A New Reston Recreation Center: Where should it be located?

At the moment, the location of a new Reston recreation center may be the most contentious issue among the several issues surrounding the possible construction of a new recreation center as reflected in comments at the RCA-sponsored public meeting, dialogues in online newspapers and blogs, and other public commentary suggest.  

The Baron Cameron Park location proposed by RCC has met with vocal neighborhood opposition about both losing some valued facilities, most notably the local dog park, and adding the traffic that a new recreation facility will generate.    

Other possible locations have been identified, including:

·    Tall Oaks shopping center.   The near-vacant shopping center may be ripe for acquisition by the County although there are no current plans to do so. This location would be relatively near the Wiehle Metrorail station.

·    Isaac Newton Square.  Another under-utilized office development area that the County could acquire, although there are no indications the owners would sell, and has been identified by the Reston Task Force (RTF) as a logical place for high-density housing near Wiehle station.

   

     The southwest corner of Lake Fairfax Park.  The park backs up to the end of Business Center Drive, the end of Michael Faraday Court to the south, and the end of Isaac Newton Square South east of the fast food drive-throughs off Wiehle Avenue Clay Court to the east.  Access from any of these streets would require acquisition of right-of-way and construction over some difficult terrain.

·    Undeveloped FCPA park land in Town Center North.  The FCPA owns five acres of undeveloped land just south of the INOVA Urgent Care facility.  The size of property is ideal for the intended purpose, but the County is in negotiations with INOVA, the other major landowner in this area, about re-parceling their land as the area develops.

As this brief listing suggests, none of the locations is singularly superior to the others; each has its strengths and weaknesses.  In this situation, we think that several criteria should be used to identify which locations would be most appropriate for a new Reston Recreation Center.   These are: 

• Minimizing land costs.  Minimizing land cost will substantially reduce the overall cost of building a new recreation center.  In this context, building on land already owned by FCPA is far preferable to privately held land—or even to FCPA land that requires acquiring an access right-of-way.  

• Maximizing immediate proximity to potential Reston users.  Restonians ought to be able to walk to the new recreation center in large numbers both so as to attract greater participation and reduce added traffic.  In general, this means being in or close to one of the transit station areas, the locus of Reston major population and employment growth for many decades to come.  

• Minimizing disruption of existing uses valued by the community.  To maximize the community gain from investing in a recreation center, it would be unwise to undo an existing or future public or private opportunity that is important to the community.  It also means adhering to Reston's core values, including protecting the environment.  

• Space for sufficient parking.  Providing parking for visitors and staff will also be an important element of the facility’s capabilities.  Without sufficient parking, the facility will almost certainly be under-utilized or nearby streets, parking facilities, and neighborhoods will be over-burdened with recreation center traffic.   The actual size of the parking lot needed for a recreation center is somewhat flexible, however, depending on the recreation center’s location--an urban area relying on walk-in participation will need less than a suburban location.   

These are our preliminary thoughts on criteria to use in selecting a location for a new Reston recreation center.  We welcome your thoughts on sites, locations, or other issues as a comment here on the blog or in an e-mail to Terry Maynard, terrmayn@yahoo.com.  

Please let us know what you think.

Agenda: Reston P and Z Committee, May 20, 2013

THE RESTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Monday, May 20, 2013 – 7:30 p.m.

North County Government Center

Community Room

12000 Bowman Towne Drive, Reston, VA

1. Approve April meeting minutes.

2. Wiehle-Reston East Metro Station Access Discussion.  A discussion with Patty
Nicoson and Bill Penniman regarding pedestrian and vehicular access to the
Wiehle-Reston East Metro Station.  Patty and Bill will provide insight on this
topic from the perspective of the Reston Master Plan Special Study Task Force.

