►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
B
The
commission
will
consider
amendments
to
its
bylaws
and
operating
policies
to
facilitate
options
for
hybrid
participation
at
certain
subcommittee
meetings
as
well
as
conduct
other
commission
business,
such
as
committee
reports
and
adopting
minutes
I'd
like
to
share
a
few
logistical
points
for
those
members
and
commissioners
who
will
be
participating
remotely
this
evening.
Tonight's
meeting
is
available
as
a
broadcast
with
closed
captioning
on
comcast,
xfinity
channels,
25
and
1085..
I
assume
that's
still
correct
as
long
as
as
well
as
verizon
files
channels,
39
and
40,
and
the
county
website.
B
Audio
of
tonight's
meeting
is
available
via
phone
commissioners,
presenters
members
of
the
public
or
speakers
who
would
lose
internet
connectivity
who
participating
remotely
and
losing
internet
connectivity.
Please
reconnect
by
phone.
You
can
use
the
phone
number
provided
in
the
teams.
Invite
and
registered
speakers
have
received
the
clerk's
telephone
number
and
their
speaker
registration,
confirmation
for
other
presenters
and
speakers
joining
us
through
microsoft
teams.
B
Please
keep
your
phones
and
devices
muted
until
called
upon
I'm
going
to
skip
the
next
few
bullets,
because
after
the
last
two
and
a
half
years,
we
should
all
know
how
to
use
teams
by
now,
but
pre-registration
was
required
and
we
are
not
able
to
accommodate
additional
speakers,
and
a
public
comment
on
the
item
will
take
place
within
the
same
time.
Frames
as
we
would
provide,
as
we
have
been
providing.
Speakers
will
have
three
minutes
to
comment
on
individuals
as
individuals
in
five
minutes
to
speak.
B
If
representing
an
organization,
we
will
have
a
timer
available
up
front
and
for
those
who
are
observing
or
participating
through
teams,
we
do
not
see
the
meeting
chat
at
all.
Those
of
us
who
are
here,
which
is
an
additional
emphasis
to
what
we
have
said
in
past
virtual
meetings,
to
note
that
please
don't
use
it
for
discussion.
Public
comment,
questions
about
agenda
items,
requests
for
more
information,
etc.
B
Public
comment
when
we
get
to
it
will
be
shared
verbally
for
the
record
during
the
assigned
public
testimony
period
and,
lastly,
tonight's
meeting
will
be
recorded
and
posted
to
the
county
website
and
all
information
associated
with
it.
Whether
written
or
spoken
is
subject
to
the
virginia
freedom
of
information
act.
B
I
am
going
to
take
the
additional
privilege
of
noting
how
happy
I
am
to
be
back
and
seeing
people's
faces.
The
roman
building
is
looking
great
to
anyone
here,
who's
involved
in
that.
So
thank
you
and
I
think
with
that,
madam
quick,
are
we
ready
to
call
the
first
item.
C
Yes,
thank
you.
Our
first
item
is
the
consideration
of
the
following
actions
pertaining
to
the
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use
plan
study
to
adopt
this
planned
study.
I'm
just
going
to
you
know
abbreviate
one
a
is
the
adoption
of
the
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use
plan,
study
document
and
one
b
is
a
glob
amendment
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office,
apartment
hotel
for
the
area
located
on
the
block
bounded
by
wilson,
boulevard,
north
cleveland
street
clarendon
boulevard
and
north
danville
street.
B
Thank
you,
mr
murphy,
and
for
everyone's
confirmation.
We've
agreed
that
the
staff
presentation
will
have
15
minutes
and
this
is
a
long-range
plan.
General
land
use
plan
project,
so
there
it
technically
is
not
an
applicant,
but
we
will
have
an
anticipated
applicant
here
to
speak
as
the
applicant
for
10
minutes
when
we
get
to
that
portion.
D
In
july.
The
planning
commission
recommended
advertisement
of
public
hearings
on
a
draft
study
document
which
contains
guiding
principles
and
recommendations
to
guide
future
development
in
the
study
area
and
a
future
glop
amendment
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office
apartment
hotel
to
accompany
public
hearings
on
a
future
site
plan
and
rezoning
tonight's
presentation
focuses
on
the
potential
adoption
of
the
draft
study
document.
D
The
study
area
possesses
a
glup
designation
of
service
commercial
and
the
applicant
requested
a
go
up
amendment
from
service
commercial
to
high
office
apartment
hotel.
At
its
july
meeting,
the
county
board
authorized
advertisement
of
public
hearings
on
a
feature:
glob
amendment
from
service,
commercial
to
medium
office,
apartment
hotel.
D
In
addition,
the
applicant
and
the
other
private
property
owner
on
the
block
in
the
study
area
participated
in
the
lrpc
process
through
two
online
feedback
opportunities
and
two
lrpc
meetings.
Staff
participated
in
discussion
and
received
feedback
from
the
lrpc
and
the
community
on
draft
guiding
principles
and
modeling
scenarios
that
led
to
refinements
and
to
the
preliminary
staff
recommendations.
D
The
initial
set
of
draft
guiding
principles
were
based
on
adopted
county
guidance,
including
the
gloves,
development
and
growth
goals,
and
they
were
shared
at
the
initial
online
engagement
session,
and
these
principles
were
revised
during
the
study
process
to
incorporate
feedback
from
both
the
lrpc
and
the
community
feedback
throughout.
The
study
also
informed
the
development
of
the
recommendations
across
the
eight
different
elements:
land
use
and
building
design,
public
space,
transportation,
housing,
sustainability,
biophilic
design,
natural
resources
and
public
art.
D
Throughout
the
study
process,
feedback
on
building
height
and
density
were
major
areas
for
discussion
when
staff
considered
building
height
and
density
within
the
larger
context
of
existing
guidance
for
the
roslin-ballston
corridor.
Staff.
First
recognize
that
the
glops
development
and
growth
goals
provide
high-level
guidance
that
speaks
to
concentrating
high-density
mixed-use
development
within
metro
station
areas,
along
with
tapering
down
to
surrounding
residential
areas.
D
However,
unlike
the
study
area,
these
other
areas
in
roslyn
and
ballston
were
subject
to
studies
that
focused
on
developing
building
height
guidance
for
larger
geographic
areas.
In
addition
to
other
guidance
from
an
equity
perspective,
increasing
building
heights
and
density
above
the
existing
allowable
building
height
of
45
feet
in
the
study
area
would
result
in
an
increase
in
housing
opportunities
in
an
accessible
area
close
to
services
and
amenities.
D
Increased
building,
height
and
density
could
also
be
experienced
by
existing
users
and
residents
of
the
surrounding
area
differently.
Some
users
may
desire
to
preserve
access
to
light
air
and
views,
while
others
may
desire
having
additional
neighbors
and
the
benefits
that
they
and
the
new
development
bring
to
the
area.
D
When
considering
potential
massing
in
the
study
area,
staff
observed
that
a
building
with
heights
of
15
and
16
stories
near
the
center
of
the
study
area
could
project
shadows
onto
nearby
residential
areas
to
the
north
staff.
Also
notes
in
the
draft
staff
report
that,
if
the
block
of
existing
commercial
buildings
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard
were
to
redevelop
under
its
existing
zoning
up
to
45
feet
that
development,
depending
on
site
layout
and
the
building
design,
could
also
generate
shadows.
That
project
onto
lower
density,
residential
properties,
north
of
wilson
boulevard.
D
B
Unless
there's
anything
that
I'm
forgetting,
I
think
we
can
go
over
to
mr
whitball,
I
think
we
can
go
over
to
crc
and
mr
whitmore
unless
there's
anything,
I'm
forgetting,
okay,
great,
it's
the
august
recess,
you
I
get
a
little
rusty,
mr
whitmore,
ten
minutes.
E
It'll
actually
be
mr
nolan
from
crc.
F
Good
evening
planning
commissioners
staff
and
other
members
of
the
community,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
discuss
the
special
glop
study
for
the
proposed
courthouse
west
project.
From
the
applicant's
perspective,
my
name
is
casey
nolan
and
I
help
lead
the
local
development
team
for
crc
companies.
F
Thank
you
to
the
county
staff
for
its
work
on
the
study
and
thank
you
to
the
community
for
your
participation
in
lrpc
meetings,
planning,
commission
meetings
and
the
online
engagement
opportunities
this
evening.
I
will
try
to
be
brief
and
highlight
a
few
areas
that
have
comments
or
questions
in
recent
public
meetings.
F
F
The
point
has
been
made
that
this
site
is
a
gap
in
the
rb
corridor.
If
you
look
along
the
entire
spine
of
the
corridor
between
the
northern
and
southern
major
thoroughfares,
there
are
no
blocks
left
that
are
95
asphalt
and
underdeveloped.
Courthouse
west
is
a
gateway
site
that
can
weave
courthouse
and
clarendon
together.
F
This
is
a
site
with
significant
public
infrastructure
in
place,
as
mentioned
previously.
While
it
is
a
five
to
six
minute
walk
to
two
existing
metro
stops,
the
pedestrian
commute
will
become
even
shorter
when
a
future
courthouse
metro,
elevator,
is
constructed.
One
block
away.
This
planned
infrastructure,
which
is
in
the
county,
cip,
will
reinforce
the
spine
in
the
courthouse
neighborhood,
but
can
still
enable
tapering,
north
and
south
to
the
existing
residential
neighborhoods.
F
Staff
has
done
an
excellent
job,
laying
out
the
planning
history
of
the
courthouse
neighborhood
and
why
we
are
going
through
this
special
glove
study
staff
addressed
some
questions
on
the
purpose
of
the
study
and
goals
in
the
recent
virtual
open
house.
I
wanted
to
also
reinforce
this
study
is
not
like
some
prior
special
glop
studies
and
that
there
is
a
sector
plan
in
place.
F
What
the
nearly
30
year
old
sector
plan
update
did
not
do
was
specify
a
specific
zoning
category
or
height
for
this
block.
Our
interpretation,
the
antenna
sector
plan,
combined
with
the
attributes
of
this
transit-rich
site,
was
that
co
was
the
appropriate
category.
Co
is
an
far
cap
zoning
category
with
a
height
gap
of
180
feet,
which
corresponds
to
17
to
18
stories.
F
F
We
have
experienced
molding
buildings
to
achieve
stakeholder
goals,
such
as
the
image
images
shown
of
the
clarendon
apartments
along
hudson
street,
a
budding
line
village.
That
project
went
through
the
4.1
process
and
had
tapered
massing,
as
well
as
the
iconic
archway
for
pedestrian
and
vehicular
connectivity.
F
We
have
listened
to
comments
and
questions
about
potential
shadow
impacts
and
wanted
to
share
how
a
tapered
building
up
to
16
stories
can
mitigate
those
concerns.
The
above
and
below
images
depict
the
courthouse
west
block
with
a
schematic
layout
of
a
building
up
to
16
stories,
but
tapering
to
14
and
12
stories
per
the
prior
image.
F
The
top
images
show
shadows
on
the
winter
solstice,
with
the
existing
properties
north
of
wilson
boulevard,
as
is
the
bottom
images,
show
shadows
if
the
commercial
portion
of
the
block
north
of
wilson
were
redeveloped
by
right
up
to
45
feet
in
height.
In
both
instances
there
are
minimal
shadows
on
or
north
of
franklin.
It
is
worth
noting
that
the
commercial
property
owner
also
owns
the
single-family
home
south
of
franklin.
In
summary,
tapering
can
mitigate
potential
impacts.
F
We
support
the
public
open
space
that
will
be
a
key
feature,
transforming
the
current
sea
of
asphalt
into
a
place
where
the
neighborhood
retail
patrons
and
residents
can
gather
now
more
than
ever.
I
think
we
all
appreciate
the
need
for
well-designed
places
outside
to
gather
with
family
or
friends
enjoy,
enjoy
outdoor
dining
or
get
work
done
with
a
more
flexible
work
lifestyle
that
many
will
continue
to
enjoy.
F
F
I
also
wanted
to
provide
an
update
on
the
public
engagement
process,
which
we
feel
has
been
both
robust
and
inclusive.
Through
this
process,
the
county
will
have
held
11
public
meetings
or
online
engagements.
We
as
the
applicant
had
led
over
20
meetings
since
2019
with
civic
associations,
neighbors
and
community
stakeholders.
We
also
stood
up
an
online
community
engagement
website
in
2019
before
the
pandemic,
to
complement
the
ongoing
process.
F
We
look
forward
to
more
engagement
to
make
the
courthouse
west
project
the
best
it
can
be.
As
for
the
schedule,
we
have
much
work
to
do
in
the
4.1
process
before
a
project
can
break
ground.
However,
after
over
three
years
since
the
glove
study
application
was
submitted,
we
feel
this
study
milestone,
has
helped
flush
out
key
issues
to
stakeholders.
F
We
feel
our
firm
and
the
courthouse
west
project
are
well
positioned
to
be
part
of
the
solution
to
a
regional
housing
crisis,
while
activating
an
underutilized
transit-rich
site
in
the
heart
of
the
roslyn
balsam
corridor,
with
a
sustainable
building
where
people
can
live,
work
shop
and
play.
Thank
you
very
much.
B
Thank
you
very
much.
I
am
going
to
rewind
the
clock
just
a
moment.
I
should
have
recognized
at
the
outset
of
our
meeting
that
we
anticipate
being
joined
this
evening
remotely
by
commissioner
patel,
who
is
out
of
town
for
training
purposes
and
will
be
joining
remotely
because
of
that-
and
we
are
not
joined
this
evening
by
commissioners,
hughes,
giron
or
steinberger
wanted
to
get
that
on
the
record
before
I
forgot.
So
that
then
being
said,
madam
clerk,
do
we
have
any
public
speakers.
C
Yes,
we
have
20
speakers.
Okay,
let
me
just
go
on
the
record
as
saying
since
this
is
our
first
in-person
meeting
since
two
and
a
half
years
ago,
and
I've
been
out.
This
is
my
first
meeting
back
in
person
for
a
while
just
bear
with
me.
That
goes
for
the
people
on
teams,
as
well
as
the
people
in
the
room.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
madam
clerk,
and
I
believe
that
you
have
sorted
the
public
speakers
into
will
be
doing
the
virtual
speakers
and
and
doing
the
all
together
and
doing
the
in-person
speakers
altogether.
I
don't
know
if
that's
the
order
that
you're
doing
them
or
not.
C
B
Thank
you
that
being
said,
then,
madam
clerk,
would
you
please
call
the
first
speaker.
C
G
G
Good
evening,
commissioners,
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
you
all
tonight,
I'm
collier
cook
a
long
time
resident
of
ballston
and
as
I've
met
many
of
you
over
the
years.
G
You
may
recall
that
one
of
my
desires
is
to
get
the
bolston
sector
plan
from
1980,
updated
community
planning
leadership
has
stated
in
multiple
forums
that,
while
this
is
understood
that
the
sector
plan
is
aged,
there
are
not
enough
resources
to
do
a
comprehensive
update
of
not
only
that
sector
plan,
but
any
of
the
sector
plans
within
the
rp
corridor,
so
for
the
near
term
for
better
or
worse,
we'll
be
conducting
these
piecemeal
studies
in
the
corridor.
G
So
how
do
we
go
forward
from
here
and
looking
at
this
subject
block?
Well,
let's
start
look,
let's
start
with
what
the
planning
documents
that
have
been
that
that
are
in
place
and
applied
to
the
site.
G
You
know,
there's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
the
bullseye
concept
for
each
for
the
station
areas
along
the
rb
corridor.
I
recall
many
years
ago
when
researching
the
history
of
the
balsam
sector
plan.
G
The
1981
courthouse
sector
plan
had
specific
language
that
referenced
a
taper
down
to
not
only
the
residential
neighborhoods
but
to
both
the
clarendon
and
roslin
sector
station
areas.
However,
the
subsequent
1993
courthouse
sector
plan
amendment
removed
references
to
tapers
to
the
joining
station
areas.
This
removal
of
the
tapering
requirement
is
very
important
for
you
to
know
the
subject.
Block
we're
looking
at
tonight
has
has
a
part
of
the
1993
concept
plan
defined
as
higher
density,
commercial,
residential,
mixed
use.
G
This
is
the
exact
same
district
that
includes
buildings
such
as
courthouse
towers
on
north
beach
street,
that
has
a
large
portion
of
its
building
height
but
18
floors
and
is
a
quarter
a
mile
away
from
the
core.
Again,
this
is
18
floors,
a
quarter
a
mile
away
from
the
core.
The
subject
block
is
a
similar
distance,
so
I
hope
you
consider
this
in
your
deliberations
tonight.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
cook.
B
C
Okay,
our
next
speaker
will
be
elizabeth
farrell.
C
Oh,
I'm
sorry
priya
shekla,
if
you're
online,
please
and
you
will
be
followed
by
elizabeth
pharrell.
B
That's
that
was
that
was
ms
pharrell
sorry.
H
I
want
to
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
this
evening.
I
live
in
franklin
and
danville
street
and
I
will
be
able
to
see
this
proposed
building
outside
of
my
kitchen
window.
I've.
To
be
frank,
I
have
serious
concerns
about
traffic.
I
have
lived
on
this
street
for
six
years.
By
my
account,
there
are
16
children
who
live
on
my
block
of
danville
alone.
H
Currently,
both
waze
and
google
maps
sends
people
down
our
street
because
there
is
a
light
at
langston.
This
is
a
problem
because
our
street
is
a
yield
street
with
limited
space
on
both
sides,
and
we
already
have
an
extremely
confusing
traffic
pattern.
I
invite
you
to
drive
down
the
street
pretty
much
in
the
middle
of
any
day
and
it's
it's
very
confusing.
H
H
I'm
very
concerned
that
a
tall
building
such
as
I'm
concerned
about
the
12
stories
I
prefer
6
but
12
is
definitely
better
than
16..
I'm
concerned
about
the
additional
residents,
as
you
saw
in
the
powerpoint
presentation
provided
by
the
applicant,
there's
a
proposal
that
the
garage
exit
to
danville
street.
I
believe
that
those
people
will
take
a
left
on
danville
cross
wilson
and
to
get
to
langston
and
come
down
my
street.
H
I
think
that
I
would
encourage
you
all
to
definitely
not
lift
the
height
cap
and
please
consider
something
something
lower.
You
know.
I
think
that
when
we
look
at
the
original
bullseye
plan,
what
that
led
to
were
streets
like
highland
and
beach,
both
of
which
go
into
the
center
of
the
bullseye
and
are
wider
streets
with
better
traffic
controls
and
better
able
to
handle
this
type
of
volume
of
traffic.
H
So
in
closing,
I'm
concerned
about
the
traffic,
I
think
that
12
is
better
than
six,
but
I
think
that
16
would
it
would
it's
not
right
for
the
the
surrounding
community
and
I
think
that,
whatever
goals,
you
know,
the
planning
commission
hopes
to
achieve
in
terms
of
resonances
and
other
things.
I
really
think
that
can
be
done
with
12..
Thank
you
for
your
time.
C
C
All
right,
our
next
speaker,
is
patrick
grossby,
followed
by
nerja
carr.
C
I
Hi,
my
name
is
patrick
grossby,
I'm
a
resident
of
arlington.
I
live
in
the
balsam
neighborhood
and
I
moved
to
the
county
into
this
neighborhood,
I'm
first
in
2018,
I'm
shortly
after
graduating
college.
This
is
my
first
time
speaking
at
the
arlington
county
meeting
or
any
public
meeting
here.
So
I'm
grateful
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
and
appreciate
the
effort.
That's
gone
to
the
study
and
the
effort
done
by
the
applicant
I'm
seeking
to
support
the
maximum
height
and
density
possible
at
this
development
under
consideration
specifically
to
support
16
stories
or
even
higher,
if
possible.
I
I
think
this
development
is
occurring
in
a
high
density
area
that
everyone
kind
of
just
considers
to
be.
You
know
part
of
the
metro,
orange
blue,
I'm
sorry
orange
silver
line.
