►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
evening
and
welcome
to
the
july
6
2022
meeting
of
the
arlington
county
planning
commission,
I
am
commission
chair
daniel
weir.
This
is
the
first
of
two
evenings
scheduled
for
our
public
hearings
this
month
tonight
the
commission
will
hear
a
request
to
advertise
future
public
hearings
by
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board
to
consider
the
following
actions
to
consider
actions
pertaining
to
the
courthouse
west
special
club
land
use
plan
study.
The
commission
will
also
receive
an
informational
briefing
on
the
study
on
a
study
on
commercial
resiliency
issues.
A
Tomorrow
night,
the
commission
will
hear
a
request
for
you,
a
use
permit
for
a
below-grade
parking
structure
at
the
height
school.
If
you
are
here
to
speak
on
that
item,
you
will
need
to
return
tomorrow
night
tomorrow
night.
The
commission
will
also
hear
a
briefing
on
updates
to
administrative
regulations
to
conduct
other
commission
business,
such
as.
A
Before
I
begin
a
few
specifics
to
orient
everyone
to
our
virtual
environment,
tonight's
meeting
is
available
as
a
broadcast
with
a
closed
captioning
on
comcast,
xfinity
channels,
25
and
1085
of
verizon,
fios
channels,
39
and
40,
and
the
county
website.
Audio
of
tonight's
meeting
is
available
via
phone.
If
commissioners,
presenters
or
speakers
lose
internet
connectivity
during
tonight's
meeting,
please
reconnect
with
us
by
phone.
I
understand
you
can
use
the
phone
number
provided
in
the
teams.
A
Invite
and
registered
speakers
have
received
for
in
their
speaker,
registration
for
other
presenters
and
speakers
joining
us
through
microsoft
teams.
Please
keep
your
phones
and
devices
muted
until
you
are
called
upon.
Please
turn
off
sound
to
any
other
devices
around
you
to
minimize
interference
and
please
keep
your
cameras
off
until
the
clerk
calls
on
you
to
speak
when
called
upon
to
speak.
You
must
unmute
yourself
by
clicking
on
the
microphone
icon
that
is
located
on
your
meeting
command
bar.
The
moderator
does
not
have
the
ability
to
mute
you
once
you've
spoken.
A
Please
turn
your
camera
back
off.
If
you're
dialing
in
by
phone
press,
star
6
to
unmute
public
speakers,
you'll
be
called
upon
by
the
clerk
get
an
assigned
time,
pre-registration
that
tonight's
to
speak
at
tonight's
hearing
was
required
and
we
are
not
able
to
accommodate
additional
speakers.
A
public
comment
will
take
place
within
the
same
time
frames
as
we
would
provide
at
in-person
meeting.
Speakers
will
have
three
minutes
to
comment
as
applicants
and
five
minutes
to
speak.
If
representing
an
organization,
as
speaking
speak
will
be
displayed
on
screen
by
the
clerk.
A
If
you
are
dialing
in
by
phone
and
unable
to
see
the
screen,
we
can
provide
an
audible
warning
at
30
seconds
and
you
will
be
muted
when
your
time
is
concluded
for
staff
and
applicant
presentations.
I
believe
that
we
have
asked
the
presentations
be
kept
to
10
minutes.
I
will
be
giving
audible
warnings
at
two
and
one
minute,
since
the
slideshows
tend
to
prevent
us
from
being
able
to
put
the
timers
on
the
screen
for
your
benefit.
A
The
meeting
chat
is
active
for
presenters
or
commissioners
who
need
technical
assistance.
Only
please
do
not
use
the
mean
chat
for
discussion
for
public
comment
for
questions
about
agenda
items
or
requests
for
more
information.
All
public
comment
must
be
shared
verbally
for
the
record
during
the
assigned
public
testimony
period.
And
lastly,
this
is
a
public
forum.
Tonight's
meeting
will
be
recorded
and
posted
to
the
county
website.
All
information
associated
with
tonight's
meeting,
whether
written
or
spoken,
is
subject
to
virginia
freedom
of
information
act
requirements.
B
C
Okay,
good
evening,
members
of
the
planning
commission
again,
my
name
is
tim
murphy,
I'm
a
principal
planner
with
arlington's
planning
division.
Let
me
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen.
C
Okay:
this
item
is
a
request
to
authorize
advertisement
of
future
public
hearings
by
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board
to
consider
actions
pertaining
to
the
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use
plan
study,
and
these
hearings
would
be
to
consider
adoption
of
the
courthouse
west
special
gulf
study
document
and
a
future
global
moment
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office.
Department,
hotel.
C
C
Study
process
was
initiated
in
december
2021
and
involved
two
meetings
with
the
long-range
planning
committee
or
lrpc,
and
two
online
feedback
opportunities
during
the
study.
Equity
was
a
key
consideration
in
the
development
of
the
recommendations,
with
the
intent
to
support
accessibility
and
inclusion
within
the
study
area.
C
Diverse
feedback
on
the
building,
height
and
density
recommendations
have
been
provided
throughout
this
study
process.
The
initial
online
engagement
session
sought
feedback
from
stakeholders
regarding
which
of
the
three
preliminary
massing
scenarios.
They
felt
best
reflected
draft
guiding
principles
that
were
developed
for
the
study
and
the
results
shown
here
indicated.
There
was
a
range
in
preferences
at
the
in
this
initial
engagement
session,
with
no
majority
among
the
three
different
scenarios.
C
These
diverse
views
on
building
height
and
density
were
also
expressed
at
the
january
and
may
lrpc
meetings
on
one
side.
Staff
received
feedback
that
expressed
a
desire
for
greater
building,
height
and
density
at
the
may
lrpc
meeting,
lrpc
feedback,
supportive
of
greater
building
height
and
density,
expressed
a
preference
for
additional
height
and
density
above
the
preliminary
staff
recommendations
with
a
desire
to
consider
high
office
apartment,
hotels,
potential,
designation
or
medium
office
apartment
hotel
and
an
allowance
for
up
to
16
stories.
C
C
Additional
dwelling
units
would
result
in
new
opportunities
for
residents
who
are
currently
unable
to
find
housing
within
the
area,
including
people
of
color
and
people
of
lower
socioeconomic
status,
and
the
increased
building
height
could
also
be
experienced
by
existing
users
and
residents
of
the
surrounding
area
differently.
We
acknowledge
that
some
users
may
desire
to
preserve
access
existing
access
to
light
air
and
views,
while
others
may
desire
having
additional
neighbors
and
the
benefits
that
they
and
the
new
development
can
bring
to
the
area.
C
C
After
the
may
lrpc
meeting
and
the
conclusion
of
a
public
feedback
opportunity
to
review
and
comment
on
an
earlier
draft
of
the
study
document,
staff
has
updated
the
principles
to
remove
a
reference
in
the
third
principle,
to
a
specific
building
massing
orientation
and
have
also
added
additional
clarity
to
the
fifth
principle.
Regarding
consolidation
of
the
properties
within
the
block
for
the
potential
bluff.
Designation
staff
recommends
that
an
amendment
to
medium
office
apartment
hotel
is
within
the
realm
of
consideration.
C
C
This
designation
would
allow
for
taller
heights
than
other
medium
density,
mixed-use
schlep
designations,
which
would
allow
for
greater
height
in
the
center
of
the
block
and
greater
tapering
down
to
the
edges
of
the
study
area,
and
this
consideration
also
this.
This
designation
recommendation
also
considered
3d
computer
modeling
of
building
masking
and
height
scenarios,
including
shadow
studies
and
view
studies,
as
well
as
a
preliminary
transportation
analysis
for
building
heights.
C
C
C
The
document
also
provides
recommendations
across
seven
other
areas
in
addition
to
land
use
and
building
design,
including
the
provision
of
public
space
and
multimodal
transportation.
Improvements
to
improve
accessibility
and
safety
updates
on
this
slide
include
adding
additional
clarity
regarding
the
consideration
and
usage
of
rooftop
rooftop
space,
identifying
that
the
space
be
considered
for
green
space
and
not
other
uses,
and
also
the
other
update
being
including
north
cleveland
street
as
a
potential
location
for
loading
and
access
about
one
minute
left.
Mr
murphy.
C
The
additional
recommendations
focus
on
these
additional
five
areas.
The
new
information
from
the
mail
or
pc
meeting
shown
here
is
adding
a
recommendation
regarding
family
size
dwelling
units.
C
To
recap,
the
focus
of
this
presentation
again
as
a
request
to
authorize
advertisement
of
future
public
hearings
related
to
the
adoption
of
the
study
document
and
a
future
gallup
amendment.
That
hearing
would
occur
concurrently
with
a
feature
site
plan
application
for
next
steps.
C
Staff
anticipates
moving
the
request
to
advertise
to
the
county
board
this
month,
their
july
16
meeting
and
then
dependent
on
that
feedback
and
the
feedback
at
this
meeting
tonight
staff
envisions
that
the
draft
study
document
could
be
considered
for
adoption
in
september
by
both
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board.
This
concludes
the
staff
presentation
this
evening.
A
Mr
nolan,
I'm
I
have
11
minutes
on
the
timer.
I
afford
you
the
same
extra
time
that
we
gave
to
mr
murphy
and
at
your.
E
Pleasure,
thank
you
very
much
good
evening,
commissioners,
staff
and
other
members
of
the
community.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
discuss
the
special
glove
study
for
the
proposed
courthouse
west
project
from
the
applicant's
perspective
for
those
of
you
whom
I've
not
met.
My
name
is
casey
nolan
and
I
help
lead
the
local
development
team
for
crc
companies
first
off.
Thank
you
to
the
county
staff
that
has
worked
tirelessly
on
this
effort
and
thank
you
to
the
community
for
your
participation
in
lrpc
meetings
and
the
online
engagement
opportunities.
E
Tonight
I'll
spend
a
few
minutes
introducing
our
team
discussing
the
site,
sharing
our
vision
and
recommending
next
steps,
formerly
known
as
clerk
reality.
Capital
crc
is
an
arlington-based
turnkey
development
and
investment
firm.
We
have
a
30-year
history
of
delivering
purpose-driven
projects.
We
are
privately
held
and
focused
on
long-term
ownership
and
management
of
our
projects,
which
are
primarily
mixed-use
residential.
E
Although
we
are
still
early
in
the
planning
stages,
we
have
assembled
a
team
that
includes
not
only
elite
architect
and
buyer
blender
bell,
but
also
retail
and
landscape
architects,
to
have
their
input
on
how
the
retail,
residential
and
open
space
will
best
work
for
the
residents,
retail,
patrons
and
community.
Our
entire
team
has
arlington
experience.
E
10
select
is
by
right
and
we
feel
represents
the
quality
of
design
and
examples
of
family
size
units
that
we
did
with
no
requirement
to
do
so,
and
the
tenant
clarendon
went
through
the
yuck
mud
process
and
was
the
first
lee
platinum,
residential
building
in
arlington
and
set
a
new
standard
for
successful
live
work
units
we
have
invested
in
the
courthouse
west
project
to
make
arlington
an
even
better
place
to
live,
work
and
play
staff
has
done
an
excellent
job.
Orienting
everyone
to
the
site.
E
I
want
to
just
to
highlight
why
we
feel
a
mixed-use
residential
zoning.
Category
and
density
makes
sense
at
this
location.
The
courthouse
west
block
is
a
gap
in
the
rosslyn
boston
corridor.
It
is
a
sea
of
asphalt
that
has
been
there
for
decades
and
could
be
a
mixed-use
project
that
weaves
the
courthouse
and
clarendon
neighborhoods
together.
E
While
there
has
been
a
healthy
discussion
about
planning
concepts
that
date
back
to
the
1980s,
we
feel
a
sight
would
not
one,
but
two
metro
stops
a
short
walk
away
is
where
housing
and
density
make
the
most
sense.
This
is
a
multi-modal
site.
Redevelopment
of
this
block
will
improve
the
pedestrian
and
cyclist
experience
at
this
location.
E
There's
also
been
some
discussion
about
the
special
glop
study,
encompassing
the
entire
block,
although
our
firm
does
not
control
the
small
used
car
lot
located
on
the
upper
right
corner
of
the
block.
There's
precedent
for
glop
studies
having
been
done
without
full
block
consolidation,
such
as
the
washington
and
kirkwood
one.
More
importantly,
legal
counsel
for
the
adjacent
property
owner
has
supported
the
study,
and
the
study
does
enable
a
potential
consolidation
without
additional
planning
time
in
the
future
by
staff.
E
E
E
Our
recommendation
is
to
remove
the
height
cap
to
enable
flexibility
in
the
design
during
the
4.1
process
and
achieve
more
housing
in
a
location
that
is
served
by
transportation,
infrastructure,
walkable
jobs
and
numerous
amenities
staff
has
depicted
potential
massing
schemes.
In
its
report
we
have
included
one
as
well.
That
shows
how
a
building
might
be
oriented,
tapered
and
sculpted.
While
this
is
just
a
schematic
plan,
it
shows
how
building
can
be
broken
apart
into
different
heights
across
the
block
and
how
open
space
might
work
for
context.
E
E
E
We
feel
our
firm
and
the
courthouse
west
project
are
well
positioned
to
be
part
of
the
solution
of
a
regional
housing
crisis,
while
activating
an
overlooked
transit-rich
site
in
the
heart
of
the
roslin
boston
corridor,
with
a
sustainable
building
where
people
can
live,
work
shop
and
play.
Thank
you
again
for
your
time.
B
A
And
ms
badger
to
the
well,
we've
got
the
timer
up
here
so
so
there
it
is
all
right!
Thank
you,
ms
hakura.
F
Hello
good
evening,
as
you
all
know,
can
you
see
me
by
the
way?
Okay,
okay,
sorry,
okay,
let
me
start
good
evening.
As
you
all
know,
arlington
was
recognized
in
2017
by
the
american
planning
association
with
a
gold
national
planning
achievement
award
for
its
excellence
in
implementing
the
globe
in
courthouse,
clarendon
the
profession's
highest
honor.
They
found
the
glove
to
be
a
well-conceived,
comprehensive
plan
that
the
county
excelled
at
implementing.
What
struck
me
in
the
apa
summary
is
a
quote
from
a
local
restaurant
owner.
F
F
The
intent
is
to
create
a
spot
change
in
zoning
at
the
behest
of
an
individual
developer
for
a
block
that
was
not
even
consolidated
under
one
ownership:
a
curious
move
by
the
county.
If
the
county
wants
to
change
the
character
of
the
area,
then
a
larger,
more
comprehensive
study
of
the
glove
should
have
been
implemented.
F
Placing
a
dramatically
higher
density
on
this
lot
that
lots
adjacent
to
it
on
all
four
sides
does
not
make
sense.
If
the
desire
is
to
add
housing
on
that
lot,
then
a
mixed-use
low-density
designation
is
much
more
appropriate
and
would
fit
in
with
the
character
and
personality
for
which
people
are
attracted
to
the
courthouse
clarendon
area
for
their
work,
homes,
pleasure
and
entertainment.
F
In
addition,
since
that
site
is
located
in
the
center
of
a
pedestrian
area
with
no
major
access
to
thoroughfares,
it
would
be
adding
pressure
to
the
small
roads
around
it
which
are
already
troublesome
today,
foot
and
vehicle
traffic
around
that
block
is
hazardous,
planned
county
improvements
will
not
be
sufficient
to
handle
the
demands
and
pressure
from
the
population
of
a
12
story
or
higher
building
further.
There
are
plans
currently
underway
for
many
new
density
developments
in
this
area.
A
courthouse,
clarendon
and
virginia
square
way
too
many
to
list.
F
This
is
going
to
place
an
appreciable
straight
strain
on
the
services,
facilities,
parks,
traffic
schools
and
infrastructure
in
this
area,
in
already
dense
area
than
the
county's
ability
to
meet
those
needs.
The
county
has
not
met
the
burden
of
proof
that
even
more
high
density
development
is
sustainable.
For
this
site
for
furtherance
of
equity,
we
need
to
maintain
the
same
quality
of
life
as
other
arlingtonians.
Have
we
all
want
to
see
the
site
develop?
F
We
want
it
to
be
successful,
but
we
want
that
done
in
a
smart
growth
method
that
arlington
has
always
led
by
a
low
density.
Mixed-Use
development
would
be
the
most
appropriate
designation
and
a
glob
amendment
that
serves
the
needs
of
current
and
future
inhabitants.
It
may
also
be
a
good
opportunity
to
encourage
a
missing
middle
development
on
this
site.
Thank
you.
G
My
name
is
john
corton,
I'm
I'm
the
president
of
line
village,
citizens
association.
