You are on page 1of 15

Coalition for a Planned Reston (CPR

)
Statement to RA Board of Directors re
Proposed Changes to Reston Master Plan
November 16, 2017

Good evening. I am Terry Maynard, 2217 Wakerobin Lane, and Co-Chair of the Reston 20/20
Committee. I am speaking on behalf of the Coalition for a Planned Reston or CPR, a consortium of
Reston Citizens Association, Reclaim Reston, and Reston 20/20 focused on addressing the issues
with the pending Reston PRC zoning ordinance amendment and weaknesses in the Reston Master
Plan.

The members of CPR greatly appreciate the efforts Reston Association and its Board have taken to
address the flaws in the proposed PRC zoning amendment and build “One Reston” for us all
consistent with Reston’s Vision and Planning Principles. We especially appreciate the RA Board’s
position taken last month opposing the proposed zoning amendment and its initiative to respond
to Supervisor Hudgins’ commitment to open a dialogue on specific changes to the Reston Master
Plan. We also greatly appreciate RA’s including members of the coalition in RA’s discussion to
identify specific plan amendment proposals to present to Supervisor Hudgins and County staff.

Still, we would like to offer recommendations that, in our view, strengthen the language of the
proposed changes. We are driven by two key motivations:

 Assure that the specifics of the Reston Master Plan are consistent with the plan’s vision
and planning principles, and
 Where feasible, uses language from the more thorough Tysons comprehensive plan to
tighten the expectations of the Reston plan.

First, we believe Reston needs to make a strong statement about the value of affordable housing
of all varieties in our community. The Tysons Plan has such language, calling for 20% Affordable or
Workforce housing in station area development while Reston’s generally accepts the County’s
tiered system for affordable housing.

We believe infrastructure phasing is the most important area of the plan that needs
strengthening. Most who spoke at the October 23 community meeting expressed concern about
the County’s poor performance in meeting Reston’s infrastructure needs. Borrowing from the
Tysons plan, we believe we believe RA should call for stronger language on tracking infrastructure
progress, including RA taking on that task itself if the County won’t, assuring that developers
provide the land needed for that infrastructure, and assuring that the public facilities are available
at the time a development is operational. Related to the last point, we believe that developers
should be expected to provide all proffered funding before beginning development.

1
Language and planning capacity in the Reston plan also needs to be improved concerning key
public facilities, especially parks and recreation, public schools, and transportation also needs to
be improved. We concur in RA’s proposed master plan changes in these topic areas and would
hope language comparable in its thoroughness to the Tysons Plan in identifying facilities, sites,
scheduling, and more could ultimately be introduced.

We certainly share RA’s concern about the planned overall density of Reston and concur with its
proposal to include an overall Reston population cap in the plan. As RA suggests, this cap should
include all potential affordable units as well as the bonus market units associated with them and
other bonus opportunities laid out in the plan. This overall cap should be captured in the area
covered by the PRC zoning ordinance as well.

Moreover, we believe that allowable residential development, especially high-density
development, should not be left unconstrained. As it stands now, high-density development is
unlimited in the plan, subject to County Board approval and some consistency with the malleable
Reston plan. We believe that the higher density categories should be reduced to a maximum
density of 60 DU/acre and the sixth density category—compliance with County guidelines in non-
PRC areas—should be deleted.

Residential density is also especially troublesome in Reston’s village centers, which the Reston
plan characterizes as neighborhood scale mixed-use areas consistent with their surrounding
neighborhoods, but then permits high-density residential redevelopment. We recommend that
the density in village centers be capped at 30 dwelling units per acre consistent with their
neighborhood scale character.

Finally, we believe there are two places where language should be deleted, neither of which had
an opportunity for adequate public discussion:

 The first of these is the language inserted by the Planning Commission to allow increased
density at Saint Johns Woods. The new language is inconsistent with the overarching
Reston plan calling for established neighborhoods to remain stable.
 The second is the road on the map of the grid of streets that would link Isaac Newton
Square with American Dream Way that would require destroying the Hidden Creek
Country Club golf course. This is in direct contradiction of the Reston plan’s intent to
retain two golf courses in our community.

We appreciate your taking the time to listen to these suggestions. We hope that, before
approving the letter that has been drafted, you will take the time to read and discuss these
proposed changes and those offered by others in the community. Given the importance of this
planning and zoning issue, we think it is far more important to get our community’s proposals
right than to get them fast.

