►
Description
The Arlington County Board discusses Four Mile Run Planning Initiative issues with the Working Group, including the Shirlington Dog Park, Jennie Dean Park West of S. Nelson St., and parking. View the Agenda, and the staff presentation.
Live-captioning of the work session is available on the County website or on the ATV cable channel, Comcast 25 & 74 and Verizon FiOs 39 & 40.
A
Well,
we
what
we
hit,
but
we
have
tonight,
for
you
is
a
whole
set
of
ideas
about
changes
that
could
be
made
in
the
form
of
run
Valley
area
and
they
are
admittedly
a
little
uneven.
Some
are
more
developed
than
others.
For
example,
we
have
two
alternatives
for
the
larger
land
use
area,
but
we
have
in
that
chance
to
dig
into
some
of
the
details
of
that.
We
have
for
alternatives
virginity
and
park
proper,
and
but
we
have
a
lot
of
questions
about
those
as
well.
A
We
have
several
ideas
about
the
to
block
area
west
of
Nelson
Street,
but
actually
haven't
seen
any
illustrations
and
really
haven't
haven't
dug
into
those.
In
any
degree,
we've
discussed
a
road
diet
on
form,
hour
and
drive,
but
haven't
discussed
exactly
where
the
diet
would
be
or
or
where
it
could
be
implemented
or
or
about
alternatives
that
might
make
that
diet
unnecessary.
So
again,
it's
just
an
idea
and
I'm
sure
you've
heard
we've
looked
at
three
alternatives
for
the
Shirlington
dog
park.
A
In
addition
to
the
alternative
of
not
doing
anything
major,
but
we
have
reached
no
consensus
on
those,
we
actually
only
saw
those
illustrations
that
last
meeting
two
weeks
ago,
so
they've
just
been
put
out
there.
We
have
not
reached
any
kind
of
consensus
recommendation
on
those,
but
there
is
a
consensus
on
certain
areas
and
some
of
the
broad
questions
in
mr.
Fassett
you
mentioned
the
first
one,
which
is
that
generally,
the
community
wants
to
maintain
the
industrial
uses,
zoning
and
character
of
the
area,
because
we
see
the
value
of
all
the
businesses
there.
A
We
also
believe
reached
the
consensus
on
the
need
to
improve
pedestrian
bicycle
accessibility,
to
improve
pedestrian
connections,
to
make
it
in
general,
a
more
pleasant
place
to
be
if
you're,
not
in
the
car.
There's
also
I
think
a
consensus
that
adding
to
our
green
space
is
a
good
idea
that
we
need
to
protect
the
run,
and
then
we
need
to
support
our
small
businesses
in
the
area.
A
Some
of
the
details
obviously
have
to
work
out,
but
but
there
is
a
general
sense,
those
are
all
things
we
want
to
do
and,
and
we
are
frankly
entering
the
period
where
we're
just
going
to
be
talking
about
making
trade-offs
from
one
issue
to
another
and
I.
Think
that's
why,
as
you
mentioned,
there's
so
much
interest
in
this
there's
a
lots
going
on
down
there
and
it's
really
not
that
big
an
area,
and
it's
really
going
to
be
very
difficult
to
fit
everything.
That's
been
discussed
into
the
end
of
the
land
use
planning
area.
A
So
we
really
want
to
get
your
thoughts
on
all
the
issues.
They'll
be
a
pretty
extensive
staff
presentation.
You
may
have
looked
at
it
already,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
ideas
there.
We'd
love
to
have
your
thoughts
on
any
of
the
issues
that
are
discussed
and
particularly,
we
want
to
know
your
thoughts
about
three
specific
talk
topics,
one
of
which
is
how
to
provide
more
parking.
Second
is
what
options
we
should
consider
for
the
area
west
of
Nelson,
Street
and
third,
is
what
approach
we
should
take
on
the
dog
park.
I.
B
Very
good,
thank
you
and
I'll
echo,
my
thanks
that
Charles
has
offered
to
to
the
Chairman
to
members
of
the
board
county
manager
and
staff.
It's
really
been
a
pleasure
to
work
with
everybody.
I'll
start
by
just
saying
a
year
and
a
half
ago
the
NOC
community
really
welcomed
you
all
to
what
we
referred
to
as
the
launch
of
the
North
Crescent.
We
were
there
to
celebrate
after
more
than
a
decade
of
delay.
The
prioritization
of
the
Crescent
in
the
county
planning
process.
I
think
you'll
agree
that
the
mood
at
that
time
was
exuberant.
B
Just
that
day,
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
a
distribution
brewery
opened
on
Oakland
Street.
More
recently,
the
local
food
bank
has
undergone
significant
renovation
buses,
no
longer
idle
on
Jenny
Dean
Park.
Thank
you
very
much.
We're
still
waiting
for
the
grass,
though,
and
now,
of
course,
is
the
working
group
studying
the
area
tonight.
As
you've
heard,
you
will
have
a
series
of
questions
to
provide
guidance
on
a
very
narrow
set
of
issues
and
I'm
not
going
to
presume
to
tell
you
how
to
respond.
B
This
is
a
large
study
area
and
we
ask
that
you
consider
it
as
a
whole,
not
merely
by
the
elements
that
we're
discussing
today
and
then.
Finally,
the
art
of
North,
the
heart
of
knock,
presents
Arlington
with
a
unique
opportunity
to
create
a
place
of
soul
and
I
hope
you'll.
Consider
that
in
your
recommendations,
thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
I,
don't
have
a
whole
lot
more
to
add.
I.
Think
we've
been
over
a
number
of
these
I
just
want
to
note
that
in
theory,
I
think
combining
the
land
use
in
them
and
the
park
planning
process
sounds
good,
but
it's
hard.
This
has
been
very
difficult
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people
have
felt
that,
and
you
know
we
shouldn't
under.
C
We
need
to
acknowledge
that
first
time,
we've
really
done
that
here
Arlington
and
it's
been
hard
I
think
on
some
of
the
working
group,
members
and
I
know
it's
been
hard
on
staff
and
I
really
commend
them
for
the
quick
turnaround
that
they
have
had
to
do
with
having
the
twice
a
month
meetings.
We
may
be
at
a
point
where
we
may
want
to
slow
it
down
a
little
bit.
We've
had
a
huge
amount
of
information.
C
F
Okay,
there's
just
a
general
overview
of
what
the
work
session
this
evening
for
the
staff
presentation
I'm
just
going
to
give
a
brief
overview
of
the
purpose
of
the
work
session.
Go
over
a
little
bit
of
the
background
that
touches
on
the
charge.
The
time
line.
Some
of
the
outreach
we've
done
to
date,
some
of
the
other
efforts
and
then
we'll
get
into
the
more
detailed
conversations
around
the
concepts
so
again
for
the
work
session.
F
Here's
a
general
overview
of
the
study
area
going
from
24th
at
glebe
up
in
the
far
upper
right-hand
corner
of
the
screen
down
395
down
four
mile
run,
drive
north
of
Arlington
middle
all.
The
way
over
to
Barcroft
Park
is
the
four
mile
run
area
plan
area
and
the
green
dashed
line
enclosed
within
that
is
the
Jenny
Dean
Park
master
plan
area,
so
just
to
briefly
touch
on
the
charge.
F
That
includes
representatives
from
Department
of
Parks
and
Natural
Resources
C
PhD,
our
intent,
economic
development
and
Department
of
Environmental
Services,
and
we
we
work
to
provide
the
working
group
in
the
broader
community
with
information,
analysis
options
and
proposals
for
their
feedback
that
ultimately
help
us
draft.
An
area
plan
and
master
plan
for
the
county
board
to
consider
and
we'll
also
take
into
acceleration
information
from
advisory
boards
commissions
in
the
broader
community.
F
In
the
role
of
the
workgroup
is
to
provide
that
input
to
County
staff
and
the
consultants
as
we
look
through
these
proposals
and
options
to
act
as
liaison
with
the
community
and
to
ultimately
give
us
comments
on
these
draft
plans
and
proposals.
As
they're
developed
as
we've
covered
earlier
here,
members
of
the
working
group
representing
business,
not-for-profit
commission
and
neighborhood
associations
as
24
members
and
here's
where
we
are
on
the
timeline.
We
had
the
kickoff
back
in
June,
where
the
process
was
initiated.
F
We
had
in
a
community
forum
where
some
initial
ideas
were
presented
from
members
of
the
community
and
from
members
of
the
working
group.
We
use
that
information
to
provide
a
foundation
for
our
community
visioning
workshops
that
happened
in
early
December
and
we've
been
deliberating
on
that
information
and
coming
back
with
a
range
of
options
and
concepts
to
the
working
group,
which
is
brought
us
forward
to
the
work
session
today.
F
Some
of
the
outreach
that's
occurred
to
date
that
generally
have
been
to
working
group
meetings
per
month.
They've
been
a
series
of
meetings
throughout
the
community
either
at
civic
associations.
Events
like
field
the
Heritage,
not
community,
Pride,
Day,
pop-up
events
in
the
actual
park
itself.
We've
have
about
1,200
subscribers
on
forum
RV
comm,
and
we
encourage
people
to
continue
to
go
there
for
information
and
to
sign
up.
As
I
mentioned,
we
had
the
community
forum
in
September
the
december
work.
F
The
community
visioning
work
session,
December
and
April
business
forum
at
the
new
District
brewery,
and
we
had
about
30
to
40
business
and
property
owners
attend
and
ultimately
we're
going
to
go
to
the
open
house
in
on
July
17th
and
again.
We
continue
to
look
for
opportunities
to
meet
with
the
community
and
we'll
continue
to
do
so
throughout
this
process.
F
Some
other
efforts
where
the
knock
town
squares
is
mentioned
earlier.
We've
acquired
the
final
parcel
for
that
site,
we're
at
60%
design
and
we
hope
to
go
into
construction
sometime
in
the
spring
of
2018.
