TO:
Fairfax County Planning Commission
FROM: Fairfax Citizens for Responsible Growth,
Inc. (FairGrowth)
DATE: February 6, 2007
RE:
Transit-Oriented Development Definition, Item ST07-CW-1CP
Fairfax Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. (FairGrowth) appreciates
the opportunity it has had to participate in the Planning Commission's
recent effort to establish a working definition of "Transit-Oriented
Development" (TOD) in Fairfax County. FairGrowth requests that language
be added to the definition that addresses: (1) oversight, enforcement
and transparency measures; (2) the use of 3-D modeling; and (3)
protections for lower-density zones against "density creep."
1. Oversight,
Enforcement & Transparency
FairGrowth implores the Planning Commission to include language
that ensures any TOD projects will be subject to adequate oversight,
enforcement and transparency. While it is FairGrowth's understanding
that some of these issues were discussed during the TOD committee's
deliberations, they were not included in the final draft.
Specifically, FairGrowth suggests the following language be included:
"The County recognizes that even the
best plans can go awry if there is insufficient follow through.
Proffers, TDM commitments, and other assurances both short and long
term related to TOD projects must be vigorously monitored and enforced
in a transparent and accountable manner. Any increased costs incurred
to monitor and enforce provisions of TOD plans should be factored in to
the cost of the project.
"Citizens should have full access to all data related to ongoing TOD
projects. Such data will be made available on the County's web site
whenever practical. Data that is not practical to supply online will be
provided to members of the public upon request, without requiring
residents to go through state Freedom of Information Act procedures and
at no cost in the case of TOD projects. Citizen panels open to full
participation by interested residents should assist in monitoring TOD
progress and compliance with agreed-upon requirements."
Such language is necessary due to recent experiences that have
demonstrated shortcomings in Fairfax County's enforcement and oversight
of development projects, both large and small.
For example, in December of last year, the
Washington Post noted an "
apparent
lack of commitment to traffic reduction" related to development on
the part of the County government, and the County did not dispute this
assessment: "
Fairfax
officials acknowledge that they have not done enough to monitor the 290
traffic-reduction measures they have required from developers, but they
say that will change." This is a perfect opportunity for the County
to demonstrate its willingness and ability to implement the kind of
change that is necessary, and that has been promised.
Further, this past summer the
Post
reported that County officials acknowledged that "
they
have not closely monitored compliance with their zoning rules," and
that the County was "
caught
unprepared" by widespread violations.
These articles came on the heels of a report on how
unfulfilled
commitments cost Fairfax taxpayers over $1 million, "because
developers failed to make the public improvements they promised when
their building plans were approved."
In an August 10 2006 editorial, the
Times
Community newspaper correctly
made
the following observation:
"Given the fact that Fairfax County is
about to pull the trigger on some of the largest, most complex
transit-oriented development projects in its history, it would be nice
to know that the county has a zoning rulebook that makes sense and,
more important, is capable of enforcing it."
Openness and transparency are equally important. Residents have
encountered difficulties in learning details of the status of projects,
and have found themselves required to undergo Freedom of Information
Act procedures (which the County does not always comply with in a
timely manner) and incur charges in order to learn the status of major
projects. FairGrowth finds such circumstances to constitute further
barriers to the citizen involvement that is necessary for TOD projects
to be successful.
2. 3-D Modeling
FairGrowth urges the Planning Commission to include language in the
definition that ensures members of the community will have frequent and
easy access to 3-D modeling of any TOD proposals. This sort of tool
provides residents with a frame of reference that effectively imparts a
great deal of information that is not easily gleaned from technical
descriptions that are replete with terminology rarely found outside of
planning proposals and amendments. Such modeling is an important way to
convey impacts to communities, without requiring citizens to become
immersed in jargon specific to the planning and development industries.
3. Protections For Lower-Density Zones
Against "Density Creep"
A sentence should be added to the end of Section 1, "Transit Proximity
and Station Area Boundaries:"
The TOD planning process should safeguard lower-density zones ("green
belts") outside of transit station area boundaries, and provide
explicit protections against incidents of "density creep," where higher
density is sought for lower-density areas that border transit station
areas.
For the reasons given above, FairGrowth requests that the items
suggested herein be included in the Comprehensive Plan's definition of
Transit-Oriented Development.
Respectfully submitted,
Board of Directors
Fairfax Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. (FairGrowth)
fairgrowth@fairgrowth.org
http://www.fairgrowth.org
"FairGrowth: Transit-Oriented Development With Citizen Input"