Thank you for your time and consideration.
2
Appendix: Recommendations for Reston Master Plan Language Changes

In the following pages, we provide specific language that we believe may be inserted (or deleted)
from the current Reston Master Plan to improve its effectiveness as a planning tool.

 Additions are included in red.
 Language from the Tysons is shown in green.
 Deletions are denoted by strikethroughs.

3
Affordable Housing

Reston has lake front homes with private docks, homes within steps of golf courses,
suburban style neighborhoods with curvilinear streets, cubist styled townhomes amidst heavily
forested areas, high-rise multi-family in Lake Anne and the Reston Town Center, and multi-
family communities of various sizes located throughout Reston. Residential developments
designed by noted architects such as Charles Goodman, Cothiel Smith, and James Rosant are
present within the diverse housing landscape of Reston.
Housing Affordability

As Reston continues to attract new residents, there is likely to be continued
upward pressure on housing prices. As prices increase, the number of families who pay more
than 30 percent of their income for housing may increase 3. An ample supply of affordable and
permanent supportive housing that provides the opportunity to preserve an economically
diverse community will be essential for continuing to fulfill the Vision of Reston.
Reston currently has assisted housing units as highlighted in Figure 3 of the Upper
Potomac Planning District Overview, but to ensure the continued provision of affordable
housing, future development should meet county policies on affordable housing. Specifically,
the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan provides guidance within the Land Use and Housing
Sections of the Policy Plan that emphasize the expectations of increased affordable housing
opportunities in conjunction with redevelopment of existing residential neighborhoods,
revitalization areas, and development of high-density mixed-use projects.
Opportunities to include micro apartments, residential studio units, and workforce
housing within development should be pursued along with cost-saving construction techniques
for affordable housing. 4 Incentives should be used to sustain and grow the amount of
available affordable housing.
All new development or redevelopment projects should contribute toward the creation of
affordable housing as described below.
• Development proposals with a residential component should meet the provisions of
the Affordable Dwelling Unit Ordinance (ADU), when applicable, and the Workforce
Housing Policy.
• Proposals that include residential use in the Village Centers should meet the
provisions of the county’s Workforce Housing Policy.

3 US Department of Housing and Urban Development states that families who pay more
than 30 percent of their income for housing are considered cost burdened and may have
difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.

4 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Joint Venture for Affordable
Housing (JVAH) program offers detailed information for builders who want to incorporate
affordable housing techniques into land planning, development, and house and lot designs.

4
• Proposals within the Transit Station Areas (TSA) should contribute towards
affordable and workforce housing as described in the TSA Areawide
Recommendations.
A critical aspect of the vision Reston planning principle is to provide housing choices for all ages
and ensure that a population with a variety of income levels has the ability to live in Tysons
Reston. The Policy Plan states that affordable housing should be located close to employment
opportunities and should be a vital element in high density and mixed use development
projects. A specific objective in the Policy Plan is to encourage affordable and workforce
housing in Tysons. Affordable housing may include Affordable Dwelling Units (ADUs) required
pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance and Workforce Dwelling Units (WDUs) administered
consistent with the Board’s administrative policy guidelines for such units, or other such price
controlled units that the Board deems to meet the intent of these provisions.

All projects with a residential component that seek to utilize the redevelopment option in
the District Recommendations should provide 20% affordable and workforce dwelling units.
These projects are allowed a 20% residential floor area bonus and flexibility in how and where
Workforce Dwelling Units can be provided within Tysons Reston.

Because development proposals within 1/4 mile of the Metro stations are not subject to a
maximum intensity, the FAR proposed for rezoning applications in these areas is considered to
include the bonus floor area allowed for meeting the affordable and workforce housing
expectations.

For Affordable Dwelling Units (ADUs), the provisions of Part 8 of Article 2 of the
Fairfax County Zoning Ordinance shall apply, unless the dwelling units proposed in the
development are specifically exempted from compliance with the ADU Program.

For Workforce Dwelling Units (WDUs), the following housing conditions and the
guidelines in the Housing section of the Policy Plan (except as modified below) apply to any
residential development built under the redevelopment option, regardless of whether or not
the development elects to utilize the available bonus density.

