►
From YouTube: Arlington County Planning Commission - October 11, 2017
Description
To view this meeting with the agenda, go to https://arlington.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=44
B
Good
evening
welcome
to
the
October
2017
carryover
meeting
of
the
Arlington
County
Planning
Commission.
The
main
item
on
the
agenda
tonight
is
the
request
to
authorize
advertisement
of
public
hearings
by
the
Planning
Commission
and
County
Board
to
consider
the
adoption
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
general
land
use,
study,
plus
and
associated
amendments
of
concept
plan
and
associated
amendments.
This
item
will
be
heard
by
the
County
Board
on
October
21st.
B
Anyone
wishing
to
speak
on
this
item
this
evening
must
fill
out
a
speaker
slip
before
the
item
is
called.
Please
turn
your
slip
in
to
the
clerk
who
will
call
you
in
the
order
received.
She
will
call
you
two
at
a
time
so
that
you
can
be
ready
when
your
time
comes.
As
a
further
reminder,
this
public
hearing
is
being
broadcast
and
recorded
in
both
video
and
audio.
Accordingly,
all
speakers
must
use
the
microphone
the
speaker.
A
podium
can
be
raised
up
or
down
by
a
button
on
the
top
of
the
podium.
B
C
Item
for
this
evening
is
starting
with
number
four
request
to
authorize
advertisement
of
public
hearings
by
the
Planning
Commission
and
County
Board
to
consider
the
following:
a
adoption
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
general
Land
Use
Plan,
study
and
concept
plan
be
associated
amendments
to
the
general
land-use
plan
and
see
associated
amendments
to
the
master
transportation
plan.
We
have
Anthony
few
Cirelli,
Brett,
Wallace
and
rich
viola
to
present
this
item
this
evening.
D
E
E
Good
evening
agenda
item
number
four
for
this
month's
Planning
Commission
meeting
is
the
consideration
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
general
land-use
plans,
study,
plus
the
subjects,
requests
or
recommendations
includes
three
items.
These
are
all
requests
to
advertise
that
will
be
presented
to
the
county
board
at
their
October
meeting
requesting
advertisement
for
consideration
in
November.
E
The
three
items
do
include
the
adoption
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
glup
study,
plus
and
concept
plan
documents
and
associated
amendments
to
the
general
land-use
plan,
as
well
as
the
master
transportation
plan,
tonight's
presentation
will
be
organized
into
six
components
or
six
parts.
First,
we'll
review
partner
background
in
context
for
consideration
of
the
study.
Second
staff
will
provide
an
overview
of
glup
zoning
and
Master
Transportation
Plan
patterns
for
the
study
area
and
surroundings.
E
Next,
the
presentation
will
address
the
lrpc
review
of
framework
concept
plans,
as
well
as
three-dimensional
building
form
and
massing
studies.
We
will
then
review
a
set
of
guiding
principles
that
have
emerged
over
the
course
of
study
discussions.
Fifth,
we
will
highlights
some
of
the
key
concept
plans
and
supporting
guidance
and
recommendations,
especially
related
to
circulation
and
open
space,
building,
Forman,
Heights
and
land
use
and,
finally,
will
conclude
a
presentation
covering
the
associated
general
land-use
plan
and
master
transportation
plan
recommendations.
E
F
E
Evaluate
subject
request
to
change
the
general
land-use
plan
designation
for
these
sites,
based
on
a
2008
county
board
resolution.
This
type
of
process
is
required
when
we
receive
a
glop
amendment
request,
for
which
there
is
no
existing
policy
guidance
to
support
it
with
general
land-use
plan
change
requests
in
four
three
contiguous
sites.
At
the
same
time,
the
scope
of
the
special
the
glop
study
was
expanded
to
become
a
plus,
which
essentially
meant
the
inclusion
of
crafting
guiding
planning
principles,
conceptual
guidance
and
other
recommendations
to
help
inform
the
future
vision
and
implementation
in
this
area.
E
The
study
area
for
this
effort
is
located
just
north
and
outside
of
the
Virginia
Square
metro
station
area.
It
includes
land
parcels
in
the
northwest,
quadrant
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
intersection
in
total.
The
study
area
is
approximately
eight
and
a
half
acres,
with
close
to
seven
acres,
comprising
the
three
sites
for
which
the
county
has
formally
received
requested.
Glop
amendment
requests
highlighted
in
the
table
here.
E
The
American
Legion
and
11th
Street
development
sites
along
Washington
Boulevard,
are
requesting
Club
amendments
from
service,
commercial
to
medium
office,
apartment
hotel
and
the
YMCA
is
requesting
a
change
from
semi-public
to
medium
residential.
As
a
club
study,
plus,
we
incorporated
into
the
study
the
additional
commercially
zoned
and
designated
properties
fronting
along
Washington
Boulevard
generally
here
and
here,
so
that
we
were
able
to
take
a
more
comprehensive
look
at
this
area.
E
This
recent
bird's-eye
view
image
I
believe
from
2015
shows
the
study
area
and
its
surrounding
development
as
depicted
here.
The
study
area
with
is
sits
with
its
one
to
two
storey:
commercial
and
institutional
development.
It's
generally
situated,
as
you
can
see
in
a
transitional
area.
We're
building,
Heights
and
densities,
are
evolving
from
taller
higher
density
development
to
the
south
of
Washington,
Boulevard,
closer
to
Metro
and
transitioning
to
lower
townhouse
and
single-family
detached
development
patterns
on
the
north
side
of
Washington
Boulevard.
E
E
E
The
key
component
of
this
is
actually
estimating
the
future
number
of
trips
by
each
general
land-use
plans,
scenario
studied,
and
you
see
here
in
total,
there
were
scenarios
one
through
four.
A
fifth
scenario
was
added
later
in
the
process.
That
was
actually
a
very
close
comparable
to
scenario
two,
and
you
can
see
here
in
total,
the
breakdown
of
estimated
total
peak-hour
trips
for
the
a.m.
the
morning
peak
power,
four
scenarios,
one
a
which
is
substantially
higher
due
to
the
amount
of
commercial
development
assumed
in
that
type
of
scenario,
in
comparison
with
the
balances
scenarios.
E
The
lrpc
process
included
a
iterative
process
and
consideration
of
both
public
realm
framework
concepts
and
3d
building
form
and
massing
study.
The
draft
the
October
second
draft
study
document
that
was
included
in
your
package
covers
that
evolution
in
great
detail
for
this
evenings
presentation.
We
just
wanted
to
hit
a
few
of
the
highlights,
as
it
relates
to
the
considerations
regarding
the
public
realm
and
then
also
quickly,
the
highlights,
as
it
relates
to
the
building
form
in
massing
studies.
E
The
in
support,
or
conjunction
with,
in
conjunction
with
the
framework
concept.
Iterations
staff
had
also
developed
or
established
a
number
of
different
glup
designation
assumptions
and
scenarios
to
help
inform
the
target
densities,
uses
and
overall
building
form
outcomes
associated
with
the
building
form
and
massing
studies.
These
five
scenarios
shown
here
convey
the
range
of
different
options
that
were
looked
at
throughout
the
study.
E
I
should
note
that,
typically
or
especially,
for
the
medium
residential
designations,
the
while
the
scenario
two
for
instance
does
not
expressly
show
low
office
apartment,
Hotel
designation
in
this
area,
from
a
enough
from
an
assumption
where
residential
use
would
be
the
prevailing
use
on
that
area
on
that
parcel
or
on
area
the
medium
residential
densities
and
the
low
office
apartment,
Hotel
designations
would
have
the
same
level
of
development
potential,
and
so
that's
important
to
point
out
as
we
get
further
into
the
document.
But
this
next
slide
just
from
the
dock.
D
E
Through
the
process,
lrpc
number
two
staff
had
presented
the
first
array
of
different
form
and
massing
studies.
Looking
at
each
of
the
scenarios,
the
input
received
by
staff
at
that
second
lrpc
meeting
helped
inform
further
consideration
throughout
the
process.
Seen
here
are
some
of
the
model
views
presented
at
the
fourth
lrpc
meeting
and
then
as
an
iterative
process.
These
views
presented
at
lrpc
number
five
in
july,
really
start
to
show
some
of
the
the
most
current
model
scenarios
that
were
generated,
incorporating
lrpc
input
and
further
staff
consideration
and
discussion.
E
The
study
area
itself,
as
well
as
potential
impacts
on
surrounding
neighborhood,
public,
open
spaces
and
landscape
and
cultural
resources,
in
particular
related
to
the
ball
family
burial,
ground,
the
mature
trees
along
13th,
Street,
north
and
potential
locations
of
planned
public,
open
space
building
heights
and
development
densities
and
the
corresponding
general
land
use
plan
designations
were
all
also
key
issues
of
discussion
during
the
process.
The.
E
Fourth
component
of
the
presentation
introduces
the
guiding
principles
and
the
guiding
principles
were
first
introduced
in
very
draft
format.
Lrpc
number
three:
they
were
reviewed
by
lrpc
and
input
was
provided
back
to
staff,
who
then
generated
revised
drafts
for
the
subsequent
to
lrpc
meetings
since
lrpc
number
five,
given
the
input
we
had
received
throughout
that
meeting
in
particular,
we've
actually
expanded
the
guiding
principles
from
what
they
were
in
the
july
draft
to
what
you
see
in
this
october
draft
to
be
a
much
more
substantial
part
of
the
document
to
really
emphasize
and
convey
more
effectively.
E
We
hope
really
the
planning
principles
that
should
help
guide
the
future
consideration
of
this
area.
So
we
would
not
go
through
these
in
detail
as
part
of
this
presentation,
but
this
is
just
a
sample
spread
from
the
document
with
principles.
Five
and
six
shown
here,
the
text
kind
of
in
the
located
in
the
call-out
boxes
and
with
supporting
imagery
and
captions
as
well
moving
along
to
the
concept
plans,
and
so
in
the
special
study
plus
and
concept
plan
documents.
E
There
are
a
set
of
recommendations
as
it
pertains
to
different
concept
maps
and
the
first
one
shown
here
includes
circulation
public
space.
A
couple
key
highlights
to
point
out
here
and
clarify.
So
what
we
see
in
this
concept
map
are
a
number
of
elements,
including
first,
these
orange
arrows
running
across
the
study
area
and
north
through
the
study
area
denote
areas
where
the
levels
of
vehicular
access
are
recommended
in
comparison
to
the
July
draft
that
was
shared
at
lrpc.
E
These
lines
have
become
much
more
much
thicker
to
really
convey
a
sense
of
generality
in
terms
of
exactly
where
the
alignment
of
a
potential
future
Street
might
occur.
But
the
emphasis
is
on
the
point
of
including
Street
connectivity
in
these
areas
to
be
determined
in
their
exact
locations
with
future
site
plan.
Applications.
E
The
the
cemetery
we
also
see
opportunities
to
expand,
open
space
really
is
just
an
added
relief
and
buffer
area
for
the
burial
ground
that
could
see
future
development
around
it
in
the
future,
and
so
that
lighter
green
tone
here
relates
to
that,
as
well
as
the
idea
of
connecting
the
cemetery
and
the
mature
trees
along
that
linear
north-south
connection,
as
well
to
showcase
and
celebrate
those
trees
further
and
then.
Finally,
the
at
the
Northwest
limits
of
the
study
area.
We
see
a
proposed
open
space
that
would
not
only
serve
as
potential
community
serving
open.
E
The
second
concept
map
relates
to
building
height
in
form
shown
here
and
so
to
summarize,
the
areas
in
the
darkest
blue
are
building
height,
maximums,
recommended
of
up
to
six
storeys
or
not
to
exceed
70
feet.
Total.
The
lighter
blue,
along
Washington,
Boulevard
west
of
founders
way
are
recommended
at
five
storey
maximums
and
then
to
the
north
of
that
to
transition
to
the
rear.
E
The
properties
along
12th
Road,
north
I
recommended
step
down
of
the
three
storeys
in
height
and
then
along
the
western
edge
of
the
American
Legion
property
and
the
northern
edge
of
the
YMCA
properties
transitioning,
and
stepping
down
to
four
stories
to
ensure
an
appropriate
transition
to
the
surrounding
areas
as
well
and
then.
Finally,
the
from
a
land-use
concept
perspective
based
on
input
from
the
july
lrpc
meeting
and
other
feedback.
E
The
majority
of
the
YMCA
site
are
basically
the
YMCA
site
is
shown
here
as
residential
in
brown
and
note,
one
does
Express
that
civic
institutional
or
semi
public
land
uses
may
be
considered
for
any
location
within
the
study
area.
It
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
they
would
be
appropriate
in
all
areas,
but
at
least
they
would
be
open
for
consideration
and
could
be
evaluated
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
E
The
frontage
along
Washington
Boulevard
is
also
shown
as
retail
or
retail
equivalents
on
the
ground-floor,
and
so
we've
applied
a
gold-colored
treatment
here
to
correspond
with
the
Gold
Street
designation
in
the
arlington
county
retail
plan,
updated
or
adopted
in
2015,
and
then
finally,
that
takes
us
to
the
general
Angie's
plan
and
master
transportation
plan
recommendations.
So
as
far
as
the
general
Land
Use
Plan
recommendations,
they're
presented
in
two
parts,
the
first
part
are
include
two
near-term
glup
recommendations
shown
here,
and
so
the
first
would
be
to
add
note
27
to
the
glut
map.
E
This
would
be
a
numerical
label
that
gets
added
to
the
map
generally
over
the
study
area
and
there
would
be
text
that
expresses
basically
that
the
county
board
adopted
the
Washington,
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
glup
study,
plus
and
concept
plan
on
fate
to
be
determined
and
that
that
can
that
document
conveys
additional
planning,
guidance
and
vision
for
the
future
of
this
area,
and
so
that's
important.
So,
if
someone's
looking
at
the
general
Land
Use
Plan,
they
understand
that
there
is
an
Associated
adopted
planning
document
to
support
that.
E
As
far
as
prospective
future
glup
recommendations.
These
are
broken
into
are
identified
as
three
parts.
Four
areas
on
the
north
side
of
washington,
boulevard,
east
of
founders,
way
and
generally
south
of
an
area.
An
imaginary
line,
extending
extension
of
12th
road
north
this
area
could
be
considered
should
be
considered
for
future
amendments
to
medium
office,
apartment
hotel
with
future
redevelopment
areas.
West
a
founders
way.
E
The
recommendation
is
to
consider
future
amendments
to
low
office
apartment
hotel
with
future
redevelopment,
as
well
as
the
area
north
of
an
imaginary,
extended
12th
road
would
also
be
to
consider
future
amendments
to
low
office
apartment
hotel
with
redevelopment
and
so
each
of
those
sites.
If
future
site
plan
applications
and
rezoning
requests
were
to
come
forward,
the
glup
changed
for
any
property
within
those
areas
would
occur,
concurrent
with
actions
on
those
requests
and
then
finally,
the
master
transportation
plan
recommendations.
There
are
two
of
them
recommended
in
the
report.
E
The
second
amendment
would
read:
Ezek
Nate
the
portion
of
Washington
Boulevard
between
Kirkwood
Road
and
Lincoln
Street
from
a
type
D
arterial
to
a
type
of
be
arterial,
which
is
primarily
urban
mixed-use,
and
so
that
change
is
depicted
here.
As
far
as
Advisory
Commission
review
last
Thursday,
the
Transportation
Commission
considered
the
request
to
advertise.
B
B
C
C
G
G
We
have
about
more
than
half
a
million
members
around
the
country
and
Canada,
and
we
also
have
about
5,000
members
in
the
area
and
I
do
support
the
the
YMCA
and
lay
Yoona
to
come
together,
because
we
understand
that
the
two
groups,
we
firmly
believe
that
they
can
the
importance
of
joining
this
and
enhancing
the
lives
of
the
residents
of
the
community
local
communities
in
the
area.
Also,
with
the
partnership,
I
will
say
that
will
be
good-paying
jobs.
