Actually, I was not planning to speak at the April meeting. It was my understanding that evincing support for the project at the February meeting would encourage the county to negotiate in earnest and resolve the community benefits package with JBG so that the project would be primed for approval at the April meeting without further need for "testimonials." The board said as much at the February meeting.

Of course, that situation could change -- for instance, we fully expected that the developer would not agree to a deferral at the February meeting, yet that is what in fact occurred. So, if there is some burning position on Central Place that NRCA needs/wants to take at the county board's April meeting, let's discuss it. In my opinion, however, the project is at the point where NRCA can only either speak in general terms for or against approval in April -- I doubt NRCA could have any influence on the terms or specifics of any deal that might be negotiated between the county and JBG by speaking at that meeting.

I know RAFOM believes passionately that the observation deck should be free -- I guess we could lobby for that as well, although personally I am not so sure that having a nominal charge for access would be a bad thing. One concern I'd have about free access would be the possibility that vagrants might camp there, as they do in some of our parks. I'm not sure how that could be reduced or prevented without some sort of gate charge.

Jennifer
----- Original Message -----
From: mantell
To: Jennifer Zeien
Cc: Paul Derby ; Anne Spiesman ; gtlivingstone@earthlink.net
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: County Board and Central Place.


Hello Jennifer,
Despite my doubts about the actual position taken, I'm glad that the NRCA executive board was able to respond to the rapid need for an NRCA position concerning Central Place site-plan approval.
However, polling the executive board for a quick decision is the kind of thing one does when there's an imminent deadline. Given that the next County Board meeting on this topic is not scheduled till late April, I think that we've got time to set this before the NRCA membership for discussion and direction. I'll leave it to you to pose (via posting to the NRCA website) the position that you'd like to represent for NRCA to the County Board when they next take up the question of Central Place site-plan approval.
Mark Antell

--------------


Dear All:

There were about 25 speakers at last night's County Board meeting on Central Place. The preponderance of the comments on the proposed development were positive. Only one person, a resident of Colonial Village, was utterly opposed to the development. The County and developer agreed at the 11th hour to a two-month deferral for the purpose of negotiating the community benefits package and some of the technical details of the proposed development raised by the County Board members.

The observation deck and cost to Arlington residents of accessing the facility was discussed by a number of speakers. RAFOM feels strongly that access should be free to residents at all times. The developer is proposing a nominal charge of $3.00 or something on that order.

Other facets of the community benefits package that will be subject to negotiation include: credit for block assemblage (the County is giving none); affordable housing (County will require a full affordable housing contribution); developer's financing of three metro elevators (County's position is to require a $22 million cash contribution to these elevators).

As an aside, one interesting issue that was raised by a County Board member was his disappointment that the project would not affect the treatment of Moore Street to make it special and pedestrian friendly. Although the history of the Rosslyn Working Group shows that early plans were to pedestrianize Moore Street through changes that would have included merging sidewalks and street surfaces, widening crosswalks, using different special paving surfaces and possibly adding bollards that would allow the street to be closed for special events, all of these change proposals were nixed by WMATA and the County's transportation people because they would possibly interfere with bus operation on Moore Street. Specifically, kneeling buses required curbs; time would be lost if buses were required to stop for multiple or widened crosswalks; and cutouts were needed for (I forget what at this point). Anyway, it is amusing how the issues push and pull their way along and reappear at odd moments.

Jennifer

Thanks, Jennifer, for all the work you are putting into representing our community interests in these meetings.

Since moving into the North Rosslyn community in 1999, I've noticed a steady deterioration of the two main blocks in the center of the commercial area, the block with the metro station and the block with Burger King/MacDonalds. Many of the retail businesses are gone (FEDEX, Chinese Restaurant, etc.) and what little retail that remains is run down and shoddy. Taking the center of Rosslyn and rebuilding is a great idea, I think. Hopefully, some of the vision and thinking that has made the Ballston, Clarendon and Court House areas will influence the redevelopment of Rosslyn. There is no doubt that we will end up with a lot of office space. Projects now underway will bring more residential housing within the center of Rosslyn. With the increased residential density that has occurred over the past 8 years, one would hope that we have achieved enough residents to warrant an increased retail presence with shops and restaurants. Rosslyn is due to have a much broader retail offering. More destination restaurants, retail such as a pet store, a decent grocery store, a few good delis, interior furnishing stores, art shops, etc. would all be welcome additions to our collections of cleaners and early closing convenience stores.

Regarding the observation deck, a nominal entrance fee doesn't seem unreasonable especially if it keeps the place maintained and cuts down loitering. Maybe an "annual pass" for $10 or $20 that allows a resident and their guest unlimited visits would be a way for residents to enjoy the views and show off their community to their guests while tourists pay a small amount for their one time visits.

