Fort Belvoir Real Property Master Plan MP20 Fort Belvoir 9820 Flagler Road NCPC MAP FILE NUMBER Fort Belvoir, VA 2204.10(05.00)44465

Home , Davison Army Airfield, Fort Belvoir

Executive Director’s Recommendation Commission Meeting: January 5, 2017

PROJECT NCPC FILE NUMBER Fort Belvoir Real Property Master Plan MP20 Fort Belvoir 9820 Flagler Road NCPC MAP FILE NUMBER Fort Belvoir, VA 2204.10(05.00)44465

SUBMITTED BY APPLICANT’S REQUEST United States Department of Defense Approval of final master plan Department of the Army PROPOSED ACTION REVIEW AUTHORITY Approve with comments Federal Projects in the Environs per 40 U.S.C. § 8722(a) and (b)(1) ACTION ITEM TYPE Open Session Presentation

PROJECT SUMMARY The Department of the Army has submitted the final 2015 Fort Belvoir Master Plan package, which consists of three separate documents: the Installation Vision and Development Plan (Master Plan); the Transportation Management Plan (TMP); and the Installation Planning Standards (IPS). As background, Fort Belvoir’s previous master plan was completed in 1993, with amendments in 2002 and 2007. An updated master plan is necessary to assist the installation with real property planning through 2030, based on projected employment growth of 17,000 personnel (from 39,000 in 2011 to 56,000 in 2030). The Master Plan Update includes 52 short-term (through 2017) building demolition, construction, and renovation projects, and four transportation improvement projects. The Plan includes 10 long-term building and 10 transportation projects, scheduled for completion between 2018 and 2030. The long-term projects are less defined in terms of siting, design, and timing. NCPC will need additional analysis as each project reaches a more advanced stage of planning.

Fort Belvoir (Main Post and Fort Belvoir North Area (FBNA)) is located along the Potomac River in Fairfax County, Virginia, situated 16 miles southwest of Washington, D.C. and eight miles southwest of the City of Alexandria. The installation is situated near Interstate 95, which serves as the primary north-south vehicular corridor for the East Coast. Fort Belvoir encompasses approximately 8,500 acres of property, with approximately 140 tenants, with missions related to community services, housing, security, training, and command functions. Originally established as an Army engineering school in 1912, the installation was officially created in 1918 as Camp A.A. Humphreys. The Army Post gradually grew in population and functions through World War I and II, and was re-named Fort Belvoir in 1935.

KEY INFORMATION • Fort Belvoir consists of approximately 8,500 acres of land, with 39,000 workers and 7,500 residents (2,100 housing units).

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 2 NCPC File No. MP20

• Of Fort Belvoir’s 8,500 acres, the Army has determined that 3,442 acres (40%) of the land area is developable with no significant natural or man-made constraints. This area includes both existing and potential future development sites. • The current parking ratio for Fort Belvoir is 1:1.23, and the final Transportation Management Plan includes an overall long-term (2030) installation parking ratio goal of 1:1.5 and a long-term Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) mode share of 60%. • The final Master Plan submission responds to each of the Commission’s previous nine (9) requests and two (2) recommendations, which were transmitted to the Army during NCPC’s review of the 2014 draft Master Plan submission. • The next Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update is scheduled for NCPC review in 2019.

RECOMMENDATION The Commission:

Approves the final Fort Belvoir Master Plan, dated May 2015, for use by the Commission as a guide for future reviews of individual site and building projects at the Fort Belvoir installation.

Notes that the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail (PHNST) as shown in the 2015 Fort Belvoir Master Plan is a tentative alignment based on the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan; the current NCPC PHNST Feasibility Study may propose a modified trail alignment; and the Army will use the feasibility study findings to inform the next Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update.

Recommends that the Army include information that details consideration of sustainable energy sources (geothermal, wind, solar) for each project in future submissions.

Notes that the Transportation Management Plan includes a long-term installation parking ratio goal of 1:1.5 and long-term Single Occupant Vehicle mode share goal of 60% through a combination of employment growth, more efficient parking usage, and an active Travel Demand Management program.

Recommends that the Army further explore the National Park Service’s comments related to the improvements/implementation of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail and Star-Spangled Banner National Scenic Historic Trail as part of the 2019 Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update.