It's
near
lots
of
bike
share
stations,
popular
bike
lanes,
which
means
that
people
who
live
here
will
be
able
to
do
so,
potentially
car
free,
which
is
really
special
and
unique
in
the
county,
and
even
you
know,
across
the
country
or
even
if
they're,
not
car
free,
they
can
live
so
car
light.
I
I
I
I
hope
that
the
county
considers
that
and
considers
at
least
16
stories,
if
not
higher,
if
possible,
this
development
would
provide
an
opportunity
to
build
more
homes
for
our
families,
our
friends,
our
neighbors,
and
that's,
that's,
I
guess
my
my
would
I
like
to
contribute
to
the
meeting
so
thank
you.
J
Yes,
I
have
been,
I
was
talking
even
when
you
guys
called
me
earlier,
but
for
some
reason
you
guys
couldn't
hear
me.
Can
you
hear
me
clearly
now.
B
We
can,
I
think,
that
since
we,
since
we
have
you
on
the
line,
why
don't
we
go
ahead
and
take
your
comment
now
and
then
we
will
go.
I
believe,
then,
we'll
go
back
to
ms
carr.
J
I
really
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
so
much
thank
you
for
for
giving
us
a
chance
to
speak
here.
I
do
understand
that
the
the
subject
property
here,
which
is
currently
zoned
for
four
stories,
is
being
recommended
to
change
to
16
stories
during
the
open
house.
J
Streetscapes
number
five
seeks
to
consolidate
and
block
design
art
of
the
design
considerations
that
enhance
multi-modal
access
number
seven.
You
are
trying
to
increase
multimodal
transportation
now.
The
only
guiding
principles
which
seem
to
be
pertinent
to
this
recommendation
are
the
first
few
concentrations
of
high
density
development
and
increased
supply
of
housing.
J
Now,
before
we
even
completed
these
two
guiding
principles,
we
have
to
look
at
some
facts.
The
facts
are
early.
Arlington
is
the
11th
most
densely
populated
county
in
u.s,
while
geographically,
it
is
the
smallest
self-governing
county
in
the
u.s.
Also
arlington
ranks
sixth
in
population
in
virginia
counties,
and
if
arlington
was
incorporated
as
a
city,
arlington
would
be
the
third
most
populous
city
in
the
state
of
virginia.
Now,
with
these
facts,
the
first
two
guiding
principles
are
already
more
than
taken
care
of
in
arlington.
J
As
a
concerned
resident,
I
request
a
planning
commission
to
say
no
to
over
development
and,
yes,
the
smart
growth
we're
already
over
crowded
just
the
other
day
right
at
this
location,
which
is
in
discussion
right
now,
while
crossing
the
street
across
full
whole
foods.
My
five-year-old
got
hit
by
a
bicycle
rider.
This
mindless
development
will
only
make
this
area
increasingly
unsafe
for
our
families.
Again,
I
urge
the
planning
commission
to
think
of
the
residents
and
do
not
succumb
to
builders
and
their
unlimited
grief
for
financial
gains.
J
B
Thank
you,
mr
I
believe
next
is
this
car.
K
Right:
okay,
thank
you.
So
much
for
your
time,
I'm
a
resident
and
member
of
ccca
single
parent
of
two
elementary
children
and
widow
and
I've
lived
in
this
community
since
2014.
K
It's
my
belief
that
adding
further
density
to
an
already
overwhelmed
community
experienced
many
annual
budget
cuts
will
have
further
negative
impact
on
both
near
and
long-term
futures
of
the
community
and
resources
our
schools
are
over,
packed
classrooms
have
shortfalls
of
teachers
and
staff.
This
also
includes
transportation.
K
Standards
of
learning
have
dropped
significantly
only
those
with
economic
leverage
able
to
hire
tutors
or
extracurricular
activities
to
supplement
education,
all
those
lucky
enough
to
have
two
parents
to
help
their
kids
with
homework.
We
feel
this
in
our
overcrowded
playgrounds.
There
is
no
space
to
play.
We
fill
this
on
our
streets,
filthy
with
dog
excrement.
Several
dogs
attacks,
my
five-year-old
is
bitten,
as
owners
don't
want
to
go
to
overcrowded
and
filthy
dog
parks.
I
don't
blame
them.
K
On
other
occasions,
my
children
were
chased
by
a
large
unleashed
dog
in
the
11th
street
north
park
in
the
townhouses,
where
I
live
frightening
us
all
another
time,
yelled
at
by
a
male
dog
owner
very
aggressively
when
we
asked
if
they
could
leash
their
great
dane.
So
we
could
enter
that
same
tiny
screen
space.
K
We
fill
this
in
our
ever
dirtying
parks
with
broken
glass
used
condoms
as
budget
cuts,
don't
have
enough
rangers
to
protect
and
keep
these
facilities
clean
and
safe.
They
are
already
overcrowded
overburdened.
We
fill
this
on
our
streets
as
they
become
more
and
more
unsafe,
with
speeding
delivery
drivers
with
too
many
cars
due
to
burgeoning
population
growth.
My
daughter
was
hit
by
a
car
when
she
was
four
on
a
crosswalk
at
a
school
bus,
stop
another
time
on
danville
street
in
lyon,
village.
Just
three
months
ago,
exactly
where
you're
talking
about
my
car
was
parked.
K
As
I
stepped
out
of
it,
the
car
was
hit
at
the
back
of
it
as
he
was
speeding
to
pick
up
a
passenger.
My
six
and
nine-year-old,
thankfully,
was
strapped
to
their
seats
frightened
out
of
their
wits.
We
are
overcrowded.
Please
stop
this
development
going
beyond
four
or
five
stories.
Last
sunday
I
witnessed
my
friend's
five-year-old
son
being
hit
by
a
speeding
bicycle
at
the
crosswork
crosswalk
that
goes
from
whole
foods
to
starbucks.
We
are
overcrowded
and
experiencing
so
many
near
misses.
K
Do
we
need
a
fatality
before
we,
as
residents,
are
taken
seriously
as
a
single
income
household?
I
am
that
missing
middle
housing
that
I
hear
you
talk
about
that
you
want
to
keep.
I
am
the
demographic
that
relies
on
the
ever
depleting
overburdened
population
of
clarendon,
courthouse
areas,
facilities
and
education,
and
I
will
continue
to
advocate
for
it.
We
should
be
focused
on
to
make
today's
smart
growth
plan
focused
on
climate
change
impacts
on
our
community.
A
green
space
instead
should
have
been
planned
to
call
the
surrounding
areas
further
developing
tree
canopy.
K
L
Yes,
hello,
you
can
hear
me
yes,
yes,
I'm
bernie
byrne.
I
live
in
boston.
I
travel
this
area
very
often,
especially
here
to
the
meetings
at
courthouse.
The
the
first
thing
I
want
to
say
is
something
I
said
before
to
the
last
meeting,
and
that
is
you
have
the
a
plaza
being
planned,
not
a
pleasant
says:
am
a
public
space
in
public
space
being
planned
on
clarendon
boulevard,
but
this
that's
very
non-specific.
L
I
don't
want
to
see
this
become
a
another
paved
plaza
with
maybe
a
few
trees
in
it.
That's
you
know
we
have
plenty
of
those
I'm
right
next
to
the
clown
and
metro
station
market.
Commons
is
mostly
like
that
we
need
green
space.
Please
recommend
that
that
that
that
this
this
document
specify
that
the
that
public
space
be
contained
a
park
or
greens
be
basically
green
space
with
trees
and
plantings,
and
things
like
that.
L
But
we
don't
want
another
plaza
there
that
simply
increases
impervious
surfaces
and
creates
all
sorts
of
problems
which
you'll
feel
familiar
with.
So
that's
please.
If
nothing
else,
please
do
that.
At
this
meeting
you
you
didn't,
do
anything
on
larry's
assets.
The
last
time
it
would
helpful
if
you
did
this
time
regarding
other
topics,
he's
mostly
been
said
before.
I've
seen
no
need
for
anything
higher
than
six
stories
here.
I
see
no
reason
to
do
away
with
the
bull's-eye.
L
Basically,
this
is
not
going
to
cause
any
kind
of
equity,
because
all
those
new
apartments
are
going
to
be
high,
like
only
affordable,
would
be
with
high
incomes.
There'll
be
a
few
affordable
housing,
but
not
many.
This
is
not
going
to
solve
any
problem
that
like
it
has.
It
will,
however,
increase
the
traffic
because,
even
though
it's
a
metro
station,
many
people
will
drive
because
there's
people
they
have
occupied
by
several
people-
some
don't
even
live
anywhere
near
work
anywhere
near
metro
stations.
This
will
have
to
increase
traffic.
L
Remember
that
I-66
was
recently
widened
west
of
boston
because
of
the
army
corridors,
conges
density
increase.
This
is
what's
happening.
Also,
the
streets
may
not
appear
more
crowded,
but
there
are
more
cars
and
it's
I
ride
a
bike
there.
It
is
not
pleasant
people
park
into
the
in
the
bike
lanes
all
the
time
trucks
unloading,
the
bike
lanes,
it's
an
unpleasant
area
to
be
in,
but
the
low
the
density
should
not
be.
The
height
should
not
be
increased
if
you've
kept
low.
Most
people
want
it
in
the
initial
survey.
L
It
said
seven
stories,
that's
what
I
favor
so
there's
no
purpose
in
putting
the
high
building,
except
that
the
developer
just
wanted
to
increase
the
profits,
but
but
really
we
there's
plenty
of
high
density
in
boston,
clarendon,
courthouse
and
it's
just
too
much.
But
again
going
back
to
my
original
statement.
Please
say
give
up
for
use
for
that
up
that
public
space
it
should
be.
You
could
say,
green
space.
L
B
Thank
you,
mr
burn.
C
M
Hi,
my
name
is
jane
green.
I
live
in
the
courthouse,
radnor
fort
myers,
height
neighborhood.
I
support
having
this
I'm
removing
the
height
cap
and
allowing
this
glock
go
up
to
16
stories.
We
have
a
housing
crisis,
I'm
just
resigning.
My
lease
in
my
building.
It
went
up
eight
percent
and
that's
something
that
we're
going
to
have
to
come
to
expect.
If
we
don't
continue
to
allow
the
housing
that
you
know,
developers
want
to
build
so
that
people
who
want
to
live
here
have
a
place
to
live
and
don't
have
to.
M
You
know,
push
out
existing
residents.
This
site
is
between
two
metro
stations.
We
know
it's
going
to
have
a
continued
access
to
good
bus
service
and
when
we
allow
up
to
16
stories,
we
can
get
greater
community
benefits
so
that
the
streetscape
bike
lanes
can
all
be
enhanced,
which
will
address
a
lot
of
the
concerns
that
neighbors
have
brought
up
about
car
traffic.
I
have
two
kids.
I
am
not
concerned
about
overcrowding
in
parks.
I'm
not
concerned
about
overcrowding
in
our
schools.
M
I
am
concerned
about
dangerous
street
traffic
and
having
a
a
developer
ad
community
benefits
can
add
to
the
enhanced
streetscape
that
will
give
us
wider
sidewalks
that
will
give
us
better
bike
lanes.
All
of
that
can
really
only
happen
when
we
get
those
community
developments
when
we
allow
greater
height
and
greater
density.
M
The
staff's
own
analysis
shows
that
the
most
equitable
route
to
go
is
to
allow
that
further
height
and
density.
That's
how
we
can
have
not
only
a
few
more
committed,
affordable
units,
but
also
just
general
housing
supply
that
we
know
our
community
needs.
I
think
the
bullseye
model
is
outdated
and
I
understand
that
the
staff
wants
to
look
at
a
height
study
kind
of
comprehensively,
but
we
don't
have
time
for
that.
We
have
a
housing
crisis.
M
N
Hi
good
evening
planning,
commission
members,
my
name
is
ben
devonzo.
I
lived
a
caddy
corridor
to
this
property
for
five
years
in
courtland
called
cortland
park,
so
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
area.
I
was
also
the
president
of
the
queen
and
quarter
civic
association
for
two
years.
In
addition
to
holding
other
officer
positions,
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
area.
I'm
also
a
housing
advocate
and,
as
others
have
said,
rents
in
arlington
are
skyrocketing.
N
Reporting
is
that
we
have
the
highest
rate
increases
in
arlington
compared
to
anywhere
else
in
the
dmv
rate,
increases
range
from
10
to
16,
that's
hundreds
of
dollars
more
a
month.
This
area
is
not
affordable
for
people
to
stay
and
live
in.
We
need
more
housing.
It
is
pretty
clear
that
demand
is
outstripping
supply.
N
Therefore,
it's
pretty
disappointing
to
see
that
staff
recommendation
for
the
site
is
only
12
stories.
I
think
16
stories
would
be
more
than
appropriate,
having
lived
right
across
from
it
for
many
years.
Actually,
my
balcony
overlooked
where
the
site
would
be,
and
I
felt
pretty
uncomfortable
with
the
area.
N
It's
an
empty
lot,
it's
a
parking
lot
and
it
is
a
gap
in
the
street
grid
where
my
wife
and
I
did
not
feel
super
comfortable
walking
by
it
at
night,
because
of
that
a
16-story
building
would
offer
lots
of
new
people
walking
the
streets
creating
vibrancy
in
the
area.
Making
this
a
safer
place
to
be
because
the
more
people
walking
around
the
more
safe
it
is.
N
In
addition,
this
is
very
close
to
two
metro
stations
in
less
than
10
minutes
in
either
direction
and
usually
quicker
depending
on
the
street
crossings,
you
can
make
it
to
the
clarendon
or
courthouse
stations.
A
lot
of
people
will
be
able
to
live
in
this
building
car
free-
and
I
imagine
probably
a
majority
of
them
will.
N
So
I
highly
encourage
the
county
staff
and
the
planning
commission
to
have
at
least
16
stories
at
this
site.
There's
a
lot
of
needed
improvements
in
this
area.
There's
a
need
to
improve
the
streetscape
with
wilson,
boulevard
and
clarinet
boulevard
having
cars
that
are
going
too
fast.
There's
a
need
for
better
bike
lanes,
there's
a
need
for
more
green
space,
a
denser
building
and
a
higher
building.
N
C
Jane,
I'm
sorry
joe
james
is
followed
by
randy
bell.
O
Hello,
you
guys
can
hear
me
right.
Yes,
okay,
so
I
I
want
to
speak
in
favor
of
this
amendment.
I
think
it's
a
great
proposal.
I
was
actually
more
impressed
with
the
proposal
by
crc
how
they
are
bending
over
backwards
to
you
know,
emphasize
the
transit
capacity,
as
well
as
the
how
they're
not
going
to
cast
shadows
on
neighborhoods
that
seem
to
be
destined
to
have
shadows
based
off
of
other
site
other
sector
plans.
O
So
this
location
is
walking
distance
between
two
metro
stations
and
it
will
be
especially
so
when
the
new
elevator
comes
in
in
the
coming
years,
I
don't
see
I
live
in
a
12-story
building
right
next
to
a
a
single-family
neighborhood.
I
just
do
not
see
that
the
aesthetic
or
otherwise
distinction
between
12
or
16
stories.
O
We
don't
need
to
be
denying
more
people
with
our
zoning
laws
in
that
way.
So,
yes,
I
don't
really
have
much
more
to
say.
I
think,
as
arlington
anticipates
more
population
growth,
we
really
have
to
densify
our
corridors.
We
have
to
you
know.
You
know
this
is
smart
growth.
It
is
walking
distance
from
a
metro
station,
putting
more
density
and
more
height.
So
I
will
just
echo
the
words
of
miss
green
and
mr
davonzo
as
well
as
others
who
have
spoken
here
tonight.
C
Our
next
speaker,
this
will
be
the
last
three
minute
speaker
for
our
remote
speakers
is
randy
bell.
P
Can
yeah
my
comment
is
more
of
a
generic
comment
concerning
going
green
and
planning
for
a
future
where
we
have
all
electric
cars.
I
haven't
followed
this
project
too
much.
I
think
I
favor
it,
but
I'm
assuming
that
there
are
residential
parking
spaces,
maybe
not
that
many,
but
there
are
some
and
the
comment
I'm
making
is
that
we
need
to
plan
ahead
for
having
a
charging
station
at
every
single
parking
space.
P
It
may
be
that
it's
not
a
tesla
connector
at
this
point,
but
it
should
have
a
be
pre-wired
for
a
60,
amp
sub-panel
and
every
parking
space
for
all
new
development,
and
then
that
would
require
that
the
developer
provide
the
electric
feed
into
the
building.
That
would
be
able
to
power
all
of
these
60
amp
circuits.
If
we
don't
do
this
now
we're
going
to
be
caught
in
a
situation
like
california
mandate
electric
cars,
but
then
they
can't
charge
them.
A
B
All
right,
then,
would
you
please
call
the
next
speaker.
C
Okay,
thank
you,
our
next
speaker,
five
minute
speakers
will
be
bill.
Gearhart,
followed
by
john
carteen.
Q
Good,
even
trying
to
see,
if
the
I
don't
know,
the
camera
works
anyway.
Lion
village
joins
in
in
supporting
the
views
of
the
other
civic
associations,
including
clarendon
courthouse,
essentially
that
this
is
too
big
and
we're.
We
haven't
followed
the
appropriate
process,
and
I
want
to
really
focus
on
more
on
process
in.
In
my
comments.
C
Q
Of
all
the
the
site
is
planned,
there's
a
statement
earlier
that
this
site
is
on
plan,
but
I
can't
imagine
something
that
is
more
carefully
or
more
definitively
planned
than
service
commercial
one
to
four
stories.
Q
So
it
is
a
misnomer
that
the
site
was
not
planned
and
I
was
involved
with
the
clarinet
courthouse
with
with
this
sector
plan
when
it
was
developed-
and
I
remember
the
discussions
about
what
this
site
should
be,
and
it
should
be
essentially
retail
commercial,
maybe
small
apartment
buildings
in
the
neighborhood
of
four
stories.
Q
Secondly,
I'd
like
to
make
the
point
about
that.
This
has
an
appearance
of
being
spot
zoning,
where
you're
taking
a
site
you've
got
an
applicant
who
has
come
in,
wants
to
build
a
much
bigger
building
than
is
permitted,
has
about
three
quarters
of
the
site
and
is
proposing
something
that
is
is
not
allowed
on
any
on
this
block
or
any
of
the
blocks
surrounding
it.
That
has
the
look
of
of
spot
zoning,
and
this
there
probably
should
be
a
discussion
with
the
county
attorney
on
the
legality
of
this.
Q
Further
point
I
want
to
make
is
that
we
have
a
general
process
in
the
county
for
developing
site
plans
and
for
amending
the
site
plans,
and
that
involves
the
engagement
of
the
of
the
property
owners,
county
staff
and
and
so
forth,
and
also
the
neighborhoods
and
these
plans
don't
go
forward
until
we
have
everybody
on
board,
including
the
neighborhoods
oftentimes.
A
county
board
member
has
gotten
engaged
in
the
process,
like
chris
zimmerman
did
with
the
clarendon
sector
plan
back
in
2006,
but
everyone
was
on
board
and
there's
a
reason
for
that.
Q
It
means
that
property
owners
can't
object
to
what's
when,
when
they're
being
held
to
something
that
the
the
pros
that
the
plan
holds
them
to
and
also
that
neighborhoods
can't
come
in
and
object.
So
there
is
a
reason
for
doing
this,
and-
and
this
goes
back
years
in
the
in
the
county
and
if
it
would
make
sense
for
us
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
boards,
try
to
get
the
neighborhoods
together
and
see
if
they
can't
come
up
with
something-
that's
maybe
maybe
bigger
than
the
four
stories.
Q
Maybe
it's
six
or
eight
stories,
but
where
you
have
that
consensus
behind
this
change
and
and
and
and
you
preserve
that
process
and
and
avoid
setting
precedence.