I would encourage you to push for whatever it takes to get the project moving. It looks like the transportation issues are solved with the design accomodating buses and pedestrians and an integral metro station with more elevators. The BIG issue, in my opinion, is getting a retail presence embedded in the plans so we don't end up with deserted urban canyons at night. Also, until redevelopment occurs, Rosslyn is going to look worse and worse as leases are not renewed and long term tenants give way to short term commercial space renting to business looking for cheap space and no money to invest in looking professional.

Dear Paul:

Thanks for your comments. I thoroughly agree. As for the retail component of the proposed development, I believe there will be about 46K square feet of retail. More will be added if the bus alley is ever closed -- that passage cuts down on the square footage available at the base of the buildings.

As far as retailers in the new development, McDonalds will (unfortunately) be returning as one of the conditions they placed on JBG's acquisition of their parcel.

JBG has been made aware that the community favors high-end retail and restaurant tenants as opposed to dry cleaning establishments and the like. The vision is for at least one restaurant besides McDonalds on the plaza, and high-end retail elsewhere within the development.

Note also that other areas of downtown Rosslyn will be redeveloped in the next few years, and the quest for additional high end retail will also be pursued in those developments.

Jennifer

The County Board appropriately delayed approval of Central Place.

I can understand why some folks want this deal done .... now. The area around metro station is dull and shabby; the project has been in discussion for a long time; and Central Place will provide us with a genuine destination: an observation deck with a great view of DC and the Potomac Gorge. However, I favor agreement on a community benefits package prior to project approval. Below I describe the concept of community benefits, and explain why community benefits should be defined prior to approval of the Central Place plan.

What are community benefits and why is this an issue at Central Place? I discussed community benefits and Central Place with Tom Miller of the Arlington Planning and Zoning Department. He explained to me that Central Place site is currently zoned to allow a certain density (specifically FAR* 3.8 for office and FAR 4.8 for residential). The Central Place proposal requests upzoning of the property to C-O Rosslyn which allows for a density over twice as great (specifically FAR 10.0). The County zoning regulations allow C-O Rosslyn zoning if community benefits are provided equivalent to the value of the additional density. Community benefits are not cash payments, but rather are amenities like artwork, or special building features, or affordable housing, or transportation improvements. This is the way the game is played in Arlington. Other recent developments including Turnberry, Waterview, and 1801 Lynn conform to the community benefit requirements. As you can imagine, there's often ˜dynamic' between government and developer on what is a community benefit. For example, a developer might claim that a lovely atrium is a community benefit. But the county might say, no, that's just the way new construction is done. So, there's a negotiation. For Central Place, that negotiation is going on right now.

I do like high-density construction near the metro. That's what smart growth is about. But I'm not ready to give away lots of community benefits to get that done. When the upzoning plan is approved for Central Place, we can forget about any more bargaining. One just doesn't have bargaining leverage if one has agreed to the other side's requests. That's why I say, let's first get agreement on a community benefit plan before approval of the Central Place upzoning

By the way, the Central Place development is not entirely without cost to our community:
- We lose two of the three public parks in downtown Rosslyn (including, alas, that little quiet fountain at the north tip of the block between Moore and Lynn).
- The development adds a parking garage and thus additional traffic to Moore street (that's not good for pedestrians).
- And Central Place does nothing to help what is already a very tight situation for bus to metro transfer in the Rosslyn Station area.
My point is that we are losing some things as a result of Central Place, so we should assure ourselves that we are getting benefits to offset those losses.


* FAR is an acronym for 'Floor to Area Ratio.' An FAR of 0.5 would mean that a building provided a floor space equal to 1/2 the size of the building lot. An FAR of 10.0 refers to a tall building which provides a floor area ten times the lot size.
Information on the construction density allowed in the Rosslyn Coordinated Redevelopment District may be found at:
http://www.arlingtonva.us/Departments/CPHD/Planning/doc...rridors.aspx#rosslyn

Believe me, Central Place will not receive approval by the County unless the County and the developer can agree on a community benefits package for Central Place. Emphasis on the two parties to the negotiation: (1) the County and (2) the developer.

Although it would be nice to think there's a role for NRCA at this point in the process, the only way of affecting the outcome on what the parties agree to would be to lobby the County Board directly, before the April meeting.

At the April meeting, I expect that the County will either announce that it has reached agreement with the developer and approve the project or that it has not, in which case the project will not be approved (or receive yet another deferral, which will amount to the same thing).

That's why I don't feel there's a role for NRCA at that meeting.

Jennifer