The
block
in
question
is
covered
by
the
county's
courthouse
sector
plan,
which
calls
for
service
commercial
buildings
on
the
site.
The
site's
certainly
currently
zoned
service
commercial
c2.
As
we
know
now,
the
neighbors
who
live
close
to
this
site
want
low
mixed
use.
This
would
allow
for
up
to
six
stories.
This
is
the
third
option
for
neighbors
who
live
across
from
and
close
close
to
the
site.
G
G
It
was
like
asking
somebody
on
a
diet.
Did
they
want
a
24
ounce
steak
or
a
32
ounce
steak,
since
there
was
no
six
ounce
steak
as
an
option?
There
also
was
no
place
to
write
in
comments
on
the
survey
about
the
plan.
It
was
a
done
deal
if
you
responded
to
the
survey.
The
minimum
number
of
floors
that
you
could
pick
was
12.,
so
the
result
ended
up
being
biased
and
an
equitable
survey
result
now.
G
This
is
what
the
long
time
plan
for
the
rb
quarter
calls
for
the
for
building
heights
and
densities
that
they
should
taper
down
between
stations
and
be
consistent
with
the
long
and
be
consistent
with
these
long-term
county
planning
principles.
This
site
is
just
about
halfway
between
courthouse
and
clarendon
metro
station.
G
H
H
A
proportion
of
the
parcel
that
faces
clarendon
boulevard
would
contain
a
public
space
staff
initially
proposed
three
scenarios
for
the
state
scenario:
six
stories,
ten
stories
and
seventeen
stories.
Forty
nine
percent,
almost
half
of
the
res
responders,
prefer
the
six
story
scenario
that
most
of
the
respondents
that
resolved
it
in
this
size
affinity
also
referred
the
strict
story
for
that
scenario.
H
Please
therefore
recommend
the
six
story
scenario
to
the
county
board
and,
according
to
club,
changes
the
neighborhood
on
this
on
the
opposite
side
of
planet
boulevard
contains
town
houses,
most
of
which
are
three
stories
high.
A
12-story
building
would
tower
over
these
howard
houses,
creating
a
mock
discordance
in
a
residential
neighborhood.
H
There
is
little
real
need
for
a
12-story
building.
The
building
primarily
contains
luxury
of
residential
units
and,
since
it'll
be
still
built
soon.
That's
the
market.
The
high
prices
of
these
units
would
raise
the
property
values
of
the
surrounding
neighborhoods,
making
the
entire
neighborhood
less
affordable
than
it
is
now.
The
large
number
of
residential
use
would
increase
demand
for
new
schools
and
front
for
public
services.
These
would
be
costly,
although
the
building
would
be
a
metro
in
a
metropolitan.
H
Many
residents
will
use
automobiles
to
reach
reach
met
with
workplaces
that
are
far
from
metro
that
will
occur
because
many
units
will
have
more
than
one
occupant
one.
Accurate
may
work
near
metro,
but
there
are
others
who
work
while
away
from
metro.
It's
important
to
recognize
that
feedhop
recently
added
two
lanes
in
I-66
west
of
walleston
to
reduce
the
traffic
congestion
into
that
development
goal.
The
army
current
has
generated
a
12-story
resident
would
increase
that
congestion
contribute
the
need
for
yet
another
winding
of
the
highway
and
disruption
of
housing.
H
Nearby,
a
12-star
building
may
be
able
to
may
be
able
to
hold
an
old
calf
to
commuter,
fully
housing
units.
However,
the
number
of
caffeines
were
much
smaller
than
the
tip
number
of
these
luxury
units.
Typically
about
four
percent
the
the
the
caffeines
were
created.
It
would
further
create
an
inequity.
Residents
of
the
cafes
would
most
likely
have
access
to
the
buildings
of
your
amenities
while
paying
low
rents,
whereas
the
residents
of
neighboring
buildings
who
are
paying
higher
prices
will
have
no
such
access.
H
This
is
inequitable
plain
and
simple
and
remember
that
the
courthouse
area
is
presently
planned
to
have
pulls
out
pattern
of
density
with
the
tourist
abilities
near
the
courthouse
metro
station.
The
courthouse
west
side
is
neither
near
a
courthouse
nor
the
clown
metro
station.
A
12-story
at
that
site
will
destroy
the
building's
bullseye
pattern
for
both
metro
stations.
It
would
create
a
net,
an
extremely
poor
press
center
for
the
planning
of
the
roswell
balsa
corridor.
H
The
staff
proposal
does
not
provide
a
useful
public
space.
Please
vote
to
recommend
the
space
should
be
a
green
area,
not
a
paved
plaza.
This
is
important.
The
russia
boston
card
has
too
much
favor
and
too
little
greens
grace
to
increase
livability
and
biophilia.
The
public
space
must
be
a
green
space.
Thank.
A
A
Yeah
is
it?
Is
it
possible,
though,
that
there's
a
there's
a
there's,
a
brook
alexander
name
that
looks
both
like
the
screen?
Can
the
camera
length
the
lens
cap
is
on
and
it's
on
mute
so
just
addressing.
If,
if
that's,
if
that's
you
miss
pharrell
fyi,
but
let's
go
on
to
miss
green
and
then
come
back.
I
Great,
my
name
is
jane
green.
I
live
in
radnor,
fort
myers
heights
in
a
building
that
is
situated
between
the
courthouse
and
rosalind
metro
stations.
I
I
am
asking
that
the
staff
preserve
flexibility
at
this
stage
in
the
process
and
for
this
project
by
removing
the
additional
height
cap
of
the
12
stories
along
a
building
that
could
potentially
reach
up
to
16
stories
in
a
process
that
will
be
worked
out
through
the
site
plan
will
not
only
have
the
potential
to
house
more
people
in
this
very
transit
rich
area,
but
will
also
support
the
creation
of
a
more
sculpted
and,
potentially,
you
know,
a
more
attractive
building.
I
In
the
end,
one
of
the
biggest
things
that
I'm
concerned
about
reading
the
staff
report
is
that
even
now,
in
the
21st
century,
with
a
housing
crisis
and
a
climate
crisis,
the
staff
report
is
still
expressing
concerns
about
the
proximity
of
tall
apartment
buildings
to
lower
density
residential
areas.
I
think
it
is
far
past
time
for
us
to
stop
enacting
policies
that
are
founded
on
the
assumption
that
single-family
detached
homes
need
to
be
protected
from
apartment
buildings.
I
This
site
is
situated
in
a
very
high
capacity,
multi-modal
transportation
network.
The
low-density
neighborhoods
that
exist
within
a
few
blocks
of
this
corridor
are
under
utilizing
their
land.
That
should
not
be
a
reason
to
force
this
property
owner
and
adjacent
property
owners
to
under
develop
their
capacity
and
underdevelop
what
the
market
could
need,
just
because
we
have
underutilized
land
nearby
and
some
folks
have
mentioned
the
courthouse
sector
plan.
I
think
the
most
recent
update
to
that
is
1993..
I
A
lot
has
changed.
A
lot
is
changing.
We
need
to
start
building
for
the
future,
and
that
means
allowing
higher
than
what
is
currently
there
and
hire
what
is
nearby
and
allow
this
building
to
allow
something
to
replace
what
is
currently
a
vacant
lot
with
a
place
to
house
people
who
want
to
live
in
arlington
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
Thank
you.
So
much.
B
J
Great
so
hi,
my
name
is
elizabeth
farrell
and
I
live
at
the
corner
of
danville
street
and
franklin
street,
and
I
can
see
the
proposed
building
site
outside
my
window.
My
kitchen
window.
I've
spoken
to
many
members
of
my
community
who
live
on
my
block
and
I'm
trying
to
express
my
opinions
as
well
as
theirs.
We've
many
young
families
on
the
block.
I
counted
15
children
under
the
age
of
18
living
on
just
our
blocks
between
franklin
and
key.
J
We
have
many
concerns
about
the
height
and
size
of
the
building,
but
we
specifically
have
concerns
about
the
traffic.
We
are
a
yield
street,
which
means
it's
a
two-way
street
with
just
three.
That's
just
three
lanes
wide
with
parking
on
both
sides.
We
have
a
light
at
danville
and
langston
boulevard,
and
so
both
google
maps
and
waze
directs
a
lot
of
traffic
down
our
street
already
already
regularly.
We
have
people
driving
too
fast
for
the
street,
even
though
we
have
traffic
calming
measures.
J
As
a
result,
we
have
concerns
about
how
much
traffic
a
12
to
15
story
or
17
to
20
story
building
would
bring.
We
strongly
encourage
the
board
to
seriously
consider
the
low
option
the
developer
proposes
that
we
all
imagine
all
the
buildings
in
the
area
are
built
to
their
highest
authorized
height,
but
that
is
simply
not
the
reality.
When
I
look
outside
my
window,
I
see
the
whole
foods
building.
I
see
the
clarinet
crossing
buildings
and
those
buildings
are
not
built
to
their
maximum
height.
J
J
J
A
Thank
you,
ms
farrell,
ms
badger.
I
yield
back
to
you.
K
Good
evening
planning
commission
I'm
adam
theo,
independent
candidate
for
arlington
county
board,
as
well
as
vice
president
of
boston,
virginia
square
civic
association.
Although
I'm
not
here
in
that
capacity,
only
to
show
my
commitment
to
the
area.
I've
lived
in
boston
up
until
I've
lived
in
boston
for
approximately
nine
years
and
I've
passed
by
this
site,
courthouse
west
hundreds,
in
fact
it's
probably
safe
to
say
over
a
thousand
times
by
now
going
to
and
from
roslyn
the
whole
foods
courthouse.
K
K
I
don't
have
any
qualms
or
fears
about
height
up
to
even
16
stories.
I
think
that
16
stories
would
be
very
appropriate
for
the
roslin-ballston
corridor.
I
myself
up
until
two
weeks
ago
lived
in
a
20-story
building
and
it
was
perfectly
fine
that
whole
area
that
that
area
between
ross
and
boston
really
is
a
a
single
neighborhood
in
a
way
one
big
neighborhood
that
can
easily
accommodate
buildings
of
that
height
16
stories,
20
stories.
K
One
reason
that
I'd
like
to
see
up
to
16
stories,
instead
of
just
the
12
that
is
being
proposed
by
staff,
is
it
the
higher
you
go
the
more
opportunity
there
is
for
setbacks,
and
I
want
to
see
street
trees
for
added
free
canopy
along
all
four
sides
of
the
block
that
really
wouldn't
be
done
with
just
a
12
story.
Building
the
developers
would
have
to
maximize
every
square
foot
of
the
parcel,
but
at
least
with
higher
building
and
well.
K
L
I
know
there
were
some
concerns
about
parking
and
car
traffic,
but
in
any
any
reason,
but
I
can
share
like
a
16
story.
L
Building
within
a
five
minute,
walk
from
two
metro
stops
is
going
to
mostly
attract
transit-oriented
people,
certainly
more
so
than
all
the
single
families
owned
areas
nearby
and
the
primary
reason
I
support
this
change
is
that
it's
in
keeping
with
the
spirit
of
the
arlington
the
bullseye
strategy
that
has
been
referred
to
several
times
and
by
the
spirit
of
that
any
area
that
any
place
that
is
five
minute
walk
from
two
metro
station.
Two
metro
station
should
be
an
area
of
high
density,
more
affordable
housing.
L
So,
from
my
personal
background
for
this,
I
live
actually
right
down.
North
barn
street
closer
to
rocky
run
park,
and
I
think
that
the
building
would
fit
perfectly
in
the
area.
I
don't
think
it
would
be.
I
know
there
are
a
lot
of
areas
that
are
zoned,
for
there
are
more
low
rise
in
the
area,
but
there
are.
L
It
is
also
very
very
close
to
a
number
of
higher
buildings,
and,
I
think,
is
in
keeping
with
that
the
principle
of
having
that
main
court
or
be
more
more
housing
for
more
people.
We
have
a
severe
affordability
in
crisis
in
arlington,
which
is
causing
a
lot
of
people
in
my
demographic
who
are
young
people
who
are
looking
to
start
families
to
have
to
like
move
out
of
arlington,
find
anything
affordable,
challenging
to
stay
here,
as
is
without
any
expansion
of
the
housing
supply.
L
So
that's
why
I'm
speaking
here
today
to
advocate
for
allowing
more
housing
rather
than
less,
and
I
am
a
resident
of
the
area,
and
I
too,
walk
by
the
area,
and
currently
the
only
thing
that's
there
is.
I
think
there
are
five
food
trucks
that
park
there
overnight,
which
love
food
trucks,
but
there
is
definitely
better
use
for
that
space
and
that
place
spaces
and
that
uses
more
homes
for
arlingtonians.
B
Brooke
and
chair
we're
brooke
alexander,
has
a
slideshow
that
she
would
like
to
show.
Is
it
okay?
If
I
bring
that
on
the
screen.
M
M
I
want
to
thank
everyone
for
their
work
and
efforts
on
this
project
back
in
the
early
80s,
when
I
was
working
on
the
clarendon
sector
plan,
this
was
the
graphic
we
were
given
for
the
overall
plan
for
the
quarter.
Could
you
put
slide
two
on
please
today?
This
same
graphic
is
on
the
county's
website
for
the
roslin
boston
corridor.
M
I
understand
from
the
staff
report
that
there
has
been
some
infilling
of
this
bullseye
plan,
but
the
plan
still
stands
on
the
slide.
If
it
can
come
up,
you
can
see
the
density
concentrated
on
top
of
the
metro
stations
with
the
height
and
density
declining
in
between
the
stations.
Sorry
there
it
is
okay,
the
bull's-eye
concept.
M
Thank
you.
So
that
was,
and
could
you
move
to
the
next
slide,
which
is
slide
three
and
on
it
you'll
see
a
little
x
which
marks
the
location
in
the
courthouse
west
proposal
smack
in
the
middle
of
the
trough
between
courthouse
and
clarendon.
There
are
four
troughs
in
the
corridor,
as
you
can
see,
between
each
of
the
metro
stations,
each
of
which
are
planned
for
lower
density
and
height.
M
M
I
don't
know
if
you
can
see
it
on
there,
as
was
brought
up
on
the
lrpc
meeting.
We
can
do
this
by
filling
in
the
yellow
areas,
between
the
metro
stations
with
more
height
and
density.
I
commend
to
you
the
recent
forestry
and
natural
resources
commission
letter
on
the
missing
middle
dated
june
23rd,
which
supports
this
area.
M
It
states,
among
other
things.
We
worry
that
staff
did
not
examine
opportunities
to
concentrate
missing
middle
housing
redevelopment
along
transit
corridors.
This
project
in
courthouse
west
is
an
opportunity
to
make
these
places
for
lower
income
people
to
live.
Here's
the
catch,
though
this
current
method
is
not
going
to
do
it.
We
cannot
be.
It
cannot
be
accomplished
by
replanning
and
rezoning
one
block
at
a
time.
It
needs
a
holistic
policy
study.
It
needs
to
be
coordinated
with
the
whole
community.
We
need
to
look
at
parks
and
schools.
M
So
to
accomplish
this,
we
need
to
leave
the
zoning
and
land
use
for
west
courthouse,
as
it
is
no
upzoning
at
this
point
in
time
to
upzone
this
property
at
this
point
sets
a
precedent
for
all
the
other
troughs
in
the
corridor
and
gives
away
the
opportunity
to
allocate
the
space
in
this
middle.
I'm
hoping
that
you
can
add
this
option
to
your
choices
going
to
advertising
tonight,
so
it
can
be
considered
as
we
move
forward
for
those
who
haven't
seen
the
forestry
natural
resources
commission
letter.
N
Thank
you,
mr
chair
members
of
the
commission.
My
name
is
scott
pedowitz,
I'm
the
virginia
government
affairs
manager
for
the
apartment
and
office
building
association,
but
also
and
more
significant.
In
my
life,
I'm
a
more
than
14-year
neighbor
who's
been
living
a
mere
three
blocks
from
the
site
we're
discussing
this
evening.
In
fact,
I
did
the
math
and
courthouse
has
been
my
home
for
fully
one-third
of
my
life
and
70
percent
of
my
post-collegiate
adult
life.
N
N
Moreover,
we
had
much
conversation
at
the
time
about
the
benefits
of
not
being
constrained
by
the
original
mid
20th
century
metro
plan
bullseyes,
as
experienced
since
has
shown
that
future
residents
at
this
site
will
walk
both
to
courthouse
and
to
clarendon
metros,
not
to
mention
making
extensive
use
of
the
many
many
buses
that
pass
right
alongside
of
it.
