Tysons -- so what's the alternative?
Printer-Friendly
Email this Letter
Post a Comment (0)
Now that the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors has accepted and endorsed the Tysons Land Use Task Force’s vision for transforming Tysons, it certainly is fair to examine that plan and question some aspects of it. In so doing, it is also fair to insist that those few critics suggest modifications or alternatives to what that vision is and how it is to be achieved.
When the Task Force was debating and examining ideas and comments from both the county staff and from the consultants, I insisted that members’ comments such as “I don’t like this (or that),” or “This is not clear,” or “I don’t agree with this conclusion" ... were all not sufficient UNLESS these were accompanied by specific rephrasing, clear alternatives, or evidence of a particular position. Critics should also be similarly admonished.
To be clear – if the Task Force’s plan for a transformed Tysons is not implemented in some form, then Tysons will continue to develop as it has developed over the last 40 years. This means continued auto domination, piecemeal approval of projects and suburban sprawl “standards.” There are few, if any, residents of this area who would endorse such a continuation. Unless amended, the current comprehensive plan and current by-right zoning would permit such continuation unless this process is interrupted by adoption of a plausible path to a transformed Tysons.
That transformation is based upon the 1,700 acres becoming pedestrian (and bicycle) friendly; substantially more workforce/affordable housing; overriding environmental considerations (such as stormwater management and green buildings); and a full range of auto trip reduction measures. There is a substantial body of evidence on this last component from other Transit Oriented Developments throughout the country.
Let me be explicit:
Enhanced transit access – with both the four Metrorail stations as well as the three recommended circulator service routes.
Significantly changing the imbalance between numbers of jobs and numbers of residents.
Improving the mode share to include walking and biking.
Adding a grid of streets with shorter (and streetscaped) blocks.
Including ground floor, convenience retail in both office and residential buildings.
Adding shuttle bus service from adjoining communities (McLean, Vienna, Pimmit Hills, etc.)
Adopting principles of parking management (shared parking, fees for parking, requiring less parking for projects).
Lessening the ratio of car ownership and vehicle miles traveled per household (as Arlington has done).
Monitoring performance-based commitments to trip reduction measures agreed to by developers.
Aggressively pursuing other transportation demand strategies (of which there are 25).
These 10 measures have individually produced substantial auto trip reductions in other areas of the nation, and they will certainly do so in a transformed Tysons. Thus before people assume that any further development in Tysons will automatically strangle area roadways, these things must be factored into the assumption.
Many people also fail to consider the fact that there is a lot of traffic on both the Beltway and the Toll Road that has little to do with Tysons. Similarly, there is a significant amount of recent retail, office and residential development in McLean, Vienna, Great Falls and other adjacent areas that generates traffic that has nothing to do with Tysons.
All these things will be a part of the transportation analysis that is now under way as a result of the Task Force’s plan. This analysis will also be constructed on a phased basis, which assumes that development will only occur gradually and will be considered to balance the need for supporting infrastructure (water, sewer, parks, utilities, schools and other community services).
If the ensuing dialogue is based on such delineated facts, then it will be productive.
Clark Tyler is chairman of the Tysons Land Use Task Force.
You must be logged in to post a comment.