|
|
Welcome Governor-Elect Tim Kaine! (Thank you for your Transportation Town Halls!)
|
|
Introduction
|
 |
|
Transportation needs for Northern Virginia must take into account the intense development occurring in Fairfax County and throughout the region. Major increases in density in Tysons Corner, the Dulles Corridor, and at the Vienna and Dunn Loring Metro stations will have a profound effect on our quality of life. Smaller developments also must be evaluated for their collective effects on traffic, schools, and the environment.
Citizens groups concerned about Fairfax County development policies and a County process that often brushes aside legitimate community questions have joined together to create this website, to allow residents in all parts of the County and beyond to discuss their concerns about the direction and effects of growth. The Network is founded on the principle that citizens must have both input and influence in the evolution of the County. It is our community.
Member groups are non-partisan, and represent individuals across a wide political spectrum. Member groups are not "anti-growth," but rather advocate responsible development, taking into account regional and infrastructure needs, and employing a process that respects citizen voices. We invite you to explore our website.
Network members are expanding a dialogue that flowered dramatically this past Spring with two town hall meetings. The first attracted nearly 600 citizens to Oakton High School, the largest citizens' meeting on general growth issues in Fairfax in at least 20 years. Over the past six months, citizens engaged in community affairs through the Network have flocked by the hundreds to hearings and meetings across the County.
What follows is a brief thematic presentation of the issues of primary concern to Fairfax citizens, followed by a one-page overview briefing of several currently pressing local matters that implicate these themes. While a number of the matters addressed may not be subject to remedy at the state-wide level, we want you to understand the full context of our concerns in evaluating options for those that are. All of the land-use issues of concern to us intersect at some level with the transportation problems and challenges facing Northern Virginia.
Thank you for your time and attention, and for your service to the citizens of Virginia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Themes
|
|
|
Focus on Infrastructure and Environment First - Spot-planning and zoning is outpacing regional planning and infrastructure development. We need to give broader attention to roads, watersheds, sewers, transit, schools, parks, and air and water quality - before authorizing expanded development.
Development in metro areas should be analyzed comprehensively for its impact on the public good (broadly defined to include economic impact, service facilities capacity, environmental protection, time value (a cost of traffic), recreation, education, etc.)
If the existing infrastructure cannot support today's population, even "smart growth" harms the community.
Current policies force local taxpayers to bear the costs of both inadequate public facilities (crowded schools, traffic gridlock, overcrowded Metro trains, deteriorating water quality) and higher taxes to pay for infrastructure improvements.
To address the impacts of development, local jurisdictions should be given the option of enacting impact fees or an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to analyze development requests for their impacts on existing public infrastructure. See, e.g., FLA. STAT. 163.3202.
Should Virginia seek to increase density in competition with the District of Columbia that has considerable infrastructure in place and is seeking population growth?
Should Virginia focus increased density in areas actively seeking revitalization through retail and commercial businesses and upscale office space class, such as the Route 1 corridor, or Baileys Crossroads?
Transportation is Key - How to move people is a critical question, but one that should focus on what works for the populace, and not just for developer profits based on speculative real estate investments. Given the timetable necessary for transportation improvements, these issues also must be evaluated in tandem with growth and land-use issues, or the new systems will be outdated before they are even fully implemented.
Start at square one and really evaluate all options on the merits and economics, including both their degree of improvement (measured on multiple criteria) and cost-effectiveness.
Take a close look at Bus Rapid Transit. Metro alone cannot solve our problems. We have a complex transportation problem that requires a multi-faceted approach.
Evaluate extending the Yellow line Metro from Huntington to Fort Belvoir or Lorton.
Evaluate Service Level Agreements for transportation projects that set forth hard performance standards for each project and require funding to be canceled for any project that fails to deliver the level of service improvements promised in exchange for funding.
Make WMATA Accountable to the Public - Development decisions involving WMATA need to be open to public scrutiny. WMATA is not subject to any federal or state FOIA or open government laws. WMATA must be made subject to the federal Freedom of Information Act, as well as the Administrative Procedures Act. Barring that, Virginia should work with Maryland and DC to reach agreement on a set of disclosure laws and administrative procedures to govern WMATA under the interstate compact.
Be True to Transit-Oriented Development - What we are getting is density at - or simply near - transit nodes, not "smart growth." MetroWest (Vienna Metro) and Hunter Mill Road (near Reston) and the newly proposed development at the Dunn Loring Metro station are prime examples.
Establish (with community input) a set of carefully defined parameters for "transit-oriented development." Prevent the morphing of "transit-oriented" development into a loose "transit-friendly" concept.
Transfer development rights from areas located away from transit nodes to those within mile of such nodes, to ensure a net benefit and not just increase density everywhere.
Carefully evaluate ridership projections and parking needs, particularly at terminus stations.
Enhance secondary transportation modes to allow those living in transit-oriented developments to travel easily to nearby Town Centers, shopping and recreation areas without cars.
Ensure Citizen Inclusion and Influence in an Open Process - Process problems are interfering with trust in our local government. Examples: hand-picked special Task Forces, enforcing and changing rules for the use of public parks by private organizations, loss of protection for Chesapeake tributary streams. We need to make the County decision-making process more transparent and responsive, and build in accountability.
Zoning decisions must be made on an administrative, rather than on a legislative, basis, based on record evidence with notice and opportunity for hearing, findings of fact and conclusions of law that are responsive to testimony as well as electronic and written comments, and subject to judicial review.
