REVISED Agenda & Materials: RTF Steering Committee Meeting, February 8, 2011

RESTON MASTER PLAN SPECIAL STUDY TASK FORCE
Co-Chairs’ Steering Sub-Committee Meeting
Langston Hughes Middle School Cafeteria, 11401 Ridge Heights Road, Reston
Tuesday, February 08, 2011

FINAL AGENDA

7:00 p.m. Public Comment

7:10 p.m. Administrative Items Patty Nicoson, Chair

7:20 p.m. Review of Vision and Planning Principles Discussion Document (see below)

7:30 p.m. Review of proposed 3 Station area and North Town Center Character (formerly Vision)  Statements (see earlier blog post)

7:45 p.m. Review of Station-area Form Recommendations

8:10 p.m. Review of Station-area General Location of Uses Recommendations

8:25 p.m. Review of Station-area Open Space Recommendations

8:50 p.m. Next Meeting
     •  When (where TBD)
     •  Proposed Topics

9:00 p.m. Adjourn, Patty Nicoson

Draft Summary of RTF Steering Committee Meeting, 1-25-2011

Reston Vision and Planning Principles with Track Changes
Proposed Schedule for Reston TF Steering Committee

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.

Notes on Reston Task Force Meeting, September 14, 2010, Dick Rogers & Marion Stillson

1.  During the administrative portion of the meeting, the Task Force agreed in principle to support a letter from the Vision Committee to MWAA, as they get their air-rights study results (within a month), asking MWAA not to take steps which will preclude future air rights.

 

2. Heidi Merkel, FC DPZ, outlined the near term schedule for the Task Force::

•  28 Sept.  Wiehle sub-com will report tentative conclusions (this changes what she said at the RTC Committee meeting in the morning when she said TC would go then!)
•  5 October. Special presentation on Design and Architecture.
•  12 Oct.  TC Committee will present what will presumably be its final report.
•  26 Oct.  At last the county transportation presentation. 

Click here for the full presentation. 

 

She indicated that the reports prepared by the Task Force would go through a rigorous staff review, which drew no general reaction from the Task Force. She was talking about staff performing two tasks:  

• Putting TF recommendations into CP language was one, and I think many felt relief that the TF would not have to do this. 
• The second staff task was assessing the impact of TF recommendations against such measures as the GMU forecasts. There was an explicit TF reaction to the latter, though it might have been at another point in the evening, I'm not sure:  This reaction was to decry the GMU horizon of 40-50 years as too great, 20-30 years being more realistic. However, Heidi appeared to stick with the 40-50 year horizon. 

Someone asked her what the timeframe was for the final stages of Phase 1, and she hesitated very long before saying "the first half of the year."  I think people were so surprised at going beyond December 2010, that no one asked about Phase 2 (which will consider the Village Centers and Reston's residential areas).

 

3.   John Carter presented the Vision Committee's principles and preliminary overview.  They were well received. He drew particular reaction on a couple of points:

• The Soapstone overpass across the DTR should be built soonest. Question: With what money?
• We should be thinking of extending the Reston tree canopy, not reducing it.  (He cited a County figure of 45% tree cover up from the current 38%.)  Skeptical developers and TODers were on this one at this morning's Wiehle mtg.
• Where are the places for quasi-industrial type uses like storage facilities, which are not generally being thought of?
• Village Centers: He noted potential concerns--something to think about--that the VCs might be undercut by retail in the TOD areas. 

In other comments during his presentation,

• He honored' Reston 2020 explicitly by saying his report's transportation segment uses Reston 2020 maps. 
• At least three times he also remarked that there are 5 "failing" intersections near where the stations will be, with no satisfactory plans to improve them. In imitation of "Houston, we have a problem" he said, "Reston, we have a problem." It's no exaggeration to say he emphasized this issue, legitimately so, in my opinion.

Mike Cooper of Brandywine (a very pro-office developer) raised some questions about John's slide on residential-commercial growth which implied lots of the former and less of the latter. He stressed the need to continue to attract jobs.

