►
Description
To view the agenda, go to https://arlington.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=45
A
C
Good
evening
I'd
like
to
stand
here
tonight
and
if
Richard
could
drive,
that
would
be
wonderful.
Thank
you
for
having
me
back.
It's
been
a
while,
but
a
lot
has
been
getting
done
on
our
delivery
of
the
I-66
Express
Lanes
inside
the
beltway.
You
can
see
more
of
the
branding
that
we've
given
this
project.
Now,
if
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
just
the
overall
program
scope
tonight,
I'm
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
we've
been
doing
to
get
ready
for
tolling.
C
C
So
this
is
the
Express
Lanes
mapping.
You
can
see
here
where
we
have
towing
from
the
Capital
Beltway
into
Rosslyn
right
now,
we're
delivering
this
project
that
we
are
tolling,
eastbound
a.m.
from
5:30
in
the
morning
until
9:30
in
the
morning
and
tolling
westbound
p.m.
from
3
o'clock
to
7
o'clock
p.m.
C
so
back,
1
HOV
2
is
toll
toll-free
and
then
the
entire
system
will
convert
to
an
HOV
3
toll
free
when
the
Express
Lanes
outside
the
Beltway,
open
and
2022.
What
we're
really
focused
on
right
now
is
making
sure
people
have
their
EZ
Pass.
You
might
have
seen
an
article
recently
where,
through
our
testing,
we
can
actually
determine
right
now
with
the
gantries
about
how
many
people
are
having
you
pass
that
travel
the
corridor
and
right
now
we
have
about
fifty
percent
saturation.
C
Sure
a
lot
of
that
is
from
the
you
know:
Dulles
Toll,
Road,
coming
off
a
lot
of
people
already
have
an
EZ
Pass
coming
off
there,
but
we
do
have
special
user
groups
that
have
a
lot
of
changes
coming.
That's
the
hybrid
users
that
are
no
longer
exempt
from
the
facility
as
an
HOV
user,
and
we
also
have
the
airport
users
that
are
no
longer
exempt.
We've
done
a
lot
of
outreach
with
a
special
user
groups.
Dmv
has
sent
two
letters
to
those
user
groups,
letting
them
know
about
the
changes
for
the
hybrids.
C
We've
also
met
with
the
airport
council
out
of
em
wha,
to
make
them
aware
that
you
know
the
entire.
You
know
working
Dulles,
Airport
traffic,
that's
rental,
cars,
delivery,
trucks,
taxis,
pilots,
we've
gotten
all
kinds
of
different
inquiries.
Everyone
needs
an
EZ
Pass
to
be
on
this
corridor
during
rush
hour.
C
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
just
and
one
things
I
want
to
touch
upon.
As
far
as
our
construction
is
concerned,
all
of
our
construction
for
the
toll
system
is
complete.
We
did
I,
don't
know
if
you've
noticed,
but
we
did
take
down
a
couple
large
DMS
signs
a
few
weekends
ago
that
we're
reinstalling
before
told
day
one.
There
had
to
be
some
adjustments,
ones
right
out
here
on
Glebe
as
you
head
out
that
really
large
electronic
sign,
but
those
will
be
reinstalled.
C
Otherwise
we
do
have
everything
complete
in
about
two
weeks
time
or
next
weekend.
You're
gonna
see
a
lot
of
signs
go
up
and
along
down
the
corridor,
that's
going
to
I
guess
advertise
that
changes
are
coming.
It's
more
of
a
campaign,
part
of
our
campaign
to
saturate
and
then
another
thing
that
we're
doing
as
of
tomorrow.
We
have
about
ten
to
eleven
Park
and
Ride
Lots,
both
vdot
Park
and
Ride
Lots
in
the
corridor.
Loudoun
County
Fairfax
County
run
Park
and
Ride
Lots,
where
we
have
a
big
66,
Express
Lanes
campaign.
C
So
people
know
that
changes
are
coming,
get
an
easy
pass
and
then
the
following
week
will
likely
have
the
DMV
van
there,
so
people
can
actually
make
exchanges
for
their
easy
passes.
So
we
have
a
really
large
campaign.
A
lot
of
this
has
done
30
days
in
advance,
because
surveys
have
shown-
and
we've
done
this
twice
before-
with
495
and
95,
working
with
our
private
partner-
that
a
lot
of
people
make
the
adjustments
about
30
days
out
before
tolling
and
we're
still
testing
right
now.
C
This
is
still
testing
in
progress
and
we'll
probably
do
that
all
the
way
up
work.
You
know
we're
in
the
stages
of
where
you
know
we're
trying
to
break
the
system.
What
could
go
wrong?
What
we're
trying
to
do,
although
we
have
a
target
date
of
tolling
December
4th,
we
always
have
a
plan
B
Plan
C.
It
is
the
time
for
snow.
There
has
been
snow,
December
4th,
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
could
change
our
go-live
decision
and
we
will
be
making
those
adjustments.
C
You
know
on
daily
calls
ten
days
out
before
tolling
to
see
if
going
live
is
appropriate
for
that.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
this
is
a
multi-modal
project.
Now
this
is
the
initial
project
that
actually
the
Commonwealth
invested
in
advance
of
the
tolling.
This
is
the
ten
million
dollar
program.
That's
that
has
been
implemented
and
you
can
see
the
status
of
those
projects
in
these
columns.
This
is
the
slide.
C
We
call
that
the
commuter
choice
that
is
being
managed
and
delivered
by
the
Northern,
Virginia
Transportation
Commission
and
actually
this
program
right
here,
this
initial
program,
we
funded
MVT
C
reports
that
it
will
actually
move
five
thousand
more
people
through
the
corridor
just
through
this
program
alone.
So
they
are
actually
implementing
a
round
to
call
for
projects
right
now,
they're
using
the
same
ten
million
dollar
threshold.
Since
we
haven't
started
revenue
collection,
but
then
every
year
yearly
will
give
them
a
revenue
projection
once
the
system
is
audited.
C
So
they
know
how
much
revenue
is
coming
in
to
spend
on
projects
similar
to
these
next
slide.
So
tonight,
one
one
important
thing:
that's
coming
up
and
a
change
that
is
underway
to
be
implemented
as
our
eastbound
winding,
and
just
to
remind
you
all,
it's
a
four
mile
widening
from
two
to
three
lanes,
beginning
at
the
Dulles
connector
Road
to
the
Boston
exit
here
exit
71.
We
also
have
a
lot
of
new
and
replace
sound
walls
that
we're
we're
constructing
as
part
of
that
project.
We
have
some
offering
improvements
at
Washington,
Boulevard
and
glebe.
C
We
have
the
great
W
no
D
at
grade.
Excuse
me
grade
separated
crossing
the
bridge
at
lehigh
way
and
then
also
delivered
as
part
of
this
project
and
I'll
show
you
a
high
level
snapshot
of
that
is
the
ramp
to
ramp
connection.
That's
actually
outside
the
footprint
of
widening
that
we're
doing
at
the
route
7
interchange,
so
just
to
go
to
the
widening
extents
next
slide
is
this
just
gives
you
a
limit
of
where
we're
widening
the
red
line
next
slide.
C
This
is
the
actual
design
constraints
we
were
actually
working
within.
You
can
see
that
we
have
a
lot
of
challenges.
We
are
tempest,
do
all
of
this
within
our
existing
right-of-way.
That
includes
the
additional
lane
all
of
our
drainage,
stormwater
management.
We
are
looking
at
a
lot
of
pedestrian
facilities
over
here.
Not
only
are
we
building
a
new
bridge,
but
the
two
existing
pedestrian
bridge
that
cross
66
will
have
to
retrofit
those
in
place,
we're
actually
not
reconstructing
those
we're
actually
shifting
piers
to
get
the
lanes
and
in
those
locations.
C
C
This
is
the
first
one
here
at
East,
Falls,
Church
69.
This
is
the
existing
condition
where
you
actually
exit
here
in
a
one-lane
configuration.
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
you
can
see
that
we're
adding
the
orange
line
on
the
top
is
the
second
lane
that
we're
adding
at
that
inner
interchange
that
ramp
and
then
on.
C
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
the
same
idea
here
this
is
the
existing
configuration
at
exit
71
in
the
following
slide
shows
the
actual
two-lane
striping
that
we're
doing
off
there
with
some
improvements
of
that
off-ramp
in
general.