 20% of the residential units in new developments should be affordable to households
with incomes ranging from 50 up to 120% of AMI (Area Median Income), as set forth in
Table 1A. Within 1/4 mile of the Metro stations, the 20% applies to the total number of
dwelling units to be constructed in the proposed development. Beyond 1/4 mile of the
Metro stations, any units created with bonus floor area should be excluded from the 20%
WDU calculation. In a development that is required to provide ADUs, the ADUs and
ADU bonus units may be deducted from the total number of dwelling units on which the
WDU calculation is based.

 For WDUs associated with high-rise condominiums, the income tiers may be adjusted to

5
three (3) income tiers as follows: one-third up to 70% AMI, one-third at 71 to 80% AMI,
and one-third at 81 to 100% AMI, as set forth in “Table 1B: Income Tiers for Workforce
Dwelling Units in High-rise Condominiums.” In addition, if the applicant provides all of
the for-sale workforce housing units onsite, the percentage of WDUs should be reduced
from 20% to 14%. If the units are provided as new construction for-sale units but are
transferred to another property offsite in Tysons Reston, the percentage to be provided
should be 16%. If rental workforce housing units are provided onsite or offsite in Tysons
Reston in lieu of the for-sale units, the percentage of rental units to be provided should be
20% and follow the income tiers outlined in Table 1A.

 To account for market conditions such as increases in interest rates that may affect the
published Workforce Dwelling Unit Pricing for High-rise Condominium Buildings
approved by the County Executive on January 16, 2015 or as amended, the income tiers
may be adjusted upward 5% (i.e. 70% to 75%, 80% to 85%, and 100 to 105%) at the time
of delivery as may be approved by the Department of Housing and Community
Development and the County Executive.

 If required by the Zoning Ordinance, ADUs may be counted toward the 20% affordable
housing objective identified in the previous bulleted item, above. Any such ADUs could
be used to satisfy the lower income tiers identified in Tables 1A and 1B for WDUs.

 A maximum 20% increase in residential floor area is allowed for achieving the workforce
housing objective. In mixed use developments, some of this increase in floor area may be

6
used for commercial purposes. The percentage of nonresidential and residential bonus
floor area should be similar to the project’s overall land use mix. In order to provide
more flexibility with the bonus, the Policy Plan’s size restrictions on bonus market rate
units do not apply within Tysons.

 The WDUs provided should have a similar mix in the number of bedrooms as the market
rate units. The minimum unit size of WDUs should be consistent with the Policy Plan.

 WDUs should be price controlled as set forth in the Board of Supervisors’ Tysons Corner
Urban Center Workforce Dwelling Unit Administrative Policy Guidelines, adopted June
22, 2010, or as may be amended.

 WDUs are preferred to be provided on-site. However, developers may aggregate land
for workforce housing off-site and/or transfer to others the responsibility for creating such
units in building structures where the advantages of financing and operating affordable and
workforce housing can be realized. Units provided in this manner should be located within
Tysons Reston, should be in general conformance with the applicable land use, intensity, public
facility and urban design objectives, and should include all of the income tiers set forth in
Tables 1A and 1B.

 Efforts should be made to preserve market rate housing units that are affordable to
households earning below 120% of AMI. Land owners may meet their affordable
housing objective by purchasing existing units and preserving their affordability as set
forth in the Board of Supervisors’ Tysons Corner Urban Center Workforce Dwelling Unit
Administrative Policy Guidelines, adopted June 22, 2010 or as may be amended County
workforce housing policy guidance. Redevelopment of existing housing units should satisfy
Objective 11 in the Land Use section of the Policy Plan, including increased affordable housing
opportunities and positive impacts on the environment, public facilities and transportation
systems.

 The WDUs should be provided concurrently with market rate units or with some form of
surety that they will be built.

 A housing trust fund will be established and used to create affordable and workforce
housing opportunities in Tysons Reston.

 Cash contributions in lieu of providing WDUs are not desired. However, in the rare event
that a payment in lieu of affordable units is considered, this payment should be 3% of the
total contract sales price for each market rate unit within the building that is subject to the
WDU policy, payable at the time of settlement to the Tysons a Reston Housing Trust Fund. Any
combination of units and cash contribution may be considered provided that the combination
of WDUs and monetary contribution is proportional to the overall requirement. The applicant

7
must coordinate with both the Department of Housing and Community Development and the
Department of Planning and Zoning for implementation.