Q
The
the
last
point
I'd
like
to
make
is
that
this
is
a
huge
change
from
what's
being
planned
and
for
the
county
to
approve
this
kind
of
opens
the
door
to
every
other
developer
and
the
black
rocks
of
the
world
and
so
forth
for
coming
in
and
seeking
rezonings
and
changes
in
planned
areas
to
something
that
is
way
out
of
whack
with
the
planned
area.
Q
Having
set
the
president,
how
does
the
county
say
no
to
the
next
one,
and
and
is
it
the
county,
then
a
litigation
that
it
perhaps
loses,
because
it
has
done
something
so
out
of
place
here
that
the
county
has
no
legs
to
stand
on
on
other
sites.
So
I
would
leave
it
with
that
and-
and
I
think,
you're
going
in
the
wrong
direction
without
getting
the
support
of
the
neighborhood
civic
associations.
Q
B
Thank
you,
mr
gerhart,
mr
carton.
If
you're
on
the
line
with
respect
we
we
are
going
to
ask
you
to
limit
your
comments
to
three
minutes.
We
typically
accept
one
speaker
on
behalf
of
a
neighborhood
organization.
B
Unfortunately,
mr
gerhart
beat
you
to
getting
the
speaker
slip
in
so
I'll
I'll.
Take
you
now
but
again
ask
you
to
keep
your
comments
to
three
minutes
as
an
individual
speaker.
Thank
you.
B
R
No
problem
anyway,
as
as
bill
has
said,
and
other
people
in
the
neighborhood
have
said,
and
I
think
you've
hear
hearing
a
pretty
clear
message
from
the
neighborhood
about
about
these
buildings.
We
want
something:
that's
smaller
rather
than
bigger.
You
know
the
developer
always
goes
reaches
for
the
sky
because
that's
to
their
benefit,
but
we
prefer
to
stay
with
the
county's
courthouse
sector
plan.
R
The
neighbors
who
live
close
by
to
the
site
want
low
mixed
use
that
would
allow
for
up
to
six
stories.
This
is
the
per
preferred
option
for
the
neighbors
who
live
across
from
and
around
this
site.
If
melanie
cummings
had
had
spoken
tonight,
I'm
sure
she
would
have
said
the
same
thing
this
would
conform
with
the
zoning
of
all
the
other
large
commercial
lots
in
the
immediate
vicinity,
including
market
commons,
whole
foods
and
the
building.
R
That's
east
of
this
block
what's
proposed
here
would
be
a
radical
change.
The
block
is
not
even
fully
consolidated
and
we're
letting
him
do
this.
I
also
want
to
comment
just
quickly
on
the
survey
that
went
out.
R
It
was
really
unfortunate
that
it
didn't
give
you
a
four
to
four
or
five
story:
option.
The
smallest
option
was
12.,
so
it
was
very
flawed
and
biased
and
when
the
respondents
asked
what
size
building
they'd
like
to
see
on
the
site,
the
current
land
use
plan
and
zoning
was
not
even
a
choice,
so
there
was
no
base
case
which
didn't
really
make
it
a
consistent
and
fair
survey.
R
There
was
also
no
place
to
write
in
comments
on
the
survey
about
the
plan.
It
was
a
done
deal
if
you
respond
to
the
survey.
The
minimum
number
of
floors
that
you
could
pick
was
12..
So
the
result
was
a
biased,
non-inclusive
and
discriminatory
survey
result,
and
this
actually
violates
one
of
the
stated
goals
of
inclusivity
for
the
for
this
process
that
the
staff
just
talked
about
earlier.
R
So
we
support,
you
know
the
planning,
that's
already
in
place
for
the
metro
corridor,
which
follows
the
nub
concept
used
in
north
northwest
washington
other
places
with
greatest
heights
at
the
metro
stations
and
lower
heights
further
away.
R
This
is
what
the
long
time
plan
for
the
rv
corridor
calls
for
that.
Those
building
heights
and
densities
should
taper
down
between
stations
and
be
consistent
with
the
long-term
county
planning
principle,
and
this
site
is
just
about
halfway
between
courthouse
and
clarendon
metro
stations,
so
lion
village.
Actually
this
presents
a
problem
for
us,
particularly,
you
know
we're
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard
we're
talking
about
one
and
two-story
buildings
in
houses,
so
12
stores
would
really
tower
over.
R
B
Metal
clerk
we
saw-
I
I
saw
that
we
had
three
remote
five-minute.
Speakers
did
one
of
them
move
away
now.
C
She's
in
person,
so
I
moved
her
to
in
person
five
minutes
very
good.
Thank.
B
You
then,
I
believe,
we're
going
to
next
to
in-person
speakers.
Would
you
call
the
next
speaker.
C
Yes,
it's
mr
pedowitz,
mr
pedowitz
cause.
You
give
me
just
one
second
to
take
your
time.
S
S
If
we
evaluate
only
on
what
some
in
our
community
see
as
negatives
before
we
have
the
chance
to
consider
fully
all
of
the
positives,
and
so
this
evening,
I
encourage
the
planning
commission
to
recommend
to
the
county
board
that
they
adopt
a
special
glove
study,
designating
the
site
as
medium
office
apartment
hotel,
without
any
supplementary
note,
limiting
the
height
of
any
future
structure
below
the
general
guidance
for
this
club
designation
and
its
associated
co.
2.5
zoning
to
be
clear.
S
Any
future
project
will
be
by
site
plan
and
all
the
process
that
that
entails
and
an
sprc,
including
many
people
in
this
room,
will
consider
sculpting
community
benefit,
earning
height
and
density
in
the
appropriate
and
usual
manner,
and
most
certainly
the
project
that
results
will
bear
little
resemblance
to
these
blocky,
yellow
massing
diagrams.
That
we've
seen
that
I
complement
staff
on
their
hard
work
on
them.
S
S
As
I've
noted
at
previous
hearings,
the
county
board
gave
a
similar
allowance
in
the
special
globe
study
plus
for
shirlington,
that
was
july
of
2020.
I
think
that
is
instructive
to
us,
and
so
let
us
give
guidance
that
allows
for
that
sprc
process
to
continue
that
allows
us
to
consider
the
full
benefit
to
the
community,
and
so
once
again,
I
encourage
the
commission
to
recommend
to
the
board
that
they
adopt
the
study
without
additional
height
restrictions
and
allow
this
up
and
gloating
is
very
the
glop
and
zoning
to
guide
the
sprc
to
come.
T
Good
evening,
arlingtonians
are
proud
of
their
neighborhoods,
each
with
its
own
vibe
and
character.
We
flaunt
the
unique
identity
of
each
of
our
neighborhoods
and
our
tourist
brochures
in
the
courthouse
clarendon
area.
We
want
to
maintain
our
unique
character
as
the
urban
village
for
people
of
all
ages
and
walks
of
life
to
live,
work
and
play
with
all
due
respect.
We
do
not
wish
to
merge
our
identity
with
ballston
or
roslyn.
T
I'm
a
resident
of
this
neighborhood
for
over
30
years
as
a
renter
owner
young
professional
and
a
mother
responsiveness
of
the
county
to
the
neighborhood
residents
starts
at
the
commission.
I
did
not
come
before
you
with
the
other
high
density
developments
declared
in
a
courthouse,
because
that
is
where
tall
buildings
were
planned
for
and
expected
near.
The
metro
courthouse
west,
on
the
other
hand,
has
always
been
planned
to
be
a
trough.
T
The
low
area
that
binds
together
adjacent
low-rise,
residential
neighborhoods
with
gradually
escalating
office
apartments
and
condo
buildings
that
peak
at
denser
metro
areas
to
create
a
harmonious
rhythm
to
the
area.
Despite
staff
recommendation,
a
thorough
assessment
of
their
study
leads
to
the
conclusion
that
this
development
should
be
capped
at
six
stories
at
its
highest
point
along
the
taperings
and
setbacks.
County
staff
were
correct
to
point
out
that
one
never
before
has
a
tall
building
been
built
on
the
periphery
of
a
planning
area
without
an
extensive
community
planning
process
to
establish
tailored
guidance.
T
Two
any
buildings
above
six
stories
at
this
location
diverges
from
the
surrounding
skyline
and
three.
Never
before
in
arlington
has
a
16-story
building
abutted
a
lower
density
residential
area.
However,
county
staff
mistakenly
settled
at
the
12-story
cap
in
an
attempt
to
balance
a
push
for
additional
housing
opportunities.
That
is
contrary
to
the
planning
guidance
for
this
area
already.
Sites
that
were
slated
to
be
offices
were
converted
to
residential
and
contravene
the
original
balanced
mixed-use
plans
that
mitigate
pressures
on
a
relatively
small
area.
T
For
example,
a
balanced
combination
of
office,
commercial
and
residential,
creates
different
non-competing
traffic
patterns
and
provides
local
businesses
clientele
at
different
times
of
the
day.
Thorough
thoughtful
planning
was
abandoned
to
favor
residential
developments
without
an
equitable
accommodation
for
this
major
influx
of
residents
to
afford
them
the
same
access
to
county
facilities,
certainties
and
quality
of
life
afforded
to
other
arlingtonians
a
low-density
mixed-use
development
with
a
maximum
of
16
stories
along
with
taperings
and
setbacks
per
the
staff
study,
is
the
most
appropriate,
designation
or
less.
T
I
am
disappointed
that
developer
today
chose
to
misrepresent
their
by-right
development,
which
is
only
zero
to
four
stories
of
commercial
under
c2
zoning.
Also,
the
building
height
of
this
development
will
not,
unfortunately,
bring
down
rents.
As
to
the
ever-hopeful
speakers,
our
county
is
run
by
the
rule
of
law
procedures
and
plans.
We
cannot
drop
all
the
guidelines
at
a
whim.
We
need.
U
Commissioner,
chairman,
are
you
ready?
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
We
are
commissioners
staff.
Thank
you.
My
name
is
anne
bodine,
I'm
speaking
on
today
on
behalf
of
arlingtonians
for
our
sustainable
future.
I'd
like
to
endorse
the
comments
by
mr
gearin
and
mr
carton
before
me.
Asf
is
asking
that
you
not
amend
the
glove
for
this
particular
courthouse
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office
apartment
hotel
for
the
following
reasons.
U
Asf
is
concerned
that
arlington
has
not
planned
adequate
infrastructure
or
services
or
budgeted
for
the
consequences
of
a
commitment
made
in
2018
under
then
current
zoning
to
allow
up
to
63
000
more
residents
by
2045..
That
alone
is
a
significant
increase
in
population
and
we
have
not
done
the
requisite
planning.
U
These
plans
and
missing
middle
effort
asked
us
to
support,
support
or
accept
the
same
poor
logic
that
there
is
no
need
to
plan
for
large
numbers
of
people
that
hire
land
use,
make
certain
pentagon
city
alone
added
twelve
thousand
new
people,
but
that
area
got
no
community
school,
no
community
owned
park
with
a
ball
field,
no
community
center.
Every
month,
you
and
then
the
board
vote.
Yes
on
code,
exceptions
for
more
infill,
massing
setbacks,
reduced
parking
ratios
or
penthouses
that
don't
count
towards
glorif's
floor
area.
U
This
massive
gifting
to
developers
and
the
short-changing
residents
is
not
sustainable
on
courthouse
west
12
stories,
much
less
16
is
even
before
site
planning,
piles
on
new
density
and
even
with
bonus
density.
This
is
not
the
path
to
true
and
responsive,
affordable
housing.
It's
not
the
path
to
green
building.
It's
not
the
path
to
new
parks
and
new
schools
until
the
county,
with
your
help,
settles
on
a
new
formula
where
the
public
sees
the
full
benefits
from
infill
up
front
and
forever.
Our
opposition
remains
steady.
U
So
we
ask
that
you
provide
for
courthouse
west
a
site-specific
fiscal
and
environmental
impact,
analysis
and
project
the
demographics
of
added
density
in
a
corridor.
That
right
now
is
only
five
percent
black.
How
do
we
explain
that
already
low
number
wasn't
density,
the
key
to
diversity,
absent
these
analyses?
C
Scott
sutherland
is
our
next
meet
speaker
and
last
three-minute
speaker.
V
Thank
you
and
good
evening
appreciate
being
here.
So
some
of
the
people
that
come
and
talk
to
you
are
obviously
paid
they're
professionals
they
held,
say
hello,
I'm
a
newbie!
I
haven't
been
here
in
front
of
this
body
for
gosh,
it's
almost
30
years
and
the
last
time
I
was
here
it
was
to
talk
about
the
proposed
development
of
home
depot
where
the
market
common
is
right.
V
Now
I've
bought
a
house
on
north
danville
street
in
1992
and,
thank
goodness,
the
the
neighborhood
associations
joined
together
and
were
heard
by
the
government
were
heard
by
the
county
board
and
so
forth.
Ultimately,
home
depot
withdrew,
but
we
were,
we
were
at
least
listened
to
bill.
V
Gearhart
who
spoke
earlier
was
was
a
huge
leader
in
that,
and
I
remember
the
talk
of
the
sector
plan
and
that
and
the
changes
that
we
made
then
and
the
concessions
we
made
then
to
even
allow
the
market
common
to
get
built
and
allow
the
aiken
young
and
todd
development
along
north
danville
street
to
get
belt
and
there
were
concessions
made,
and
they
were
helpful.
There's
a
park
there.
Now
the
streetscape
along
danville
street
is
better
than
it
would
have
been
originally
etc.
V
The
point
is
is
that
I
feel
like
deals,
get
made
and
deals
get
made
with
citizens
to
say:
okay,
well,
we'll
allow
density
and
we'll
allow
higher
buildings
etc
in
this
particular
place.
But
we'll
give
you
this
and
then
here
we
are
30
years
later,
and
it's
sort
of
like
that
deal
now
is
out
the
window.
It's
like
it
was
forgotten
because
somebody
else
has
come
with
a
hey.
V
It
seems
like
let's
cut
split
the
baby
down
the
middle,
and
I
suspect
every
developer
in
in
that's
interested
in
this
county
is
going
to
do
the
same
kind
of
thing,
particularly
if
you
guys
say
thumbs
up
to
this
kind
of
deal.
So
I'll
just
say:
the
building
that's
being
proposed
here
is
way
out
of
character.
With
this
neighborhood,
it's
not
only
out
of
character
with
the
homes,
it's
out
of
character
with
the
commercial
development
in
the
neighborhood.
V
I
likened
it
at
the
open
house
to
feeling
like
a
classic
clarendon
craftsman
house
was
torn,
would
be
torn
down
and
a
mcmansion
built
in
its
place
in
the
neighborhood.
That's
the
equivalent
of
this
in
a
commercial
area
this
this
would
be
a
mcmansion
in
a
commercial
area
of
arlington.
V
I
did
ask
during
the
open
house
that
a
map
be
created.
I
asked
county
staff.
If
a
map
could
be
created,
they
would
show
where
the
six
the
buildings
in
our
county
are
16
stories
or
higher
and
where
the
buildings
are
that
are
12
to
16
stories
and
where
the
270
dwelling
unit
buildings
are
so
that
we
could
look
in
the
county
at
where
these
kinds
of
things
are.
They
say
they're
working
on
that.
V
C
W
All
good
evening,
members
of
the
commission,
my
name
is
john
musa,
I'm
the
new
government
affairs
manager
for
the
arlington
chamber
of
commerce.
I
am
here
tonight
to
express
the
chamber
support
for
the
maximum
height
a
cap
of
16
stores
within
the
staff's
recommended
zoning
category
of
c
c,
o
2.5.
W
As
the
chamber
stated
in
the
december
2021
letter,
the
chamber
supports
additional
density,
particularly
in
established
bus
and
rail
transit
corridors
along
with
land
use
policy
that
is
flexible
to
attract
new
investment.
Arlington.
This
site
provides
the
opportunity
to
do
just
that
this
site,
as
is
mentioned
before
and
by
many
other
speakers,
is
in
incredibly
easy,
walking
distance
to
the
courthouse
metro
station,
the
clarity
metro
station,
a
whole
variety
of
art
and
much
of
a
stops.
W
This
site
is
near,
as
previously
stated,
a
high
concentration
of
jobs,
a
really
vibrant
retail
scene
and
one
of
the
beating
economic
engines
of
this
county
and
in
order
to
increase
housing,
affordability
going
forward,
arlington
county
needs
to
or
should
remove,
barriers
to,
the
provision
of
housing
supply,
including,
but
not
limited
to
height.
Limitations
on
density,
allowing
for
a
higher
maximum
height,
is
still
going
to
provide
the
chance
for
the
commission
to
further
refine
proposals
in
the
4.1
site
plan
process
going
forward.
This
could
increase.
W
C
Okay,
just
one
second,
please.
X
Hello,
my
name
is
brooke
alexander,
I'm
here
tonight
representing
the
ashton
heights
civic
association.
Our
comments
first
are
to
support
the
positions
of
our
sister
civic
associations,
who
have
or
will
speak
tonight.
In
particular,
we
support
the
clarendon
courthouse
letter,
which
is
in
your
packet.
I
believe
I
will
not
repeat
its
contents.
X
This
bullseye
concept
is
the
only
graphic
on
the
county,
roslin
boston
website,
I'm
assuming
that
something
on
this
website
would
be
current
county
policy.
Otherwise,
it's
false
advertisement.
In
my
opinion,
I
sent
a
link
and
a
copy
of
it
to
staff.
Today
you
should
find
it
in
your
packet
if
you're
not
familiar
with
it.
X
X
X
X
X
We
need
to
plan
for
these
services
and
then
defend
them.
The
10th
street
park
in
clarendon,
which
was
on
the
general
annual
plan,
was
not
defended.
It
is
at
risk,
have
changed
since
1984
priorities
have
changed.
We
need
to
make
good
decisions
going
forward.
We
have
as
yet
unallocated
potential
development
along
the
corridor
within
the
truss.
X
If
the
decision
is
made
to
convert
to
a
spine
rather
than
a
bullseye
concept,
if
we
do
it
one
property
at
a
time,
the
beneficiaries
are
the
developers.
I
urge
you
to
make
a
decision
that
will
allow
the
county
to
capture
that
potential
development
for
the
good
of
the
county.
Those
options
could
include.
Parks
could
include
missing
middle
housing,
but
we
should
have
a
comprehensive
look
at
this
potential
development
and
make
a
decision
as
a
county
rather
than
no
offense
one
committee
making
the
decision
one
block
at
a
time.
Y
Hello,
everybody,
my
name
is
lisa
chavez.
I
am
the
representative
for
the
clarinet
courthouse
civic
association
here
tonight
and
there
are
a
number
of
questions
and
concerns
that
we
raised
in
the
letter
here
and
many
of
us
in
this
neighborhood
as
well.
Some
of
the
speakers
tonight
have
taken
part
in
extensive
counting
account
me
planning
exercises
throughout
the
county
over
numerous
years
and
some
more
recent,
but
in
this
particular
site.
What
we're
seeing
is
a
lack
of
inclusion
in
fully
considering
outreach,
the
neighborhood,
significant
input
and
neighborhood-led
design
or
choices
from
the
proposed
options.
Y
Many
of
the
speakers
have
already
spoken
to
the
issues
about
how
the
study
was
originally
laid
out.
The
types
of
questions
and
answers
that
were
basically
inferred
through
some
of
that
process,
and
this
is
not
the
kind
of
equitable
outcome
that
we
would
want
to
see,
particularly
on
a
block
that
is
being
done
as
a
one-off,
special
glip
study.
Y
The
gleb
study
itself
has
possible
potential,
but
at
the
heights
and
densities
that
are
named
in
that
study,
we're
not
in
a
position
to
fully
support
that,
simply
because
we
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
have
our
voices
heard
at
the
ways
that
we
traditionally
have
had
interactions
with
county
staff
across
the
board.
There
are
a
number
of
times
where
this
civic
association
and
other
neighboring
associations
have
supported
significant
increases
in
density
and
the
site
might
even
potentially
be
one
of
those,
but
we
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
do
that.