G
H
All
right
good
evening,
everyone,
my
name-
is
Julio
Medina
I'm,
also
a
member
of
la
unit,
local
11,
otherwise
known
as
the
laborers
International
Union
of
North
America
together
like
unit
the
YMCA,
can
improve
lives
of
the
people
that
build
our
communities.
Allow
you
in
a
construction
job
who
provide
families,
good
jobs
benefits
while
creating
new
and
improving
existing
YMCA
facilities
and
buildings.
I
was
actually
an
employee
years
ago
of
the
national
capital
anti
servicemen
YMCA.
So
this
has
a
good
meaning
for
me.
Together.
H
La
unión
de
huantar,
1
CA
I
could
improve
the
lives
of
people
who
live
in
the
community
as
well
as
work.
There.
Many
families
depend
on
the
YMCA,
with
the
additional
facilities,
more
people
will
be
able
to
participate
in
the
YMCA
programs
and
therefore
have
a
larger
role
in
the
community.
Thank
you
for
that
for
the
Commission
to.
Let
me
express
my
our
comments
and
opinion
in
today's
hearing.
Thank
you.
Thank.
I
Hi
good
evening,
on
behalf
of
app'
and
advocates
for
affordable
housing,
I
want
a
voice
support
for
this
draft
plan,
but
I
also
wish
to
address
a
few
points
for
discussion
tonight.
I
hope
particularly
principle,
one
about
creating
a
pedestrian
friendly,
mixed-use
community,
but
really
minimizing
the
amount
of
vehicular
connectivity
through
the
block
and
really
promoting
site
plans
that
talk
about
walkability
and
bike.
I
Accident,
it's
it's
critical
that
we
minimize
the
impact
on
the
neighborhoods
by
making
those
really
only
for
pedestrians
and
emergency
vehicles
and
making
this
a
campus
like
setting.
Let's
try
to
work
and
be
creative
here
and
incorporate
attractive
and
safe
pedestrian
areas
in
this
county
and
in
terms
of
the
master
transportation
plan.
There
are
also
solutions
there
that
are
pedestrian
only
solutions,
so
let's
not
gravitate
to
only
vehicular
answers
to
making
our
neighborhoods
more
connected.
I
I
These
are
two
really
important
community
partners
in
Arlington,
and
we
know
how
committed
they
are
to
working
together
to
really
make
some
of
those
connections
through
the
Block
work,
as
well
as
in
terms
of
embracing
open
space
next
to
the
cemetery
and
other
creative
ways,
so
I'm
very
confident
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
deliver
to
the
community
the
vision
that
those
around
the
table
who
worked
so
hard
on
and
again
I
commend
staff
I.
Think
it's
a
great
effort.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
Good
evening
I'm
the
Post
Commander
for
the
American
Legion
Post
on
on
Washington
Boulevard
I,
was
a
veteran
from
1968
to
74
as
active
duty
and
reserve.
Army
medic,
sometimes
referred
to
as
targets
I
have
been
a
calling
tonight
now
for
over
40
years.
So
I
just
started
my
fifth
decade
in
Arlington
and
I'm,
proud
of
that
being
the
commander
of
the
of
the
American
Legion
Post.
J
Overseas
I've
had
two
phone
calls
in
the
past
week,
one
just
transferring
into
our
unit
from
out
of
state
but
another
one
from
a
gentleman
who
is
losing
his
housing
and
he
wondered
if,
if
we
had
any
options
for
him
and
I
had
to
say
no,
not
until
we
get
the
housing
and
the
partnership
with
with
ABBA
completed
I'm,
very,
very
supportive
of
seeing
seven
stories
there.
And
let
me
give
you
a
little
bit
of
background.
J
J
The
county
staff
has
done
a
fabulous
job
with
this
club
out
of
60
some
odd
pages
here,
there's
only
a
half
a
page
that
I
would
like
to
promote
and
that's
going
from
6
to
7
stories
on
this.
They
have
focused
heavily
on
walkability
and
if
you
have
a
lot
of
walkability,
that's
that's
a
blessing,
but
you
have
to
have
the
people
coming
from
somewhere
to
walk
where
you
want
them
to
walk.
If
you
take
a
look
at
Minneapolis
where
they
have
Nicollet
Mall
and
they've
made
a
downtown
street,
nothing
but
pedestrians
and
public
transportation.
J
J
J
B
K
Evening,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
members
of
the
Commission,
my
name
is
todd
yates.
I
am
a
member
of
the
Arlington
Economic
Development
Commission
on
the
Immediate
Past
Chair
of
the
Arlington
Chamber
of
Commerce
retired
marine
and
a
member
of
the
American
Legion,
but
I'm
here
tonight.
As
a
member
of
the
YMCA
board
of
directors,
the
Arlington
YMCA
has
served
our
community
for
more
than
seventy
years.
K
As
you
may
know,
the
Y
provides
programs
for
preschool
aged
children
through
senior
citizens.
This
includes
pre-k
programs
before
and
after
school
care
gymnastics
enrichment
programs
in
our
schools,
summer
camps,
the
model
general
assembly,
tennis,
adult
fitness,
diabetes
prevention
and
stroke
recovery
program.
The
Y's
programs
are
open
to
everyone.
No
one
is
turned
away
from
the
Y
due
to
the
inability
to
pay
since
2010
the
wives
provided
more
than
seven
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
scholarships
to
children,
adults
and
families
in
our
community.
K
For
this
work
serving
the
entire
Arlington
community,
the
Y
I
received
this
year's
leader
Center
for
Excellence
nonprofit
of
the
Year
award,
we're
very
proud
of
that
honor
with
the
growing
arlington
population,
the
limits
of
space
and
arlington
the
wise
poised
to
do
even
more
for
community.
I
know
firsthand
what
a
y
can
do
in
transforming
the
community
is
the
former
city
assistant
city
manager
and
ambled
virginia.
K
We
underwent
the
same
process
and
took
a
very
small
YMCA
that
served
a
small
segment
of
the
community
and
made
it
transformational
during
this
polenta
marry
process
to
redevelop
Arlington
why
to
meet
the
needs?
We
have
done
our
own
demand
survey
and
reviewed
the
work
of
the
various
County
groups.
Looking
at
recreational
and
open
space,
we've
met
many
times
with
community
groups
to
listen
what
they'd
like
to
see
in
the
new
way
and
to
also
hear
their
concerns
in
this
redevelopment
process.
K
The
lies
engaged
teamate
grow,
a
G
ro
development
in
partnership
with
the
YMCA
of
the
USA
gr.
The
gr
o
delivers
expertise
in
YMCA
facility
development
and
design
and
assists
opening
35
new
YMCAs
each
year
across
the
country
working
with
Chiara.
We
know
the
New,
Orleans
and
Y
will
be
a
best-in-class
facility.
Thank
you
all
for
your
consideration.
We
look
forward
to
tonight's
vote
and
the
next
steps
in
this
process.
Thank.
B
L
Earlier
today
we
sent
a
letter
of
support
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
I
brought
some
extra
copies
and
left
them
with
the
clerk,
and
we
certainly
thank
staff
for
all
their
hard
work
on
this
study
and
for
the
process
that
they
helped
manage
very,
very
grateful
for
all
their
efforts
and
very
supportive
of
the
plan.
We
did
want
to
take
tonight
as
an
opportunity
to
just
highlight
three
or
four
items
that
we
think
would
benefit
from
some
tweaking
in
the
plan
between
now
and
the
eventual
public
hearings
on
adoption.
L
The
first
point
concerns
below-grade
parking.
We
know
that
the
plan
encourages
low-grade
parking
and
we
completely
agree
with
that,
but
we
also
know
that
there
is
some
significant
topography
in
this
sector
plan.
Boundary
I
think
the
reality
is
that
some
of
the
below
grade
levels
may
actually
be
visible
from
the
street
or
from
internal
site
frontages
depending
on
the
layout.
So
we
think
the
plan
should
acknowledge
that
likelihood
and
maybe
give
some
recommendations
of
how
you
might
deal
with
that
in
the
context
of
a
site
plan.
L
Second,
we
think
the
precedent
images
for
the
vehicular
connections
should
include
some
examples
of
alleys
or
perhaps
pedestrian
and
bicycle
connections
as
well.
We
think
there
are
areas
of
the
plan
where
a
full-blown
public
street
section
may
not
be
appropriate
for
the
neighborhood
or
or
physically
possible
again
on
account
of
the
topography.
So
we
think
a
broader
range
of
precedent
images
will
help
capture
some
of
that
discussion
from
the
review
committee.
M
Unfortunately,
Arlington
County
has
been
governed
by
one
political
party
for
more
than
35
years,
and
one
planning
paradigm,
new
urbanism,
also
known
as
Smart
Growth
Smart
Growth,
is
a
planning
ideology.
Ideology
miss
Siegel
that
sir,
that
seeks
to
pack
as
many
upscale
people
vehicles,
events
and
activities
into
as
little
space
as
possible.
An
important
component,
perhaps
the
most
important
component
of
new
urbanism
is
neighborhoods-
are
allowed
to
become
rundown.
M
Public
and
private
infrastructure
are
allowed
to
deteriorate
for
decades.
Second
elitists
elitists,
who
are
total
Smart
Growth,
adherents
completely
controlled
development
and
redevelopment
these
people,
Misaka
Meany,
despised,
the
middle-class
and
working-class
and
neighborhood
amenities
like
auto
repair.
It
want
the
aforementioned
people
and
amenities
out
of
the
neighborhood
and
out
of
Arlington,
so
another
vibrant
middle
class
community
becomes
Clarendon.
Does
anyone
doubt
that
not
only
necessary
amenities
will
be
gentrified
out
of
this
neighborhood
but
affordable?
M
Our
five
homes
and
small,
older
townhomes
will
be
torn
down
and
replaced
by
McMansions
or
some
form
of
unified
residential
development.
Future
residents
will
drive
with
their
families,
miles
to
active
sports
facilities,
will
drive
to
drop
off
their
children
at
school
and
will
generally
behave
like
residents
of
infill
Clarendon.
A
few
blocks
away.
Hundreds
more
vehicle
trips
per
day
generated
by
gentrified
out
workforces,
another
Smart,
Growth
charade.
D
B
N
N
N
The
chair
had
sort
of
acknowledged
that
it
was
tangential
literally
to
the
study,
and
the
only
other
thing
to
report
is
that
that
I
I
don't
think
that
the
Commission
really
had
or
expressed
at
this
point
nor
nor
do
I
think
Commission
members
expressed
any
real
preference
for
any
of
the
scenarios
envisioned
in
the
draft.
I
think
the
only
other
question
that
might
have
come
up
was
about
realignment
of
12th
Street.
N
B
N
I,
don't
recall
and
I
asked
staff
to
help
me
out
if
I'm
missing
anything
but
I
think
that
at
this
point,
that
the
Commission
really
had
no
concerns
for
the
RTA
point.
I
expect
that
we
may
have
a
lot
more
to
say
next
time
around,
but
there
were
no.
The
only
the
only
actual
action
was
endorsement
of
the
recommendation
to
advertise.
Okay.
B
O
O
I'll
give
a
little
bit
of
background
on
the
special
Club
typical
to
what
I
did
in
all
the
meetings
and
I
think
it
will
clarify
to
some
extent
why
the
giant
was
not
included.
The
general
Land
Use
Plan
can
be
amended
as
part
of
a
long-range
planning
process
for
a
designated
area
or
as
a
result
of
an
individual
request
for
change,
and
that's
essentially
what
happened
here.
We
had
three
requests
for
change.
Giant
was
not
one
of
them.
O
Given
this
massing
of
land,
almost
eight
acres,
the
lrpc
also
considered,
in
addition
to
height
and
massing,
which
is
what
we
typically
consider
for
a
glup
change
connectivity
through
and
around
the
site
and
opportunities
to
provide
accessible,
open
space.
So
that's
why
it's
a
special
LUP
study,
so
the
chronology
of
our
process.
Lrpc
met
five
times
from
fall
2016
through
summer
2017.
O
Additionally,
many
members
of
the
public
attended
these
meetings,
but
also
participated
in
extensive
public
outreach
for
this
process
and
included
a
survey
and
mailing
to
owners
of
c2
property
in
the
study
area
and
to
residential
property
owners
to
the
west
of
the
site,
including
owners
of
rental
properties
and
an
open
house
and
a
walking
tour.
We
wanted
to
make
sure
we
did
not
miss
any
information
throughout
the
special
Club
study
process
staff
provided
thorough
analysis
of
the
site.
O
Its
context
in
the
area,
historical
and
existing
development
guiding
policy
from
plans
and
regulations
that
were
tangential
or
included
the
site,
several
iterations
of
the
three-dimensional
models
of
the
form
and
massing
to
help
illustrate
the
different
glup
designations
that
might
be
considered
appropriate
with
a
change
to
the
designations.
At
our
first
meeting,
we
had
a
staff
report.
We
asked
questions
by
the
second
meeting
in
December.
O
They
did
an
excellent
job
in
responding
to
the
public,
lrpc
members,
the
development
teams
and
balancing
information,
varied
interests
and
goals
for
the
community.
It's
a
credit
to
them
that
were
at
the
point
where
we
are
tonight.
Looking
at
this
draft
plan
throughout
the
special
Club
study
process,
lrpc
expressed
preferences
for
below-grade
parking,
reduced,
paved
area,
including
any
new
streets
and
improved
pedestrian
experience.
O
These
are
similar
to
what
we
heard
tonight
with
public
comment:
vertical
mixed-use
modeling,
especially
with
regard
to
the
Y
additional
open
space,
especially
broad
areas
of
open
space,
where
that
was
possible,
including
preservation
of
the
trees
along
13th
Street
and
potentially
increased
access
to
the
ball
family
graveyard
retention
of
the
residential
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
respect
for
the
topography
of
the
development
site.
There's
a
lot
of
elevation
change.
We
heard
about
concerns
with
creating
an
appropriate
transition
between
any
new
development
and
the
single-family
and
townhomes
adjacent
to
and
across
from
the
site.
O
Low
OAH
is
outlined
in
the
recommendations
on
page
54
of
our
draft
concept
plan
within
the
following
parameters,
and
this
touches
again
on
the
issues
that
we've
heard
throughout
the
process
and
that
we
raised
tonight,
height
and
massing
massing
on
the
site
should
step
down
or
taper
toward
the
single-family
homes
to
the
west
and
the
townhomes
to
the
north.
We
should
look
for
additional
transitions
to
these
lower
density
neighborhoods.
O
We
should
encourage
that,
if
that
might
be
by
a
vegetative,
buffers
were
open
space
between
the
proposed
multi-family
developments
in
the
single-family
homes,
and
any
discussion
of
heights
should
respect
the
topography
modeling
that
represented
8
storeys,
that
the
highest
elevations
of
the
site
was
not
supported
by
lrpc,
but
that's
not
to
say
that
we
can't
revisit
higher
elevations
than
what
are
in
the
current
in
the
in
the
current
draft.
There
are
indeed
some
changes
from
the
July
to
the
October.
Bonus
density
may
be
permitted
in
exchange
for
the
provision
of
affordable
housing.
O
That's
a
long-standing
County
goal.
Affordable
housing
connectivity
is
the
second
one
so
height
and
mass
and
connectivity
increased
pedestrian
connections
to
metro
stations
in
Virginia
square
and
Clarendon
provide
a
neighborhood
pedestrian
connection
to
the
pedestrian
walkway
founders,
way
to
George
Mason.
An
open
space
ensure
the
preservation
of
the
historic
ball
family
graveyard,
encourage
passive
use.
O
Access
to
the
site,
preserve
the
stand
of
evergreen
trees
in
front
of
the
Y
ideally
provide
a
visual
connection
to
both
of
these
through
Washington
Boulevard
provides
some
additional
open
space
for
this
neighborhood,
possibly
at
the
northwest
corner
of
the
site.
So
initial
suggested
points
for
discussion
as
we
go
forward
among
the
PC,
given
the
established
pattern
of
development,
the
area
as
well
as
expected
redevelopment
the
red
top
cab
site
recognizing
there
are
no
sector
plans
that
currently
guide
development.
