A proposal to bring a Marlo Furniture store to a mixed-use development in Chantilly moved forward last week, and a spot where a hotel was planned will be left, instead, as open space.
The change was the latest in a long line in Marlo's attempt to locate in Chantilly Crossing, at the southwest corner of Routes 28 and 50, near the future National Air and Space Museum Annex. Although Marlo initially tried to substitute the furniture store for the hotel, most recently, it agreed to build both, side by side.
But at its Jan. 6 meeting, the Sully District Council of Citizens Associations Land-Use and Transportation Committee concluded that cramming both businesses in a small area would be too intense a use of the land. And last Thursday, Jan. 9, the Fairfax County Planning Commission agreed.
"A hotel and furniture store on that site would increase the amount of square footage too much and would be too high of a density there," explained Sully District Planning Commissioner Ron Koch. "And a furniture store will generate much less traffic than a hotel would."
He said that, last fall, a proffered-condition amendment of the development proposal transferred 77,000 square feet of hotel use from that spot to another area of the property. So, said Koch, "There's plenty of land elsewhere in the area to put hotels."
As a result, the Planning Commission approved amending the county's Comprehensive Plan text, adding an option for a furniture-store use at that site. It also imposed specific conditions on Marlo: If it does build a furniture store there, it can't exceed 67,500 square feet, and the rest of that site — some 2 1/2 acres — will be left as open space.
There's also another condition because — according to the Comprehensive Plan, — that location is supposed to contain tourist-oriented uses supporting the museum annex. Said Koch: "[Marlo] would have to offset the loss of recreational amenities on that site by compensating the county with money for recreation or recreational facilities, or with land, elsewhere." (Marlo owner Lou Glickfield had earlier agreed to contribute $250,000 toward Sully District-related athletic fields).
Koch also noted that the Planning Commission had received quite a few petitions and letters on behalf of locating the furniture store there. The support came from surrounding businesses, area residents and charitable organizations that Glickfield had helped in the past.
All in all, said Koch, it's a fair trade. "I think it's equitable, with the conditions that were imposed," he said. "[Glickfield] gets his furniture store and the county gets open space and some compensation for the loss of recreation."
Jeff Parnes, chairman of Sully Council's land-use and transportation committee, agrees. "We didn't want to see another use shoehorned in that site," he said. "We said the furniture store was OK, provided that its signage would be reviewed, the site would be furniture-store usage only — [or other low-intensity use] — and no other development went on that parcel."
The committee also levied other conditions, including the monetary contribution to recreation. And it wanted assurances that the property's Environmental Quality Corridor (EQC) is maintained and not adversely impacted by the development.
In addition, said Parnes, "This action by the county should not be considered indicative of a change to allow more retail further south of Route 28." The county Board of Supervisors will consider the Comprehensive Plan amendment adding the furniture-store option on Jan. 27.