A divided County Board on Wednesday (April 9) approved development of a 531-unit residential project despite ongoing concerns from residents in the Green Valley neighborhood.
The 4-0 vote, with one abstention, paves the way for construction a mix of residential uses at the 5.52 acre site.
The project will replace two hotels at 2480 S. Glebe Road with 37 townhouses in four buildings and 494 rental units in a single nine-story multifamily building.
The project also calls for 549 parking spaces, most in an eight-story garage in the central part of the development.
Board members who supported the project acknowledged the process getting to a vote was not a smooth one.
“It’s not perfect,” Board member Matt de Ferranti said of both the project itself and the public-engagement process that accompanied it. But, he said, the end result would prove a “net step forward” in adding housing to the county.
The vote came four days after Board members initially deferred consideration of the project in an effort to iron out points of disagreement between the developer, an affiliate of Crescent Communities, and the surrounding neighborhood.
Some of those concerns had been addressed by Wednesday evening, but others remained. As a result, some local residents asked for a second deferral.
Rev. Dr. Adrian Nelson II of Lomax African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Zion Church, which is located adjacent to the site, did not expect an additional reprieve to be granted.
“The handwriting is on the wall — we know how it’s going to end,” he said during testimony that preceded the vote.
Nelson decried the “systemic injustices” of the entire process, which has spanned two years.
That view resonated with Board Chair Takis Karantonis, who said both the developer and county government “missed important points of engagement” with the Green Valley community.
“It really stuns me,” said Karantonis, who opted to abstain rather than vote for or against the proposal.
Several of those who voted in favor had similar concerns about the process.
“There’s a wrong way to do the right thing,” said Board member JD Spain, Sr., who opted to support the project because he felt it would bring needed housing to the vicinity.
Spain said he preferred to have more discussion, but given the views of a majority of his colleagues, that was a nonstarter.
“Would I like to see us defer? Yes. But the votes aren’t there. It’s not going to happen,” he said.
As with Saturday’s hearing, public comment on Wednesday night centered on traffic impacts, community benefits and the overall massing of the project.
“This will create a traffic nightmare,” said Frederick Craddock, a longtime resident of nearby 24th Road South.
Craddock sought a delay for more discussion.
“We need to get back to the table and see how we can integrate this project into Green Valley,” Craddock said.
Representatives of the developer said they had worked diligently to address concerns of residents and the church, but are facing a “hard deadline” to get the project moving or put funding at risk.
Karantonis offered only a muted criticism of what amounted to the county’s back being put up against the wall — its options being to approve the project now or potentially lose it entirely.
“This is not a desirable position to be in,” Karantonis said.
The developer has agreed to provide nine committed-affordable apartment units within the project, up from seven proposed by staff, and provide just over $2 million to the government’s Affordable Housing Investment Fund.
The developer also agreed to meet quarterly with neighborhood residents through at least 2028 in an effort to maintain lines of communications.
The developer also will serve as a sponsor of the annual Green Valley Day celebration for at least a decade, and will work with the Green Valley Civic Association for improvements to the John Robinson Jr. Town Square.
There also was a promise from both the developer and county officials to consider options for creating a second access point into the site to take pressure off 24th Road S., currently the only projected entrance and exit.
That promise of future action was not enough to sway local resident Tia Alfred, who testified in support of a deferral.
“We need a transparent plan; a logical and viable plan,” she told Board members, predicting traffic in the area would become “nothing short of a horrendous nightmare.”
County officials plan to convene a meeting in mid-June to discuss traffic issues.
The Board’s April 9 action made changes to the General Land Use Plan, Master Transportation Plan and a site plan to allow the proposal to move forward on the site, located just north of the intersection of S. Glebe Road and I-395.
Without zoning changes, the developer would have been limited to constructing just 133 units on the site.
Hotels have been located on the parcel since the early 1960s. Before that, it was a residential tract.
The two hotels now occupying the site combine for about 330 rooms spread over multiple buildings with nearly 300 surface parking spaces. They will be razed to make room for the new housing.
The proposal had the support of the Planning Commission and Arlington Chamber of Commerce, but the Arlington County Civic Federation pressed for more discussion before a final vote.
