The much awaited draft of the Tysons Corner Urban Design Guidelines has been posted (Find it here!). The committee, constituted of architects, planners, and landscape architects should be applauded for their efforts in providing specific direction to developers on the implementation of previously conceptualized urban designs. The committee has also incorporated a week long review period for the document open to public comment. As part of this public discussion thetysonscorner.com will provide a week long discussion of each component of the guidelines leading up to the comment deadline of December 29th. Please provide your own thoughts and comments to be incorporated into our community discussion.
Pedestrian Systems
The urban design guidelines for Tysons Corner discusses pedestrian facilities throughout each chapter in correlation to other design elements. The main pedestrian section of the document is within chapter 2 and provides extensive detail into elements of the sidewalk including materials, size, and integration with other streetscape and building elements. As a starting point Page 2-4 provides a well thought out design guidelines and addresses a major concern of pedestrian usability in relation to obstructive building elements and requires a set of geometry that forms maximums of block size and pedestrian grid size.
Within this section we find that more guidelines should be developed to avoid developments simply meeting the minimum geometric requirements. Providing a typical block grid increases the viability for pedestrians to use the network and is an essential fundamental to urban design. Page 2-12 of the guidelines indicates;
“All tree planting spaces should accommodate adequate soil volume to foster healthy root growth for street trees. Innovative use of subgrade structural elements and suspended paving is encouraged to provide this soil volume while accommodating pedestrian traffic.”
The sustainability of streetscape plantings is clearly improved through these forms of innovative practices, however minimum surface allotment for planting spaces should not be deferred by use of these technologies as the secondary function of the planted areas is to provide a separation of vehicular and pedestrian space. This is an important aspect of giving an urban corridor a human scale which encourages pedestrian utilization. Page 2-22 continues;
“Provide curb extensions (bulb-outs) into the parking lane wherever feasible.”
This provision is extremely important to the above point and should not be a choice of feasibility within any road except for Boulevard style roads, ie Rt 123, 7, and International Drive. These Boulevards do not prioritize pedestrian access above all other transportation modes and therefore traffic calming would cause unwanted repercussions to vehicular congestion. For all other road sections (Avenues, Collectors, and Local) where pedestrian connectivity is a high priority these bulbouts should be essential for traffic calming and pedestrian safety as well as to define space for parkable areas and intersections. Additionally, requirement of this standard would bare no additional impact to development or traffic flow in these other vicinities. Within Page 2-31 the guidelines continue to discuss the hierarchical designation of pedestrian corridors which is integral in the function of the new comprehensive plan, however no connection is made between pedestrian and other modal systems in this chapter. The conceptual Tysons wide pedestrian plan shows the same grid of transportation as the road networks. Special consideration and emphasis on mid-block grid connections for pedestrians as a necessity of new developments should be denoted. Pedestrian systems should be a micro-grid of the road system providing more shortcutted paths through developments as well as roadways which will benefit internal retail spaces within projects.
The guideline appears to conflict the current plans for metro-connectivity when it states;
“Pedestrian circulation should occur at ground level to the greatest extent possible. Above-grade skybridges or below-grade pedestrian tunnels are strongly discouraged as they detract from the vibrancy of the streetscape. Further, skybridges and tunnels can pose challenges for security and public access.”
While all of these points are well stated there is no indication within the guidelines how the guidelines will be applied
to the current conceptual ideas of both the metro stations as well as projects such as Tysons II. It is an important goal of the comprehensive plan and projects applying under the new regulations to provide this street level vibrant culture however no reconciliation of this concept with currently approved projects is denoted. It is unclear if the county will pursue discussion, agreements, and compromise with these existing developments in order to assure the system as whole can function as intended or if these areas will remain a problem until which time a new rezoning is requested. This gap in guidelines for existing conditions in coordination with future conditions should be the biggest concern of residents as it is still unclear what will be done to connect the old Tysons Corner to the new Tysons Corner. Within Chapter 6 the interim condition of construction projects is further discussed however no specific indication to a developers responsibilities to the public access of streetscape is provided. Without these requirements a developer may delay public access for long periods of time with no acceptable alternatives to users. It should be the responsibility of the guidelines to better define what portions of a development will be considered interim in lieu of any development with multiple phases being considered in an interim condition as a whole. In other words, if part of a new development currently under construction has frontage along a permanent streetscape, this streetscape should now be considered permanent and not interim and should be provided within this phase of the project and not at the time of project completion. This is a very important facet of the usability for residents over the next several years as without these provisions the system as a whole will remain as disconnected as it is today.
The new Urban Design Guidelines are elevating pedestrian and mass transit systems as viable modal options on par with vehicular access, and within most corridors as a prioritized transportation option. This is an important first step in the creation of a dynamic urban center and will encourage multi-use development and increased vibrance. While our comments denote gaps, and in some cases disagreement of design concepts, it should be noted that this document is extremely thorough given the constraints imposed on the committee and in-line with concepts the urban design community can agree with. The guidelines also act as the first step to visualizing, beyond unfounded conceptual sketches, the implementation of a pedestrian network into a region which has long been dominated by the car. There are many ways the guidelines could be improved including utilizing existing ROW space within regions such as Tysons Boulevard by decreasing the width of the road lanes, decreasing the number of lanes, removing multi-stacked turnlanes and returning this space back to better pedestrian functions as discussed. By incorporating this design concept of reduced pavement the cost of infrastructure improvements can be drastically cut, land cost being the greatest cost of road improvement projects, as well as by reducing the massive road scales of the region to better fit the human scale envisioned in the comprehensive plan. With continued community discussion Fairfax County hopes that all involved parties goals for the future of Tysons Corner can be met providing the urban downtown that this region has lacked.