PROJECT REVIEW TIMELINE Previous actions November, 2014 – Draft Master Plan comments

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 3 NCPC File No. MP20

Remaining actions None. (anticipated)

PROJECT ANALYSIS Executive Summary

Staff evaluated the final Fort Belvoir Master Plan (known as the Installation Vision and Development Plan), dated May 2015, against the Commission’s previous guidance and with consideration of the principles set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, staff supports the Master Plan’s guiding principles to: create and sustain a world-class Installation; achieve environmental sustainability; support the natural habitat; recognize that land is a valuable resource; improve multimodal connectivity; create a diverse and dynamic community; respect the history of Fort Belvoir to ensure the continuation of its legacy; and strengthen community partnerships for mutual benefits. Staff particularly supports the Plan’s foundational site assessment, which identifies a number of natural and man-made development constraints that will provide a solid framework, within which, to accommodate future sustainable on-site planning and development. Finally, staff supports the relatively detailed nature of the Transportation Management Plan (TMP), with a long-term (2030) parking goal of 1:1.5 and a long-term Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) goal of 60%.

Analysis

Master Plan Vision

The Commission was supportive of the vision and guiding principles of the Fort Belvoir Master Plan during its draft review in November, 2014. In particular, NCPC expressed support for the Plan as a way to achieve environmental sustainability; support the natural habitat; recognize that land is a valuable resource; improve multimodal connectivity; and strengthen community partnerships. The Commission requested that the Army evaluate three topic areas during the Master Plan finalization process as follows:

• Environmental Mitigation Areas; • Potential sea level rise and effect on developable areas; and • Locations for sustainable energy sources.

NCPC staff will describe how the Army responded to each Commission request within the following sections, where applicable.

Site Assessment

The Army identifies 25 different natural, cultural, and operational constraints that result in three categories of development potential: Least Suitable for Development, Moderately Suitable for Development, and Most Suitable for Development (Slide 11). The analysis is used with various planning strategies to identify long-term land uses and necessary facilities. The site assessment

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 4 NCPC File No. MP20

determined that of 8,500 total acres on Fort Belvoir, only 3,442 acres (40%) are deemed “most suitable” for development. The installation applies relatively conservative development constraints, resulting in a future planning framework that errs on the side of environmental sustainability.

Regarding Environmental Mitigation Areas, the final Master Plan identifies specific areas throughout the installation where different types of mitigation related to streams, wetlands, trees, wildlife, and environmental restoration will be undertaken as part of specific project NEPA actions. For example, should a future project require tree replacement that is unable to be accommodated directly on the project site, then new trees may be planted to help mitigate the project’s impact in one of the “tree mitigation” areas, which are identified for maximum environmental benefit.

Regarding potential sea level rise, the Army mapped out the 100-year floodplain (10 feet above normal conditions), plus an additional six feet above the 100-year flood level (totaling 16 feet above normal levels) to simulate forecasted sea level rise in the region during the next 100 years. Based on the analysis, Fort Belvoir determined that most of its existing development and all future development sites would be unaffected by anticipated sea level rise. Existing development (mostly along the eastern side of the South Post peninsula) will gradually be relocated out of the “sea level rise impact” area as each building reaches the end of its lifecycle.

The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail (PHNST) is described in the Site Assessment section of the Master Plan as a planned multi-purpose hiker/biker trail between the mouth of the Potomac River and the Allegheny Plateau in western Pennsylvania. Previously, the Commission provided the following specific comments related to the Trail during its November, 2014 review of the draft Master Plan:

Notes that while commenting on the PHNST feasibility study, the Commission supported the creation of the trail and stated that it would ensure that the PHNST was in future master plans for Fort Belvoir and Marine Corps Base Quantico.

Notes that the Fort Belvoir draft master plan discusses the PHNST; however, in agreement with NCPC and the National Park Service (NPS) staff, the Army will not delineate a route for the PHNST in the master plan until further planning analysis is completed.

Notes that the NPS submitted language modifications pertaining to the PHNST and requests the Army review the language with the NPS and NCPC staff for inclusion in the master plan documents.

