TOWN CENTER COMMITTEE

AGENDA - 5/18/10

Open Forum (15 minutes – took over 30 minutes)

Rob Whitfield asked for clarification of the Lerner/RAJ lawsuit. Mark Looney reported that there
was a collective density number assigned to the Spectrum, Library Park, and RAJ lots.
Lerner asked for clarification from the County that these slots could be assigned
essentially on a first come, first served basis and was given that confirmation. Lerner
then got its concept plan approved for Spectrum. RAJ now wants those slots distributed
on what it describes as a “more equitable” sharing, dividing them more equally among the
individual lot owners. Lerner has resisted this given the prior County ruling. It then
sought additional clarification from the County which said that it did not have jurisdiction
over the matter. The lawsuit to settle the issue then ensued, though Mark is hopeful that
this will get resolved without need of pursuing the legal action to finality.
Mary Ellen Craig returned to issues about the Library Park deed and to what extent it is
committed as park land. It was suggested that this would require legal analysis beyond
the scope of the Committee, but that in any event this parcel would very much be the
subject of future discussions if the town green concept the Committee may recommend is
to become a reality.
Dave Edwards reiterated the need in his and others’ minds for an urban school in TCN.
Dick Rogers presented his vision of a “Cascades Park” – using about a 200’ strip east-west
through the existing FCPA parcel with a cascading waterfall effect and potentially a children’s
boat pond at the bottom. He feels strongly that some portion of this park must be preserved, and
his idea is to find a compromise between what the Committee seems to be leaning toward
(swapping this for a large town green concept) and Guy Rando’s vision of using the entire space
as a re-imagined park area with water and other features. Dick feels his idea would still allow
some retail development along Fountain but add to the value by creating a unique urban space
that would complement and not prevent the retail development.

Administrative – TC South
The Committee discussed the possibility of extending its charter to assume south of the TC Metro
Station as well. It was suggested this would require extending our Tuesday meetings at
least through June with the goal of then creating an integrated report to the TF that would
address all of TC – from Baron Cameroon through the Metro Station to the AGS site.
The gist of the comments suggested this made sense given the dynamic that has
developed with the Committee and that if we were to do this we should model it along
what we have done to date: get the landowners in the room with us to collaborate on
needs, goals, and aspirations. Outcome: consensus that we could and would assume
the area south of the Metro station as part of our charter if the TF Chair was so inclined in
that direction.

I. Committee Discussion (70 minutes – truncated as a result of the above)

a. Incentive/density issues (Master Conceptual Plan, Town Center District)

b. Principles for Comp Plan text (time permitting)

The Conceptual plan map was reviewed. It was determined this is not an official document of any
kind; and it doesn’t include data for all of the lots in TC. Mark Looney gave an overview of what
he generally believes are the key data:

Urban Core: 0.95 non-res FAR (@ 3.5M sq. ft. of commercial space); 50 du/a (@ 4200
residential units; though certain of these slots cannot be used unless certain blocks are
designated for non-urban use); general building height limitation of 275’ (no building in TC
currently approaches that limit)
South: 1.0 FAR to the east (Oracle, NG, Disc. Sq.) and 0.7 elsewhere; 180’ building height limit
West: 0.5 FAR, 50 du/a, 125’ height limit
TCN: 0.7 FAR, 50 du/a, 180’ height limit

Tim Sampson and Dave Sittler from INOVA then offered some thoughts:

- Flexibility is the key.

- The current 0.7 FAR and 50 du/a needs to be adjusted. They think a 0.9 FAR is needed to get
rhe kind of civic uses we are talking about, and going to .35 du//a will actually more likely yield a
closer to 50-50 mix of residential and non-residential given the civic uses being contemplated.
- They feel about 1M sq. ft. of non-residential (combined County and INOVA) at about a 150’
height limit makes sense, with residential nearer to Baron Cameron likely to be 4-5 stories.
- Much of the parking will have to be underneath buildings.
- Suspect this will yield about 130K sq. ft. of retail (by comparison Spectrum today is about 280K
sq. ft.).

Form there the Committee went into a wide-ranging discussion with the thought being that some
of these ideas be captured in whatever draft document is prepared for next week:

- We need a “front door” to the space with a vision

- How do we create language suggesting we want stepped building heights or varied

milieu?

- On the vision:

o Urban space

o Grid served by linear open park space, capped by County services building

o Grid should be through streets that link TCP and Fountain, including Cameroon
Glen

o Fountain Drive as “front door” north-south with ground floor retail and
streetscapes

o RMAG and bike/ped access, including bike lanes

o Park should be more people to people; ensure “solar access”; perhaps shade
and sun studies to ensure widest possible access to sun is protected

o Commercial activity more east of park and government to west

o Traffic analysis essential to ensure traffic flows are adequately addressed

o Highlight the public facilities we want and suggest the fuel depot should be out

o Bus circulator a key

II. Future Schedule (5 minutes)

Agreed we would spend next meeting marking up a draft Committee report concerning TCN that
Robert will attempt to take first cut on, with assumption we will report to the TF next Tuesday
night. Ideally we would then start June 1 on south of the Metro Station.