I
thus
encourage
the
commission
to
recommend
to
the
board
a
special
glob
study
advertisement
that
will
allow
our
planning
processes
to
deliver
the
best
possible
project
at
this
site,
which
is
bounded
by
both
wilson
and
clarendon.
N
Boulevards
recall
that
we
will
be
back
here
again
several
times
with
this
site.
We
will
have
the
hearing
on
the
glove
change
whose
advertisement
we're
discussing
now
that'll
be
in
a
couple
of
months
and
then
we'll
have
a
site
plan
application
and
that
will
come
with
a
complete
site
plan
process
which
will
help
sculpt
and
tailor
the
project,
and
that
really
brings
me
to
my
key
point
for
the
evening
and
one
which
might
seem
counterintuitive
until
we
dig
in
and
think
about
it.
N
So,
notwithstanding
the
theoretical
blocky
images
that
you
see
in
the
staff
presentation,
higher
floors
in
any
delivered
project
are
likely
to
be
significantly
tailored
and
their
presence
can
even
allow
for
more
tapering
at
lower
floors
than
would
be
without
the
higher
floors
all
done
without
sacrificing
the
number
of
units.
By
contrast,
if
we
can
train,
if
we
can
strain
our
height
options
now,
we
will
preclude
ourselves
from
considering
such
design
options
later.
N
N
The
price
of
rent
is
a
function
of
the
broader
marketplace,
as
we
all
know,
and
so
the
amount
of
housing
is
the
variable
that
allows
this
or
any
project
to
clear
its
costs
and
to
be
built
as
such.
If
sufficient
density
is
required
to
make
the
project
work,
but
the
height
is
constrained,
the
resulting
building
will
be
shorter,
but
quite
possibly
the
sort
of
bulky
blocky
structure
that
these
proposed
limits
are
seeking
to
forestall
and
there's
precedent
here.
The
county
board's
adoption
of
the
shirlington
special
glove
study,
plus
in
july
of
2020,
is
instructed.
N
N
It
allows
us
to
maximize
the
number
of
potential
housing
units,
whilst
also
delivering
a
better
sculpted
structure
that
minimizes
the
impact
on
the
surrounding
properties,
and
to
that
end,
I
encourage
the
commission
to
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
it
include
an
option
without
the
staff
proposed
height
limit
when
it
advertises
a
special
glove
study.
Thank
you.
O
Oh
hey,
this
is
dave
thanks
for
letting
me
speak
like
scott
I've
lived
here
about
14
years
on
and
off,
and
I
own
a
home
by
11th
street
park
down
the
street
I'll
talk
behalf
on
the
civic
association
myself
a
little
bit
and
just
definitely
pros
and
cons
for
whatever
you
guys
decide
on
the
civic
association
side.
As
president
there's
really
no
consensus.
O
I
think
what
I
kind
of
read
is
like
the
homeowners
really
don't
want
over
six
stories
and
then
some
of
the
other
members
who
might
live
down
the
street
want
higher.
So
I
think
that's
kind
of
like
we're
at
I
have
to
do
a
poll.
O
You
know
like
a
google
poll
or
something
like
that,
but
it's
kind
of
like
a
mixed
reaction
right
now
to
what
people
want,
I'm
a
cyclist
I
go
by
their
daily
at
that
area
between
starbucks
to
courthouse
where
the
county
building
is
it's
pretty
dangerous?
Actually
you
start
off
by
the
starbucks,
usually
the
18-wheeler
parks
there
at
nighttime.
I
don't
know,
I'm
sure
a
lot
of
people
know
about
that,
and
then
it's
kind
of
funny
and
ironic,
but
I
saw
a
police
motorcycle
parked
in
the
bike
lane.
O
Usually
it's
cars
like
delivery,
cars
or
just
random
cars
parked
there.
So
because
of
the
way,
this
is
designed
like
you're,
going
to
have
cars
parked
on
both
sides
and
the
bike
lanes
all
the
time
and
then.
O
To
get
really
police
to
do
anything
because
one
they're
underfunded,
they
don't
have
enough
people
or
personnel
and
also
it's
just
not
their
priority-
to
pull
over
or
move
people
because
they
have
a
lot
of
other
things
to
do
so.
It's
going
to
definitely
make
a
little
more
danger
for
cyclists
and
mixed
modal
like
vehicles
such
as
electric
vehicles
and
stuff
schools.
This
one
is
not
going
to
really
impact
schools
too
much,
but
there
is
a
county-wide
concern
that
all
the
developments
going
on
at
once.
O
It's
going
to
end
up
impacting
schools,
overcrowding
and
there's
not
really
a
solution
to
like
new
schools
in
the
near
future
to
cover
that
and
then
actually
there
was
another
speaker
today.
She
talked
about
reckless
driving
on
the
other
side
of
near
land
village
and
that's
actually.
The
reason
I
got
involved
with
civic
engagement
was
our
street.
Basically,
what
happened
was
there's
some
stop
signs
put
over
on
barton
and
google
maps
added
all
the
streets
around
11th
street
park.
O
So
it's
like
a
racetrack
now
I
got
a
video
of
a
guy
a
couple
days
ago,
hitting
60
miles
an
hour
on
our
street.
Now
this
is
residential.
This
is
not
like
a
10th
street
north
or
barton,
and
you
basically
you
can
hear
the
car
skidding
at
the
end,
because
the
driver
was
probably
drunk
and
didn't
know
that
there
was
a
hill,
then
a
stop
sign.
So
I
can
send
the
video
it's.
I
got
thousands
of
them.
Actually
it's
just
it's
very
dangerous.
O
Around
11
street
park
now
and
I've
been
trying
to
work
with
the
county,
talked
to
andrea,
wilkinson,
she's,
a
traffic
engineer.
I
think
it's
like
number
two.
Basically
most
of
the
responses
were
hostile.
I
think
the
last
thing
she
said
was
your
disappointment
is
noted,
referring
to
our
neighbors,
who
have
children,
because
I'm
trying
to
represent
them
saying
we're
concerned
for
their
safety
and
we're
disappointed.
Nothing's
been
done.
I
mean
it's
pretty
pathetic.
Actually,
the
response
from
traffic
engineering,
so
I
guess
the
concern.
Is
you
put
this
building
up
here?
O
There's
going
to
be
more
traffic.
If
you
put
12
stories,
it's
gonna
be
more
than
six
stories,
so,
unfortunately,
for
the
developer,
I
mean
I
actually
asked
the
developer
to
see.
They
could
fix
it
because
I
figured
the
county
board.
Will
listen
to
them
more
than
us
in
the
civic
association,
but
you
know
if
you
can't
fix
this,
then
us
you
know,
residents
have
to
fight
the
development,
which
is
not
fair
of
the
developer,
but
we
don't
have
any
confidence
in
the
county
fixing
these
issues,
which
is
but
it's
sad
I
mean
you
really
want.
O
This
is
actually
the
best
quote
from
a
fellow
from
yinbee.
Today
his
name
is
alex.
He
goes.
This
is
a
great
distillation
of
why
things
like
traffic
coming
and
safe
street
design
needs
to
be
part
of
the
package
when
it
comes
to
a
growing
community.
I
hope
that
quote
can
be
like
taken
to
the
planning
commission
because
he's
exactly
right
and
then
what
else
do
we
got?
Second
order
effects
that
the
county
board
members
and
county
manager
got
the
ability
to
mitigate
all
the
other
problems.
O
I
guess
like
storm
water,
trees
and
all
that
stuff
and
again,
if
they
could
do
a
better
job
of
it,
maybe
get
more
support
and
then
the
last,
what
else?
Oh
yeah
so
like
if
the
developer
is
going
to
buy
this
land
for
a
relatively
low
price
and
then
after
like
17
times
just
the
height,
you
know,
usually
a
city
would
do
like
a
cash
property
of
like
a
large
sum
of
money.
We
should
go
to
like
schools
and
infrastructure
and
stuff,
but
arlington
doesn't
do
that.
O
So
developers
usually
get
like
a
huge
profit
by
like
paying
like
30
percent
on
the
dollar,
which
leaves
the
homeowners
to
get
like
six
percent.
Six
percent
tax
increases,
so
I
mean,
if
they're
willing
to
put
in
a
cash
payment
or
something
you
know
that
would
show
support
it's
not
going
to
happen,
but
I
mean
like:
what's
the
ups?
What's
the
upside
for
homeowners,
we
keep
getting
like
hit
with
six
percent
tax
increases
to
pay
for
second
order
effects
which
in
other
cities
the
developers
do
so
we
don't.
O
Like
paid
lobbyists,
you
know
we
don't.
We
just
do
this
for
volunteering,
which
makes
it
a
little
trickier
and
then
the
last
one
is
so
the
people
like
in
2000.
I
was
not
involved
with
this
until
recently,
but
like
they
came
up
with
a
pretty
good
plan
for
clarendon,
like
low
density
and
a
community
sale,
and
I
got
renters
and
like
people
walk
by
my
house,
I
always
talk
to
them
just
like
ask
them
what
they
think
about
clarendon.
O
Why
they
live
here,
and
you
know
basically
the
general
feeling
is
like
they
like
the
vibe
here
and
that's
why
they're
here
versus
boston,
because
boston
is
more
like
you
know,
manhattan,
it's
one
of
the
most
dense
areas
in
the
entire
like
dmv
area.
So
when
you
change
something
like
this,
like
you
change
the
feel
and
the
vibe,
which
I
don't
know,
is
that
like,
what's
what's
the
whole
purpose
of
this
anyways
like?
Why?
Don't
we
just
make
13
15
20
stories
and
all
the
buildings
going
up?
O
B
Sorry
about
that,
I
think
I
got
frozen
for
a
second.
We
have
william
gerhart
up
next,
followed
by
john
jacks
pillsbury.
A
Let's
go
to
mr
spillsbury.
If
mr
gerhart
comes
back
to
us,
then
we
can
go
to
him.
We
we
did
hear
from
mr
carton
did
introduce
himself
as
the
president
of
the
line
village,
civic
association
too,
so
I
I
believe
that
we
can,
at
a
minimum
rest
on
having
heard
comment
there.
So
mr
pillsbury
spielsberg.
Q
Q
First,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
on
this
important
topic
and
for
the
efforts
of
staff
and
planning
commissions
on
on
the
study,
we
appreciate
we
especially
appreciate
the
attention
in
the
study
to
design
features
and
tapering
requirements
and
the
opportunity
to
add
to
local
tree
canopy
and
other
biophilic
elements
via
the
public
space
running
on
clarendon,
and
I
gladly
associate
myself
with
dr
burns
comments
about
the
importance
of
ensuring
that
that
space
is
green.
Q
Nonetheless,
the
view
of
our
association
is
that
the
guidance
in
the
courthouse
sector
plan
is
consistent
with
this
study
area.
Having
long
been
intended
to
be
a
part
of
a
walkable
street
area
with
low-rise
commercial
and
residential
buildings
and
multiple
street
entrances,
and
thus
the
hca
favors
option
one
and
opposes
options.
Two
and
three
presented
previously
by
county
staff,
which
would
permit
greatly
increased
heights
and
substantially
more
than
the
sixth
floor,
is
considered
an
option
one.
Q
This
is
essentially
the
low-rise
residential
part
of
the
r
b
corridor
and
the
planned
one
to
four-story
building
heights
and
uses
there
remain
appropriate
in
that
location.
The
existing
glock
designation
for
service
commercial
and
its
c2
zoning
designation
reflect
a
comprehensive
planning
process
and
the
vision
for
the
that
neighborhood.
Q
So
we
we
have
concerns
about
that
process
being
altered
just
for
one
property
when
it's
part
of
a
larger,
larger
vision
and
a
multi-year
planning
process.
That
really
needs
to
be
revisited
if
substantial
changes
along
of
this
magnitude
are
to
be
considered.
Q
I
just
point
out:
a
number
of
the
nearby
properties
are
zoned.
Similarly,
they're
occupied
by
modest
structures.
Little
is
one
or
two
stories
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard,
including
a
number
of
historic
structures
and
modest
structures,
also
nearby
town
houses
and
family
buildings.
The
highest
building
in
the
vicinity
is
at
2500,
wilson,
boulevard
just
to
the
east
of
the
site
in
the
direction
of
courthouse
metro,
and
I
believe
that
is
six
or
seven
stories
maximum.
Q
So,
in
that
context,
we
believe
the
building
considered
for
this
site,
including
the
elevator
and
park
park,
and
you
know,
other
facilities
on
the
roof-
should
not
be
taller
than
the
existing
highest
existing
building
in
the
immediate
area.
Otherwise,
the
proposed
building
would
tower
over
every
other
neighboring
building.
Q
Okay,
we're
concerned
that
the
bluff
change
proposed,
the
corresponding
rezoning
and
resulting
buildings
would
also
have
likely
significant
adverse
impacts
on
the
surrounding
community
in
terms
of
traffic
light
reaching
the
street
and
neighborhood
character
and
bigger
buildings
would
mean
more
traffic
and
traffic
is
already
a
major
problem
in
that
narrow
stretch
of
the
of
the
corridor
between
those
two
between
those
two
boulevards.
Q
In
particular,
changes
made
in
one
part
of
the
corridor
can
encourage
developers
to
cite
those
changes
as
precedent
for
changes
in
other
parts
of
the
corridor,
and
this
is
part
of
the
reason
why
all
of
the
neighboring
civic
associations
are
here
speaking
tonight.
So
that's
all.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
our
position.
A
Mr
romero,
it's
possible
that
that
romero
intended
to
register
for
tomorrow
evening
because
the
apa
property
across
the
street
from
from
the
heights.
Why
don't
we
go
to
mr
rose
now
and
and
if,
if
ms
romero
is
here,
we'll
go
back
to
work.
R
R
As
the
we
stated
in
a
december
2021
letter
to
planning
staff,
the
chambers
support
additional
density,
especially
in
established
bus
and
rail
transit
corridors
and
land
use
policy
and
regulations
that
are
flexible
to
attract
investment
in
arlington,
and
this
site
proves
the
opportunity
to
do
just
that.
R
R
A
Thank
you,
mr
president.
Last
call
for
mr
merrill.
A
Yeah,
I'm
and
clerk
I'm
fairly
confident
that
what
happened
here
is
that
that
ms
romero,
intended
to
speak
for
tomorrow
evening,
I've
sent
her
a
text
message
as
well.
I
A
If
she,
if
she
rejoins
us,
I
think
what
we
do
is
is
invite
written
comments
to
be
to
add
it
to
the
record,
but
I
just
know
for
tomorrow
night:
do
we
have
any
other.
A
We
have
any
any
commission
reports
well
first,
I
just
want
to
confirm,
madam
quick,
that
this
confirms
public
comment.
This
concludes
public
comment.
A
Commissioner,
tell
me:
did
this:
I
I
did
this
come
to
the
transportation
commission.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Tell
me
then,
commissioner
bagley
I'll
go
to
you.
T
Thank
you
chairwear.
I
did
send.
U
Everybody,
a
a
summary
of
which
has
been
pretty
much,
also
stated
extremely
well
by
staff
about
the
previous
meetings
and
some
of
the
topics
that
were
raised,
but
I
won't
be.
You
know
I
won't
belabor
that
point
by
going
back
through
those,
I
would
say,
suggest
a
discussion
for
us
tonight,
first
and
foremost
would
be
massing
in
density.
That's
probably
the
biggest
one
open
space,
affordable,
housing,
transportation,
including
loading
dock
and
parking,
were
some
of
the
other
things
that
came
up.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Bagley.
Are
there
any
additional
discussion
topics
beyond
the
four
that
commissioner
bagley
has
recommended
to
us
I'll
go
look
for
any
hands,
I'm
seeing
one
commissioner
peterson.
V
Thank
you.
I
was
interested
in
learning
more
about
the
stated
goal
of
increasing
family-sized
units
and
that's
more
of
a
clarifying
question.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
peterson.
I
I
I'm
going
to
add
that
as
a
as
a
fifth
topic,
any
other
additional
topics.
A
So
what
I
think
that
I
would
like
to
do
is
actually
start
with
open
space,
affordable
housing,
family
sized
units,
transportation
and
then,
let's
cover
massing
and
density.
Last,
since
I
believe
that
that's
where
I,
since
I
agree
with
commissioner
bagley,
that's
where
most
of
the
discussion
is
going
to
be,
if
there's
any
objection
to
that,
please
raise
your
hand
pipe
in,
but
seeing
no
hands
go
up.
I
think
we'll
start
with
open
space.
Are
there
any.