Applications for rezoning must address the impacts on public infrastructure and the public fisc. The analysis must include both new revenues, including developer contributions, and new costs. Citizens should have standing to challenge these analyses.
Planning and zoning decisions must be free of the appearance of bias or conflict. Disclosures should be made at the initial -- and critical -- stage of amending the Comprehensive Plan, and not just in connection with re-zoning applications. Criteria for assessing conflict and bias should take into account employment with landowners that stand to profit from development under review.
The Magisterial system in which each Districts Supervisor essentially makes a unilateral decision on projects within his or her District to which other Supervisors then defer needs to be re-evaluated and re-vamped. A rolling election cycle should also be considered so that the record of each Supervisor can be evaluated on a comprehensive and County-wide basis.
Preserve Green Belts - Fairfax County has a plan for areas of substantial growth (including some blighted and failing areas), areas which will be maintained at low density, and strategic buffer/greenbelt areas to separate urban cores, which we should adhere to and protect. Affirmative plans for protecting green space are needed in all areas subject to development pressure.
Reconsider Active Growth Advocacy - Does it make sense to spend $6.8M annually just in Fairfax to advocate business migration to the County? Northern Virginia is on auto-pilot with growth policies from a decade ago that should be re-examined. Growth must be managed, not simply invited at all costs.
Give the Town of Vienna and Similarly Situated Localities a Seat at the Table - While growth must be evaluated and managed based on its regional as well as local impacts, the decisions should not all be made at state and regional level; there has to be room for our highly-valued small communities (which provide the quality of life we love) to have both input and influence.
|
|
|
|
|
Issues Briefings
|
|
|
|
|
|
In January, 2003 the Fairfax County Park Authority signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with McLean Youth Soccer to allow the soccer organization to take cash from Marymount University (a private, Arlington County university) to help build an artificial turf field at Lewinsville Park, a public park located in a residential area in McLean, in exchange for exclusive rights to prime playing and practice time at that field for four University teams for as much as a ten-year period. This arrangement had been proposed to the PA by the then Dranesville representative to the Board of Supervisors, and had been under consideration for many months without the knowledge of the general public. A Zoning Administrator for Fairfax County decided that this dealdid not violate theZoning Code requirement that public parks be used "exclusively" for public use. Therefore the allowed the deal to go forward without a special permit or special exception, which would have required a public hearing. No public hearing has ever been conducted on the Marymount arrangement, or the conversion of the grass field to artificial turf. Meanwhile, citizens were adverely affected by the increased traffic, noise, and other diminishments of the quality of life that come from having college sports events held in a neighborhood community park with no on-site Park Authority management. An unknown blogger has documented the story (starting on April 3, 2004 and continuing through the present). The Fairfax County Park Authority was complicit in this deal, making changes in policies governing residency requirements for field use, field usage dates, and other regulations to accommodate MYS and Marymount - all without public exposure or explanation. These changes will have County-wide ramifications as more artificial turf fields are built. Repeated violatoins of the MOA between the PA and MYV have been exposed only becuase of the actions of concerned residents, who have been forced to file repeated FOIA requests to botain needed answers from the County. Nearby homeowners, many of whom were responsible for having obtained the Lewinsville park land for public use in the first place, found themsleves excluded from the procedd, and finally appealed to the BZA. While the homeowners were wiating to be heard by the BZA, the County allowed construction of the artificial turf field to take place. The homeowners' position was unanimously upheld by the BZA, but the County then appealed that decision in Fairfax County Circuit Court. When the Circuit Court judge found in favor of the County, the BZA and the homeowners appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court on several counts. The County's appeal of the BZA ruling ultimately was ruled untimely by a unanimously Virginia Supreme Court, but only after continued massive expenditures in legal fees by citizens. Undeterred, the Board of Supervisors filed a futile petition for rehearing of the case in the Va. S. Ct. The sole apparent purpose of this doomed action was to stay the mandate on the S.Ct.'s ruling so that Marymount could finish its Fall 2005 soccer season and so that the BOS could issue a fast-tracked proposed amendment to the County's Zoning Ordinance that would change the "exclusive" public use requirement to a "primarily" public use requirement and allow the MYS/Marymount deal, and others like it, to go forward again WITHOUT any public comment or hearing. Citizens from across the County testified against the proposed change in the rules in droves, and the Planning Commission just last month "indefinitely deferred" further consideration of the amendment. Even now, however, the citizens' relief may be short-lived, as there is nothing to stop the BOS from again proposing changes to the Zoning Ordinance to allow uses such as Marymount's public parks to go forward solely with administrative approval and without public scrutiny. "I don't know what's going to happen next" said Supervisor DuBois (R. Dranesville) in a recent newspaper article. Dubois said the County Attorney and Planning and Zoning staff are reviewing "possible options" for what to do next. What we need now: We need to strengthen FOIA and disclosure laws to include penalties and enforcement that will discourage violations of open meeting and public access laws at the local level. It is imperative to ensure that citizens be heard. We need controls to ensure that local officials do not bend the rules to restrict the right of citizens to public notice and comment and a right to be heard at a public hearing. Stronger campaign disclosure laws and restrictions are a necessary part of needed reforms and long overdue in Virginia. Our local elected and appointed boards must not continue to be bullet-proof. Citizens deserve the right to recall a local elected official when necessary to prevent abuse of office, and some state level oversight of county government actions is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|