Realizing Rosslyn - Amazon Web Services€¦ · FARR ASSOCIATES | W-ZHA 2. Building Height and Form...

GOODY CLANCY WITHKITTELSON & ASSOCIATES | RHODESIDE & HARWELLFARR ASSOCIATES | W-ZHA

Realizing Rosslyn: a new era of opportunity

1


AGENDA

2


1. Project Background and Overview

3


Transportation Policy Directives

4

KEY ELEMENTS

Refined street grid

18th Street Extension

2-way Lynn/Fort Myer

Remove Fort Myer Drive tunnel

Second Metro Station

Enhanced bus service

Right-sized sidewalks

Bicycle facilities


Public Parks + Open Space Policy Directives

5

KEY ELEMENTS

The Esplanade

18th Street Extension

Gateway Park

Rosslyn Plaza Park

1401 Wilson Park

Freedom Park

Boathouse

Lively, diverse program


Urban Design, LU, Sustainability Directives

6

KEY ELEMENTS

More housing (including affordable)

Focused, strategic ground level land use

Human scale architecture/design

Sensitive transitions

Improved streetscapes

Green building strategies

Energy and environment

Urban tree canopy


Building Form + Height Policy Directives

7

KEY ELEMENTS

New building heights policy w/ varied heights across district

Sensitive edge transitions

Priority view corridors from Central Place observation deck

Ground level view corridors

More refined architecture, design treatments

Prioritize community benefits


2. Building Height and Form Approach

8


2. Building Height and Form |

Questions

9

•

•

•


2. Building Height and Form

10

•

•

•

•

•

How to manage future building forms to

create the best possible Rosslyn?



11

•••••••••



Scenarios: peaks and valleysSCENARIO A (average FAR 9.5)• Least height variation• 470’ ASL peaks wherever public view corridors allow• On 2-tower sites, lower tower limited to 75% height of taller tower

12

What we heard:• Perpetuates undesirable

current trends• Concern that density close to

FAR 10 should not be assumed as typical condition; must be earned through project’s merits



Scenarios: peaks and valleysSCENARIO B (average FAR 9.5)• Moderate height variation• 470’ ASL peaks in selected areas• Other sites limited to 85% of (470’-grade)

13

What we heard:• Some building form &

orientation advantages over Scenario A (except at Holiday Inn)

• Concern that density close to FAR 10 should not be assumed as typical condition; must be earned through project’s merits



Scenarios: peaks and valleysSCENARIO C (average FAR 8.8)• Most height variation• 470’ ASL peaks in selected areas• Other sites limited to 70% of (470’-grade)

14

What we heard:• Building forms typically

preferred over A & B • Still doesn’t achieve

compelling skyline, but its variety is better

• Concern for infeasibility of development, and inconsistent constraints among sites



Proposed scenario: peaks and valleysPROPOSED SCENARIO (average FAR 9.2)• Significant height variation• 470’ ASL peaks permitted

in selected areas (where not blocking observation deck view corridors)

• Other sites generally limited to 70-80% of nearby towers for height variation (may be taller to achieve 8FAR min)

• On multiple-tower sites, min. 40’ height differences among towers sought

15



Proposed scenario – aerial view to northeast

16



Proposed scenario – fly-around

17



How are the “valleys” defined?

18

• Located to create contrast with peaks, and preserve priority view corridors

• Also to assist with edge transitions• Height limits are a balance of:

– Contrast with surrounding building heights as measured from the ground

– Contrast with surrounding building heights as seen in the skyline

– Ensuring FAR of at least 8, and preferably 9 or greater where possible, in the modeled scenario

– Ratio of buildable area/total site area

• Resulting height differences from peaks are generally at least 40’ – Reduced to 30’ in certain cases

Hyatt buildings (to achieve FAR 8)



Proposed scenario – skyline view

1919

From northern end of Key Bridge, looking south




2020

From Lincoln Memorial area, looking west




21

From Central Place observation deck, looking east




22

From Iwo Jima Memorial, looking north



Proposed scenario – select views from building tops

23

View from 443’ amsl (top floor)

