To: Old Town Civic Association Members

From: Michael Hobbs, President

Re: MEMBERSHIP SURVEY – King Street Retail Strategy

Date: March 25, 2005

For more than two centuries, King Street has been the commercial heart and a central transportation artery first for the old town and later for the larger city of Alexandria. King Street extends more than one mile from the Potomac River waterfront on the east to the Metro and Amtrak stations on the west. Home to a preponderance of the hotels, restaurants and shops which serve visitors to the city, it has been called “the preeminent historical ‘Main Street’ in the country” and might be considered the backbone of Alexandria’s economy.

At the same time, King Street bisects Alexandria’s Old and Historic District: the third oldest such district in the country, and the locus of the extraordinary concentration of eighteenth and nineteenth century residences and historic sites which give Alexandria its emblematic personality, distinguishing it from any number of would-be competitors in Greater Washington and elsewhere which can only wish they had Alexandria’s unique and compelling charm and character.

King Street is an important asset for the citizens, residents and businesspeople of Alexandria. How that asset is employed in the years ahead will have a significant impact on the quality of Alexandria’s future. Will the short-term pressures of a competitive economy drive King Street toward a tawdry, blighted future (think Wisconsin Avenue/M Street in Georgetown)? Or will a determination to revitalize King Street and protect and enhance its core values preserve its unique place in Alexandria’s heritage for a new century, and beyond?

The City has for more than a year been conducting a planning process focusing on the present and future of King Street. The result of that process is the “King Street Retail Strategy,” a comprehensive plan that is proposed for adoption as a new chapter of the City’s Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance by the Planning Commission and City Council at their meetings of April 5 and April 16. The Draft Plan includes a market analysis and chapters on Urban Design, Land Use, Parking, Transit, Waterfront, and Strategy Implementation. (The complete March 1, 2005 Draft Plan can be found at the City’s website: go to ci.Alexandria.va.us, then click in succession on Planning & Zoning; Neighborhood Planning & Community Development; King Street Retail Strategy.)

The OTCA Board will meet March 31 to adopt positions to recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council at their meetings following. We invite our members to communicate your comments, views, questions or concerns to us (preferably by noon on March 31) so that we may take your views into account as we deliberate the Association’s position on these issues. You may do so by returning your comments by e-mail to mhobbs27@comcast.net, by returning this survey by mail or hand to 419 Cameron Street, or by contacting your Area Director or any other board member (list attached).

RESTAURANTS (In General). The plan recommends that “restaurants, music venues, and other entertainment should be encouraged to promote activity throughout the extended day” on King Street, while maintaining the Old Town Restaurant Policy “that directs the City to carefully scrutinize new restaurants for their impact on the neighboring residential community.” To encourage new restaurants, a two-year pilot program would provide an expedited process for administrative approval (by the Planning Department staff) for those west of Washington Street with less than 60 seats; rather than a Special Use Permit after public hearings by the Planning Commission and Council, as do all restaurants in the Old and Historic District at present.

Questions:

(1) Should new or enlarged restaurants on King Street be encouraged?

(2) Should new retail establishments (other than restaurants), and retention of existing establishments, be encouraged?

(3) The present “Old Town Restaurant Policy” provides that City Council shall not approve a request for a Special Use Permit for a new restaurant, carryout or fast food establishment (or expansion of an existing establishment) “unless it finds that the request does not significantly impact nearby residential neighborhoods,” considering such factors as the availability of off-street parking, late night hours, the ratio of alcohol and food consumption, and litter.

Should that policy be (a) retained, (b) modified as necessary to encourage new restaurants, or (c) discontinued?

(4) Should restaurants in the Old and Historic District continue to require Special Use Permits (a) in all cases, (b) except in the case of 60-seat restaurants west of Washington Street, or (c) not at all?

OUTDOOR DINING. The plan recommends that the outdoor dining experiment conducted through the end of 2004 be extended through a pilot program to assess its impact. A 5-foot portion of the sidewalk would be reserved for pedestrians; a 7- or 8-foot portion would be available for outdoor dining use. Outdoor dining limited to 20 seats per establishment would be authorized by administrative approval for applicants which met identified design guidelines, dimensions, and operating standards.

Questions:

(1) Should outdoor dining on King Street be, in general, encouraged or discouraged?

(2) Should outdoor dining standards be tightly drawn to minimize interference with pedestrian traffic and adjacent retail or other establishments; broadly drawn to optimize encouragement of outdoor dining facilities by existing restaurants; or some other approach?