 

4.  Herndon-Monroe Committee Report--The presentation largely followed that of their draft paper.

•  Protect established commercial/office sites was emphasized but more mixed use and residential and TOD in A-2 and C-2 (the station area) was allowed for than the draft paper suggests.
•  Protect wetlands drew applause.
•  Paul Damory of Polo Fields thanked the committee for, in effect, protecting his neighborhood.

(Comment: I continue to find them a bit vague on improved access to the station from Monroe and FCP; also they do not really embrace the Joe Stowers proposal to convert the existing access ramp into a link to Herndon.)

 

5.  Sandi Smith of DPZ gets married Saturday--gone for two weeks!

Next Steps for the Reston Task Force, September 14, 2010

The Reston Task Force is in the midst of drafting its Phase I reports on the areawide vision for Reston and each of the Metrorail station TOD areas and Town Center for presentation over the next month.  The County Department of Planning and Zoning Staff presented an outline of how they anticipate the Task Force will proceed in the months ahead as it proceeds to its Phase II look at the rest of Reston, including the village centers and residential neighborhoods.  The following is the DPZ presentation on this transition. 

Next Steps in Reston Task Force Process, Sept. 14, 2010

Updated Reston Task Force Schedule, April 9, 2010 (thru March 2011)

Tuesday, April 13, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Briefing re: Dulles Rail Project
* Herndon-Monroe area presentations (residents & property owners)
* Update re: Draft Planning Principles
* Overview of Reston Parkway area

Saturday, April 17, 2010
Langston Hughes MS cafeteria
*Community Meeting – Reston Parkway area

Tuesday, April 27, 2010
South Lakes High School cafeteria
* Briefings re: Supporting Transportation Network and Environmental Policy (including Green Buildings, Stormwater Management and Noise Impacts)
* Review of Reston Parkway area Community Meeting
* Discussion of Wiehle Avenue and Reston Parkway areas (specific topics to be shown on meeting agenda)

Tuesday, May 11, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Briefings re: Parks and Recreation Facilities Policies and Affordable Housing Policy
* Overview of north Reston Town Center area
* Discussion of Wiehle Avenue and Reston Parkway areas (specific topics to be shown on meeting agenda)

Saturday, May 22, 2010
Langston Hughes MS cafeteria
* Community Meeting – north Reston Town Center area

Tuesday, May 25, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Review of north Reston Town Center area Community Meeting
* Discussion of Reston Parkway and north Reston Town Center areas (specific topics to be shown on meeting agenda)

Tuesday, June 8, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Presentations by community groups and citizens/ Open Comment Period

Tuesday, June 22, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Discussion of community input
* Other meeting topics to be determined

July–August
* Task Force Committees to meet as needed – Meeting dates, times and topics to be posted on the Special Study webpage

Tuesday, September 14, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Tentative - Discussion of draft recommendations for Reston Planning Principles and 3 Dulles Corridor Areas and north Town Center area

Tuesday, September 28, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Tentative – Briefing re: proposed transportation analysis to be submitted to Virginia Department of Transportation for comment (Section 527 review)

Tuesday, October 12, 2010
RCC at Lake Anne
* Tentative - Staff to outline approach for discussing Planned Residential Community (PRC) zoned Residential Areas and Village Centers

October – November 2010
* Task Force to finalize recommendations and prepare Task Force report
(Task Force meetings to be scheduled as needed)
*Staff to finalize staff report

December 2010
* Publish Task Force and Staff Reports with Plan recommendations on Reston Planning Principles and four Dulles Corridor Areas

2011

February 2011
* Proposed Planning Commission Public Hearing and recommendation to Board of Supervisors re: Plan recommendations on Reston Planning Principles, 3 Rail Station Areas and Reston Town Center

March 2011
* Proposed Board of Supervisors’ public hearing and decision re: Reston Planning Principles, 3 Rail Station Areas and Reston Town Center

Updated Reston Task Force Schedule and Supporting Reston Civic Groups, April 8, 2010

Reston Task Force Overview and Schedule-040810