3. Transit Screen Presentation.  A presentation by Matt Caywood and/or Ryan
Croft regarding a new technology that provides real time data from all major
transit agencies in the Washington D.C. Metro area (Metro, Metrobus, Capital
Bikeshare, Circulator, ART and Fairfax Connector).  The technology is billed as a
sustainable way for businesses to inform customers, reduce traffic congestion and
promote safe public transportation alternatives.  Transit Screen works closely with
business improvement districts, real estate developers, property managers,
homeowners associations, retail locations and government agencies across the
Washington, D.C. Metro and San Francisco Bay areas.

4. School Review Criteria Discussion.  A discussion of the criteria recently
developed by Sue Straits and Nicole Wynands regarding P&Z's review of future
school renovation and construction applications.

5. Discuss any additional matters and adjourn.

Next meeting date: June 17

Agenda is subject to change without notice by order of the Chairman, Michael Romeo,
(703) 579-7525, or Jared Willcox, Vice Chairman, (703) 638-7555.

May 7, 2013

‘Densification’ is new a challenge for Downtown DC Business Improvement District, WaPo, May 5, 2013

Whoa!  Now even the Washington Post has recognized that the space per office worker is dropping sharply!  Ergo, it must be true--even in over-monied Washington, DC!  Apparently, office space is slipping from 250 square feet per worker to 150 square feet per worker.

Apparently that trend has oozed across the Potomac, however, because here in Fairfax County the Department of Planning and Zoning and apparently the County Board of Supervisors is trying to make the Reston Task Force buy ion to a huge increase in office space based on 300 square feet per worker--twice what is going on in DC (and, actually, pretty much the rest of the United States, maybe even the developed world). 

Here's what reporter Dan Beyer writes in Sunday's Post:

I dropped by a presentation on the health of the Downtown DC Business Improvement District recently to hear an update on the area’s ongoing resurgence.

The business leaders had plenty to say about their successes, of course, patting themselves on the back for snagging this restaurant and celebrating that anniversary. But they also were not shy about discussing their challenges, displaying a kind of candor I don’t often encounter at this sort of event.

A chief concern, it seems, is something called “densification,” which is a fancy term to mean that companies, law firms, banks and residents are settling for less space than they once occupied. The local lexicon is full of talk about “micro” apartments and office “hoteling,” where workers share desks and common spaces.

There are a lot of explanations for the trend. . .

. . . Where once 5,400 workers might be needed to bring the vacancy rate in 2012 down to 9 percent, assuming each worker accounted for 250 square of space, now 9,000 workers would be required if they wind up only needing 150 square feet a person.

You can see where this is headed. Either the demand for buildings will decline, or business groups such as the BID must redouble their efforts to attract even more people and companies to the city — this at a time when the suburbs are hatching their own plans for rival town centers and transit-oriented development.

Click here for the rest of this article. 

So why do we care?  Because the goal in transit-oriented development (TOD) is to try to establish a balance in the jobs and housing in the area around the transit station.  A good balance between the two minimizes congestion growth while maximizing transit use, and minimizes the impact on the environment, road improvement costs, etc.

Instead, we are headed for a situation in which the risk exists that at least twice as many jobs will be added to Reston's station areas than is intended and the jobs:housing balance will remain nearly as skewed as it is now (14:1!).   Now that's simply bad planning based on bad assumptions, assumptions that are known to be false in the real world.
 

Office walls are closing in on corporate workers, Los Angeles Times, December 15, 2010

This two and a half year-old Los Angeles Times article highlights that the downward trend in office space is not a new one.  Based on analysis by a senior Jones Lang LaSalle manager--the same company that told the Reston Task Force the same message a year ago--this report highlights that not only are technology, teamwork, and cost considerations driving down office space per worker, but younger office workers actually prefer it!

Here's how the article by Roger Vincent begins:

Businesses used to provide 500 to 700 square feet of work space per employee, but the average is down to 200 square feet — and shrinking. The recession and an emphasis on teamwork accelerated the trend, and younger staffers prefer less.