A
Are
there
any
commissioner's
role,
we'll
start
with
you
and
if,
if
it's
open
space
great,
if
it's
I
got
distracted
on
by
apologies,
but
if
it's
an
additional
topic
or
a
different
organizational
comment,
that's
welcome
to.
W
W
W
Higher
density
than
what
staff
is
proposing,
which
in
some
ways
presupposes
that
one
is
forthcoming
and
I
would
like
to
get
a
sense
from
staff
what
the
plan
is
to
update
the
the
two
kind
of
plans
that
are
referenced
in
the
in
the
staff
documents.
So
the
you
know
the
courthouse
plan,
and
I
know
there
was
a
courthouse
plan
addendum
for
courthouse
square,
but
I'm
wondering
what
the
plan
is
for
updating
the
other
planning
documents
which
are
from
1981
1993
respectively.
So,
mr
murphy.
C
C
Both
of
these
provide
guidance
for
the
the
study
area
related
to
to
different
topic
areas,
including
land
use.
Obviously,
you
also
noted
that
there
was
the
courthouse
square
addendum.
I
believe
that
was
adopted
in
2015.
C
currently
at
this
time
within
within
the
planning
division's
work
plan,
a
future
update
or
courthouse
sector
plan
addendum
is
not
envisioned
it.
You
know
on
on
the
the
short-term
horizon,
so
that
that
is
something
that
kind
of
is
still.
W
Great
and
then
just
a
quick
follow-up
on
that.
Is
there
any
plan
or
thought
to
have
an
update
to
any
of
the
sector
plans
along
the
rb
corridor
within
the
next
two
to
three
years.
C
To
to
my
knowledge
as
a
staff
planner,
you
know,
I
know
that
our
the
planning
vision,
work
plan
is
updated
on
an
annual
basis
and
is
reassessed
each
each
year.
So
I
I
believe
I
haven't
taken
a
look
at
the
current
current
year's
work
plan
in
a
few
months,
but
I
don't
recall
there
being
a
sector
plan
update
on
this.
Current
year's
planning
division
work
plan,
but
again
the
the
work
plan
is
updated
on
an
annual
basis
and
is
reassessed
based
on
kind
of
accounting,
board,
priorities,
staff
resources,
etc.
W
A
All
right
and
our
questions
are
overlapping,
but
but
discreet,
and
I'm
going
to
raise
mine
it'll,
be
for
you,
mr
murphy,
as
well
and
I'll,
raise
that
when
we
get
to
build
density
and
massing.
So
anyone
with
anything
on
open
space.
A
I
think
then
the
next
topic
will
be
affordable,
housing
and
commissioner
peterson
will
I'll
come
next
to
the
family
status
units.
A
Just
note
for
anyone
who
might
be
following
following
along
at
home
that
this
is
usually
an
opportu,
a
part
of
the
discussion
where
we
ask
questions
to
the
effect
of
what
share
of
the
project
is,
you
know,
are
we
looking
at
a
cash
contribution,
or
are
we
looking
at
a
on-site
caveat?
Is
that
we're
not
getting
into
that?
A
Because
that's
you
know,
that's
the
next
stage
of
the
project,
that's
more
of
a
site
plan
review
project
than
it
is
a
club
project,
but
but
it's
always
a
good
thing
to
be
keeping
in
mind,
as
commissioner
hughes,
who
isn't
here,
would
would
point
out
that,
it's
always
you
know
it's
there's
always
a.
There
are
good
policy
reasons
to
to
support
and
hope
for
on-site
units
instead
of
a
cash
contribution.
That
is
enough
of
my
rambling
commissioner
peterson.
V
Thank
you.
The
staff
report
mentions
that
going
from
12
floors
to
16
floors
does
lead
to
an
incremental
increase
in
the
number
of
units,
including
affordable
units.
So
I
was
wondering
if
the
applicant
could
give
us
a
rough
idea
of
how
many
extra
affordable
housing
units
we
would
get
from
the
project
being.
The
extra
four
stories.
D
Commissioner
peterson
thanks
for
your
thanks
for
your
question.
So
a
couple
a
couple
things
to
factor
in
one
is
that,
with
any
proposed
development,
there
is
an
affordable
housing
contribution
that
is
based
on
the
density
and
the
number
of
units
that
are
that
are
in
the
in
the
building.
So
in
any
event,
there
will
be
an
incremental
increase
as
a
result
of
additional
units
and
additional
density
at
this
building
there.
D
That
will
also
excuse
me
provide
the
opportunity
for
a
good
number
of
units
based
on
the
tapering
and
and
the
massing
of
the
building.
That's
ultimately
selected.
I
don't
know
if
we
have
a
specific
number
for
what
that
increase
would
be,
but
it
could
be
in
total
each
floor
would
be
25
to
50
total
additional
units,
some
proportion
of
which
would
always
be
affordable.
V
Okay,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
the
percentage
that's
required
were
we
talking
like
0.63
extra
units
which
actually
gets
rounded
down
or
are
we
talking
like?
Oh
no
you're,
actually
to
get
like
five
extra,
affordable
units.
D
So
the
the
numbers
are
based
on
a
formula
that
is
determined
at
the
time
of
the
site
plan
review.
So
there
are
certain
percentages
that
the
county
staff
typically
looks
for
for
any
development
in
the
rv
corridor
or
through
the
site
plan
process.
So
there
will
always
be
a
competent
increase
in
affordable
units
with
an
overall
increase
in
density
at
any
site.
D
V
Mr
murphy,
do
you
have
just
a
general
idea
of
the
formula
that,
if
there's
25
extra
units
per
floor
times
four
additional
floors,
what
what
does
that
actually
equal,
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
like
if
we're
actually
gonna
get
extra
units
or
if
it's,
if
the
the
percentage
actually
is
less
than
one?
And
so
we
aren't
going
to
get
anything
extra
for
the
four
floors.
C
Yeah,
so
I
don't,
I
don't
have
the
specific
math
in
front
of
me,
but,
as
mr
whitmore
noted
the
way
in
practice,
the
affordable
housing
requirement
in
the
zoning
ordinance
works
is
it's
applied
and
it's
a
percentage-based
requirement
that
that
is
standardized,
and
so
it's
really
based
on
the
total,
gfa
or
gross
floor
area
of
of
the
building
or
the
proposed
site
plan.
U
I
have
a
question
for
the
applicant
and
are
we
assuming
that
this
will
be
a
rentals
project?
And
if
so,
will
this
be
a
luxury
or
market
rate.
E
Thank
you
for
the
question
I'll
take
that
our
our
business
plan
is
rental
apartments,
although
it's
possible
over
the
life
of
any
building
things,
things
could
change,
and
it's
a
market-driven
project
similar
to
other
things
that
I
reference
that
we've
done
in
the
clarendon
neighborhood.
E
I
guess
it
depends
on
how
someone
defines
market
and
luxury
right,
so
the
the
typical
rents
in
that
neighborhood
is
kind
of
how
we
underwrite
and
would
set
a
rent.
So
it's
gonna
depend
on
unit
mix
and
pricing
will
depend
on
whatever
is
a
market
price
for
apartments
in
that
neighborhood.
At
the
time.
U
Thank
you
yeah,
just
as
an
observation
as
someone
who
is
in
the
real
estate
industry
locally,
even
with
the
proliferation
of
buildings
that
have
come
into
our
area
recently,
many
of
which
were
approved
when
I
was
a
civic
association
president
with
extra
units,
we
have
not
seen
a
decrease
in
the
amount
that
it
requires
to
live
in
those
areas,
not
just
for
low-income
people
but
for
middle-income
people
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
commissioner
bagley
commissioner
kieran.
X
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
applicant
and
mr
murphy.
I
want
to
follow
up
on
this
discussion
with
the
extra
floors.
Would
we
consider
getting
some
more
family
style
units?
X
That's
my
first
question
and
I'll
just
put
them
all
out
there.
Additionally,
what's
your
thinking
now,
are
you
thinking
you'll
provide
some
of
the
affordable
units
on
site
or
are
you
pretty
sure,
you'll
go
with
and
in
luffy
and
then
my
last
question
is-
and
I
think
this
this
piggy
backs
on
commissioner
bagley's
point:
we've
had
a
lot
of
luxury
new
construction
apartments
come
in
and
when
they
were
slow
to
rent
up
to
the
capacity
that
they
needed.
E
Thank
you,
miss
karen.
In
terms
of
family,
the
family
style
units
there's
been
some
discussion,
I'm
actually
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
size
people
are
intending
to
be
family
sized,
but
I
will
use
an
example
of
a
project.
I
reference
in
clarendon
called
the
tenant
clarendon,
where
our
unit
mix
included
over
10
percent
of
the
units
were
four
bedroom,
three
bath
units,
and
so
some
have
called
those
family
units.
E
So
we
envisioned
the
unit
mix
to
respond
to
where
we
see
the
demand
and
what's
interesting
is
terms
of
those
renters
we've
had
families,
we've
had
venting
had
empty
nesters
and
we've
also
had
just
single
renters
that
are
friends.
So
the
price
point
per
person
is
actually
affordable
for
a
demographic
that
tends
to
live
in
rental
group
houses
versus
apartments.
E
So
we
believe
in
that
and
we've
executed
on
that
to
your
second
question
on
affordable
units,
it's
still
early
that
that's
the
site
plan
question,
but
we
are
open
and
we
have
done
in
the
past-
have
have
had
committed
on-site
affordables
and
we
look
forward
to
future
discussion
in
a
site
plan.
For
that
and
to
your
last
question,
is
karen
on
conversion?
E
X
A
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Giron.
I'm
not
seeing
any
more
questions
on
any
more
hands
up,
so
I
I
I
think
commissioner
peterson
I'm
gonna
defer
to
you
in
case
there's
more
that
you
want
to
cover
on
the
topic
of
increasing
family
size
units.
I
I
think
that
we
might
have
gotten
the
bulk
of
the
answer.
Just
now,
I'm
seeing
well
I'll
go
to
you.
V
Yeah,
so
I'm
actually,
so
I
noted
in
the
staff
report,
there's
a
specified
goal
of
increasing
the
housing
supply,
including
family
size
units,
and
I
wanted
to
know
how
staff
is
thinking
about
achieving
that.
Knowing
that
a
goal
without
a
plan
is
just
a
wish.
So
is
this
something
we're
going
to
start
negotiating
extra
density
to
get,
and
can
you
define
what
is
a
family-sized
unit
just
so
we
can
get
a
better
idea
of
you
know.
Are
we
actually
going
to
be
able
to
make
this
happen?
V
C
Yes,
I'm
glad
you
I'm
glad
you
raised
the
family
size
units
within
this
study
document
family
size
units
come
up
in
two
locations,
one
in
the
guiding
principles
that
really
kind
of
set
forth
the
vision
for
the
study
area
and
really
help
guide
redevelopment
and
then,
more
recently,
following
the
may
lrpc
meeting,
we
also
added
a
recommendation
within
the
study
document
in
the
housing
section
to
reinforce
the
pr
really
the
provision
of
of
family
size
dwelling
units
and
that's
something
that
you
know
from
a
staff
perspective
is
definitely
something
that
is
it's
a
recommendation
like
the
provision
of
public
space
and
transportation
improvements.
C
It's
something
that,
as
as
a
future
site
plan,
comes
forward
for
the
study
area.
You
know
we
want
to
see
the
the
recommendations
being
being
realized
and
the
plans
for
for
the
future
development,
and
so
that
that's
definitely
something
that
we
would
want
to
see
from
a
future
application
and
as
a
future,
application
is
reviewed
through
the
site
plan
review
process.
That
would
definitely
be
kind
of
a
key
consideration,
as
that
plan
is
reviewed
and
brought
forward
for
consideration
to
the
planning,
commission
and
the
county
board.
C
In
terms
of
your
other
question
about
kind
of
potential
size
of
a
family
size
unit,
I
think
what
mr
nolan
laid
out
with
hi.
The
the
10
project
is
something
along
the
similar
lines
that
staff
was
was
thinking
about
three
bedroom
units,
four
bedroom
units.
V
Okay,
I'm
very
happy
to
hear
that
as
a
condo
dweller
in
a
high-rise
in
the
courthouse
neighborhood-
and
I
very
much
enjoy
my
family
living
situation,
except
that
we
are
a
family
of
five
in
a
two-bedroom
plus
den,
and
I
need
more
more
another
bedroom.
So
get
me
another
bedroom.
I
think
families
in
arlington
need
it
and
for
yeah.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Absolutely
thank
you,
commissioner
peterson,
and
thank
you
for
raising
these
issues.
I'm
gonna
ask
whether
or
not
we
have
any
transportation
related
issues,
I'm
not
seeing
any
hands.
X
Yes,
that
was
me,
thank
you,
so
this
isn't
really
a
transportation
question
per
se,
but
I
would
like
a
little
bit
more
understanding
of
how
wide
the
streets
are
in
this
area
to
get
a
sense
of
how
far
this
building
would
be
from
the
houses
on
wilson
and
clarendon.
X
I
I'm
there
fairly
often,
I
think
it's
two
lanes
in
each
direction
plus
parking
on
both
sides
and
sometimes
when
we
consider
proximity
of
a
tall
building
near
single-family
homes
or
townhomes.
X
P
C
No
problem,
commissioner
gierin.
Yes,
that's
an
excellent
question
in
terms
of
kind
of
the
general,
the
general
street
widths.
You
know,
wilson,
boulevard
is
a
roughly
40
40
feet
it
along
the
the
side
of
the
block.
I
believe
the
the
clarendon
boulevard
is
roughly
the
same
as
well,
and
then
when,
when
looking
at
the
two
side,
streets,
cleveland
street
and
danville
street,
those
those
are
narrower
streets
at
roughly
30
to
35
feet,
I
believe
approximately.
P
K
S
So
it
might
be
a
little
clunky.
I
do
have
a
question
for
staff
on
transportation
and
it
really
involves
traffic
counts
for
the
clarendon
wilson
pair
traffic
is
always
a
concern
of
neighborhoods
and
that's
unbelievable.
It's
raised,
I
think,
at
almost
every
meeting
that
we
have
when
a
project
comes
up.
S
My
understanding,
though,
is
that
the
traffic
counts
on
the
wilson.
Clarendon
pair
have
been
pretty
stable
for
the
past
two
decades
and
putting
the
message
thing
aside
the
past
weird
two
years,
where
I
don't
think
anything
counts
as
far
as
as
numbers,
but
am
I
correct
about
that,
or
is
there
growing
traffic
on
that
pair?
Do
you
know
that
mr
murphy.
C
Commissioner,
tell
me
I'm
not
I'm
not
specifically,
I
don't.
I
don't
know
the
the
specifics
of
the
trends.
My
understanding
is
that
is
similar
to
your
understanding
as
well
in
terms
of
the
traffic
council
on
clarendon
and
wilson
over
time,
but
I
don't.
I
don't,
have
the
specific
data
to
definitely
provide
that
to
you.
S
I
know
when
I
the
few
times
I've
parked
it
at
the
crossing
it
used
to
be
market
common.
There
are
multiple
empty
spots
almost
all
year
round,
in
fact,
so
much
so
that
one
of
the
car
dealers
was
storing
cars
there.
So
is
there
any
reason
to
think
this
would
be
different
from
that
trend
of
people
who
would
be
in
this
building,
not
using
the
other
the
alternative
methods
of
transportation
instead,
relying
on
their
cars.
C
Yeah,
that's
another
excellent
question.
Thank
you
for
that.
Commissioner,
then,
tell
me
they're
yeah
they're,
you
know
based
on
our
transportation
analysis,
that
was
done
as
done
for
our
three
preliminary
preliminary
massing
scenarios,
the
six-story
development,
the
ten-story
and
the
17-story
development.
C
What
we
saw
there
in
terms
of
the
the
assumptions
that
that
went
into
that
based
on
you
know
knowledge
of
of
precedent
projects.
C
What
we
saw
in
terms
of
a
mode
split
was
roughly
40
percent
vehicle
on
the
resident
for
the
residential
dwelling
units
that
that
trips
about
40
of
the
trips
could
potentially
be
personal
vehicle,
60
non
non-vehicle,
and
so
I
think,
when
it
comes
to
the
parking
for
for
the
potential
future
development,
you
know
that
that
would
certainly
be
something
that
would
be
worked
out
via
via
the
site
plan
process.
C
As
you're
aware,
there's
the
the
residential
parking,
the
the
guidelines
for
for
off
street
parking
in
the
roslyn
ballston
corridor,
that
that
provides
some
guidance
regarding
parking
ratios,
so
that
that
would
be
certainly
a
piece
of
information
and
input
into
kind
of
the
the
future
parking
situation
for
for
future
development.