O
O
Do
we
want
to
ensure
the
retail
and
retail
like
ground
floor
uses
on
the
properties
fronting
Washington
Boulevard
in
order
to
activate
the
street,
and
here
I
have
a
question
for
staff
as
any
of
this
dictated
by
the
change
in
the
road
designation
to
a
type
b
arterial
mixed
use.
Street?
Does
any
of
that
define
what
would
be
on
the
ground
floor
of
the
buildings
that
front
on
the
street?
Are
the
suggested
height
limits
of
we're
here?
Oh,
we
we're
not
proposing
to
adopt
a
height
map
like
we
did
in
courthouse.
O
Individual
site
plans
might
make
different
cases
for
Heights,
but
what
was
important
from
lrpc
in
the
comments
we
heard
tonight
was
transitions
and
respecting
the
topography.
So
we
have
to
think
about
how
we
would
want
to
achieve
that
is
the
desired
connectivity
sufficiently
and
appropriately
by
the
pedestrian
access
through
the
site.
We
heard
this
from
several
members
tonight
and
we
heard
this
throughout
the
lrpc
process.
O
Do
we
need
additional
Auto
access
if
the
desire
to
focus
is
on
pedestrian
and
walkability
versus
autos
want
to
be
more
specific
about
what
we're
looking
for
in
the
circulation
and
public
space
concept
Maps,
we
saw
one
version
in
July
and
another
version
tonight.
The
version
of
July
is
very
similar
to
exhibit
four
on
page
19
of
the
current
travel
plan.
If
we
do
prefer
pedestrian
only
access
on
portions
of
these
connections,
how
do
we
ensure
access
and
usability?
B
Thank
you
very,
very
much
for
that
very
well
thought
through
and
well
presented
fully
articulated
report
of
a
lot
of
long,
very
substantive
meetings.
You
saw
that
in
staffs
report,
I
want
to
take
the
matter.
It's
now
with
the
Commission
and
I
wanted
to
introduce
our
discussion
in
the
following
way.
I
want
to
just
note.
This
is
a
as
I
mentioned,
the
beginning
of
the
meeting,
a
request
to
advertise.
This
is
not
final
action.
B
Some
of
the
issues
that
were
raised
are
process.
Procedural
issues
and
I
hope
that,
in
addition
to
the
suggestions
from
Commissioner
gear-
and
we
can
also
ask
clarifying
questions
about
the
process,
for
example,
I
would
just
lay
this
out
as
kind
of
process
question,
which
I
think
we
can
have
a
basket
of
those.
If
there
is
a
concern
that
was
expressed
through
the
lrpc
and
this
evening
for,
for
example,
less
Auto
access
on
the
one
hand
and
one
one
issue
and
an
additional
floor
for
the
app'
building
can
that
contain?
B
Can
we
continue
the
discussion
on
that
basis?
The
maps
don't
seem
at
least
the
the
the
heights
map
does
not
seem
to
support
an
additional
seventh
floor.
Given
the
recommendations
so
I
think
we
should
ask
those
questions
so
that
we
understand
what
what
kind
of
contribution
we
can
make
this
evening
that
fits
with
the
process
going
forward,
but
reflects
community
sentiment
that
we've
heard
and
that
Commissioner
Garin
is
summarized
for
us
as
well.
So
let's,
let's
do
that?
Let's
let
some
Commissioner
Garin!
B
Can
you
and
I
initial
list
of
topics
for
clarifying
questions
and
then
other
commissioners
to
see
if
we've
hit
all
the
right
spots,
so
I
would
start
with
the
process
questions.
So
I
am
a
little
confused
about
that,
and
I
want
to
be
efficient
in
giving
staff
the
advice
that
they're
seeking
from
us
for
the
board
so
process,
questions
height,
you've
got
height
and
height.
B
E
With
the
you
know,
particularly
with
the
adoption
of
the
the
study
document
and
concept
plan,
which
are
the
the
subject
of
the
questions
that
I'm
hearing
there
really
is
no
similar
scope
issue
so
that,
if
you
know
if
what
gets
advertised
is
that
which
is
reflected
in
the
October
2nd
draft,
if
there
are
changes
made
and
discussed
identified
at
the
Planning
Commission
next
month
and
even
at
the
board
meeting
itself,
those
are
all
changes
that
are
certainly
subject
to
be
included.
Within
that
final
document,
it's
not
held
to
the
same
sort
of
standard.
E
That
I'd
say
that's
correct
and
I'd
also
say
that
you
know
before
the
Board
considers
acting
on
the
advertisement
at
their
October
meeting.
They
presumably
will
have
the
recommendation
from
this
commission
and
from
some
several
others
and
at
that
October
meeting,
if
they
authorize
or
when
they
authorize
advertisements
of
public
hearing
speak
if
they
wish
to
direct
staff
based
on
guidance
that
they've
received
from
the
various
Commission's
or
others.
That
would
be
an
opportune
time
for
them
to
do
so,
and
then
again,
we
may
not
necessarily
need
to
actually
for
legal
purposes.
E
B
Good,
thank
you
very
much
for
that.
So
let's
continue
with
the
list
of
categories
for
clarifying
questions
and
eventually
motions.
So
we
have
ice.
There's
another
process,
question
I,
won't
burden
us
now
with
that
others
may
have
questions
about
that.
We
have
height
and
massing
there
circulation
parking.
B
We
can
add
the
topographical
issues
to
parking.
We
heard
that
connection,
there's
open
space,
tree
preservation
and
visual
connectivity,
height
limits,
height
and
massing
retail
out
parcels
and
out
Oh
that'll,
be
a
fifth
one,
the
out
parcels
and
how
how
how
we
think
about
those
and
what
recommendations
there
may
be
that
we
may
want
to
support
I.
B
B
Me
that
I
need
a
process.
Question
answered
before
that,
but
I'll
put
that
down
the
YMCA,
because
I
believe
that
will
depend
on
a
site
plan
that
comes
in
is
that
correct
I
mean
at
this
point,
given
this
document
and
what
we
are
reviewing
tonight,
we
don't
have
a
site
plan
in
which
we
can
evaluate
the
densities
needed
for
a.
Why
and
and
things
like
things
of
that
nature.
So
that's
a
process
question
for
me,
but
we'll
put
it
down
because
it
came
up
anything
else
from
you.
P
B
When
I
looked
at
page
54,
I
thought
and
I
sensual
email
I
thought
it
laid
out
exactly
the
different
processes
that
are
at
work,
that
in
November
we
will
hear
what
what
are
tagged
as
a
near
term
issues,
but
we
won't
make
final
judgments
or
judgments
about
certain
issues
like
how
wide
a
street
is.
Until
we
see
a
final
site
plan
and
I
wanted
to
be
sure
that
our
questions
were
appropriate
to
what
was
being
presented,
which
is
why
I
I
thought.
We
should
do
that
now.
B
Q
Actually,
it's
it's
not
necessarily
well
I
questioned,
but
it
just
is
a
clarification
from
mr.
for
Sorelli,
and
that
is
the
role
that
the
special
glup
study,
+
and
concept
plan
plays
as
after
adoption
and
unlike
what
we
did
with
courthouse
last
night,
where
we
had
an
addendum
to
a
sector
plan
and
we're
now
in
the
implementation
process,
where
we
have
taken
the
heights
map,
for
instance
from
that
document
and
are
working
on
putting
it
into
the
zoning
code
into
the
zoning
ordinance.
That's
not
anticipated
with
this
particular
document
is
that
correct.
Q
The
guidance
that
we
see
in
this
document,
however,
it
comes
out
whether
it's
six
storeys
or
whether
it's
seven
storeys,
for
instance,
for
height
because
of
the
glup
recommendation
of
medium
OAH,
which
does
have
higher
heights
available
in
it.
It
would
be
possible
for
an
applicant
to
come
in
with
a
site
plan
that
may
not
actually
completely
comport
with
what's
in
the
plan,
that
would
not
be
precluded.
E
In
term,
if
the
question
is
directed
at,
would
the
zoning
regulations
or
provisions
associated
with
that
particular
district?
Let's
say
in
this
case
the
co
2.5
district
permit
greater
heights
than
what
is
recommended
in
the
study
document
and
concept
plan.
Then
yes,
that's
correct,
but
so,
but
the
plan,
if
adopted
by
the
board
I
think
you
know,
should
be
understood
as
the
county's
guidance
regard
in
regarding
the
maximum
building
heights
for
this
area.
Right.
Q
B
Very
good,
thank
you
for
that
question.
Anyone
else
have
a
question
about
process.
What
when
do
we
have?
When
can
we
review
certain
issues?
When
are
certain
issues
going
to
be
decided
or
not
decided?
There
is
there's
a
lag.
There
are
near-term
decisions
that
will
be
made
made
sooner
and
ones
later
when
site
plans
come
in.
I
did
I
didn't
want
to
ask
you
perhaps
if
you
could
frame
in
general,
a
concern
that
I've
had
as
I
worked
through
this,
which
is
when
will
certain
comments
that
may
come
up
tonight?
B
E
As
I
mean,
as
recommended
in
the
staff
report
for
October,
so
just
to
set
the
framing
for
this,
the
staff
is
recommending
that
the
board
advertise
future
public
hearings
on
these
three
associated
items
to
consider
in
November.
So
if
at
the
October
meeting
they
approve
the
advertisement
of
those
hearings,
we
would
be
back
before
the
transportation,
the
Planning
Commission's
in
November
prior
to
presenting
the
county
board
with
a
final
recommendation.
E
You
know
anticipated
at
that
November
meeting
the
basically
between
now
and
then
is
really
the
opportunity,
for
you
know:
continued
discussion
and
consideration
of
potential
refinements
and
revisions
to
the
draft
document
and
so
over
the
next
five
or
six
or
seven
weeks,
depending
on
how
the
exact
meeting
dates
fall.
You
know
there's
that
opportunity
to
further
refine
this
document.
B
Wonderful
I
really
wanted
to
just
bring
that
out
for
the
public
so
that
we
understand
we're
really
part
of
a
continuing
conversation
and
and
nothing
nothing
has
been
ruled
out.
Things
that
are
relevant
to
what's
in
the
document
are
up
for
discussion,
okay
process
question
you
want
to
move
on,
we
can
move
on.
Let's
move
on
question
about
height
and
massing.
Q
B
Think
it's
probably
best
to
do
to
have
the
discussion
unless
you
have
a
different
point
of
view
here,
the
question
and
then
perhaps
weigh-in
with
discussion.
Let's
see
how
that
goes,
and
how
long
that
takes
will
obviously
be
looking
for
motions
and
there'll.
Be
some
discussion
with
the
motion
as
well.
Q
That
there
are
all
of
us
have
participated
in
the
lrpc
process
and
I.
Think
there's
probably
some
discussions
we'd
like
to
have
concerning
some
of
the
points
that
that
have
been
laid
out
for
this
evening.
As
we
begin
to
think
about
what
advice
we
like
to
give
to
staff
or
how
we
we
start
talking
about
things
we
think
should
be
kept
in
play.
If
you
will,
as
we
go
forward
with
the
RTA
and
then,
as
mr.
Farrelly
pointed
out,
the
five
or
six
weeks
before
a
final
document
very.
B
B
F
You
Commissioner
Segal
a
question
for
staff
on
page
52
and
the
heights
and
form
concept
map
we're
using
both
stories
and
feet
to
limit
or
guide
our
development
in
future
stories.
Is
there
a
necessity
with
feet
in
staffs
opinion
or
or
is
stories
a
defend?
If
enough,
given
our
you
know,
we
have
OAH,
so
I
guess
office
would
technically
be
allowed,
but
our
general
understanding
would
be
residential.
F
E
If
you
recall
at
the
July
lrpc
meeting,
the
previous
version
of
this
map
actually
was
expressing
maximum
recommended
Heights
only
in
terms
of
absolute
feet
and
not
stories,
but
we
did
receive
input
and
feedback
at
that
meeting
for
some
for
staff
to
consider
whether
or
not
it'd
be
beneficial
to
also
think
or
instead
think
about
maximum
building
heights
in
terms
of
stories.
So
we
think
there
is
value
in
that.
E
The
potential
for
development
here
to
take
the
form
of
office
versus
residential
and
it
wasn't
really
until
lrpc
number
five,
where
there
was
really
any
substantive
discussion
among
lrpc
and
the
terms
of
the
feedback
that
staff
heard
about
you
know
maybe
office
would
be
an
appropriate
use
here.
You
know
all
the
working
assumptions
that
staff
had
based
our
modeling
on
between
LR
pcs,
2,
&
5
had
all
been
presuming.
E
You
know
residential
development,
but
for
the
unified
commercial,
mixed
use,
development
scenario,
1a
and
so
for
that
reason,
in
particular,
there's
I
think
believe
good
value
in
having
that
foot.
You
know,
in
this
case
six
storeys
are
70
feet
to
provide
that
additional
limit.
Should
you
know
an
office
development
be
pursued
because
a
six
story
office
building
would
be
a
much
different
type
of
form
and
resulting
height
than
we
had
conceived
of
and
anticipated
in
our
modeling.
F
Mr.
seagull,
since,
if
you
don't
mind,
please
I
will
this
evening
be
making
a
motion
with
regard
to
height,
as
I'm
sure
you
all
have
anticipated
at
this
point
and
I
think
it's
something
we
should
all
think
about
carefully
as
we
move
forward,
but
I
do
think
that
hype
like
density
in
this
case,
needs
to
be
tied
to
the
provision
of
exceptional
community
benefits
and
specifically
those
benefits
being
provided
on-site.
So
as
I
work
forward,
I'll
try
to
get
you
a
host
some
language
later
on.
B
Okay,
when
you,
when
you
make
your
motion,
perhaps
you
can
speak
to
it
to
explain
exactly
under
which
process
the
establishment
that
concept
plan
or,
at
the
time
of
site
plan
I
just
like
to
have
that
specificity,
because
I
think
it
will
help
me
understand
and
and
the
community
and
staff
as
well.
What
we'd,
like
commissioners
role
thank.
P
P
P
E
It
really
doesn't
I
think
I
think
the
the
function.
This
is
basically
a
function
of
this
modeling
being
generated
in
between
the
july
lrpc
and
graphic
does
show
a
scenario
that
comports
with
the
recommendation.
The
top
does
not,
and
so
we
should
probably
go
back
and
take
another
look
at
that
to
make
sure
it's
reflecting
what
would
actually
be
supported
by
the
heights
plan.
Okay,.
P
Yeah
I
think
that
would
be
helpful
that
it's
kind
of
more
work
product
of
that
and
not
necessarily
what
was
considered
and
I
guess.
Similarly,
on
page
48,
principal
14
encourages
consolidation
of
the
parcels
and
I
think
here.
This
might
be
something
just
with
these
two
images.
This
is,
it
seems
to
be
more
illustrative
and
not
necessarily
that
this
would
be
incongruous
with
what
you
have
on
page
52
either,
but
is
that
true,
mr.
E
So
that,
actually
those
numbers
don't
do
not
reflect
that
modeled
stories,
but
that
is
a
good
comment
and
I
can
see
how
that's
raising
confusion
so
yeah
per
the
caption.
These
were
really
just
two
different
ways
of
thinking
about
how
meit's
sites
might
assemble
and
it
made
more
sense
when
there
was
a
supporting
table
that
was
presented
and
passed
lrpc
meetings
and
without
that
table
here,
I
understand
the
cause
for
confusion.
So
let
us
take
another
look
at
how
to
reconcile
that.
P
R
There
is
often
an
outline
of
the
desired
heights
and
also
stated
way
that
if
a
site
plan
were
to
come
in
that
they
could
achieve
some
of
the
community
benefits
on
the
sites
by
buying
up
or
increasing
density.
Now
that
is
not
outlined
here
and
I
just
wanted
to
know.
If
you
could
make
a
comment
about,
you
know
the
conversation
around
that
and
if
that
was
thought
about
as
part
of
this
process,
certainly.
E
We
hit
we
had
given
sort
of
extensive
thought
to
how
the
implementation
component
of
this
might
work
and
I.
Think
it's
important
to
first
recognize
that
and
I
believe
it's
in
the
staff
report,
in
particular
pages
in
the
discussion
of
land
use,
plan
designation.