They've
been
a
variety
of
interim
improvement
to
Jenny.
Dean
Park
proved
signage
at
the
entrance
of
the
park.
Some
improvements
have
been
made
to
some
of
the
park
structures.
There's
been
the
repaving
of
the
South
open,
Street
parking
lot
and
restriping
near
the
dog
park.
G
Good
evening,
I'm
going
to
start
with
just
some
background
and
overview
before
we
get
into
or
viewing
area
plan
concepts
and
share
with
you
to
begin
with
a
series
of
graphics
that
we
created
for
the
briefing
book
was
produced
for
this
process.
This
is
the
general
land-use
plan
map
for
this
area,
which
shows
primarily
this
area
is
designated
for
industrial
use.
G
Similarly,
the
zoning
for
the
area
matches
that
so
the
m1
designation,
the
m2
designation,
those
are
industrial
designations
for
the
that
are
the
primary
use
in
this
area.
The
county,
owned
properties
or
park
properties
are
our
zone,
s
3a,
which
is
a
public
designation,
and
then
there
is
some
ra
h,
which
is
hotel
and
residential
development
in
the
in
the
area
near
24th
and
Glee
Road.
This
next
slide
shows
the
overview
of
the
area.
G
Aerial
that
we
developed
at
the
time
is
somewhat
dated,
but
it
does
show
the
overall
character
of
the
area,
including
the
residential
areas,
to
the
north
and
to
the
south
and
west,
the
mixed
used
area
in
Shirlington
village,
and
then
within
the
study
area.
You
see
a
series
of
small
industrially
used,
ozone
properties
and
the
park
itself.
Canadian
Park
along
four
mile
run,
drive
and
then
also
you
see
a
range
of
buildings
that
are
larger
in
scale
for
the
warehousing
type
uses
that
are
in
what
we
call
the
Crescent.
G
This
next
slide
shows
the
floodplain
and
our
PA,
which
predominate
in
this
area
and
is
a
major
consideration
as
part
of
what
we're
studying
getting
back
to
some
of
the
big
ideas,
some
of
which
have
already
been
mentioned.
Keeping
the
industrial
feel
for
the
area
using
the
building's
reusing
the
buildings
in
a
flexible
way
and
including
buildings
that
can
be
used
in
the
future
in
that
matter.
G
Some
of
them
are
centered
around
large
public
facilities
or
concert
halls
or
things
of
that
nature.
Some
of
them
are
very
organic
in
nature.
These
two
examples
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen
demonstrate
that
there's
a
mix
of
uses
that
can
be
within
the
arts
district,
not
just
arts,
it
could
be
auto
repair
and
both
of
these
examples
show
so
that
there
are
breweries
in
these
areas.
So
we
have
one
one
in
Tucson
Arizona
and
another
in
Asheville,
North
Carolina.
G
So
before
getting
into
the
area
plan
concepts.
Preliminary
area
plan
concepts
want
to
describe
what
you
will
see
so
areas
shaded
in
light
blue
are
indicated
for
preserving
existing
uses.
So
what
you
see
is
a
series
of
pictures
here
of
businesses
that
are
in
the
area
currently,
and
these
types
of
uses
could
continue
in
the
future.
G
The
second
area
is
shaded
in
purple
or
light
purple,
which
is
arts
associated
uses
that
might
be
blended
in
with
the
existing
uses
as
well,
and
so
these
are
some
funky
buildings
that
have
different
types
of
uses
and
some
outdoor
spaces
that
can
complement
the
things
that
are
already
in
in
certain
areas.
The
third
and
I
have
two
different
slides
here,
a
greater
scale
and
broader
uses.
G
So
looking
at
the
area
plan
concepts
is,
there
are
two
the
first
one
again
to
review
in
the
area
west
of
Walter
E
to
Drive,
and
we've
broken
this
down
in
the
sub
areas.
To
make
it
easy
to
talk
about
so
sub
area,
a
west
of
Walter
E
drive.
We
have
indicated
that
we
would
preserve
the
existing
types
of
uses,
not
necessarily
the
businesses
there,
but
the
types
of
uses
that
are
a
mix
of
service,
commercial
and
industrial
in
subby
area
B.
G
That's
an
area
we've
designated
for
extent,
the
existing
uses
and
inclusion
of
Arts
uses
or
the
arts
hub
idea
in
sub
area,
C
and
part
of
sub
area,
D
continuing
existing
uses
and
what
we
begin
to
study
began.
The
study
is
the
potential
for
broader
density
and
greater
height
in
a
broad
range
of
uses
in
the
area
where
the
hotel
site
is
located
at
24th
and
angly
broke
as
an
alternative
to
this
proposal.
G
Basically,
building
on
the
ideas
we
received
about
keeping
the
industrial
feel
and
the
types
of
uses
that
are
out
there,
this
alternative
proposes
a
moderate
change
where
a
broader
area
or
larger
area
would
be
considered
for
different
changes.
Our
broader
range
of
uses,
so
those
two
are
the
concepts
that
we
continue
to
dig
into
and
we'll
have
some
more
conversations
in
the
next
month.
G
As
part
of
our
conversations,
we
have
looked
at
the
site
where
art
buses
are
currently
parked,
and
many
people
have
had
ideas
about
this
site
building
upon
the
community
facility
study,
which
recommends
that
the
county
seek
to
co-locate
uses,
and
one
of
the
ideas
is,
is
thinking
about
what
additional
uses
could
be
on
this
site
is
our
thinking
at
this
point.
The
area
plan
could
address
insight
in
terms
of
height
and
density
and
urban
design
elements,
but
not
get
into
the
specific
uses
that
might
be
on
this
site
over
the
long
term.
G
H
So
first
just
wanted
to
touch
on
the
charge
for
the
park
master
plan
and
that
is
to
provide
a
vision
for
the
comprehensive
replacement
and
realignment
of
existing
park,
features
exclusively
for
park
purposes
and
the
addition
of
new
park
amenities
to
meet
the
growing
demand
for
active
and
passive
recreation,
cultural
resources
and
natural
resource
preservation.
So
I
think,
is
some
some
folks
in
particularly
Caroline
alluded
to.
That's
that's
been
a
bit
of
a
challenge.
We
have
existing
park
facilities
that
people
feel
very
strongly
about.
H
The
area
goes
from
Shirlington
Road
by
the
weenie
beany
West
to
Walter
Reed
Drive,
so
the
park
master
plan
is
anticipated
to
eventually
be
adopted
by
the
board
sometime
next
year
and
when
it's
completed
it
is
going
to
guide
the
phased
implementation
of
the
park
as
well
as
potential
for
additional
acquisition
of
parkland.
So
what
we've
been
focusing
on
with
the
working
group
since
the
beginning
of
this
year
is
looking
at
Park
concept
plans.
H
So
we
started
that
back
in
January
and
the
ideas
were
gathered
from
the
pop-up
events,
the
community
forum
and
the
community
visioning
workshops
that
were
last
year.
We
started
with
very
high
level
diagrams
that
illustrate
the
full
range
of
opportunities
and
then
we've
been
working
on
revising
and
narrowing
them
down,
based
on
working
group
feedback
similar
to
the
concept
plans
for
the
overall
area
that
Richard
just
presented.
H
The
park
master
plan
is
falling
into
three
distinct
areas
within
the
overall
park
plan:
the
Shirlington
Park
Shirlington
dog
park
area
on
the
west,
the
portion
of
Jay
Dean
Park
between
South
Nelson
and
South
Oakland
Street.
That
also
includes
a
lot
of
the
private
properties
and
the
portion
of
JD
nice,
tough,
south
Nelson,
which
is
generally
where
the
park
currently
exists.
H
This
area
is
intended
to
be
the
first
phase
of
park
development,
and
it
is
already
outlined
in
the
current
CIP
design
has
already
been
funded
in
FY
2018,
and
there
is
funding
in
the
current
CIP
for
construction
of
this
first
phase
of
the
park.
Once
the
master
plan
is
completed,
the
air
includes
the
existing
park
with
its
aging
facilities,
as
well
as
two
of
the
five
parcels
that
we've
been
acquiring
basically
what's
referred
to
as
the
old
Motorola
site
used
by
seek
in
the
county
for
storage
and
a
Laporte
site.
H
All
three
of
the
alternative
concepts
have
some
similar
considerations
for
the
East
area
that
show
increased
parking
along
South
Nelson,
improved
traffic
flow,
around
South,
Nelson
and
South
Oakland
Street
retention
of
the
existing
Park
amenities
and
enhanced
pedestrian
experience,
new
streetscape
and
trees
and
the
consolidation
of
the
two
properties
into
Jenny
Dean
Park
option.
One
shows
a
vegetated
buffer
being
created,
adjacent
to
form,
I'll
run
additional
recreation.
H
Whoops.
Excuse
me,
with
the
park
facilities,
shifting
north
from
four
mile
run
and
in
the
second
phase,
which
is
on
the
right.
It
shows
that
when
we
de
and
the
properties
along
for
my
aroma
be
acquired,
that
you
would
be
able
to
fit
in
additional
recreation,
amenities
and
casual
use
space
over
time.
H
H
The
third
option
shows
relocation
of
some
of
the
recreational
monies
in
phase
one,
but
the
softball
field
and
the
courts
would
remain
in
place
until
additional
parkland
has
been
acquired.
That
creates,
in
this
instance,
a
more
casual
use
area
adjacent
to
Four,
Mile
Run
Drive,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
concern,
I
think
from
the
working
group
about
doing
anything
that
would
take
some
of
the
recreational
features
out
of
play
for
a
number
of
years
until
acquisition
had
been
completed,
and
that's
why
this
has
sort
of
a
phased
approach
to
its
implementation.
H
So,
starting
with
the
dog
park,
the
the
Shirlington
dog
park
issue
is
certainly
a
very
complex
one
and
it
is
a
challenge
we
have
the
county's
existing
in
much-beloved
dog
park,
which
is
approximately
a
hundred
thousand
square
feet.