Y
A
few
comments
here
and
there
in
long
range
planning
commission,
which
is
largely
closed
off
to
residents,
but
we
haven't
had
the
kind
of
open
houses
and
old
time
charrettes
that
we
sometimes
had
and
that
we
would
normally
expect
to
get
a
diverse
cross-section
of
neighborhood.
Participation
from
this
site
is
a
precedent,
settings
site,
and
as
ashton
heights
mentioned,
this
is
a
change
into
what
we've
traditionally
done
in
arlington
in
the
trough
development.
Y
If
the
county
were
to
conduct
an
exercise
about
what
to
do
with
the
troughs,
what
do
we
then
there's
a
reasonable
opportunity
for
a
larger
group
exercise
to
look
at
what
we
really
want,
rather
than
simply
reacting
to
what
a
proposal
is.
That's
on
the
table
that
isn't
fully
baked
out.
Of
course,
this
takes
a
long
time.
It's
already
taken
a
fair
amount
of
time,
but
that
is
typical
for
ex
for
asking
for
a
significant
change
in
height
and
density
off
this
already
planned
site.
Y
If
there's
an
exercise
in
changing
the
zoning
throughout
of
other
parts
of
the
sector
plan,
that
would
be
something
the
clarinet
courthouse.
Civic
association
would
participate
in,
but
a
piecemeal
approach
does
not
give
us
the
confidence
that
the
county
or
the
developer
are
able
to
ameliorate
the
effects
of
development,
and
many
of
these
effects
can
be
ameliorated.
Y
Several
speakers,
including
the
applicant,
mentioned
the
long-standing
plan
for
a
second
metro
insurance.
That
plan
is
still
significantly
underdeveloped
if
the
county
and
the
developer
were
to
come
forward
with
a
significant
commitment
that
would
give
the
neighbors
the
confidence
to
believe
that
this
would
actually
happen
in
the
building
life
of
this
building.
Y
Affordable
housing
at
the
income
levels
most
desperately
needed
in
the
county
and
green
space
places
for
kids
to
play
dogs
to
walk.
Some
of
these
issues
can
be
fleshed
out
in
sight
plan,
and
what
we've
heard
today
is
that
the
applicant
has
to
earn
it
whether
you're
earning
that
density
at
six
stories.
Eight
stories,
nine
and
a
half
there's
a
price
to
be
paid
for
that,
and
those
community
benefits
need
to
be
direct.
They
need
to
be
clear
and
they
need
to
ameliorate
some
of
the
long-standing
concerns
and
reasonable
requests
that
residents
have
have
noted.
B
Thank
you.
I
believe
our
next
step
would
be
to
go
to
representatives
of
any
commissions.
Do
we
have
representatives
of
any
commissions
here
this
evening,
including
transportation,
all
right?
Thank
you,
then,
commissioner
bagley,
if
you
have
any
comments
to
kick
us
off,
I've
got
a
few
questions
I
know,
but
if
you
want
to
give
us
some
structure
or
any
or
any
guidance,
we
can
start
there.
Z
Actually,
thank
you,
mr
chair.
No,
when
we
met
on
the
rta
in
july,
I
gave
a
pretty
thorough
report
of
what
had
happened.
You
know
in
the
process
and
I
think
staff
as
usual
has
done
a
great
job
of
putting
together
what
has
happened
in
the
process
since
so
I
have
no
other
comments
right
now.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
B
And
just
this,
doesn't
I'm
not
proposing
this
as
an
outline,
but
I
happen
to
have
it
literally
in
front
of
me.
Our
discussion
outline
in
july
was
open
space,
affordable
housing,
stated
goal
of
increasing
family
size
units
transportation
and
massive
density
again
that
by
no
means
does
that
need
to
or
should
even
dictate
how
we
proceed.
B
So
I
guess
maybe
the
first
thing
to
do
is
open
the
floor
for
discussion,
sort
of
topics
and
then
once
we
have
a
list
of
two
three,
maybe
one
topic,
then
then
we
can
start
with
questions.
Commissioner,
schroll
I'll
go
to
you.
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
some
questions
just
about
staff's
analysis
regarding
kind
of.
AA
What
would
be
required
for
a
more
comprehensive
look
at
this
site
or
for
and
I
think
in
response
to
some
of
the
questions
public
speakers
about
additional
study.
AA
The
the
sector
plan
itself
so
so.
B
B
I
think
that
I
want
to
put
height
and
massing
in
connected
with
we'll
call
it
the
commissioner's
role
category
for
now,
because
I
think
that
that's
the
one
that's
gonna
tend
to
sprawl
out
a
little
bit.
Commissioner
starling.
B
Context
of
sector
plan
county
plan.
I
think
that
that
is
commissioner
troll.
I
think
that
that's
also
very
much
within
kind
of
the
questions
you
were
leaning
on
asking
yeah,
so
I
think
we
basically
have
two
small
topics
and
one
potentially
big
comprehensive
topic.
Commissioner,
peterson
yeah
just
a
transportation
question.
AD
The
red
lights:
oh
there
we
go
okay.
I
also
wanted
to
just
see
how
how
do
we
know
when
somebody
from
our
commission
is
on
teams
wanting
to
raise
their
hand
gizelle?
Do
you
miss
johnson?
Do
you
let
us
know
if
that's
happening.
C
So
we
actually,
as
far
as
I
know,
don't
have
the
ability
to
do
that.
There's
a
lot
of
functionalities
that
we've
disabled
so
as
not
to
disrupt
the
streaming
or
the
projection.
AB
B
So
the
I
I
misunderstood
that
we
would
still
have
the
team's
screen
in
front
of
us
for
for
this
purpose.
This
is
you
know
all
this.
All
of
us
are
aware
of
the
fact.
This
is
our
first
meeting
and
we
are
learning
as
we
go.
Commissioner
patel,
if
you
are
on,
please
send
me
a
text
just
to
one.
Let
me
know
that
you're
on
and
two
I
will
rely
on
you
to
send
me
a
text
or
call
my
phone
if
you
need
to
in
order
to
get
my.
C
Attention-
excuse
me:
were
you
referring
to
commissioner
patel,
commissioner
yeah.
C
B
C
B
Will
send
her
a
text
to
that
effect?
I
we
we
were
not
expecting
her
until
about
now
anyway,
given
the
nature
of
her
of
her
personal
conflict
that
has
her
out
of
out
of
county
okay.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up,
as
it
happens,
the
other
you
know
three
are
all
absent
today,
so
they
all
have
various
conflicts.
AB
B
AD
Thank
you
chairwear,
so
I
appreciate
the
presentations
tonight
and
I
also
appreciate
hearing
from
all
of
the
public
speakers,
both
in
person
and
virtually
so
one
of
the
goals
stated
in
this
study
was
to
increase
the
amount
of
housing,
including
specifically
family
housing.
This
is
something
that
I
am
very
interested
in
as
a
person
who
lives
in
a
multi-residential
building
a
13-story
condo
building
with
my
three
children
and
spouse.
AD
I
really
think
that
apartment
buildings
can
be
a
great
place
for
a
family
to
live,
and
so
I'd
be
interested
to
know
if
the
12-story
option
is,
if
that's
what
we
allow
for
tonight,
how
can
we
accomplish
the
family
housing
units
that
we
call
for
in
the
study
versus
if
we
go
to
16
stories?
That's
just
more
square
footage
that
could
then
lead
to
more
possible
family
size
units.
So
I
kind
of
wanted
to
know
staff
from
your
perspective
negotiating
for
more
family
size
units.
You
know
how.
D
D
So
as
that,
future
site
plan
is
reviewed
through
the
site
plan
review
process,
the
the
stated
guiding
principles,
the
stated
recommendations
will
be
weighed
with
the
site
plane
application
to
understand.
How
is
that
site
plan
application,
reflecting
these
recommendations
reflecting
these
principles?
D
AD
Okay,
thank
you
and
if
I
may
ask
a
follow-up
question,
so
I
was
wondering
if
there
is
a
way
to
create
a
condition
to
say
that
if
the
building
were
to
go
above
12
stories,
there
would
be
required
to
have
a
certain
percentage
of
units
or
certain
square
footage
of
units
that
reflects
maybe
an
ami
of
a
certain
percentage.
So
these
wouldn't
necessarily
be
affordable
housing,
but
they
wouldn't
be
luxury
housing.
AD
So
I
imagine
if
we
go
from
12
to
16
stories,
those
12
to
16
stories,
they're
going
to
have
views
of
you
know
across
the
county
into
dc
beautiful
views.
Those
are
going
to
be
luxury
units
and
we
know
that.
But
maybe
if
we
do
have
those
luxury
units
that
are
bringing
in
lots
of
profits
for
the
applicant,
that
gives
them
the
ability
to
offer
some
not
missing
middle
housing,
because
we
know
missing,
milling
missing
middle
doesn't
include
these
highly
dense
buildings
but
but
housing
that
maybe
two
teachers
working
in
arlington
could
afford.
D
So
the
the
way
the
current
study
document
lays
out
a
recommendation
regarding
affordable
housing.
We
speak
to
the
zoning
ordinance
and
what
the
zoning
ordinance
requires
for
both
site
plan
applications,
but
also
for
fluff
designation
changes.
D
D
So
there
there
could
be
potential
opportunity
to
provide
some
some
guidance
there
related
to
amis,
but
that's
also
something
that
I
think
is
something
that
can
happen
during
the
site
plan
review
process
to
really
help
understand,
as
we
review
the
totality
of
the
application
and
how
it
best
reflects
all
of
the
different
elements
of
the
study
document.
You
know
how
it
can
incorporate
all
these
to
the
best
of
its
ability.
Okay,.
B
Anyone
else
have
questions
on
this
topic.
I
think
then
we
also
had
affordable
housing.
I
forget
who
raised
that
commissioner
told
me
I'll
go
to
you.
AB
Yeah
that
might
have
actually
been
answered
or
in
the
last
colloquy.
So
I
don't
think
I
really
need
to
add
anything
further,
but
I
do
know.
Would
you
know
what
the
proportion
of
units
would
be
affordable
where
if
we
were
to
go
from
12
to
16.
that'd
be
approximately
70
more
units
that
could
be
built
of
the
70?
How
many
do
you
think
would
could
be
or
could
be
affordable
as
defined?
You
know.
D
Yeah,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Lynn.
Tell
me
so
staff
in
our
in
our
staff
report
our
draft
staff
report.
We
did
look
at
the
development
potential
of
what
what
is
included
in
the
study
document
at
the
12
stories,
as
well
as
what
a
theoretical,
16
story,
development
scenario
would
look
like
and
you're
correct.
The
delta
between
those
two
would
be
approximately
70
stories
and
again
this
is
very
generalized
massing
with
you
know.
D
D
Correct
yes,
there
under
under
16
stories,
there
would
be
additional
density
above
the
base
site,
plant
density
of
115
units
per
acre
and
that
that
density
would
need
to
be
earned
via
you
know,
achieving
the
study's
recommendations-
and
you
know
there
are
ways
through
the
zoning
ordinance
to
to
achieve
additional
density,
affordable
housing
being
one
of
them.
B
From
my
fellow
question
is
that
it
looks
like
all
of
our
microphones
have
lights
on
them
now
and
I'm
commissioner
styling,
I
may
or
may
not
be
able
to
see
you
but
commissioners
peterson,
troll
and
bagley.
I
I'm
going
to
use
the
it
doesn't
light
up
for
you.
Well,
you
get
to
raise
your
hand,
but
but
other
commissioners
I'll
be
going
on
by
by
the
light,
and
so
commissioner
bagley
I'll
go
to
you.
Z
So
I
can
go
okay,
we
do
have
a
housing
crisis
in
arlington
and
I
do
believe
it
is
one
of
affordability.
Z
If
we
go
back
to
the
chart
that
staff
had
about
inclusivity
and
the
goals
of
inclusivity,
when
people
cannot
afford
to
live
in
a
place,
whether
it's
got
12
stories
or
16
stories,
it
become,
they
become
excluded,
and
that
is
exclusivity,
not
inclusivity.
Z
I
don't
think
I
can
go
for
a
higher
height
thing.
Thank
you.
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I'm
picking
up
on
commissioner
bakley's
comment,
mr
murphy,
four
proposals
that
have
gone
through
the
special
study
process.
There
is
an
additional
affordab
affordability
requirement.
Is
there
not.
AA
D
Yeah,
absolutely
so,
the
the
zoning
ordinance
includes
provisions
or
a
specific
provision
related
to
glock
changes,
and
so
what
that
speaks
to
is
that
there
there's
a
a
provision
of
affordable
housing
when
there's
the
consideration
of
a
designation
change.
And
so,
as
we
note
in
the
study
document
by
practice,
that
that
is
considered,
it's
a
20
figure
and
so
that
that
is
kind
of
something
that
is
considered
when
there
is
a
request
for
glove
change.
AA
Thank
you
so,
commissioner
bagley
I
mean,
I
think
there
would
be.
You
know,
committed
units
here
at
around
the
60
ami,
it's
immortalized
on
the
study
document
on
page
38,
so
I
mean
I.
I
certainly
share
your
concerns,
but
there
are
some
at
least
some
provisions
there.
It
may
not
satisfy
what
you're
what
you're
after
and
that
might
be.
Z
B
Right,
not
not,
commissioner
peterson,
I
I
have.
I
have
a
resp
comment
on
that,
but,
commissioner
peterson,
I
want
to
go
to
you
first,
you
would.
AD
Well,
I
just
it's
like
mute
and
unmute,
and
I
wanted
to
see
if
mr
whitmore
had
possibly
an
estimate
where
staff
couldn't
give
an
estimate
of
how
many
extra
possible,
affordable
housing
units
you'd
get
from
going
to
12
to
16..
Do
you
all
have
one
that
you
would
say
on
the
record
and
that
we
might
remind
you
of
if
we
ever
got
to
the
point
where
we
are
debating
16
stories
in
affordable
housing.
E
Thank
you,
I'm
better
at
raising
my
virtual
hand
than
my
real
hand.
So
with
all
of
those
caveats
that
you
mentioned,
commissioner
peterson,
that
obviously
we
have
haven't
designed
the
building
yet
and
we
have
a
number
of
issues
to
look
at.
But
we
think
that
for
each
story,
additional
story
there
would
be
between
one
and
five
affordable
units
on
each
floor,
which
would
be
between
four
and
twenty
additional
affordable
units.
E
In
addition
to
the
the
requirement
that
mr
shroll
mentioned
for
an
increase
from
the
12
stories
to
the
16
stories.
B
I
just
want
to
share
an
observation
on
the
topic
of
housing,
affordability
and
I
don't
know
that.
I
anticipate
that
it's
going
to
move
anyone
in
terms
of
a
vote,
but
I
think
that
it's
worth
getting
on
the
record
and
that
that's
that
the
the
term
luxury
housing
gets
banded
around
a
lot
and
it's
it's
a
marketing
term.
It's
it's
not
a
term.
That
means
anything
other
than
new
and
expensive.
B
You
know
it's
it's
it's
it's
about
the
rent,
it's
about
the
rent,
that's
what
it
is
and
the
thing
that
makes
tall
buildings
expensive,
isn't
the
stainless
steel
appliances
and
it
isn't
the
granite
countertops
or
marble
countertops
or
whatever.
It
is
these
days,
it's
the
elevators
and
it's
the
three
or
four
basements
of
parking.
It's
the
it's
the
structure,
it's
the
concrete
construction!
It's
it's
the
it's!
B
The
fact
that
it's
bigger
than
missing
middle
is
what
thing
that
makes
it
expensive
and
that's
what
makes
it
luxury
combined
with
the
fact
that
that
demand
so
gratuitously
exceeds
supply.
So
I
don't
for
what
it's
worth.
I
I
I
I
struggle
with
the
use
of
the
term
luxury
housing
in
thinking
through
affordability,
because
because
it's
a
marketing
term,
there
was
a
house
that
was
advertised
not
far
from
where
I
live
as
luxury
housing
that
was
built
in
the
50s
and
had
a
flooded
basement.
B
A
B
B
I
think
the
next
topic
that
I
have
the
next
one
that
I
want
to
go
to
is
elevator
and
metro
questions.
I
can't
remember
who
raised
that
commissioner
peterson.
AD
Well,
I
appreciated
the
public
comment
that
kind
of
questioned
like
how
likely
is
it
that
we're
going
to
get
this
elevator
metro
entrance,
that's
right
near
the
building,
so
I
wanted
to
see
if
staff
had
an
idea
in
mind
of
you
know,
how
likely
is
that?
What
is
the
timeline
for
that,
or
is
that
kind
of
like
a
dream,
but
not
actually
in
any
kind
of?
Is
it
in
the
cip
questions
like
that?
Thank
you.
D
Thank
you
for
that
question.
I
believe
it
I
believe
it
is
in
in
our
county,
cip.
I
I
would
need
to
confer
with
des
staff
that
that's
something
that
we
could
definitely
provide
additional
clarity
in
in
their
draft
in
our
staff
report
to
the
county
board.
In
our
summary
of
the
the
meeting
tonight,.
B
B
I
would
I'll
echo
commissioner
peterson's
question,
mr
murphy,
that
I
I
imagine
that
it's
very
likely
that
the
presence
of
a
potential
metro
exit
400
feet
from
this
project
could
prove
to
be
material
in
the
board's
determination,
and
I
would
very
much
hope
that
that
information,
no
matter
what
this
commission
recommends,
is,
is
ready
to
go
to
the
county
board.
Commissioner
sarley
will
be
representing
us,
so
you
get
to
mention
that
we
would
have
liked
to
have
known
that
or
not.
AB
AB
I'm
happy
to
say
that
we
have
recently
seen
movement
on
at
least
two
other
metro
station
additional
entrances
where
they
are
really
for
honest
to
god
moving
ahead,
which
is
great
news,
which
gives
me
a
little
more
hope
than
I
have
ever
had
for
a
long
time
about
this
entrance.
I
know
it's
been
a
ccca
priority
for
decades
and
seeing
it
actually
make
the
cip
is
big
news.
I
think,
but
a
little
more
detail
about
for
the
county
board
meeting
would
be,
I
think,
useful.
Thank
you.
B
B
E
If
helpful,
I
have
some
of
the
cip
information
here
on
the
elevator.
I.
A
E
It
does
appear
to
and
I'll
obviously
defer
to
anything
that
des
may
say
because
they're
far
more
involved
in
it,
but
it
does
reference.
The
design,
engineering
and
construction
of
the
elevators,
and
it
starts
in,
looks
like
fy26
ending
in
fy29
is
the
timing
that
I
see.
B
Anything
else
on
metro
issues,
you
know,
let
me
ask
you,
mr
murphy,
also,
commissioner,
tell
me,
throughout
the
number
70
in
terms
of
units
on
the
margin
between
12
and
16.
B
What
staff
thinks,
what
difference
staff
thinks?
The
presence
of
metro
10
years
out
would
make
for
trip
generation
in
terms
of
those
70
units?
I
mean
a
lot
of
the
concerns
and
comments
that
we
heard
tonight
had
to
do
with
traffic
coming
down
from
langston
boulevard,
and
it's
one
thing:
if
each
of
those
units
is
generating,
you
know
it
has
one
or
two
cars
that's
being
used
every
day,
but
a
metro
entrance
400
feet
from
that
is,
is
probably
going
to
have
some
significant
impact
on
what
that
would
be.
B
I
I
hate
to
suggest
I
I
hate
to
get
into
the
business
of
saying
I
bet
the
county
board
is
going
to
be
interested
in
this,
but
it
is
stuff
that
we
would
have
been
interested
in
yeah.
Commissioner,
tell
me.
AB
Yeah
along
those
lines,
I
did
notice
a
number
of
the
public
comments
go
to
similar
things,
though
a
lot
of
this
really
is
at
sprc,
rather
than
lrpc
level.
Things
like
parking
amount
of
parking,
ev
chargers,
garage
entrances,
delivery,
entrances
even
things
like
open
space,
character,
they're,
really
not
an
lrpc
type
of
discussion
for
changing
the
glove.