 Programs that capitalize on either the development of housing or on the incomes of
households, such as low income housing tax credits, tax-exempt housing bonds, tax
increment financing, tax abatement, or a county housing fund, should be considered.

 Flexibility in the total number of WDUs provided may be considered for projects that
meet additional housing needs that have been identified by the county. Examples include
providing a higher proportion of units in the lowest income tiers or providing units with
more bedrooms than would otherwise be expected. Such proposals should be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis.

 Creative strategies for achieving housing objectives should be considered. These could
include a system similar to wetlands banking in which a developer builds additional
affordable and workforce dwelling units and the credit for providing the units is sold to
another developer who has an obligation to provide affordable housing. Another
strategy could be to incorporate units into public buildings. Facilities for populations
with special needs, including those who are homeless, should also be considered.

A housing trust fund will be used to create affordable and workforce housing opportunities in
Tysons Reston. Nonresidential development throughout Tysons Reston should contribute a
minimum of $3.00 per nonresidential square foot (adjusted annually based on the Consumer
Price Index) or at least $0.25 per nonresidential square foot over a period of time to be
determined at the time of rezoning approval. Such developments may provide an equivalent
contribution of land or affordable units in lieu of a cash contribution. Nonresidential
contributions could also be used to fund affordable housing opportunities in Tysons Reston
through a partnership. If nonresidential floor area is achieved through a bonus for providing
affordable and workforce dwelling units, the bonus floor area should not be included when
calculating the contribution amount. Ground level retail located in office, hotel, and residential
buildings should also not be included when calculating the contribution amount.

The provision of workforce housing should be viewed as a collective responsibility that
will directly benefit employers in Tysons Reston. New office, retail, and hotel developments
will benefit from having a range of affordable housing opportunities within a short commuting
distance of the jobs in Tysons Reston.

(Excerpted from pp. 34-37 of the Tysons Plan)

Senior Housing

The Vision and Planning Principles of Reston promote increasing the amount of senior
housing available to provide an opportunity for residents to age in place. The Land Use
element of the Policy Plan also emphasizes the importance of locating senior housing within a

8
short walking distance of community services, and public transportation. Infill development,
new development and especially redevelopment within Village Centers and the TSAs
should strive to ensure opportunities are provided for adequate senior housing designed to
suit a range of age, income and health needs. Incentives should be used to sustain and
grow the amount of available senior housing.
Universally Designed Housing
As baby boomers age and life expectancy continues to increase, the county and Reston
will continue to experience an increased need for housing to accommodate the physically
disabled and handicapped. In furtherance of countywide policies and the Reston Vision,
proposals should increase the supply of townhouse and multifamily housing designed to
accommodate these populations through the application of universal design. If incorporated
into building designs, additional costs will be minimal, while community benefits will be
substantial.
Development and redevelopment proposals with a residential component should
commit to providing units designed specifically for these populations.
• Proposals located closer to transit and services and their associated higher
development intensities (e.g. Village Centers and TSAs) should provide more units.
• The units may be either market rate or affordable.

. . . . . . . .END

9
PHASING
Private Partnerships

Cooperation among landowners will be necessary to obtain land for public facilities,
park and open space, and the grid of streets. These elements are necessary to the successful
evolution of the TOD areas from a suburban environment to a more urban one and it will be
incumbent on private property owners to contribute to that success.
Phasing

An evolving phasing plan linking future development to specific improvements will
ensure that the desired urban infrastructure and public amenities, as well as transportation
infrastructure, will occur as growth within the TSAs occurs. The goal of appropriate
phasing is to balance projected development with infrastructure and public facility needs
over time. Monitoring the approval of and actual construction of new development will
ensure that the phasing plan stays current as needs are addressed and new ones identified.
The new Tysons Reston’s redevelopment will unfold incrementally over the next 40
years. Incremental redevelopment must be balanced by having infrastructure in place when
needed, such as the Circulator System, the new grid of streets, parks and recreational
facilities, schools and fire stations to successfully support an increased population in Tysons
Reston. Each step of redevelopment in Tysons Reston needs to move in the direction of
achieving the vision laid out in the Plan.
The phasing of development is essential to assure the provision of public facilities. A
phased strategy to grow, monitor that growth, and adjust the implementation strategy based
on experience and performance is crucial to Tysons’ success. The goal of appropriate phasing
is to balance projected development with infrastructure and public facility needs over time.
The Areawide Land Use, Transportation, and Public Facilities sections provide guidance on
phasing that will be applied during the review of development applications.
(Taken from p. 19 of the Tysons Plan)