It's
also
the
county's
largest
dog
park.
There
are
also
environmental
regulations
that
were
adopted
by
the
Commonwealth
of
Virginia
and
the
county
through
several
regulatory
plans
and
ordinances.
H
It's
a
challenge
of
an
industrial
area
that
developed
in
the
1940s
to
1960s
with
a
dog
park
added
in
the
1990s,
all
of
which
predate
the
regulatory
and
policy
requirements
today
for
the
21st
century,
riparian
management.
There
is
also
the
challenge
of
a
very
long
narrow
dog
park,
with
a
pinch
point
in
the
middle
near
South,
Oxford
Street
and
the
stormwater
solutions,
the
point
to
natural
vegetation
and
an
increase
in
buffer
width.
H
The
main
focus
on
of
the
working
group
meeting
when
we
met
with
them
on
April
4th
was
a
very
detailed
presentation
from
the
Department
of
Environmental
Services
on
stormwater
management,
to
help
educate
them
and
inform
them
on
the
considerations
not
just
for
the
dog
park,
but
for
all
of
Jenny
Dean
Park.
As
we
move
forward
with
the
master
plan
throughout
the
planning
staff
has
been
cleared,
the
county
has
no
intention
of
closing
the
Shirlington
dog
park.
H
What
we
would
like
to
do
is
walk
you
through
some
of
the
background
touch
on
the
regulatory
framework
and
then
share
the
existing
configuration
and
the
three
alternative
or
preliminary
alternatives
that
have
been
developed
so
far.
So
what
you
see
in
this
first
slide
is
an
aerial
photo
of
the
existing
dog
park
which
extends
from
South
Oakland
Street
West,
past
South,
Oxford
Street,
the
resource
protection
area
or
our
PA
for
the
four
mile
run
stream
is
a
hundred
feet
from
the
edge
of
the
stream
Bank.
H
The
long
term
objection
I'm,
sorry
objective
of
the
RPA
is
to
improve
the
areas
through
redevelopment
and
restoration.
The
existing
conditions
in
the
AR
PA
today
include
a
minimal
riparian
buffer
exposed
soil
and
soil
compaction,
areas
of
erosion
on
the
upper
bank
and
high
pollutant
load
potential
from
bacteria
nutrients
and
sediment.
H
What
we
know
from
user
feedback
is
that
the
dog
park
is
valued
for
the
unique
elongated
shape
the
size
of
it.
The
shade
we
have
separate
areas
for
large
and
small
dogs-
it
is
separated
from
the
other
Park
uses,
and
the
proximity
to
the
four
mile
run
stream.
An
additional
challenge
that
we
face
in
the
current
dog
park
and
going
forward
in
the
future
is
the
drainage
from
adjacent
properties
coming
from
roof
drains
that
out
fall
directly
onto
the
dog
park,
as
well
as
existing
drain
inlets
out
Falls
and
storm
sewer.
H
So
where
we
are,
we
know
the
dog
parks
well-loved
and
the
most
heavily
used
dog
park
in
the
county
and
probably
in
the
region.
It
is
also
in
the
RP
a
which
means
future
redevelopment
requires
compliance
with
state
and
county
regulations
for
stormwater
management.
We
also
know
that
complying
with
these
regulations
is
going
to
be
challenging
and
could
mean
configuration.
And/Or
size
would
need
to
change
over
time
as
improvements
are
made.
H
While
there
are
adjacent
county
owned
parcels
which
could
be
incorporated
into
the
dog
park,
there
have
also
been
competing
ideas
for
how
to
use
those
areas.
So
before
looking
at
the
possible
alternatives
that
we've
developed
preliminarily,
we
want
to
touch
on
the
regulatory
and
the
policy
framework.
H
That
means
that
the
regulatory
and
policy
framework
we
are
working
with
for
the
dog
park
and
Jenny
Dean
Park
are
similar
to
the
challenges
and
compliance
techniques
that
we
recently
used
at
Bluemont
Park
for
the
diamond
field
that
required
in
and
incorporated
a
35
foot
vegetated
strip
or
the
riparian
enhancements
that
were
added
when
the
playground
was
just
replaced
at
Woodlawn
park.
There
are
several
main
areas
that
frame
the
RPA
requirements.
H
So
what
triggers
compliance
with
these
projects
when
we
do
them?
It's
triggered
by
land
disturbances
that
are
2,500
square
feet
are
larger
in
size.
Some
examples
could
include
a
large
natural
or
weather
events
such
as
significant
flooding
or
erosion,
that
causes
the
need
to
come
in
and
do
some
renovation
or
major
renovations
or
improvements
to
an
area
such
as
the
dog
park.
H
The
considerations
included
reconfiguring
to
maintain
the
general
location
and
proximity
to
the
four
mile
run
stream
supporting
renovation
in
a
future
phase
of
the
park
master
plan
for
implementation,
providing
a
quality
experience
for
dog
park
users,
providing
a
dog
park
that
is
environmentally
healthy
and
operationally
sustainable
over
time
and
providing
good
stewardship
for
four
mile
run
stream.
All
those
considerations
point
to
the
need
to
work
hard
to
find
the
right
balance
for
the
long
term,
so
the
next
few
slides
show
the
current
configuration
and
three
preliminary
alternatives.
H
H
H
Similar
talk
to
alternative
one,
the
riparian
trail,
loops
up,
South,
Oxford
and
around
to
South
Nelson,
and
then
an
alternative
to
be
the
riparian
trail
runs
along
the
shoreline
outside
the
dog
park,
which
would
make
the
dog
park
approximately
47
thousand
square
feet.
Now,
one
of
the
things
we
shared
with
the
working
group
a
couple
weeks
ago,
when
we
met
was
you
know
there
are?
There
are
opportunities
if
it's
just
a
question
of
getting
back
matching
the
size,
there
are
other
opportunities
again.
H
It's
going
to
become
about
choices,
so
if
we
were
to
include
the
old
Signature,
Theatre
parcel
and
the
warehouse
along
with
the
existing
dog
park,
we
could
get
to
a
dog
park,
that's
approximately
96
thousand
square
feet
or
something
in
and
around
what
the
current
dog
park
size
is.
There's
also
a
small
parking
area
right
across
from
the
storage
that's
used
now
so
I
think
there
are
there
opportunities,
there's
going
to
be
choices
in
just
a
lot
of
questions
for
us
all
to
consider
going
forward.
H
D
Will
keep
track
of
it?
That's
one
of
my
specialties
staying
on
pace,
so
this
one
will
spend
some
time
on
and
we
do
have
the
two
questions
or
that
have
been
posed
and
again
I
say
there
may
be
several
others
that
we
want
to
explore.
The
first
one
is:
should
the
master
park
master
plan
indicated
dog
park
that
remains
unchanged,
or
is
there
openness
to
reducing
the
size
of
the
dog
park
to
meet
environmental
regulations
in
a
reconfiguration,
it
really
could
be
read
either
way.
I
Going
to
begin
with
a
question
rather
than
a
comment,
which
is,
as
we
try
to
get
our
arms
around
the
the
the
nature
of
the
choices
before
us.
Is
it
correct
that
these
designs
assume
that
full
remediation
of
all
of
the
sort
of
stormwater
needs
for
the
dog
park
and
then
the
associated
businesses
and
structures
which
you
showed
us
in
the
slide,
the
full
remediation
is
done
through
that
vegetated
strip
and
I
guess
what
I'm
asking
is?
Are
there
options
to
remediate
this
sort
of
swathmore
holistically
through
partnerships
with
the
private
sites?
I
You
know
some
of
the
other
stormwater
management
tactics.
We've
we've
undertaken
elsewhere
in
the
county,
green
roofs,
rain,
barrels,
cisterns,
etc.
Could
you
talk
about
sort
of?
Are
we
trying
to
get
to
stormwater
remediation
for
the
whole
site
through
this
strip?
Have
we
considered
other
options?
If
so,
what
are
they
all.
K
Right,
that's
a
that's
a
good
question
and
there
are
obviously
adjacent
runoff
issues
that
were
highlighted
in
the
presentation.
I
guess
that
going
first,
what
Lisa
was
was
emphasizing
that
this
isn't
a
design
kind
of
compliance
review
exercise,
so
that
makes
a
little
more
challenging,
but
we
looked
at
it
as
if
we
were
doing
that
and
typically
the
way
that's
done
is
on
a
sort
of
project-by-project
basis,
so
we
didn't
assume
any
remediation
for
the
adjacent
property
runoff.
K
For
a
few
reasons,
one
is
typically
that
they're
responsible
for
what
they're
going
to
need
to
do
when
they
redevelop.
So
just
in
terms
of
how
the
ordinance
works,
it's
it's
project
by
project
rather
than
hey.
Could
we
treat
runoff
from
over
here
to
meet
our
compliance
over
here
generally?
We
don't
because
it
leads
to
complexity
later
when
those
properties
have
to
comply
and
and
now
we're
getting
or
trading
credits
around.
The
other
thing
I'd
highlight
is
the
the
stormwater
impacts
in
a
dog
park
itself.
K
D
L
K
So
the
the
dual
regulatory
challenge
here
is
you're
dealing
with
the
stormwater
ordinance
requirements
and
the
RPA
requirements,
and
so
that
water
quality
impact
assessment
process
under
the
chest
by
ordinance
dealing
with
our
pas
requires
a
few
things.
One
is
that
you
deal
with
pollutant
loads
that
are
existing
and
that
you
achieve
a
net
improvement
in
the
buffer,
so
you've
got
that
and
then
stormwater
you've
got.
You
know
the
general
requirement
that
you
achieve
and
in
an
area
like
this,
be
about
20%,
pollutant
reduction
over
existing
conditions.
