26/old dominion task force · double access cv. at grade. high. low. initial concept name. order of...

Preferred Scenarios

Study Area OverviewStaff Name, Department (DEPT ACRONYM)

26/Old Dominion Task ForceMeeting #9: March 21, 2019

26/Old Dominion Task Force 2

Outline

1. Task Force Feedback from 3/7

2. Refined Concepts

3. Implementation and Next Steps

4. Task Force Discussion/Reactions


FEEDBACK ONINITIAL CONCEPTS


Site Planning Criteria and Considerations Minimum Criteria for All Refined Concepts:

1. Must meet the adopted charge2. Can clearly be associated with previous (what fits) schemes3. Only site uses identified by subcommittees as appropriate4. Accommodate operations of both leaf & winter storm response in

the winter months5. Minimize pavement/expand open space

Considerations include reserved site area to allow for: Fire Lanes Ingress & Egress to the site Large vehicle turning radii Site security Zoning Setbacks Stormwater Management Facilities Buffering and Screening Operational Safety


Role of 25th Road in the Refined Concepts

north

Study Area Arlington County Right-of-Way

• Staff and consultants did not utilize 25th Road in any of the Initial Concepts presented to the Task Force on 3/7/19.

• Since that time, staff has confirmed the extent of the County’s right-of-way, adjacent to the study area

• Existing pavement for 25th

Road stops at the edge of the Missionhurst parking lot, while the County’s right of way continues further north

25TH ROAD

Missionhurst Parking Lot


Role of 25th Road in the Refined Concepts

Challenges of utilizing 25th Road for truck access to the 26/OD site:

• Problematic turning movements for larger trucks - based on current lane configurations and intersection geometry

• Increase in traffic volume atun-signalized intersection (where queuing concerns have previously been raised)

• Significant impact to single-family homes through intensified use of 25th Road

north


Open Space Considerations – Represented in ConceptsPrior to and during the Task Force planning process, several surveys have been made available that detail community preferences for open space amenities:

ODCA Letter (Mar 2019)Preferred elements:• Playground (for kids <10)• Welcoming structure• Connectivity to park• Small sports field (no lights)

DRCA Survey (Feb 2019)Preferred elements:• Undisturbed open space• Hiking Trails• Playgrounds• Casual Use Open Space• Paved Multi-Use Trails• Pollinator Garden• Park Shelter/Picnic Area

DRCA Letter (Oct 2018)Preferred elements:• Kid’s splash park• Multi-generational park• Concrete ping-pong/chess• Dog Park• Community Center

Draft PSMP Survey (2016)Preferred elements:• Paved Multi-Use Trails• Natural Areas• Wildlife Habitats• Casual Use spaces• Hiking Trails

ODCA Conceptual Plan (2015)Preferred elements:• Dog Park• Multi-Generational Park• Water Feature• Connectivity to existing trail• Gardening Space• Gateway Feature (corner)

ODCA NC Plan (2002)Preferred elements:• Multi-Generational Park• Active Recreational Uses

Marymount ( Dec 2018)Preferred elements:• NCAA-regulation sports field


Open Space Considerations – Common Definition

Open space is any open piece of land that is undeveloped (has no buildings or other built structures), is accessible to the public, provides ecosystem services, supports agricultural and forest production, and offers opportunities for recreation.

Open space can include:• Green space (land that is partly or completely covered with

grass, trees, shrubs, or other vegetation) and typically includes parks, community gardens, and cemeteries,

• Schoolyards,• Playgrounds,• Public seating areas,• Public plazas,• Vacant lots,• Forests and grasslands,• Farms and ranches, or• Streams and rivers.

As defined by the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and US Forest Service (USFS)


Open Space Considerations – Common Definition

Green Space is a publicly accessible area with a focus on natural vegetation, such as grass, plants, or trees, that may include built environment features, such as urban parks, as well as less managed areas, including woodland and nature reserves.