So
it's
really
on
page
12,
there's
a
that
section
of
the
report.
Talks
about
potential
development
densities
and
general
land
use
plan
designations,
and
it
goes
into
some
detail
and
level
discussion
about
the
thought
process.
In
terms
of
how
this
was
approached
and
I
think
it's
important
to
point
out
that
the.
E
In
this,
in
this
instance,
the
recommendation
to
consider
potential
future
changes,
for
instance
for
some
of
the
study
area
to
medium
office.
Apartment
hotel
is
one
of
the
recommendations
of
the
report,
correct
and
so,
but
there's
also
in
the
staff
report,
and
this
really
ties
back
to
a
lot
of
the
modeling
that
was
conducted
during
the
lrpc
study.
E
E
But
you
know
we
saw
that
outcome
in
some
of
the
modeling
that
we
had
presented
back
in
lrpc
number
two
and
three
and
I
think
that
was
those
were
outcomes
that
were
not
supported.
Generally
speaking,
and
so
in
this
instance,
we
actually
looked
to
a
model
of
the
Roz
on
the
courthouse
urban
design
study
and,
if
anyone's
familiar
with
that
document
from
2003,
that
was
more
of
a
form
based
planning
approach,
and
it
was
ultimately
an
urban
design
study
document
that
was
adopted
by
the
board
and
it
alluded
to
what
glop
designations
could
be
appropriate.
E
But
the
process
followed
to
actually
change.
The
glop
is
consistent
with
the
approach
conceived
here,
which
is
the
glop,
would
not
change
until
site
plans
and
rezoning
czar
acted
upon
as
well,
and
the
expectation
in
that
instance,
which
is
really
the
same
way.
This
plan
is
being
approached.
Is
that
should
the
board
adopt
this
document,
it's
the
county's
expectation
that
any
site
plan
should
be.
E
You
know
advancing
and
achieving
as
many
of
these
principles
as
a
pertinent
to
that
particular
site
in
order
to
sort
of
merit
the
approval
of
that
site
plan
no
I
understand
that
was
a
bit
of
a
long-winded
way
to
address
that
question.
I'm,
not
sure
if
it
fully
answers
it
but
you'll.
Let
me
know
if
there's
any
questions.
B
Do
you
want
to
come
back
because
I
would
just
come
back
and
say
how
then
would
affordable
housing,
which
normally
is
a
community
benefit
that
you
earn?
How
would
affordable
I
mean
it's
a
different
process?
So
could
you
explain
that?
Because
we
have
a
developer,
app'
is
going
to
build
affordable
housing,
but.
E
Certainly,
and
so
all
right,
certainly
and
so
I
mean
affordable.
How
I
think
it
needs
should
be
recognized
that
affordable
housing
is
achieved
in
a
variety
of
different
ways.
We've
seen
site
plans
come
through.
We
see
many
site
plans
come
through
where
a
certain
level
of
bonus
density
is
sought
and
in
in
order
to
achieve
that
bonus
density,
some
number
of
affordable
units
or
provided
for
in
some
way
shape
or
form.
But
that's
certainly
not
the
only
case.
E
In
fact,
we've
seen
other
projects
come
forward
where
there
is
no
bonus
density
associated
with
it,
but
they're
you
know,
90
percent
or
a
hundred
percent
committed,
affordable
units
such
as
a
recent
example,
would
be
the
springs
in
in
Ballston
and
at
Carlin,
Springs
Road
and
Thomas
Street
there
that
dent
that,
if
I
recall
the
floor
area
ratio
for
that
project
is
three
point
two
four
or
below,
and
so
while
it
provides
a
significant
number
of
committed,
affordable
housing
units,
there's
no
bonus
density
associated
with
that
site.
Planner.
Q
Chairman,
if,
if
I
may,
I,
think
that
that
the
springs
is
an
interesting
example,
I
think
what
a
lot
of
us
are
are
looking
at
is
maybe
not
even
just
necessarily
the
affordable
housing,
zoning
ordinance
requirements,
the
zoning
requirements
and
what
densities
that
you
can
get
through
the
provision
of
affordable
housing,
but
thinking
even
a
little
more
broadly.
Since
this.
Q
B
D
R
You,
commissioner,
you
got
community
because
that
is
exactly
what
was
giving
me
pause,
that
we
do
have
an
affordable
housing
master
plan.
It's
not
really
and
perhaps
I'm
making
some
assumptions,
but
it's
not
really
the
Apple
property
that
I'm
worried
about
not
coming
in
with
any
affordable
housing,
but
it's
the
other
potential
buildings
on
this
site
or
on
these
sites.
That
I
would
hope
would
also
contribute
to
affordable
housing
in
that
area
as
well
and
I'm
not
sure
what
incentive
they
have
to
achieve
it.
E
Secondly,
as
far
as
I
need
to
copy
out
what
I
said
earlier
about
the
floor
area
ratios
that
were
modeled
in
densities,
that
you
know
the
2.5
to
3
that
really
the
resulting
density
is
really
going
to
depend
on
sort
of
the
unit
sizes
for
residential
projects.
The
unit
sizes
that
a
developer
might
propose
because,
as
a
units
per
acre
district,
you
know
if
they're,
providing
on
average
smaller
unit
sizes.
That
very
well
could
put
them
into
a
situation
where
they
may
be
looking
at
a
notable
percentage
of
bonus
density
being
included.
B
P
E
S
P
S
S
P
I
would
certainly
encourage
staff
to
be
a
little
bit
more
inclusive
at
this
stage
of
what
we
might
see.
These
are
large
streets
on
what
we've
heard
for
many
of
the
people
tonight
right,
not
one
as
big
big
streets,
kind
of
cutting
through
this
site.
If
we
could
go
back
to
page
50
quickly,
a
couple
more
questions
here
so
in
the
July
report,
which
was
similar
to
I,
think
what
we
see
in
page
19,
which
you
don't
have
to
jump
to
there
were
nub
streets
and
things
that
didn't
cut
all
the
way.
S
All
right,
I'll
continue
that
I
know
that
there
are
a
number
of
different
alternatives
that
were
looked
at
throughout
the
process,
and
so
we
considered
many
of
those
and
I
think
there's
still
some
opportunities
for
some
different
things,
maybe
just
a
little
bit
different
from
what
we
see
here
with
the
orange
lines.
I
think
the
reason
is
generally
is
a
County
policy
towards
construction
of
new
streets
that
connect
to
other
streets.
We
don't
really
like
to
see
the
cul-de-sac
or
the
just
the
driveway.
Those
are
not
very
efficient
in
terms
of
moving
anything
transportation.
S
They
have
drawbacks
in
that
they
tend
to.
You
know
they
tend
to
result
in
more
traffic,
actually
more
vehicle
miles
traveled
because
they
have
little
connectivity.
They
do
have
a
flaw
of
there's
really
only
one
way
in
and
out.
If
anything
should
happen
to
that,
one
in
or
one
way
out,
traffic
gets
backed
up.
It's
congested,
it's
difficult
for
emergency
vehicles
to
kind
of
access
properties
when
they
have
only
one
way
in
and
out,
and
they
often
we've
gone
from,
have
a
case
these
days
where
we
have
the
fire
fire
marshal.
H
S
And
that
there
is
some
vehicle
or
access
generally
adjacent
to
that.
But
there
is
not
a
through
connection
through
to
Fairfax
Drive
and
that's
maybe
a
result
of
the
fact
that
that
was
planned
20-plus
years
ago
and
we
were
a
little
less
aware
of
what
we
were
wanted
at
that
point,
that
we
didn't
have
this
massive
transportation
plan.
But
I
can't.
P
P
S
Mean
have
you
have
we
modeled
it
is
that
what
you're
asking
for
sort
of
that
kind
of
a
look
at
I
mean?
Certainly
there
is
there
is
existing
signalized
intersection
and,
and
we
thought
that
that
would
be
an
ideal
location
to
try
to
focus
some
of
the
access
point
on
and
so
that
one
wasn't
in
use.
I,
don't
know
if
the
other
one
that
we're
showing
there
that
somewhat
to
the
east
of
it.
F
You
mr.
Siegel
I,
want
to
follow
up
to
staff
just
to
help
me
again
understand
the
logic
about
connecting
to
existing
streets,
which
we
use
to
get
to
the
intersection
at
the
South
on
Washington
Boulevard
and
to
avoid
the
nubs,
but
we're
not
applying
it
at
the
12th
Road
north
to
create
the
grid.
We're
we're
explicitly
holding
that
line
and.
S
S
We
thought
it
was
appropriate
to
bring
in
some
pedestrian
access
bicycle
pedestrian
access,
but
the
Ecola
access
might
be
over
a
little
bit
overwhelming
on
those
neighborhoods
and
to
not
include
that
because
of
the
the
nature
of
what
is
there
today
and
we
suspect
would
remain
for
a
longer
period
of
time.
So,
okay,.
Q
Wanted
to
follow
up
on
in
the
direction
that
commissioners
role
was
going
if
I
may
and
Brett
or
Anthony,
would
you
pull
up
my
slide?
Please
I
had
asked
I
have
a
slide
because
we
all
like
visuals
right
at
this
time
of
night,
oh
okay!
Well,
it's
still
early,
and
so
here
we
are.
This
is
this
is
just
for
full
disclosure.
My
first
attempt
at
PowerPoint,
so
it's
not
too
bad
I,
don't
think
so.
Q
This
is
the
aerial
of
of
the
study
area
and
what
you
see
in
the
green
arrow
is
across
the
George
Mason
University
fdic
campus
and,
as
commissioner
Searle
pointed
out,
there
is
a
pedestrian
connection
through
there.
There
is
also
a
loading
dock
on
the
safe
way
there.
The
road
is
sort
of
split,
there's
a
walkway
and
then
a
drive
goes
down.
That
goes
to
the
loading
dock
of
excuse,
me
giant.
Q
You
can
tell
where
I
shop
and
then
it
goes
down
to
the
parking
garage
entrance
for
FDIC
and
then
it
veers
to
the
left
and
goes
under
founders
square
and
goes
as
sort
of
an
alley
that
has
access
to
the
parking
garage
or
founders
square
and
then
comes
out
further
down
on
Kirkwood.
So
there
is
no
opportunity
for
a
street
here.
I
know
that
George
Mason
University
is
rethinking
Phase
three
of
their
campus.
Q
We
had
approved
an
MoU
of
sort
of
three
phases
back
in
the
90s
when
I
was
in
the
Boston
Virginia
square,
Civic
Association,
and
now
we're
rethinking
that
there's
also,
probably
because
of
the
presence
of
FDIC
they're
not
going
to
want
to
street
through
there
I
think
we
all
know
how
our
federal
tenants
tend
to
be
and-
and
we
want
them
here
in
the
county,
so
the
dotted
bloom
there's
a
there's
an
X
there.
So
that
means
there's
no
through
Street
or
connectivity.
Q
There's
then,
a
solid,
a
dashed
blue
line
through
there,
which
would
be
one
of
the
proposed
north-south
streets
and
you'll
notice,
there's
an
X
at
the
end
of
it
because
it
doesn't
connect
to
any
grid
either.
It
goes
just
to
north
13th
Street,
which
is
small
neighborhood
street
there.
There
is
also
a
yellow
excuse
me,
a
blue,
dashed
line
that
does
come
down
from
twelfth
Road,
which
it's
been
unclear
to
me.
Q
How
to
interpret
page
50
at
first
I
was
giddy
with
delight
when
I
saw
it,
because
I
thought
that
I
was
seeing
the
two
stubb
streets
from
the
July
draft,
with
pedestrians
in
the
middle,
and
then
I
was
disabused
of
that
so
I'm
not
taking
anything
for
granted
and
I'm.
Just
saying
that,
should
there
be
a
street
that
comes
down
through
there,
it
it
connects
to
12th
red
which,
as
mr.
viola
has
rightly
said,
is
a
very
small
unimproved
Street.
Q
That
I
don't
think
because
of
the
property
ownership
is
ever
going
to
have
an
opportunity
to
get
much
bigger,
never
know,
never
know,
but
probably
not
so
what
I've
also
put
on
our
stars
that
indicate
traffic
control
signals.
So
you
have
one
at
Kirkwood
and
Washington
Boulevard.
You
have
a
small
green
one.
That's
actually
a
light
for
the
pedestrian
and
loading
dock
connection
across
Washington
Boulevard.
Then
you
have
one
within
a
block.
Q
Q
So
what
I've
done
with
the
red
dotted
lines
is
to
show
what
would
probably
be
desire
lines
of
cut
through
traffic
to
avoid
signalized,
intersections
and
I
know
from
the
lrpc
meetings
with
the
representative
of
the
neighborhood
there
that
they
are
very
concerned
about
allowing
more
access
points
for
more
bailing
out
of
vehicles
from
an
arterial
Street,
which
is
Washington,
Boulevard
and
I
share
their
concerns.
The
solid
blue
line
down
at
the
bottom
indicates
possible
vehicle
access
with
which
I
think
from
all
the
lrpc
meetings.
Q
We
agree
that,
whether
it's
what
width
of
the
street,
whether
it's
an
alley,
a
loading
area,
how
that
works,
it
does
provide
internal
circulation
for
development.
On
that
block,
going
back
up
to
the
where
the
green
arrows
across
the
street
there's
the
right
tip
to
yellow
areas
that
really
go
back
to
the
nub.
Q
Street
idea
that
allow
in-and-out
traffic
to
a
garage
that
would
serve
the
légion
site
where
they
would
immediately
go
onto
Washington
Boulevard,
so
no
access
back
to
13th
Street
on
13th
Street,
the
Y
development,
we're
not
sure
how
many
curb
cuts
there
would
be.
I
would
say
that
probably
one
of
the
things
that's
a
down
side
of
this
is
that
any
development
there
would
probably
go
on
13th
I
mean
particularly
if
there's
a
nub
Street,
that's
where
vehicles
are
going
to
go.
Q
Q
That
I
think
one
of
the
things
we
should
have
in
the
plan,
of
course,
is
to
make
these
pedestrian
and
bicycle
connections
only,
but
to
be
wide
enough
to
accommodate
emergency
vehicles.
We
know
that
there
are
different,
paving
style
styles
and
things
that
can
be
done
and
widths
that
that
allow
emergency
vehicle
access,
so
yes,
emergency
vehicles
need
to
get
around
these
sites.
Q
They
could
certainly
forty
is
probably
too
high
for
this
block,
but
something
like
that,
and
so
that's
what
we
wouldn't
I
I
personally
had
a
new
vision
for
this
particular
block
and
that's
the
kind
of
connectivity
we
want
and
just
to
go
a
little
bit
further.
One
of
the
speakers
mentioned
it
this
evening
and
it's
and
it
sort
of
captivated
me-
and
that
was
the
word
campus
and
mr.
Q
foo
Cirelli,
when
he
and
I
have
have
been
having
back
and
forth
about
connectivity,
and
this
block
asked
me
what
I
really
sort
of
my
vision
and
why-
and
it
suddenly
dawned
on
me
that
I
really
see
development
in
this
block
as
sort
of
a
campus
that
there
are
main
buildings,
there's
a
there
should
be
green
and
we
already
have
the
ball
family
graveyard
that
necessitates
that
and
it's
an
opportunity
for
pedestrians.
We
would
have
people
using
the
Y.
We
can
figure
out
how
to
make
sure
that
it's
always
there,
the
metro
isn't
going
anyplace.
Q
We
would
certainly
have
good
access
to
that
and
a
transitional
campus
that
has
green
as
an
opportunity
we
haven't
had
in
the
corridor
before
as
a
transition
site
and
it's
sort
of
mirrors
in
an
opposite
way.
The
campus
across
the
street,
which
is
very
paved
but
as
the
University
and
FDIC
so
here
ends
the
sermon
for
tonight
on
circulation,
I'm,
sorry,
but
I.
It's
it.
We've
really
been
thinking
a
lot
about
this.
Q
B
O
You,
madam
chair,
so
we
heard
from
PC
some
of
the
develop
developer,
applicants
and
other
PC
members
that
they
would
like
more
pedestrian
connections.