S
Thank
you,
and
I
have
two
other
transportation
related
questions
or
comments.
One
is
the
one
developed
lot
on
this
piece
of
property.
Is
the
bank
that
bank
has
a
drive
through
that
clearly
generates
traffic
in
our
our
traffic
analysis?
Do
we
and
it
isn't
simply
the
number
that
this
project
could
potentially
generate?
It
would
also
be
what
the
delta
is
between
what
is
being
generated
now
and
what
would
be
generated
by
this
building,
because,
right
now
it
is
not
zero
trips
from
this
entire
block.
S
C
So
the
the
the
preliminary
transportation
analysis
that
was
done
in
the
trip
generation
estimates
those
were
based
on
the
the
potential
development
within
each
of
those
scenarios.
So
what
was
being
captured
and
the
results
of
those
scenarios
indicated
that
a
six-story
building,
a
ten-story
building
and
a
17-story
building
that
had
the
the
floor
area
that
that
we
modeled
each
of
those
scenarios
would
would
produce
both
vehicle.
C
S
Okay-
and
my
final
comment
is-
and
this
gets
to
the
road
network-
I
know
we
do
often
do
traffic
counts
for
the
the
clarendon
wilson
pair
there,
but
one
of
the
commenters
in
blind
village
is
correct
about
danville
street
as
being
a
gps
being
directed
traffic
through
there,
and
it's
been
that
way
for
quite
a
long
time.
S
Our
traffic
counts
done
on
streets
like
that
that
we
are
now
fully
aware
are
being
used
by
by
people
as
opposed
to
going
up
beach
or
kirkwood,
and
would
there
be
an
impact
on
streets
like
that?
I
do
think
the
traffic
council
should
be
done
when
I
was
president
of
lion
village,
one
thing
to
work
on
was
getting
four-way
stops
or
or
at
least
better
stop
signs
along
danville
and
key
because
of
accidents
there
and
getting
the
traffic
calming
in
place
along
the
military
too.
S
A
Thank
you
come
strong.
Tell
me,
mr
murphy
anything
further.
C
A
A
V
Thank
you,
I'm
happy
to
get
the
conversation
rolling,
I'm
trying
to
understand
what
the
maximum
density
height
means
for
a
decision
that
we're
making
now.
So,
if
we
say
the
max
height
is
12
stories
or
the
max
height
is
six
stories
or
the
max
height
is
16.
Is
that
the
absolute
maximum
that
could
be
built
or
is
that
the
buy
right
height
and
then,
if
the
applicant
wants
more
than
that,
they
have
to
earn
it
by
providing
more
family
units
or
more
affordable
housing
or
more
tapering?
V
So
if
we
approve
six
tonight
or
if
we
prove
12
tonight,
can
they
actually
get
to
16
if
they
give
us
a
lot
of
stuff
that
we
want
that,
we
feel
like
would
offset
the
or
mitigate
the
the
height
that
we're
getting.
C
Yeah,
thank
you,
commissioner.
Peterson
yeah.
I
think
this
is
an
excellent
question,
an
excellent
point
to
to
raise
this
question
at
this
time.
So
we
in
terms
of
the
overall
structure
we
have.
C
So
the
the
zoning
ordinance
permit
permits
those
heights
with
with
this
study
document
as
it's
currently
developed
staff
is
proposing
a
recommended
maximum
building
height
of
up
to
12
stories.
For
for
any
any
use,
but
the
the
desired
land
uses
a
residential
and
with
ground
for
retail,
with
with
this
study
document
potentially
moving
forward.
What
what
could
happen
is
that
the
study
document
is
adopted
by
the
county
board
as
policy,
so
it
lives
and
exists
in
perpetuity
as
policy
for
the
study
area
and
so
the
recommendations
there
hold
hold
weight
as
policy.
C
C
The
study
document
is
not
regulatory,
whereas
the
zoning
ordinance
is,
and
so
what
what
could
happen
in
a
future
scenario
is
that
a
future
site
plan
applicant
could
could
submit
an
application
with
a
height
that
exceeds
the
recommendation,
recommended
maximum
height
in
the
study
document
and
that
could
that
could
be
discussed
during
the
site
plan
process,
as
it
pertains
to
the
comprehensive
review
of
how
the
the
site
plan
application
conforms
and
and
tries
to
and
and
realize
the
recommendations
in
the
study
document.
C
And
so
then,
if,
if
you
know
the
the
site
plan
could
potentially
move
forward
and
be
considered
by
the
county
board
and
the
county
board
can
weigh
the
the
the
recommendations
in
the
study
document.
As
adopted
policy-
and
you
know
the
the
underlying
regulations
in
the
zoning
ordinance.
A
A
Commissioner
peterson,
if,
if
you're
finished,
I'm
going
to
jump
in
with
it
with
a
question.
But
if
but
I
don't
mean
to
cut
you
off.
V
Well,
no,
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
I
I
think
that
is
very
reassuring,
that
if
we
go
with
the
staff
recommendation
of
medium,
but
we
personally
may
be
comfortable
with
a
little
bit
more
height
that
the
applicant
could
propose
that
by
by
their
zoning
ordinance,
and
then
staff
has
a
little
bit
more
leverage
to
say.
Look.
We
need
that
tapering
so
that
between
12
and
16
feet
from
a
pedestrian
point
of
view,
there's
not
going
to
be
a
big
difference
and
we
need
more
affordable
units
and
we
need
more
family
units.
V
So
I
think
that
you
have
perfectly
answered
my
question
and
I
I'm
sorry
I
I
have
to.
A
Mr,
mr,
mr
whitmore,
I
I
see
that
your
hand
is
up.
I
I
do
plan
on
recognizing
you,
but
I
will
recognize
you
in
turn
and
and
as
we
get
to
the
bottom
of
this
one
particular
topic,
mr
murphy
and-
and
I
think
mr
whitmore,
this
is
along
the
lines
of
what
you
were
getting
at.
What
I
wanna
tease
out
is
is
what
happens?
A
Should
the
study
document,
capital
12
stories
and
the
4.1
submission
is
16..
I
I
please
tell
me
the
story
of
of
of
of
sprc's
of
future
days.
How
does
it
like?
What
does
staff
tell
the
applicant
if
it
goes
to
sprc?
What
is
you
know?
How
does
staff
characterize
the
discrepancy,
then,
between
what
is
hypothetically
adopted
policy
and
and
regulation?
C
Yeah
absolutely
thank
you,
commissioner
weir.
So
what
what
can
happen
is
that
the
study
document
can
be
adopted
as
as
policy.
The
recommendation
for
the
recommended
maximum
height
is
12
stories.
The
underlying
zoning
which
exists
as
regulation
allows
for
up
to
16
stories
a
site
plan.
C
Application
could
potentially
be
submitted
that
exceeds
the
12
stories,
but
cannot
exceed
16
stories
per
the
zoning
ordinance
and
that
that
that
potential
change
in
height
or
from
from
the
the
plan
document
can
really
be
weighed
within
within
the
whole
of
kind
of
what
what
the
site
plan
is
doing
to
achieve.
C
All
of
all
of
the
recommendations
in
the
study
document,
I
think
I
think
what
we've
seen
in
the
past
is
sometimes
site
plans.
Don't
always
achieve
everything
you
know
in
some
areas
they
kind
of
exceed
certain
recommendations
in
a
study
document,
and
so
in
this
sort
of
scenario,
it's
really
the
totality
of
the
site
plan
and
how
does
it?
C
How
does
it
best
exemplify
the
recommendations
in
the
document
the
county
board,
if,
if
a
site
plan
such
as
in
this
hypothetical
scenario,
playing
this
out,
if,
if
the
site
plan
proceeded
to
the
county
board
for
for
review
and
consideration,
the
county
board
would
have
the
discretion
to
consider
taller
heights
as
part
of
its
deliberation.
C
A
Okay,
commissioner,
commissioner
scharle,
I
think
I
want
to
go
to
mr
whitmore
on
this
topic
and
then
go
back
to
you
and
I
recognize
that
that
may
result
in
a
little
bit
more
ping
pong.
But,
mr
whitmore,
I
think
I
wanna.
A
C
It
is
different
there.
There
is
this.
Y
A
Why
don't
I
have
you
proceed,
mr
mr
murphy?
I'm
not
sure
what's
happening.
C
Sure
this
the
study
document
exists
as
as
county
policy,
not
as
then
regulatory
language
that
exists
within
the
zoning
ordinance.
So
there
is
a
distinction
there
that
that's
all
I
wanted
to
raise.
A
Okay,
not
sure
what
happened,
but
my
apologies
for
the
interruption
to
your
to
your
point,
but
I
think
we
can
proceed.
I
hope
mr
buttmore
can
can
we
go
to
you
and
then
we'll
go
to
commissioner
troll.
D
Thanks,
mr
chair,
I
have
to
really
disagree
with
with
that
characterization.
Theoretically,
yes,
this
will
be
policy
versus
law.
That's
in
the
zoning
ordinance
practically
speaking.
There
is
absolutely
no
chance
that
this,
if
it
is
approved
at
12
stories,
that
the
staff
will
even
accept
an
application
for
a
4.1
over
12
stories,
much
less
recommend
approval,
regardless
of
what's
there
and
I'm
going
to
give
you
a
corollary
example.
This
is
tantamount
to
a
sector
plan.
This
is
a
special
general
land
use
planning
process.
D
So
while
there
is
a
distinction
between
what
the
zoning
ordinance
says
and
what
the
glove
study
says,
I
think
it's
a
hundred
percent
wrong
to
say
that
we
are
not
locking
in
a
maximum
height
right
now,
with
with
the
rta
and,
ultimately,
the
glove
study.
That's
adopted,
staff
can
expand
on
that,
but
I
don't
think
that
that
we
can
even
entertain
a
discussion
about
there
being
a
potential
for
higher
heights
if
we
lock
something
in
today.
A
Thank
you,
mr
whitmore.
I
I
might
want
to
drill
down
on
this
further,
but
I
suspect
that
commissioner
schroll
and
guerin
may
also
have
some
of
the
same
questions.
So,
commissioner,
schroll,
thank
you
for
your
patience
and
indulgence
I'll
go
to
you.
W
Yeah,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
you
were
kicking
off
a
discussion
I
wanted
to
have.
So.
Thank
you
for
that,
mr
murphy.
I
want
to
pick
up
on
what
whether
mr
whitmore
left
off,
which
is
my
concern,
is
you
know.
W
His
concern
will
will
4.1
actually
be
accepted
and
you
iterated
or
explained
to
the
chair
that
that
in
theory
that
could
happen
and
that
we
could
consider
this
and
it's
ultimate
ultimately
up
to
the
board
as
long
as
it's
within
the
parameters
set
forth
in
the
zoning
would
love
to
have
you
provide
an
example
where
staff
accepted
a
4.1
that
was
inconsistent
with
the
heights
density
set
forth
in
a
special
glove
study,
or,
as
mr
whitmer
noted
you
know,
other
adopted
county
adopted
plan
guidance.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner,
stroll
so
again
you
know
the
the
practice
is
to
reinforce
adopted
policy
in
a
plan,
but
I
I
just
again
wanna
to
reiterate
that
the
county
board
does
have
within
itself
the
discretion
to
to
consider,
in
this
case
heights
above
what
is
in
an
adopted
plan.
I
think,
in
terms
of
your
I'm
sorry,
your
your
other.
Your
question
really
was
more
focused
on
examples.
Is
that
correct.
W
Yeah,
I
would
like
to
have
examples
where
staff
has
accepted
4.1
that
is
inconsistent
with
special
glove
study
heights
from
a
special
glove
study,
or
you
know
other
adopted
other
adopted
plans.
C
To
to
my
knowledge,
I
I
can't
recall
one
right
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
I
would,
I
would
definitely
need
to
to
go
back.
I
think
I
believe
the
wendy's
site
plan
there
was
a
difference
in
the
height
with
that
one,
but
I
believe
that
there
was
a
note
within
the
plan
that
allowed,
for
that.
I
see.
Miss
smith
has
her
hand
raised.
A
Yeah
I
was
gonna
unless
commissioner
gear,
unless
you
object.
I
think
I
want
to
recognize
miss
smith
here.
Z
Thank
you,
chair,
we're.
I
I
know
that
planning
director
mr
friscorelli
is
on
the
line
and
he
may
have
some
specific
examples,
but
I
just
want
to
reinforce
what
mr
murphy
said
in
in
his
response
that
it
is
our
practice
to
reinforce
our
adopted
policy.
So
you
know:
we've
gone
through
this
planning
process
and
we
feel
like
we're,
making
a
recommendation
for
a
height
limit
of
up
to
12
stories,
which
is
less
than
the
the
full
height
limit
allowed
under
the
zoning.
Z
So
we
would
be
looking
to
reinforce
that
with
any
site
plan
application.
But,
however,
that
is
planning
guidance,
so
the
the
applicant
would
have
the
potential
to
submit
an
application
and
that's
something
that
the
the
county
board
would
have
the
discretion
to
consider.
But
I
would
like
to
turn
to
mr
fusorelli
to
see
if
he's
got
anything
else
to
add
or
any
other
specific
examples
to
the
question.
A
I'm
going
to
go
to
mr
fusorelli,
mr
whitmore.
I
see.
You've
got
your
hand
up
again
I'll,
come
to
you
after
mr
fuzzerelli,
but
I
also
you
know
I
this.
This
has
been
a
productive
discussion
and
I
trusted
will
continue
to
be
a
productive
discussion,
but
what
it
won't
be
is
a
reiteration
of
things
that
have
been
previously
said.
I
have
every
confidence
that
I
won't
be,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
people
know
that
there's
an
expectation
that
we
keep
moving
the
discussion
forward.
A
So
I'm
also
talking
to
myself
in
this
one
trust
me.
I
am
mr
fuzzerelli
all
right.
AA
Thank
you,
chair,
weir
and
good
evening,
commissioners.
I
think
just
two
additional
points
I
would
want
to
add
in
the
context
of
this
consideration.
AA
One
is
just
one
immediate
specific
example
that
does
come
to
mind
where
the
county
had
accepted
a
4.1
site
plan
application
that
actually
needed
a
zoning
ordinance
amendment
to
allow
the
heights
being
requested
was
in
fact
the
central
place
project
part
of
site
plan
335
down
in
rosalind
circa
2006
2007.,
so
that
was
actually
a
site
plan
that
at
the
time
it
was
submitted
it
exceeded
what
would
be
allowed
by
the
seal.
Roslin
zoning
district
staff
had
to
bring
forward
a
zoning
ordinance
amendment,
concurrent
with
the
board's
action
on
that
site
plan.
AA
To
actually
have
the
development
achieve
that
height.
There
may
be
others,
I'm
almost
certain.
There
are
other
examples
since
that
time,
but
that
one
based
on
personal
experience
comes
to
mind
immediately.
AA
Secondly,
I
I
think
a
point
that
would
be
helpful
could
be
helpful,
for
the
commission's
consideration
tonight
is
for
purposes
of
the
rta
for
the
study
documents
right.
What
the
planning
commission
may
recommend
this
evening
will
in
no
means
be
limiting
to
the
board's
final
action
in
september,
that
is
to
say
that
for
purposes
of
the
this
may
be
a
conversation.
What
I'm
trying
to
say
is
this
may
be
a
topic
of
conversation.
AA
We
could
seek
to
add
more
clarity
on
when
we
bring
it
back
in
september,
but
if
the
commission
were
desired
to
inten,
convey
its
recommendations
to
the
board
regarding
heights
one
way
or
the
other
whether
to
support
the
12
stories
or
to
consider
something
higher
or
lower.
There
would
be
an
opportunity
to
kind
of
revisit
and
refresh
this
discussion
in
september
before
the
board
ultimately
adopts
the
study
document.
AA
So
it
is
different
from
the
zoning
ordinance
amendment
in
that
way,
so
that
there
would
be
breath
for
the
board
and
for
the
commission
to
consider
something
in
september.
That
is
an
update,
updated
piece
of
information
from
from
july.
If,
if
that's
helpful,.
A
I
think
so
I
I
might
have
a
follow-up
question
on
that.
One
too,
mr
fusrelli,
as
giron
may
raise
it.
Commissioner,
stroll
you've,
got
your
finger
up.
I'm
gonna
go
to
you
then,
to
mr
whitmore
than
to
commissioner.
W
Guerin
yeah
just
a
couple
things
this
has
been,
as
you
said,
mr
chairman
of
fruitful
discussion,
and
I
appreciate
the
input
from
staff.