10
Land Use/Transportation Balance (PHASING)

Maintaining a balance between the land uses in Reston, and the supporting
transportation system is essential in order to preserve accessibility in and around Reston as
development occurs over time. To maintain a balance, the increase in development should
be coordinated with the provision of transportation infrastructure and specific programs to
reduce vehicle trips.
Within the Reston TSAs, preference should be given to maintaining a high level of
service for all modes including transit, vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. To achieve this,
consideration should be given to safety and security, direct pathways, topography, and
the achievement of a balance between traffic delay and a pedestrian friendly environment.
Impact studies should quantify the level of service (LOS) for all applicable modes by
applying up-to- date standard techniques. It is the intent of these recommendations to
maximize the future use of transit, bicycling and walking in these TSAs and Reston in the
future. However, safe and efficient circulation for vehicles will still need to be provided
within, through and around the TSAs and Reston.
Major transportation improvements and public facilities can take many years to design,
fund, and construct. The sequencing of such public improvements will require close monitoring
of approved rezonings, building permits, commuting patterns, demographic trends, and
population and employment growth. Actual performance in these areas and other market
trends may result in the need for the county to perform additional analyses and make
adjustments to the timing of transportation improvements and/or public facilities. In this
regard there is a need to monitor achievement of Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
goals as indicated in Table 5 Figure 44: TDM Vehicle Trip Reduction Goals for Commercial and
Residential Development.
Five years after the Silver Line is completed to Dulles International Airport and Loudoun
County, the county should assess the following:
• How actual growth compares to the baseline GMU growth forecasts;
• How the pace of growth compares to the provision of transportation infrastructure
projects and public facilities;
• Whether the growth anticipated to occur over a five to ten year period is in balance
with transportation improvements and public facilities programmed to be completed
over the same time period; and
• Whether total development approved through rezonings is in balance with the
private and public sector commitments toward achieving achievements of the
necessary transportation and public facility improvements.
The following strategies are general approaches to achieve a sustainable balance of
development with infrastructure and public facilities throughout Tysons Reston.
(Excerpted from pp. 30-31 of Tysons Plan)

11
PUBLIC FACILITIES PHASING

As noted above, virtually all future growth planned in Reston should be focused in the
three Transit Station Areas (TSAs) and the Village Centers. During Phase I of the Reston Master
Plan Special Study, the projected impacts on public facilities resulting from the planned growth
in the TSAs were identified. Providing adequate public facilities to serve that planned growth
will require the expansion or modification of existing facilities in some cases and the
development of new facilities in other cases. The existing and future public facilities in the
TSAs are described below. At such time as redevelopment is proposed for each Village Center,
additional analysis will be conducted to determine the impacts of the additional development
on
existing facilities and identify what new facilities, if any, would be needed to accommodate the
new development. The provision of future facilities will need to be coordinated with the rate at
which planned development occurs in these TSAs as well as in the rest of the Reston
community.
See the Reston TSA Implementation section for additional guidance regarding implementation
of
public facilities.

Phasing Public Facilities

In Tysons Reston, an intensely a highly developed area where most of the land is privately
owned and already developed, locating new public facilities will be cost-prohibitive if the
county has to purchase land to build stand-alone public structures. It will therefore be critical
that land for free-standing uses or spaces within buildings for co-located uses is provided within
private developments at no cost to the public sector.

While the facilities themselves will be constructed throughout the planning horizon as
need arises, it is critical that space for most, if not all, of these facilities be secured as soon as
possible. Therefore, rezoning proposals, through proffers, should commit to provide the
necessary land and/or building space to ensure locations are available for the county to
construct facilities in concert with the pace of growth.

Commitments to dedicate building space or land for most, if not all, of the public
facilities needed by 2050 should be provided as development approvals occur during the first
10 or 20 years of Plan implementation.