There's
a
sense
that
we'd
like
you
to
consider
things
like
pedestrian
priority
streets
that
allow
fire
access,
if
necessary,
on
the
draft
from
July
page
36
of
the
draft.
O
There
was
something
else
that
we
don't
include
in
our
current
circulation
in
public
space
concept
map,
and
that
is
specifically
the
pedestrian
and
bicycle
connections
around
the
perimeter
of
the
site,
and
we
had
been
talking
throughout
the
process
not
just
of
ensuring
those
through
the
site,
but
also
the
perimeter,
making
sure
that
we
did
have
very
accessible
wide
enough
sidewalks
that
people
could
walk
their
dogs
on
them
or
take
a
stroller.
So
I
do
have
a
slight
preference
for
that
as
well.
O
But
I
guess
this
is
getting
me
towards
a
bigger
question
and
that
is
for
purposes
of
considering
the
RTA.
Does
one
of
these
concept
Maps
give
us
more
flexibility
going
forward
in
terms
of
what
we
might
ultimately
decide
is
most
appropriate.
There's
a
lot
of
support
in
the
community
for
these
substrates
I
really
appreciate
Commissioner.
Your
community's
visual
that
helps
illustrate
a
lot
of
what
we
heard
throughout
the
process
and
the
current
version
of
the
concept
map
seems
to
assume
vehicle
er
access
from
13th
to
Washington
and
and
I.
O
Don't
I'm,
not
comfortable,
supporting
that
going
forward.
I
think
we
should
consider
to
keep
looking
at
the
option
of
the
stub
streets,
pedestrian
bike
connections,
so
can
can
we
get
some
sense
from
staff?
Just
one
of
these
concept
maps
give
us
more
flexibility
going
forward
for
purposes
of
the
RTA.
E
Think
in
terms
of
seeking
clarity
in
terms
of
perhaps
focusing
in
on,
you
know
what
the
appropriate
concept,
what
an
appropriate
concept
map
should
be.
Ultimately,
you
know
one
one
potential
path
to
get
there
would
be
if,
in
tonight's
action
or
motion
the
Commission
included,
you
know
sort
of
identifying
their
potential
recommended
change
to
this
map
that,
if
there's
you
know,
ultimately,
the
Commission
decides
to
support
something
other
than
staff
is
what
staff
is
recommending.
E
We
will
flag
that
as
an
issue
when
we
present
this
to
the
board
in
October,
and
you
know
to
the
extent
that
that
board
discussion
for
the
RTA
is
an
opportunity
to
then
provide
direction
back
to
staff
in
terms
of
okay.
Well,
we
know
we
understand
the
staff
recommendation,
we
understand
what
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
Transportation
Commission's
are
recommending.
We
would
then
potentially
be
able
to
seek
additional
direction
from
the
board
in
terms
of
moving
forward
towards
a
final
draft
that
makes
sense
I.
Q
Think
what
you're
saying
mister
for
Cirelli
is
that
if
we
feel
strongly
about
this,
you
would
expect
to
come
flying
out
of
our
mouth
later
this
evening.
Something
that
says
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
that
the
county
board
include
or
substitute
a
the
map
from
page
36
of
the
July
draft.
For
page
50
of
the
current
draft
right
is
that
that
what
you're
saying
possibly.
E
Q
Q
So
so
maybe
it
is
that
we
make
motions
about
recommending
that
the
county
board
include
or
substitute
or
whatever,
in
VRT,
a
draft
or
in
the
RTA
when
it
comes
to
them.
And
it's
and
it's
understood
that
you
know
we're
not
necessarily
you
telling
you
what
to
write
we're
trying
to
express
our
preference
and
that's
because
of
our
nature
of
being
advisory
to
the
county
board,
that's
sort
of
how
we
have
to
do
it.
I.
B
I
would
just
add
to
that
that
I
think
there's
been
a
very
clear
discussion,
at
least
verbally
in
what
are
the
features
of
circulation
transportation,
auto
access.
The
that
we
would
like
to
see
that
the
community
has
expressed
an
interest
in
seeing
some
of
which
elements
are
either
not
present
in
on
page
50
or
are.
B
Not
clearly
present,
because
I
think
there
was
some
confusion
about
which
diagram
offered
more
flexibility,
etcetera,
given
that
this
is
guidance,
it's
not
regulatory
as
long
I.
Think,
as
we
have
a
list
of
features
the
the
idea
of
a
campus,
the
idea
of
increased
pedestrian
access,
rather
than
having
Auto
access,
Trump
every
other
of
form
of
circulation.
I
think
that's
that's
kind
of
the
numb
of
it.
But
we'll
see
when
we
come
to
a
motion,
commissioner,
we
are
and
then
Commissioner
Lang
tell
me.
I
have.
N
Q
N
Promise
I
will
try
to
not
be
snarky
about
PowerPoint
I'm.
Just
trying
to
understand
the
concerns.
I
want
to
I'm,
not
sure
I,
understand
the
specific
concerns
that
you're
trying
to
convey
so
I'm.
Looking
at
two
east-west
red
dotted
lines
right
and
as
one
of
them
supposed
to
be,
are
they
moved
just
a
little
bit
to
the
right?
Is
one
of
them
supposed
to
be
on
top
of
Washington
Boulevard
and
the
other
is
supposed
to
be?
Yes,.
N
I've
I've
I've
done
exactly
that,
okay,
so
the
the
concern
that
is
being
represented
here
am
I
right
is
that
in
lieu
of
traveling
east
to
west
on
Washington
Boulevard,
that
a
motorist
would
go
north
to
13th
somewhere
between
Quincy,
where
it
cuts
off
to
the
west
and
Kirkwood,
where
it
cuts
off
to
the
east
and
that
they
would,
they
would
go
up
a
block
to
bypass
the
three
blocks
of
of
Washington
Boulevard
that
that's
the
concern.
Okay,
well,.
Q
Yes,
that
and
that's
what
we
heard
from
the
neighborhood
in
the
red
for
me.
It
it.
It
even
became
more
of
the
policy
and
and
thought
about
connectivity
and
creating
a
street
grid
and
the
fact
that
the
addition
of
the
north-south,
particularly
and
even
the
east-west
as
streets,
doesn't
actually
fit
into
a
grid,
because
there's
no
connection
on
either
end.
All
it's
really
providing
is
access
to
what
would
be
a
cut
through
in
the
neighborhood
and
is
already,
although
the
beep
saw
from
the
traffic
counts.
N
N
I
see
sit
down
and
we'll
come
down
Kirkwood
and
then
use
13th
as
a
way
to
get
westbound
more
quickly
rather
than
okay,
yep
okay,
I
I
was
I
was
imagining
the
main
flow
of
traffic
coming
from
the
West.
Hence
my
confusion
on
that
on
that
particular
concern,
but
it's
from
the
north.
Okay,
thank
you
that
that
clarifies
the
concern
a
lot
actually
Commissioner.
T
Lang
tell
me
thank
you,
madam
chair
I
also
have
a
concern
about
the
number
of
north-south
connections
were
putting
on
the
northern
part
of
the
property.
We
have
a
large
block
right
there,
of
course,
which
I
and
I
agree
with
having
it
be
a
permeable.
That
means
we
should
definitely
have
the
pedestrian
pathways
I
very
much
agree
with
Commissioner
yamini's
analysis
of
all
of
this
I
have
the
same
concerns
about
the
streets,
pedestrian
vehicular
streets
versus
pedestrian
streets,
access.
T
That
sort
of
thing,
so
I
concur
with
her
observations,
but
I
also
want
to
raise
that
this
is
a
large
block.
The
YMCA
is
on
it
right
now.
We
have
a
pedestrian
path,
cutting
right
through
the
middle
of
that
site.
I
want
to
be
sure
that
there's
continues
to
be
flexibility,
that,
when
a
site
plan
does
come
in
for
this,
that
that
the
ymc
has
the
ability
with
whether,
for
programmatic
reasons,
economic
reasons.
What
ever
that
this
pedestrian
path
is
not
in
stone
that
it
could
be
moved,
it
could
be
different.
T
It
may
not
even
work.
Where
are
we
when
we're
balancing
what
is
needed
for
that
site
right
now?
The
YMCA
is
using
that
entire
site
for
it
for
programmatic
uses
how
that
will
come
in
in
a
site
plan.
We
don't
know
at
this
point
and
I
don't
want
to
preclude
the
ability
of
the
YMCA
to
work
that
site
to
its
best
use
for
the
county
and
it's
in
its
knees,
which
is
also
the
county's
needs.
T
B
B
Map
the
circulation
public
space
concept
map
on
page
36
of
the
July
draft,
because
it
appeared
to
be
setting
up
a
street
grid
which
was
premature
because
there
hasn't
been
a
site
plan
yet
to
see
how
they.
Why
would
mass
and
and
take
a
presence
within
this
with
a
block?
So
it
was
that
one
of
the
reasons
for
going
to
the
broad,
transparent
orange
indicators.
U
U
In
the
end,
the
land-use
concept
mapped
as
us
as
you
can
see
there
as
a
stippled
kind
of
green
hatch,
but
you
know
I
think
there
is
flexibility
in
that
connection
that
could
shift
east
or
west,
but
the
idea
and
intent
there
is
really
to
provide
a
pedestrian
green
connection
from
the
cemetery
to
13th,
Street,
north
and
the
tree
preservation
area.
So,
but
again,
flexibility
is
built
in
with
that
that
graphic
thank.
N
Now
I
can
ask
my
real
question
and
thank
you
again
to
Commissioner
a
community
for
helping
me
better
understand
what
the
expressed
concern
was.
I
I'm
I
started
on
the
Commission.
I
was
taking
a
final
during
May
18th
and
I
was
taking
a
much
bigger
test
on
July
25th,
so
I
am
new
to
this
process,
so
I.
Thank
you
for
your
indulgence
on
my
learning
curve
in
Pentagon
City.
N
We
have
this
phase
development
plan
that
has
recently
been
coming
through
the
Commission's
and
one
of
the
next
stages
envisions
a
pedestrian
priority
street
on
Elm
Street
I
believe
where
there
is
not
a
street
currently
and
I.
If
I
had
a
slot,
I
would
put
it
up
and
I
I
want
it.
My
unfortunately
you're
all
squinting
your
eyes,
I
was
hoping
to
see
a
different
facial
expression
because
I
want
to
it.
N
I
was
hoping
that
you
might
recall
what
I'm
talking
about
immediately,
but
it's
one
of
these
streets
where
you
know
there
are,
there
are
no
curbs.
It
looks
like
a
very
wide
sidewalk.
It's
similar
in
nature
to
Nicollet
Mall,
as
was
discussed
in
Minneapolis,
was
discussed
by
one
of
the
public
commenters,
and
the
idea
is
to
make
it
look
to
motorists
like
a
sidewalk
that
is
also
amenable
to
vehicular
traffic
and
I.
I
can't
remember
exactly
what
the
distinction
is
between
that
and
the
pedestrian
priority
street
that
we
approved
recommended
for
for
Courthouse
Square.
N
If
there's
a
difference
between
these
two
models,
I
guess
I'm
wondering
whether
or
not
either
of
them
were
considered
in
the
context
of
these
of
connecting
these
stub
streets
or
the
model.
If
it's
the
same
and
if
not
whether
that
was
a
decision
or
whether
that's
something
that
could
be
revisited
between
the
board
hypothetically
advertising
and
then
ultimately
voting
on
it
in
November
I
mean.
S
I'm
pretty
familiar
with
it
with
the
proposal,
that's
down
there
in
Pentagon,
City
and
I.
Think
that
case
it's
really
a
matter
of
they're
trying
to
link
up
there
kind
of
high-rise
apartment
development
with
a
sort
of
a
park,
a
Plaza,
that's
jacent
across
the
street,
so
they've
reduced
the
curbs
they
put
in
maybe
a
special
paving
and
kind
of
made
it
sort
of
a
little
more
permeable
crossing
for
a
hundred
yards
or
so
on
that
Street,
a
section
but
they're
also
trying.
N
S
I
mean
the
way
it's
it
is.
The
the
whole
development
is
designed.
It
really
doesn't
go
very
far.
It's
internal
circulation
for
the
most
part.
Within
that
larger
multi,
building
kind
of
development,
it
doesn't
I,
don't
know
if
it
I
guess
it
does
connect
12th
and
13th
streets,
so
it
does
have
a
little
bit
of
a
connectivity,
but
it
is
not
a
lengthy
section
of
roadway
that
you
might
use
for
much
travel
at
all.
We're.
N
B
Appreciate
your
raising
the
issue-
and
we
have
been
talking
about-
we've-
mentioned
priority
pedestrian
streets
and
shared
streets,
but
that
sort
of
level
of
detail.
What
I'd
like
to
do
is
move
on,
make
sure
we
cover
the
agenda
and
I
believe
we're
going
to
hear
a
motion
about
circulation
transportation,
and
if
you
have
any
remaining
questions,
maybe
you
could
make
them
at
that
time.
We
won't
be
able
to
solve
the
problem
tonight.
That's
not
the
exercise
and
it's
simply
too.
N
S
B
E
Looking
back
at
the
current
language
for
principle,
5,
which
really
speaks
to
you
know
providing
the
appropriate
amount
of
parking,
basically
not
too
much
not
too
little,
but
then
also
strongly
encouraging
any
structured
parking
to
be
below
grade.
So
this
is
something
that
it's
a
wreckage
eneral
II,
it's
recommendation.
That
appears
in
a
lot
of
our
you
know:
sector
plans
in
the
area,
planning
type
documents,
I
think
in
certain
instances.
You
know,
we've
also
add,
did
an
additional
degree
of
detail.
It
says
you
know:
should
you
have
any
level
of
above
grade
parking?
E
There
might
be
a
preference,
for
you
know,
may
not
be
excluded
or
precluded
outright,
but
to
the
extent
that
topographic
conditions
or
other
features
or
factors
lead
to
that
as
part
of
a
proposal
that
you
know
at
a
minimum.
If
there
is
above
grade
parking,
the
edges
of
above
a
parking
facing
like
the
public
right-of-way,
but
especially
arterial
streets
and
oftentimes,
you
know
urban
center,
local
streets
and
neighborhood
streets
should
be
wrapped,
you
know
or
lined
with
active
uses.
We
could
certainly
consider
you
know
how
similar
language
might
be
included
here.
There's
also
I.
E
In
some
instance,
a
lot
of
the
alleys
that
we
see
being
you
know,
planned
and
implemented
in
the
county,
aren't
necessarily
the
most
optimal
pedestrian
spaces,
and
so
there's
there's
those
almost
this
just
inherent
conflict
between
those
two
things,
and
so
you
can
think
about.
Well,
if
we,
these
are
alley
like
connections,
what
is
their
design?
What
is
their
treatment?
What
is
their
dimension?
How
can
all
those
details
be
worked
out
in
a
way
that
makes
for
the
positive
experience?
E
B
O
Responding
to
mr.
almonds
concern
about
the
retail
on
the
property
on
Washington.
Well,
we
do
have
a
preference
for
that
that
came
out
of
the
lrpc
discussions.
I
wanted
to
know,
if
that's
a
requirement
from
the
change
in
the
MTP,
when
we
changed
that
portion
of
Washington
Boulevard
does
it
require
some
sort
of
retail.
It's.
T
Tell
me,
following
up
on
Commissioner
Garen's
comment,
the
retail
or
retail
equivalents
along
Washington
Boulevard.
Is
it
even
necessary
to
have
those
I
know?
The
county
has
the
listed
as
being
one
of
those
type
of
streets.
Given
the
shrinkage
in
need,
retail
and
given
the
steep
slope
there,
the
lack
of
retail
on
the
other
side
or
down
Washington,
Boulevard
or
Clarendon?
Is
it
really
even
wise
to
have
any
be
required
there?
Even
a
retail
equivalent,
be
required.
I
think
this
is
almost
a
dead
zone
for
this
type
of
use.