Mr
fusreli,
I
do
think
from
my
own
perspective.
It
would
be
useful
probably
to
see
more
analysis
of
16
stories.
W
In
september,
anticipating,
perhaps
a
motion
by
colleagues
to
convey
support
for
that
this
evening.
We
don't
know
how
that
motion
will
go,
but
I
do
think
that
would
be
helpful
for
our
discussion
later
I
for
my
own
purposes
as
well.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
being
as
honest
about
this
process
and
the
4.1
and
staff's
intentions
and
where
they
are
going
to
land
on
planning,
guidance
and
county
board
adopted
guidance
in
the
future.
W
So
if
it's
as
ms
smith
noted
that
staff
would
generally
stand
behind
12
stories,
then
let's,
let's
say
that
and
if
it's
it's
open
and
it's
and
there's
we
can
have
a
conversation.
Then
let's
say
that.
But
let's
be
clear
and
then,
mr
chairman,
I
do
have
a
question:
that's
a
little.
It's
related
to
height,
but
it's
a
little
separate
from
the
current
discussion.
It's
about
shadow
studies
and
whatnot.
So
if
my
colleagues
have
questions
that
are
more
pertinent,
I'll
yield
back
for
the
time
being,.
A
T
D
Thanks,
mr
chair,
you
know,
I
think
the
amount
of
discussion
and
confusion
we're
having
over
this
topic
is
good
and
what
it
means
like
what
what
an
actual
recommendation
on
height
is
going
to
mean
with
this
glove
study
is
good
evidence
that
it's
not
something
that
should
be
baked
in
right
now
that,
at
the
very
least,
there
needs
to
be
clarity
for
the
commission
and
ultimately
for
the
board
before
anything
goes
forward
with
any
kind
of
height
recommendation
beyond.
D
What's
in
the
zoning
ordinance,
I
do
think
that
there
is
still-
and
I
appreciate
this
commissioner
schroll's
comments
about
what
it's
actually
going
to
mean.
If
there's
a
recommendation
for
12
stories,
the
board
can
do
many
things,
but
the
board
is
not
going
to
do
something
that
doesn't
have
the
staff's
recommendation
and
I
don't
see
any
world
where
the
staff
makes
a
recommendation
that
is
not
in
accordance
with
a
height
cap
in
a
globe
study.
D
I,
if
we
are
at
12
stories
and
we're
allowed
to
apply
for
16,
I
will
send
this
commission
the
staff
comment
that
inevitably
will
say
your
application
does
not
comply
with
the
glop
study,
throw
it
out
throw
out
this
hype.
So
I
think
it's
really
important
to
just
keep
that
in
mind
and
let's
be
real
about
what
what
the
results
are
going
to
be.
You
know,
I
think,
if
the
example
we're
looking
at
of
something
being
accepted
that
didn't
comply.
D
His
central
place
is
15
years
old
and
it
still
required
a
text
amendment
that
this
isn't
something
that's
done
very
frequently,
and
it's
not
something
that
I
think
any
of
us
should
hang
our
hats
on
after
spending
three
years
of
studying
this
site
to
then
say
well,
the
applicant
can
apply
for
something
else,
that's
not
in
the
glove
study.
I
just
think
that's
a
bad
outcome
for
everybody,
not
only
for
the
applicant
for
the
staff
and
for
the
community,
not
knowing.
What's
what's
going
to
be
approved
and
what's
going
to
come
forward.
A
Yeah.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
whitmore.
I
am
commissioner
kieran.
You've
been
very
indulgent.
I'm
gonna
go
to
you
at
this
point.
X
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
have
been
patient,
but
I'm
still
a
little
confused.
I
it
feels
like
we
are
very
interested
in
exploring
going
up
to
16
with
some
sort
of
amenities
or
mitigating
features.
I'm
I'm
confused.
If
we
recommend
medium
tonight,
can
we
actually
get
up
to
high
in
september?
I'm
I'm
really.
I'm
sorry.
I
feel,
like
I've
lost
the
train
here
on
that,
and
I
also
just
wanted
to
have
someone
confirm,
because
my
understanding
is
once
we
change
this.
It
goes
with
the
land
for
good
or
for
bad.
X
So
I
believe
this
is
true.
If
mr
whitmore's
client
changes
and
someone
else
gets
this,
they
may
be
able
to
go
up
to
16
or
they
may
be
limited
to
12..
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
all
had
that
same
understanding
because
it's
been
a
while
since
pc
considered
one
of
these-
and
I
think
that's
a
really
important
feature
to
consider
that
this
changes
the
options,
regardless
of
who
goes
forward
and
develops
it.
So
those
are
my
questions.
I'll
go
off
camera
to
take
the
responses.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Gearin
to
your
first
question
about
the
glut
designation.
So
the
the
request
to
advertise
tonight
is:
is
twofold?
Really
two
public
hearings,
one
on
the
the
study
document
which
would
occur
potentially
in
september,
the
second
public
hearing
for
a
date
to
be
determined
in
the
future
and
concurrent
with
a
site
plan.
Application
would
be
a
potential
glup
amendment,
and
so
the
glop
amendment
would
that
that
would
essentially
exist
and
be
approved
for
that
feature.
C
Site
plan
so
in
in
this
case,
staff
is
recommending
medium
office
apartment
hotel.
If
the
planning
commission
recommended
and
and
the
county
board,
then
recommend
approved
an
authorized
advertisement
of
a
public
hearing
for
medium
office
department
hotel
that
that
that
recommendation
would
would
continue
forward,
I
I
believe
it
I
believe
in
other
staff
potentially
can
weigh
in
and
confirm.
C
But
if,
if
an
alternate,
pull-up
designation
were
to
to
be
considered
beyond
that
point
that
there
would
be
there
would
be
a
need
to
re-advertise
for
that
other
glove
designation
and
then,
in
regards
to
your
second
question,
about
the
special
glove
study,
the
recommendations
associated
with
it.
My
understanding
is
yes,
the
the
the
special
glip
study
document,
if
it
were
to
be
adopted,
would
exist
as
county
policy
for
the
study
area,
regardless
of
who
the
future,
who,
who
a
future
landowner
or
site
plan
applicant,
is.
X
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
murphy.
Mr
chair
still
not
quite
sure
on
this,
so
if
we
recommend
the
medium
oah
tonight
does
that
allow
the
applicant
to
go
up
to
the
16
stories,
even
though
staff
is
recommending
12.
C
So,
with
medium
office
apartment
hotel,
the
zoning
district
that
that
is
found
with
medium
is
co,
2.5
that
district
allows
for
heights
up
to
16
stories,
and
and
so
that
that
that
zoning
district,
the
that
regulation
allows
for
heights
up
to
16
stories.
If
that
answers
your
question.
X
A
Thanks,
please
thank
you,
please,
mr
moore.
D
Thanks
thanks
mr
chair
and
thanks
commissioner
here,
I
just
think
it's
really
important
to
put
a
fine
point
on
what
mr
murphy
said,
that
if
the
staff
recommendation
as
set
forth
is
adopted,
we
will
not
have
c02.5
heights.
We
will
have
a
cap
of
12
stories,
so
I
just
think
it's
important
for
the
commission
to
understand
that,
in
order
to
allow
this
to
go
forward,
add
a
c02.5
height
without
the
12-story
cap,
there
must
be
a
motion
to
amend
the
staff
recommendation.
D
A
Whitmore
I
what
I
hear
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
what
you're
saying
as
counsel
for
the
applicant,
that
that
that
the
the
glup
designation
would
permit
zoning
districts
that,
on
under
under
the
authority
of
the
zoning
districts,
would
allow
16
stories.
But
your
concern
is
that
the
glove
study
would
implement
a
separate
policy
that
would
further
restrict
the
independent
of
the
zoning
district
would
further
restrict
what
can
be
considered
in
on
this
parcel
is
that
is.
Is
that
a
fair
way
of
characterizing?
Your
concern.
D
That's
it.
You
said
it
much
more
succinctly
than
I
have
and
I
would
direct
folks
to
take
a
look
at
the
glut
map.
The
glut
map
has
20
plus
notes
on
it,
with
additional
restrictions
that
are
set
on
different
parts
of
the
county
and
and
those
yeah
they're,
not
the
zoning
ordinance
but
their
de
facto
law.
You
can
be
guaranteed
that
any
recommendation
for
a
site
plan
is
going
to
take
those
into
account,
and
that
is
where
that
12-story
restriction
will
go.
D
If
this
is
adopted
with
the
staff
recommendation
but
chair,
where
you're
absolutely
right
about
the
the
distinction
there
between
the
zoning
ordinance
and
the
the
additional
cap
on
the
heights.
A
C
Thank
you,
commissioner
weir.
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
with
mr
whitmore's
comments.
Staff
is
not
through
this
special
lip
study
process.
Staff
is
not
proposing
to
add
a
note
to
the
glup
map.
The
general
land
use
plan
map
that
would
provide
or
restrict
maximum
heights
that
that
is
not
something
that's
being
proposed.
What
is
being
proposed
is
the
potential
public
hearings
for
the
adoption
of
the
study
document
as
county
policy
and
advertisement
for
a
public
hearing
for
a
future
go
up
amendment,
but
not
an
amendment
to
the
glup
map.
C
That
would
add
a
note.
I
just
want
to
clarify.
A
C
There
are
two
public
hearings,
one
on
the
study
document,
which
would
occur
in
september.
The
second
hearing
would
be
on
the
go
up
amendment
to
occur,
concurrent
with
a
site
plane
application
absolutely.
A
However,
this
is,
I
believe
mr
whitmore's
point
is
that
that
the
policy,
as
included
in
the
glup
study
right
and
that's
what
this
rta
is
for,
would
put
a
separate
policy
that,
in
theory,.
A
Whether
there
is
consensus
among
the
consumer,
whether
there
is
whether
the
commissioners
are
have
a
consensus
about
how
comfortable
we
are
that
that
application
would
actually
be
accepted
and
sent
on
to
sprc
or
and
and
with
the
note
that
it's
inconsistent
with
policy
or
just
not
accepted.
I
think
that
that's
where
we're
at.
I,
commissioner,
I
have
promised
commissioner,
tell
me
that
I
was
going
to
get
to
him.
So,
commissioner,
tell
me
I'm
going
to
go
to
you,
commissioner
gear
and
your
hand
is
still
up
if
we
need
to
come
back
to
you.
S
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
guess
what
I
want
to
emphasize
and
note
is
that
this
is
an
rta,
so
I
want
to
be
sure
that
we,
as
the
planning
commission
and
our
recommendations
to
the
county
board,
don't
box
them
in.
At
this
point,
I
would
want
us
to
have
enough
flexibility
that
we
can
fully
discuss
appropriately
the
three
scenarios:
6
12
and
16..
S
I
think
it's
also
important
that
we
do
this
for
the
sake
of
the
neighborhoods
around
that
are
have
been
participating
in
this,
that,
regardless
of
what
height
comes
out,
they
have
to
have
assurances
that
that's
what
it's
going
to
be.
So
if
it's
12
it's
going
to
be
12.,
even
though,
theoretically,
under
some
scenario,
you
know
you
could
actually
go
ahead
and
go
to
16,
it's
not
going
to
happen,
and
that
shouldn't
happen,
because,
if
we're
saying
12,
we
should
mean
12..
S
You
know
and-
and
I
think
that's
only
fair
to
the
surrounding
neighborhoods.
I've
been
through
enough
of
these
special
glove
studies,
where
we
have
put
caps
on
height,
despite
what
the
zoning
ordinance
would
otherwise
say,
we
come
out
of
washington
kirkwood.
We
did
that
down
at
the
motel,
the
best
western
site.
We
have
height
caps
there
now.
Maybe
that
is
because
there's
a
note
in
the
club.
That's
fine!
That's
different!
I
understand
that,
but
we
are
giving
certainty
there.
S
Despite
what
the
zoning
ordinance
says,
people
are
going
to
see
this
the
same
way
whether
we
have
a
node
in
the
club
or
not.
So
I
think
we
have
to
be
strong
when
we
go
forward
whatever
we
do
is
going
to
be
the
answer
that
people
can
rely
on
and
that's
why
I
want
to
have
flexibility
in
going
forward.
S
So
when
we're
discussing
this
in
september,
we
can
talk
about
all
three
scenarios
I
will
be
making
a
motion
later
on.
That
would
allow
us
to
do
that
that
we
would
include
the
16
stories
as
part
of
that
discussion.
That
said,
you
know
I
just
want
to
sort
of
give
that
as
fair
warning.
Thank
you.
A
Tell
me,
commissioner
schroll
I
I
I
think
I
I
think
that
we
are
I'm
not
addressing
your
commissioner's
role
generally
to
my
colleagues,
I
think
that
we
are
very
near
to
a
point
where
everything
that
needs
to
be
said
has
been
said
on
this
topic,
and
I
hope
that
we
don't
require
a
synthesis
of
it,
although
if
anyone
needs
that,
of
course,
I
am
happy
to
keep
us
on
this
point
to
raise
any
questions,
should
anyone
still
have
them,
but
christian
schroeder,
this
isn't
direct
that
wasn't
directed
to
you.
W
Great,
thank
you,
mr
chairman
yeah.
This
is
a
it's
on
hype,
but
a
slightly
different
topic.
So,
mr
murphy,
a
question
about
the
shadow
studies
that
were
conducted.
W
I
was
wondering
in
the
staff
report
on
page
13
steph
note
that
the
c2
zoning
districts
north
of
the
subject
parcel
while
their
c2
they
could
be
allowed
to
redevelop
under
uk
mud
up
to
45
feet,
and
I'm
wondering
if
the
staff's
shadow
analysis
took
that
into
consideration
for
the
shadows
that
that
might
cast
on
a
json
single
family
homes.
C
Sure,
thank
you,
commissioner
schroll.
So,
with
our
shadow
studies,
we
we
looked
at
really
just
what
what
the
development
looks
like
within
the
study
area.
You
know
from
from
the
six
stories
up
to
17
stories.
With
with
the
surrounding
context.
We
we
utilize
the
existing
context
to
really
understand
what
what
that
quote
unquote.
Worst
case
scenario
could
potentially
be,
as
you
noted,
north
of
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard,
the
the
low
rise
commercial
buildings.
C
There
are
one
to
three
stories,
so
we
we
wanted
to
utilize
that
to
understand
really
kind
of
what
what
the
potential
impact
could
be
from
kind
of
the
conservative
point
of
view,
understanding
that,
as
you
noted
things
could
change
redevelopment
could
occur
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard
and
that
could
could
potentially,
you
know,
influence
what
what
shadow
projections
look
like
in
the
future.
W
Great
and
understanding
you're,
looking
at
the
background
conditions
from
your
understanding
of
a
45-foot
building,
would
you
know
not
not
seeing
a
4.1,
not
knowing
what
what
would
would
occur
there
does
steph
know
whether
that
the
redevelopment
in
the
north
side
would
cast
shadows
on
its
own,
or
was
that
something
that
stopped
didn't?
Look
at
so.
W
Okay,
that's
fair
all
right!
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
Thank
you,
mr
commissioner
troll,
mr
murphy,
commissioner,
sally
to
you.
AB
Thank
you,
chair
we're
and
thank
you
staff
in
particular,
I'm
I
really
enjoyed
reading
through
this
report
and
I
think
the
studies
are
really
good.
So
I
commend
you
on
a
well
done
study.
I
particularly
appreciate
the
heights
and
the
massing
being
done
in
that
sort
of
clay,
yellow,
which
is
really
good
to
keep
us
from
being
distracted
from
some
of
the
more
refined
renderings
that
we
get.
Sometimes,
where
you
you
know,
it's
a
little
harder
to
see
just
the
sheer
massing.
AB
So
I
I
just
really
appreciated
the
study
and
the
shadow
studies,
the
massing
and
all
that
being
done
on
this
sort
of
clay
sort
of
medium.
Almost
it
was
really
good.
The
other.
The
one
question
I
had
was
there
was
a
note
about
green
space
only
on
the
rooftop.
I
wonder
if
you
could
clarify
that
and
how
that
would
be
used
relative
to
the
height
and
are
we
talking
about
trees
like
what
are
we
talking.
AB
C
No
absolutely
thank
you,
commissioner
starling,
so
this
kind
of
gets
into
both
the
land
use
and
building
design
and
the
public
space
recommendations
with
the
public
space
recommendations.
C
We're
recommending
public
space
at
ground
level
be
provided
along
along
clarendon
boulevard,
in
addition
to
to
that
public
space
staff
receive
feedback
via
the
engagement
session
and
and
the
the
yeah
really
the
engagement
session
in
the
lrpc
meetings.