The walls are closing in on white-collar workers — their office environments are shrinking, propelled by new technology, a changing corporate culture and the age-old imperative to save a buck.

Although personal workstations won't disappear, the sprawling warrens of cubicles and private offices that have defined the workplace for the last few decades are heading the way of Rolodexes and typewriters. The shift is of tectonic proportions, experts on the workplace say.

In the 1970s, American corporations typically thought they needed 500 to 700 square feet per employee to build an effective office. Today's average is a little more than 200 square feet per person, and the space allocation could hit a mere 50 square feet by 2015, said Peter Miscovich, who studies workplace trends as a managing director at brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle.

"We're at a very interesting inflection point in real estate history," Miscovich said. "The next 10 years will be very different than the last 30."

Companies have been gradually dialing back on office size and grandness for years, but the recession accelerated the trend as sobered owners let go of their old floor plans and tried new ways to speed productivity, attract talent and cut costs. . . .

Click here for the rest of this article.

But never mind . . . Here in good ol' Fairfax County, Virginia, where change is s-o  m-u-c-h  s-l-o-w-e-r, County planners are still calling for 300 gross square feet per office worker in the latest Reston Task Force planning scenario and the proposed new Comprehensive Plan for the Metrorail station areas.  What that means is, if the market permits, efforts to improve the jobs:housing balance from its current lopsided 14:1 to the hoped for 4:1 in 2030 will actually see it drop only to 11:1--and maybe not at all if Mr. Miscovich's forecast of "a mere 50 square feet" is anywhere near accurate.  Nonetheless, we could add as many as 229,000 jobs to the 82,000 we already have in the station areas if each office worker occupies a full 100 square feet. 

RCA Reston 2020 Discussions with Fairfax County School Officials

                                                               R. Rogers

                                                                         1 May 2013

RCA Reston 2020 Discussions with Fairfax County School Officials

Summary: FCPS officials recognize that several Reston schools are currently at or over capacity and are planning to accommodate this in the intermediate term.  In particular, a major expansion of South Lakes High School in planned.  The officials anticipate that ”Scenario G”—the baseline development plan County staff is using to build a new Comprehensive Plan for Reston's transit station areas-- could bring a significant expansion of the school population. They see a need build two elementary schools in Reston and an intermediate and senior high school in the “southwest” portion of the County to accommodate a build out of that planned residential density as well as expected growth in the Centerville/Chantilly area.  Although they have no specific plans, they hope the master plan will include specific language that will help them accommodate this growth.

On 25 April 2013 Terry Maynard and Dick Rogers met with Fairfax School officials to discuss future school capacity issues relating to Reston.  Participating for the County were:

• Pat Hynes—Fairfax County School Board representative from Hunter Mill District (and Reston resident)
• Ajay Rawat--Acting Director Office of Facilities Planning Services
• Greg Bokan --Planner, Office of Facilities Planning Services

Ajay and Greg are responsible for analyzing demographics and other factors to determine long term school facility needs.

Background

Dick Rogers and Tammy Petrine had met in early April with Ajay and Greg to discuss school planning issues (they had earlier discussed these issues in May 2010).   In April, the FCPS officers gave them a December 2012 memo to DPZ done in conjunction with the Reston Master Planning process.  The memo outlined long term needs of Scenario G development—the scenario around which the County Planning staff is now developing Comprehensive Plan language despite the absence of Task Force endorsement—as requiring two new elementary schools, and facilities for about 1,000 middle school and 1,000 high school students.  The County planning staff still has not shared this memorandum with the Reston Task Force although Reston 2020 has posted it on its blog. 

They based these projections on “yield factors” associated with different types of housing development.  For example, the 20,080 high-rise multi-family units projected under Scenario G are estimated to yield 1,747 students.

Near Term Outlook

Standard FCPS school enrollment projections look out about six years.  They are based on highly specific criteria like births, established school enrollment, demographic changes, and school program changes that have been shown to be reliable indicators of future school populations.  Residential development completed and being occupied is taken into account, but they do not take into account approved but not constructed projects like Spectrum and Fairways in their projections.