People
do
that
somewhat
today
during
rush
hour,
they
try
to
get
off
the
interstate,
but
this
will
definitely
improved
a
more
stacking
for
those
people
that
are
trying
to
get
off
at
glebe.
So
66
beyond
this
point
can
can
move
more
of
a
free
flow.
You
go
to
the
next
slide.
C
This
is
just
the
last
public
hearing
that
our
workshop
I
want
to
say
for
the
actual
bridge.
This
was
the
overall
rendering
that
we
showed
for
the
grade
separation.
Now
this
can
still
be
modified
even
further.
We're
looking
to
hire
a
design-build
team
to
to
improve
upon
these
aesthetics
and
coordination
with
the
public,
a
couple
of
things
that
you
see
here
that
have
been
changes,
part
of
the
project
you
could
see
the
lighting
across
the
bridge
that
actually
is
not
going
to
be
in
that
manner.
C
With
the
last
workshop
that
we
had
Nova
Parks
actually
came
to
the
table
and
said
that
they
would
maintain
other
types
of
lighting
on
the
bridge,
which
is
actually
in
rail
lighting
and
footpath
lighting.
That
is
a
nicer
aesthetic.
The
lighting
that
you
see
here
is
lighting.
That
Dominion
would
actually
maintain
four
VDOT,
since
we
don't
maintain
lighting,
but
it
really
doesn't
fit
it
within
the
aesthetics,
because
our
selection
is
pretty
traditional
and
this
is
more
of
a
contemporary
style.
C
So
the
rail
lighting
and
the
footpath
lighting
for
that
bridge
will
be
a
nice
addition,
as
we
continue
to
refine
this
design.
The
following
slide
is
actually
the
site
plan
for
the
WOD
again.
This
can
still
be
adjusted
based
on
our
design
builder.
If
people
don't
understand
the
design-build
process,
we
bring
the
design
up
to
about
a
30
percent
completion
stage
and
then
it's
up
to
the
design-builder
to
finish
that
design.
C
If
you
go
to
the
following
slide,
this
is
what
I
touched
upon
in
the
introduction.
This
might
have
been
something
we
didn't
present.
This
was
done
under
a
separate
NEPA
document
outside
the
widening,
but
we're
rolling
it
into
this
project.
This
is
actually
as
you
approach
route
7
heading
eastbound
on
66.
One
thing
I
want
to
point
out
with
this
is
the
reason
for
this
product.
C
This
improvement
is
that
we
wanted
to
provide
a
better
connection
to
the
metro
here
when
66
was
constructed,
it
was
constructed
actually
as
an
HOV
4
facility
when
it
opened,
and
there
was
access
to
the
Metro-
wasn't
necessarily
important
because
mostly
everyone
it,
but
inside
the
corridor
inside
the
beltway
was
already
traveling
at
a
very
high
carpool
rate.
What
this
does
is
it
provides
a
ramp
if
you
see
ramp
W
on
this
drawing
that
would
be
the
new
proposed
ramp
that
would
connect
the
off
ramp
to
the
existing
loop
ramp.
C
So,
if
you're
going
to
the
Metro,
you
don't
have
to
exit
off
now
make
a
right
on
seven
make
a
left
on
Haycock
make
a
left
on
Foster
strive
to
work.
Your
way
back
to
the
schools
into
the
Metro.
You
can
simply
just
get
off
at
that
ramp
to
ramp
connection.
Continue
on
straight
to
that
more
of
that
on
ramp
266.
That
also
acts
as
a
collector
and
distributor,
because
once
you
get
on
that,
there's
a
little
slip
off
ramp.
C
That
can
take
you
right
to
the
Metro,
so
this
will
be
an
improved
access
to
the
West
Falls
Church
Metro,
for
people
that
want
to
change
their
trip
into
a
Metro
trip,
and
actually
we
we
see
here
that
this
really
improves
the
p.m.
peak.
This
Metro
is
highly
used
in
the
evening
at
this
location,
so
this
is
a
great
improvement
that
we're
introducing
I'm
going
to
end
with
this
next
slide
is
our
project
schedule
the
multimodal
projects
are
underway.
We
are
31
days
out
from
getting
the
Express
Lanes
open
on
66.
C
We
are
also
doing
a
live
opening
tomorrow
of
the
price
proposals
for
the
widening,
so
that
will
be
a
very
high-level
look
at
who
will
be
awarded
this
project.
We
have
scored
the
technical
proposals
that
have
come
in
so
they
have
a
score,
and
then
we
get
a
price
proposal
and
obviously
the
low
price
gets
the
best
score.
C
Construction
will
begin
early
next
year
for
this
project.
We
plan
to
continue
tolling
during
rush
hour
during
construction,
in
the
way
that
we
work.
Those
plans
is
that
traffic
will
be
shifted
three
times
during
construction
in
order
to
set
expectations
on
how
we
have
the
tolling
calibrated
contractually.
We
have
the
eastbound
lane
for
the
project
opening
up
and
of
on
November
10th,
contractually
2020.
They
even
have
an
incentive
in
the
contract
if
they
can
get
it
up
or
get
it
opened
up
earlier.
C
The
project
itself
enlarge
is
October,
21,
2021
delivery
and
the
difference
between
that
is
a
having
the
travel
lane
open
up
in
advance.
So
there's
new,
you
know
mobility
through
the
corridor,
but
then
the
other
elements,
such
as
the
bridge,
the
sound
walls
and
other
elements,
will
then
be
happening
around
that
time
and
then
delivered
the
following
fall,
and
that
is
my
presentation
so
like
to
open
up
to
any
questions.
B
A
D
Hello:
everyone,
my
name,
is
Matthew
almond
and
with
the
firm
of
Walsh
Colucci
I'm
here
tonight,
representing
Rosalyn
the
applicant
for
the
Crystal
houses,
three
site
plan
project
get
the
first
slide
just
to
briefly
orient
you
to
the
site.
You
can
see
it
in
the
middle
of
this
slide
outlined
in
orange.
This
site
is
very
much
in
the
heart
of
the
route,
1
transit
corridor
adjacent
to
Crystal
City,
and
if
we
could
get
the
next
slide,
this
will
zoom
in
a
bit.
Here
you
see
the
two
block
site
area
of
site
plan,
13
site
plan.
D
It
was
just
never
feasible
to
build
the
underground
garages
for
each
of
the
two
buildings
with
the
relatively
low
amount
of
density.
Above
so
the
new
plan
takes
the
same
amount
of
density
and
re,
consolidates
that
into
a
single
building
footprint,
with
approximately
the
same
footprint
and
height
the
north
loft
building.
And
that's
what
you
see
generally
outlined
in
red
here
and
we'll
kind
of
show
you
that
in
a
future
slide.
D
So
here's
the
ground
floor
layout
of
the
proposed
building,
it's
located
at
the
corner
of
18th
Street
and
EADS
Street.
You
can
see
that
the
building
has
two
main
lobbies,
one
at
the
corner
of
18th
and
EADS.
We
call
this
the
metro
lobby
because
we
think
that's
where
residents
walking
to
and
from
Crystal
City
metro
will
be
most
likely
to
walk
in
and
out
of
the
building,
there's
also
a
lobby
on
the
opposite,
frontage
of
the
building
near
the
private
side
entrance
and
that's
on
the
left-hand
side
of
this
image
in
terms
of
vehicular
access.
D
We
think
in
the
proposed
location,
now
it'll
be
a
little
more
functional
for
folks
that
are
pulling
in
and
need
to
make
a
quick
stop
right.
At
that
front
entrance
we've
removed
a
lot
of
surface
parking
near
the
18th
Street
site
entrance
and
really
simplified
that
design
to
try
and
consolidate
turning
movements
and
eliminate
conflicts.
In
that
area.
We've
widened
the
sidewalk
along
18th
Street
in
response
to
comments
at
SPRC
from
6
feet
to
7
feet
and
we
think
that'll
be
an
improvement
near
the
Metro
lobby
entrance.
D
We
have
tinkered
with
the
balance
of
hardscaping
and
landscaping
to
better
honor
the
natural
desire
lines
of
pedestrians
walking
to
and
from
the
site
in
that
area,
and
then
it's
not
quite
shown
on
this
slide,
but
you'll
see
it
later.
