Jennifer Zeien wrote:

> The final meeting of the Site Plan Review Committee for Central Place occurred November 9, 2006. The applicant, JGB Associates, presented yet another revision of its plan, incorporating changes recommended in the previous SPRC meeting and additional changes recommended by the county transportation people and WMATA, primarily respecting placement of the bus alley.

> Reactions to the revised design were generally positive. The buildings are iconic and will definitely contribute to transforming the Rosslyn skyline. There were three principal changes to the design:

> (1) Density was transferred from the proposed residential building at the north end of the block to the office building at the south end of the block, allowing better utilization of the top of the office tower and enhancing viewing from the observation deck by allowing the observation deck to look over the top of the residential building giving views to the north including the cathedral.

> (2) The bus alley was moved from a location at the far south end of the block to a location that approximates the position it occupies currently (during construction, the bus alley will be at the north end of the proposed plaza). This necessitated reworking of the retail spaces and office lobby. The office lobby is now proposed to front on Wilson Boulevard instead of Lynn St.

> (3) The configuration of the observation deck was changed and an outside terrace area was added. Capacity for the observation deck is established as 500 by the fire marshal (and is associated with access issues), which limits flexibility for having a larger space. There is now a 360 degree view from the observation deck, although the views being emphasized are those to the south and west. The area will be served by a catering kitchen and there is some initial planning for refreshments in the space.

> Concerns included the following:

> (1) The applicant must obtain FAA approval in an environment when the height of the flight path has been reduced from 1000 feet above sea level to 933 feet above sea level. The applicant must also obtain a height amendment to allow the building to go to 470 above sea level.

> (2) Parking was seen to be inadequate -- the amount of parking for the office building was much lower than county standards and would require an aggressive parking management plan to be approved by the county. Also, garage operations need to be addressed.

> (3) A management and accessibility plan for the observation deck is needed. The reduction in public open space argues for the observation deck to be particularly accessible, and the applicant's plan to provide access to the public without charge for only one year was seen to be much less than other applicants provided on other sites, which typically include access for the life of the project on some basis. There were also some concerns that both the plaza and the observation deck be accessible to those who were not "paying to sit down" (i.e., ordering food or beverages from a restaurant or concession stand).

> (4) Another criticism of the plan related to the width of the sidewalks. The current proposal is for 10 feet of clear space, an additional 7 feet for tree grates and 18 inches alongside the curbs for vehicle access. Some SPRC members felt this was inadequate, although the possibility to add sidewalk width is limited owing to the very narrow block. Similarly, there was no provision for a drop off at the office entrance on Wilson Blvd., and this would in all likelihood contribute to congestion in that area.

> (5) Strong views were expressed that signage should be limited or prevented, particularly at the top of the building. One person recommended signs be prohibited above 300 feet, another recommended limiting signage to under 35 feet. Some felt adamant that signage restrictions be made a site condition rather than negotiated later.

> (6) There was some criticism of placing the lobby entrance on Wilson.

> (7) Moving forward in the absence of the Rosslyn Transportation study was felt might preclude some options later.

> (8) The quality of design was generally applauded. One person said they were happy the building would not be brick.

> (9) An important critique of the plan related to the size of the plaza (relative to other plazas in Arlington) and its ability to support the types of programming Rosslyn Renaissance envisions for the area. The width of the plaza is 50 feet and outdoor seating, a water feature (pond), and two rows of trees eat into the clear space. Positioning of the three new proposed metro elevators in the plaza was also questioned, but this matter was at the discretion of WMATA.

> (10) The applicant was advised that additional streetscapes would be needed before the matter goes before the planning commission.

Jennifer