Greater Greater Washington

Development


Falls Church misses planning opportunity with BJ's

Rather than taking maximum advantage of an opportunity to improve an area that is in dire need of better design, the City of Falls Church settled on a cookie-cutter, big box store when planning for BJ's.


Photo by the author.

The BJ's Wholesale Club opened last October 9 near Seven Corners to much fanfare. Most of the press around the opening was very positive, though it was built with little regard for future urban design or long-term planning in the area.

The property owner, JBG Properties, and the City of Falls Church announced the original plan two years earlier in October 2008. In that deal, the city agreed to provide $250,000 in annual tax relief to the property owners (totaling approximately $3 million over 12 years). The relief was intended to help offset some of the costs of site preparation, including retaining walls and infill.

At least one Falls Church resident perceived the deal as providing an unfair advantage to a business that doesn't really need it in comparison to some of the small businesses in the area.

The site is approximately 8.5 acres, and the store is reportedly 87,000 square feet, or about 24% of the site area (for comparison, the wildly popular, mixed-use Clarendon Common in Clarendon sits on 10 acres). It is exactly 1 mile from the East Falls Church Metro and is a typical big box retailer, with a large parking lot along the street and a deep setback.

Though tastefully landscaped, the site was formerly forested, and as many as 100 mature trees were sacrificed for the store's construction. As expected, the parking lot was full the first weekend it opened. On the numerous occasions I've passed by there since, I have never seen it more than about 2/3 full and often more than half empty.


Photo by the author.

As the resident above points out, there is little to no chance Falls Church would have allowed this BJ's near the center of the city. It is in the far southeast corner of the city (map), bordering both Fairfax and Arlington Counties, and away from the "village" area of Falls Church.

One could argue that the BJ's fits into this car-centric area around Seven Corners, which is unlike the center of Falls Church, with its mom-and-pop stores. However, the design could have been somewhat better with minor adjustments and considerably better with significant changes.

One step toward transforming the site to be more pedestrian-friendly could have been siting the building next to the street with a wide, inviting sidewalk and the parking in the rear. Better yet, a few small storefronts could have been integrated along the street as well, lessening the anchor store's isolation and vastly improving the pedestrian experience. Within 1/2 mile of this site are literally hundreds of housing units, primarily multi-family, so a significant density of potential pedestrians exists.

Even more innovative, though, would have been to develop the site completely differently, perhaps with a variety of uses and working on intelligent ways to take advantage of the Metro station just 1 mile away and the density of nearby housing. It could have been the start of a larger transformation for the entire area.

This picture shows the small group of stores just to the west of BJs. When this strip is redeveloped, the setback could be moved closer to the street, improving the pedestrian experience and continuing what could have been a mild transformation had the BJs site been more well designed.

To the east of BJ's is this Jiffy Lube, a fine establishment no doubt, but one that for the time being will detract from improving the streetscape. I am unaware of any current or imminent development efforts in the immediate vicinity of the BJ's.

Presumably Falls Church, with its relatively progressive population and policies, is a strong candidate for innovative suburban land use. In fact, the city has been working with Arlington County on a more progressive, long-term plan for the East Falls Church Metro station area.

In the end, timing likely affected some of the decisions surrounding this property. Because of the recession, Falls Church was desperate for sales tax revenue. If this deal had taken place before the downturn, the city may have had the means to negotiate for a better land use in return for less revenue.

It wouldn't be surprising if, at the end of the 12-year tax break period, the owners either negotiate an extension or simply move to another location. The building itself is single use and couldn't be easily re-purposed, as evidenced by the long-empty Big Lots less than 1000 feet away in the Eden Center.

In retrospect, a few design changes could have been implemented that would have served as a small step towards transforming this area. Unfortunately, that effort was not made and we're left with another disposable big box.

Unless Falls Church and Fairfax County decide to work together to develop a vision for Seven Corners, it will remain a poorly designed, unsafe, and unattractive part of the Washington region.

Steve Offutt has been working at the confluence of business and environment for almost 20 years, with experience in climate change solutions, green building, business-government partnerships, transportation demand management, and more. He lives in Arlington with his wife and two children and is a cyclist, pedestrian, transit rider and driver. 

Comments

Add a comment »

Uh, the area before wasn't forested, at least not like you imply. Before there was the BJs, there was a plumbing supply and transfer center for commercial contractors. Perhaps the back half of the property was forested, but the front half had light industrial use.

by Michael Perkins on Sep 19, 2011 1:48 pm • linkreport

Just thinking, it's not really in BJ's interest to have a walkable, urban storefront. Most of their products are heavy or bulky, and the entire concept is getting the consumer to buy huge quantities at once. It would be inconvenient at best to try to take the bus or Metro after shopping at BJ's.

by AdaminAlexandria on Sep 19, 2011 2:35 pm • linkreport

So, uh, not to act like I'm 13 years old or anything, but either you're *really* trying to grab eyeballs, or your headline and lede are very easily misconstrued without proper context.

by Jesse on Sep 19, 2011 2:38 pm • linkreport

I agree. Falls Church blew a serious wad of cash on this. You'd think they could find something better to come in this space.

by aaa on Sep 19, 2011 2:53 pm • linkreport

Personally, I feel like BJ's can be great, whether or not they're well planned.

by Kevin on Sep 19, 2011 3:00 pm • linkreport

Best. Headline. Ever.

by Bessie on Sep 19, 2011 3:05 pm • linkreport

AdaminAlexandria is right. People rarely walk or take transit to a warehouse store. Look at the Costco at Pentagon City. It almost on top of the Metro, yet you hardly see anyone on the platforms with their purchases from that store; and the parking lot is nearly always full.

by Juanita de Talmas on Sep 19, 2011 3:09 pm • linkreport

I've never shopped at a BJ's but as I understand it the store is similar to Costco and Sam's Club, where a significant amount of the items they sell is in bulk quantity. If that's the case then why would they have much interest in making access to the store more pedestrian friendly?