We've
also
removed
quite
a
bit
of
surface
parking
on
the
southern
boundary
of
the
park
and
changed
the
way
that
this
internal
service
road
loops
around
the
park,
and
that
was
done
primarily
to
save
some
of
the
existing
mature
trees.
D
Next
slide,
please
just
very
quickly
to
give
you
a
sense
of
what's
there
today
versus
the
proposed
architecture.
This
top
left
image
is
the
corner
of
the
private
driveway
entrance
from
each
street
and
then
the
bottom
right
image
is
the
view
head-on
from
each
Street.
You
can
see
the
what
is
today
just
a
surface
parking
lot
in
front
of
an
existing
12
story
building
and
then
the
proposed
architecture.
D
From
the
same
two
vantage
points,
the
top
left
is
that
main
lobby
entrance
near
the
park
and
near
the
each
Street
entrance
and
then
the
bottom
image
is
that
whole
each
street
frontage-
and
you
can
see
how
the
architects
have
tried
to
work
with
dimensionality
colors
massing
to
try
and
break
up
that
rather
lengthy
facade.
So
I'm
gonna
turn
it
over
to
my
colleague
from
Wells
and
associates
who
will
actually
walk
you
through
the
components
of
the
transportation
study.
Thanks.
E
Hi
good
evening,
I'm
Mike
Penkovsky,
with
Wells
&
Associates,
we've
completed
the
multimodal
transportation
study
for
the
project.
The
T
ia
for
the
project
was
originally
done
with
the
2006
site
plan
and
they
included
a
total
of
10
intersections
when
the
site
plan
was
brought
back
in,
we
coordinated
with
the
staff,
and
they
requested
that
the
five
immediate
previous
study
intersections
be
included
in
the
update
for
this
study.
The
analysis
showed
similar
results
to
the
2006
study,
as
well
as
similar
traffic
volumes
at
at
the
surrounding
intersections.
E
E
Here
summarizes
all
the
existing
multimodal
facilities
as
far
as
transit
facilities.
Excuse
me,
it
highlights
the
bus
lines
in
the
area,
there's
for
Capital
Bikeshare
stations
within
a
block
of
the
site,
totaling
fifty-six
docks
and
then
there's
also
multiple
car
sharing
opportunities
nearby
and
also
highlighted
on
here
from
the
Metro
access.
Is
it's
a
700
foot
walk
across
the
Eids
18th
signalized
intersection,
there's
pedestrian
countdowns
marked
crosswalks
on
all
quadrants
of
the
intersection,
the
northern
sidewalk
to
the
Crystal
City
metro,
vehicular,
access
to
the
site,
there's
multiple
points
of
access
serving
the
property.
E
These
two
highlighted
here
are
the
two
closest
to
the
proposed
building,
EADS
and
20th,
and
the
private
driveway
is
a
signalized
intersection,
18th
Street
and
the
northern
driveway
there
today
is
a
right
in
right
out
driveway.
The
county
has
a
plan
in
place
to
remove
the
median
there
and
create
new
buffered
bike
lanes
along
that
section,
which
will
allow
for
full
movement
to
occur
at
that
intersection
in
the
future.
E
Mentioned
is
not
going
to
change,
go
into
the
next
slide.
What
you'll
see
is
the
18th
Street
section
here
shown
is
with
the
removal
of
the
median
and
a
highlight
on
the
west
side
of
the
or
the
left
side
of
the
exhibit
the
wider
sidewalks
that
meet
the
sector
plan
minimums
on
south
EADS
it'll
be
a
six-foot
sidewalk
with
a
six-foot
landscape
buffer.
E
Pier
summarizes
all
the
pedestrian
connections
through
the
site
and
on
this
slide
here,
you
can
also
see
the
improvements
on
the
west
side
of
the
pair
of
the
southern
side
of
the
park.
Previously
we
had
parking
front
in
all
the
way
down
from
where
the
pool
is
to
this
southern
portion
of
the
building
along
EADS.
This
design
only
puts
parking
closer
to
the
pool
and
preserves
all
the
trees
and
creates
more
of
a
buffer
between
the
existing
building
and
the
driveway.
E
Also,
as
this
project
is
going
through,
we
took
a
look
at
other
locations,
not
specifically
within
this
quadrant,
of
where
the
new
building
will
be
to
and
look
for,
opportunities
to
put
new
ad
a
ramps
and
new
connections
and
really,
if
there's
two
or
three
new
ramps
being
put
in
so
here's
a
shot
of
the
section,
the
typical
section
along
EADS.
It
highlights
the
six-foot
planting
strip
and
the
sidewalk,
and
then
the
you'll
have
a
variation
in
the
building
zone
depending
on
the
stoops.
E
E
E
That
brings
us
to
a
total
of
486
for
for
a
crystal
house
block
ratio
of
0.9
one
and
an
overall
site
plan
ratio
of
0.9
seven
as
far
as
bicycle
parking
will
will
meet
the
code
requirement.
Currently
we
have
109
shown
that
includes
a
hundred
and
one
in
the
secure
bike
room
on
the
p1
level
of
the
garage,
as
well
as
four
racks
at
each
of
the
main
lobby.
Entrances.
E
Here
summarizes
the
on
street
parking
availability
within
a
block
of
the
site,
excluding
the
six
zone,
a
parking
and
the
four
highlighted
in
blue
for
taxis.
We
have
approximately
eighty
four
spaces
on
street
available
for
the
public.
The
TMP
is
going
to
include
physical
facilities,
improvements
that
include
the
bicycle
parking
that
we
just
mentioned:
streetscape
improvements
on
18th
and
EADS
and
traffic
signal
improvements.
E
There
will
be
a
commitment
to
a
parking
management
plan,
typical
promotions
and
pilot
and
services,
including
smart
trip
cards
for
new
employees
and
Lee
sees
and
and
there
will
be
performance
and
monitoring
as
well
that'll
be
required.
So
that's.
That
concludes
the
presentation.
So,
if
you
have
any
questions
for
us,
we'll
be
happy
to
answer
them.
F
Hello,
my
name
is
Joanne
Gabor
I'm,
with
DES
and
I'm
here
to
present
the
Crystal
houses.
Three.
This
is
site
plan
thirteen.
It
is
a
major
site
plan
amendment
the
applicant
covered
this
fairly
well,
so
some
of
these
I'm
gonna
skip
over
in
reference
to
time.
I
think
we
all
know
where
the
site
is.
It
is
at
the
southwest
corner
of
18th
and
EADS
Street.
It's
shown
here
in
the
solid
white
polygon.
F
As
mentioned
the
site
plan.
13
actually
comprises
the
two
blocks:
it's
the
Crystal
Towers
block
and
then
the
Crystal
houses
block,
so
the
block
just
north
of
18th
and
a
block
south
of
18th-
and
this
is
the
combination
of
this-
is
another
facet
of
the
site
plan.
Thirteen
site
plan
amendment.
Just
to
refresh
your
memory,
the
2006
approval
was
to
four-story
buildings.
It
was
originally
approved
with
247
units
and
then
administrative
Lehrer,
Vives
to
252
units.
F
They
were
total
of
588
underground
parking
spaces,
and
this
was
supporting
some
new
spaces
for
the
new
buildings
and
then
replacing
some
of
the
surface
spaces.
So
some
of
the
existing
residents
in
the
existing
buildings
would
then
Park
in
the
new
garage.
This
lt'sa
would
allow
the
lot
just
south
of
22nd
to
be
removed
from
the
site
plan,
because
currently,
that
lot
is
used
by
some
of
the
residents
of
the
Crystal
houses
complex
the
applicant
at
that
time
also
agreed
to
improve
streetscape
around
the
entire
houses
block
dedication
of
the
streets.
F
There
also
was
a
lead
score
of
26
and
again
this
is
still
active
because
it
has
been
extended
by
the
General
Assembly
the
current
proposal.
This
is
within
the
Crystal
City
sector
plan.
They
are
maintaining
the
existing
zoning
of
RA
615
and,
as
was
mentioned,
it's
252
units
now
in
one
building,
so
it's
five
storeys
with
a
60-foot
height,
the
parking
ratio
is
0.9
one
spaces
per
unit
for
the
block
and
then
0.9
seven
spaces
per
unit
for
the
entire
site
plan.
