>>Attachment 1: Criteria for Consideration of Arlington County Facilities & Land in Arlington Public Schools’ Capacity Planning Process

High-quality infrastructure has been a key element of the County’s economic health and the quality of life for its residents and businesses.  The County maintains a wide spectrum of assets, including: parks; libraries; community centers; maintenance shops and warehouse support facilities; roads; bridges; buses; technology; water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure – along with many others that combine to support the community and its economic vitality.  Continued reinvestment in existing assets combined with strategic investments in new assets is essential to the future success of the County.  At the same time, any capital investment plan must be affordable.  The County Board directs the County Manager to prepare a proposed 10-year CIP that will take a broader look at long-term needs, capacity, and external risks to planned funding sources and specifically address the following issues:

Investment in County Infrastructure & Other Physical Assets

• Include recommended updates to County capital policies
  
• Reflects an appropriate balance between investment in existing assets vs. new assets.  In weighing options, consideration shall be given to short-term and long-term operating costs of investments, opportunities to leverage non-County funds, existing plans and past investments in project design and the maintenance needs of existing assets.
  

• Addresses all major infrastructure areas including:
  
  • Maintenance capital – the proposed CIP should reflect appropriate reinvestment in the full range of existing County infrastructure and assets, including technology, transportation, facilities and parks, among others.  The proposed CIP should also incorporate the recent work completed by the CIP Working Group on maintenance capital in parks and facilities, including management’s response to the group’s recommendations
    
  • Stormwater – the proposed CIP should reflect the results of the master planning effort currently underway
    
  • Utilities – the proposed CIP should reflect the results of the water master planning efforts currently underway
    
  • Telecommunications master plan (INET – CNET) – the proposed CIP should reflect the results of the telecommunications master plan
    
  • Other areas – the proposed CIP should reflect the results of the space / storage needs analysis and other planning initiatives as appropriate

• Long Bridge aquatics and fitness facility – the proposed CIP should include timing and funding options for this project reflective of the latest cost estimates and potential for external contribution
  
• Transportation – the proposed CIP should reflect the County’s Master Transportation Plan and include the following:
  • Meet the County’s commitment to Metro’s capital program
    
  • Provide an integrated ten-year plan that reflects all available funding sources and provides updates (both timing and financial) on the projects noted below. 
    
    • Columbia Pike Complete Streets initiative
    • Streetcar initiative connecting Columbia Pike to Pentagon City to Crystal City to Potomac Yards.  The proposed CIP should include updated funding plans for each segment of the planned streetcar, as appropriate.
    • Metro station access improvements – include update on station improvements previously included in prior CIPs.  For those station improvements in conceptual / planning phases, include proposed criteria (e.g., safety, impact of development) for analysis of  improvements and development of strategies to achieve full implementation. 

• Strategies that link transportation investments to continued economic competitiveness through steady improvement of transportation access and choice, integrated with private development and redevelopment

Investment in Schools

• The County has long supported Schools’ capital program, including most recently approving significant referenda for the replacement of three high schools.  As the Schools continues its capacity planning process over the next several months, the County will continue to support Schools’ efforts including consideration of County facilities where they meet County criteria as reflected in Attachment 1.  The proposed CIP should also include analysis of existing joint use facilities, associated maintenance capital requirements for each facility, and a summary of MOU provisions where applicable.

Financial Capacity

• Provides an analysis of debt capacity based on current multi-year revenue projections that complies with the County’s financial and debt management policies

• Provides analysis on the projected operating budget and future maintenance capital impact of projects in the proposed CIP

Other Policy Goals

The County has adopted policy goals and planning initiatives in many areas that directly impact the scope and cost estimates of all capital projects.  As the proposed CIP is developed, the following policy guidance and potential regulatory requirements should be considered to help achieve the County Board’s vision of a sustainable and accessible community. 

• The “Community Energy Plan (CEP) Policy Determinations” adopted by the County Board in May 2011 and the goals of the FreshAIRE program should inform the scoping of projects included in the proposed CIP until a more detailed CEP Implementation Workplan is adopted in 2012.
• Overarching policies and goals for community sustainability relative to a growing County asset base of facilities, parks, and infrastructure that deliver more services to the community
  • To include the Natural Resources Management Plan adopted in 2010

• Evolving state and federal regulatory requirements for Chesapeake Bay protection

• Smart integration of appropriate accessibility upgrades as part of all capital improvements in facilities, parks, and the pedestrian environment

Attachment 1

CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION OF ARLINGTON COUNTY FACILITIES & LAND IN ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS’ CAPACITY PLANNING PROCESS

Arlington County and Arlington Public Schools have a long tradition of working together to solve problems, with a focus on creative solutions that take into account the needs of both students and the broader Arlington community.  In fall 2009, the County Board and School Board reaffirmed the commitment to collaboration, which includes a policy that both organizations will, “collaborate proactively and systematically in the interests of maximizing the efficient use of community resources and building space to help provide all residents of Arlington access to efficient services and community-based programs.  The County and Schools endorse the joint development and use of environmentally sustainable facilities whenever it is in the best interests of both entities and of the community.”

In the spirit of the collaboration policy, the County and Schools support the evaluation of the potential use of County facilities to address the enrollment growth and capacity challenges Schools currently face, particularly where such a solution would provide mutual benefits to Schools and the broader County population.  To that end, the County and Schools support the following criteria to be used in consideration of County facilities.

Joint Space Philosophy

Because facilities are held and controlled by both the County and Schools, both should openly assess operational needs reflected in shortages and excess space of different types to find opportunities, where feasible, for efficient shared use.  

Services

• Services provided to County residents will continue at a comparable or greater level.  Examples of factors to be considered in use of County properties include:
  • Appropriateness of current uses to, or synergies that could be created by co-location with a Schools use
  • number of current users & types of programs,
  • square footage currently in use on a regular basis,
  • specialized space / square footage needed to support existing programming (e.g., studio, gym or kitchen space)

Other Policy Areas

• Any permanent solution will respect the County’s articulated goals in open / green space, affordable housing, historic preservation, land use, transportation, smart growth, and energy and environmental goals, among others.  Examples of factors to be considered in use of County properties include but are not limited to:
  • Access to major / minor arterial streets and traffic impacts on surrounding community
  • Consistency with neighborhood land use and development plans
• Given that both County and Schools needs can change dramatically over the life of any facility, planning, design, and construction should deliberately address long-range flexibility for both organizations. 

Financial

• Any solution should be cost-effective, yielding economies of scale for both organizations.
• Any solution should consider existing CIP and other financial commitments. 
• An estimate of operating costs and future maintenance capital costs for both County and Schools of any solution should be developed and presented to both Boards.  

The County and Schools look forward to working collaboratively in the near-term and through Schools’ processes and the County’s Public Facilities Review Committee process as projects get closer to implementation.