Source and additional details: :The Fairfax Newsletter

Rte. 1 Office Vacancies Now at 7% Is there a need for more office space on Richmond Highway?

Madison Development Partners, which has been working for the past couple of years to find tenants for the office building it contracted with Fairfax County to build at the former Groveton school site at Richmond Highway and Memorial Drive at Beacon Hill, has made public statements that the office market in Fairfax County is soft...

Source and additional details: Mount Vernon Voice by Steve Hunt November 25, 2004

Wrong Way for Route 1?

Becky Witsman sees a trend, and she's not sure she likes it. As the director of Southeast Fairfax Development Corporation (SFDC), she is responsible for maintaining the balance of Richmond Highway. She is concerned that the projects that developers are applying for are not in keeping with long-range plans.

Source and additional details: Mount Vernon Gazette by Gale Curcio November 18, 2004 

____________________________________________________

Question suggested for this meeting 

Thank you for the heads up. Unfortunately I will not be able to attend , but I hope many of our colleagues
will be able to. Note, this is not an "us vs. them" both groups have same goals to improve Rich. hwy. This is what has been instrumental in the past for revitalization efforts. It seems that they may have only heard one side 
of the story so far and have not heard all the issues. I am sure there are additional issues that we have not yet heard.

- four thousand daily vehicles trips added to the immediate streets. If getting through Beacon Hill
is tough now on a weekend, think what will happen when 4000 trips are added to this.

- Office use will not overflow parking to our neighborhoods on nights and weekends. Just ask anyone in Arlington who lives near an apartment complex about overflow parking. 

- Office use will not crowd our streets on nights and weekends

- Office use provides critical daytime patronage of restaurants

- Eliminating office space requirement means loss of opportunity of quality office space forever. This was a primary reason for the county land swap subsidy.

- Land is currently not blighted, and could be aesthetically improved with minimal landscaping efforts. Something
that had not been done to date.

- A developer at Buckman Rd is planning 60,000 Ft of office space - and that is at a significantly less prime location
and without a county land subsidy. Certainly 70,000 is feasible at this prime location.

- If this is a "luxury" residential facility, people with cars loath to use the bus, especially if it does not get them there faster.

Any changes in the plan should maintain the original intent of minimum of 70,000 sq ft of office space for long term revitalization of Richmond Hwy.

Thanks,

Jim Walton
James_P_Walton@ieee.org
703-780-9555
MVCCA P&Z committee member
Mt. Zephyr Citizens Association
Safe Crossings Campaign www.metroped.org
Member, SFDC area advisory committee

1. Have you been involved with this project from the beginning?
For "project", I assume you mean the deal for the South County Center and Land Swap Deal (Office Building Covenant for the Groveton property). I have been aware of the project once the county publicly announced its solution in 1999 or 2000 (after it worked it for two years).


2. Are you more concerned about the effect of the building on the area or the fact that they are reneging on the original agreement?
Both, I am concerned we will lose opportunity for high-quality office space at a prime location. Quality office space has been key to long term revitalization efforts along Richmond Hwy. I do not think the original agreement could have been worded more strongly for this. It has words such as "buy back" and "sue for performance" to ensure a "Class A" office building. This was critical for BOTH business and community support for the
deal. It appears that although the words were serious then, no one is taking them serious now.

As for a residential development itself, if I lived in the area I would be more concerned if I lived adjacent to it or on the shady (East) side of Route 1. I would be concerned that this could be an apartment complex or condo complex that could become a high-rental complex(i.e. non-owner occupied). I would also be very concerned about the overflow of parking from the development. Just ask anyone in Arlington who lives near an apartment complex. Instead of this just an "8x5" problem (which can be addressed with 3 hour parking limits) it becomes a nighttime and weekend problem for the rest of eternity. I would also be concerned about the fighting with the extra two or three thousand cars trips trying to access Richmond Hwy on evening and especially on weekends.

3. How do you think Mount Zephyr will be impacted if the revised plan goes through?
Revitalization is a long term effort and requires a mix of residential and commercial improvements. The Richmond hwy area is getting better and will need room for quality office space sometime in the future. If we lose this
opportunity for quality office space in a prime location, I fear revitalization will stagnate in the future. This will be bad for everyone.

4. Do you plan to keep fighting the amendment, and if so, how?
Yes. But I am not sure how much more I can do than to provide information to the newspapers, which in turn will provide information to the community leaders. One person cannot effect a change, but a community can. Right
now, I think people are only getting one side of the story, hopefully they will told both sides and base their decisions knowing all the information (including all opinions).

5. Are you president of the civic association?
Yes, I am the President of the Mt. Zephyr Citizen's Association.
Also, member of SFDC Area Advisory committee, and
Safe Crossings Campaign, www.MetroPed.Org

6. Any other thoughts you want to share?
Beacon Hill is sandwiched between growing Fort Belvoir to the South and the growing office developments on Eisenhower Ave. With Fort Belvoir just four miles to the south and Patent Trade Office complex just three miles to
north- this certainly seems like a viable candidate for office space in the future.   A developer about a mile down the road, with a much more difficult situation and without a land subsidy from the County plans to build a mixed
use development with 60,000 sq ft office space. If that developer believes it can be done, certainly 70,000 sq ft in a prime location can also be accomplished. Hopefully, the county will recall the wisdom of their original dream for this location and ensure that intent is still somehow met.

Jim Walton

______________________________________________________________________