T
It
might
be
better
if
it
is
just
purely
residential
I'm,
throwing
this
out
as
an
idea,
because
I
am
very
concerned
that
this
is
not
the
right
place
for
those
type
of
uses.
It's
a
busy
street
there's.
You
know
up
the
hill
yeah
where
we
have
Rockland's
and
casual
adventure,
but
certainly
down
toward
Kirkwood.
It
just
doesn't
seem
to
make
sense
to
me
and
I'm
afraid
that
that
would
be
a
kiss
of
death
to
require
something.
There
will
have
a
lot
of
empty
space.
Q
Just
just
to
follow
on
to
Commissioner
Len
Tommy's
comment,
I,
agree,
I
think
the
low
were
part
of
Washington
Boulevard
is
a
is
a
little
bit
fraught,
but
as
we
discussed
when
we
adopted
the
retail
plan
and
just
as
a
footnote
to
that
mr.
Foose
irelia
I,
don't
think
is
Washington
Boulevard
actually
called
out
in
the
retail
plan.
The
adopted
retail
plan.
It.
Q
So
what
we're
sort
of
building
on
on
concepts
that
we
have-
and
one
of
them
really
has
been
that
many
times
I
think
in
the
past,
we've
tended
to
require
retail,
because
what
we
wanted
was
Street
activation.
So
maybe
it's
it's
appropriate
to
talk
about
these
blocks
are
particularly
lower,
Washington
Boulevard
as
making
sure
that
the
design
of
any
new
building
activates
the
street.
However,
they
want
to
prove
that
they
do
that,
whether
it's
by
lighting
transparency
and
in
to
what's
going
on.
Q
However,
that
is
because
that
sort
of
been
the
goal
of
retail
it
is
to
serve
the
community
is
to
have
needs
right
there.
It
is
to
be
the
urban
village
so
that
you
can
walk
to
your
dry,
cleaner
and
your
ATM
machine,
because
God
knows
nobody
goes
into
the
bank
anymore,
and
you
know
that
sort
of
thing,
but
but
it
really
is
also
about
the
pedestrian
realm.
So
I
I
agree
about
the
absolute
retail
I.
I
would
like
to
see
the
language
about
how
you
design
to
the
pedestrian
realm
and.
T
B
N
You
I
think
that
there
are
two
things
that
we
need
to
think
about
when
we
think
about
the
activity
of
this
one-fifth
of
a
mile
stretch
all
of
this
glove,
and
that
is
that
that's
the
only
part
where
it
is
dead
right
now
across
Kirkwood
we're
looking
at
a
site
plan.
That's
going
to
be
adding
retail
to
that
intersection.
B
P
You,
madam
chair
I,
just
want
to
ask
staff
why
they
did
put
the
retail
here,
and
actually
you
were
kind
of
respond
to
some
of
the
comments
that
you
just
heard
about
whether
you
know
having
some
other
mechanism
to
have
the
fenestration
and
transparency
would
perhaps
achieve
what
you
might
have
wanted
to
achieve
here.
If
we
got
rid
of
the
you
know,
the
Gold
Line.
E
Maybe
it
would
be
helpful
to
for
this
plan
to
have
a
nod
or
to
have
some
encouragement
that
you
know
the
provision
of
retail
space
in
the
ground
floor.
The
new
development
could
then
provide
an
opportunity
for
some
of
those
established
retailers
to
reestablish
themselves.
In
you
know
this
same
sort
of
street
frontage,
I
think
others,
the
other
thing
to
point
out
to
GM
you
and
conversations
with
leadership
at
the
University.
E
There
was
a
lot
of
interest
in
you
know
looking
at
this
particular
street
segment
as
an
opportunity
to
provide
more
amenities
to
the
campus
as
the
campus
grows.
You
know,
based
on
existing
conditions.
They
feel
they're
a
bit
of
an
island
in
terms
of
amenities
that
you
know
they
have
to
travel
eastward
to
Clarendon
a
few
blocks,
and
you
know
the
development
hasn't
happened
on
the
south
side
of
Fairfax
Drive,
yet
I
mean
when
those
things
happen.
E
They'll
have
more
offerings
and
amenities
immediately
around
them,
but
they
recognize
the
importance
of
some
of
those
retailers
today
and
would
like
to
see
them
expanded
upon.
Thirdly,
you
know
per
this
recommendation
and
further
guidance
in
the
retail
plan.
You
know
we're
the
recommendation,
isn't
necessarily
you
know
to
focus
exclusively
on
retail
and
when
we
talk
about
or
think
about
retail
equivalents,
it
does
cover
a
pretty
broad
range.
It
could
include
space
for
childcare
centers.
It
could
include
conference
facilities,
it
could
include
maker
spaces.
E
It
could
include,
you
know,
fitness
centers
for
the
residential
buildings
that
might
be
here.
So
you
know
all
those
things
in
terms
of
having
spaces
on
the
ground
floor
that
could
either
be
retail
or
retail
equivalent.
We
think
are
important
to
helping
to
activate
that
space
as
opposed
to
maybe
just
having
you
know,
a
stretch
of
ground
floor
residences
that
often
have
their
blinds
drawn
for
a
large
portion
of
the
day
and
are
sort
of
working
against
that
goal.
Thank.
P
You
mr.
Fiorelli
I
think
that's
helpful,
yeah
I'm
not
necessarily
concerned
about
this.
This
is
also
policy.
It's
not
you
know
it's
not
lost
so
we've
seen
other
applicants
come
forward
with
site
plans
and
not
not
do
the
whole
thing
so
even
in
more
dense
areas
and
clearin,
and
things
like
that.
So
I
think
this
gets
at
what
we
want
with
ministration
and
with
transparency
and
activating
the
street
streetscape
as
mr.
Hakim
you
talked
about
so
I
can
understand
if
my
colleagues
want
a
little
bit
less
for
the
RTA
but
I
think
I'm.
N
A
recent
student
at
that
campus,
who
also
has
a
job
which
is
the
case
for
many
of
the
students
at
that
campus
I-
think
that
that
second
point
that
was
just
made
cannot
be
understood
enough.
There
is
a
whole
lot
of
economic
activity
that
wants
to
happen
on
that
block
and
it's
not
happening
because
it's
Rockland's
or
walking.
R
Thank
you,
I
did
want
to
take
the
opportunity
to
commend
you
for
putting
in
the
plan
schools
as
well.
It's
one
of
the
first
plans,
I,
think
I've,
seen
with
schools
specifically
in
it,
except
for
the
Wilson
school
site.
So
even
though
I
I
won't
even
a
pine
as
to
what
kind
of
school
could
fit
here,
I
just
I
wanted
to
thank
you
for
for
actually
putting
it
in
a
daycare
centers
as
well.
Just.
B
Q
Just
frame
for
folks
that
what
we're
talking
about
is
you
see
along
12th
road
north
immediately
to
the
south?
There
are
single-family
homes.
You
will
note
that
they
share
the
block
with
the
sea,
to
land
and
during
in
preparation
for
the
study.
There
were
some
of
us
who
felt
very
strongly
that,
because
they
shared
the
block,
they
needed
to
be
addressed
in
some
way.
Q
Q
Knowing
that
we
have
at
some
point
lee
highway
coming
to
us,
where
we
are
going
to
face
other
situations
where
we
have
may
have
single
family
sharing
a
commercial
block
or
we're
going
to
have
a
single
family,
very
close
across
a
small
road
from
commercial
property
that
that
may
be
redeveloped
in
a
different
way
than
just
c2,
and
that
this
was
an
opportunity
to
begin
to
have
community
discussions
and
figure
out
how
that
works.
Or
could
it
work
or
what
what
are
possible
answers.
Q
But
it
was
decided
at
the
end
of
the
day,
not
to
do
that,
and
and
I
can
certainly
understand
the
feelings
of
the
people
who
live
there
and
they're
not
here
tonight,
but
some
of
those
houses
are
rental.
Some
are
owner-occupied
and
it's
really
scary
when
people
are
talking
about
what
what
can
and
can't
happen
to
yours
to
your
house,
but
there
I
also
feel
there's
an
obligation
to
think
about
how
those
structures
affect
proposals
inside
the
study
area.
Q
Because
does
that
mean
there
has
to
be
note
that
there's
a
proposed
lower
height
right
next
to
them,
as
in
deference
to
them,
some
of
them
are
older
homes.
We
know
that
in
your
houses
now
are
generally
45
feet
at
the
ridge
right
because
you
get
35
feet
and
it's
the
midpoint
of
the
roof
so,
depending
on
the
roof
type,
you
pick
you
can
have
a
taller
structure
who
knows
what's
gonna
happen
to
those
houses?
Who
knows
if
somebody
will
come
along
and
want
to
consolidate
I
know.
Mr.
Q
F
You
don't
mind
Commissioner
Siegel
later
on
this
evening.
I
am
going
to
make
two
separate
motions,
and
so
I
do
want
us
to
think
about
them.
Almost
it's
two
separate.
First,
there
are
the
seven
homes
that
are
south
of
12th,
Road,
north
and
and
I.
Take
this
very
personal.
I
live
in
a
single-family
home
with
the
street
in
front
of
me
that
looks
on
to
an
s3,
a
zoned
property
that
I
can
see.
F
Garden-Style
apartments,
mid-rise
and
townhomes.
So
I
live
in
a
transitional
zone
personally
and
you
can
all
go
google
where
I
live
if
you
wish,
but
but
I
do
take
that
seriously.
But
at
the
same
time
we
do
have
to
respect
our
missing
middle
and
we
have
to
respect
our
club,
which
currently
does
explicitly
respect
the
single-family
home
and,
and
here
I,
think
we're
missing
an
opportunity,
we're
missing
the
middle
because
we
miss
planning
the
middle.
F
In
my
opinion
and
I
I,
don't
I
draw
the
line
very
explicitly,
because
if
you
notice
to
the
west
north
Lincoln
Street,
we
have
duplexes
that
are
historically
contextualized
to
transition
to
the
single-family
neighborhood
beyond
and
I'm,
not
in
favor
of
us
I'm
in
favor
of
opportunities
to
the
owners,
and
that's
how
I
see
it.
Nobody
will
be
forced
to
move
I
suspect,
but
I
do
suspect
that
they
may
get
very
convincing
offers
from
people
who
who
may
very
well
have
wonderful
visions
for
our
community.
F
So
that's
with
respect
to
the
land
south
of
12th
Road
north
with
respect
to
the
single
home
that
was
excluded.
12Th
Road
north
to
North
Kansas
treat
I,
do
have
one
quick
question
for
staff,
and
that
is
staff.
The
is
there
any
other
reason.
Besides
that
it
was
not
within
the
glove
requested
that
we
did
not
include
the
single-family
home
at
the
corner
of
North
Kansas
and
12th
Road
north.
E
We'll
just
to
clarify
so
in
addition
to
the
three
sites,
the
YMCA,
the
American
Legion
and
the
11th
Street
Development
assemblage,
which
are
each
the
subject
of
formal
applications
to
the
county
to
change
the
glove.
The
all
the
other
properties
that
were
included
within
the
study
area,
which
include
a
number
of
properties
that
didn't
ask
to
be
included.
E
F
B
Hughes
could
could
we
wait
I'd
like
to
move
the
discussion
on.
You
can
make
your
motion
and
at
that
time
you
can
speak
to
it.
Okay,
anyone
else
out
parcels
or
shall
we
move
on
I
do
have
YMCA
and
I'd
like
to
hear
any
questions
comments
about
that
subject,
although
it's
it's
I
don't
know,
is
it
mentioned
in
documents,
I
I'm,
not
sure
I,
guess
it
is
commissioner
yeah
kamini.
Q
Mr.
Farrelly,
we
during
the
lrpc
discussions
and
all
of
us
are
very
cognizant
of
the
wise
desire
to
redevelop
and
and
make
their
facility
more
sustainable
for
the
use
of
all
of
our
community,
and-
and
indeed
we
know
that
there
are-
it
has
a
great
following,
and
there
are
people
from
lots
of
neighborhoods
that
use
the
Y.
Q
It
could
either
be
turned
to
private
hands
or
changed,
as
staff
explored
just
to
keep
in
the
back
of
our
minds
any
mechanisms
that
might
that
might
be
used
if
a
site
plan
comes
in.
That
would
help
us
in
that
deliberation
to
somehow
say,
as
part
of
one
of
the
conditions
that
the
Y
would
continue
on
that
site
as
a
community
available
facility.
E
It
calls
into
questions
in
terms
of
well.
You
know
what
what
would
be
the
point
or
manner
of
enforcement
to
you
know
a
site
that
that
zoning
violation
and
so
from
a
land
use
perspective.
I,
think
the
way
we've
thought
about
this
is
that
you
know
the
adoption
of
a
plan
here.
Sort
of
sets
identifies
the
principles,
identifies
the
goals
that
you
know.
E
Principle,
nine
in
particular
speaks
to
the
modern
or
the
modernization
and
retention
of
the
important
Civic
institutions
in
this
area,
and
it
thinks
about
you
know
what
how
those
uses
could
fit
within
the
overall
vision.
It
doesn't
go
so
far
as
to
suggest
you
know
specific
implementation
mechanisms
that
would,
you
know,
try
to
require
that,
in
a
more
in
a
more
firm
way,.
O
You
mr.
Fiorelli,
so
just
to
clarify
changing
the
land
use
in
the
zoning
doesn't
necessarily
make
it
easier
for
the
why
to
no
longer
operate
if
they
cannot
leaving
it
to
my
public
also
wouldn't
ensure
that
they
could
stay
operating
as
a.
Why
long
term,
if,
for
some
reason
it
was
no
longer
feasible,
is
that
correct.
O
P
P
And
then
number
5
was
just
wondering
in
the
parenthetical.
At
the
end,
it
says,
although
upper
storey
uses
should
be
limited
to
residential
or
institutional
activities,
I'm
wondering
mr.
Fiorelli.
If
you
could
just
explain
at
what
point,
do
they
become
upper
storeys?
Is
it
just
beyond
the
first
floor,
yeah.
P
Right,
that's
great,
and
then,
if
I
might
my
chair
I
have
some
MTP
questions
for
mr.
viola.
We
got
a
comment
tonight
for
mr.
Ullman
about
the
MTP
bubble
there
that
it
was
planned
for
new
new
streets,
and
his
suggestion
was
that
it
that
be
broadened
to
include
alleys
or
other
considerations
I'm
wondering
mr.
viola.
If
our
MTP
map
includes
such
language
elsewhere
in
the
county
or
if
that
would
be
kind
of
a
deviation
from
we.
S
P
S
B
V
V
It
shares
it's
just
a
block
away
from
that
part,
North,
Side,
Clarendon,
Metro
is
is
close
by
and
it
just
yeah
I
think
if
that
intersection
were
developed,
maybe
with
a
little
more
emphasis
and
I'm
and
I'm
speaking
more
in
terms
of
public
space
kind
of
development
that
it
could
be
an
interesting
arrival
point
to
to
almost
showcase
this.
This
glove
location,
as
well
as
create
meaningful
connections
to
MU,
Clarendon,
downtown
and
headed
up
towards
Washington
Boulevard
to
the
to
the
West.
E
E
Q
Not
specifically
on
open
space,
but
I
just
wanted
to
ask
mr.
Foos
Cirelli,
you
know
in
in
this
particular
study
document.
We
didn't
call
out
features
or
characteristics
that
we
would
consider
being
a
benefit
to
the
community.
You
know
not
community
benefits
writ
large
with
a
capital
C
and
a
capital
B,
but
but
benefits
to
the
community.
Q
Specifically
I
mean
we've
sort
of
talked
about
it
at
one
point
where
open
space
was
important
and
maybe
we
would
link
you
know,
height
and
density,
to
provisions
of
certain
things
for
the
block,
whether
it
was
more
green
space
connectivity.
Something
like
that.
But
you
know
that
was
one
of
the
discussions
and
we
didn't
go
there.
Do
you
see
the
guiding
principle?
Look.
So
that's
the
answer
to
my
question.
Yes,
you
do
we
in
this
particular
document.
We
would
look
to
the
guiding
principles
to
think
about
benefits
to
the
community.
