Category: Transit-Oriented Development

CSG comments on Plan Langston (Lee) Highway study

Posted on by Ayesha Amsa

Dear Ms. Alfonso-Ahmed,

The Coalition for Smarter Growth appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Land Use Scenario Analysis (LUSA) shared with the community over the spring as part of the Plan Lee Highway visioning process. 

CSG advocates for walkable, bikeable, inclusive, and transit-oriented communities as the most sustainable and equitable way for the Washington, DC region to grow and provide opportunities for all. The Lee Highway (future Langston Boulevard) corridor provides a great opportunity to plan for a future that accommodates new growth and development in a way that is inclusive, sustainable, and meets the community’s current and future transportation, housing, and livability needs. 

CSG offers the following comments on the LUSA:

  • The additional heights and greater potential for consolidation as part of the LUSA’s Scenario B will help facilitate more affordable multifamily housing in the corridor and help to produce more housing overall. 
  • Providing bonus heights to reach the maximum heights shown in Scenario B could be achieved in exchange for committed affordable units within those buildings. Similar zoning incentives are utilized elsewhere in the County. The Columbia Pike Neighborhoods Form Based Code allows for a bonus of either two or six stories for provision of affordable housing, and other RA zoning districts within the County are allowed up to 60 feet of additional height for projects with 100% committed affordable units. 
  • The edges of the commercial areas along the corridor are ideal places for Missing Middle Housing as a transition to the lower-density residential areas. As presented in the LUSA, however, it is unclear how the County plans to regulate development within the “two-family to low-scale multifamily residential” and areas of up to 4 stories in height. This lack of clarity has caused concern among some neighborhood residents. Since the Missing Middle Study is expected to include an analysis of this type of housing, it would be helpful for the county to conduct additional community outreach and discussions regarding the specifics of these transition areas once that study is further along. 

To assuage concerns, the Preliminary Concept Plan should make clear that transition zones will be established to step down heights to nearby neighborhoods and include goals that these transition zones are expected to achieve and the potential forms that the development could take. It should further make clear that any action to move toward a possible redevelopment in these areas would be voluntary and that no forced acquisition or eminent domain will be a part of that process.

  • The East Falls Church (EFC) area plan should be updated with the higher allowable heights and transition zones consistent with the rest of the corridor. The current EFC area plan does not allow for an adequate amount of development for a key Metro station that will also serve the future Route 7 Bus Rapid Transit. These updates should include not only the direct Metro station area but also the surrounding commercial and residential blocks to create a walkable, transit-oriented neighborhood befitting a major metro station area. 
  • The Cherrydale plan should also be updated to be consistent with the allowable heights and transition zones in the rest of the corridor. This means that additional height beyond what is in the original Cherrydale plan should be proposed.

Thank you for your consideration of our comments. We appreciate the opportunity to help develop a plan that helps guide the new Langston Boulevard corridor into a vibrant, inclusive, and transit-oriented corridor.

Thank you,
Sonya Breehey  

Comments in Support of West Falls Church Plan Amendment 2018-II-1M

Posted on by Ayesha Amsa

Chairman McKay and Members of the Board,

Please accept the attached joint comments on the West Falls Church Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2018-II-1M before you tomorrow. We write to express our support for the redevelopment of the West Falls Church Transit Station Area and urge you to consider our recommendations below and vote in favor of the CPA.

These comments are being submitted jointly on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the Audubon Naturalist Society, the Northern Virginia Affordable Housing Alliance, the Sierra Club Great Falls Group, Friends of Holmes Run, Faith Alliance for Climate Solutions, and the Fairfax Alliance for Better Bicycling.

Thank you,
Sonya Breehey

CSG Testimony: Comments in Support of West Falls Church Redevelopment Plan

CSG Testimony: Comments in Support of West Falls Church Redevelopment Plan

Posted on by Ayesha Amsa

For nearly 25 years since our founding by the region’s leading conservation groups, we have helped the region work toward a vision for a network of transit-oriented communities, a vision committed to by Fairfax County and endorsed by all 23 jurisdictions in the Council of Governments’ Region Forward plan and supporting plans. It is a vision shared by the conservation community, affordable housing, bike/ped and transit advocates, and much of the business community.

We support the West Falls Church TSA – with recommendations: 1) swift action to make the streets that surround the Metro station site safer for local residents, bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit-
users and 2) addressing climate change by slashing our emissions from transportation. L

We are signatories to the joint supportive comments submitted by leading conservation and housing groups in the Fairfax Healthy Communities Network – which you have in your packet. In addition to CSG, the signatories are Audubon Naturalist Society, Northern VA Affordable Housing Alliance, Sierra Club – Great Falls Group, Friends of Holmes Run, and Faith Alliance for Climate Solutions.

Joint Letter: Comments in Support of PA 2018-II-1M WFC TSA

Joint Letter: Comments in Support of PA 2018-II-1M WFC TSA

Posted on by Ayesha Amsa

Please accept these comments on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the Audubon  Naturalist Society, the Northern Virginia Affordable Housing Alliance, the Sierra Club Great Falls  Group, Friends of Holmes Run, and Faith Alliance for Climate Solutions. We write to express  our support for the redevelopment of the West Falls Church Transit Station Area and urge you  to consider our recommendations below and vote in favor of the comprehensive plan  amendment (CPA) (2018-II-1M). 