Notes that the Army, the NPS, the Northern Virginia Regional Commission, and NCPC are in the process of executing a Memorandum of Understanding to conduct planning analysis for the PHNST in southern Fairfax County, including potential opportunities within Fort Belvoir.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 5 NCPC File No. MP20

As background, the Army, NCPC, NPS, and the Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to consider ways to eliminate a gap in the PHNST network between Grist Mill Park and Pohick Bay Regional Park (Slide 17). Pursuant to the MOU, NCPC is undertaking a feasibility study that analyzes several potential trail alignments, including within Fort Belvoir. The Army will use the final study report, scheduled for completion in late January 2017, to inform future trail planning, which will be reflected in the next Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update (2019). With the timing of the feasibility study and NCPC review of the final Master Plan however, the 2015 Master Plan shows a tentative PHNST alignment within the US Route 1 corridor, outside the installation’s secure perimeter, as shown in the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan.

In light of the nature and timing of the NCPC study, staff recommends that the Commission note that the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail (PHNST) as shown in the 2015 Fort Belvoir Master Plan is a tentative alignment based on the Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan; the current NCPC PHNST Feasibility Study may propose a modified trail alignment; and the Army will use the feasibility study findings to inform the next Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update.

Land Use Plan

The future Land Use Plan identifies seven land use categories: Airfield; Community; Industrial; Profession/Institutional; Residential; Ranges/Training; and Troop. The Plan continues the trend of increasing Professional/Institutional and Troop uses at Fort Belvoir, with decreases in Community and Industrial uses.

Framework Plan

The Framework Plan is intended to function as “an adaptable blueprint to control, coordinate, and direct change” by guiding long-term installation development. Areas that are identified as developable are used to create specific development parcels for the short-term (by 2017) and long- term (by 2030). In addition, the Framework Plan includes changes to the internal roadway network to strengthen Fort Belvoir’s street-grid network, and identifies locations for open/recreational space and future housing development/redevelopment.

Infrastructure Plans

The Infrastructure Plan evaluates the installation’s existing transportation and utility infrastructure against proposed development and recommends phased approaches to support future growth. The Master Plan identifies seven short-term and ten long-term transportation-related projects, and four short-term and six long-term utility-related projects to maintain installation operations.

In response to the request to evaluate locations for sustainable energy sources, the Army determined that future sustainable energy opportunities would be best identified and implemented on a project-by-project basis. The Master Plan explains that at a large scale, renewable energy projects such as geothermal energy (dependent on hot water and steam reservoirs) are generally not feasible (cost effective) on the installation. Fort Belvoir’s location is not well-suited for the

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 6 NCPC File No. MP20

continuously high wind speeds needed for significant wind power potential, and wind turbines would likely impact migratory bird routes. Solar photovoltaic technology has been too costly to pursue without access to federal and state tax incentives that are typically available for the commercial and residential sector. Smaller scale renewable energy systems (i.e. building rooftop solar panels and geothermal systems) however, may be possible in certain select areas.

NCPC staff generally concurs with the Army assessment of larger-scale sustainable energy production on the installation, however, staff believes that the Army should proactively explore sustainable energy production on a project-by-project basis as alluded to in the Master Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission recommend that the Army include information that details consideration of sustainable energy sources (geothermal, wind, solar) for each project in future submissions.

Transportation Management Plan

The final TMP document is extremely thorough, consisting of the following sections: Introduction, Existing and Emerging Conditions, [Commuter] Survey Assessment, Parking Assessment, Traffic Analysis, TMP Strategies, Implementation Plan, and Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. The Commission previously requested that the Army accomplish the following tasks in the final Master Plan submission:

1. Continue to evaluate strategies and opportunities to reach the applicable NCPC Comprehensive Plan goal of 1:1.5 parking ratio goal for the overall installation; 2. Develop and implement a “mechanism” for monitoring agency TMPs; 3. Evaluate planning district-level parking ratio goals for each South Post district; 4. Include traffic impact mitigation measures in the EIS Record of Decision (ROD); 5. Add future mitigation monitoring to the TMP to assess the effectiveness of planned mitigation measures; and 6. Commit to future mitigation monitoring in coordination with Fairfax County.