F
The
only
modifications
requested
are
for
a
reduced
parking
ratio,
as
mentioned
than
a
28%
compact
parking
ratio
within
the
new
proposed
garage
and
again
just
to
walk
us
through
the
streets.
Looking
at
18th
Street,
they
are
maintaining
the
existing
curb
location.
The
sector
plan
does
call
for
a
six
foot
minimum
clear
sidewalk.
They
are
proposing
a
seven
foot,
clear,
sidewalk
along
the
building
frontage,
and
this
is
again
mentioned
numerous
times
during
SPRC
do
the
volume
and
pedestrians
they
would
like
to
see
an
increased
sidewalk,
and
so
that's
how
we
know
seven
feet
instead
of
six.
F
This
does
meet
all
the
crystal
city
sector
planning
guidelines
for
the
clear
sidewalks
and
in
the
overall
streetscape
width.
As
mentioned,
there
is
a
county
project
along
18th
Street
that
will
modify
the
travel
lanes
and
this
will
include
the
buffered
bike
lane
and
the
removal
of
the
median
that
exists
today,
and
this
is
from
EADS
to
fern
Street
on
South
East
Street.
It's
a
lot
of
the
same
scenario.
They
are
maintaining
the
existing
curb
location.
So
there
is
no
proposed
changes
to
the
street
section.
F
There
will
be
a
proposed
six
foot,
clear
sidewalk
and
there
are
going
to
be
two
small
pinch
points
at
the
main
lobby
at
20th
Street
that
do
not
inhibit
the
six
foot
clear
sidewalk
and
the
pinch
points
about
point
five
feet
in
so
they
don't
have
technically
the
18
foot
street
scape,
it's
17
foot
5
inches,
but
that
entire
area
is
paved.
So
it's
not
going
to
inhibit
or
diminish
anyone's
ability
to
walk
through
there.
It's
more
just
something.
F
The
proposed
parking
garage
is
beneath
the
proposed
building.
It's
two
levels:
the
parking
garage
will
be
utilized
by
residents
that
proposed
the
existing
buildings
and
it
is
to
be
accessed
from
the
internal
roadway
system.
I
think
we've
mentioned
the
parking
issues
a
couple
times
and
again,
they're
also
the
surface
parking
will
be
reconfigured
a
little,
so
some
spaces
are
going
to
remain,
some
will
be
restriped
and
there
is
going
to
be
a
little
reconfiguration
to
have
some
new
spaces
based
on
the
geometry.
F
The
bicycle
parking.
There
are
101
residential
spaces
within
the
garage
and
then
the
e
residential
spaces
around
the
site,
grouped
at
the
corner
of
18th
and
EADS,
and
then
20th
and
EADS,
and
this
does
again
meet
the
site
plan
standards
and
then
they
do
of
loading
docks
and
they
are
accessed
from
the
internal
roadway
as
well.
F
So,
in
conclusion,
staff
does
support
this
project
with
the
conditions
that
are
shown
in
the
county
board
report.
A
couple
items
to
note
is
when
I
did
is
presentation.
There
was
still
some
discussions
about
the
installation,
the
in
building
Wireless
since
I
crafted
this.
There
have
been
more
discussions
with
the
applicant
and
I'd
say
conceptually.
The
applicant
does
agree
to
this,
but
we're
still
doing
some
looking
into
how
it
would
play
out
in
the
building.
F
So
it's
something
that's
still
being
discussed,
but
the
applicant
and
staff
are
both
working
toward
a
solution
that
will
make
everyone
satisfied.
There
also
was
discussion
about
a
public
easement
to
permit
mid
block
access
to
the
park
from
south
fern
street.
This
is
something
that,
in
the
2006
approval,
it
was
just
by
condition,
and
since
that
time
we
are
now
looking
more
for
an
easement.
Something
again
since
I
put
this
together.
The
applicant
is
now
conceptually
on
board
with
providing
an
easement,
but
there's
some
concern
and
we
want
to
make
sure
the
language
works.
F
So
if
there's
some
construction
or
they
need
to
make
some
changes
internally
to
the
site
that
they're
not
going
to
be
they're
not
going
to
be
violating
the
terms
of
the
easement,
you
know.
So
if
they
do
some
construction
on
a
sidewalk
for
a
little
bit,
you
know
a
couple
days
so
technically
the
axis
would
be
blocked
for
a
couple
days.
It's
something
that
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
the
Spirit
is
there,
but
that
the
terminology
and
the
language
is
written
appropriately.
F
And
so
that's
something
we're
also
going
to
be
working
with
the
applicant
between
now
and
Planning,
Commission
and
County
Board.
To
make
sure
that
everyone's
on
board
with
the
language
but
again
conceptually
I,
would
say
we're
all
on
board
with
these
two
conditions,
but
the
language
does
still
need
to
be
tweaked.
A
little
bit
and
with
that
I
will
take
any
questions.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
G
G
F
So
just
so,
everyone
can
see
what
we're
talking
about
is
today.
So
this
is
the
30
1,600
square
foot
park
that
will
be
dedicated
and
if
you
can
see
there's
this,
we
have
these
couple
red
lines,
one
at
this
location.
Then
we
also
have
one
here
so
and
also
there's
one
here,
so
we
are
looking
to
have
access
through
the
site.
This
is
all
going
to
be.
This
is
all
in
private
property.
It's
not
in
public
right
away,
so
I
would
say.
The
big
difference
is
because
this
is
a
pedestrian
access
and
also
it's
private.
F
So
it's
not
impeding
construction
or
walkability
in
the
public
right
away.
So
the
easement
language
is
what
we
just
want
to
make
sure
satisfies
everyone.
Yes,
if
like
for
the
Park
easement,
for
example,
we
have
some
language
in
there
that
says
portions
of
the
park
and
again
I'm
going
to
paraphrase
portions
of
the
park,
maybe
corned
off
our
clothes
temporarily
for
construction
or
utility
upgrades
or
something
of
that
nature.
G
G
What
would
make
it
hard
to
allow
for
restriction
I'm
just
trying
to
I'm
trying
to
understand
if
there's
any
conceptual
difference
between
having
an
easement
that
could
be
closed,
sometimes
on
the
one
hand,
and
a
public
right-of-way
that
can
be
closed
off?
On
the
other
hand,
it
would
seem
harder
in
terms
of
it
would
seem
like
a
bigger
deal
to
close
off
a
sidewalk.
That's
on
the
public
right-of-way,
what
to
close
off
an
easement
that
is
already
private
property
and
the
public
has
limited
interest
in
so.
F
I
guess
the
one
thing
also
to
notice:
if
they're
closures
within
the
public
right
away,
then
permits
need
to
be
obtained.
So
you
know
if
you
were
gonna
close
the
sidewalk.
You
know
for
two
weeks
to
put
it
in
gas
line
or
something
you
would
come
to
the
county
and
you
would
apply
for
transportation
right
away,
permit
and
then
you'd
provide
a
plan.
You'd
provided
I
mean
it's
a
traffic
plan.
We
would
review
it,
we
would
approve
it
and
then
you
would
have
a
permit
for
a
specific
duration.
F
So
in
this
instance,
because
this
is
private
and
it
would
just
be
easier-
that's
not
something
that
the
applicant
would
be
required
to
do
so.
This
is
really
probably
the
only
mechanism
we
have
to
have
some
sort
of
you
know,
checks
and
balances.
If
you
will
to
make
sure
that
a
walkway
easement
through
the
site,
it
was
honored
I,
don't
know
if
the
applicant
wants
to
add
anything
to
that
or
not
okay,.
H
I
A
question
about
the
enhanced
TDM
that
was
going
to
be
provided
by
the
applicant
I
believe
in
the
staff
report.
It
says
that
there
would
be
an
enhanced
TDM
in
the
form
of
additional
subsidy
for
car
share
bike
share
or
transit,
but
the
applicants
presentation
appeared
to
mention
like
a
one-time
metro
card
or
one
year
bike
or
car
share
membership.
Is
that
what's
it's?
That
is
that,
what's
intended?
No.
F
The
condition
does
have
our
if
you
will
standard
enhanced
residential
TDM,
which
is
the
option
of
the
a
car
share
like
share
or
MetroCard,
with
sixty
five
dollars
of
ser
media
for
every
unit,
less
the
one-to-one
in
this
instance.