They
are
absolutely
major
topics
at
sbrcs
and
would
be
fully
vetted
at
that
level.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
tell
me
I'm
going
to
cross
off
elevator
and
metro
questions.
We
covered
affordable
housing.
I
think
that
I
want
to
just
say
start
with
height
and
massing,
and
then
when
we
can
move
on
to
broader,
comprehensive
analysis,
questions
from
that
as
it
develops,
is
that
this
is.
You
were
the
first
one
to
raise
your
hand
on
this
one,
commissioner
schroell.
So
if
that's.
B
AA
Mr
chairman
happy
to
proceed,
however,
you
want,
I
mean
in
the
way
I'm
processing
it.
At
least
some
of
these
issues
are
somewhat
interconnected,
so,
but
I'm
I'm
happy
to
take
them
separately.
If,
if
that's
the
chair's
preference.
AA
AB
This
thank
you.
Yes,
as
far
as
height
goes
from
way
back
when,
as
you
know,
everyone
here
knows,
I've
been
a
proponent
of
extra
height
here
I
am
and
was
concerned
about
what
the
impact
of
that
would
be
on
the
surrounding
on
the
surroundings.
AB
I
did
very
closely
I
asked
for
and
did
get
the
the
shadow
study,
it's
pretty
clear
to
me
that
the
impact,
if
any,
is
extremely
minor
on
the
single-family
houses
around
the
neighborhood.
AB
I
also
note
that,
as
was
noted,
I
think
by
one
of
the
the
presenters
that
the
block
across
wilson
has
been
assembled
by
a
commercial
owner,
the
entire
block
when
that
redevelops,
which
no
doubt
it
will-
that
will
probably
throw
shadows
on
those
houses
that
you
wouldn't
even
be
able
to
see,
potentially
a
16-story
apartment
building
from
those
homes.
AB
So
you
know,
and
that's
by
where
the
current
plan
is
explicit-
that
I
think
his
four
stories
are
allowed
on
the
north
side
of
wilson
boulevard
already
four
or
five
stories,
so
you
know
that
that
would
in
fact
block
the
view
of
this
building,
even
at
the
greater
height.
So
I
think
that
that
that
concern
was
laid
in
my
mind
that
it
would
have
just
a
bad
impact
on
the
neighborhood
and
by
the
way
this
is
the
neighborhood.
I've
lived
into
too
what
you
we
get
from.
AB
The
extra
height,
of
course,
is
potentially
more
traffic,
but,
as
we've
talked
earlier,
this
is
very
close
to
a
metro
station.
A
quarter
mile
is
absolutely
walking
distance.
What
we
have
seen
is
that
up
and
down
the
corridor
on
residential
structures,
the
garages
are
not
filled.
That
is
because
people
choose
to
not
have
cars.
Cars
cost
a
lot
of
money.
AB
They'd
rather
spend
the
money
on
the
rent
than
on
a
car
parked
in
the
basement
that
they're
only
going
to
use
once
in
a
while,
given
all
the
other
transit
type
of
options
we
have
around
here,
so
I
don't
think
a
gr.
The
amount
of
traffic
that
would
be
generated
by
the
extra
stories
in
the
building-
I
don't
think,
will
be
particularly
noticed
in
any
of
these
neighborhoods.
AB
I
am
absolutely
concerned
about
cut
through
traffic.
After
all,
I
live
in
this
neighborhood,
but
part
of
that's
controlled
by
google
maps
and
waze,
and
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
influence
on
that
other
than
continue
to
keep
those
yield
streets
as
yield
streets
and
have
the
stop
signs
and
have
the
speed
bumps
that
make
it
just
not
a
pleasant
thing
to
drive
through
by
anybody
who's
trying
to
get
through.
So
I
think
we
can.
The
traffic
is
addressed
too
by
the
extra
height
and
the
extra
density
here.
What
do
we
get
from
it?
AB
We
get
more
a
greater
likelihood
of
having
that
metro
entrance
built
because
it
creates
more
demand
for
it
and
it
creates
additional
revenues
that
can
be
used
to
dedicate
to
that
that
you
know,
I
see
the
additional
force
and
I
think
the
county's
design
team
has
looked
at
that
and
also
feels
that
an
additional
four
stories
as
far
as
people
walking
along
the
street
really
isn't
noticeable,
especially
with
setbacks.
AB
So
I
think
that
really
is
that
that
helps
ameliorate
the
concerns
about
the
extra
height.
Finally,
we
are
getting
a
lot
of
this.
We
get
additional,
affordable
housing.
We
get
additional
contributions
to
transit.
We
get
additional
wider
sidewalks,
we
get.
We
get
some
green
space
in
this
block,
which
right
now
is
nothing
but
broken
concrete
and
one
pavement
and
one
small
building.
AB
We
will
get
additional
park
space
and
that
is
important
for
this
neighborhood.
So
we're
getting
quite
a
number
of
benefits
if
we
can
get
the
extra
height
here.
The
extra
density
and
I
think
the
concerns
which
I
absolutely
understand,
those
concerns
of
the
neighborhood,
because
I've
had
them
too.
But
those
concerns,
in
my
mind,
have
been
ameliorated
sufficiently
that
in
doing
the
balancing
it's
better
to
have
the
extra
heightened
density.
AB
So
I'm
not
really
giving
a
question
here.
I
guess
I'm
giving
more
of
a
of
a
my
thinking
on
this
matter
and
throwing
out
to
my
fellow
commissioners
for
for
reactions
and
responses.
AC
I
guess
I'll
react
briefly.
I
think
I
think
my
my
concern
here
is
the
the
commission's
getting
ahead
of
staff
and
planning,
so
that's
sort
of
in
a
nutshell,
and
I
think
with
that
comes
some
risks
and
some
unintended
consequences
that
we
could
potentially
run
into
and
to
react
a
little
bit
to
commissioner
and
tell
me
comments,
you
know
the
the
the
whole
is
greater
than
the
sum
of
a
part.
AC
So
I
think
you
know
the
the
possibility
that
the
massing
of
this
particular
unit,
where
there
was
this
intended,
which
I
think
is,
is
a
genuine
design
approach
that
does
have
positive
impact
in
the
urban
fabric.
In
other
words,
these
aesthetic
concerns
are
not
something
we
should
dismiss
out
of
hand
because
they
do
have
positive
impact.
A
la
biophilia.
AC
All
these
other
issues
we've
had
so
I
my
hesitancy
to
the
16th
story,
is
one
sort
of
being
a
little
bit
of
a
touch
with
some
of
the
neighbors
and
some
of
the
neighbors
concerns
which
I
think
are
legitimate
and
then
also
the
unintended
impact
of
shadows.
And
I
understand
that,
yes,
we
can
do
these
studies
and
the
shadows
are
not
impacting
the
homes
directly,
but
I
think,
as
the
whole,
as
the
composition
starts
to
evolve.
You
know
that
differentiation
between
blocks
the
the
the
bull's
eyes,
the
nodes,
the
valleys.
AB
Actually,
I
agree
with
you,
commissioner
charlotte
we
probably
are
getting
a
bit
ahead
of
planning
the
planning
staff
here
and
I
think
partly
that's
our
role
to
be
thinking
larger
and
give
an
indication
to
staff
where
we're
coming
from
in
our
recommendations
to
the
county
board.
So,
yes,
you're
right,
we
are
a
bit
here.
I
certainly
feel
that
I
am-
and
I
do
feel
that's
part
of
what
my
role
is
here
on
the
commission,
to
send
those
signals
that
maybe
it
is
time
to
be
looking
at
things.
AB
I
actually
do
agree
with
some
of
the
neighborhood
comments
about
this
gets
into
a
larger
topic,
but
that
we
do
need
more
comprehensive
planning
for
these
type
of
things.
I
absolutely
I
I'm
100
with
them
on
that
that
we
will
be
needing
to
look
at
the
the
bullseye
approach
and
whether
it
whether
it's
outmoded
or
needs
to
be
modified,
but
we
should
be
doing
this
on
a
more
comprehensive
basis
rather
than
on
a
block
by
block
basis.
AB
However,
we
have
this
in
front
of
us
now
we
have
the
site
plan
of
the
special
glove
studies
procedure
that
we
are
following
and
I'm
giving
my
best
advice.
Given
the
current
restraints
we
have
for
our
procedures,
but
yes,
you're
right,
we
are
get.
I
am
getting
up
ahead
of
the
plan
of
our
planning
staff
right
now.
Thank
you.
AA
AA
There
aren't
current
plans
to
update
the
courthouse
sector
plan
or
the
a
wider
addendum.
I
mean
we
updated
the
courthouse
square
addendum
several
years
ago,
but
I
again
I'd
like
to
get
confirmation
on
that,
but
we,
as
far
as
I'm
aware,
we
don't
have
current
plans
to
update
these
these
documents
or
any
sector
plan
that
I'm
aware
of,
and
so
special
glock
studies
are
the
way
in
which
we
do
this.
AA
Now
that
is
not
ideal
and
I'd
like
to
have
a
little
colloquy
with
with
staff
about
that
sure
shortly,
but
given
where
we
are,
commissioner,
charlie
this
we
have
to
kind
of
make
the
best
out
of
these
processes
and
yeah.
Again,
it's
not
an
ideal
situation.
I
think
a
more
com,
comprehensive
approach
would
be
preferred
and
I
share
the
sentiments
of
members
of
the
public
who
would
like
a
more
robust
planning
process
akin
to
what
they
had
in
previous
decades.
AA
We're
not
doing
that
now
and
so,
which
is
unfortunate,
so
we,
but
given
that
and
some
other
things
we
see
in
the
cip
and
others,
I'm
comfortable
at
12
here
we're
within
half
a
mile
of
fixed
rat
transit.
AA
AA
So
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I
deal
back
and
I,
as
I
mentioned,
I
do
have
some
questions
for
staff
when
the
time
is
appropriate.
B
Thank
you
coach,
michelle
other
questions
on
this
before.
I
think
commissioner
schroll
I'll
give
the
floor
back
to
you
on
the
broader
topics.
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
mr
murphy
or
mr
pfeiffer.
A
couple
questions
to
you.
So
I
mean
I
would
in
staff
report
does
mention
that
their
you
know.
Staff
is
not
supportive
of
16
stories
because
you
would
like
to
have
a
more
comprehensive
study
to
evaluate
that
possibility
to
you.
Mr
murphy.
Is
there
a
comprehensive
study?
That's
in
the
cphd
work
plan
for
the
next
year
or
two
or
you
know
that
you're
aware
of.
D
I
I'm
not
currently
aware
that
an
update
to
like
a
new
addendum
to
the
courthouse
sector
plan
addendum
is
currently
on
our
work
plan,
but
our
work
plan
is
revisited
annually
and
as
priorities
arise,
that
are
recognized
by
the
county
board
planning
commission
that
the
the
work
plan
is
updated
annually.
AA
Okay-
and
I
would
suspect
that
mr
fusarelli
who's
in
the
audience
tonight
would
correct
any
of
this
if
it's
wrong
good
to
have
you
here
kind
of
following
up
on
that,
as
was
noted,
I
think
this.
You
know
these
documents
are
well
the
most
recent
one
is
nearly
30
years
old
and
the
one
that
it
amended
is
41
years
old.
What
does
the
american
planning,
association
or
kind
of
other
planning
bodies
give
as
kind
of
the
recommended
duration
of
a
planning
document
for
like
a
sector
plan
or
a
corridor
plan.
D
I
I
can't
speak
specifically
to
what
the
american
planning
association
recommends.
I
do
know
that
our
sector
plans
can
vary
in
terms
of
their
timelines
and
their
horizons.
For
example,
the
the
crystal
city
sector
plan
was
adopted
in
2010
and
envisions
development,
I
believe
through
2050.,
so
a
40-year
horizon,
I
believe.
AA
And
then
how
many
special
glove
studies
are
in
the
queue
currently
and
how
many
are
for
planned
areas.
D
AE
Hi,
I'm
kelly
brown,
I'm
with
the
comprehensive
planning
group,
so
I
can
answer
that
question
about
special
club
studies.
Right
now.
We
have
currently
one
project
that
is
anticipated
for
tier
one
review.
This
fall.
We
have
a
tier
two
study
that
is
underway.
It's
the
sunrise,
special
glip
study.
We
have
another
study
that
has
been
recommended
for
tier
2
review.
That's
the
melrose
site.
AE
AE
AA
So,
given
that
we're
hearing,
thank
you,
ms
brown,
given
that
we're
hearing
or
receiving
special
glove
studies
for
adjacent
blocks,
is
it
not
worth
staff's
time,
since
you
do
spend
a
lot
of
time
and
effort
on
this
collectively
to
be
doing
something
more
comprehensive?
Instead
of
doing
several
one-off
studies
for
adjacent
blocks,
I
know
you
couldn't
anticipate
that
before
it
happened,
but
that's
the
situation
in
which
we're
about
to
be
in.
AE
So
when,
when
the
when
the
courthouse
west
special
club
study
was
first
considered
in
tier
one,
there
were
a
number
of
different
options
considered
for
how
to
approach
the
site
and
a
small
area
planning
process
was
one
of
the
options
considered
at
the
time.
There
was
not
an
identification
of
resources
and
prioritization
to
consider
that
this
area
more
comprehensively
and
that's
why
a
single
site
study
was
pursued.
AE
Certainly,
I
think
a
comprehensive
approach
is
is
ideal,
but
right
now
our
work
plan
is
is
focused
on
other
priorities.
AA
I
appreciate
staff's
answers.
I'll
I'll
certainly
have
more
when
we
get
to
motions-
and
I
think
staff.
B
B
I
I
think
that
that
means
we've
sort
of
gotten
through
our
topics.
Are
there
any
plates,
or
bowls
or
balls
or
lawn
darts,
that
I've
dropped
all
right.
B
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
would
move
to
the
planning
commission
recommend
that
the
county
board
adopt
the
attached
resolution
to
this
staff
report
dated
august
30th
2022
to
adopt
the
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use
plan
study
document,
as
shown
in
attachment
2.
B
B
Thank
you,
yeah.
AB
AB
To
read
now,
therefore,
be
it
resolved
that,
based
on
the
aforementioned
considerations,
deliberations
and
all
public
comments,
the
county
board
of
arlington
county
finds
that
the
courthouse
west
special
general
land
use
plan
study
document
set
forth
in
attachment
2
should
be
and
is
thereby
adopted,
with
the
additional
provision
that
a
site
plan
review
committee
addressing
any
project
proposed
for
this
site
may
consider
a
mixed
use
residential
height
of
up
to
16
stories.
Second,.
B
So
that's
moved
by
commissioner
mattel
me
seconded
by
commissioner
schroll.
Commissioner,
tell
me:
let
me
before
asking
you
to
speak
to
your
motion.
You
circulated
a
draft
of
this
to
members
of
the
commission.
Have
you
changed
the
language?
No.
AB
B
Thank
you,
so
anyone
who
has
a
device
you,
you
are
now
able
to
see
it.
B
Madam
clerk,
do
you
did
you
get
a?
Did
you
get
this
if
you
would,
if
you
want
to
put
it
on
the
screen,
that
would
be
helpful.
Commissioner,
tell
me:
let
me
ask
you,
then,
to
speak
to
your
motion.
AB
Sure
I
probably
went
through
it
when
I
spoke
to
massing
in
height
as
to
why
I
believe
that
this
is
appropriate.
This
doesn't
require
16
stories,
but
it
does
give
the
flexibility
for
it.
You
know
it's.
I
think
that
for
all
the
reasons
that
I
had
discussed
earlier,
this
is
appropriate
for
this
site
and
I
will
have
a
further
motion
about.
AB
Further
planning
it's
up
there
on
the
screen.
Actually
I
have
not
made
that
yet,
but
that's
what
I
intend
to
make
as
a
follow-up
to
this.
B
So
a
little
bit
of
a
sneak
full
preview.
Is
there
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
be
heard
on
the
motion
before
us?
That's
the
first
larger
paragraph
on
the
screen,
commissioner
peterson.
AD
And
thank
you
so
I
I
wanted
to
say.
I
appreciate
commissioner
telen's
motion
and
also
just
to
make
sure
the
community
knows
that
we
are
not
approving
a
16-story
building
as
he,
as
you
said,
we
are
giving
the
option
to
allow
staff
to
potentially
negotiate
up
to
that
height
if
they
provide
community
benefits
that
the
planning
commission
thinks
are
valuable.
That's.
AB
AD
And
so
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
personally
would
only
be
supportive
of
something
going
up
to
16
stories,
I'm
already
skeptical
of
it,
but
if
there
was
significant
promise
during
the
sprc
process
that
we
are
getting
a
lot
of
affordable
housing
and
a
lot
of
housing
that
is
affordable
to
two
teachers
who
live
in
arlington
and
have
two
kids
and
want
to
live
in
a
three-bedroom,
condo
or
apartment
building.
AD
Z
Z
I
appreciate
your
being
out
tonight,
both
in
person
and
online,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you're
going
to
have
to
live
next
to
this.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Begley
commissioner
sally.
AC
All
right,
I
too,
I
don't
think
I
can
support
this.
I
find
that
12
is
a
reasonable
compromise
and
I
think,
as
I
stated
before,
I
I'm
a
little
hesitant
to
get
ahead
of
sort
of
planning
and
fully
addressing
the
the
impacts
of
a
16-story
building.
I
am
very
much
supportive
of
higher
density,
particularly
along
the
the
corridor
and
public
transportation
access
and
in
these
zones.
So
it's
not
that
I'm
opposed
to
the
concept.
AA
B
For
what
it's
worth,
I
also
intend
to
support
the
motion.
I
think
for
less.
I
I
want
to
be
able
to
say
that
I
support
it
because
of
the
housing
honestly.
The
thing
that
animates
me
the
most
is
that
I
think
that
if
the
zoning
district
says
that
the
board
has
the
discretion
to
go
up
to
16
stories,
I
I
don't
know
that
I'm
comfortable
with
a
a
special
club
study
document
being
the
source
of
provisions
that
limit
the
discretion
of
the
board.
B
Beyond
what
the
I.
I
think
that
our
limits
should
be
in
the
zoning
ordinance
and
that
and
that
it
should
be.
You
know,
for
for
a
lot
of
reasons.
That's
that's
where
the
rules
are,
but
also
you
know.
We
want
people
to
have
a
better
ability
to
see
to
see
what
the
rules
are
to
educate
themselves,
what
the
rules
are
and
to
understand
it,
and
so
there's
sort
of
a
keep
it.
B
I
don't
know,
there's
sort
of
a
where
there's
a
there's,
a
high
level,
abstract
thing
animating
my
my
decision,
but
also
you
know
I
I
for
what
it's
worth
I.
I
still
believe
that
the
arlington
way
is
a
thing.
That's
good
and
part
of
the
arlington
way
is
that
that
we,
as
a
community,
have
been
incredibly
successful
at
leveraging.
This
concept
of
people
call
it
community
benefits
or
mitigation
for
excess
density,
or
you
know
whatever
the
language
is
that
that
we
use
now.
B
We
have
been
very,
very
good
at
leveraging
that
to
get
the
built
environment
that
that
is
closer
to
what
we
aspire
to,
and
I
would
rather
be
able
to
have
that
conversation
about
what
does
mitigation.
What
does
community
benefits?
Look
like
for
16
stories
than
not
do
I
think
that
you
know
that
there's
a
presumption
in
favor
of
16
stories.
I
I
I
don't
know
that
I
do,
but
I
would
rather
have
that
discussion
at
the
sprc
process.
That's
that's
where
I
follow
it,
so
I
I'll
be
supporting
it
as
well.
B
AA
I
don't
think
given
where
we
are
now.
I
don't
know
if
you
need
to
call
the
role
unless
commissioner
patel
has
joined
us.
B
Thank
you
commissioner's
role
and
thank
you,
commissioner
patel.
So
I
am
going
now
I'm
going
to
call
the
role
I'll
start
with
you,
commissioner.
Begley.