The Army responded to each of NCPC’s requests in the following manner:

1. The Fort Belvoir TMP references NCPC’s 1:1.5 ratio goal, and projects a long-term SOV mode share of 60% for the installation, which equates to a parking ratio target of 1:1.7 (exceeding NCPC’s goal). The Army uses a parking standard for administrative office uses that allows no more Private Occupant Vehicle (POV) spaces that 60% of a development’s employment population. Furthermore, each future project considers potential nearby shared parking opportunities (within 2,000 feet of a development site) when assessing parking need. 2. The installation TMP includes a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan that requires agency- specific TMPs, regular installation-agency Travel Demand Management (TDM) coordination, and TMP evaluation through regular commuter surveys and project-level parking needs’ assessments.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 7 NCPC File No. MP20

3. As shown in Slide 15, the Army has identified planning districts with excess parking capacity (shaded in yellow and red), whereby future tenants will be required to use existing parking areas to meet their parking needs. 4. The EIS ROD includes a table that describes potential short-term and long-term traffic mitigation projects, both on Fort Belvoir and off-site, which will limit the installation’s traffic “generation” to current levels, despite an increase of 17,000 additional workers. However, specific installation-level mitigation measures are excluded from the ROD since the Army determined that the measures would obligate future funding without prior approval, which is done on an annual basis. In lieu of specific mitigation measures, Fort Belvoir will commit to project-level planning, traffic forecasting, monitoring, and coordination through its Annual Work Plan, on a yearly basis. 5. As previously mentioned, the final Fort Belvoir TMP includes a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan that describes a system for regular assessment of planned Travel Demand Management (TDM) strategies and measures. 6. The TMP states that Fort Belvoir is committed to working with both the State (VDOT) and Fairfax County to regularly monitor future installation-related traffic levels, and to jointly plan for traffic improvement projects (both on- and off-installation) and TDM strategies.

Upon consideration of the final Master Plan submission, NCPC staff believes that the Army has adequately fulfilled all six of the Commission’s previous 2014 TMP-related requests. The one request that the Army was not able to satisfy is NCPC’s request to include specific traffic mitigation measures in the ROD. However, staff is satisfied by the Army’s explanation that specific measures would constitute future funding allocations prior to development and approval of future annual military budgets. Upon review of the final TMP, staff recommends that the Commission note that the Transportation Management Plan includes a long-term installation parking ratio goal of 1:1.5 and long-term Single Occupant Vehicle mode share goal of 60% through a combination of employment growth, more efficient parking usage, and an active Travel Demand Management program.

Installation Planning Standards

The Installation Planning Standards (IPS) promotes visual order and architectural consistency, with guidance relating to site planning; building design; circulation; landscape design; and site elements design. Slide 24 shows an example of a “regulating” plan from the document, which adheres to various installation site planning goals such as: structured parking; continuous building walls; and new roadways that will contribute to Fort Belvoir’s street grid. The IPS also promotes specific building materials and street furniture (i.e. trash receptacles, lampposts) to distinguish the different development “neighborhoods” (districts).

Previously, the Commission recommended that the Army evaluate Low Impact Development (LID) standards for roadways and parking areas. The Installation Planning Standards (IPS) document includes two sections that specifically reference LID - Sustainable Design Standards (Chapter 4) and Site Element Design Standards (Chapter 6). In addition, the IPS includes roadway and parking design standards that accommodate generous landscaping/vegetative areas that will

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 8 NCPC File No. MP20

help improve the walkability/urban design of the installation. Lastly, the Army has stated that Fort Belvoir will continue to evaluate ways to implement LID across the installation.

In 2014, the Commission recommended that the Army evaluate permeable pavement standards. The IPS encourages the use of permeable pavement through its Sustainable Design Standards (4), with photos of existing Fort Belvoir developments, and Site Element Design Standards (6) chapters. Fort Belvoir will continue to evaluate ways to implement permeable pavement across the installation. Currently, the installation’s Post Exchange/Commissary development (approved by NCPC in May, 2011 and February, 2013) has one of the largest surface parking lots in Virginia, with permeable paving.

NCPC staff believes that the Army has adequately satisfied the Commission’s previous recommendations from its 2014 review of the draft Master Plan.

CONFORMANCE TO EXISTING PLANS, POLICIES AND RELATED GUIDANCE Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital

The Master Plan is generally consistent with the Federal Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for the National Capital, promoting: environmental sustainability; redevelopment of existing disturbed land; structured parking; reduction in parking; minimization of impacts on the environmental; increased stormwater management; and protection of historic properties.

