Printer
TextBoard of Supervisors Pass New Rules on Tysons, but Questions Remain
During its regularly scheduled June 22nd meeting, the Board of
Supervisors approved a significant Comprehensive Plan Amendment designed
to spur the redevelopment of Tysons Corner. I voted for the plan, and
while I am an optimist, I expressed my significant concern that it was
too cautious and timid, and did not support the broad economic
development objectives of the Tysons Task Force.
Why Tysons?
The redevelopment of Tysons Corner is critical to the future of
Fairfax County for a number of reasons. Primary among them is the fact
that we need a new wave of commercial development. Commercial
development, especially in the technology sector, brings good jobs to
Fairfax. Businesses also bring tax revenue as they pay more in county
taxes than they consume in county services. During the last thirty years
our commercial tax base has played an important role in funding the great
schools, police and fire, parks and libraries that Fairfax residents have
come to enjoy.
In addition to more commercial development, the vision for Tysons
proposes roughly 40,000 new residential units to handle 80,000 new
residents over the next 40 years. Why build new housing? Demographers
tell us that 250,000 people will move to Fairfax County over the next 30
to 50 years, whether we like it or not. The idea of Tysons is to
concentrate many of them near jobs and near transit, to minimize the
transportation impacts. If we don’t concentrate residential development,
those people will move all over Northern Virginia and then drive to jobs
in Tysons, creating gridlock exponentially worse than we see today.
The fact is there is only one way to stop people from moving here - make
it a bad place to live. We certainly don’t want that. As long as Fairfax
is a great place to live, people will want to come here, and we need to
prepare for them in the most advantageous way.
The Task Force Plan
Tysons Corner is currently a gridlocked sea of asphalt, concrete and
low-rise suburban office buildings. In 2005, the Board of Supervisors
established a citizens committee, known as the Tysons Task Force, and
charged it with creating a future vision for Tysons and developing a land
use plan to support it. People from literally all over the world have
been watching, as this effort marks the first time a community has tried
to convert a suburban sprawl mall into an urban center.
The Task Force delivered a bold plan that called for extensive growth,
residential development not just for the rich but for those at various
income levels, environmental protection and public facilities such as
parks and schools. It also called for developing an inviting, city-like
atmosphere with a grid of streets for shops and walking. This atmosphere
would attract the young professionals planners predict may choose to live
in the new Tysons. The grid of streets would also spread out traffic on a
number of smaller streets, instead of concentrating it on a few large
boulevards.
The genius of the Task Force approach was that it did not ask for people
to choose between economic development and environmental protection, or
between private development and public facilities. By offering adequate
density, that is, by permitting large buildings, they created a scenario
where the private sector could underwrite significant costs, but remain
profitable.
Staff and Planning Commission Plan
The Task Force proposal went to County staff and the Planning
Commission, where, unfortunately, many of the bold development
opportunities were taken away, but the expensive environmental and public
facilities requirements remained. The Staff and Planning Commission Plan,
which the Board adopted, permits large development to occur within ¼ mile
of the four new Tysons Metro stops. In other areas, however, there are
tighter restrictions on the level of density that can be built, even
though the costly requirements remain. The question left unanswered, but
so critical to the complete redevelopment of Tysons, is whether
developers will choose to build beyond the ¼ mile radius under the
recently passed plan amendment.
The newly adopted plan does not supersede current zoning, so developers
have the right to reject the new rules and build smaller buildings under
the old rules (called “By Right” development). If they view the new rules
as too costly, without sufficient incentives such as greater densities,
they will build “By Right” and we will just see more of the same low
building, horizontal sprawl in Tysons. Several businesses and business
groups testified that they believe that is exactly what will happen under
the Board plan. I tried to build a coalition on the Board to permit
significantly more development out to ½ mile from a metro stop, but the
Board did not agree. Time will tell whether the newly passed plan will
encourage, or strangle, the economic growth we need.
For More Information
Though the Braddock District may not be physically impacted by the
proposed redevelopment, we will still feel the impact. Tysons is
Fairfax’s downtown, and many Braddock residents work there. We will all
benefit if economic growth accelerates.
It is important to note, however, that the transformation of Tysons
Corner from a suburban office park to an urban center will occur slowly
over the course of many years. The Tysons Task Force presented an
over-arching vision with a long time horizon. The plan adopted by the
Board covers just the first 20 year increment.
During this initial stage, development for office space is capped at 45
million square feet. Currently, about 33 million square feet are already
built or planned for. However, this cap does not apply to retail, hotels
and other uses that generate a low number peak-hour travel trips. The
purpose of a cap is to ensure that the redevelopment of Tysons does not
outpace the building of infrastructure, such as the grid of
streets.
Much more of the focus in the first 20 years is placed on the
construction of residential properties. As we look to develop a better
resident-to-job ratio and create a livable community that will help take
some pressure off of our transportation system, this residential building
will be essential. In fact, within 1/4 mile of Metro stations, there will
be no density cap on residential, retail, hotel or certain other uses.
Between 1/4 and 1/3 mile from the stations, there will be ceilings on
density, becoming more restrictive between 1/3 and 1/2 mile. Seventy-five
percent of all new density at Tysons will be within 1/2 mile of the
stations, a distance that most studies indicate pedestrians are willing
to walk on a daily basis.
While the densities allowed in Tysons are higher than elsewhere in the
County, to build under the new plan for Tysons, developers will be
required to meet a number of new, more stringent and more urban
standards. LEED Silver environmental standards will be required for
commercial development and 20 percent of residential units built must be
“affordable” (meaning designed for those making under $120,000 per year).
Currently, that requirement is 12 percent “affordable” countywide.
Finally, in Tysons, the land area and/or building space for public
facilities - the schools, the parks, the police and fire stations - are
expected to be provided by developers at no cost to the County. The
private sector will also be responsible for paying for the grid of
streets, perhaps the piece most necessary if we wish to construct an
urban center that is truly livable. The County estimates that the grid of
streets will cost approximately $444 million dollars over the next 20
years. The development community will also be asked to pay for some
portion of the Tysons-wide road projects the County has identified, items
like widening roads within Tysons or creating ramps on and off of the
Dulles Toll Road. If that cost is too high, or the incentives not great
enough, Tysons could fail, but if the Board found the right mix, as we
hope, then we will begin a new era of economic development and the
creation of an urban, transit and pedestrian-focused community.
Stay tuned to future issues of the Beacon for information on the
infrastructure projects and their cost. In the meantime, I will continue
to push for more development near transit and for new transportation
initiatives to meet our growing needs.
Website Survey 