If it's anything like shopping at Costco then, in my experience, you never go there to purchase 1 or 2 items, you go there to purchase a bunch of stuff and load up your vehicle.

by Fitz on Sep 19, 2011 3:17 pm • linkreport

This seems like a pretty poor investment of $3M by the city. Putting a bulk purchase store like BJ's in that place exacerbates the traffic problems that already exist in heavily congested 7 Corners and the investment doesn't seem to fit into any kind of long term vision or plan.

Falls Church needs to build around it's assets -- proximity to two metro stations, frequent bus service along Rt. 7, proximity to bike trails, and successful traffic calming measures that make many parts of the city quite bikeable/walkable.

by Falls Church on Sep 19, 2011 3:29 pm • linkreport

I agree the BJ's is unfortunate from an urban design/pedestrian-friendly perspective, particularly in terms of any hope for future transformation of 7 corners. But I think one problem in terms of why they didn't site the store farther forward is that the property is quite deep and gets wider towards the back. So by putting the store behind the parking lot, they were able to fit a bigger store. And when your zoning regs allow a big box store, require a big parking lot, and don't have many urban design restrictions, this is what you get (of course, subsidies for big box stores don't help at all).

The bottom line, as you say, is this points to the need for a comprehensive vision, plan, and zoning update for the 7 corners area if it's ever to become a more mixed-use, pedestrian friendly area.

by RichardatCourthouse on Sep 19, 2011 3:58 pm • linkreport

Certainly not an optimal use in a planning sense, but many will find it useful. As for exacerbating traffic problems, this is always an argument with any new development. On the one hand it is alleged to bring traffic, but on the other hand what about the traffic that is reduced because people in the community don't have to drive as far to get what they need? Traffic is often framed as an insider/outsider argument where the source of the traffic is always "others" from outside the jurisdiction, whereas the people in the community don't usually consider the traffic that they generate.

True that the area needs an upgrade, but I don't think you will get perfection in the first stages of redevelopment. You will get projects like this, definitely not perfect, but better than what they replaced. Its very tough also because its not "close enough" to transit, so it will be somewhat more auto oriented. I'm torn because I would like the area redeveloped (and it will, slowly) but on the other hand my stomach is grumbling right now thinking about Eden Center, and I wouldn't want that to go away.

The upcoming Costco on Richmond Highway in Fairfax County is a similar dilemma. Not perfect, but better than a dilapidated vacant site, and like BJ's, Costco knows where its members live, and there is a high-income population nearby the site to support it. People will complain about traffic on Richmond Highway, but forget that they no longer have to travel 10-15 miles to the nearest Costco.

The Fairfax county comp plan recommends buildings be closer to the road, with less parking in front. In theory that is a good thing, and something I'm definately in favor of, but for large format stores it doesn't always work. The RH Costco is near the road, but the problem is the back of the store now basically faces the road. IMO it was a bad compromise.

by spookiness on Sep 19, 2011 4:13 pm • linkreport

spookiness -- I'd say the bigger problem here is less the store design, which regardless of tweaks will need to be auto oriented given the nature of the store, and more the subsidy. Tax subsidies should be used to implement some kind of strategy or vision and I don't see this store as fitting into one.

by Falls Church on Sep 19, 2011 4:27 pm • linkreport

Falls Church,
Your point is well taken. IIRC, wasn't there a fiscal argument in favor of this project? While there were breaks for the property taxes, I am curious about the difference between that and the anticipated sales tax revenue.

by spookiness on Sep 19, 2011 4:33 pm • linkreport

87,000 s.f. * $500/s.f * .05 sales tax = $2,175,000 in sales tax revenues annually. So you can see why they did it. (Granted sales tax revenue will be less in terms of whatever proportion of goods is bought for resale, and whether or not they will be resold in Falls Church, unlikely...)

2. On streets like this, people should advocate for better urban design generally. E.g., I don't care if they are big boxes, as long as the buildings are up at the street, there is a proper streetscape, sidewalks, etc., with parking in the rear.

But project by project it won't happen. You need to change the local zoning. Same goes for Rte. 1 in Fairfax ("Alexandria" mailing address, etc.

by Richard Layman on Sep 19, 2011 4:45 pm • linkreport

About the sales tax generation, my calculation is too high. I forgot to take into consideration the high percentage of sales of food, and the reduced sales tax of 2.5% on food. As much as 50% of store sales would be food. That would reduce the annual sales tax revenue to Falls Church by $543,750, so the total would be $1,631,250.

by Richard Layman on Sep 21, 2011 4:59 am • linkreport

This post really could have used a bit more research about how things came to be at the new BJs. If I recall correctly, the previous owner of the site (which hosted a Noland building supply showroom and warehouse) was thisclose to inking a deal to put a car dealership/used car lot there. Such a use would have been allowed under the then-existing zoning and would have generated minimal tax revenue for the city. (I'm remembering estimates of $40,000 annually--and I don't think I'm leaving off a zero!)

Falls Church leaders got active and made the BJs deal happen. Yeah--it's a big box store. Between a Jiffy Lube and a Public Storage. But it's a lot better use of the land than it might have been, and it generates a lot more tax revenue, too.

Given that the then-owners could have moved their car lot plans forward without any approval from the City, I think the outcome is a pretty good case of making lemonade from lemons.

(I haven't gone back to verify all my recollections, but I think this pretty well reflects the process. And I would note: I live in Fairfax County, so I'm not involved in any way in the small-town politics of Falls Church City. But that site was on my commute, so I paid attention as the development was occurring.)

by Andrew on Sep 21, 2011 7:03 am • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or