Q
So
when
a
site
plan
comes
in,
that
might
add
green
space
around
the
ball
family
graveyard,
we'd,
look
at
the
principle
and
say
yeah,
maybe
if
they
want
a
little
change
somewhere
else,
but
they're
helping
to
further
this
principle
that
that
factors
into
our
thinking
as
some
of
community
benefits
more
called
out
and
other
plans
would
do.
Is
that
correct
absolutely.
E
B
O
O
So
to
that
end,
I
move
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
the
County
Board
advertise,
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
special
general
land-use
plans,
study
and
concept
plan,
as
presented
at
the
October
11th
2017
Planning
Commission
meeting,
and
further
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommends
the
county
board
advertised
The
Associated
amendments
to
the
general
Land
Use
Plan
and
the
master
transportation
plan.
Second,.
P
B
P
P
N
I
am
going
to
support
it
because
it's
an
RTA
and
because
I
think
that
there
are
going
I,
think
and
I
hope
that
we
are
going
to
see
streets
that
accomplish
the
that
address
the
concerns
expressed
without
closing
off
vehicular
access.
This
county
has
way
too
many
broken
intersections
by
which
I
mean
people
didn't
want.
N
The
people
want
the
grid
to
be
utilized
effectively
everywhere,
but
the
intersection
that
they
live
closest
to,
and
that
is
bad
policy,
but
I
am
very
interested
in
this
concept
of
pedestrian
priority
streets
in
ways
that
we
can
think
about
calming
traffic
and
therefore
disincentivizing
using
13-3.
Does
it
cut
through
here
and
some
of
the
other
expressed
concerns
so
I
just
I,
my
despite
my
skepticism
I
I'm,
going
to
support
it,
but
I
just
want
to
be
on
record
as
to
I
think
that
we're
flirting
with
risky
policy
in
endorsing
the
stub
Street
options.
Q
The
other
thing
that's
happened
in
those
intervening
years
is
that
the
county
really
has
moved
its
focus
and
we
were
focused
in
on
on
public
transportation,
but
we
have
really,
as
a
community,
moved
into
multimodal
ISM
a
lot.
You
know,
Capital
Bikeshare
wasn't
even
something
we
thought
about
cars
to
go
what
weren't,
something
that
we
talked
about.
Q
Even
some
of
the
connectivity
we
see
now
for
pedestrians
to
the
metro
stations
we
didn't
have
I,
don't
think
we
had
art
bus.
Even
then,
maybe
we
did
maybe
just
nascent
Lee,
but
our
emphasis
really
as
a
county
has
moved
to
lots
to
do
emphasizing
the
car
frankly
and
to
the
point
where
all
of
us,
you
know,
got
the
simplicity
of
living
car
free
right
to
ever
mail
to
every
household
and
so
to
continue
to
do
policies
that
sort
of
glorify
the
automobile
and
make
it
easier
for
them.
Q
N
N
The
issue
was
in
so
much
cars,
I
mean
it
is
cars,
but
the
the
real
correlation
is
corners.
The
the
economic
activity
that
we're
looking
for
follows
intersections.
That's
one
of
the
main
reasons
to
connect
grids,
isn't
so
much
that
we
want
cars
to
be
able
to
get
here
and
there,
and
in
fact,
I
was
just
pointing
out
that
there's
a
good
reason
to
discourage
cars
from
using
the
streets
that
I
think
need
to
exist
here.
The
point
is
the
one
of
the
reasons
to
connect
and
build
out
grids.
N
Is
that
the
more
corners
you
have
within
you
know?
Whatever
your
radius
is
of
any
point,
the
more
economic
activity
you
can
expect
to
have-
and
you
know
I
why
that
is-
is
even
a
bit
beyond
my
own
technical
expertise,
but
I
think
that
it
bears
in
mind
that
we're
not
just
talking
about
cars
when
we
talking
about
grids
as
we
are
talking
about
making
sure
that
the
economic
activity
happens
in
a
way
that
the
Kuril
of
this,
the
correlation
and
the
research
in
the
studies
suggests.
B
Let
me
exercise
my
power
as
chair
and
just
say:
this
is
exactly
why
I
think
it's
a
very
good
thing
for
us
to
have
an
RTA
discussion
to
raise
emerging
issues
to
highlight
them
in
terms
of
community
preferences
and
sentiment
that
we've
worked
on
for
several
months
so
I'm.
This
is
a
very
good
discussion
and
I
am
sure,
will
inform
staffs
too
for
their
deliberations
and
the
board
Commissioner
Len
tell
me
just.
T
B
B
F
You
Commissioner
Siegel
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
the
County
Board
direct
the
county
manager
to
include
language
in
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirk
Court
special
glup
study
plus
and
concept
plan,
building,
height
and
form
concept,
map
page
52,
to
explicitly
allow
Heights
to
be
considered
at
site
plan
above
the
maximum
is
expressed
when
on
site.
Affordable
housing
is
proposed.
F
F
The
intent
of
the
language
is
to
honor
the
height
map
expressed
on
page
52,
but
make
clear
that
the
provision
of
on-site,
affordable
housing
would
be
a
consideration
at
the
site
plan
to
consider
the
height
max
to
be
exceeded
explicitly
and
that
the
the
language
was
explicitly
crafted
not
only
for
the
APUs
site
but
for
any
other
site
within
the
study
area.
Thank.
R
Witching
hour,
I
understand
so
Commissioner
Hughes
I
certainly
agree
with
the
sentiment
clearly
of
your
of
your
motion
and
I
will
support
it
because
I
don't
think
it
fundamentally
changes
anything
here,
because
I
believe
that
in
the
prior
conversation
there
is
an
understanding
that
we
are
not
precluding
that
from
occurring
at
all
when
a
site
plan
comes
through,
but
because
you're
underscoring,
the
importance
of
affordable
housing.
I
will
vote
with
you.
R
F
Thank
You
Commissioner
Siegel,
so
back
to
my
two
sites
and
it's
probably
best
staff.
If
you
don't
mind
pulling
up
we'll
switch
to
slide
53
for
these,
so
the
first
one
I'm
going
to
go
address
is
explicitly
the
single-family
home
lot.
F
That's
on
the
northeast
corner
of
North
Kansas
and
12th
Road
north
that
is
currently
adjacent
to
of
the
open
space
you
see,
surrounded
on
all
sides,
so
I
moved
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
they
direct
the
county
manager
to
include
language
in
the
special
glup
study
plus
for
the
Washington
Boulevard
Kirkwood
Road,
acknowledging
the
single-family
home
located
at
34
27:12
Road
North
can
be
incorporated
into
the
special
glup
plus
area.
Expanding
the
vision
of
the
planned
open
space
with
any
development
proposal
brought
forward
within
the
special
Club
study
area.
B
Second,
second
I
I
have
a
question:
I
have
a
question
the
owner
is
that
or
directed
to
Commissioner
Hughes
is
the
the
owner
of
this
house?
Has
that
person
been
present
or
I?
Guess
it's
Commissioner
Uranus
that
person
been
present
at
the
lrpc?
Has
the
county
staff
had
any
interaction
with
that
that
person?
Could
you
just
give
us
a
little.
E
Recall
that
was
in
advance,
I
believe
it
was
in
advance
or
immediately
after
the
December
lrpc
meeting.
We
actually
the
county
had
mailed
letters
to
all
of
the
abutting
property
owners
and,
if
I
recall
correctly,
the
particular
property
owner
of
that
residential
property
that
Commissioner
Hughes
just
spoke
of
also
owned,
several
other
properties.
So
he
received
that
mailing.
If
I
recall,
he
also
attended
at
least
the
February
lrpc
meeting
than
a
open
house
and
possibly
other
meetings.
So
he
has
been
engaged
to
some
extent
for
sure
during
this
process
and.
B
F
Commissioners,
see
I'm
gonna
reread
my
motion
because
I
think
it's
so
I'm
gonna
begin
with
you
know,
so.
The
county
manager
acknowledging
the
single-family
home
located
at
34
27:12
Road
north,
which
is
the
lot
we're
looking
at
here,
can
be
incorporated
into
the
special
glup
plus
area.
Expanding
the
vision
of
the
planned
open
space
with
any
development
proposal
brought
forward
within
the
special
club
study
area.
B
P
If
I
might
we've
sort
of
done
this
elsewhere
in
the
wraps
process,
that
7-eleven
was
not
included
in
the
full
design,
but
there
was
an
envision
that
if
you
know
the
county
ever
got
that
parcel,
it
would
be
incorporated
in
some
way
and
so
I
don't
think
this
is
without
precedent,
and
it's
only
saying
that
we
would
incorporate
him
to
the
park
essentially
or
whatever
so,
nor
do
I
think
it's
really
a
complete
deviation
from
what
we
would
see
here
either.
So,
although
the
support
the
motion.
O
I'm
not
certain
what
Commissioner
here's
the
second
motion
will
be,
but
this
one
is
certainly
in
line
with
the
discussions
we've
had
about
the
out
parcels.
How
can
we
facilitate
them
going
forward
at
some
point
in
the
future,
since
they
weren't
included
in
this
glup
study?
Could
is
there
a
way
to
streamline
it?
Is
there
way
to
make
this
easier
to
go
forward
without
having
a
second
prolonged
process.
R
E
Think
we
would
have
to
you
know,
be
based
on
the
exact
details
of
the
situation
at
that
time,
but
I
I
think
so
right
you,
the
options
would
be
if,
if
that
particular
parcel
we're
looking
for
a
glove
change
as
a
standalone
which
I
don't
think,
is
what
necessarily
is
being
thought
of
or
talked
about
here.
So
the
alternative
is
that
particular
parcel
gets
incorporated
into
a
larger.
You
know
proposal
for
the
YMCA
property.
More
broadly
I.
E
Don't
see
that
necessarily
requiring
another
special
study
right
because
it
just
becomes
an
expansion
of
potentially
the
area
and
I.
Think
they're,
you
know.
Should
this
this
piece
of
the
motion
or
the
recommendation
go
forward.
I
think
staff
between
now
and
November
could
look
at
the
document
and
figure
out.
You
know
how
best
that
note,
or
that
acknowledgment
could
be
incorporated
into
the
document.
I
think
in
some
of
the
you
know
some
of
the
discussions
that
we've
had
previously.
You
know
there
had
been
the
thought
of
okay.
E
E
E
It
well
there's
so
that
question
as
part
of
the
North
Quincy
Street
plan
had
been
done
adopted
in
2013.
There
is
a
single-family
residence
I
think
it's
used
as
it
grew.
It's
a
single-family
detached
residential
structure
on
the
north
side
of
North,
Thomas
Street,
and
it
was
included
as
part
of
the
study
area
and
in
fact
it
was.
You
know
it
was
more
that
plan
addressed
it
in
a
more
direct
way
than
actually
having
a
note
of
acknowledgment.
Q
Q
Maleeh-
and
maybe
this
is
not
to
the
point,
but
it
the
entire
Ballston
sector
plan,
all
the
area
between
11th
Street,
north
and
Washington,
Bull
bounded
by
glebe
and
Quincy.
Actually,
it
was
probably
Stafford
was
home
to
many
single-family
houses,
in
fact
all
single-family
houses.
There
were
no
townhouses,
and
so
in
that
plan
it
actually
said
that
we
we
changed
the
glup
and
changed
the
vailable
zoning
so
that
it
could
be
a
mix
of
single-family
and
townhouses.
Q
E
B
Thank
you
and
my
further
question
is:
should
this
recommendation
be
taken
up
and
this
property
receive
a
glup
designation?
That's
that's
what
we're
talking
about.
That
would
be
the
that
is
not
what
we're
talking
about.
So
what
we're
talking
about
when
you
say,
acknowledge
the
county
had
certain
ways
of
acknowledging
things.
Please.
B
V
P
N
P
As
it
wasn't
part
of
this
study-
and
it
seems
to
be
a
kind
of
a
doubt-
parcel,
it
would
be
good
to
have
some
indication
about
what
would
happen
if
it
were
to
be
purchased
and
incorporated
into
a
final
site
plan
that
would
come
forward
as
opposed
to
being
left
up
to
a
site
plan.
Consideration
that
we
would
have
some
plan
guidance
going
into
that
discussion.
So.
R
Wanted
to
say,
I'm
going
to
support
the
motion.
My
line
of
questioning
was
purely
to
understand
if
we
had
precedent
for
this
and
I
had
a
little
bit
of
disquiet
in
singling
out
a
single
single-family
home,
but
I
will
support
it
because
I
do
understand
the
intent
and
it
does
make
sense.
Mr.
Commissioner.
T
E
T
D
E
E
In
a
lot
of
it
depends
in
terms
two
of
the
open
space.
It's
tell
itself,
you
know,
is
it
owned?
Does
it
end
up
getting
dedicated
to
the
county
and
fee?
In
that
instance,
you
know.
Maybe
a
redesignate
into
public
would
be
would
make
sense
at
that
point,
but
if
it's
not
the
case
and
if
it's
still
gonna
be
privately
held,
but
there's
a
public
access,
easement
and
other
public
easements,
but
still
privately
held,
you
know,
then
public
may
not
be
the
right,
designation
and
so
I
think.
E
B
D
A
F
At
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
that
the
county
board
direct
the
county
manager
to
include
language
in
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
special
glup
study
plus
and
concept
plan,
building
height
and
form
concept
map,
page
52,
explicitly
allowing
height
to
be
considered
at
site
plan
above
the
maximums
expressed
when
on
site,
affordable
housing
is
proposed.
Okay,.
B
Wonderful
just
I
just
like
to
know
four
timings
sake:
Commissioner
Hughes,
you
have
one
more
emotion
to
make:
does
does
anyone
else
have
a
mo
and
I
just
want
to
get
a
heads-up,
okay
and
I?
Also
and
Commissioner
Rick's?
Yes,
good!
Are
you
raising
your
hands?
Oh
no,
I
I
did
you're.
Raising
your
glasses.
B
I
did
just
want
to
comment
that
the
the
comment
that
you
made
about
the
improvement
of
the
intersection
I
think
was
staff
had
a
positive
response
to
that
and
I
just
you
can
formulate
that
an
emotion
if
you
like
the
board
members,
as
commissioner
gucheol
pointed
out
last
night,
do
read
our
letter
in
which
that
comment
will
the
comment
that
was
made
the
into
the
exchange
will
be
recorded.
So
if
you
don't
make
a
motion,
I
think
the
points
been
made,
but
you
certainly
welcome
to
think
about
making
motion.
F
You
know,
after
the
last
conversation
he'll
just
flow
together.
You
know
it'll
be
good,
so
I
did
separate
these
two
to
make
sense,
but
let's
just
to
keep
all
the
visuals
easier
back
on
page
53
is
probably
the
easiest
one
to
put
up
in
front
of
us.
I'm
gonna
read
the
first
part
fast
and
then
I
will
very
slowly
read
the
part
that
is
material,
so
I'm
I.
B
F
B
F
Further,
that
the
plan
make
clear
the
transitional
position,
these
homes
occupy
and
note
that
any
development
proposal
for
this
part
of
the
block,
such
as
a
club
change,
request
accompanying
a
site
plan
that
includes
consolidation
of
the
Alyce's,
with
each
other
and
or
with
the
currently
commercially
zoned
land
in
the
southern
half
of
the
block
be
informed
by
this
study
and
therefore
have
a
streamlined
consideration
process
for
the
glup
change
that
could
be
done
concurrently
with
consideration
of
the
site
plan.
Second,.
Q
May
I
ask
Commissioner
Hewes,
so
the
the
purpose
of
your
motion
is
somewhat
similar
to
the
purpose
of
your
previous
motion,
which
is
to
acknowledge
that
there
was
part
of
a
block
left
out
of
the
planning
study,
and
that
should
something
happen
with
it.
You
wouldn't
necessarily
want
the
homeowners
to
have
to
go
through
a
whole
special
glup
process
to
either
do
something
with
each
other
or
with
the
block
with
the
front
half
of
the
block.
Is
that
correct?
That
is.