It's
ninety
four
units
specifically,
and
that
would
be
for
thirty
years
and
then
obviously
the
benefit
goes
first
to
the
folks
that
do
not
contract
for
a
parking
space
and
that
would
be
offered
to
the
other.
So
that's.
F
I
I'll
read
it
and
see
if
there's
any
other
question
and
the
other
question
that
I
have
is
what
can
we
look
at
the
18th
Street,
the
removing
the
center
median
for
the
the
movement?
Is
that
going
to
detract
from
pedestrian
safety
to
have
vehicles
able
to
turn
both
left
and
right
out
of
that
fat,
driveway.
I
H
F
So
this
is
very
hard
to
read
at
this
scale,
but
this
shows
the
18th
Street
plan.
The
driveway
we're
discussing
is
right
at
this
location.
I
would
say
the
reality
is
that
we
have
many
locations
where
there
are
driveways
that
it's
not
just
right
in
right
out.
You
know.
Pedestrians
obviously
need
to
be
cognizant
as
they
are
crossing
an
active
driveway
to
make
sure
that
they're
not
going
to
get.
You
know
any
conflicts
with
cars
and
pedestrians.
It's
something
that
you
know
we're
looking
at
it
from
we're.
Introducing
the
buffered
bike
lanes.
F
We
are
gonna,
have
some
parking
right
along
here.
The
bike
share
station
is
going
to
move
a
little,
and
then
we
are
going
to
have
the
bike
lane
come
across
right
at
each
street,
so
that
the
right
turn
pocket
will
minimize
any
conflicts
with
the
bicyclists
going
through
on
18th
Street
and
the
folks
turning
right
on
Eid.
So
it's
you
know
it's
definitely
a
balance,
but
it's
something
that,
as
a
county
via
the
calendar,
this
is
a
county
project
that
was
in
the
works
before
this
even
came
before
us.
Okay,.
B
Brought
up
during
SPRC
the
possibility
that
our
opinion
that
we
should
be
requiring
the
applicant
to
upgrade
the
protected
bike
lane
lane
along
EADS
require
them
to
make
improvements
to
the
pedestrian
streetscape
when
it
doesn't
meet
standards
B
require
them
to
make
upgrades
to
the
street
trees
when
it
doesn't
meet
the
sort
of
facilities
that
we're
trying
to
install
at
this
point-
and
we
got
some
public
comment
via
email
yesterday
to
that
same
effect-
was
that
considered
or
discussed
with
the
applicant
at
all
during
this
process.
So.
F
It's
something
so
the
buffered
bike
land
today
in
this
location
is
about
a
mile
long
and
now
extends
from
12th
Street
on
the
northern
end,
all
the
way
down
to
Fort
Scott,
Street
Drive,
sorry
I,
don't
remember
which
one!
So
it's
about
16
blocks
it's
a
mile
long
and
it's
something
that
you
know
from
a
county
perspective.
We
did
it
as
a
pilot.
B
Just
want
to
say
I
for
one
feel
like
protected
bike
lanes
that
are
protected
by
actual
curbs
protected
bike
lanes
that
eliminate
the
conflict
with
buses
at
bus
stops
are
not
pilot
material
anymore.
There
are
nack
toen
Dorst,
they
have
gone
through
multiple
revisions,
they
are
being
installed
in
tons
of
cities
across
the
United
States,
and
we
don't
say
we
don't
want
this
sidewalk
widened,
because
the
sidewalk
one
block
down
you
know
is
narrow
and
we
want
consistency.
B
J
I
Well,
I
need
to
provide
a
motion.
I
move
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommend
that
the
County
Board
adopt
the
attached
ordinance
approving
an
amendment
to
site
plan
number
13
to
permit
construction
of
a
multi-family
building
for
up
to
252
dwelling
units
with
modifications
for
parking
ratio
and
compact
parking
subject
to
the
conditions
attached.
The
ordinance
also
I
would
recommend
that
we,
including
the
motion
that
the
letter
will
express
the
transportation
commission's
support
for
enhanced
bicycle
and
pedestrian
facilities
along
18th
Street.
B
Right
we
have
an
amendment
that
is
seconded.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
amendment
all
right,
all
those
in
favor
of
the
amendment,
that's
unanimous.
Any
discussion
on
the
amended
motion
before
we
vote
on
the
final
motion
as
amended
all
those
in
favor
of
the
motion
as
amended.
All
right.
That's
that's
it.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
L
Mr.
chairman
and
members
of
the
Commission's,
letting
you
know,
influence
disclosure,
my
firm
has
worked
a
little
bit
on
this
project
as
well
as
exclusively
in
the
project
for
item
number,
seven.
So
in
the
interest
of
avoiding
the
appearance
of
any
concrete
of
interest,
I'm
going
to
accuse
myself
in
the
discussion
of
this
and,
of
course,
the
vote
on
it
as
well
and
for
item
7.
M
M
So
tonight's
presentation
will
be
an
abbreviated
version
of
the
staff
RTA
or
request
to
advertise
presentation
that
was
provided
to
the
Commission
in
October.
We'll
also
include
a
few
updates
occurring
since
last
month
and
as
an
overall
structure,
we'll
follow
the
outline
shown
here
to
establish
the
appropriate
framing
for
this
presentation.
M
Our
look
at
the
study
background
in
context
begins
really
with
the
purpose
of
the
study,
and
so
the
study
began
in
2016
when
the
county
received
three
formal
requests
to
change
the
general
land-use
plan
or
the
glup
amendments
for
a
budding
sites,
just
north
of
Virginia
Square.
As
with
all
special
glove
studies,
the
primary
purpose
is
to
determine
whether
the
requested
glove
change
is
within
the
realm
of
consideration.
M
The
study
also
examines
the
relationship
between
the
requested
glove
changes
and
other
county
policies
such
as
those
relating
to
transportation,
so
located
just
outside
of
Virginia
square.
The
nearly
10
acre
study
area
includes
land
parcels
in
the
northwest,
quadrant
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
Road
intersection
in
terms
of
the
actual
glove
change
requests.
The
American
Legion
site
is
requesting
a
change
from
service,
commercial
and
semi
public
to
medium
office.
M
Apartment
Hotel,
11th,
Street
development
assemblage
is
requesting
a
change
from
service
commercial
to
medium
office,
apartment
and
hotel,
while
a
change
from
semi-public
to
medium
residential
has
been
requested
for
the
YMCA
site,
and
so
as
a
glove
study.
Plus
staff
actually
expanded.
The
study
area
in
this
case
to
include
the
balance
of
commercially
zoned
properties,
fronting
Washington
Boulevard,
to
provide
a
more
holistic
approach
to
our
analysis
and
planning
and
so
beginning
in
October
of
2016.
The
main
form
for
the
special
glup
study
plus
process
involved.
M
Several
elements
of
the
study
certainly
received
relatively
more
attention
than
others,
as
detailed
in
the
October
staff
report
for
the
request
to
advertise
those
subject.
Areas
primarily
includes
circulation
and
access
options,
parking
open
space,
cultural
resources,
building
Heights
and
development
densities
associated
with
various
Club
designations,
and
so
in
moving
on
to
the
glop
and
master
transportation
plan
overviews.
M
Next,
we
will
just
present
just
a
few
highlights
from
the
lrpc
review.
Focusing
primarily
on
a
summary
of
the
modeling
analysis,
and
so
in
terms
of
the
scenario
modeling
staff
first
had
to
develop
a
framework
to
really
pull
together
circulation,
open
space
and
building
placement.
That
would
help
inform
the
development
of
3d
form
and
massing
models
here,
and
we,
after
going
through
a
number
of
iterations,
which
we
saw
back
in
October,
we
ultimately
arrived
at
a
relatively
preferred
scenario
that
then
became
the
foundation
for
developing
concept
plan
and
glop
and
master
transportation
plan
recommendations.
M
So
during
those
meetings
there
was
great
attention
paid
to
exploring
alternative
ways
in
which
the
public,
realm
and
circulation
could
lay
out.
With
just
a
few
of
those
examples
provided
here
and
while
challenged
by
lrpc
members
and
members,
many
members
of
the
community
staff
is
recommending
that
the
area
street
grid
be
enhanced
by
introducing
through
block
connectivity
for
pedestrians,
bicyclists
and
vehicles
across
the
study
area,
while
also
reserving
great
flexibility
in
the
future
design
and
exact
treatment
of
such
connections.