K
B
Commissioner,
guerin
is
absent,
as
is
commissioner
hughes.
Commissioner.
Tell
me
aye,
commissioner
patel.
B
Commissioner,
steinberger
is
absent.
I
vote
I,
the
motion.
B
I'm
going
to
ask
that
we
stay
in
order,
commissioner
patel
is
present
and
is
entitled
to
vote.
I
I
have
commissioner
bagley
as
nay
commissioner
land
tell
me,
as
I
commissioner
patel,
as
I
commissioner
peterson.
As
I
commissioner
sarly
is
nay.
Commissioner
schrol,
as
I
commissioner
steinberger
is
absent
and
I
vote
I.
So
that's
5-2.
B
I'm
going
to
ask
that
the
room
be
in
order.
Please,
commissioner,
does
anyone
else
have
any
additional
motions.
AA
AB
Yes,
I'm
recommending
this
again.
I
refer
to
this
in
some
earlier
comments,
but
as
we've
heard
actually
in
the
staff
report
itself
and
from
various
other
communities
that,
if
we're
going
to
be
doing
things
like
this,
the
approach,
the
block
by
block
approach,
really
isn't
the
best
way
to
do
it.
And
I
agree
with
that.
I
think
that
we
really
should
be
looking
at
the
corridors,
the
the
troughs
between
the
stations-
I'm
not
talking
about
on
the
edges
of
the
communities,
because
I
think
it's
appropriate
to
have
the
tapering
there.
B
Is
there
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
be
heard
on
this?
Commissioner
schroell.
AA
I'll
just
be
brief,
I
will
concur
with
commissioner
one
tell
me,
and
you
know
we
do
need
to
do
some
comprehensive
planning
and
if
it's
not
going
to
be
enough,
folsom
update
the
sector
plans,
then
something
like
an
in-between
study
or
something
like
we've
done
previously
could
be,
could
be
appropriate
here,
and
I
thank
commissioner
and
tell
me
for
putting
forth
the
motion.
AC
I
guess
I'll
speak.
I
guess
I
have
a
little
bit
of
of
a
hang
up
or
or
trepidation
on,
the
notion
of
of
sort
of
using
the
term
bullseye
on
the
on
the
motion
as
sort
of
almost
trying
to
dismiss
it.
I
think
you
know
as
much
as
we
can
keep
these
terms
neutral.
AC
B
Anyone
else
I'm
gonna
support
the
motion
in
insofar
as
I
agree
that
we
need
to
entertain
the
concept
of
of
thinking
about
the
rv
as
a
spine
and
and
be
realistic
about
some
of
the
ways
in
which
assumptions
that
were
made
when
the
bullseye
model
was
adopted
have
not
borne
out
right.
When
the
bullseye
model
was
adopted,
we
had
a
different
idea
of
how
far
people
would
walk
to
get
to
metro.
B
B
I
think
that
everything
you
know
half
a
mile
should
be
from
metro-
should
be
16
stories
far
from
it,
but
it's
an
example
of
some
of
the
ways
in
which
the
vaunted
and
appropriately
sole
model
have
would
would
benefit
from
being
thought
through
from
a
contemporary
lens.
B
I
do
want
to
note
that
I
I
think
that
I
I
also
appreciate
what
staff
is,
what
what
y'all
are
doing
in
thinking
and
being
wary
about
committing
your
entire
work
plan
to
nothing
but
area
studies
from
here
on
forward.
There
are
more
important
things
that
staff
needs
flexibility
to
do
that
are
more
urgent.
B
I
mean
there's
a
we
can
infer
that
from
outcome
right
from
the
fact
that
the
boston
sector
plan
hasn't
been
adopted
and
updated
in
in
40
years
I
mean
we
can
infer
from
outcome
that
there
are
things
that
have
been
more
important
and
and
and
resources
are
finite.
So
I
that's
my
hesitation
in
encouraging
us
to
to
sort
of
continue
to
double
down
on
area
planning,
but
I
do
support
the
intent
and
so
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion.
B
AF
A
B
AF
B
Commissioner
peterson
aye,
commissioner
sarley
aye,
commissioner
schroell
aye,
commissioner
steinberger,
is
absent.
I
vote
eye
motion
carries
seven
to
zero.
Does
anyone
else
have
a
motion
on
this
matter.
B
I'm
fine
with
that
we'll
go
to
the
main
motion
I'll
ask
generally.
If
anyone
wants
to
speak
to
the
main
motion
as
amended,
then
commissioner
bagley.
Z
B
AF
B
B
B
I
I
just
want
to.
I
just
want
to
remind
everyone
of
that,
because
we
got
into
some
trouble
with
it
a
couple
of
years
ago,
and
hopefully
we
don't
do
that
again,
less
sit
on
that
the
better.
So
the
motion
carries
six
to
zero
to
one
commissioner's
role.
AA
Yes,
mr
chairman,
I
have
an
additional
motion:
hey
okay,
if
I
make
it
now,
mr
chamber.
AA
B
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I'll
do
so
briefly,
I
mean
I
I
think
we
heard
from
members
of
the
public
their
dismay
and
in
that
we're
doing
a
lot
of
planning
on
a
spot
by
spot
braces,
you're
hearing
from
some
planning
commissions,
including
commissioner
sarley,
to
my
rear,
who
who
also
raised
some
concerns
about
that.
This
is
happening,
because
we
have
40-year-old
guidance
that
we're
not
updating
and
it's
happening
in
planned
areas,
we're
seeing
more
and
more
of
these
special
glock
studies
and
planned
areas.
AA
There
are
four
or
five
planning
commissioners
on
the
commission
that
are
for
which
this
planning
guidance
is
older
than
they
are,
and
so
you
know
there
needs
to
be
a
process
to
do
it.
It
shouldn't
be
the
special
glop
study
process.
This
should
not
be
the
default
standard,
and
if
it's
going
to
be,
then
it
needs
to
be
much
more
robust
than
it
is,
and
so
for
that
reason
I
think
we
should
have
a
sense
of
the
planning
commission
that
there
should
be
some
process
in
place.
AA
It
may
not
be
need
to
look
exactly
like
what
we
did
and
for
realized
roslin
or
courthouse.
Sorry.
You
know
you
know
decades
ago,
but
you
know
the
current
process
is
is
seeing
some
some
challenges
and
for
that
reason
I
put
forward
the
motion
in
front
of
you
and
would
welcome
your
feedback
and
look
forward
to
the
discussion.
B
Before
I
go
to
other
members
of
the
commission,
I
want
to
do
something
that
I
wish
I
had
done
while
discussing
commissioner
lantomy's
motion,
but
if
it's
any
solace,
you'll
have
an
opportunity
to
address
it
directly
with
the
people
who
actually
get
to
vote
on
it,
and
I'm
going
to
go
to
mr
fusorelli
and
ask
if
you
have
any
comments
or
thoughts
or
or
any
any
staff,
if
you
wish
to
defer
on
this
topic
generally,
if
not
that's
fine,
but
want
to
at
least
give
you
an
opportunity
to
to
comment
your
way
in
all
right
brevity
is
the
soul
of
whit.
B
Any
other
commissioners
want
to
be
hearing
this.
Commissioner
bagley.
Z
Yeah,
I
just
have
a,
I
guess-
a
clarification
or
comment
as
the
former
president
of
balsa
virginia
square
civic
association,
where
there
was
been
a
bunch
of
buildings
built
there,
despite
having
a
very
old
sector
plan
which
all
of
us
within
the
organization
were
constantly
saying,
it
probably
should
be
updated,
but
it
didn't
stop
all
those
buildings
from
being
built,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
the
sense
of
this.
I
will
support
this,
but
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
things
have
been
built
more
modern
things.
Despite
an
old
sector
plan,.
AA
Yeah
and
that's
well
taken
commission,
commissioner
bagley,
it's
not
to
say
that
things
won't
be
built,
there
might
be
a
building
that
will
be
built
pursuant
to
1993
and
1981
planning
guidance.
Here.
I
think
that
the
challenge
that
I
see
is
that,
as
we
continue
to
rely
on
decisions
that
were
first
formulated
in
the
late
70s
early
80s
for
some
of
our
major
planning
corridors
are
those
still
the
planning
objectives
that
we
have
in
2022
and
for
some
things
that
they
they
still
ring
true
and
they're.
AA
Still
there
and
they're
still
planning
objectives
and
they
have
carried
us
for
decades
and
we
still
live
by
them,
but,
like
a
key
one,
that's
different.
Now
one
was
how
far
people
are
going
to
walk
to
transit.
That's
a
key
one.
Another
is
just
bike
facilities
that
that
has
changed
dramatically
in
the
last
40
years
and
so
best
practices
for
some
of
that
has
changed.
The
other
is
how
much
emphasis
do
we
want
to
put
on
you
know
things
like
our
building
energy
and
things
of
that
nature.
AA
Well,
we
probably
want
to
put
a
ton
in
that
we
spend
58
percent
of
our
energy
comes
from
buildings
in
the
county,
so
without
updating
these
planning
documents,
it's
a
missed
opportunity
to
emphasize
things
like
that
or
biophilia,
or
anything
else
that
people
care
about
these
are
some.
These
are
some
of
my
pet
issues,
but
I
know
there's
others
on
the
commission,
urban
forestry,
etc.
AB
We,
as
has
meant
we
have
a
lot
of
burial
plans.
The
buildings
are
getting
old,
they
need
to
they
will
they
are
being
torn
down,
they're
being
planned
to
be
redone
every
time
a
developer
comes
in.
They
always
want
something
different
and
that's
for
good
reason,
because
techniques
have
changed
as
mentioned,
transportation
has
changed
radically.
AB
AB
AB
What
we
have
to
do
is
understand
that
these
are
living
documents
that
will
have
to
be
looked
at
regularly
to
be
updated
to
stay
current
to
the
changing
demographics
of
this
county,
the
changing
methods
of
transportation
and
all
the
other
things
that
are
that
are
happening
that
we
can't
even
foresee
right
now,
it's
it's
almost
arrogant
for
us
to
think
that
a
plan
that
we
make
today
will
still
be
valid
40
years
from
now.
AB
I
think
that
what
we're
trying
to
do
is
is
indicate
by
this,
that
we
need
to
find
a
way
forward
that
we
can
more
efficiently,
maybe
even
cheaply,
with
the
same
time,
using
full
arlington
way
community
participation
to
get
these
plans
updated,
so
we're
not
always
just
spending
a
lot
of
time
on
individual
pieces
of
individual
blocks,
which
causes
the
very
valid
concerns
that
neighborhoods
have
like.
Why
are
you
doing
this?
AB
When
we
have
a
plan
already
in
place,
we
have
to
make
people
make
all
of
us
understand
that
these
are
living
documents
and
will
need
to
be
changed,
and
I
think
this
will
help
kick
off
that
search
for
how
do
we
want
to
do
this?
What
are
going
to
be
the
methods,
the
processes,
the
procedures
we
will
be
using
to
make
that
happen
and
still
do
all
the
work
we
need
to
do
otherwise.
B
B
B
Sector
plans
and
continue
to
do
block
sized
special
club
studies
and
projects.
What
distinguishes
that
from
spot
zoning.
I
have
an
instinct
that
it's
not
spot
zoning,
but
I
don't
know
how
to
articulate
to
myself
that
that
I,
that
I
don't
share
the
fear
that
the
commenters
share.
So
I
want
to
kick
that
one
over
to
the
to
the
two
of
you
or
or
perhaps
your
colleagues.
AE
So
I
think
it's
important
to
remember
that
what
we
are
looking
at
through
a
special
general
landings
plan
study
is
the
general
land
use
plan
and
what
is
the
appropriate
land
use
vision
for
a
particular
location,
so
the
county
board
has
the
opportunity
to
consider
the
land
use
vision
for
the
community,
whether
that
be
for
a
corridor
for
a
small
area
or
or
for
specific
sites,
if,
if
the
current
guidance
is
inadequate
or
outdated,
so
that's
what's
happening
through
our
process
and
through
that
process,
the
county
board,
if
it
so
chooses,
approves
a
request
to
advertise
a
potential
change
to
the
general
land
use
plan.
AE
That's
something
that's
within
their
purview
and
then
they
consider
a
requested
change.
An
action
to
change
the
general
land
use
plan
at
a
formal
public
hearing
that
can
go
along
with
a
request
for
a
rezoning
that
would
be
appropriate
for
the
vision
for
that
site.
So
it's
it's
very
different
from
from
spot
zoning
in
which
you're
looking
at
the
changing
the
zoning
for
a
site
out
of
context
with
the
surrounding
area.
AE
I
don't
have
it
at
my
fingertips,
a
definition
of
spot
zoning,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
the
county
board,
considering
a
change
to
the
general
laney's
plan,
is
something
within
their
purview
and
then
a
requested
rezoning
that
is,
you
know,
can
be
approved
and
if
it
is
consistent
with
the
general
land
use
plan,
then
that's
that's
also
something
that
the
county
board
has
has
the
right
to
consider.
B
I
think
I
find
that
very
helpful.
Thank
you,
yeah.
That
is
helpful
to
me.
Anyone
else
want
to
be
heard
or
ask
anything
on
this.
Commissioner,
sally.
AC
With
the
statement
that
I
will
be
supporting
and
strongly
support,
what's
been
said
by
commissioner
show
on
commissioner,
tell
me
relative
to
the
planning
updating.
I
will
now
contradict
myself
and
say:
urban
planning
is
something
that
takes
time
right.
It
doesn't
turn
on
a
dime
and
that's
sort
of
inherent,
and
I
think
that
we
also
have
to
have
a
certain
level
of
perseverance,
and
perhaps
this
is
a
little
bit
of
a
was
it
reacting
to
the
bullseye
motion
earlier
on.
AC
Some
of
these
things
haven't
had
a
chance
to
actually
be
implemented
and
we're
already
dismissing
them
out
of
hand.
So
that's
a
little
bit
where
I
get
a
little
bit
concerned.
Having
said
that,
I
think
updating,
plans
and-
or
you
know,
adapting
them
to
the
current
and
tech,
transportation,
etc,
etc
is
absolutely
valid
and
something
we
ought
to
be
pursuing.
So
I
strongly
support
this,
but
you
know,
with
the
caveat
that
urban
planning
is
a
slightly
longer
cycle
than
the
usual
design
process.
B
Commissioner
schroll,
I
don't
think
that
I'll
be
supporting
this,
and
I
it's
important
to
me
that
I
explain
why.
I
think
I
agree
with
everything
that
you're
that
you're
writing
that
the
res
the.
What
the
with
the
text
of
the
resolution,
I
would
like
to
be
able
to
consider
the
resolution
in
the
context
of
our
feedback
on
the
planning
staff's
annual
work
plan,
because
you
know
I
I
am.
B
B
I
believe
that
some
deference
to
that
is
is
an
order
in
this
case,
and
I
I
I
would
be
more
comfortable
thinking
about
it.
In
that
context,
I
may
even
be
willing
to
support
it.
B
You
know
if
it
were
to
come
back
again
in
that
context,
although
I
think
I'm
probably
going
to
be
the
only
nay
vote
tonight,
and
so
you
know
who
knows-
and
I
and
I
say
that
on
the
record
just
because
I
commissioner
sarly
you'll
be
representing
us,
I
I
I
you
know
if,
if
one
of
the
board
members
asks
you
know,
what's
up
with
this
one
objecting
vote,
you
know
I
I
don't
want
the
sense
to
be
that
you
know
someone
thought
it
was
a
terrible
idea.
B
It's
it's
more
of
a
procedural
or
a
timing
issue
for
me
than
it
is
the
substance
of
the
point.
If
you
want
to
respond,
I'm
happy
to
hear
your
thoughts.
AA
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
I
appreciate
you
explaining
your,
but
your
no
vote.
I
might
just
attempt
to
dissuade
you
from
that
briefly,
which
is
to
say
that
in
my
seven
and
a
half
years
on
the
commission,
I
have
not
aside
from
the
plan
langston,
so
that's
a
new
planning
corridor.
I
have,
I
guess,
realize
roslyn
happened
right
before
I
got
on
the
commission
and
was
adopted
right
right
then,
but
in
terms
of
some
of
the
old
planning
documents
that
we're
talking
about
ballston
courthouse.
AA
There
have
not
even
been
part
of
the
conversation
and
I
get
it.
Staff
has
to
manage
lots
of
things
and
I
don't
envy
them
in
that
regard.
They're
juggling
a
lot,
and
I
and
my
remarks
I
think,
sometimes
might
be
seen
as
disparaging
your
staff,
but
it's
not
intended
in
that
way.
I
know
they
do
a
lot
of
good
work.
AA
The
problem
I
see
is
that
it's
not
even
a
topic
of
conversation.
It's
not
even
in
the
parking
lot
for
ideas
we
want
to
get
to
when
we.
So
I
understand
your
reticence,
but
I
think
if
we
don't
talk
about
it,
a
lot
and
talk
about
it
any
chance
we
get.
It's
never
even
going
to
be
on
the
short
list
of
ideas
and
we
won't
even
come
up
with
a
way
to
get
to
yes
on
how
we
come
up
with
some
plan
to
have
more
recent
planning
guidance
for
several
of
our
planning
corridors.
B
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Patel.
Not
seeing
any
of
the
lights,
I'm
going
to
call
the
roll
and
commissioner
schroll
I'll
give
it
some
thought.
As
as
I
hear
what
people
have
to
say,
I
guess
that's
the
time
I
have
to
give
it
some
thought,
starting
with
commissioner
bagley.
X
B
B
Peterson
aye,
commissioner
sarley
aye,
commissioner
schroll
aye,
commissioner
steinberger
is
absent.
You
spoke
persuasively,
commissioner
schroed
butt.
I
I
think
I
still
have
to
object.
Commissioner
sally.
I
hope
that
you're
able
should
you
be
asked
to
you
know,
explain
the
situation.
The
motion
carries
six
to
one.
B
B
This
process
will
in
some
ways
start
from
scratch
at
a
much
more
intensive
level
right
where
the
real
questions
about
how
many
stories
are
appropriate
are
asked
and
the
real
questions
about
what
kind
of
mitigation
or
community
benefits
to
justify
and
support
that
increased
density
are
dealt
with
at
this
point,
all
we've
done
is
say:
let's
make
some
sausage
that
the
actual
making
starts
at
the
sprc
process,
and
I
hope
that
you
continue
to
stay
involved
and
thank
you
to
everyone
who
showed
up
staff
and
applicants
now.
Commission.
C
B
Thank
you,
madam
clerk.
I'm
gonna
before
we
get
to
the
reports
in
the
interest
of
time
and
I
hope
that
we
can
wrap
this
up
expeditiously.
I
know
people
have
some
thoughts,
but
I
don't
think
it's
gonna.
Take
us
too
long.
I'm
gonna
do
the
the
bylaws
amendments
first
and
then
we'll
do
committee
reports.
Mr
fusarelli,
once
you
are
settled,
I'm
going
to
go
to
you
for
introducing
the
matter.
AG
All
right
good
evening,
chair
weir
and
members
of
the
planning
commission,
anthony
fuscerelli
with
the
planing
division,
very
happy
to
be
here
with
you
all
tonight
in
person
and
commissioner
patel
remotely
on
that
topic.
AG
This
evening,
I'd
like
to
present
a
very
brief
overview
for
the
commission's
benefit
of
highlighting
some
really
important
considerations
and
elements
of
how
we
are
approaching
hybrid
commission
meetings
going
forward
beginning
last.
Last
week,
september
1
we
had
the
newly
enacted
2022
electronic
meetings
bill
go
into
effect,
statewide
across
the
commonwealth
of
virginia,
with
several
exceptions.
Most
county
board
approved
advice,
advisory
boards
and
commissions
may
conduct
two
or
twenty
five
percent
of
its
annual
meetings
in
a
fully
virtual
format.
AG
Unfortunately,
as
I'm
sure
you're
already
aware,
the
planning
commission
is
among
a
few
select
groups
that
actually
is
not
allowed
to
have
any
meetings
a
hundred
percent
virtually.