K
So
when
you
put
those
two
together,
the
emphasis
really
is
on
the
vegetated
buffer
enhancement
and
the
tool
we
have
given
to
us
by
that
there
is
a
tool
given
to
us
by
the
state,
essentially
a
vegetative
buffer,
that
actually
gives
you
pollutant
removal
credits
for
your
stormwater
compliance
and
helps
you
achieve
your
RP
a
requirement,
but
it's
a
minimum
35
foot
width.
So
it's
not
an
average.
It's
that's
the
minimum
and
you
go
from
there.
K
So
that's
what
we
did
in
Bluemont
Park,
for
example,
and
through
that
tool
you
can
achieve
compliance
with
both
with
both
codes.
So
we
made
that
assumption
looking
at
that
35
feet,
particularly
for
the
no
expansion
scenario
we
looked
at
when
you
get
in
the
expansion
scenario,
because
that
expand
that
area
of
potential
expansion
where
the
warehouses
are
is
already
impervious,
compliance
can
be
a
little
easier.
K
G
L
Does
the
out
with
the
buffer
need
to
be
separated
from
the
adjacent
reduced
dog
park?
Would
it
be
we'll
be
talking
about
artificial
fencing,
we'd
be
talking,
you
know,
chain-link
we'll
be
talking
about
stone
and
no
we're
not
designing
it.
Just
conceptually
what
would
be
some
options
which
would
you
know,
pass
pass
muster
in
terms
of
keeping
this
as
a
true
buffer
right.
K
So
that's
a
good
point,
so
the
state
specifications
kind
of
understandably
require
a
physical
barrier
between
the
adjacent
use
and
the
buffer
zone,
just
to
keep
it
from
getting
compacted
and
make
sure
the
vegetation
remains
intact.
So
that
can
take
a
variety
of
forms
at
the
design
level
it
turns
out.
It
was
a
fence
at
Bluemont
baseball
field,
because
that
worked
for
the
field
as
an
outfield
fence.
Here
it
could
be
other
other
aspects.
It
could
be
boulders,
it
could
be
seating
areas,
it
could
be
other
elements
that
would
create
that
physical
barrier.
J
So
mr.
Papa
Kozma
could
we
could
we
go
back
to
the
slide?
That
shows
the
very
first
slide
on
the
dog
park
before
the
alternative.
One
slide?
Okay.
So
this
is
one
of
the
questions
as
to
whether
or
not
whether
or
not
the
the
dog
park
should
remain
unchanged.
So
why
isn't
this
current
configuration
option?
One
I
mean:
why
is
this
not
an
option
or
not.
H
J
So
my
next
question
is
with
respect
to
that
2,500
square
feet.
What
does
that
mean?
Is
it
piercing
the
soil?
Is
it
just
give
us
some
color
around
the
2,500
square
feet
and
within
what
boundaries
are
we
talking
about
for
the
2,500
square
feet
disturbance
when
you
think
about
when
you
picture
yourself
at
the
dog
park?
Is
it
with?
Is
it
from,
for
example,
is
it
from
the
fence
as
you're
facing
north?
Is
it
from
the
fence
on
the
left
to
the
buildings
walls
on
the
right
or
or
or
where
is.
K
K
So
disturbance
itself
is
essentially
clearing,
grading
or
excavation,
so
clearing,
grading
or
excavation
so
tree
removal,
vegetation,
removal,
grading
where
you're
reconfiguring
the
land
surface
and
excavation,
where
you're,
actually
it's
it's
kind
of
a
form
of
grading
but
more
of
a
digging
and
removal
exercise.
So
any
of
those
activities
is
considered
land
disturbance,
but.
K
Right
the
answer
to
the
air
you
wanted
about
the
area,
so
there's
a
couple
ways
to
think
about
it:
I
mean
essentially,
you
know.
2500
square
feet
is
a
50
by
50
square
of
clearing
grading.
Your
excavation
now
could
be
longer
and
narrower,
but
the
point
is
it
doesn't
take
a
lot
of
that
type
of
activity
to
reach
the
2500
square
foot
threshold.
So
if
you
were
to
reconfigure
some
portion
of
the
dog
park,
that
was
more
than
2500
square
foot
footprint
that
would
exceed
the
threshold,
but.
J
I
mean
I
I,
guess
I
I
understand
what
you're
saying
there,
but
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
the
boundaries
within
which
the
2500
square
feet
are
disturbed,
okay,
so
in
other
words,
if
you
were
to
disturb
some
outside
the
fence
with
that
between
the
fence
and
the
ne
and
the
bank
going
down
to
the
stream,
would
that
be
part
of
the
2500?
Are
we
only
talking
about
that's
outside
the
park
with
it,
okay
and
so
the
fet?
The
fence
is
the
exact
boundary
of
the
park.
J
K
One
may
be
Richard
knows
the
answer:
is
there
an
actual
parcel
boundary
that
delineated
here?
Is
it
kind
of
vague
and
it
goes
all
the
way
across
the
stream
yeah?
So
the
fence
is
not
a
property
boundary
in
this
case,
so,
depending
on
what
the
purpose
was
I
mean
it'd,
probably
be
considered
one
exercise
disturbing
inside
or
outside
defense.
If
it's
all
part
of
one
effort-
and
we
typically
apply
a
two-year
window
of
time,
it
has
to
avoid
any
piece
Mealing
which
which
can
occur,
although
it's
not
that
common,
but
it
could
occur.
K
J
K
J
K
Yeah
we
we
certainly
haven't
done
that
for
any
of
the
specifications
for
any
of
the
tools
the
state
sets
them
up
and
then
they're
based
on
literature
and
research
that
informs
those
tools.
So
we
wouldn't
look
to
allow
deviations
from
those.
The
state
would
have
to
essentially
approve
a
narrower
width
with
perhaps
lesser
credit,
but
we
certainly
don't
don't
do
that
when
we're
looking
at
those
those
tools
and
whether
it's
the
county,
doing
a
project
or
developer
doing
the
project.
Okay,.
J
J
If
you
will,
if
we
could
find
the
map
of
the
dog
park
so
to
the
to
the
north,
that
that'll
do
so
to
the
northwest
corner,
which
is
outside
than
the
northernmost
reaches
of
the
existing
dog
park,
going
up
towards
Walter
Reed,
that
that
stretch
there
over
which
there
is
a
paved
path
and
an
open
space
and
it's
adjacent
to
I.
Guess
it's
quadruple
a
storage
there's
a
public
easement,
but
that's
private
land.
J
H
There
whoops
there
is
an
area
in
here,
that's
on
private
land
over
time,
the
stream
washed
and
eroded
away,
and
so
with
the
trail
that
we
used
to
have
went
away
and
the
private
property
owners
have
allowed
us
to
be
able
to
continue
the
path.
I
think
that's
a
we've
not
done
anything
as
part
of
this
master
plan,
but
I
think
that's
part
of
it.
As
part
of
this
whole
area
plan.
Is
you
know
what
is
the
long-term
relationship
and
part
of
that
is
the
redevelopment
that's
shown
in
the
overall
area
plan
as
well.
H
J
D
Going
to
follow
up
on
some
of
those
questions,
just
so
I
understand
the
hundred,
thousands
or
so
square
feet
of
the
existing
dog
park.
Is
that
not
up
to
the
fence
that
is
at
the
top
of
the
ridge
above
the
stream
that
doesn't
count
any
of
the
stream
right
correct?
So
it's
it's.
What's
the
boundary
of
the
park?
Okay,
that's
I.
D
D
Leaves
you
about
30
30
30
feet,
so
I
come
back
to
I,
say
I,
don't
I,
don't
fully
understand.
I
think
this
is
an
area.
I
would
propose
for
some
follow-up
or
direction
and
I'd
ask
the
working
group
to
really
dig
into
this.
To
is
really
understanding
what
Jason
knows,
which
is
which
is
what
is
with
the
2500
square
foot.
You
know
minimum
disruption
or
disturbance.
We
have
a
sense
of
what
counts
as
a
disturbance.
D
We
also
know
that
2,500
square
feet
related
to
a
dog
park
that
is
as
long
along
a
stream
as
this
that
number
you
reach
it
really
fast.
Okay,
so
the
question
becomes
what
some
alternative
I
mean:
we're
not
fully
looking
with
the
second
question,
but
what
are
the
true
regulations
and,
in
the
spirit
of
those
regulations,
the
way
the
county
takes
them
seriously
and
environmental
issues?
What
options
are
there
a
little
bit
of
what
miss
Krystal
raised?
This
is
a
much
larger
area.
D
D
We
may,
like
I,
have
a
feeling,
from
my
point
of
view,
I'm
going
to
compromise
if
I
were
making
a
choice,
I'm
going
to
compromise
on
what
may
have
been
a
perfect
environmental
solution,
but
I'm
not
exactly
clear
myself
what
is
mandated
and
what
outcome
is
mandated
and
what
alternative
there
is
to
this
exact
park,
while
keeping
a
very
large
park
with
access
to
the
water,
etc,
etc,
and
so
I'm
I,
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
But
I
would
hope.
D
The
working
group
looks
at
alternatives
between
keeping
exactly
what's
there
and
I
think
that
stays
on
the
table
from
my
point
of
view
at
the
moment,
an
alternative
that
I
cannot
yet
envision
that
might
make
it
a
little
smaller,
but
still
very
large,
while
meeting
the
environmental
meeting
enough
environmental
standards.
For
my
comfort,
when
you
look
at
the
whole
I
means.
M
K
M
Is
a
large
natural
weather
event,
but
I
read
that
as
saying
basically
a
hurricane,
so
what's
the
way
I'm
reading
this
and
it
might,
it
might
be
long
as
we're
talking
a
lot
about
this,
but
we
would
only
be
buying
ourselves
time
that
there's
no
way
to
part
the
dollar
that
there's
no
way
the
dog
park
can
legally
stay
the
way.
It
is
now
exactly
because
it's
pretty
much
a
sure
thing
that
we're
going
to
have
some
kind
of
weather
events
that
will
trigger
the
land
disturbance.