Regarding
you
know:
potential
usage
of
rooftop
space
for
for
public
space
and
in
in
in
in
developing
those
that
recommendation,
the
thought
was
on
on
the
not
on
the
kind
of
the
podium.
If
you
will,
you
know,
adjacent
and
very
close
to
ground
level.
C
Potentially,
some
rooftop
space
could
be
utilized
for
public
space
and
then,
through
the
course
of
this
study
process,
additional
feedback
was
received
via
the
the
public
feedback
opportunity
to
review
the
the
previous
draft
of
the
study
document
that
that
reiterated
that
that,
if,
if
that
recommendation
were
to
be
included
in
the
study
document
that
it
that
we
ensure
that
the
public
that
that
space,
that
rooftop
space
be
be
utilized
as
true
public
space
versus
a
commercial
use,
let's
say
or
something
like
that,
and
and
then
that
space
should
should
incorporate
green
elements
to
biophilic
elements.
C
Design
elements
potentially
to
to
add
add
to
the
enhance
a
future
development,
as
opposed
to
utilizing
it
utilizing
rooftop
space
for
a
commercial
use.
Let's
say
and
that
again
that
that
recommendation
is
geared
more
toward
the
the
podium.
If
you
will,
as
opposed
to
the
top
of
the
building
passing.
AB
AB
First
of
all,
concur
with
the
sentiment
that
you
just
expressed,
and
then
I
would
almost
say
that
we
might
want
to
clarify
a
little
bit
on
the
language
to
make
sure
that
the
public,
because
I
think
you
guys
are
pretty
good
about
using
public
space
versus
open
space.
So
I
appreciate
that
and
I
can't
find
it
now-
I'm
looking
for
it,
but
if
you
could
just
make
sure
that
that
last
point
that
it's
for
public
use
is
really
highlighted
and
iterated.
I
would
really
appreciate
that.
AC
Okay,
fellow
commissioners,
I
am
jumping
in
for
commissioner
weir
who's
having
some
audio
problems.
So
are
there
any
other
questions
on
messing
and
density
or
any
other
comments
from
the
commission
on
these
issues?.
AC
Seeing
nothing
I
am
going
to
turn
to
commissioner
bagley
for
a
motion.
I
understand,
commissioner,
and
tell
me
also
might
want
to
jump
in
here
too,
but
let
me
go
to
commissioner
bagley.
First.
T
W
AC
Was
that
commissioner
schwell?
Yes,
okay,
thank
you
any
additional
discussion.
Commissioner
bagley
did
you
want
to
speak
to
your
motion.
AC
Thanks
for
that,
okay,
so
why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
go
down
the
vote?
I
don't
have
the
order
in
the
way
that
commissioner
weir
generally.
S
Put
my
motion
out
there,
so
we
have
the
full
full
everything
that
would
be
being
looked
at.
Okay
by.
AC
That
so
I'm
gonna
what
we
have
a
second
do
we
have
to
vote
on
this
motion
now,
or
can
we
go
ahead
and
move
forward
with
your
emotion?
At
the
same
time,.
W
So,
commissioner
patel
I
you
can
always
entertain
an
other
discussion
or
intervening
emotions.
So
well
not
always,
but
in
this
case
you
can.
AC
S
You
can
hear
me
see
me
okay,
because
I'm
having
problems,
I
move
that
the
planning
commission
recommend
that
the
request
to
advertise
include
consideration
at
future.
Public
hearings
of
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board
meetings
of
the
maximum
earned,
heightened
density
allowable
under
co,
2.5
and
beyond
and
beyond
that
recommended
in
the
proposed
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use,
study,
plan,
study
document,
okay,
commissioner,.
AC
S
This
does
not,
I
think,
contradict
the
two
main
motions,
and
this
would
simply
ensure
that,
at
our
future
meetings,
both
hours
in
the
county
board
that
we
will
be
able
to
fully
discuss
and
consider
all
three
scenarios
and
for
that
matter,
whatever
would
legally
be
allowed
under
co
2.5,
which
is
being
recommended
by
as
as
being
zoning
for
this
under
the
change.
The
change
to
the
globe.
AC
AC
Did
any
other
commissioner
want
to
speak
on
this
particular
motion?
Commissioner
bagley.
U
Thank
you,
madam
vice
chair.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
that
by
our
asking
for
flexibility
that
we
are
not
necessarily.
U
S
AC
Okay,
so
I
so,
commissioner
where's
audio
has
been
fixed,
so
I'm
gonna
pass
back
to
commission
ware
since
he's
got
the
list
of
people
and
how
they
vote.
Commission.
Where
can
you
now
do
the
vote
for
us.
A
Madam
chair,
my
apologies
to
my
colleagues
for
my
audio
issues
this
evening.
I
think
that
I've
got
them
sorted
out
by
splitting
the
audio
between
my
phone
and
my
computer,
just
so
that
I
have
my
my
head
on
straight.
A
A
Okay
and
and.
A
A
Yes,
okay.
Is
there
anyone
who
wishes
to
speak
to
the
commissioner
tell
me
motion
to
amend
before
I
call
the
role
and,
and
actually
let
me
let
me
just
because
I
was
doing
one
final
fixing
thing.
Commissioner
bagley
your
question
has
been
addressed.
To
your
satisfaction.
Is
that
correct.
A
Commissioner,
peterson
your
hand
is
up.
Did
you
want
to
speak
to
the
to
the
motion
to
commissioner
tommy's
motion.
V
Well,
I
I
think
I'm
confused,
because
somebody
said
that
the
motions
don't
contradict
one
another,
but
I
thought
they
did
because
commissioner
bagley's
motion
says
to
support
the
staff's
recommendation
for
medium
and
then
I
think
commissioner
land
tell
me
recommendation
is
to
give
us
the
flexibility
to
talk
more,
which
would
then
say
no
we
need
to
so
I
guess
I
wasn't
sure
if
it
would
be,
if
I
would
be
contradictory
if
I
voted
yes
for
both
of
them,
because
I
would
like
to
continue
this
more
open
conversation,
which
I
thought
meant
that
I
have
to
say
no
to
the
staff
motion.
V
A
Yeah
and
I'll
just
weigh
in
you
know
in
my
understanding,
is
that,
as
the
chair
commissioner
peterson,
is
that
that
the
motions
are
not
contradictory
to
the
extent
that
what
what
commissioner
lantomy's
motion
is
doing,
as
as
commissioner
bagley
asked
or
stated
in
asking
for
clarification,
is,
is
simply
expanding.
A
Our
recommendation
to
the
board
to
to
advertise
hearings
at
up
to
16
stories
to
allow
effectively
to
allow
the
fuller
conversation
to
continue,
rather
than
precluding,
based
on
the
rta,
considering
a
policy
of
of
16
stories.
So
I
don't
that
may
or
may
not
be
redundant
to
what
commissioner
land
tell
me
has
said.
My
apologies.
If
so,
commissioner
schroll.
W
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
The
only
thing
to
add
I
think
to
what
you've
just
explained
is
that
as
the
head
of
the
planning
department,
mr
fusrelli
noted
as
this
is
policy,
we
have
greater
flexibility
here
to
consider
amendments
to
the
to
the
plan,
guidance
and
so.
W
They
wouldn't
be
as
conflictual
as
it
as
it
would
have
been
had
it
been
a
zoning
ordinance
amendment
where
we
would
probably
need
to
be
a
bit
more
specific.
A
AB
I
I
think
I
think
commissioner
troll
kind
of
answered
my
question.
I'm
struggling
a
little
bit
understanding.
What
commissioner
tell
me
motion:
what's
the
problem
that
it's
trying
to
fix,
I
I
don't
see
from
the
the
first
motion
that
the
the
conversation
about
zoning
is
excluded.
Am
I
and
again
I
I
apologize.
AB
I
have
a
hard
time
following
some
of
this
sort
of
policy
language,
but
so
I'm
a
little
unsure
as
to
what
the
problem
is
that
we're
trying
to
fix
with
commissioner
lentelme's
motion
relative
to
what
the
main
motion
is
stating
and
what
is
being
excluded
from
what
language
is
excluding.
What
mr
luntelman
is
trying
to
do.
Is
it
just
a
highlight
of
this
sort
of
option
flexibility
thing,
or
are
we
actually
sort
of
solving
a
problem.
A
One
is
the
zoning
ordinance
right
and
that
is
also
guided
by
the
glup,
which
delimits
what
zoning
districts
are
allowable
and
then
the
third
is
the
study
right
and
so
by
you're,
right
that
there
is
no
that
there's
no
debate
or
issue
about
what
the
zoning
district
is
or
what
it
would
do.
It
would
allow
up
to
16
stories.
There's
no
debate
about
what
the
glop
is.
That
is
recommended
by
the
study.
A
What
what
we
are
discussing
is
whether
or
not
the
study
itself
should
should
be
advertised
to
permit
up
to
16
stories
right,
because
the
study
is
basically,
as
I
think,
we've
under.
As
I
think
we've
heard
the
study
the
study
throttles,
what
the
zoning
ordinance,
what
the
districts
permitted
under
the
glock
designation
would
permit.
And
that's
that's
what
we're
you
know.
That's
the
the
discussion
is.
A
Do
we
only
recommends
that
the
board
direct
authorize
advertisements
of
of
this
study
up
to
12
stories,
or
do
we
recommend
that
the
board
authorize
advertisements
of
the
study
in
a
way
that
would
not
throttle
what
the
what
the
recommended
glup
and
zoning
districts
would
permit?
If
anyone
wants
to
or
needs
to
correct
me
on
that,
please
do
so
and
I
do
see
a
hand
up.
A
I
I,
however,
don't
recognize.
I
don't
you'll
have
to
forgive
me,
sir.
I
I
just
don't
recognize
the
name
from.
Y
I
think
yeah
I'm
in
place
for
lisa
chavez
she
couldn't
make
it
tonight.
I
just
wanted
to
say
I
support
commissioner
ellen.
Tell
me
motion.
That's
all
yeah.
A
Thank
you
just
a
reminder
that
to
others
that,
right
now
that
the
discussion
is
is
with
the
commission,
but
if
there's.
P
A
AB
Sorry
so
quick,
quick
follow
up
so
we're
committing
to
something
that
has
not
been
studied
right
because
we
don't
have
any
like
analysis
on
the
16
that
we
could
include,
and
it's
just
from
a
point
of
understanding
what
it
is
that
we're
sort
of
you
know
recommending
without
having
looked
at
it,
it's
sort
of
where
I'm
I'm
concerned,
but
I
I
guess
that's
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
You
had
your
hand
up,
so
I
I
think
that
you
might
have
also
been
hoping
to
respond
to
commissioner
sally.
If
I,
if
that's
the,
I
hope
that
that's
the
case,
but.
W
W
W
Nor
does
it
really
go
into
the
great
detail
about
six,
but
what
I
think,
commissioner,
what
tell
me
is
trying
to
do
is
to
convey
to
staff
and
the
board
that
in
september
we
would
want
to
see
that
so
we
could
have
a
fulsome
discussion
of
those
options
and,
as
mr
fucerelli
noted
staff
could
do
that
and
that
this
is
our
opportunity
at
the
rta
to
really
say
here's
what
we
want.
W
We
can
kind
of
go
outside
the
bounds,
a
little
bit
and
still
be
square
with
the
law
in
that
regard,
and
so
we're
just
asking
for
more
information
so
that
when
we
circle
back
to
this
in
september
september,
7th,
it
seems
that
we
would
be
able
to
consider
more
things
at
that
time.
We're
not
committing
ourselves
to
anything
and
to
members
of
the
public
who
are
hearing
this
and
might
be
scared
that,
oh,
no,
now
we're
going
to
16.
W
A
Any
other
anyone
else
wish
to
be
heard
on
or
have
questions
on
this
motion
now
I'll,
just
I'll
recognize
myself
to
say,
I
intend
to
support
it.
If
anyone
else
wants
to
speak
to
it
or
or
a
guest,
then
you're
welcome
to
do
so
at
this
point
among
among
the
commission,
so.
P
A
Sorry
bear
with
me
for
one
second
colleagues:
I
will
call
the
role
commissioner
bagley
we'll
start
with
you.
U
X
S
P
M
W
A
Seven
to
zero
and
just
a
reminder
that
you
know
it's
not
seven
to
zero
to
one.
It's
it's
seven
to
zero,
the
effect
of
an
extent,
an
abstention
changes,
the
it
only
changes
the
denominator
so
so
that
so
the
motion
carries.
Then
I
believe
we
are
back
to
the
this
is
where
my
audio
was
was
failing.
So
I
believe
we're
back
to
commissioner.
Bagley's
first
motion
is
that:
can
I
get
a
confirmation
on
that.
A
The
main
motion
has
amended,
but
commissioner
bagley
did
you
not
send
out
two
motions
or
did
they
get
moved
together.
A
You
only
read
the
first,
so
we
have
not
yet
come
to
the
second
one,
okay,
great
so,
okay,
now
I've
got
my
head
on
completely
straight.
So
then
we
are
now
at
commissioner
bagley's
motion
has
amended
and
if,
if
my
colleagues
can
just
remind
me,
if
anyone
who
did
commissioners
role,
did
you
second,
this
one
as
well.
P
A
I'm
sorry
I'm
calling
call.
Let
me
let
me
back
up.
Is
there
anyone
who
wishes
to
be
recognized
to
speak
in
support
or
opposed,
or
regarding
this
motion,
as
amended.
P
P
P
AC
W
A
U
Yes,
I
move
that
the
planning
commission
recommend
the
county
board
adopt
the
attached
resolution
to
authorize
advertisement
attachment
3
of
future
public
hearings
by
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board
at
a
time,
concurrent,
with
consideration
of
associated
rezoning
and
site
plan.
Applications
to
consider
a
glup
amendment
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office,
apartment
hotel
for
the
area
located
on
the
block
bounded
by
wilson,
boulevard,
north
cleveland
street
clarendon
boulevard
and
north
danville
street.
As
shown
in
attachment
four.
A
W
A
A
Are
there
any
other
questions
regarding
this
motion
hearing
none?
I
am
going
to
proceed
to
calling
the
role
question
vaguely.
S
O
P
W
A
Commissioner
is
absent.
I
vote
I
as
well
motion
carries
eight
to
zero.
Thank
you,
commissioner
bagley
for
shepherding
this.
Thank
you
to
my
colleagues
for
your
thoughtful
consideration
of
it.
I
also
thank
you
to
mr
murphy
and
other
members
of
the
county
staff
and
to
the
applicant.
I
I
believe,
unless
anyone
has
anything
to
add
that
this
resolves
that
this
disposes
of
this
item
is
that
correct
amount
of
quirk.
A
Q
B
Yeah,
so
the
second
item
on
the
agenda
tonight
is
an
info
item
related
to
an
update
on
the
commercial
resiliency,
and
we
have
jill
hunger
and
mark
mccully
from
county
staff
here.
To
give
you
an
update.
AC
AC
T
AC
Great
just
thank
you
again.
Thank
you
so
much
jill
hunger
with
cphd
I'm
joined
here
with
mark
macaulay
from
aed
he's
going
to
help
me
out.
If
I
get
into
a
pinch,
but
really
we
wanted
to
present
to
you
something
regarding
the
commercial
market
resiliency
and
in
particular
some
zoning
and
planning
strategies.
AC
So
one
I
just
want
you
to
recognize
that
this
came
from
a
county
manager
initiative.
He
presented
this
as
part
of
his
manager's
report
to
our
county
board
in
on
april
26th
and
at
that
time,
sort
of
a
robust
conversation
with
our
county
board,
and
it
was
endorsed
by
the
county
board
to
you
know,
asking
the
manager
to
move
forward
with
what
we
will
be
presenting
to
you,
and
we
have
made
some
strides,
but
I
think
I
want
to
set
the
stage
to
sort
of
what
is
this
commercial
market
resiliency?
AC
What
we
really
want
to
do
is
have
some
targeted
efforts
to
support
our
robust
commercial,
real
estate
market,
ensuring
our
fiscal
balance
with
commercial
and
residential,
also
encouraging
our
private
sector,
innovations
that
we're
seeing
and
that
we're
trying
to
draw
in
as
well
as
entrepreneurship,
including
an
expanding
consumer
choice
and
ensuring
a
dynamic
housing
market
and,
above
all,
ensuring
that
we
maintain
our
great
and
sustainable
place
of
arlington
and
then
and
then
the
question
is
we:
we
have
this,
you
know
commercial
market
resiliency
and
why
now-
and
it's
a
lot
of
it
is
we
are
experiencing
rapid
shifts.