AG
However,
there
are
provisions
for
electronic
participation
by
individual
members
when
certain
criteria
are
met
and,
as
you
all
know,
this
commission,
at
your
last
meeting
in
july,
adopted
a
policy
addressing
the
electronic
participation
of
members
of
this
commission
going
forward.
AG
Just
as
a
quick
overview,
there
are
essentially
four
various
scenarios
in
which
a
member
may
participate
virtually
whether
they
have
a
disability
or
a
medical
condition
themselves
that
prevents
their
physical
attendance
at
a
meeting
or
whether
they
have
a
family
member
with
a
similar
medical
condition
for
which
they
must
provide
care
and
that
prevents
them
from
physically
attending
a
meeting.
AG
The
third
item
in
the
state
code
shouldn't
really
apply
to
this
commission.
I
don't
expect,
but
if
a
principal
residence
of
the
member
is
more
than
60
miles
out
of
outside
of
arlington,
that
also
enables
them
to
participate
remotely.
AG
AG
The
fourth
and
final
scenario
is
that
members
may
be
unable
to
attend
meetings
due
to
a
personal
matter,
and
they
they
must
identify
with
specificity
of
the
nature
of
that
personal
matter.
In
this
scenario,
they
actually
are
limited
to
either
two
meetings
or
25
percent
of
the
meetings
held
per
calendar
year.
Whichever
is
greater
should
note
that,
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
slide,
you
see
four
parameters
or
requirements
that
really
must
be
met
for
any
members
to
participate
electronically.
AG
First,
there
needs
to
be
an
in-person
physical
quorum,
as
is
the
case
this
evening,
with
the
six
of
you
all
hear
are
present
you've
already
adopted
electronic
meetings
policy
in
july,
so
that
is
covered,
but
any
time
a
member
is
interested
in
participating
remotely.
They
must
make
a
request
to
the
chair.
AG
There
are
several
other
elements
in
the
electronic
meetings
bill
in
the
interest
of
time.
I'm
not
going
to
read
all
of
these
here
tonight,
but
an
important
point
to
note
is
that
going
forward.
The
public
must
continue
to
have
an
opportunity
to
comment
through
electronic
means,
including
written
comments,
as
well
as
having
the
option
to
participate
and
testify
in
person
again,
which
was
evidenced
here
tonight
in
the
previous
hearing
item.
AG
Also,
no
more
than
two
members
can
participate
remotely
from
the
same
physical
location.
Unless
that
location
is
also
physically
accessible
to
the
broader
public
going
forward,
you
know
staff.
The
staff
team
has
been
working
diligently
to
understand
all
the
details
of
this
new
legislation
and
ensuring
we
are
operating
and
practicing
in
accordance
with
that.
So
how
our
meeting
minutes
are
captured
for
all
hybrid
meetings
going
forward,
we
will
work
to
ensure
that
we
are
fully
in
compliance
with
the
requirements
of
the
state
code,
including
details.
AG
You
see
here
in
terms
of
the
reasons
for
electronic
participation
when
that
happens,
specifying
the
nature
of
a
personal
matter
when
that
is
the
reason
for
remote
participation
and
also
identifying
the
location
from
which
a
member
might
be
participating
going
forward.
We
fully
expect,
as
with
most
other
commissions
in
the
county,
that
our
meetings
will
be
hybrid,
so
we
will
continue
to
use
a
combination
of
in-person
and
virtual
techniques,
including
the
individual
member
participation.
AG
So
I
know
shortly
you'll
be
getting
into
a
discussion
of
proposed
revisions
to
these.
This
commission's
bylaws
there's
really
two
key
components.
I
think
that
are
the
embedded
in
the
substance
of
those
revisions.
AG
In
many
ways
this
is
formalizing
past
practice,
but
also
modifying
that
to
an
extent,
but
in
concept
the
subgroup
becomes
a
distinct
public
body
established
by
this
commission
with
a
formally
adopted
roster
and
later
this
evening,
I
think
you'll
be
considering
proposed
rosters
for
for
several
subgroups
prospectively
being
created.
AG
The
importance
of
the
subgroup
really
is.
It
allows
us
to
really
in
allow
maximum
flexibility
in
terms
of
electronic
participation
so
that
the
math
associated
with
the
electronic
participation
limits
are
applied
to
the
subgroups
independently
from
all
other
commission
meetings
or
committee
meetings
that
don't
have
a
subgroup
established.
AG
Historically,
the
commission's
committees
have
really
operated
as
committees
of
the
whole
and
they
have
not
for
that
reason
needed
a
quorum.
They've
been
committees
for
discussion,
actions
are
not
taken
in
the
in
those
environments.
AG
AG
AG
So
with
that,
I
am
hopeful
that
that
provides
a
brief
but
sufficient
overview
of
some
of
the
details
of
the
new
legislation,
what
it
means
and
what
implications
that
may
have
for
the
work
of
this
commission
going
forward
and
how
meetings
are
approached
and
managed
and
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
hand
it
back
over
to
chair
weir
and
if
there
any
questions
or
if
there
are
any
questions
that
arise
in
the
context
of
the
bylaws
conversation
happy
to
address
them.
B
So,
thank
you,
mr
fusreli.
I
want
to
go
over
a
couple
of.
I
just
want
to
categorize
a
few
comments
that
I've
gotten
from
people
and
then
open
the
florida
questions,
but
first
I
want
to
thank.
I
want
to
thank
you,
mr
fusarelli,
mr
pfeiffer
you're
here,
but
obviously
it
was
not
just
the
two
of
you
that
were
in
that
meeting,
for
instance
with
commissioner
patel,
and
I
you
know,
I
know
that
that
aaron
was
there
and
and
and
kelly
was
there.
It
was.
B
You
know
that,
obviously
your
whole
team
and
then
some
have
been
involved
in
in
getting
us
to
the
spot
of
being
able
to
have
this
conversation,
and
I
can't
thank
you
enough
for
the
work
that
you've
put
in
and
the
patience
that
you've
had
with
me
and
with
davanchi
and
others
as
we
try
to
work
through
this
with.
B
You
share
our
perspectives
about
how
the
committee's
the
ontology
of
this
of
the
committees
and
and
to
get
to
a
place
where
we
are
able
to
welcome
remote
and
virtual
participation
from
as
broad
a
perspective
as
possible,
not
just
members
of
the
commission,
but
everyone
else
who
participates
in
these
projects.
B
So
you
got
to
begin
with
that,
but
I
have
tried
with
respect
to
a
few
of
you
failed,
but
I
have
tried
to
speak
with
everyone
who
would
be
participating
in
tonight's
meeting
and
and
try
to
get
concerns
and
questions
broadly
the
categories
that
they
fall
into
have
to
do
with
some
language
about
meetings
versus
hearings
in
the
bylaws.
We've
got
a
fix
for
that.
B
Whether
or
not
carryovers
are
separate
meetings.
We
have
an
answer
that
they
are
separate
for
the
purposes
of
the
denominator:
a
word
that
you're
going
to
hear
more
in
the
next
30
minutes
than
you
will
in
the
rest
of
the
calendar
year,
issues
about
alternates
and
authority
to
identify
alternates
in
the
in
the
process
of
of
impaneling
these
committees
so
that
business
business
can
continue.
B
Should
there
be
an
issue
about
someone's
ability
to
attend,
editing
the
roster
after
it's
created
the
flexibility
of
the
chair
for
sources
of
sprc
participation
process
about
you
know
when,
in
from
the
moment
that
the
opportunity
for
comment
is
sent
to
the
public
to
the
actual
meetings,
when
is
the
sprc?
B
When
is
the
sprsg
impaneled
and,
and
you
know
whether
the
chair
there,
a
few
people
ask
questions
about
whether
the
chair
has
to
be
present
in
person.
That's
probably
a
best
practice.
It
doesn't
mean
the
chair
of
the
sprc.
It
means
the
chair
of
the
sprsg.
B
B
Because
this
is
by
definition,
the
kind
of
thing
where
we
are
not
going
to
get
everything
right
at
10
10,
the
first
time
that
we
have
a
chance
to
vote
on
it
before
I
go
to
anyone
else,
mr
fusarelli
or
commissioner
peterson
am
I:
are
there
any
categories
of
questions
or
issues
that
I'm
that
we've
conversed
about
that?
I'm
forgetting?
AD
I
just
wanted
to
add
at
a
future
hearing,
I
will
be
introducing
a
motion
that
I'm
going
to
try
to
wordsmith
over
the
next
couple
months.
That
would
acknowledge
a
commissioner's
ability
to
take
fmla,
so
that
would
not
count
against
them
in
their
meeting
attendance
for
the
year
as
well
as
it
wouldn't
count
against
the
commission
in
a
negative
way.
That
forces
us
to
have
a
pro
denominator
problem
so
future.
B
AG
I
will
add
on
the
question
of
fmla,
happy
to
engage
our
county
attorney's
office,
in
short
order
to
confirm
to
try
and
get
clarity
or
additional
insights
in
terms
of
their
opinion
on
the
ability
of
whether
the
bylaws
or
as
the
state
code
currently
stands,
whether
there's
any
accommodations
for
that.
So
we'll
be
back
in
touch
in
short
order
once
got
additional
information
to
share.
B
I
I
know,
for
instance,
that
the
commissioner
seinberger
said
that
she'll
be
back
in
october
right,
but
I
will
be
not.
I
will
probably
not
be
here
in
november,
so
so
it
would
be
nice
to
if
there's
an
opportunity
to
take
care
of
it.
You
know
it
would
be
nice
to
do
that.
B
AA
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
So,
mr
fisarelli,
thank
you
for
your
presentation,
a
few
questions
for
you.
So
in
looking
at
the
staff,
the
proposed
language,
it
didn't
see
subgroups
for
zoco
and
would
love
staff
to
kind
of
explain
the
thinking
there
and
as
to
why
that
couldn't
be
treated
like
lrpc,
where
you
might
have
a
you
know:
distinct
subgroup
for
the
missing
middle
discussion
and
then
and
paneled,
and
it
would
still
be
planning
commissioners
most
likely,
but
why
that
couldn't
be
done
for
that
too.
AG
Yeah
no
thank
you
for
the
question.
I
don't
want
to
say
in
absolute
terms
that
it
could
never
be
done.
AG
I
think,
based
on
the
pr
our
practice
past
practice
and
experience
that
we
can
recall
you
know,
zoco
didn't
we
do
not
recall
any
recent
history
with
zoco
that
really
warranted,
or
involved
kind
of
a
specific
makeup
of
that
committee
that
extended
beyond
the
committee
of
the
whole
commission,
not
to
say
that
that
might
you
know
we
may
just
want
to
keep
the
option
open
and
there
may
be
no
harm
in
that
and
no
reason
not
to.
I
think
it
was
just
coming
from
a
place
of
for
site
plan
reviews.
AG
We
know
each
project
essentially
has
its
own
specific
group
of
stakeholder
voices
and
potential
roster
roster
candidates
lrpcs.
It
depends
right
for
a
special
glup
study.
There
probably
is
an
interest
in
having
a
subgroup,
because
that
same
group
of
of
individuals
will
meet
several
times
to
focus
on
a
specific
project.
A
AA
B
Be
helpful
and
that's
that
there
there
was
a
number
of
questions
from
the
county
attorney's
office
during
one
of
our
meetings
about
the
number
of
times
that
a
subgroup
meets,
and
I
think
that
there
was
a
concern,
not
a
decision
but
a
question,
a
concern
that
if
a
subgroup
is
only
meeting
once
it's
not
really
a
subgroup.
It's
a
committee
of
the
whole
meeting-
and
I
that's
reflected
in
in
mr
fuserally's
answer,
but
I
thought
I
would
just
also
share.
I
I
thought
I
would
make
it
a
little
bit.
AA
More
explicit,
so
then
a
couple,
that's
helpful.
So
then
a
couple
of
two
follow-up
questions
based
on
your
response,
mr
fuscarelli,
and
the
chairman's
further
explanation.
So
one
is:
does
that
mean
that
zoco
like
if
I
wanted
to
attend
next
week's
zoco
meeting
virtually
that
counts
against
my
20
of
planning
commission
meetings?
I
can
attend
in
the
year.
That's
question
one
and
then
two
there
are
lots
of
small
site
plans
for
which
there's
only
one
meeting,
and
does
that
mean
that
by
the
definition
that
I
just
heard
that
that's
not
really
a
sub
group.
B
AA
AG
AG
AA
AD
Absolutely
go
ahead,
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt.
I
guess
I
should
know
this
because
I've
been
talking
with
you
all,
so
the
denominator
then,
is
based
on
the
number
of
meetings
that
I
attend.
So
if
I'm
like,
oh
I'm
interested
in
attending
the
zoco
meeting,
but
I
can't
because
I'm
going
to
be
in
california,
and
so
I
want
to
attend
virtually.
But
if
I
do
that's
going
to
mess
up
my
ability
to
attend
virtually
the
december
hearing,
which
I
know
I
might
not
be
able
to
attend.
AH
Commissioner
peterson,
I
think
thanks
anthony,
for
I
I
think
the
answer
is
yes.
Basically,
I
think
that
what
we're
talking
about
here
is
the
ability
to
participate
in
a
meeting
remotely
so.
AH
Yes,
basically
I
I
know,
I
don't
know
that
I
would
couch
it
in
the
terms
of
you
know
it's
better
to
to
miss
a
meeting,
but
I
think
you
know
following
the
strict
definition
of
the
law.
Yes,
I
it
it's
participating
in
the
meeting
remotely
that
counts
towards
it,
not
necessarily
missing
a
meeting.
AG
And
if
I
could
just
add
to
that,
just
taking
having
the
opportunity
to
add
to
what
mr
pfeiffer
had
just
said,
but
looking
back
at
the
language
and
I'd
like
to
confirm
with
the
specific
language
of
legislation,
I
think
it's
framed.
The
the
25
is
framed
in
the
meetings
held
on
an
annual
basis,
not
attended.
B
B
Well,
but
but
the
issue
here
is
that
we
want
22,
you
know
if
28,
if
the
zoning
committee
meets
six
times
right,
that's
a
that's
a
number
that
can
be
known
to
commissioners
right
if,
if
it's
also
all
of
the
sprc
and
lrpc
meetings,
that's
an
impossible
number
for
us
to
know
and
and
make
plans
before,
which
is
another
reason
to
sort
of
carve
out
the
the
sprc
process
and
other
pc
process
here
commissioner's
role.
Sorry.
AA
Yeah,
I
just
I
think
I
have
maybe
two
more
well.
It's
one
more
kind
of
some
question:
that's
kind
of
two-parter,
so,
mr
fusorelli,
so
with
the
you
know,
adoption
of
the
rosters
for
these
subgroups
that
will
be
done
at
a
planned
commission
meeting
we're
going
to
do
that
in
a
little
bit
here
for
the
upcoming
spcs.
AA
Question
kind
of
two-part
question
about
how
we
amend
that.
So,
if,
if
we
need
to
amend
it,
is
it
only
we're
gonna
only
do
that
at
a
at
a
planning
commission
meeting,
and
does
that
mean
that
if
we
didn't
include
an
alternate
that
we
couldn't
amend
that
until
we
come
back
to
a
planning
commission
meeting
again
and
then
does
the
adoption?
I
guess
this
three-parter?
Does
the
adoption
of
the
roster
start
the
whole
process,
by
which
I
mean
like
we
were
all
off
in
august?
AA
Could
we
not
have
done
any
kind
of
work
on
communicating
sprc's
to
folks
or
any
kind
of
subgroup
until
we
adopted
a
planning
commission
meeting.
AA
AG
No,
no,
that's
quite
all
right
on
the
first
question.
You
know
this,
I
think,
was
a
question
that
has
been
relayed
recently
to
staff.
This
particular
question:
I
would
suggest
you
know
the
commission
may
consider
taking
an
action
or
considering
future
action
to
incorporate
how
that
gets
addressed.
Perhaps
at
a
subsequent
meeting
later
this
fall
the
the
reason
being
throughout
the
course
of
the
the
second
half
of
the
summer.
AG
We
have
been
working
closely
with
the
county
attorney's
office
on
some
of
the
basically
the
proposed
revisions
that
you
see
here
tonight.
We
would
want
to
further
engage
and
have
the
benefit
of
the
county.
Attorney's
opinion
on.
I
think
the
question
you
just
proposed,
which
is,
would
it
be
the
best
practice
for
the
commission
to
you,
know
formally
act
on
any
amendments
or
updates
to
the
roster?
If
it's
adding
an
alternate
or
is
it
also
sufficient?
AG
Alternatively,
for
you
know
that
to
be
framed
in
terms
of
the
discretion
of
the
chair,
so
recognizing
there's
various
approaches
to
how
that
gets
addressed.
I
think
we'd
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
have
a
little
further
discussion
and
perhaps
come
back.
You
know
in
the
october
time
frame
with
some
updated
thinking,
that's
beyond
cphd
planning.
That's.
AA
That's
helpful.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
think
you
kind
of
answered
I
think
most
of
that
and
last
thing
I'll
say,
is
wherever
we
land
on
that.
I
think
I
would
just
request
that
cphd
be
he
might
be
already
doing
this,
but
just
make
sure
it's
really
clear
to
all
the
other
commissions
that
this
is
the
new
way
of
think
world
and
if
they
don't
respond
to
matt's
email
or
something
that,
like
there
may
be
some
delay
in
them
participating.
AA
AB
AB
AB
AG
AG
There
could
be
a
scenario
where,
if,
if
the
commission
accepts
the
proposed
bylaws
that
sets
the
quorum
at
three
for
the
lrpc,
for
example,
you
could
have
a
scenario,
albeit
not
ideal,
where
two
planning
commissioners
show
up
for
that
lrpc
meeting
and
you
can
have
a
meeting
in
person
and
discuss
whatever
it
is
you'd
like
to
discuss
what
you
cannot
do
since
you
have
not
met
a
quorum.
Is
you
cannot
have
any
other
members
participate
electronically?
AB
AG
AG
AB
AG
AB
AB
AG
AG
It
was
impressed
upon
us
the
importance
of
having
specific
individuals,
but
we
didn't-
I
don't
recall,
getting
to
the
point
of
discussing
alternates,
and
so
that's
something
that
you
know
we're
we're
in
constant
communication
with
them
and
and
that
we
would
gladly
bring
that
question
for
further
discussion.
AH
And
commissioner
land
tell
me
you'll
notice,
on
the
the
three
rosters
we'll
begin
considering
tonight,
there
are
several
designations
where
alternates
were
provided.
So
when
we
reached
out,
you
know
we
we
did
say
you
know
at
the
moment,
not
having
you
know
full
clarity
on
on
this
issue.
It's
it's
important
to
to
make
sure
that
we
have
alternates
just
in
case
for
the
september
meeting,
so
you'll
see
that
on
the
rosters
okay.
AG
Z
Thank
you,
mr
fuzorelli,
for
clarifying
some
things
for
me.
So
just
to
go
back
through
I'm
chairing
an
sprc,
I'm
hoping
that
from
the
roster
at
least
two
other
warm
bodies
show
up.
I
mean
it
seems
to
me.
We're
gonna
have
to
have
some
sort
of
an
account,
like
commissioner
chairwear
before
tonight,
actively
recruited
to
make
sure
that
we
would
have
people
here.
So
it
just
seems
to
me
that
there's
going
to
have
to
be
some
responsibility
versus
just
hoping
that
oh
gosh,
we
do
have
some
warm
bodies
here.
Z
So
I
guess
I
am
wondering
how
that
would
work
and
if
somebody
gives
me
so
say,
I'm
guessing
that
somebody
from
parks
and
rec
or
somebody
from
a
civic
assistant
says
yes,
I'm
coming
and
then
two
of
my
fellow
planning
commissioners
say
will
come
or
can
we
come
virtually
me
as
a
chair
doesn't
make
that
determination.
That's
still
the
chair
of
the
planning
commission
that
makes
the
or
is
it
is
that
the
chair
of
the
sprc,
if.