M
D
M
M
But
so
we
could
go
through
a
lot
of
effort
as
decides
that
we
really
don't
want
it
same
thing,
but
yet
we
have
a
hurricane
and
we
didn't
lose
those
2,500
square
feet
of
just
service,
but
but
Mother
Nature
does,
and
it
seems
to
me
the
likelihood
of
that
happening
is
quite
high
in
the
next.
You
know:
5
10,
20
years,
mother,
nature
being
what
she
is
so
I
wonder
if
we're
spending
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
something
it
really
is
not
not
likely
to
be
possible
for
any
large
length
of
time
and.
D
K
Think
the
point
we're
trying
to
make
there
is
that
if
there's
a
flood
like
that
you're
going
to
have
to
repair
the
dog
park,
not
that
the
act
of
the
flood
is
disturbance
that
now
Mother
Nature
has
to
comply.
That
know
that
there
be
damage
to
the
extent
that
you'd
have
to
go
in
and
repair
it
and
doing
so.
They're.
Repairing
the.
K
D
K
On
the
type
of
damage,
I
guess
is
we're
just
or
hand
Oh
doing
it
now.
Well,
the
issue
have
now
you're
in
a
floodplain,
so
there's
a
capacity
of
the
channel
that
has
to
be
maintained.
Otherwise,
if
it
gets
reduced,
you
increase
the
flood
elevation.
You
increase
the
floodplain,
so
FEMA
has
oversight
of
that.
So
it's
not
a
matter
of
just
going
in
and
putting
rocks
on
the
bank
you're
really
talking
about
reconfiguring
the
whole
channel.
If
you
go
down
that
road,
which
is,
of
course,
is
a
complex,
expensive
exercise,
Katie.
M
D
I
I
just
wanted
to,
we
were
sort
of
making
comments
wanted
to
associate
myself
with
this
sense
that
there
is
more
that
we
don't
know
about
alternatives,
or
perhaps
you
all
feel
confident
that
you
know
them.
I
do
not
yet
feel
confident
enough
to
recommend
or
approve
or
direct
such
significant
changes
to
such
a
well-loved
community
amenity
without
a
better
sense
of
the
alternatives
for
stormwater
remediation.
Your
point
is
really
well
taken
about
that
the
likelihood
or
almost
the
necessity
of
disturbing
this
threshold
in
order
to
be
good
environmental
stewards.
I
That
point
is
is
well
taken
and
I
am
persuaded
to
that.
I
am
not
persuaded
that
this
35
foot
vegetated
buffer,
is
our
only
way
to
do
it
and
I
think
you
know
J
reference.
Some
of
the
questions
that
you
still
have
open
for
me,
the
other
ones
are,
you
know,
certainly
the
the
the
actions
that
could
be
taken
by
private
property
owners.
I
You
know
having
a
clear
sense
of
how
many
trees
are
already
there
on
the
West
parcel.
Could
other
trees
be
knowing
now
that
tree
planting
is
not
considered?
You
know
part
of
disturbance,
could
they
be
planted
throughout
the
dog
park,
more
options
there
as
well,
so
so
a
series
of
things
that
I
yeah
I
would
simply
just
need
to
know
that
that
really
this
is
not
just
the
preferred
option,
but
the
only
option
is
to
pursue
this
vegetated
buffer
before
I
could
ever
support
such
a
reduction
in
size
of
such
a
beloved
community
amenity,
algorithm.
J
Yeah
yeah
no
I
mean
I
would
just
really
echo
that
and
say
that
that
I
would
like
to
see
this
dog
part
remain
substantially,
as
is
for
the
longest
possible
time,
and
that
only
in
the
event
of
a
precipitating
event
that,
legally
speaking,
we
need
to
take
remediation
steps
to
take.
Would
we
consider
a
reconfiguration
and,
while
I
agree,
that
we
need
to
plan
for
that?
J
I
guess
worst
case
scenario,
where
contingency
I
would
hope
that
we
could
also
do
it
while
having
on
the
table
for
discussion
that
additional
land
above
the
northernmost
reaches
of
the
park
up
to
Walter,
Reed
Drive,
so
I
would
encourage
staff
to
at
least
initiate
conversations
in
that
regard
and
then,
finally,
some
greater
refinement
of
what
else.
Besides
planting
trees
might
be
done
in
the
short
term
to
buttress
the
environmental
health
of
the
dog
park.
J
L
Yeah
on
this
type,
generally,
just
associating
myself
with
the
way
this
is,
is
going
I
think
what
we
have
here
is
just
where
we
are
in
the
process.
We
haven't
gotten
to
the
point
where
we've
actually
thought
about
what
it
would
be
like
to
have
a
dog
park
that
didn't
look
the
same
but
substantially
offered
the
same
kinds
of
benefits,
even
perhaps
with
a
different
configuration
that
may
be
a
requirement
of
future
planning.
I
think
that's!
What's
giving
me
the
greatest
amount
of
pause?
L
What
I'm
seeing
is
a
realization
that
here
are
environmental
concerns,
and
this
is
what
the
impact
would
be
if
all
things
were
created.
Equal
and
I
know
that
there
was
some
work
to
say:
okay,
we
could
add
a
parcel
here
or
parcel
there
and
and
roughly
come
up
with
the
same
amount
of
square
footage,
but
that's
a
Lego
exercise.
I
think
what
I'm
wanting
to
see
is
a
little
bit
more
of
a
thoughtful
programmatic
exercise
that
could
really
envision
a
dog
park
that
provides
the
same
level
of
quality.
L
Even
if
there
are
other
considerations
which
prevented
from
having
the
same
actual
consideration
and
one
that's
realizable
and
achievable,
as
opposed
to
the
the
multi
multi-year
plan,
that
would
have
to
be
realized
if
we
were
to
look
at
buying
all
of
those
adjacent
parcels.
So
that's
it's
not
really
much
direction,
but
a
hope
and
a
desire
that
we
think
about
this
a
little
bit
more
qualitatively
Oh.
Mr.
E
Chairman
I
understand
what
you're
all
saying
and
I
think
that
we
will.
We
can
think
about
that
and
really
sort
of
dig
down
and
try
to
come
up
with
some
more
options.
I
did,
while
we
have
Mr
Papa
Kozma
here,
I
want
to
make
sure,
because
it's
something
that
I'm
learning
about
it.
If
there's
a
point
that
he
wants
to
make,
because
this
is
being
televised
and
everyone
gets
to
see
it
about
specifically
related
to
the
pollution
or
created
by
the.
D
D
K
Thanks
mark
now,
it's
I
think
it's
an
important
point.
We
didn't
touch
on.
It
was
a
couple
ways
to
to
frame
and
I
think
one
is:
we've
talked
a
little
bit
in
some
of
the
briefing
sessions
about
the
bacterial
impairment
and
four
mile
run,
and
it's
not
unique
to
four
mile
run.
Almost
every
urban
all
urban
streams
have
a
bacterial
impairment,
and
the
sources
are
both
related
to
people
and
dogs
really
are
in
that
category
and
they're
also
urban
wildlife.
K
So
there's
sort
of
two
main
sources
of
bacteria
and
the
way
a
lot
of
the
regulators
have
looked
at,
oh
and
in
order
to
meet
water
quality
standards
for
bacteria
you'd
have
to
reduce
those
sources
by
over
ninety
percent.
So
that's
a
lot,
it's
very
difficult
to
do.
It's
really
related
to
how
much
we've
changed
the
hydrology
of
the
watershed,
all
the
runoff
and
then
concentrating
sources
and
areas
that
can
runoff
really
readily
so
the
regulators
have
focused
on
dealing
with
controllable
sources.
K
So
it's
really
for
us
you're,
looking
primarily
at
the
sanitary
sewer
system
and
all
of
our
programs
around
maintaining
that
system
and
making
sure
we
are
rehabbing.
It
over
time
which
we
do
and
then
there's
a
domestic
category,
so
they
really
do
focus
on
on
dogs
and
dog
waste
as
a
controllable
source.
You
know
when
I
hear
two
hundred
thousand
visits
a
year
that
translates
into
a
lot
of
dogs
and
a
lot
of
dog
waste
concentrated
in
a
riparian
zone.
So
I
think
it's
an
important
point
to
make.
The
state
has
put
out.
K
You
know
some
new
new
guidelines
for
dealing
with
these
bacteria
impairments,
and
then
they
call
out
dog
parks
by
name
that
the
recommendation
is
not
to
cite
them
in
environmentally
sensitive
areas
and
to
add
and
to
include
unmanned,
cured
vegetative
buffers
to
discourage
access.
So
that's
the
state's
thinking
when
it
comes
to
bacterial
impairments
and
demonstrating
that
you
have
a
defensible
program
to
address
those.
Now
we,
you
know
I'm,
saying
that's
recognizing.
We
have
this
amenity
in
this
location,
but
it
is
something
to
think
about
it.
D
K
D
Lately
about
the
park
in
general
in
the
working
group
work,
but
also
about
the
dog
park,
one
of
those
said
that
when
the
bacteria
and
the
stream
are
measured,
there's
more
upstream
than
downstream
from
the
dog
park,
do
you
know
if
that's
true
I
can't
validate
it?
I
just
read
it
and
something
that
just
came
to
us.
It
bacteria.
K
Levels
are
very
widely
I
mean
significantly
from
sample
to
sample.
Our
sampling
program
is
in
the
stream.
So
it's
not
intended
to
look
at
what's
happening
between
each
sample
because
at
each
sample
you
have
5
10
15
square
miles
of
drainage
coming
above
it.
So
what
happens
between
the
sample
above
the
dog
park
and
below
the
dog
park?
There's
a
lot
of
water
that
comes
into
the
stream
between
those
Sam
was
in
bacteria
live
in
sediments.
They
multiply,
so
it
really
depends
on
a
lot
of
factors.
K
So
we
didn't
set
up
that
program
to
demonstrate
whether
the
dog
park
itself
was
having
an
impact.