1500 Wilson Blvd


1400 Wilson Blvd


1515 Wilson Blvd


1101 Wilson Blvd

GOODY CLANCY WITHKITTELSON & ASSOCIATES | RHODESIDE & HARWELLFARR ASSOCIATES | W-ZHA 24


Proposed Scenario yields FAR 9+ for most sites

0

5

10

15

20

25[A Taper Policy

Scenario]



Ease of fitting density varies widely across sites • Ground floor area

as percentage of lot area varies between 42-100%

• Sites with lower percentages typically will need greater building height to reach densities that make redevelopment feasible



Proposed Approach to Density

•

•



Proposed building height & form policy

27

Items of focus tonight

C

C

C

C Emerging as item intended to be codified



Block and street network

28



Building heights | above average site elevation

29

•

Site under further study



Building heights flexibility, in select cases

30

•

•

•

•

Height limit per Heights Map

Additional height may be considered in certain circumstances

More slender base



Building height variety

31

•

•

•



Recommended tower orientation – with flexibility

32

•

•



Recommended tower dimensions, spacing, use

33

•

•

•

≥60’

≤120’≤90’



Wilson Blvd. step-backs expand view opportunities

34


2. Building Height and Form | Discussion

Questions

35

•

•

•


3. 18th Street Implementation

36


3. 18th Street Implementation |

Questions

37

•

•



18th Street extension, by segment

38

1401 Wilson Blvd./1400 Key Blvd.

Site Plan(approved)

MetroStationPlaza

CentralPlacePlaza(under

construction)

RosslynPlaza

(PDSP proposalUnder review)

AmesCenter

Site

InternationalPlace

Black: existing, approved, or under construction

Red: to be achievedw/ future redevelopment


3. 18th Street Implementation Emerging Guidance on location and spatial attributes

39



International Place density

40



International Place density

41


3. 18th Street Implementation | Discussion

Questions

42

•

•


4. Potential Air-Rights Development

43

•

•

•


4. Air-rights study |

Questions

44

•

•


4. Air-rights study

Background

45

•

•

•

•


4. Air-rights study

Study Area

46


4. Air-rights study

Key Assumptions

47

• Building height limits per MWAA-preferred elevations

• “C-O Rosslyn” parking standards

• Air rights development to support cost of access to air rights (to VA) and community benefits (to County)

• Included Site 3 (Gateway Park) in study, yet Plan Framework envisions revitalized park space

• Reinforcing existing deck is half the cost of a new deck


4. Air-rights study

Building Program Summary

48

• Building massing schemes modeled for each site

• Sample pro forma created for each site to study economic feasibility of development


4. Air-rights study

Site 1 potential air rights development scenario

49

• 460,000sf office• 220,000sf residential• 10,000sf retail

Site 1: view from northeast

Waterview -Office

Gateway Park

PotomacTower

Waterview -Residential /

Hotel

(Height: 242’ ASE /302’ AMSL)

(Height: 237’ ASE /297’ AMSL)


4. Air-rights study

Summary of economics findings

50

Site Return achieved Rent increase needed to achieve target return

Potential timeframe needed for rent increase

Site 1 6.8% 15% 20+ years

Site 2 6.4% 20% 20+ years

Site 3 alone 8% 2% Under 20 years

Site 4 alone 6.9% 13% 20+ years

Sites 3 & 4 office 7.7% 5% Under 20 years

Sites 3 & 4 residential/ office

6.2% 20% 20+ years

• 9% target return on investment assumed necessary for feasibility• Target rate higher than usual (as low as 6.25%) due to perceived project

risk and potential for increased financing costs over time


4. Air-rights study | Conclusion #1

Economics are challenging

51

•

•

•



Focus on the core, first

52

•

•

•



But, don’t say no - not at all

53

•

•

•


4. Air-rights study | Conclusion #4But, set expectations for a very special project

54

•

•

•


4. Air-rights study | Wrap-up

Rosslyn Sector Plan Update Approach

55

•

•

•


4. Air-rights study | Discussion

Questions

56

•

•


5. Rosslyn Plaza public realm

57


5. Rosslyn Plaza Public Realm |

58

Is the proposed guidance for the location, size, and program opportunities of the public open space at Rosslyn Plaza generally moving in the right direction?