M
Staffs
preference,
our
recommendations
for
adding
this
level
of
connectivity
is
certainly
grounded
in
the
county's
master
transportation
plan
policy.
Guidance
for
such
conditions.
Furthermore,
enhancing
the
grid
and
expanding
Street
connectivity
here
are
also
being
recommended
for
the
range
of
benefits
associated
with
providing
such
facilities.
M
More
recently,
the
county
has
implemented
such
policies
by
achieving
new
streets,
Oran
Street
connections
with
redevelopment
across
the
county
in
many
instances
as
a
result
of
prior
County
at
that
plans,
but
there
have
also
been
instances
where
we've
achieved
new
connections
in
unplanned
circumstances
as
well
beyond
the
public
realm.
The
other
key
focus
of
the
lrpc
discussions
involved.
M
M
Guiding
principles
overall
can
really
be
best
to
be
thought
of
as
overarching
aspirational
goals
or
big
ideas
that
we'd
like
to
achieve
with
redevelopment
here
and
so
they've
been
framed
and
presented
accordingly.
One
update
I
did
want
to
point
out
last
month.
This
commission
had
some
feedback
and
comments
about
Washington
Boulevard
and
to
the
extent
to
which
the
plan
did
or
didn't
sort
of
speak
to
the
future
vision.
So
we
did
have
principle
four
established
at
that
time
and
thinking
through
further.
M
We
have
modified
some
of
the
text,
the
caption
text,
to
really
speak
to
the
potential
for
on
street
parking
to
perhaps
be
introduced
as
a
feature
in
the
future
streetscape
designs
in
order
to
help
provide
that
buffer
between
the
pedestrians
on
the
sidewalk
and
passing
traffic
on
the
street
and
points
to
this
example
shown
here
along
Columbia
Pike
with
Penrose
square,
as
perhaps
just
one
precedent.
So
that's
an
update.
M
We
wanted
to
point
out
the
circulation
of
public
space
map
really
seen
here
has
been
is
I,
think
unchanged
since
last
last
meeting,
perhaps
but
for
a
modest
wordsmithing
of
a
label
here
or
there,
and
so
you'll
recall
that
the
recommended
integrator
addition
of
additional
connectivity
is
generally
reflected
in
terms
of
location
via
the
orange
lines
and
arrows
accommodating
for
vehicular
access,
pedestrian
and
bicycle
access.
Again.
M
The
idea
that,
in
the
future,
with
future
development
proposals,
there
would
be
the
broad
latitude
in
terms
of
defining
the
exact
detailing
the
type,
the
topologies
of
the
streets,
the
detailing
of
the
streets
and
so
on.
This
next
slide.
This
spread
here
is
actually
greatly
revised
from
the
version
that
we
presented
a
month
ago.
M
Responding
to
comments
such
as
precedent.
Examples
should
illustrate
streets
that
are
perhaps
narrower
than
the
55
foot
example
that
we
had
provided
as
opposed
to
examples.
We
had
last
month
that
maybe
went
up
to
70
feet
between
building
phases,
and
so,
in
addition
to
that,
there
was
we've
received
input
about
you
know,
perhaps
there's
their
shared
street
opportunities
or
pedestrian
priority
zone
opportunities,
and
so
we've
included
some
additional
precedent.
M
Images
in
the
bottom
row
to
that
effect,
and
so
out
of
all
these
examples,
the
only
one
that
was
really
present
in
the
previous
draft
is
the
one
the
ninth
Street
example
at
the
upper
left
and
so
on.
October
21st.
We
had
presented
the
request
to
advertise
to
the
board.
They
did
authorize
advertisement
of
public
earrings
for
November
the
in
their
discussion.
M
And
so
what
we
see
on
the
left
in
the
yellow
lines
and
arrows
are
generally
what
the
existing
routes
are.
Today
for
someone
accessing
the
YMCA
site
and
compared
with
the
image
on
the
right,
where
we've
generally
overlaid,
some
of
the
the
general
locations
of
the
additional
Street
connectivity
and
so
I.
Think.
A
couple
important
points
here
is
that,
under
today's
routing,
everyone
accessing
the
YMCA,
particularly
by
automobile,
needs
to
use
13th
Street
for
at
least
some
part
of
that
trip
with
redevelopment
and
with
the
recommended
concept.
M
One
of
the
potential
new
access
points
for
potential
development
on
the
Y
site,
as
well
as
the
11th
Street
development
site,
could
be
off
of
Kirkwood.
That
would
provide
the
opportunity
to
provide
another
access
point
as
an
alternative
to
needing
to
access
13th
Street
to
the
Y,
and
you
see
several
other
recommended
locations
for
connectivity
that
could
also
collectively
provide
different
options,
other
options
and
potentially
result
in
an
instance
where
less
YMCA
visitors
are
actually
using
the
13th
Street
to
get
to
that
amenity.
M
The
necessary
infrastructure
to
add
a
left
turn
arrow
if,
in
fact,
future
study
and
monitoring
of
that
intersection
warrants
it
and
then.
Finally,
to
conclude,
the
presentation,
just
a
few
notes
about
the
the
glove
and
MTP
recommendations,
so
in
terms
of
the
General
Land
Use,
Plan,
recommendations,
action,
one
and
two
to
add
note
27
to
the
glop
map
that
makes
reference
to
the
adopted
study
document
and
action.
M
Two
to
amend
the
ball
family
cemetery
from
service
commercial
to
semi-public
staff
is
recommending
that
those
actions
be
approved
in
November
and
the
other
three
actions
that
speak
to
the
potential
consideration
of
either
medium
office,
apartment,
hotel
or
low
office
apartment
Hotel
designations,
be
something
that
be
taken
into
consideration
with
prospective
future
site
plan
and
rezoning
applications
relatedly,
as
we
typically
do
with
our
special
bluff
studies.
The
sort
of
concluding
milestone
of
that
study
is
to
request
that
the
board
authorize
advertisement
of
future
public
hearings
for
those
subject,
sites
and
so
item.
B
N
There
are
a
few
issues
that
we
need
that
need
to
be
addressed
relating
to
the
latest
version
of
the
study
document
released
a
day
or
so
ago,
but
only
one
of
them
is
transportation
related.
So
I'll
keep
my
comments
to
that
particular
issue.
That
issue
relates
to
the
circulation
concept
map
in
the
study
and
the
reference
references
to
it
in
the
study
document,
which
lays
out
some
fairly
broad
connectivity
and
transportation
modal
goal
goals,
which
have
been
the
subject
of
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
discussion
lately.
N
First,
just
taking
into
account
the
topography,
property
boundaries
and
likely
the
development
sequencing.
We
know
that
the
suggested
locations
are
just
not
feasible
in
the
real
world
and
we
understand
that
these
are
not
supposed
to
be
hard
and
fast
location
recommendations,
but
rather
the
principles
that
are
supposed
to
guide
our
design
teams
in
the
future,
which
we
are
totally
on
board
with
the
crux
of
the
issue
comes
down
not
to
whether
or
not
there
should
be
north,
south,
east
and
west
connectivity
through
the
block.
N
Currently,
there
is
a
recommendation
that
a
high-volume,
large
scale,
automobile
connection
north-south
through
the
block,
joining
Washington,
Boulevard
and
13th
Street,
as
well
as
a
significant
automobile
oriented
Street,
east-west
through
the
center
of
the
block
for
this
County
policy
des
staff
working
on
the
study,
who
are
not
political
of
a
totally
objective,
objective
and
data-driven
view
of
13th
Street
as
a
transportation
resource
having
an
opinion.
We
understand
and
respect,
however,
I
believe
the
community
who
I
do
not
speak
for
and
the
applicants
in
this
situation
are
aligned
on
this
point.
N
A
high
volume,
vehicular
connection
and
roads
of
the
size
proposed
really
don't
reflect
any
of
the
stakeholders,
thoughts
of
what
is
appropriate
here,
pedestrian
and
bike
connectivity
through
the
block
with
limited
vehicular
access
roads
that
do
not
encourage
traffic
through
the
block,
but
rather
provide
access
into
the
block
and
planned
open
space.
Concepts
are
universally
desired
by
everyone
involved,
except
for
professional
staff.