Relevant Federal Facility Master Plan

The Commission last approved the Fort Belvoir Master Plan in 1993, with the Installation Design Guide in 1995 and a subarea plan approval in 2002. The proposed 2015 final Master Plan would supersede the 1993 Master Plan upon Commission approval of the final version.

National Historic Preservation Act

In accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Army consulted with the Virginia State Historic Preservation Officer (Virginia SHPO) and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) to develop a Programmatic Agreement (PA), which has been finalized and included in the final Master Plan submission. The PA provides a procedural framework for evaluating potential impacts that master plan projects may have on historic properties. Due to Fort Belvoir’s location in the environs, NCPC does not have independent Section 106 responsibility.

National Environmental Policy Act

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Army completed an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the potential impacts of the short-term and long-term projects. The NEPA process was concluded with a signed Record of Decision on September 28, 2016, which was included as part of the final Master Plan submission. NCPC does not have an independent NEPA responsibility for master plans or federal projects outside the District of Columbia.

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 9 NCPC File No. MP20

CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission’s Procedures for Intergovernmental Cooperation in Federal Planning in the National Capital Region, NCPC staff previously referred the draft Master Plan submission to: National Park Service (NPS); Fairfax County, Virginia; Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT); the Virginia State Historic Preservation Office (VA SHPO); Virginia Department of Environmental Quality; Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments; Northern Virginia Regional Commission; and the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission. Comments were received from Fairfax County, Virginia SHPO, VDOT, and NPS. The final Master Plan submission includes final Master Plan and/or TMP documents that reflect some of the referral comments, in addition to a signed Record of Decision (ROD) and two comment matrices that include formal Army responses to each comment.

National Park Service

The NPS provided several noteworthy enhancement ideas related to the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail and Star-Spangled Banner National Historic Trail, and pointed out the connection between implementing these trails and two of the following Master Plan guiding principles: “Respect the history of Fort Belvoir to ensure the continuation of its legacy” and “Strengthen community partnerships for mutual benefits.” NCPC staff believes that further exploration of NPS’s ideas is warranted, and should use NPS’s input during the process to update the Fort Belvoir Master Plan and TMP, which is scheduled for 2019. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission note that the Army further explore the National Park Service’s comments related to the improvements/implementation of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail and Star-Spangled Banner National Scenic Historic Trail as part of the 2019 Fort Belvoir Master Plan Update.

Fairfax County

As background, the County was highly appreciative of the coordination that occurred as part of the draft master planning and NEPA processes, and the County provided generally positive comments related to the following key topics: stormwater management, tree replacement, Environmental Quality Corridors (EQC), transportation impacts and mitigation, and Davison Army Airfield development. To assuage the County’s concerns about future development-related traffic and TMP effectiveness, the Army has committed to coordinate their future TMP evaluation and monitoring efforts with the County. In response to the County’s Environmental Quality Corridors (EQC) policy, the Army agreed to use the County policy as much as possible to preserve these “environmentally-sensitive” lands (surrounding stream valleys). Regarding tree replacement, the County supported the installation’s policy. Fairfax County noted that federal stormwater management standards under EISA, Section 438 exceed County standards. Lastly, the County expressed a desire to coordinate future airfield operations with the Army (adjacent to Davison Airfield), and the Army agreed.

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)

Executive Director’s Recommendation Page 10 NCPC File No. MP20

Regarding mitigation, VDOT noted that the mitigation measures identified in the EIS should be made part of the Record of Decision (ROD) and recommended regular monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of the TMP to reduce SOV travel to the installation. Although the Army was unable to include specific traffic mitigation measures in the ROD (since inclusion would obligate funding without prior approval), the Army has agreed to include VDOT (and Fairfax County) in future TMP evaluation and traffic monitoring efforts.