It's
more
to
measure
bacteria
levels
in
the
stream
to
help
us
support.
One
of
our
primary
messages
is
secondary.
Contact
is
safe.
You
know
waiting
those
sorts
of
activities,
but
not
not
full
immersion.
So
that's
another
reason
why
we
do
that
program,
but
also
just
to
monitor
bacteria
levels
over
time
on
this.
D
One
I
again
I
would
I
would
direct
them.
The
working
group
to
just
helps
if
some
of
that
out
I
will
make
a
comment
on
my
own
in
this
regard,
and
that
is
having
used
that
dog
park
many
times
with
my
own
dog
I
would
personally
opposed
if
I
were
here
any
dog
park
that
did
not
retain
access
to
the
stream
for
the
dogs.
To
me,
that
is
one
of
the
very
unusual
and
and
with
all
the
I
mean
I
know,
most
dog
owners
that
use
that
park
are
incredibly
good
about
now.
D
To
maintain,
can
I
try
to
go
back
and
summarize
a
couple.
Things
see
if
you're
earning
it.
The
first
question
that
we
addressed
was:
should
the
park
essentially
remain
unchanged,
or
are
we
open
to
reducing
it,
I'm
going
to
argue
that
what
I've
heard
is
both
are
we
haven't
decided
we
are
open
to
leaving
it
the
same
with
some
improvements
we
are
open
to.
I
would
argue,
reducing
it
somewhat
and
I'm
going
to
put
a
caveat
on.
That
is
no
we're
not
not
to
the
degree
that
the
three
options
proposed.
D
L
I
I
think
just
up
just
to
be
clear.
I
think
part
of
the
pushback
we're
getting
from
the
community
and
part
of
what's
giving
us
and
consternation
is
just
how
dramatic
the
options
are
in
terms
of
amount
of
square
feet,
reduced
and
so
would
want
to
be
clear.
I
am
NOT
especially
open
to
reducing
this
dog
park
by
three
quarters,
for
example
as
advance
in
one
of
the
options,
and
that's.
D
Why
my
point
in
this
would
be
modest
that
had
to
be
an
understanding
of
why
what
we're
complan,
but
that
the
so
I
can't
say
no
to
either
part
of
this
yet
I,
don't
think
the
board
is
saying
no
I
think
what
you're
hearing
is
a
reduction
in
size
needs
to
be
understandable
and
and
and
get
us
benefits
that
we
see
as
a
good
trade-off
for
a
modest
reduction
in
size.
Not
not
the
kind
of
reduction
you've
proposed
is
that
correct.
J
That
that
that's
correct
and
I
would
I
would
argue,
let's
maybe
put
modest
or
somewhat
or
figure
out
the
right
adjective
so
we're
signaling
today
that
that
would
be.
We
would
plan
for
a
contingency
like
that,
but
it's
certainly
not
something
that
at
least
I
feel
we
should
move
forward
to
until
we're
forced
to
until
our
hand,
is
forced,
okay,
I
think
we're
in
good
shape.
M
J
As
either
in
addition
to
the
dog
park,
to
compensate
for
reduction
elsewhere
or
for
additional
park
planning
purposes,
Park
planning
right,
not
I,
mean,
in
other
words,
not
necessary
park
acquisition,
not
necessarily
to
have
it
to
have
the
dog
park
a
crew
into
that
area.
But
to
have
that
as
an
option.
Well.
Just
to
have
that
as
part
of
the
conversation
going.
E
D
Okay
right,
that
was
a
reworded.
Let's
go
to
the
question
number
two:
if
its
reconfigured
are
you
open
to
using
county
owned
parcels?
This
is
in
that
two
block
area
correct
to
achieve
a
dog
park.
That's
approximately
the
same
size,
meaning
that,
should
the
staff
be
looking
at
some
stormwater,
some
some
reconfiguration
that
makes
the
existing
park
smaller,
but
expands
into
that
to
block
area
that
you
had
labeled.
What
they're
it's
the
nineteen
thousand
five
hundred
and
forty
1500
is
that
right,
yeah.
H
I
I
Do
wonder
that
it
could
cause
some
further
challenges
for
the
purpose
of
public
discussion
to
add
a
third
set
of
interests
into
sort
of
contesting
for
the
use
of
this
parcel
I
actually
would
love
to
ask
the
chair
of
the
working
group
of
the
vice-chair
is
for
a
point
of
view
about
whether
it
you
see
it
as
being
more
productive
or
potentially
detrimental
to
the
what
I
know
has
been
at
times
contentious
conversation
about
the
future
of
this
area
to
sort
of
add
into
the
mix.
Some
discussion
of
dog
park
uses
I,
think.
A
D
Would
tend
to
agree,
I
mean
there
may
be
a
little
smidgen
of
it
or
something.
That's
not
a
building.
You
know
adjacent,
but
by
and
large
I
would
say
this
is
likely
to
be
a
no
the
answer
to
this
question
again,
if
you,
if
you
were
there,
was
an
area
of
land
between
a
building
and
the
existing
park.
I
might
be
a
little
more
flexible,
but
not
not
when
once
you
get
to
the
buildings
are.
J
L
D
M
D
H
We've
I
think
what
we've
heard
from
the
working
group
and
back
when
we
were
having
the
public
discussions
last
fall
is
just
an
interest
in
having
them
in
close
proximity
to
each
other,
so
I
don't
think
you'd
want
to
physically
move
it
to
some
other
area
in
Jenny,
Dean
Park,
for
example,
I
think
you
want
to
keep
them
close
together.
Okay,.
M
D
The
only
other
thing
I
would
reiterate
is
for
me
and
I:
don't
know
that
we
have
to
go
down
the
line
here
now,
but
the
issue
of
the
access
to
the
water,
the
second
one
was
I
had
heard.
There
was
some
discussion
of.
Is
there
a
value
to
a
paved
path
between
in
that
buffer
area,
in
other
words,
between
the
stream
and
in
the
one
of
the
staff
proposals
to
create
that
buffer
I
will
will
just
say
that
I
don't
think
a
paved
trail
along?
H
Jenny
Dean
Park
has
been
identified
as
a
high
priority
area
for
acquisition
to
expand
the
park
since
the
1990s
and
again,
we've
purchased
five
properties,
three
of
which
are
in
this
area.
The
five
new
properties
that
we've
acquired
total
approximately
four
acres.
They
have
existing
buildings
and
parking
and
they've
been
used
for
temporary
interim
uses,
such
as
until
such
time
as
this
park,
master
plan
could
be
developed
and
start
to
get
implemented
in
phases.
H
The
properties
that
are
shown
on
the
right
here,
the
3600
South
four
mile
run
drive,
which
is
often
referred
to
as
the
Laporte
site.
I
was
most
recently
used
to
store
the
county,
art
buses
and
then
the
2701
south
Nelson
Street
property,
often
referred
to
as
the
Motorola
site
was
used
for,
seek
and
County
storage
and
seek
has
recently
relocated
nearby
to
the
property
on
South
Nelson
Street.
H
Those
two
properties
together
total
about
two
acres
and
there
they
are
incorporated
in
the
area
east
of
South
Nelson,
for
the
plans
to
replace
and
renovate
the
existing
facilities.
The
other
three
properties
are
3700,
which
currently
houses
a
combination
of
County
staff
and
cultural
opportunities,
the
property
at
3806,
which
currently
has
some
old
signature,
theater
uses
in
it
and
2654
South
Auckland
again.
Those
have
are
about
2
acres,
that
Oakland
Street
property
is
also
used
for
County
storage.
H
H
Again,
the
county
plans
call
for
land
acquisition
for
park
and
cultural
purposes
in
a
shown
on
the
last
slide.
There
are
a
number
of
private
properties
in
this
part
of
the
park
master
plan
area
that
are
occupied
and
used
for
a
variety
of
service,
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses.
So
what
we've
heard
so
far
in
the
planning
process,
the
county
has
a
need
for
more
Park
and
Recreation
space.
H
There's,
definitely
an
interest
in
an
arts
hub
that
would
be
expanded
upon
from
the
one
shown
in
the
area,
planning
concepts
just
west
of
the
old
signature,
theater
building
and
carried
over
into
this
area.
There's
existing
property
and
business
owners
who
are
concerned
about
the
impacts
of
the
counties
in
and
continued
parkland
acquisition,
and
there's
been
a
request
from
some
to
remove
these
private
parcels
from
the
park.
Master
plan
boundary
all
together.
H
So
some
considerations,
each
of
the
alternatives
for
this
area,
improves
the
walkability
and
would
enhance
pedestrian
experience.
Provide
new
streetscape,
enhance
stormwater
management
to
provide
comprehensive
landscaping,
help
increase
the
parking
and
improve
the
connectivity
between
the
county
and
properties
and
incorporate
them
into
the
existing
surrounding
parks.
H
H
So
that's
that's,
basically,
there's
very
little
that's
unbuilt,
and
that
is
how
we,
how
we
acquire
and
create
the
open
space.
This
next
slide
shows
a
building
either
remaining
or
being
replaced
with
a
new
building
at
the
current
site
of
a
3,700
South
4
mile
run.
If
replaced
there's
been
some
discussion
about,
it
would
provide
an
opportunity
to
include
structure
parking
and
a
multi-story
building
designed
for
cultural
and
recreational
uses.
H
This
final
slide
shows
both
the
3700
South
farm
run,
drive,
building
and
the
3806
South
four
mile
run
drive
bill
being
retained
or
replaced.
I
will
say
in
all
of
these.
We
did
not
show
the
warehouse
building
being
retained
because
I
guess
we
were
considering
what
we'd
previously
shown
you
for
the
dog
park.
H
So
these
next
couple
of
slides,
the
next
part
of
the
issue,
really
focuses
on
whether
this
area
should
continue
to
be
planned
for
park.
Use
is
consistent
with
the
adopted
policy,
or
should
they
remain,
as
is
with
a
mix
of
service,
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses
or
be
further
studied
for
the
extension
of
the
arts
hub.