N
Doing
otherwise
seems
inappropriate
in
a
singular
specific
situation:
smaller,
auto
access
streets
and
safer
and
greener
pedestrian
and
bike
connectivity
all
seemed
to
us
at
least
to
be
more
in
line
with
the
vision
for
this
block
by
the
applicants
and
the
neighbors.
We
maintain
that
there
should
be
flexibility
in
this
regard
to
allow
for
either
auto
and/or
bike
and
pedestrian
connectivity
through
the
site,
and
that
this
needs
to
be
identified,
specifically
in
any
recommendation
from
the
Transportation
Commission
to
the
County
Board.
Thank
you.
O
Good
evening,
everyone,
my
name,
is
Nia
Bagley
and
I
am
a
neighbor.
I
live
at
the
corner
of
North
Monroe
and
Washington
Boulevard
I'm.
Also,
president
of
Boston
Virginia
square
Civic,
Association
I
have
given
mr.
best
our
written
comments,
so
I'm
going
to
go
through
those
BBS
CA
has
many
concerns
about
the
proposed
addition
of
streets
in
the
study
area,
particularly
those
which
would
connect
Washington
Boulevard
to
north
13th
Street.
We
also
oppose
any
changes
to
the
small
partial
blocks
of
north
12th,
Road
and
North
Kansas
Street,
which
are
part
of
this
study.
O
Throughout
the
lrpc
process
in
which
we
participated,
we
have
repeatedly
expressed
concern
about
adding
to
cut
through
traffic
on
North
Monroe
Street
between
North
Quincy
and
Kirkwood
Road
cut
through
traffic
concerns
on
north
13th.
Street
are
nothing
new.
You
can
find
them
cited
33
years
ago
in
the
1984
Boston
Virginia
square
conservation
plan.
We
believe
new
tolling,
as
we
heard
from
Amanda
tonight
on
I
66,
which
will
start
in
just
a
little
bit
more
than
a
month,
will
force
even
more
traffic
to
Washington,
Boulevard
and,
consequently,
to
13th
Street
more
over
500
to
600.
O
New
seats
will
be
added
to
Washington
Lee
high
school
at
the
edge
Center
on
North
Quincy
at
the
end
of
13th
and
14th
streets
as
early
as
2020
and
the
future
of
the
buck
property
across
the
street
from
the
ED
Center
has
not
yet
been
decided,
but
will
likely
add
even
more
traffic
to
Quincy.
That
will
be
looking
for
a
faster
way
to
get
around
33
years
later,
with
driving
navigation
applications
like
Waze,
sending
more
drivers
to
13th
Street,
adding
new
streets
that
connect
it
from
Washington
Boulevard
is
simply
not
a
good
idea.
O
In
addition,
our
residents
are
concerned
that
adding
new
streets
versus
pedestrian
and
bike
connections
and
alleys
for
access
which
BVS
CA
has
supported
throughout
the
lrpc
process,
would
take
up
more
valuable
land
space.
Consequently,
adding
to
unprecedented
and
undesired
building
height
and
density
in
their
well-established
single-family
neighborhood.
We
continue
to
support
reasonable
and
responsible
growth
along
Washington
Boulevard,
but
request
your
very
careful
consideration
for,
and
support
of
our
neighborhood,
which,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
will
bear
the
brunt
of
any
changes
to
the
globe.
Thank
you.
P
There
is
a
lot
of
potential
here
to
realize
a
lot
of
goals
and
visions
that
the
county
has
for
the
county,
but
for
tonight,
I
want
to
limit
my
comments
on
the
few
limited
areas
of
tweaks.
That
I
think
the
plan
needs
to
really
reflect
the
vision
of
all
these
community
meetings.
We've
participated
in
and
they
do
dovetail
with
the
two
speakers
performing
I.
P
Think
you
know
it's
really
important
to
continue
to
press
on
these
cross
sections
so
that
we're
not
making
these
huge
roads
throughout
the
site
and
instead
really
challenge
ourselves
to
create
more
pedestrian
bike
friendly
connections.
In
a
campus
like
setting
to
reflect
what
we
have
at
you
know,
George
Mason
across
the
way,
I
feel
that's
much
more
appropriate
and
consistent
with
the
conversations
we've
had
in
the
community.
P
You
know
we
will
each
build,
maybe
24
feet
or
25
feet
of
a
50
foot
dimension,
but
you're
gonna
see
it
come
online
at
different
times.
So
how
do
we
work
together
and
put
you
know,
put
that
flexibility
in
the
plan,
because
otherwise
we
won't
be
able
to
go
forward
in
a
Phase
one
project
and,
lastly,
I
really
want
to.
You
know
remind
us
what
principle
one
is
evolving:
the
areas
automotive
oriented
development
pattern
into
a
pedestrian
oriented
of
mixed-use
place.
P
That
was
really
what
we
talked
about
in
a
lot
of
our
meetings
and
and
I.
Think
you've
been.
You
know
asked
by
the
Civic
Association
by
Ted,
on
behalf
of
the
web
team
and
by
myself
on
behalf
of
Apple
and
the
Legion,
to
really
help
us
really
challenge
staff
to
seeing
how
we
can
implement
that
here.
Thank
you.
D
We
to
think
that
the
addition
of
the
precedent,
images
and
some
of
the
language
clarifying
that
alleys
or
pedestrian
connections
might
be
the
appropriate
outcome,
for
some
of
these
sites
is
a
great
improvement
and
I
would
echo
the
comments
of
the
previous
speaker
about
the
need
to
work
together
and
find
interim
solutions
where
that's
appropriate
and
make
sure
that
each
site
is
it's
coming
online.
Is,
is
really
making
the
right
choice
for
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
that
balance
between
the
the
connection
and
the
adjacent
development
and
the
landscaping.
D
Q
Good
evening
my
name
is
Albert
Lewis
I
live
on
13th
Street,
then
a
relatively
short
stone's
throw
of
the
why
development
in
this
whole
block
I
also
lived
on
Edgewood
Street,
my
kids
walk
to
key
school.
They
were
at
Washington,
Lee,
high
school
HB
all
around
this
area
as
a
resident
of
this
block
I'm
extremely
concerned
by
this
increased
density.
Q
That's
going
to
be
placed
on
our
street
I've
watched
the
cut
through
traffic
grow
over
the
last
20
years
and
at
this
point,
we're
extremely
concerned
that
this
this
type
of
development
and
the
way
in
which
the
streets
are
designed
are
going
to
increase
the
volume
to
make
it
much
more
uncomfortable.
Now,
residential
neighbourhood
depends
on
cars.
We
have
to
have
cars
to
go
to
soccer
practice
to
even
drive
to
the
giant
cross
the
way.
Sometimes,
if
you
have
a
97
year
old
mother,
like
mine,
you
need
to
have
your
car.
Q
You
can't
go
walking
or
riding
a
bike.
We're
very
concerned
that
by
eliminating
and
some
of
these
principles,
where
they're
destroying
the
surface
parking
for
underground
parking,
you're
eliminating
the
use
of
our
residential
neighborhood,
we're
very
concerned
about
the
through
traffic
that
they
were
talking
about
before
the
the
surface
parking
on
Washington
Boulevard,
Washington
Boulevard
is
a
very
major
throughput
street
and
if
we're
going
to
slow
down
Washington
Boulevard
we're
going
to
have
more
traffic
there,
I
keep
I
worry
about
it.
I
cross
that
to
go
walk
to
the
Metro.
Q
It
takes
a
little
bit
another
five
minutes
because
of
the
heavy
volume
on
Washington
Boulevard
that
Street.
It
seems
to
me
that
the
throughput
is
something
that
should
be
maximized
and
if
we
start
having
people
cutting
off
and
going
into
parking
garages
and
so
forth,
it
will
be
a
much
it
will
put
a
burden
on
that
Street,
which
will
will
redound
to
the
detriment
of
our
community.
In
the
addition,
elimination,
all
the
surface
parking
will
kill
off
the
small
businesses
that
are
there
like
the
Rockland's
would
not
exist.
Q
If
you
didn't
have
the
surface
parking,
you
look
at
the
mellah
tang
when
you
drive
along
you'll,
see
a
little
sign
that
says:
go
across
to
the
American
Legion
parking
lot,
so
you
can
park
because
you're
not
going
to
go
into
the
underground
parking
underneath
melih
thing.