• Elementary Schools.  Several Reston schools are projected to be at or over capacity in 2017-2018.   To meet this need, Lake Anne has just gone through expansion, Sunrise Valley will soon undergo a modest expansion and Terraset will be increased by about one-third.  There is also tentative thinking about moving parts of special programs from more crowded to less crowded schools in the area.

• Middle School: Hughes Middle School is at capacity now and will be about 130 students over by 2017-2018. 

• High School.  The most serious situation is faced by South Lakes High School.  It is currently 200-300 students over capacity.  By 2017-18 the projection is that South Lakes will be 858 students over current capacity.  Herndon HS will also be 300 students over by then.

To meet the needs at South Lakes High School, FCPS plans to substantially augment the school to handle another 800 students. This $17 million “capacity enhancement” will involve real brick and mortar construction, not temporary classrooms.  This will probably be completed in time for the 2017-2018 school year if a bond issue passes in 2014.  This hopefully will take South Lakes to 2025 or so and it will be a school of about 3,000 students, which FCPS does not consider “too large.”  It is also possible that additional program changes could be made at South Lakes that would send students elsewhere.  For example, they mentioned the special education placements program which brings 200 or so students to the school.

Elsewhere in the area, they noted that Herndon HS and Oakton HS are also slated for expansion.

They noted that boundary changes might also be considered but they are usually highly controversial.

They also noted that some elementary schools to the west of Reston face even more pressing problems.  They mentioned McNair, to the West of Polo Fields, and Coates, near Route 28 and south of Dulles Toll Road.  Coates is projected to be 600 students over capacity in 2018.  This area is heavily populated by a younger Indian-American population and has one of the highest birth rates in the county.  They mentioned 200 new kindergarteners a year within the next few years at Coates Elementary!

Longer Term

FCPS does not appear to have any firm plans at this point to meet the needs of new development in Reston generated by Scenario G.

Re elementary schools:  They note their projection is that if Scenario G is built out, there will be a need for two new elementary schools in Reston.  They are very open to an urban setting for these schools, with a smaller school site (they mentioned the 2 ½ acre Arbor row school proposed for Tysons).  They can see it co-located with other civic facilities or even in a commercial building.  They could envision co-location of outdoor space with other park facilities. 

We discussed possible locations in Reston including Town Center, Isaac Newton Square, and the southwest corner of Baron Cameron Park.  They particularly like the idea of using land already owned by the county. They also took aboard the idea of locating a school in North Town Center with a new Library, governmental center, and park facilities.

We noted that Phase Two of the Reston Task Force will focus on the village centers and could entail population increases in those areas.  They had no firm idea of school needs in these areas and suggested that some of the existing elementary schools could undergo further expansion.

Beyond the elementary schools, the FCPS Scenario G memorandum projected a need for half a high school and half a middle school to meet the growth in student populations in Reston and Herndon.  They have no specific plans in mind for meeting this need, but noted a general need for a new Fairfax County high school in southwestern Fairfax County to meet the growing student population.  The new middle and high schools would probably be located in the Centerville area, is badly needed.  The County is looking for a substantial amount of land (perhaps costing $10 million) and has a contractor looking at potential sites.

We noted skepticism among some task force members to the idea that future Reston development would entail a substantial expansion of the student population, and especially the notion that any new student population should be accommodated within the transit station areas now being studied.  They noted several factors at work that they think will lead to student numbers growing substantially:

• The changing demographic mix in the county means that the Hispanic and Asian-American households are more likely to remain in high rises even as family size grows.

• The County experience is that high rises begin with a low number of children but as the population matures the student population tends to rise to the projected “yield” rate.

• In residential areas there is a cycle of children early on, then fewer children as the population matures and then a re-population by families with children.  They suspect this is going on in various Reston neighborhoods now.  (Anecdotal information indicates this process is underway in Reston as a new generation of families moves into established neighborhoods.)