H
So
if
the
county
plans
for
park
uses,
should
it
continue
to
explore
parkland
acquisition
as
properties
become
available
from
willing
sellers
over
time
so
again,
I'm
going
to
show
you
five
slides
at
our
combination
of
existing
county
properties
and
private
properties.
So
in
this
first
alternative
this
just
happens
to
show
that
we
would
retain
the
two
buildings,
but
it
also
shows
that
there
would
be
no
extension
or
expansion
of
the
park
and
basically
the
area
between
Nelson
and
Oakland
and
Oakland,
and
the
old
signature
theater
building
would
remain
as
private
property.
H
H
The
fourth
option
shows
the
county
retaining
its
buildings
and,
over
the
long
term,
requiring
all
of
the
private
property
between
South,
Nelson
and
South
Auckland,
and
then
this
last
option
shows
we
removing
all
of
our
buildings
and
also
acquiring
and
removing
all
the
buildings
on
private
property
and
converting
it
all
to
open
space.
So,
obviously-
and
we
talked
about
this
with
the
working
group-
there
is
a
number
of
variations-
you
could
go
parcel
by
parcel.
H
D
Okay,
so
we've
got
the
three
questions
and
the
slides
show
a
full
rate,
not
even
the
full
range,
a
number
of
alternative
permutations,
as
you
say,
parcel
by
parcel
or
block
by
block,
but
I.
Think
the
operative
question
is
the
first
one
here,
and
it
really
is
saying:
should
these
this
two
block
area
be
assumed
to
become
a
park
in
the
vision
over
the
long
haul,
or
should
it
remain
private?
D
L
I,
don't
know
how
helpful
this
will
be.
I
I
generally
like
the
idea
of
pursuing
some
sort
of
an
arts
centric
hub
here
and
leaving
open
maximum
flexibility
to
acquire
properties
that
willing
that
may
become
available
from
willing
willing
owners
to
further
expand
the
hub.
If
we
create
one.
However,
I,
don't
really
have
the
ability
to
dynamically
figure
out
all
the
different
permutations
which
may
make
it
possible
to
really
give
some
informed
guidance
on
these
specific
areas
of
questions.
So
that's
just
generally
where
I
am
standard.
D
J
J
I'm
just
fearful
that
that
one
by
one
these
businesses
are
going
to
fall
like
dominoes
and
eventually
be
gone
and
that
that
could
end
up
marked
that
same
phenomenon
could
end
up
marching
up
four
mile
run.
So
from
my
for
my
own
perspective,
I
view
just
as
I
kind
of
view.
The
dog
park
I
think
four
mile
run
right
now
is
working
great.
There
needs
to
be
some
adjustments
at
the
margins
beautification,
you
know
bringing
back
Jenny
Dean,
it's
it's
true
and
originally
anticipated
glory
and
so
forth.
I
And
actually
to
maybe
to
speak
a
little
bit
to
B,
because
I
think
mr.
Vyse
had
did
a
nice
job
explaining
why
you
know
there's
some
hesitation
or
even
opposition
to
continuing
to
target
the
private
parcels
for
acquisition.
The
other
concern
that
I
have
is
that
we
actually
have
a
couple
of
uses
that
are
well.
One
is
working
well
and
the
other
is
I
would
argue
full
of
potential
for
this
idea
of
an
arts
district
with
theater
on
the
run
and
the
and
the
Shirlington
garage
I
think
they
call
it
and
I
you
know.
I
I'm
certainly
would
be
supportive
of
including
some
vision
for
redevelopment
of
those
physical
buildings
as
arts
spaces.
But
you
know,
we've
talked
at
some
length
about
the
lack
of
rehearsal
and
performance
spaces
throughout
the
county,
and
so
you
know,
in
addition
to
these,
having
really
meaningful
uses
on
the
private
properties.
They're
also
uses
that
that
are,
you
know,
well
appreciated
in
the
community
already
and
pretty
consistent,
actually
with
this
popularity
of
an
arts
hub
the
one
that
I'd
embrace
on
our
on
our
own
property
already.
I
The
only
thing
that
gives
me
some
pause
is
thinking
about
the
number
of
plans
that
ms
Grandal
walked
us
through
for
for
going
back
a
couple
of
decades,
identifying
these
areas
as
open
space
and-
and
what
gives
me
most
pause
I
think-
is
some
questions
about.
If
the
properties
we
have
the
parcels
we
have
were
acquired
with
bonds,
I,
wonder
if
it'd
be
possible
to
just
learn
a
little
more
about
the
language
of
those
of
those
those
bond
referenda.
We
don't
have
that
missing.
I
We've
paid
up
right,
no,
no
I,
know
I'm,
not
I'm
less
worried
about
our
credit
rating
and
I'm
a
little
more
worried
about
sort
of
the
commitments
that
we've
made
to
the
community
over
time.
Right
because
that's
been
a
question
raised
in
the
past,
so
it
would
help
meet
it
to
see
this
before
sort
of
making
a
kind
of
final
determination,
but
I
am
generally
inclined
towards
you
know
sort
of
remain,
as
is
perhaps
with
some
visioning
of
the
parcels
that
we
do
own
being
being
used
for
similar
uses,
but
but
not
I.
Just.
E
Wanted
to
point
out
one
thing
which-
and
we
don't
have
the
bond
language
with
me,
but
at
the
time
was
the
Department
of
Parks
Recreation
and
cultural
resources.
So
the
wording
of
the
bonds,
if
my
recollection
is
correct,
was
targeted
towards
both
parks
and
and
I.
Know:
Edie's,
probably
waving
the
languages
language
right
now
because
she
has
it
but
yeah.
I
L
Can
I
raise
a
just
a
semantic
question,
so
a
I'm
not
really
sure
why
those
are
all
wars,
as
in
they're
mutually
exclusive,
given
that
we've
determined
that
what
we
popularly
conceived
as
an
arts
hub
maintains
a
variety
of
uses
within
existing
buildings.
The
way
this
is
framed
is
that
you're
either
for
arts
or
keeping
the
existing
businesses
and
I
I,
don't
view
it
that
way,
and
can
someone
give
me
some
some
clarity
as
to
why
it's
phrased
that
way,
I
think.
H
D
I
think
mr.
Dorsey,
you
raised
a
good
point
and
I
think
what
I
would
do
is
again
identify
this
as
something
we'd
asked
the
working
group
to
explore
sort
of
define
better.
My
own
response
to
the
first
question,
which
would
be
very
much
what
mr.
doar
sees
was
I
I,
think
the
concept
of
an
arts
hub
deserves
serious
consideration
and
I'm
really
attracted
to
it.
D
What
that
actually
means
in
terms
of
the
structures
and
that's
why
I
framed
it
at
the
beginning,
I
think
the
arts
hub
were
that
to
take
shape
in
some
form
means
leaving
the
structures
there
predominantly
it
may
mean
privately
owned,
and
it
may
mean
when
they
come
up
for
sale,
that
it
behooves
us
to
purchase
them
to
ensure
that
granular
mix
of
whatever
it
is.
We
are
envisioning
in
an
arts
hub,
but
I
will
say
that
the
point
we're
trying
to
create
is
this
is
a
vision.
D
There
is
no
threat
and
I
know
there
are
those
businesses
in
the
community
in
the
neighborhood
that
have
some
anxiety
about
it.
But
but
this
area
has
been
designated
for
a
park
for
what
20
years
it
was
in
the
master
plan
that
this
be
a
park
and
that
didn't
change,
anyone's
ability
to
move
in
or
buy
or
anything
else
as
weary
vision
and
validate
some
of
that
and
refine
a
little
bit
more
of
it.
D
I
think
it's
tied
to
that
question
of
what
an
ARP
sub
would
be
from
my
point
of
view.
So
I
would
say
yes,
no
one
ever
goes
in.
We
would
never
consider.
We
never
have
condemning
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
the
working
group
to
hear
from
maybe
real
estate
folks
to
put
some
of
the
small
businesses
minds
at
ease
about
the
implications
for
the
value
of
their
property
and
so
forth.
But
to
me
that
would
be
all
good
information
for
everybody.
From
this
point
on
Libby
hi.
M
There,
thank
you,
I,
think
we're
all
kind
of
in
the
middle,
which
is
you,
notices,
areas
and
sort
of
left
on
its
own
for
several
decades
and
actually
has
been
doing.
Some
really
cool
stuff
has
been
sort
of
evolving
organically,
so
and
I
think.
What
we
need
to
do
is
not
get
too
much
in
the
way
so
I'm
with
mr.
Vyse
and
I
think,
maybe
several
other.
My
colleagues
and
I
would
like
to
have.
M
D
Me
let
me
try
to
summarize
this
once
see
if
you
guys,
if
you
disagree,
say
it,
but
what
I'm
hearing
is
and
I
think
that
the
first
part
of
this
is
that
we're
looking
for
some
modification
of
the
past
plan
and
I?
Think
that's
not
necessarily
does
everybody
would
like
to
have
everything
right?
We
want
it
all
right.
On
the
other
hand,
there's
some
recognition
that
the
Laporte
property,
the
WETA
building
a
good
amount
of
parkland,
would
be
added
to
the
park
to
the
east.
D
I
think
that's
no
small
thing
we're
seeing
that
as
happening
regardless.
It's
not
really
teed
up
it's
an
assumption,
so
there
will
be
some
percentage,
30,
40,
50
percent,
more
part,
I,
don't
know
what
that
number
is,
but
parkland
and
I.
Think,
honestly,
if
we
ended
up
at
some
point
down
the
road
owning
this,
you
never
know
what
happens
in
terms
of
50
years
down
the
road
or
at
some
point.
You
know
integrating
this
parkland
with
this
or
tub
or
the
buildings
that
are
there
so
to
tie
up
number
two.