In addition to facilitating public facility objectives through zoning actions, it may be
necessary for landowners throughout Tysons Reston to work collaboratively and creatively
through partnerships to meet public facility objectives. Detailed plans for the provision of
public facilities, including parks and athletic fields, for a district or subdistrict should be in place
prior to or concurrent with the first rezoning approval in that district or subdistrict. Such plans
should enumerate the public facilities needed in that district, the proposed locations for the
facilities, their anticipated year of construction, and the private sector’s commitments toward

12
the provision of those facilities. The public facilities plans should be coordinated with the
county and land owners within the district or subdistrict. The locations of proposed public
facilities may be placed on an “official map” as described in the Transportation section.

Public facility and infrastructure analyses should be performed in conjunction with any
development application. The results of these analyses should identify needed improvements,
the phasing of these improvements with new development, and appropriate measures to
mitigate other impacts.

Commitments should be provided for needed improvements and for the mitigation of
impacts identified in the public facility and infrastructure analyses, as well as improvements and
mitigation measures identified in the Areawide recommendations.

Public facilities will be funded from a combination of public and private sources,
including Community Development Authorities at the Tysons-wide, district and/or subdistrict
levels. Financing strategies are discussed in the Implementation chapter of the Areawide plan
text.

For development thresholds and estimated timing of needed public facilities, refer to
Public Facility Needs and Commitments, Table 8. ((We need a similar table for Reston.))

Additional discussion of phasing public facilities and infrastructure can be found in the
Areawide Land Use and Transportation recommendations.

((Excerpted from pp. 101-102 of the Tysons Plan))

13
GUIDELINES FOR VILLAGE CENTER REDEVELOPMENT

Each of the Village Centers consists of a non-residential mixed-use area and adjacent residential
uses. The focus of redevelopment should be in the non-residential mixed-use area. For Hunters
Woods, North Point, South Lakes and Tall Oaks Village Centers, at such time as the property
owners are contemplating redevelopment, they will need to work with the community and
Fairfax County to create a detailed plan for the property, as specified below.

In order to establish clear expectations for all residents, landowners and businesses, any
proposal for redevelopment of Reston’s Village Centers should generally follow the process
outlined below. In addition, the proposal should demonstrate achievement of the planning
objectives.

( . . . break . . . )

Planning Objectives

Land Use

 The mix of uses should include neighborhood-serving retail and service uses for
neighborhood convenience and activation of the area after work hours.

 The mix of uses may also include accessory office use and community uses. Community
uses should include public meeting spaces.

 The mix of uses should include residential uses to support the retail and service uses,
offer additional housing options, as well as enliven the area.

 Residential uses should provide for a variety of housing types as well as affordable
housing. To sustain the plan focus on neighborhood scale development in village
centers, housing density for residential redevelopment there should not exceed
medium-density multi-family (21-30 DU/AC) – typically mid-rise structures of four to six
stories with structured parking..

 Senior housing is encouraged due to the proximity and convenience of retail and other
service uses, as well as transit accessibility.

 Encourage residents to walk to the other uses and linger, through exceptionally
integrated design.

 Public plazas are a key element. These spaces should be programmable for community
events.

14
Residential Land Use Categories

Residential

Residential neighborhoods are the foundation of Reston. These areas are planned for
residential uses, including single-family and multi-family housing.

The Reston Land Use map includes six categories of residential land uses:

• Low-density Single-family (.1-5 DU/AC) – Typically single-family detached structures
that sit on their own lot without sharing any walls with another home or building.
Typical lot size is about 1/4 to 1/3 acre; however larger lots up to 3 acres are dispersed
throughout the area.

• Medium-density Single-family (6-12 DU/AC) – Typically single-family attached
structures containing a common wall like townhomes, rowhomes, and duplexes.

• Low-density Multi-family (13-20 DU/AC) – Typically low-rise structures of one to four
stories like garden style apartments or condominiums as well as more contemporary
designs.

• Medium-density Multi-family (21-50 21-30 DU/AC) – Typically mid-rise structures of
five four to eight six stories with structured parking.

• High-density Multi-family (greater than 50 30-60 DU/AC) – Typically high-rise
structures of nine or more stories with underground or below grade structured parking
located near high-capacity mass transit, such as Metrorail.

• Countywide Comprehensive Land Use categories - This category applies to parcels not
designated as Residential Planned Community on the countywide Comprehensive Land
Use Plan Map. These parcels are designated solely by density categories expressed in
DU/AC (dwelling unit per acre).

15