Regarding planning, they emphasize that the language in the comprehensive plan is most important.  (Comment: Attached to their December 2012 paper was a “draft comprehensive plan text” for DPZ review.  That text has not been provided to the Task Force by either FCPS or DPZ.  It apparently looks for developers to provide support “in kind” in the form of land or space contributions and monetary proffers.)

Silver Line Update: Partners Await Fed Loan Decision, Ashburn Patch, May 2, 2013

Supervisors in Loudoun are counting on saving from a federal loan; express desire to engage MWAA on airport development.

• By Dusty Smith

The most notable elements of a presentation Wednesday about the second phase of Metro’s Silver Line were news that the project appears to be nearing final approval for a federal loan that will save Loudoun millions and concerns about potential development on Dulles International Airport property.  . .

Most recently, the federal government requested $100,000 from the project partners – MWAA, Loudoun and Fairfax County – to pay for a review of financial records. Newquist said she expected the partners to complete their presentation to TIFIA administrators by the end of May and receive a decision by the end of the year. When supervisors expressed dismay at the uncertainty of a final approval date, County Administrator Tim Hemstreet said he believed the project was on track for TIFIA approval now that it had entered the “application phase.” . . 

During the discussion, Supervisor Matt Letourneau (R-Dulles) said he wants to make sure the county pays close attention and engages MWAA about its plans on the Dulles International Airport property.

“Certainly presentations were made by Mr. Potter that he would wish to work with the county in a cohesive manner to develop the property,” Letourneau said, referring to MWAA president and CEO Jack Potter. “But there is still the concern that MWAA could move forward on their property and develop large-scale commercial, which would be competing with what’s happening on county property.” . . .

Click here for the rest of this article.

Although this discusses TIFIA financing issues in Loudoun County, they also apply to Fairfax County where the County has agreed to pay 16.1% of the Silver Line's construction costs.  The big winners if the Silver Line project receives TIFIA financing will be Dulles Toll Road users who are now accountable for over half the line's construction costs.  TIFIA financing would substantially reduce the debt service costs and, therefore, toll increases in the years ahead.  But tolls will still go up substantially even with TIFIA financing.

We would also note that at least one Loudoun County Supervisor has the same concern the RCA Board of Directors has expressed about unfair competition from MWAA in developing its property near one of the Loudoun County Metrorail stations. 

A Connection to Less Congestion, Colin Mills, Reston Patch, May 1, 2013

As the opening of the Silver Line draws ever closer, Reston’s citizens are keeping a close eye on traffic.  How will our roads be affected by the new Wiehle Metro station?  What is being done (or not being done) to alleviate congestion and ensure that Restonians will be able to access our own station?

After the activism on this issue by RCA and others, Supervisor Hudgins has begun taking action to improve access in the station area.  (Last week, I sent a letter to her on behalf of RCA thanking her for her efforts.)  One of the keys to reducing congestion around the station, the Supervisor and most Restonians agree, is additional crossings of the Dulles Toll Road.

The north-south roads that pass over the Toll Road are Reston’s biggest traffic choke points.  (I can attest to this, as I sit in backups every evening on Reston Parkway traveling to pick up my daughter after work.)  The congestion will only get worse as thousands of people from inside and outside of Reston try to get to the station.  With only a handful of crossings to carry all that demand, we’re going to need additional outlets to keep Reston moving.

The top priority for a new crossing is what’s known as the “Soapstone Connector.”  This would start around the current end of Soapstone Drive and connect Sunrise Valley with Sunset Hills, passing over the Toll Road near the Wiehle station.  This would not only provide an alternate route for people accessing the station from south Reston, but it would also serve as a relief valve for cross-town traffic seeking to avoid the backups at Wiehle or Reston Parkway.
Supervisor Hudgins has called for making the Soapstone Connector a priority, and the County is studying several possible alignment options.  RCA’s Reston 20/20 Committee looked at the options and last week, we issued a paper,  The Soapstone Connection: A Bridge to Reston’s Future, outlining our recommendations.