The proposed plan amendment will help realize Fairfax County’s vision of providing a network of  transit-oriented development (TOD) along its transit corridors. This vision is outlined in the  County’s Comprehensive Plan guidance, which calls for development close to transit stations to  focus on reducing dependence on driving and increasing transit ridership. 

Event: Envision the Future of Lee Highway

Posted on by Ayesha Amsa

Arlington County wants to hear from you as the community lays out a vision for the Lee Highway corridor! The Plan Lee Highway team is hosting a community meeting this Thursday, May 27th to present and get feedback on corridor-wide and neighborhood area plans for the Arlington East Falls Church, North Highlands and Lyon Village neighborhoods.

You are also invited to join the Plan Lee Highway team for a walking tour on June 12th to discuss visions for the future. Walking tours are a great opportunity to think about how we can transform commercial corridors into more walkable, sustainable neighborhoods.

Plan Lee Highway Community Meeting
Arlington East Falls Church – North Highlands – Lyon Village
May 27, 2021 at 7 pm
Join the Meeting

Walking Tour
June 12, 2021 at 10 am
Join the Walking Tour

Community members’ input helped to shape the preliminary land use scenarios for five neighborhood areas. The scenarios offer different land use mixes to provide diverse housing options, enhanced open space and stormwater management, safer streets and better transit. Feedback will be used to help develop a preferred Concept Plan.

Thursday’s community meeting will focus on Neighborhood Areas 1 and 5 including Arlington East Falls Church, North Highlands, and Lyon Village neighborhoods. Two other community meetings were already held for Neighborhood Area 2 (John M. Langston, Yorktown, Tara Leeway Heights, Leeway Overlee), Area 3 (Waverly Hills, Donaldson Run, Old Dominion, Glebewood, Waycroft Woodlawn), and Area 4 (Cherrydale and Maywood). The recordings and presentations for all the meetings are posted on the project website here. 

You can provide feedback for all neighborhood area and corridor-wide concepts via an online survey through June 20th. 

For more information about the Plan Lee Highway process, visit the project website. 

CSG Testimony Re: Virginia 6 Year Plan

Posted on by Emily Maurer
2021.05.04-Testimony-re-VA-6-Year-PlanDownload

May 4, 2021 

Testimony re Virginia 6-Year Plan 2022 – 2027 

For this evening I will focus on the big picture. We will submit more detailed comments by the deadline. 

First, thank you for your leadership in supporting transit in Virginia including funding reduced  fare and free fare initiatives for bus service. Transit is now receiving more funding than it has in  the past, however we believe it should receive far more – as much as 50% of future state  transportation funding in order to support economic opportunity and equity, more efficient  land use and state competitiveness, and fight climate change. 

Second, thank you for your great leadership on Virginia intercity rail. Your analysis showed that  adding another lane the length of I-95 would be both costly and a failure due to induced  demand. Since our Reconnecting Virginia project in 2005, we’ve shown that intercity rail,  transit, and transit-oriented development in the state’s urban crescent should be a top priority. Third, thank you for adoption and implementation of SmartScale which in general is resulting in more effective projects and spending.  

However, we urge you to do more, in light of the existential threat of climate change. Virginia will be heavily impacted by sea level rise and we must limit that rise if we are going to save our  coastal communities including Hampton Roads and the Naval facilities. In addition, we will be  faced with more flooding events, washed out roads and transit facilities, as well as longer  droughts and significant heat events.  

This means you must scale back the extensive road expansion in state plans. New and wider  roads in metro areas fill up in as few as five years and they fuel more auto-dependent  development, more vehicle miles traveled, and more greenhouse gas emissions. “Congestion  relief” is not possible. The science shows electrical vehicles will not be enough. We need to  reduce VMT by at least 20% statewide, and because rural residents have fewer options and  must drive more miles, our metro areas need to reduce VMT even more. We know how to do  this – by focusing development in our cities and towns, and creating transit-oriented  communities (TOCs) in our suburbs. This must be combined with focusing our transportation $  on transit, on local street networks for TOCs and on bike/walk investments. It also means  pricing solutions like parking pricing, and employer transit benefits, and zero transit fares. 

As usual, we strongly disagree with the Northern VA Transportation Alliance whose focus on  the failed metric congestion reduction has done great damage to planning in NOVA. 

Our suburban elected officials must recognize that the auto-dependent land use approvals that  they are granting and the efforts to widen so many roads (even if they have bike/ped paths)  creates more traffic and less than ideal experiences for pedestrians and cyclists. 

For today, I will just mention two items of concern:

495Next – we and our partners urge you to delay action because VA and Md have not studied a  TOC/transit/demand management alternative. The P3 process continues to override fair and  objective alternatives analysis. As it is, the proposal to date has far too little funding for transit,  and extends the provision limiting transit and HOV to 24% of HOT traffic after which the  taxpayers must pay fees to Transurban. 

State of good repair – We appreciate the increased attention to maintenance. But it appears  that you are including capacity expansion, at least for bridges, in your state of good repair  program. If that means additional vehicle lanes, we ask that the relevant portion of the cost due  to capacity expansion not be charged in the SGR category but to the capital funding spent on  road expansion. 

Route 1: We are concerned that the widening of most of Route 1 will create a barrier and make  the road far more dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. So could the proposed  123 and Route 1 interchange.  

Thank you, 

Stewart Schwartz 

Executive Director