D
Should
the
county
remove
the
existing
county
owned
buildings
in
the
area
to
create
open
space
I've
not
heard
anyone
suggesting
that
that
was
a
good
idea?
Is
that
correct?
Okay,
then,
let's
just
assume
number
two
is
a
no,
and
some
of
this
is
also
generating
from
the
fact
that
in
the
arts,
community
cultural
community
there's
a
little
bit
of
tension
and
pressure
right
now
from
the
loss
of
venues
and
a
lot
of
people
are
looking
to
this
area
as
maybe
making
up
some
of
that
loss.
J
Going
to
can
we
move
on
to
number
three
can
I
just
just
make
one
comment
and
I
agree
with
mr.
pizzette
that
you
know
we
that
that
some
sort
of
arts
component
I,
you
know
you-
can
define
an
arts
hub
any
way
you
want,
but
I
mean
certainly
if
we
keep
the
3700
building
and
we
keep
the
signature
theater.
J
Building
that
to
me
can
confits
of
the
definition
of
an
arts,
an
arts
hub,
but
I
do
want
to
recommend
too
to
really
the
entire
community
the
memo
that
Kathleen
McSweeney
and
Elizabeth
Guerin
two
of
our
planning
commissioners,
authored
that
talks
about
the
value
of
light
industrial
and
a
companion
article
that
was
circa.
That
was
circulated
from
from
2016
about
how
Smart
Growth
the
Smart
Growth
framework
must
be
adjusted
to
acknowledge
industrial
industries,
critical
role
in
creating
sustainable
and
innovative
economies.
Okay,.
G
Just
to
jump
right
into
parking,
starting
with
policy
guidance
on
this
subject,
the
master
transportation
plan
promotes
on
street
parking
and
to
calm
traffic
and
efficiently
use
Park
resources.
It
also
encourages
metered
parking
to
manage
supply
and
enhance
convenience,
and
it
also
discourages
publicly
owned
or
managed
garages
unless
on
street
parking
is
very
limited.
So,
with
this
as
a
backdrop,
looking
at
the
study
area
and
where
we
are,
what
we
knows
is
the
shortage
of
convenient
parking
for
public
and
private
uses.
Large
commercial
vehicles
are
stored
on
form
and
drive.
G
G
G
G
We
have
varying
cross
sections
that
do
different
things
in
different
stretches,
but
we
show
this
as
an
example
of
how
we
can
achieve
more
parking.
There's
more
conversation
to
be
had
I.
Think
the
general
point
is
that
we
want
to
look
at
achieving
that
parking
on
street
if
we
can,
in
addition
to
that,
we
can
get
more
better
sidewalks
and
street
trees
as
well.
G
So
what
we've
heard
initially
in
our
outreach,
the
community
forum,
that
we
have
that
September
and
the
Charette
people
say
we
want
parking
garages
to
meet
both
public
and
private
needs
and
in
Iraq
reaction
to
the
road
reconfiguration
that
we
have
proposed.
We've
had
a
lot
of
questions
which
needs
some
exploration,
so
those
questions
include
how
does
truck
loading
happen?
Where
will
there
be
more
congestion
and
will
there
be
spillover
to
adjacent
roads,
and
these
are
things
that
would
need
to
be
studied
in
the
future?
G
So
at
this
point,
I
think
the
question
is
consistent
with
our
existing
county
policy.
Should
we
should
staff
continue
to
explore
maximizing
on
street
parking
prior
to
evaluating
the
need
for
construction
of
parking
garages,
new
parking
public
parking
garages
to
serve
the
area,
and
it's
part
of
that,
maybe
even
looking
at
other
existing
parking
resources
in
the
surrounding
area.
Before
we
spend
money
to
build
new
parking,
can
we
maximize
the
use
of
those
as
well
so
I
think
that's
really
the
question.
Okay,.
A
B
A
One
more
point
is
one
of
our
goals
here
is
to
get
the
parking
out
of
the
center
of
the
park,
because
there
is
some
there
now
and
we
really
like
to
devote
all
the
park
area
to
green
space
right
at
the
parking
on
the
outside,
and
we
just
need
to
have
do
further
work
to
see
what's
possible.
With
that
sure.
L
J
B
You
for
asking
there
there
are
a
number
of
concerns
based
on
the
one
option
that
we've
been
presented,
so
the
one
option
that
we've
been
presented
presented
shows
of
shows
four
lanes
going
to
two
lanes
with
a
middle
turn.
Lane
among
the
many
concerns
for
businesses
are.
This
is
an
industrial
area.
How
does
that
constricted
roadway
now
accommodate
the
large
trucks,
the
buses,
as
well
as
just
the
general
traffic
that
we
have
from
cars?
That's
one
concern
another
concern:
is
we
have
a
number
of
self
storage
facilities
in
the
area?
B
How
do
people
load
and
unload
with
that
kind
of
a
stricter
road
path,
as
well
as
parking?
That's
not
accommodating
buses,
same
thing
for
businesses
that
have
to
load
and
unload.
We
have
a
good
example
of
something
that
happened
more
recently
where
we
saw
Road.
We
saw
changes
to
to
striping
for
parking
in
in
South
in
the
Nelson
Street
area
at
the
bottom
of
the
street.
What
that
did
that
striping?
B
Was
it
hurt
a
FAQ
and
their
ability
for
their
trucks
to
go
through
their
trucks,
used
to
turn
around
there
and
be
able
to
come
up
the
street?
They
can't
do
that
now.
They
have
to
have
a
different
pathway
that
just
wasn't
accounted
for
until
the
stripes
went
in
not
beforehand.
So
these
are
issues
that
the
the
certainly
the
industry
is
concerned
about
the
the
businesses
are
concerned
about
their
also
areas.
With
regard
to
parking.
Specifically,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
public
has
opportunities
to
park,
particularly
to
use
the
amenities
in
the
area.
B
We
recognize
that
businesses
also
need,
particularly
the
the
mechanic
shops
need
places
to
park,
their
customer
vehicles
and
they've
run
out
of
space.
So
how
do
we
balance
that
and
that's
an
issue
that
we're
trying
to
adjust
as
well?
We
need
to
provide
some
parking,
but
we
also
don't
want
to
become
the
storage
facility.
We
don't
form
or
run
to
become
the
storage
facility,
so
we're
trying
to
figure
that
as
well,
but.
G
I
think
we've
bet
that's
exactly
what
we've
heard
in
terms
of
concerns
and
things
that
will
be
worked
out
in
the
future
in
a
design
phase,
but
I
think
it's
important
to
just
note
that
we
haven't
at
this
point
settled
on
road
diet
or
the
configuration
that
you
see
where
we
suggested
that
as
a
possible
solution.
There
could
be
a
range
of
things
that
we
could
do
in
this
area,
but
I
think
the
general
idea
is
that
we
want
to
maximize
the
on
street
in
whatever
ways
we
can
prior
to
getting
into
evaluating
garages.
I
For
my
part,
I
am
comfortable
with
and
I
support
that
I
think
not
only
for
the
space
configurations
that
mr.
Dorsey
mentioned
you
know
anywhere.
We
don't
have
to
put
a
parking
garage
as
more
space
for
the
Arts
for
parks
for
uses
its
also
dollars.
I
mean
we've
talked
about.
This
could
save
us
literally
millions
of
dollars
relative
to
constructing
a
parking
garage
that
could
then
go
back
into
facilities
to
further
some
of
our
goals
for
open
space,
arts
etc.
So
I
am
supportive
of
prior
to
but
I
just
want
us
to
be
really
clear.
I
G
Want
to
note
that
there's
one
other
element
to
this,
and
that
is
just
better
use
of
the
space
that
we
have
currently
in
better
management.
So
we
have
a
variety
of
parking
regulations
out
there.
So
we
can
streamline
those
to
maximize
usage.
So
that's
something
that
we
can
do.
That's
no
no
cost
or
whatever,
and
we
can
do
it
fairly
quickly
to
address
needs
that
are
out
there
currently
miss.
D
M
To
talk,
oh
I,
think
not
not.
We
ought
to
pretty
much
know
what
we're
going
to
do
before
we
make
too
many
big
changes.
I
think
trying
to
maximize
what
we've
got
now
is
great
and
I.
Think
if
you
go
to
the
arts
hub
idea,
what
would
we
include
looking
at
possibly
a
circulator?
If
we
have
an
arts
sort
of
district,
you
know,
we've
got
signature
and
you
know
art
on
either
side
of
four
mile
run.
M
D
Me
just
my
own
comment
on
the
last
one:
it's
an
easy!
Yes,
the
way
it's
worded
and
I
would
actually
go
so
far
as
to
say
that
just
just
having
you
know,
watch
some
of
the
four
lanes
go
to
three.
All
these
questions
you
have
have
to
be
worked
out.
They
have
to
be
understood
how
you
do
drop
off
a
delivery
and
how
you
do
visitor
and
how
you
manage
the
curb
space.
Curb
space
management.
D
I
think
this
would
be
something
like
what
you
have
envisioned
would
be
the
fastest
quickest
way
to
change
the
feeling
in
that
aesthetic
way
in
that
human
way,
in
that
quality
of
life
way
that
again,
if
you
can
meet
those
business
needs
which
I
fully
expect
you
can't
you
can,
this
would
be
a
huge
plus
but
short
answer.
The
question
is
yes,
so
so,
let's
move
on
so
with
that
I
think
we've
given
the
best.
D
We
could
a
little
bit
more
definitive
in
a
few
areas
and
generally
looking
for
more
information
in
others,
and
we
will
keep
tabs
on
you
and
through
John
and
actually
in
the
fall
we'll
decide
if
another
work
session
is
is
seen
to
be
useful.
But
let
me
let
me
say,
on
behalf
of
the
board
members
here
to
the
three
of
you.
Thank
you
very
much
to
the
whole
working
group.
Thank
you
very
much.
Please
stick
in
there
and
help
us
find
the
best
path
forward
on
all
these
pieces.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
You,
mr.