AC
I
think
a
lot
was
accelerated
by
what
we
saw
with
with
kovid
our
economic
models
that
impact
land
use
have
been
changing,
but
where
and
how
we
work
have
changed.
Just
general
consumer
behavior
and
expectations
around
that
behavior
of
what
what
people
want.
Some
of
our
business
practice,
innovations
and
and
the
well-defined
land
uses
and
based
on
this
is
defining
the
need.
So
I
think
what
we're
trying
to
achieve
with
this
is
more
dynamic
planning
and
zoning
strategies.
AC
I
think
rightfully
so
our
our
zoning
ordinance
is
a
little
bit
more
static,
sets
our
it's
our
regulatory
tone,
but
we're
seeing
uses
and
an
environment
that's
becoming
more
and
more
dynamic.
And
how
do
we
capture
that
to
be
able
to
compete
both
regionally
and
nationally?
AC
So
when
looking
at
all
of
that,
you
know
how
do
we
start
defining
some
successes
and
what
our
desired
outcomes
are.
So
I
think
a
lot
of
those-
and
some
of
this
is
actually
stemming
from-
I
think,
conversations
that
you've
had
as
a
as
a
commission
shared
with
our
county
board
members
shared
with
staff
as
sort
of
a
more
streamlined
land
use,
approval
process,
modernized,
land
use,
regulate,
regulations
to
accommodate
desired
established
and
emerging
uses
in
arlington.
AC
I
think
you
you
tackled
a
lot
of
this
with
ground
floor
uses,
for
example,
along
columbia,
pike,
limiting
some
of
the
items
with
county
board
purview
to
those
with
the
greatest
potential
impact
to
our
community,
and
by
doing
all
of
this,
we're
able
to
prioritize
our
limited
staff
resources
on
others
more
complex
work,
so
we're
looking
at
this
and
sort
of
saying
hey.
Are
there
some
quick
uses
that
we
can?
AC
We
can
look
at
and
it's
sort
of
within
a
six-month
time
frame,
looking
at
some
draft
criteria
of
little
to
no
identifiable
impacts
to
the
community,
they've,
all
or
they've
already
been
considered
through
past
processes,
as
I
alluded
to
the
ground
floor,
uses
along
columbia,
pike
or
they
might
be
minor
tweaks
to
already
approved
uses.
So
a
couple
of
them.
These
micro
fulfillment
centers
food
delivery,
animal
boarding,
the
education
and
university
uses
usually
on
upper
floors
of
an
office
building,
flex,
spaces
maker
spaces.
Urban
agriculture
distilleries
and
edge
data
centers.
AC
So,
with
all
of
this
in
mind,
looking
at
what
are
what
might
be
some
of
the
proposed
changes
and
we've
placed
them
into
four
buckets,
this
presentation
is
really
focusing
on
sort
of
those.
First,
three
buckets
of
you
know:
how
do
we
modernize
our
regulations,
practices
and
processes
for
new
uses
in
commercial
buildings
in
our
ground
floor
in
the
upper
floors?
AC
How
do
we
consider
new
uses
in
looking
at
our
use
categories,
ensuring
that
we
do
have
internal
conver
coordination
and
then
how
do
we
have
the
external
process
and
then
the
types
of
entitlements
and
it's
by
right,
site
plan
special
exception,
use,
permit,
etc.
This
other
category
is
also
talking
about
other
process
changes
and
that's
where
looking
at
you
know,
could
there
be
omnibus
site
plan
amendments
to
accommodate
something
looking
at
our
standard
conditions,
matt
pfeiffer
and
if
you're
on
this
call,
I'm
sorry
to
bring
that
up.
AC
It
might
be
coming
from
research
that
we're
doing
that.
We
hear
something
that
you
hear
something
our
manager
hears,
something
like
what
about
this
use
and
then
four
sort
of
the
business
requests
and
either
that
might
be
a
business
that
or
a
tenant
that's
coming
to
us
or
our
colleagues
in
economic
development,
specifically
our
business
investment
group
they're
on
the
street
and
they're
hearing
people
that
are
interested
in
trying
to
figure
like
well.
How
do
we?
AC
How
do
we
work
in
arlington,
so
this
rapid
response
team
would
really
look
at
this
and,
like
one
can
be
accommodated
in
our
zoning
ordinance
or
not,
and
then
how
might
we
be
able
to
do
it
check
in
with
our
zoning
administrator
apply
a
criteria
of
you
know.
Can
we
do
this
quickly?
Is
this
actually
a
little
bit
more
of
the
nimble
process
or
or
should
this
be
a
nuanced
process?
And
what
do
I
mean
by
that
and
the
idea
is
looking
at
our
zoning
ordinance
amendments
or
policy
changes?
AC
So
some
of
these
quick
projects
that
we're
looking
at
about
a
four
to
six
months,
again
very
low
impact,
for
example
this
and
I'll
talk
about
it
soon
in
micro,
fulfillment
centers
we're
looking
at
a
very
broad
request
to
advertise,
going
forward
with
a
targeted
engagement
and
then
going
into
a
county
board
action.
That
nimble
is
going
to
take
a
little
bit
longer
between
six
to
nine
months,
again,
sort
of
a
broader
rta
and
then
the
targeted
engagement
in
the
county
board
action
and
then
the
third
one.
AC
AC
So
it's
going
to
be
a
little
longer
time,
we'll
have
an
enhanced
engagement
up
front,
we'll
have
the
refined
request
to
advertise
and
then
going
into
a
county
board
action
so
again
we're
trying
to
to
tranch
these
and
and
prioritize
move
easy
things
through
as
quickly
as
possible
and
and
then
and
then
paste
them
out
and
managing
both
your
your
time
wisely
and
staff
time
wisely.
AC
AC
So
this
quick
is
the
micro
fulfillment
uses
where
the
activity
is
internal
to
the
building
and
then
all
the
way
up
to
a
nuanced
approach
where
it
could
be
a
larger
fulfillment
activity
such
as
a
grocery
store
like
a
full-size
grocery
store
that
wants
to
do
predominantly
delivery
as
an
activity.
AC
So
our
initial
pilot
that
we
are
working
on
is
this
micro
fulfillment
use.
So
it's
where
the
activity
is
generally
internal
to
the
building.
Lots
of
the
deliveries
are
by
foot
and
bike,
so
we're
taking
it
forward
a
request
to
advertise
to
our
county
board
a
very
broad
request
to
advertise.
AC
We're
going
to
you
know
we
want
to
define
it,
we
want
to
categorize
it
and
we
want
it
in
all
of
these
different
use
categories
and
we'll
have
some
use
standards,
but
we're
not
defining
all
of
that,
because
then
we'll
be
going
into
this
targeted
engagement
going
to
zoco,
and
then
the
planning,
commission
and
county
board.
So.
T
B
AC
Pilot
we're
going
to
see
how
it
works
so
bear
with
us,
as
as
we
do
this,
but
I
won't
say:
that's
the
only
one
I
you
know
you
saw
the
apple
tree
and
I
just
want
everybody
to
know.
There
are
other
uses
to
be
further
analyzed
by
staff,
and
this
is
sort
of
in
their
calendar
year.
22-23
and
a
lot
of
these
are
falling
out
on
the
the
broader
planning
work
plan
that
you've
seen,
and
these
include
the
institutional
and
child
care.
AC
One
is
the
light
industrial
and
artisanal
industrial.
The
broader
fulfillment
uses
that
I
alluded
to
the
future
of
outdoor
dining
food
as
the
acronym
data
centers,
and
then
I
would
be
remiss
without
saying
you
know,
bring
us
back
to
that
that
that
last
chance
of
the
other
process
changes
that
that
we'll
have
to
to
continue
to
work
on
as
we're
looking
at
this
commercial
market
resiliency.
AC
A
Thank
you
very
much,
ms
anger,
for
this
really
great
presentation
and
and
for
being
with
us
this
evening.
Colleagues,
any
any
any
questions.
A
And
and
there's
hunger
and
your
colleagues,
if
there
aren't
any
questions,
please
take
it
as
as
an
indication
of
how
of
of
how
much
we
had
to
of
how
much
branding
we
had
to
do
earlier
this
evening,
as
opposed
to
the
the
the
quality
of
of
and
and
content
of
what
you've
presented
to
us.
This
evening,
too,.
AC
Either,
if
I
put
out
everybody
to
sleep
or
you're
thrilled
about
trying
this
new
process
with
us
and
I'll
work
with
courtney
and
we'll
make
certain
that
you
are
receive
a
copy
of
the
presentation
as
well.
A
Thank
you,
and
can
I
just
ask
you
to
go
back
to
the
to
the
the
there
was
a
timeline?
Was
there
there
was
a
time
you
were
talking
about
timeline,
and
I
think
this
commissioner
peterson
has
got
her
hand
up
as
well,
so
I'll
go
to
her
in
a
moment.
But
I
you
know
you
were
talking
about
coming
back
through
some
of
the
commission
process
and
I
would
just
like
to
see
that
quickly,
if
possible,.
A
V
Thank
you,
as
my
colleagues
know,
I
was
formerly
on
the
fiscal
affairs
advisory
commission
of
arlington
county
for
seven
years
and
we
often
talked
about
commercial
vacancy
rates
and
looking
at
the
numbers
go
down.
So
do
you?
V
Do
you
all
have
like
a
chart
that
shows
the
commercial
vacancy
rates
and
just
kind
of
talks
about,
like
you
know
when
I
was
on
faq,
the
commercial
vacancy
rates
were
very
high
and
we
were
very
concerned
about
it
and
I
feel
like
they
would
be
coming
down
in
recent
years,
but
then
with
the
pandemic,
maybe
not
so
much
so
I
would
love
to
see
what
those
numbers
look
like
and
how
that
might
be
part
of
the
justification
for
trying
all
these
exciting
new
ideas.
AC
AD
And-
and
we
can
forward
you
to
link
to
the
the
most
recent
public
presentation,
which
would
be
pretty
substantive,
was
our
budget
presentation
of
the
county
board
from
economic
development
which
walk
through
all
those
data
sets
and-
and
the
answer
is
we're
still
facing
tremendous
headwinds,
especially
in
commercial
office,
vacancy
and
and
and
worse
than
headwinds,
which
you,
which
you
can
feel
and
know,
is
the
uncertainty
of
when
people
return
back
to
the
office,
how
they're
going
to
use
their
space
differently?
AD
So
we
can
forge
you
that
presentation
and
also
the
link
to
the
actual
presentation
by
our
former
director
telly
tucker
at
the
time
and
give
you
that
content
as
well
and
if
there's
any
need
for
an
update,
we
can
certainly
provide
one.
AD
W
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Ms
hunger,
thank
you
for
your
presentation
question
for
you,
and
maybe
mr
mccauley
wondering
how
your
team
is
working
with
long-range
planning
and
what
kind
of
discussions
you
might
be.
Having
about
the
things
that
you're
seeing
and
how
we're
using
space
differently
and
how
that
might
be
encapsulated
in
something
like
the
langston
planning
process,
and
so
that
we're
you
know,
incorporating
the
latest
and
greatest
and
something
that
we're
going
to
have
for
20
30
years
would
be
interested
in
hearing
your
thoughts.
AC
AC
So
that's
why
you
know
we're
trying
to
ensure
that
we're
we're
building
spaces,
but
one
when
we're
suggesting
a
variety
of
different
uses
that
we're
not
precluding
anything
from
going
into
a
space
that
we're
being
a
little
bit
more
ex
inclusive
of
everything
and
not
very
exclusive
of
what
can
and
can't
go
in
so
mark.
Perhaps
you
have
a
different
different
nuance
on
that,
but
I
think
that
that's
our
primary
goal
as
we've
been
working
through
a
couple
of
our
different
planning
long-range
planning
processes.
AD
Yeah,
certainly
we
we
all
coordinate,
and
we
have
members
of
the
long-range
plan
as
part
of
a
rapid
response
team
on
the
zoning
side
and
and
and
but
more
importantly,
I
think
the
decision
made
by
the
manager
to
really
push
staff
to
think
comprehensively
about
these
changes
in
the
zoning
ordinance
was
that
we
didn't
want
to
piecemeal
out
this
right,
where
one
sector
plan
was
ahead
of
another
or
one.
AD
Zoning
district
was
ahead
of
another,
because
we
had
just
made
incremental
changes
by
zoning
districts
so
that,
if
it's
good
for-
and
this
was
really
the
columbia
pike
example
where
we
started
up
by
really
thinking
about
columbia,
pike
is
unique,
and
I
think
what
we
heard
from
a
lot
of
including
this,
this
commission
was.
Why
isn't
that
good
everywhere?
Right
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
solve
for
so.
Certainly
the
things
we
do
in
as
part
of
this
process
would
benefit.
AD
Langston
boulevard
would
benefit
all
the
other
zoning
districts
in
areas
that
allow
and
a
a
nod
to
jill
many
years
ago.
The
retail
plan,
I
think,
started
this
process
by
introducing
retail
equivalents
and
really
freeing
up
that.
That
definition
of
what
retail
is-
and
I
think
this
is
another
step
within
this
process-
to
really
think
differently
about
sort
of
ground
floor
uses
and
upper
floor,
uses
differently
than
we
have
in
the
past.
W
Yeah-
that's
that's
great.
I'm
I'm
heartened
to
hear
this
is
in
the
works
and
would
really
encourage
as
much
of
kind
of
this
as
we
can
sort
of
bring
to
the
table.
I
think
there
have
been
some
times,
particularly
during
covid,
where
some
of
this
didn't
really
happen
as
quickly
as
it
probably
should
have.
Things
were
talking
about
taking
over
on
street
parking,
and
things
like
that.
That
probably
should
have
been
part
of
the
conversation
really
early
on,
and
you
know
really
just
converting
parking
into.
W
You
know
outdoor
dining
space
and
things
like
that
and
really
trying
to
to
really
be
nimble
and
and
quick
and
kind
of
using
your
terminology
here,
but
that
needs
to
happen
in
two
or
three
month
timelines,
it
you
know,
and
so
and
for
some
of
these
businesses,
if
they
can't
get
some
of
that,
as
I'm
sure
you
all
know,
then
the
building's
gone
or
the
financing
is
gone
or
something
isn't
there
so
wanting
to
balance
that
economic
development
with
also
responsible
planning
and
a
public
process,
and
so
I
know
it
probably
can't
be
faster
than
four
months.
W
But
I
guess
we
all
need
to
recognize
that.
That's
that
that
will
come
at
some
cost
and
that
we'll
lose
some
cool
things,
because
you
know
we
still
want
to
have
a
well-planned
and
community
that
that
offers
that.
But
thank
you
again
for
your
work
and,
like
the
chairman,
said,
I'm
excited
to
see
some
of
this
come
through
starting.
This
fall.
A
Well,
seeing
none
again,
thank
you
for,
for
being
with
us
tonight,
look
forward
to
seeing
it
again,
madam
clerk,
do
we
have
any
other
items
on
our
agenda
for
this
evening?.
G
V
I
started
doing
a
screen
share
and
my
buttons
changed
place
on
my
screen.
Okay,
so
I
just
wanted
to
share
the
exciting
news
that
two
of
our
fellow
planning
commissioners
have
had
big
changes
in
their
lives.
Commissioner,
hughes's
partner
gave
birth
to
little
baby
owen
oliver.
On
july
1st
and
last
night
july
5th
planning
commissioner
steinberger
had
her
baby
albert
ellis
and
sarah
was
watching
from
her
hospital
bed
earlier
tonight
and
I'm
sure
commissioner
hughes
is
probably
also
watching
from
home
with
his
babe
in
arms.
V
So
if
we
I'll
go
off
mute
and
say,
congratulations,
maybe
they'll
hear
us.
So
that's
that's
all
from
me.
So
congratulations
guys
we're
very
excited
for
you.
So.
A
Well,
thank
you,
commissioner
peterson,
and
I'm
seeing
a
number
of
these.
These
don't
go
on
the
youtube
channel,
but
I'm
seeing
a
whole
lot
of
teams
reacts,
heart,
reacts
and,
and-
and
applause
reacts
to
that
I've
just
you
know
sarah
and
steven
you
should,
if
you've
seen
this,
you
should
know
that
that's
there,
even
though
everyone's
not
everyone
is,
is
saying
so
verbally
all
of
our
hearts
come
out
to
you
and
and
blessings
and
yeah.
A
I
am
looking
forward
to
seeing
everyone
again
we'll
have
these
we'll
have
commission
business
preceded
by
the
heights,
and
we
will
see
you
tomorrow
night.