AG
Z
And
I
guess
you
know,
as
you
pointed
out,
sometimes
we
have
very
large
groups.
Sometimes
we
have
like
we're
scratching
to
get
anybody
there.
So,
like
I
said
I
just
it
seems
to
me
it's
going
to
require
a
little
bit
more
perhaps
I
mean
certainly
as
a
chair,
I've
always
sent
out
emails.
Z
Please
let
me
know
if
you're
coming
blah
blah
blah,
but
a
little
more
coordination
than
that
to
make
sure
that
you
know
we
can
really
do
something
and
then
to
figure
out
when
to
use
like
yeah
I'll,
be
there
that's
fine,
we
or
I
want
to
do
it
online.
Then
you
know
it
just
is
going
to
require
a
little
bit
more
coordination.
AD
I
just
wanted
to
say,
as
the
sprc
chair
of
kind
of
all
sprc
meetings,
I
would
like
to
encourage
us
as
a
group
to
have
meetings
in
person
as
much
as
possible
because
I
think
we're
going
to
get
more
fruitful
meetings.
Of
course
we
can
make
exceptions
for
medical
needs
or
work
travel,
but
I
think
if
when
we
are
communicating
with
the
our
roster
of
attendees
for
our
meetings,
we
can
say
please
come
in
person.
AD
AB
Yeah
I
mean
I
concur
with
that.
I
mean
I,
like
I've,
been
looking
forward
to
having
these
in
person
again
for
so
long
now,
so
yeah
I'll
I'll
show.
Don't
worry
about
that.
It'd
be
very,
very
unusual.
If
I
try
to
phone
it
in
it
may
happen,
but
I'll
do
everything
to
try
to
be
there,
but
I
can't
guarantee
that
about
a
lot
of
the
other
p
like
pacific
association
presidents,
you
saw
that
tonight
where
we
had
them
participate
virtually,
and
I
understand
that
so
people
in
this
room.
AB
B
One
thing
I
wanted
to
say
to
roster:
other
people
may
disagree
with
me.
B
Ms
core
may
disagree
with
me,
but
from
my
perspective,
when
it
comes
to
roster
issues,
is
that
once
the
boat's
out
to
sea
the
chair
is
the
captain
of
the
boat
right
and
we
have
rules
about
a
quorum
and
a
quorum's
got
to
be
met
right,
but
if
we
have
a
roster
that
says
the
transportation
commission's
designee
is
chris
slatt
and
that's
it
it's
silent
as
to
alternate
and
and
something
happens
to
chris
and
he's
not
there,
but
chris
yerry
happens
to
be
there.
You
know
it
is
I
come
on
now.
B
I
think
that
it
is
at
the
discretion
of
the
chair
of
the
spr
sg
to
say
mr
yerry.
You
know
whether
we,
whether
we
bring
it
in
as
a
early
public
comment
or
something
else,
could
you
share
the
commission's
perspective
with
us
that
and
that's
that's
the
discretion
that
the
chair
has.
We
might
you
know,
hopefully
we'll
have
something
a
little
bit
more
concrete
to
rely
on
than
than
the
chair
in
the
heat
of
the
moment
exercising
effective
discretion.
AB
AB
AB
B
AB
B
It's
not
a
loophole,
it's
it's
a
provision,
other
questions,
so
we
have
let
me,
mr
fiscally,
mr
meyer,
anything
else
you
all
have
received
and
and
perhaps
ms
johnson,
you
can
put
it
on
screen
and
we
can
sort
of
scroll
through
the
the
the
amended
the
red
line
of
the
bylaws.
There
are
a
couple
of,
I
think
we
go
through
it.
B
We
sort
of
work
session
it
and
there
are
a
couple
of
of
changes
that,
even
in
the
last
few
days,
commissioner
peterson
and
mr
fusreli
and
I
have
identified
I'll
just
flag,
those
for
you
and
then
entertain
a
motion
to
adopt
as.
B
As
edited,
and
so
ms
johnson,
can
I
get
you
to
change
the
re
under
the
review
tab
to
from
from
simple
to
complete
markup
ribbon.
Thank
you
down
and
just
to
the
right,
keep
going
just
a
little
bit
more
a
little
bit
more
up
up
one
more
change,
simple
to.
I
think
it's
it's
all
markup
yep,
so
I'll
just
walk
through
some
of
these
and
equitable.
This
was
an
amendment
that
we
acted
on.
B
I
think
when
commissioner
land
tell
me
was
chair,
can
I
let's
scroll
down
to
article,
I
think
three,
a
lot
of
these
are
emandations.
B
Why
don't
I
just
get
you
a
scroll
and
I'll?
Ask
you
to
stop
when
you
when
I,
when
we
come
to
it
there
we
go
so
okay.
B
Article
four
four:
I
think
that
one
speaks
for
itself,
removing
the
one
half
plus
one.
Can
you
keep
going
miss
johnson,
okay
were
there.
I
don't
think
that
there
were
any
edits
in
this
last
article.
Can
you
go
back
up
just
a
little
bit?
B
AG
No,
I
think
that's
reflective
of
a
recent
amendment
we
made
several
weeks
ago,
but
no
further
edits
on
on
that.
B
Okay,
let
me
then
I
had
my
laptop
up
and
it
died.
Otherwise
I
would
have
just
been
able
to
ask
you
to
go
straight
to
whatever.
Let
me
just
ask
you
a
goal.
I
think
committees,
I
think
meetings
and
committees
is
where
our
action
is
going
to
be.
So,
let's
go.
Let's
go
to
committees,
where's
the
hearings,
mr
fiscally.
It
was
hearings
and
meetings
that
that
change
was
in
meetings.
Wasn't
it
so.
AG
No
commissioner
or
chair
we're,
if
we
go
back
to
article
two,
I
believe
so
I
think
the
there
were
some
additional
edits
that
we
were
working
on
but
did
not
make
it
into
this
version.
So,
but
I
think
the
the
potential
edit
here
is
in
number
six,
where
it
says
the
three
consecutive
monthly
meetings
of
the
commission
or
four
monthly
meetings
of
the
commission.
I
think
there
was
a
consideration
to
change
meetings
to
hearings.
That's
in
article
four,
I.
AG
B
B
You
might
as
well
and
then
we'll
treat
this
as
the
canonical
document.
I.
B
B
AB
AB
AB
B
I
want
to
get
the
ones
that
we've
identified
and
then
have
a
conversation
about
where
the
bylaws
really
refer
to
hearings
and
where
they
really
refer
to
meetings,
and
then
we
can
clean
that
up
next
month.
You're,
I
think
you're
right,
I
I
just
wanna,
see
you
right
there.
I
just
wanna,
stop
I
wanna
close
up
the
rabbit
hole
before
we,
we
might
be
at
the
bottom
of
it.
I
don't
know,
commissioner
or
mr
fizweiler.
There
was
one
other
that
we
had
discussed
in
the
game
yeah.
I
lost
my
document.
AG
No
chair
there
was,
I
think,
very
recently,
considered
language
which
would
become
the
second
sentence
of
article
four
item.
One
and
I
can
either
if
it
suffices,
I
can
read
it
for
the
group
and
then
I
can
work
with
ms
johnson
following
the
meeting
to
ensure
this
language
is
captured.
AG
But
this
is
basically
reflecting,
I
think,
info
additional
information
from
the
deputy
county
attorney
following
a
meeting
with
chairs
commission
chairs
several
weeks
ago,
but
the
proposed
language,
the
proposed
language
of
the
second
sentence
in
number,
one-
would
read
for
the
purposes
of
accounting
for
meetings,
attended,
consistent
with
applicable
electronic
meetings,
policies
and
statutes.
B
I'm
satisfied
with
it
being
captured
for
the
record
commissioner
peterson.
I
want
to
turn
to
you.
Those
were
the
two
edits
to
the
text
as
we've
received
it
that
I
wanted
to
make
sure
people
were
aware
of
commissioner
peterson.
I
want
to
turn
to
you
about
the
process
question
for
finishing
the
comment
period
before
creating
the
sprcsgs
spr
sgs.
B
I
don't.
I
do
not
think
that
that
needs
to
be
captured
in
the
bylaws.
I
think
that
that's
sufficient
to
capture
in
terms
of
practice.
If
you
agree,
then
we
don't
have
anything
to
do
great
and
the
issues
about
alternates
and
editing
the
roster
after
it's
created
are
in
our
category
of
for
further
discussion.
B
B
B
If
there's
no
other
questions
that
go
to
the
language
of
the
bylaws,
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
adopt,
as
as
edited.
A
AA
B
B
Yeah,
it's
a
lot.
Okay,
so
entertaining
a
motion
to
adopt.
B
AD
Okay,
assuming
that
our
bylaws
are
adopted
this
evening,
we
will,
during
my
committee,
update,
be
adopting
three
rosters
four
meetings,
subgroup
meetings
that
were
supposed
to
take
place
this
month.
One
of
them
has
been
postponed
next
month,
but,
as
I
sent
you
all
an
email
earlier
today
with
my
kind
of
committee
update,
but
these
changes
shouldn't
affect
our
actual
workflow
too
much
you're
still
going
to
have
your
kickoff
meeting
with
your
staff
contact
you're
still
going
to
be
in
charge
of
coming
up
with
your
roster,
with
advice
and
recommendations
from
your
staff
liaison.
AD
There
may
be
an
additional
person
in
the
room
from
the
communications
team
who
will
give
their
input
and
advice
on
if
there's
any
neighborhood
associations
that
we've
missed
but
you're
still,
the
one
kind
of
doing
the
roster
staff
will
work
with
you
partner
with
you
to
reach
out
to
the
the
people
you'd
like
on
your
roster,
to
invite
them
to
participate.
AD
We're
still
working
with
staff
about,
like
the
actual
process
for
managing
the
rsvps,
which
someone
had
brought
up
earlier,
is
how
are
we
going
to
make
sure
that
the
right
number
of
people
are
showing
up
in
the
room?
So
that's
something
we'll
be
working
through
over
the
next
few
months
to
make
sure
it
runs
smoothly,
because
we
don't
want
to
end
up.
AB
Okay,
that
actually
raises
another
question.
I
have
I'm
doing
the
mace,
the
balsa
macy's
and
we
reached
out
to
pacific
association
we've
a
number
of
people
who
have
been
at
the
table.
We
also
included
some
of
the
surrounding
condos.
We
invited
them.
AB
They
are
not
showing
they've
chosen
not
to
participate,
but
it
was
important
that
they
reached
out
to
them.
When
we
do
the
roster,
then
I
would
not
include
them
even
though
they
were
invited
and
if
they
wanted
to
show,
I
would
love
to
have
them
there,
but
I
should
not
include
them
because
they're
not
showing.
AB
AD
Yeah
so
then
there
is
the
ability
to
redo
the
roster
at
a
future
planning
commission
hearing
where
we
say
hey,
we've
got
three
people
that
need
to
be
substituted
out.
So
let's
do
a
motion
as
the
hearing
to
edit
the
roster.
This
would
possibly
be
more
needed
in
a
very
long-term
project.
For
example,
when
we
did
hq2
that
process
lasted
almost
a
year
but
for
hopefully
shorter
term
projects,
we
wouldn't
need
to
be
making
amendments
to
rosters.
N
AA
B
Now
that
we
have
commissioner
bagley
back,
I'm
going
to
insist
that
we
act
while
we
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you,
commissioner,
peterson,
for
going
through
that
we'll
come
back
to
you
if
we
have
more
on
it,
but
I
would
entertain
a
motion
to
adopt
the
bylaws,
as
edited
the
bylaw
amendments.
As
edited,
can
you
make
it.
AB
B
Anyone
wish
to
speak
to
it
great
commissioner
bagley
aye,
commissioner
gear
and
and
hughes
are
absent.
Commissioner,
tell
me
aye,
commissioner
patel.
If
you're
still
on
aye,
commissioner
peterson
aye
commissioner
sally
aye,
commissioner
schroll
hi,
commissioner
peterson
is
absent.
I
vote
I
motion
carries
seven
to
one.
Thank
you.
B
You
amen,
thank
you.
Steinberg
steinberger
is
absent.
Correcting
the
record
commissioner
steinberger
is
absolute.
Commissioner,
peterson's
vote
in
favor
is
reflected
and
recorded
motion
carry
7-0.
Thank
you
all
again.
I
think
that
that
brings
us,
madam
clerk,
to
any
remaining
committee
reports.
Commissioner
peterson,
you
circulated
a
report.
Do
you
have
anything
else
that
you
want
to
add
and
then
we
should
adopt
the
rosters.
I
know.
AD
Just
that
I
wanted
to
thank
commissioners,
your.
AD
I
just
wanted
to
thank
commissioner
bagley
publicly
who's
recently
agreed
to
take
on
the
shirlington
village
sprc
subgroup,
and
yes,
I
I
mentioned
that
we
are
now
going
to
adopt
some
rosters,
so
I
will
do
that
now.
Ms
johnson,
can
you
please
share
the
roster
for
the
joyce
motors
sprc
subgroup
on
the
screen?
Please.
AD
AD
AD
AD
AA
I
do
have
a
question
for
staff
on
the
kind
of
sprc
new
sbrc
process,
mr
chairman,
so
maybe
this
is
better
directed
at
mr
pfeiffer,
so
in
preparing
for
the
in-person
sprc
next
week
on
crystal
plaza,
5
staff
have
indicated
that
we
have,
you
know
a
smaller
room
in
room
715,
I'm
wondering
how
long
that
will
be
the
case
if
we
have
bigger
facilities
available
first
for
some
of
the
other
sprc's,
maybe
like
the
one
that
commissioner
tell
me
is-
is
leading
just
interested
on
the
kind
of
those
kind
of
logistics.
AH
Yeah
absolutely
thanks
for
that
question.
Commissioner
scharl.
You
know
we're
using
room
715
right
now.
I
think,
as
folks
have
noticed,
this
building
is
under
construction.
We
do
anticipate
that
a
number
of
new
conference
rooms
will
come
online
when
that
construction
is
completed
and
we
can
start
to
utilize
those.
AH
We
also
do
have
the
option
to
look
at.
You
know,
facilities
that
are
off-site.
You
know
if
we
think
it's
necessary
in
a
case-by-case
basis.
For
example,
if
we
have
a
site
plan
project
where
we
anticipate
a
considerable
considerable
amount
of
participation
in
person,
you
know
maybe
we'll
look
at
the
navy
league
facility,
or
you
know
some
other
off-site
facility
that
we
think
can
accommodate
that
number
of
people
at
the
moment.
AH
I
think
our
our
thinking
is
that
you
know,
even
if
every
person
on
this
roster
shows
up
room,
715
should
be
able
to
handle
that,
and
you
know,
I
think,
we're
anticipating
considerable
participation
from
the
public
remotely
using
teams.
AA
B
AD
B
You're
here,
commissioner,
tell
me:
lrpc.
AB
Oh
yeah,
we
have
some
fairly
big
things.
Coming
up,
we're
going
to
be
doing
missing
a
joint
missing
middle
zok
with
zoco.
Do
we
have
the
date,
commissioner,
charlie
yeah,
it's
october
6th
october
6th
we're
also
going
to
be
doing
the
plan.
Lancaster
boulevard
that'll
be
coming
up
also,
I
don't
have
a
date
quite
yet
for
that,
but
that
is
coming
up.
This
fall
beyond
that.
AB
We
have
a
number
of
moved
on
to
tier
two
for
let's
see,
millwood
which
isn't
scheduled
yet,
but
that'll
be
coming
up
coming
up
with
tier
one
for
2500,
clarendon
boulevard,
so
or
wilson
boulevard.
I
forget
which
one
it's
on,
so
that's
not
scheduled
yet,
but
that'll
be
coming
up.
Sunrise
that'll
be
tier.
Two!
That's
coming
up!
Also,
that's
glee
road
sunrise,
the
sunrise
on
glee
road.
So
I
think
those
are
the
ones
I'm
aware
of
right
now.
Am
I
missing
any?
B
Did
you
mention
the
one
that's
adjacent
to
the
courthouse
west?
Is
that
that's
not
right?
That's
that's!
2500!
Okay!
Thank
you.
We
just
got
part
of
the
oh
and
you
know
what
commissioner
peterson.
I
don't
know
that
I
actually
included
you
in
my
round
of
thanks
for
the
work
on
the
bylaws
amendments.
It's
just
it
would
not
really
have
gotten
to
where
it
was
without
your
persistent
concern
raising,
and
I
mean
that
with
all
respect
and
admiration
and
gratitude.
B
So
thank
you,
commissioner,
sarly
and
or
commissioner
patel
on
zoco.
AC
We
have
a
zoko
meeting
coming
up
on
next
tuesday.
It's
on.
I
think,
I'm
a
little
bit
too
far
and
that's
gonna,
be
the
columbia
pike
bank
of
america
plan.
We're
reviewing
that
and
then
there
is
this
micro
facilities
which
aed
is
going
to
be
presenting
at
the
zoko
and
then
we're
also
going
to
be
hashing
out
the
what
we've
just
talked
about
as
the
implementation
on
soco
and
then
the
other
two
for
october.
I
want
to
flag
that
to
this
commission.
AC
As
commissioner
tell
me
mentioned,
we
have
a
co,
lrpc,
zoco
meeting
on
missy
middle
and
then
that's
on
the
6th
of
october
and
on
the
17th,
we're
going
to
have
a
second
session
on
missing
middle
that
I
think
it's
strictly
zoco
and
I
been
starting
to
sort
of
hash
out
that
subject
and
there's
just
a
lot
to
talk
about
so
we're
hoping
to
bang
it
out
in
two
weeks
into
meetings.
AC
But
it's
going
to
take
a
little
bit
of
discipline
and
a
little
bit
of
effort,
but
that's
it
unless
commissioner
patel
has
anything
else
to
add.
AF
B
Thank
you,
mr
fusraeli,
mr
pfeiffer,
for
the
bank
of
america
zoco
meeting,
but
also
for
the
missing
middle
zoco,
slash
lrpc
meeting,
since
there
is
not
an
empaneled
lrpc
subgroup.
B
B
Yeah
for
the
bank,
both
for
the
bank
of
america
site
on
columbia
pike
next
week,
but
then
for
the
october
6
join
lrpc,
zoco,
a
missing
middle,
where
I
think
we're
going
to
have
a
lot
more
public
interest
than
a
foreign
code
project
on
columbia
pike.
I
will
turn
out.
Will
members
of
the
public
be
able
to
participate
and
give
feedback
virtually,
and
will
members
of
the
planning
commission
be
able
to
participate
and
give
feedback
virtually
on
on
both
of
these.
AG
Based
on
based
on
the
bylaws
that
have
just
been
approved
or
adopted
so
long
as
there
are
three
members
of
the
planning
commission
present
at
either
of
those
meetings
or
both
of
those
meetings,
each
of
these
meetings.
AG
B
AG
B
Two
committees
of
the
whole:
we
don't
I
I
don't
until
I
can
clone
myself
yeah
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
then,
mr
peterson,
do
you
wanna
handle
pfrc
or
you
can
just
say
no
report.
Not
me.
AD
We
had
our
final
career
center
pfrc
meeting
at
the
end
of
last
month
at
the
end
of
august,
and
commissioner
steinberger
will
be
presenting
the
report
from
that
meeting
to
the
school
board
next
month.
So
thank.
B
You
thank
you,
commissioner
hughes
is
not
here,
and
I
am
the
alternate
to
the
og,
but
I
do
not
have
I'm
not
in
a
position
to
give
a
report
on
that
other
than
I
think
to
say
that
the
the
next
step
in
one
of
the
projects
that's
going
through
is
the
columbia
pike
bank
of
america
and
and
we've
already
gotten
an
update
on
that
coming
meeting.
The
next
order
of
business
would
be
to
adopt
the
minutes
of
our
july
6
and
7
hearings.
B
B
That
and
we're
glad
that
you're
able
to
be
back
thank.