Note: 2019 PSMP does not define the term “open space”

As defined by Arlington County (2019 Public Spaces Master Plan)


REFINED CONCEPTSNote:

The following exhibits represent draft illustrative plans still under review and pending further study of feasibility

(must meet fire code, building code, State and County regulations)


Suggested Evaluation Criteria for Initial Concepts

Challenges to conducting leaf and snow operations at the same time or when partially underground

Operational Complexity

Quantity of Open Space

Impact on Existing Trees

Safety

Community Impacts

Constructability (Cost)

Implementation (Phasing)

Mar

ch 7

Mar

ch 2

1

Difference in total area (square feet) as compared between existing conditions and proposed concepts

Extent to which existing trees must be removed (for purposes of regrading or to site other uses)

Levels of visibility for operators, clearance for multiple movements, conflict points for truck deliveries/staging

Mitigation of visual/noise/traffic impacts from all uses on the surrounding neighborhood

Higher cost associated with undergrounding operational uses and for multi-level structures supporting active uses

Extent of change between existing site conditions and proposed master plan (length of time to achieve vision)


Summary of Five (5) Initial Concepts – March 7

cvSingle Access NCAA Field

Single Access Loop

cv

cv

Double Access Loop

Double Access Drive Through

A

B

C

D

E cvDouble Access At Grade

HIGH

LOW

OPE

RATIO

NA

L

CO

MPL

EXITY

ORDER OF CONCEPTS

Site access limited to just Old Dominion Dr.; All operations undergrounded below green

roof large enough for NCAA field space

Single Access Loop

Site access from 26th St. and Old Dominion Dr.; All operations at grade; Open Space opportunities limited to area near the trail head

CONCEPT NAME CONCEPT DESCRIPTION

Site access limited to just 26th St.; Some operations undergrounded; Open space

opportunities on each end of the site

Site access from 26th St. and Old Dominion Dr.; All operations below grade and exposed;

Open space opportunities on each end of site

Site access from 26th St. and Old Dominion Dr.; Some operations undergrounded; Open

space opportunities on each end of the site


Refined Concepts for Further Consideration – March 21

cvSingle Access NCAA Field

Single Access Loop

cv

cv

Double Access Loop

Double Access Drive Through

A

B

C

D

E cvDouble Access At Grade

HIGH

LOW

ORDER OF CONCEPTSINITIAL CONCEPT NAME

cvExpose leaf storage area and add

Marymount’s park space across 26th St. with operational facilities on lower level

Combined concepts (B+D) to show double access with rooftop park space that covers a portion of the operational

facilities located on lower level

A

D

Ecv

Revised to show two variations:1. Relocated salt structure/shift change

facility to the corner (gain open space)

2. Rely on interim structure into the future by adding required elements around it

REFINED CONCEPT DESCRIPTION

OPE

RATIO

NA

L

CO

MPL

EXITY

HIGH

LOW


Summary of Requested Criteria for Refined Concepts

Refined Concepts

Total Open Space Area

Disturbed Land (% of site area)

Possible Impact on RPA


(leaf & snow)1

General Cost

Estimate2

Impact on

Existing Trees1

Level of Difficulty in Phasing1

Public Access to Change Facility

Refined Concept A

271,484 SF (6.2 acres) 81% POSSIBLE HIGH $50-60 m. HIGHEST HIGH NO

Refined Concept D

261,214 SF (6.0 acres) 58% NO MEDIUM $30-40 m. HIGH HIGH YES

(upper level)

Refined Concept E1

218,139 SF (5.0 acres) 58% NO LOW $15-20 m. HIGH MEDIUM YES

Refined Concept E2

191,139 SF (4.4 acres) 57% NO LOW $10-15 m. HIGH LOW YES

Existing Site Conditions

229,785 SF (5.3 acres) 30% NO LOW --- --- --- ---

1: “Low/Medium/High” terminology is relative to each Refined Concept (only intended for their general comparison).

2: Initial Cost estimates, received on 3/20/19, are under staff review and are provided for comparative purposes only.

TOTAL SITE AREA: 326,700 SF (7.5 Acres) | USABLE SITE AREA: 226,500 SF (5.2 acres)


WHAT IS THETASK FORCE’S

ULTIMATE PRODUCT?


Iterative Approach to Site Design – 26/OD Task Force

Decision Justifications

February

What Fits “Schemes”

“InitialConcepts”

“PreferredScenarios”

February March 7 March 21

Preferred Scenario(s): • Illustrative representation of agreed-upon use considerations for this site, their general

location, orientation, and associated mitigation strategies (i.e. buffering, screening)• Represent a “Conceptual Design” for the site and informs its implementation (phasing)

Staff & Consultants synthesize feedback and progress drawings

?