Reston 20/20’s paper, written by the hard-working Dick Rogers, doesn’t just pick a favorite of the options on the table.  It also looks at the criteria being used to evaluate the options, and suggests a few new criteria to ensure that the Connector provides the greatest possible benefit to Reston.

The County’s evaluation criteria are pretty broad, like “Connect Sunrise Hills and Sunrise Valley” and “Reduce traffic impact on Wiehle.”  These are good goals, but by themselves, they might not lead us to the best solution.  We suggested adding several criteria for a more thorough evaluation.  I’ll describe some of them here.

Expedite Construction: The Wiehle station is supposed to open at the end of this year.  There’s not a lot of time!  The Soapstone Connector won’t be ready for the station opening, but we should aim to complete it as quickly as possible, in keeping with Supervisor Hudgins’ recommendation.

One way to speed construction is to reduce the land acquisition and demolition needed.  Acquiring buildings and land costs money and takes time, and both are at a premium.  Unfortunately, most of the proposed alignments would require either demolishing buildings or buying up much developable land on the south side of the Toll Road.

As an alternative, 20/20 suggests routing the Connector along existing Association Drive.  The road would need to be improved, but since there’s already an existing right-of-way, land acquisition costs would be minimized and construction could move much faster.

Consider a “Bridge Diet”: The current plan under consideration for the Connector includes four lanes for vehicles, two bike lanes, a sidewalk and a 17-foor-wide “shared use path.”  That seems like overkill.  I understand that the County is looking at a “worst-case scenario” for the amount of land required, but we should be looking at what we’re actually going to need.

For one thing, one bike lane is probably enough.  And if the bikes have a dedicated lane, we probably don’t need the shared-use path either.  Also, it might be worth considering a two-lane bridge.  After all, Soapstone is a two-lane road.  We’ll need a four-lane bridge eventually, but might it save time and money to build two lanes now and include footings for future expansion?  Something to think about.

Give Higher Priority to Reducing Wiehle Avenue Congestion and Providing Access to the Station: If a prime goal of the Connector is to get people to the station, wouldn’t it make sense to run it as close to the station as possible?  When the Reston Metrorail Access Group originally called for the Soapstone Connector in 2009, they recommended running it right next to the station.  That turned out not to be feasible, but we should still keep it as close as possible.

Some of the proposed alignments run well west of the station.  Routing the Connector there would serve Plaza America much better than it would the station.   Wherever the Connector is routed, there will need to be another street connecting it to the station.  The farther away the Connector is, the longer it will take for that street to be built.  And if the Connector just winds up taking the traffic jam from Wiehle and dumping it on Sunset Hills, we’re not helping ourselves.

Require a Direct Connection to Soapstone Drive: Several of the proposed alignments of the so-called “Soapstone Connector” don’t connect to Soapstone at all!  One starts as far east as Commerce Park Drive (smack in the middle of the existing backups on Sunrise Valley), while another starts way to the west at Indian Ridge Drive (which doesn’t serve anyone, unless they plan to develop Reston National).  Soapstone is a natural collector for the roads from South Reston.  Providing a direct connection will provide the smoothest possible traffic flow.  Adding another traffic light on Sunrise Valley will just make things worse.

I know some of the residents along Soapstone don’t want a direct connection, for fear of turning the road into an expressway.   The recent road diet on Soapstone will help keep speeds down.  Also, no matter where the Connector is built, people will use Soapstone to get there.  A direct connection will reduce the possibility of major backups.

These are only some of the recommendations we made.  If you want to see more, you can read the paper on Reston 20/20’s blog.  I hope that the County will take a serious look at our criteria, and that we can work together to select an alignment that provides the most possible relief for our traffic woes.