Should Arlington Ridge Road be elevated to the plaza level and fully connect with Wilson Boulevard and 17th, 18th and 19th

Streets, with an Esplanade that parallels Arlington Ridge Road and ultimately extends to Gateway Park to the north and River Place and the Iwo Jima Memorial to the south?


5. Rosslyn Plaza Public Realm

59

Revitalizing Spaces• Opportunity for respite, socializing,

transition, reflection• Form/amenity may vary: hardscape

or soft-scape; small urban plazas, nature preserves, intimate spaces in larger parks. Seating, picnic tables, gardens, walking trails, public art

Recreation Spaces• Used for active recreation and

leisure activities. Amenities can include playgrounds, sport facilities, dog parks, trails

• Depending on scale, can serve the neighborhood, the community, even the region

Destination Spaces• Unique features, attracting visitors

from the community, region and beyond (e.g. vista, monument, programmed events)

• Typically larger in size, can be multi-use in function

Linking Spaces• Connect other open spaces in an

integrated, accessible network• Often linear in form (e.g. trails,

greenways, streets, linear plazas)• Amenities include greenery and

vegetation, seating, lighting, ecological corridors



Overview: Rosslyn’s major parks

•••

•••

60



Rosslyn Plaza Park

61

•

•

•••

•

•••••

•

•

•


Scenario 1

Scenario 2


Rosslyn Plaza Park: initial scenarios felt unsuccessful…

•

•

•

•

•

62

esplanade

esplanade



New location/configuration celebrates frontage on 18th St, Ridge Rd, and Esplanade



64



65

AREA EXCLUDING STREETS:

50,000 SF (1.2 acres)



66



6767



6868



6969



70

• Why strive for full connectivity?

• Street connectivity supports the public nature of the streets, site, proposed park, and esplanade

• Increase circulation options throughout Rosslyn

• Create complete streets that accommodate both vehicles and pedestrians

• Better integrate this edge site with its surroundings

• Provide opportunities for potential connectivity south (River Place) and east (air rights)



71



72

FDR Drive, NYC



73



74

Brooklyn Heights Promenade, NYC

Hoboken, NJ

Shoemaker Green, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia



75


5. Rosslyn Plaza Public Realm | Discussion

76

Is the proposed guidance for the location, size, and program opportunities of the public open space at Rosslyn Plaza generally moving in the right direction?

Should Arlington Ridge Road be elevated to the plaza level and fully connect with Wilson Boulevard and 17th, 18th and 19th

Streets, with an Esplanade that parallels Arlington Ridge Road and ultimately extends to Gateway Park to the north and River Place and the Iwo Jima Memorial to the south?


5. Updated schedule and next steps

77


5. Updated Schedule

Month Meetings Milestones

February • Rosslyn Process Panel (2/2)• LRPC (2/18)

March • County Board Work Session (3/4)• Rosslyn Process Panel (TBD)• Civic Associations (TBD, or April)• Community Open House (TBD, or April)• LRPC (TBD, or April)

April • Advisory Commissions (TBD)• LRPC (TBD)

May • Planning Commission (RTA)• County Board (RTA)

June • Planning Commission• County Board (Action)

1st Draft Plan for Public Review

RTA Draft Plan issued

Rosslyn Sector Plan Update Adoption


DISCUSSION

79

Realizing Rosslyn - Amazon Web Services€¦ · FARR ASSOCIATES | W-ZHA 2. Building Height and Form...

Documents

Transcript of Realizing Rosslyn - Amazon Web Services€¦ · FARR ASSOCIATES | W-ZHA 2. Building Height and Form...