CONCEPTUAL DESIGN SCHEMATIC DESIGN FINAL DESIGN

26/Old Dominion Task ForceVision, general site layout,

and overall approach

Public Facilities Review Committee (PFRC);DPR Public Meetings; Engagement with various Commissions

Specific design solutions informed by site engineering

Iterative Approach to Site Design – Subsequent Efforts

Once funding has been secured through the CIP process

Consensus on using fencing to frame certain elements

Specific location, size, material, and fence color identified; Installation and other details finalized

EXAMPLE

(USING A FENCE)


IMPLEMENTATIONAND NEXT STEPS


Implementation - Land Use & Zoning

Proposed Use Categories

General Land Use Plan (GLUP) Zoning Examples

PARK SPACE Public S-3A or S-D Casual space, recreational uses, trails

OPERATIONAL USES Government and Community Facilities P-S Material storage, leaf & mulch operations,

winter storm response services

Appropriate Land Use and Zoning Designations:

• Appropriate land use and zoning categories will be determined by the County Board and informed by the 26/OD Task Force Master Plan

• Areas where open space is provided above operational uses will require land use and zoning districts that permit both use categories

• County Board may choose to act on such changes prior to the identification of funding in future CIPs, but likely after additional design work takes place


Phasing: the sequence of construction where various elements of site development are delivered in multiple stages. Specific order of those stages can be expressed through a Phased Development Plan.

PHASING STRATEGIES FOR 26/OD SITE WILL BE INFLUENCED BY THE FOLLOWING:1. Operational Requirements: Necessary area to maintain leaf and winter

storm response services throughout the course of construction (size of facilities, access to/from public right of way, orientation of parking and drive aisles to facilitate deliveries, storage, loading, and other operations) and any applicable County, State, and Federal requirements

2. Site Constraints: Limited site size, availability of parking (on & off-site), and limitations of adjacent roadways and intersection geometries

3. Funding: Available funds allocated by the County Boards to capital projects or park improvements on the 26/OD site. Funding is expressed through Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) (updated every two years) and based on the County’s available bond capacity

Implementation - Construction Phasing


What to Anticipate Moving Forward?

1. Final Report submitted to County Board by Task Force chair (April)2. County Board may formally request an update/presentation from TF chair

(spring/summer)3. County Board will solicit additional public feedback as part of the next

Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) process (Spring 2020)

Additional Engagement Opportunities (once funding is made available):

• Public Facility Review Committee (PFRC) will initiate a review process to finalize the design of future operational facilities on this site

• Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR) will request public input as part of their park design for this site

• Subsequent CIP processes will invite the public to provide feedback and continue to request additional funding for this site (every two years)

Implementation - Next Steps


REFINED CONCEPTSNote:

The following exhibits represent draft illustrative plans still under review and pending further study of feasibility

(must meet fire code, building code, State and County regulations)


Refined Concept A: “Single Access NCAA Field”

Old

Dom

inio

n Dr

ive

LOWER LEVEL



UPPER LEVELO

ld D

omin

ion

Driv

e



Refined Concepts





(leaf & snow)1

General Cost

Estimate2

Impact on Existing Trees1


Public Access to Change

Facility

Refined Concept A

271,484 SF (6.2 acres) 81% POSSIBLE HIGH $50-60 m. HIGHEST HIGH NO


229,785 SF (5.3 acres) 30% NO LOW --- --- --- ---

1: “Low/Medium/High” terminology is relative to each Refined Concept (and only intended for their general comparison).



26th

Street

Old Dominion

Drive Trail


Refined Concept D: “Double Access Drive Through”

LOWER LEVELO

ld D

omin

ion

Driv

e



UPPER LEVELO

ld D

omin

ion

Driv

e



Refined Concepts





(leaf & snow)1

General Cost

Estimate2




Facility

Refined Concept D

261,214 SF (6.0 acres) 58% NO MEDIUM $30-40 m. HIGH HIGH YES

(upper level)


229,785 SF (5.3 acres) 30% NO LOW --- --- --- ---




26th

Street

Old Dominion

DriveTrail


Refined Concept E1: “Double Access At Grade”

Old

Dom

inio

n Dr

ive



Refined Concepts





(leaf & snow)1

General Cost

Estimate2




Facility

Refined Concept E1

218,139 SF (5.0 acres) 58% NO LOW $15-20 m. HIGH MEDIUM YES


229,785 SF (5.3 acres) 30% NO LOW --- --- --- ---




26th

Street

Old Dominion

DriveTrail



Old

Dom

inio

n Dr

ive



Refined Concepts





(leaf & snow)1

General Cost

Estimate2




Facility

Refined Concept E2

191,139 SF (4.4 acres) 57% NO LOW $10-15 m. HIGH LOW YES


229,785 SF (5.3 acres) 30% NO LOW --- --- --- ---




26th

Street

Old Dominion

DriveTrail


TASK FORCE DISCUSSION & REACTIONS

26/old dominion task force · double access cv. at grade. high. low. initial concept name. order of...

Documents