ONLINE REFERENCE

The following supporting documents for this project are available online:

• Submission Letter • Draft Master Plan Review Response Matrix • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) • EIS Record of Decision (ROD) • Final Master Plan • Final Transportation Management Plan (TMP) • Final Installation Planning Standards

Prepared by Michael Weil 12/28/2016

POWERPOINT (ATTACHED)

Fort Belvoir

Master Plan

Fairfax County, Fort Belvoir, Virginia ______

Submitted by the United States Department of Defense, Department of the Army

Final Review

Project Synopsis Project Information

Commission meeting date: January 5, 2017 NCPC review authority: 40 U.S.C. § 8722 (a) and (b)(1) Applicant request: Approval of the Final Master Plan for use by the Commission Delegated / consent / open / executive session: Open Session NCPC Review Officer: Michael Weil NCPC File number: MP20

Project summary: The Department of the Army has submitted the final 2015 Fort Belvoir Master Plan package, which consists of three separate documents: the Installation Vision and Development Plan (Master Plan); the Transportation Management Plan (TMP); and the Installation Planning Standards (IPS). As background, Fort Belvoir’s previous master plan was completed in 1993, with amendments in 2002 and 2007. An updated master plan is necessary to assist the installation with real property planning through 2030, based on projected employment growth of 17,000 personnel (from 39,000 in 2011 to 56,000 in 2030). The Master Plan Update includes 52 short-term (through 2017) building demolition, construction, and renovation projects, and four transportation improvement projects. The Plan includes 10 long-term building and 10 transportation projects, scheduled for completion between 2018 and 2030. The long-term projects are less defined in terms of siting, design, and timing. NCPC will need additional analysis as each project reaches a more advanced stage of planning.

2 Site Location

Fort Belvoir Information

- Approximately 8,500 acres and 40,000 employees

- Home to over 140 Department of Defense organizations

- Approximately 7,500 residents live on Fort Belvoir in about 2,100 housing units

3 Site Location

Size (acres) Employees South Post 2,550 15,600 North Post 2,250 14,000 Southwest Area 2,100 0 Davison Army Airfield 800 1,200 Fort Belvoir North Area 800 8,600

4 Significant Installation Development

NGIA Post Exchange/Commissary

DLA

Museum of the Army Hospital

South Post Town Center Davidson Air Field

5 Master Planning Process

6 Master Plan Submission

Installation Vision and Transportation Management Plan Installation Planning Standards Development Plan

7 Installation Vision and Development Plan Process

8 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Master Plan Vision and Guiding Principles

Vision Statement:

“Fort Belvoir is an outstanding place to work, train, and live that embraces a culture of diversity, innovation, and challenge while continuing its legacy as a “beautiful to see” installation.”

Guiding Principles:

1. Create and sustain a world-class Installation 2. Achieve Environmental Sustainability 3. Support the natural habitat 4. Recognize that land is a valuable resource 5. Improve multimodal connectivity 6. Create a diverse and dynamic community 7. Respect the history of Fort Belvoir to ensure the continuation of its legacy 8. Strengthen community partnerships for mutual benefits

9 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Environmental Constraints:

1. Natural Resources such as wetlands, steep slopes 2. Cultural Resources such as archaeological sites and cemeteries 3. Operation Resources such as hazardous waste management units

10 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Environmental Constraints:

1. Natural Resources such as wetlands, steep slopes 2. Cultural Resources such as archaeological sites and cemeteries 3. Operation Resources such as hazardous waste management units

11 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Proposed Land Use Map

Current Land Use

12 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Framework Plan Development Phasing Plan

13 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Roadway Framework Plan

14 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Parking Analysis

15 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Multimodal Plan

Potential Transit Center – South Post Town Center

16 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Trails and Bicycle Lanes

Grist Mill Park

Fort Belvoir

Pohick Bay Regional Park

17 Installation Vision and Development Plan

Housing Plan

18 Transportation Management Plan

19 Transportation Management Plan

Strategies

20 Transportation Management Plan

Mode Splits

Mode Split Existing 2017 2030 Drive Alone 81% 75% 60% Carpool 6% 7% 8% Vanpool 3% 4% 5% Out of Office 1% 2% 3% Metro/VRE 3% 4% 10% Public Bus 3% 4% 6% Private Bus 1% 1% 1% AWS .5% 1% 3% Telework 1% 1% 2% Bicycle/Walk Less than 1% .5% 1%

21 Installation Planning Standards

22 Installation Planning Standards

Regulating Plans

23 Installation Planning Standards

Material Standards