Q
R
Mcsweeney
and
pardon
me
it's
late,
so
maybe
I'm
not
remembering
this
correctly,
but
I
could
swear
that
I
saw
something
in
the
document
that
talked
about
not
consolidating
and
did
I
make.
That
up.
Is
that
not
anywhere
in
the
document
not
concealed
a
solid
ating
parcels
along
12th,
road,
north
or
discouraging
consolidation?
E
B
Q
Think
Commissioner
Siegel,
those
those
are
the
more
c2
currently
zoned
c2
parcels.
Mr.
Duffy
is
whispering
to
mr.
Farrelly
and
I
suspect.
What
he's
going
to
bring
up
is
a
note
that
we
have
on
the
general
Jews
plan.
Thank
you,
mr.
Duffy.
That
specifically
discourages
the
consolidation
of
properties
correct
right
and
actually
that
was
to
be.
You
know,
for
full
disclosure.
Q
That
was
one
that
was
adopted
a
lot
because
of
the
Boston
Virginia
square
area,
because
there
were
not
clear
edges
north
of
Washington
Boulevard,
and
there
are
other
opportunities
where
people
might
consolidate
single-family
houses
and
say
gee.
We
want
to
do
town
houses,
and
that
was
to
just
let
people
know,
let's
just
not
go
there,
and
so
it
was
actually
a
note
that
was
put
on
quite
a
while
ago.
Q
I
want
to
say
80s
yeah
a
lot
even
predates
me,
so
I
am
very
respectful
of
that,
because,
indeed,
back
in
the
day
when
I
was
in
Boston
Virginia
Square
Civic
Association,
there
was
a
proposal
to
have
town
houses
between
directly
across
from
Quincy
Street
on
Washington
Boulevard
on
the
northern
part
of
it.
I
think
it's
between
a
was
at
Monroe
Street.
There
had
been
a
consolidation
and
the
Civic
Association
successfully
thought
and
said
no.
This
was
for
single-family
and
this
should
remain
so
in
the
board.
Voted
that
way.
Q
That's
why
you'll
see
single-family
houses
right
there,
that
was
not
a
transition
zone
really
that
it
was
contiguous
to
single-family
houses
and
had
large
green
space
to
the
south
on
Washington
Boulevard.
This
particular
block,
as
we've
seen,
is
different
in
the
area
having
the
c2
commercial
along
the
front,
the
different
zoning
along
the
rear
for
public,
it's
not
public,
but
the
zoning
under
the.
Why,
and
here
we
have
the
back
half
of
a
block
that
actually
would
transition
to
single-family
houses
on
the
north
side
of
12th
Road
north.
Q
That
are
just
in
a
little
bit
of
a
different
situation.
You
also
have
duplexes
right
at
Lincoln,
so
there's
sort
of
a
mix
of
densities,
a
mix
of
heights-
and
this
is
to
say
in
this
particular
notion:
they
are
at
rent,
they're
a
transition
and
they
provide
they
could
provide
one.
They
provide
one,
a
single-family
houses.
Now
they
might
do
it
in
a
different
way
and
if
it
was
consolidated,
not
a
sin.
F
Just
amplify
that
the
transitional
nature
here,
I
think
is
very
important
and
in
chemistry,
alchemy,
did
an
excellent
job.
My
opinion
on
this
area
would
be
very
different
if
there
was
an
alley
between
the
c2
zoning
and
the
residential
zone
to
the
north,
but
the
site
area
builds
itself
to
amplify
the
transition
and
I
believe.
As
we
look
for
the
missing
middle,
we
have
to
find
it,
and
nobody,
in
my
mind,
is
hurt
by
this
I
think
it
only
does
benefit
to
neighbors
so
aim
that
might
not
support
it
very.
B
Q
Q
So,
commissioners,
this
is
before
you
was
what
the
heights
were
again
in
the
July
draft
and
you'll
see
that
if
you
compare
them
to
the
one
they
they're
all
about
ten
feet,
different
more
a
little
greater
I
will
make
a
motion
to
substitute
this
height
map
for
the
one
that
is
in
on
page
fifty.
That
is,
is
it
fifty
I
keep
nope
sorry
52
I
was
still
back
a
circulation,
so.
Q
Let
me
go
ahead
and
make
make
my
motion
and
then
I'll
speak
to
her.
So
I
move
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
they
direct
the
county
manager
to
substitute
the
building
height
and
form
a
concept
map
on
page
37
of
the
July
special
glup
study
draft
for
the
height
and
form
concept
map
on
page
52
of
the
October
draft.
Okay,.
Q
B
N
Q
Yes,
so
I
think
that
we
are
going
to
have
more
discussion,
it
is
the
RTA
and
we
will
have
greater.
We
lack
this
evening,
testimony
from
the
neighborhood
and
I
I
suspect
that
they
will
weigh
in
with
with
wanting
less
height
I.
Don't
know
that,
but
from
a
citizen
planner
viewpoint,
looking
south
on
Washington
Boulevard,
the
Balkan
scale
of
the
founders
squares,
the
GMU
foundations,
buildings,
which
are
those
office
buildings
and
there's
there's
all
kinds
of
different
sort
of
heights.
When
you
look
at
it,
it's
an
office
building.
Q
Q
Q
Site
plans
with
with
glup
change
requests,
which
is
what
spurred
this
whole
thing,
and
they
may
have
a
particular
vision
for
their
site,
but
I
think
we
plan
it
and
think
about
it.
In
the
absence
of
those
you
know
it
just
is
a
is
a
blank.
What
would
we
do
here
so
I
for
myself,
I
think
I
I
would
see
the
greater
height.
P
P
Q
Have
to
see
a
specific
site
plan
and
see
what
it
would
propose,
because
we
don't
have
one
in
front
of
us.
We
have
a
concept
and
and
the
notion
that
we
support
a
for
affordable
housing
and
we
look
to
the
affordable
housing
master
plan.
But
until
there's
a
specific
proposal,
I'm
not
sure
how
it
would
fit
and
address
the
site.
P
B
Point
well-taken:
there
could
be
an
see
or
misunderstanding
that
not
only
are
we
looking
at
ending
up
pushing
us
toward
not
only
eight
stories
but
nine
stories
and
how
it
depends
on,
but
I
think
at
this
point,
because
we
just
want
to
continue
the
discussion.
The
intent
of
both
of
both
motions
are
sufficient
to
for
the
job
Commissioner
we're.
What
did
you
want
to
make
a
comment?
I.
D
Q
E
N
You
and
Mike
I
guess.
My
comment
is
actually
a
question
for
Commissioner
Hughes
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
I
was
gonna.
Ask
you
whether
you
were
of
the
same
opinion
that
Commissioner
Siegel
just
articulated
that
whether
you
see
this
motion
as
undermining
the
or
consistent
with
the
motion
that
we
adopted
just
a
few
moments
ago.
F
F
Don't
know
if
we've
had
that
fulsome
conversation,
so
I
will
support
the
motion
because
I
think
it
does
us
no
harm
to
be
honest.
I
think
it
does
allow
that
flexibility,
but
I
would
suspect
that
it
will
spark
a
greater
conversation
about
each
one
of
the
little
blocks
or
whatever
blocks.
We
may
look
at
at
our
next
meeting
so
I
we
have
gained
another
half
hour
in
our
next
meeting
and
I
will
support
that.
So.
R
R
The
fact
that
this
is
an
RTA
does
not
preclude
the
county
board
from
going
higher
should
they
see
fit
also
I
do
think
it
undermines
the
affordable
housing
element
a
little
bit
and
the
ability
to
come
in
and
ask
for
additional
density
with
you
know
by
offering
affordable
housing
so
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
that.
So
I
am
NOT
going
to
support
the
motion.
F
R
R
With
the
caveat
that,
if
somebody
brings
in
affordable
housing
or
an
offer
for
affordable
housing,
then
they
could
receive
additional
density,
but
I
think
that
if
we
go
much
higher
than
this,
I
think
it
would
be
very
hard
if
I
were
in
that
neighborhood
to
support
it.
Knowing
that
you're
gonna
go
even
beyond
that
affordable
housing
and
that's
why
I
think
it
might
undermine
it.
I.
B
E
So
this
was
a
variation
of
scenario.
5
I
think
we
actually
may
have
called
it
scenario
6
when
we
presented
it
to
lrpc
lrpc
meeting
number
5.
You
may
recall
that
we
made
a
couple
of
changes
and
updates
to
our
assumptions
based
on
input
to
date
at
that
time,
so
we
actually
scaled
back
the
so
this
is
basically
showing
medium
office
apartment
hotel
along
Washington,
Boulevard
and
either
medium
residential
or
low
office
apartment
hotel
along
13th
Street,
but
we
dialed
back
the
assumptions
on
average
unit
size
from
1,100
square
feet
per
unit
mm.
Oh.
E
Per
unit,
and
then
we
also
dialed
back
assumptions
on
bonus
density
and
rather
than
using
the
most
conservative
40
percent
bonus.
You
know
if
someone
were
to
maximize
the
25
percent
bonus
and
the
maximum
green
building
incentive,
additional
density
that
equates
roughly
to
40
percent.
We
dialed
that
back
to
20
percent
in
and
that's
reflected
in
this
model
and
both
height
maps,
both
in
the
July
version
and
the
October
version
are
both
kind
of
based
upon
this
model,
and
when
you
really
study
the
two
maps
and
compare
them
closely,
I
mean
some
of
the
variations.
E
B
You
for
that
so
I'm
gonna
support
the
motion
based
on
that
exposition,
because
I
I
think
that
will
frame
a
productive
discussion.
That's
number
one
number
two:
the
issue
hasn't
been
brought
up
tonight,
but
there
is
a
need
for
density.
Some
amount
of
density
in
order
to
redevelop
the
Y,
so
I
think
erring
on
the
side
of
greater
heights,
for
the
RTA
discussion
is
I,
think
useful
and
could
be
productive.
So
I'm
gonna
support
the
motional
anyone
else
nope.
V
Yes,
I'd
like
to
make
the
motion
I
move,
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
the
County
Board
direct,
the
county
manager
to
develop
a
conceptual
urban
design
for
the
intersection
of
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road,
recognizing
it
as
a
potential
significant
public
space
which
could
serve
both
as
a
transition
between
the
residential
and
commercial
edges
and
also
serve
as
a
gateway
node
into
the
urban
corridor.
Second,
was.
B
Q
Have
a
desire
to
offer
a
motion
about
the
interior
of
the
block
and
it
goes
a
little
bit
to
design
and
it
does
presuppose
pedestrian
connections
rather
than
just
streets.
So
I
would
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
they
direct
the
county
manager
to
consider
adding
language
to
the
special
glup
study
plus
document
that
states
buildings
in
the
block
that
border
pedestrian
connections
and
open
space
should
be
designed
to
enhance
the
pedestrian
connection
and
or
open
space
contiguous.
To
second.
B
N
Think
this
is
actually
a
great
motion.
There
obviously
will
be
pedestrian
connections
within
the
block.
I
can't
see
any
design
that
doesn't
have
a
pedestrian
connections
and,
to
the
extent
that
any
roads
are
in
fact,
pedestrian
priority.
I
think
that
the
motion
would
extend
to
those
as
well.
So
I
think
that
you
looked
at
me
almost
as
if
you
were
expecting
you
to
oppose
it,
but
I
didn't.
B
Anybody
else,
I
just
have
a
I'm
prepared
to
support
the
motion
too,
because
I
think
the
community
is
building
a
vision,
or
at
least
we're
suggesting
a
discussion
in
which
the
community
can
weigh
in
on
this
vision
would
but
I
have
a
question
for
staff?
Would
the
urban
design
and
research
group
should
the
County
Board
take
this
motion
up?
Would
you
be
able
to
provide
more
detail
to
the
concept
plan
in
order
to
realize
this
or
at
what
point,
and
how
would
staff
weigh
in
to
realize
the
intent
of
this
motion?
B
Q
Chair
I
think
I
have
have
one
more.
That
also
has
to
do
with
transitions,
which
has
sort
of
been
the
theme
I.
Think
of
of
this
block,
and
this
one
is
to
talk
about
arrangements
of
new
buildings
and
within
the
block,
and
also
how
new
buildings
might
address
existing
older
buildings
that
are
outside
of
the
study
area
and
many
times
we
see
that
there
are
step
backs,
provided
we
haven't
gone
into
that
in
this
plan
and
specifically,
if
we
remember
again
last
night
with
courthouse,
it
was
very
important
to
the
pedestrian
realm.
Q
Q
So
I
move
that
the
Planning
Commission
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
they
direct
the
county
manager
to
consider
language
to
the
special
glup
study
plus
document
that
states
transitions,
north
and
south,
as
well
as
east
and
west,
between
new
buildings
and
existing
ones
outside
the
study
area,
could
help
mitigate
height
and
density
in
the
area.
Further.
That
transitions
are
to
be
understood
to
include
building
step
backs,
as
well
as
green
buffer
zones
and
pedestrian
bicycle
through
ways.
R
Q
B
B
However,
when
I
think
about
a
site
plan
coming
in
and
I
sort
of
project
myself
in
the
future
and
I
think
what
are
the
issues
that
are
going
to
be
a
play,
then
in
this
case,
as
opposed
to
what
we
saw
a
courthouse
last
night,
a
density
issue
that
that
the
developer
says
well,
I
really
need
this
density
and
I
can
do
a
little
sculpting
of
the
building.
But
it
can't
be
that
much.
There
would
be
that
flexibility.
Even
given
this
motion,
okay,
I'm
just
going
to
make
sure
of
that.
Okay,
very
good.
B
F
B
B
B
Abstention.
Sorry
I
know
fine,
so
site
plan
review
committee
report.
All
I
want
to
say
is:
we
are
getting
monthly
reports
so
far,
I've
responded
and
you've
seen
those
that
you
get
those,
and
so
you
can
see
who's
the
chair
of
upcoming
SP
RCS,
newer
commissioners,
if
you're
interested
in
co-chairing
or
being
a
second,
please
let
the
chair.
B
C
B
B
Q
Commissioner,
Guerin
and
I
had
a
little
bit
of
a
preview
of
it
today
and
it
there
are
some
different
things.
Staff
will
is
really
seeking
to
do
at
least
part
of
phase
one
of
marks
before
December
31st.
So
this
this
will
be
coming
to
us
in
November
or
December.
So
anybody
who
can
make
the
meeting
this
coming
week
I
really
encourage
you
to
do
so
and
if
not,
please,
please
look
at
the
the
document
that
staff
the
presentation
staff
will
have
up
on
the
website.
Q
B
P
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
We
have
a
busy
week
coming
up
next
week,
so
the
17th
unfortunately
be
missing
that
joint
meeting,
because
the
we
have
a
county
board
school
board
joint
meeting
to
kick
off
read
school
on
the
17th
the
next
night,
the
18th
so
Wednesday
we
from
today
P
FRC,
is
going
to
have
a
kind
of
a
first
look
at
the
long
bridge
park
design.
There
will
be
another
opportunity
in
the
January
time
frame
for
folks
to
look
at
that,
so
this
is
kind
of
first
look.
P
The
next
night
will
also
be
a
public
meeting
opportunity
for
Long
Bridge
Park
as
well,
and
then
the
week
after
that,
October
25th,
we're
kicking
off
the
BL
PCP
FRC
meeting
for
Reed
school
will
start
with
the
site,
site,
walk
and,
and
then
we'll
get
into
it.
So
that's
the
rest
of
October
and
then
we'll
be
doing
Reed
school
for
for
a
while
as
well.
Thank.
B
You
very
much
before
I,
it's
not
on
my
list
here
and
before
we
ask
commissioner
Hughes
to
talk
about
foreign
based
code,
I
just
wanted
to
say
pops
public
spaces
master
plan.
It's
moving
along.
We
working
group
has
been
meeting
there.
A
lot
of
community
outreach
so
by
the
end
of
the
year,
the
beginning
of
next
year,
I
think
you'll
be
seeing
a
final
draft
I'm
very
excited
about
it.
I
think
it
will
really
give
us
a
very
good
and
interesting
of
framing
and
framework
for
policy
direction,
but
more
to
come
on
that.
Commissioner
Hughes.