(3) Should outdoor dining be permitted by administrative approval (a) in all cases, (b) only where it does not involve enlargement of total seating capacity or extension of late-night operating hours, or (c) not at all?

LAND USE (Draft Plan, Chapter 5). The plan recommends the creation of a King Street Overlay Zone to encourage pedestrian-friendly retail and restaurant uses on the ground floor, office and residential uses on upper floors, and shifting incentives from commercial toward residential uses in both new development and redevelopment.

Question: Provisions relating to restaurants, outdoor dining, and parking are addressed elsewhere in this survey. With respect to the general strategy of promoting retail uses on the ground floor, and office and residential uses on upper floors, do you generally agree or disagree?

PARKING. A study of on-street parking availability on weekdays in the King Street corridor (King Street and the intersecting streets a block to either side) concluded that the Waterfront area (waterfront to Fairfax St.) is “essentially fully occupied” from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. and from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.; and the Government Center area (Fairfax to Saint Asaph Sts.) from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. The plan recommends a range of strategies (use of private garages, valet parking, validation programs, increased use of transit) to encourage employees and longer-term customers to use off-street parking, so as to increase the supply of on-street parking for retail and restaurant customers. In order to reduce the disincentive for residential uses in comparison to the exemption from parking requirements to which commercial buildings are typically entitled, the parking requirement for new residential units would be reduced from between 1.3 and 2.2 spaces per unit (depending on the number of bedrooms), to one space for each apartment.

Questions:

(1) Should a further study be conducted to assess parking availability (a) on weekends, as well as weekdays? (b) in the later evenings, after 8:00 p.m.? (c) on nearby residential streets, as well as on King Street?

(2) Should the City’s on-street Residential Parking Zone decals be made available to new multi-family residential units (a) on the same basis as they are now to single-family residents, (b) only if a further assessment determines that there is sufficient on-street parking available, or (c) not at all?

(3) Should new uses involving significant parking requirements (e.g., restaurants, offices, multi-family residential) be encouraged (a) if they otherwise meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance or Special Use Permit process, (b) only upon a demonstration that sufficient parking is available to meet the increased demand, or (c) not at all?

WATERFRONT. The Draft Plan addresses the waterfront briefly (Chapter 8) and offers a series of Guiding Principles (p. 8-2) and Planning Recommendations (p. 8-3) toward the end that “the waterfront should provide full access to the water’s edge for the community while incorporating passive and active recreation opportunities—offering entertainment and event opportunities, enhancing maritime and waterfront transportation and anchoring the activities of King Street and Old Town.” First among these is the recommendation that the City should undertake a comprehensive master planning and design process for the waterfront; the Planning Department expects to initiate that process soon after adoption of the King Street Retail Strategy.

Question: (a) Should the general Principles set forth in the King Street plan be used to guide the new waterfront planning process, (b) should this section of the King Street report be deferred pending completion of the waterfront planning process, or (c) some other approach?

KING STREET PARTNERSHIP. The plan recommends organization of a new “King Street Partnership” to work in concert with the City on implementing the King Street Retail Strategy. The relative roles and responsibilities of the KSP and the City in policy, financing, regulation, and management is not detailed in the Draft Plan, but would be negotiated during the formation of the KSP and documented in its charter. KSP’s Board would include representation from property owners, merchants, the City and residents. The Plan recommends consideration of a Business Improvement District (BID), with revenues derived from an add-on to the real estate tax paid by properties in the district zoned for some manner of commercial use, to assist in financing the improvements on King Street that are sought.

Questions:

(1) Should the City’s governmental bodies (Board of Architectural Review, Planning Commission, and City Council) retain the public policy and oversight responsibilities that are now their responsibility, delegating to the King Street Partnership only those responsibilities appropriate to a voluntary association of business entities under present law and policy? Or should the City seek more aggressively to devolve responsibility for the development and management of King Street to the KSP, relieving the burden of those responsibilities on the City policy bodies and management?

(2) Should Old Town Civic Association take a position on the proposed Business Improvement District, or should it defer on that question to the community’s existing business organizations such as the King Street Metro Enterprise Team (KSMET) and Old Town Business Association?

* * *

Thank you for your time and participation. The future of King Street is central to the quality of life in Old Town, and the Board of Directors is grateful for your thought and the expression of your views.