It's
important
for
a
residential
community
to
have
service
commercial
available.
Q
The
questions
is
what
traffic
volume
is
appropriate
for
a
residential
neighborhood,
our
street
many
parts
of
it
do
not
have
side
walks.
Often
it's
one
way
start
cars
will
stop
and
to
let
one
other
car
go
through.
That's
not
that
requires
it's,
not
a
large
street.
That
is
easy
for
cut
through
traffic,
and
for
that
reason
I
ask
that
you
know
you
look
after
this.
I
haven't
I
just
found
out
about
this.
You
guys
are
protecting
me.
I'm
a
resident
I
depend
on
you
and
I
commend
you
for
your
work.
Thank
you.
R
You
know
two
questions.
Yes,
the
last
speaker
raises
the
question
about
pedestrian
traffic
on
13th
Street,
and
you
raise
that
in
yours.
Your
talk
to,
can
you
confirm
that?
Can
you
confirm
whether
this
is
a
major
pedestrian
route
for
Washington,
Lee,
High,
School,
well,
I?
Think
from
areas
to
the
east
I.
O
R
Perhaps
the
last
gentleman
could
confirm
whether
that's
that's
the
case.
Okay,
second
question:
is
you
express
the
number
of
concerns
in
your
letter,
but
I
didn't
I,
don't
recall
seeing
any
specific
recommendations.
The
Association
had
four
directed
towards
us
in
terms
of
recommending
that
the
board
do
something
different
from
what's
in
the
report?
Is
there
are
there
any
recommendations
you
have
for
us
to
consider
when
we
consider
our
well.
R
O
Along
we
have
opted
instead
to
support
pedestrian
alley,
smaller
streets
that
wouldn't
necessarily
support
big-time
traffic
as
ways
to
get
in
and
around.
Obviously,
you're
gonna
have
to
have
emergency
vehicle
access
and
things
like
that,
but
not
only
to
spare
13th
street
from
additional
traffic.
But
the
bigger
concern
too,
for
residents
was
if
we
use
land
for
larger
streets
than
the
heights
and
densities
are
going
to
go
up,
which
they
have
not
been
used
to
it
all
in
their
neighborhoods.
O
R
Are
there
specific
six,
then,
in
the
plan
that
you
would
suggest
that
we
advised
the
board
not
to
support
or
to
to
take
out
of
the
plant
or
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
where
the
neighborhood's
coming
from
I
know?
This
has
been
a
long
process
and
I
haven't
really
been
that
involved
in
it.
Others
right
at
an
initial
meeting
at
Lyon
village,
the
Executive
Committee
there
maybe
two
years
ago,
right.
O
O
B
G
Mr.
Fiorelli
I
believe
we
heard
at
Planning
Commission
that
the
primary
concern
about
traffic
was
traffic
coming
down
from
Kirkwood
and
then
using
13th
Street
to
get
to
Washington
Boulevard,
rather
than
going
from
Washington
Boulevard
through
13th
Street
up
to
66.
Is
that
in
the
comments
that
have
been
collected
along
this
process,
was
there
a
clear
trend,
and
is
that?
And
if
so,
is
that
the
trend
that
was
presented
at
Planning,
Commission
I.
M
Think
and
Michelle
and
rich
can
add
to
this,
but
I
think
as
far
as
the
comments
and
input
that,
in
concerns
that
I
had
heard
raised
personally
throughout
the
process,
were
perhaps
a
little
bit
more
global
in
a
sense
that
you
know
that
there
could
be
opportunities,
I
think,
there's
this
perception.
There
could
be
opportunities
for
additional
traffic
through
this
area
in
all
directions,
both
from
Kirkwood
using
13th
to
head
west
towards
Quincy
from
Washington
to
go
through
study
area
and
had
north
towards
13th
and
then
on
to
other
destinations
and
then
also
I.
G
So
if
I
may
just
ask
a
follow-up
question,
the
presentation
that
you
gave
us
looked
at
the
efforts
that
the
county
staff
has
in
mind
to
deal
with
the
effect
of
queues
on
Quincy
in
Washington.
Did
you
do
anything
to
look
at
how
the
census,
since
the
the
last
round
of
meetings
before
the
RTA,
have
you
done
anything
to
look
at
the
effect
at
mitigating
cut
through
traffic
or
preventing
cut
the
traffic
using
13th
to
get
from
66
via
Kirkwood.
M
S
Mean
I
think
what
we've
tried
to
address
is
you
know
what
is
the?
What
are
the
options
right
there
as
far
as
people
can
get
around
I
think
this?
This
graphic
here
gets
a
sense
that
you
can
actually
reduce
some
of
the
traffic
in
the
neighborhood
residential
streets
through
some
additional
connections.
Certainly,
there's
traffic
on
Lincoln
Street,
that's
B,
that's
being
used
to
go
through
the
neighborhood
and
to
provide
an
alternative
to
that
could
actually
reduce
some
of
the
traffic
that
those
residents
face
today.
So.
I
So
I
would
like
to
see
these
internal
connections
designed
more
like
there's
a
typology
that
we
have
just
approved
in
the
master
transportation
plan
called
the
shared
street
and
I
think
that
if
we
apply
that
road
design
to
the
network
internally,
it
will
encourage
people
to
drive
carefully
and
possibly
avoid
the
street,
because
it
won't
exactly
be
a
very
quick
way
of
getting
through
it'll
be
more
leisurely.
Thank
you.
B
Yeah
I
just
want
to
agree
with
Commissioner
Perkins
here,
I
think
the
connectivity
here
is
important
and
it's
easy
to
miss.
Why?
If
there
isn't
connectivity
internal
that
cars
can
drive
on?
That
means
all
of
the
parking
garage
and
exits
and
entrances
need
to
be
onto
the
the
outer
streets
which
ultimately
ends
up
sending
traffic
in
all
sorts
of
crazy
ways
just
to
get
out
onto
the
street
that
it
wants
to
be
on.
For
instance,
you
can
imagine
somebody
at
the
some
future
building
on
the
American
Legion
site
that
wants
to
get
to
Kirkwood.
B
If
there
is
an
internal
circulation
within
this
large
area
that
we're
talking
about,
then
that
car
has
got
to
turn,
make
a
left
out
of
its
parking
garage
exit
onto
Washington,
Boulevard
and
then
another
left
onto
Kirkwood,
and
then
you
multiply
that
times.
Every
building
that
we're
building
on
this
site,
you
end
up
adding
lots
of
extra
driving,
that's
not
necessary
just
because
they
can't
traverse
the
site,
just
the
traffic
that
is
being
generated
by
these
buildings.
B
The
traffic
that
is
coming
to
these
buildings
having
to
go
around
and
around
in
various
ways,
just
to
get
headed
in
the
direction
that
they're
trying
to
head
so
I
support
what
Commissioner
Perkins
is
saying,
which
is
build
the
connectivity
but
build
it
in
a
way
that
discourages
through
traffic
and
I
think
our
shared
street
typology,
which
builds
a
street.
You
know
around
the
idea
that
people
can
be
walking
there
and
cars
can
be
exiting
a
parking
garage
and
driving
briefly
for
a
block
through
there
in
order
to
get
onto
a
Main
Street.
K
Yeah
I'm
just
gonna
second:
do
it
guys
both
of
you
because
I
think,
given
the
way
that
our
transportation
approaches
are
changing
with
ways
and
a
whole
bunch
of
other?
You
know
car
sharing
services
and
using
and
using
our
neighborhoods
differently.
We
have
to
think
about
how
that
it's
happening,
but
we
can't
stop
it
I.
K
Don't
think
at
this
point,
I
think
it's
part
of
our
what's
happening
and
so
I'm,
just
second
the
connectivity
piece
and
and
the
ways
that
we
can
slow
down
traffic
and
neighborhoods,
but
giving
people
an
ability
to
get
through
neighborhoods
because
that's
where
they
live,
and
then
they
have
cars
and
they
want
to
go
that
get
to
places
just
as
easily
as
the
people
who
are
looking
to
get
around
through
the
neighborhoods
and
off
the
main
main
roads,
so
I
think
thinking
smartly
about.
That
is
what
we
should
be
doing.
M
So
I
think
on
the
whole
phasing
the
contemplation
about
the
phasing
elements
and
aspects
of
this
I,
don't
think
the
document
and
we've
certainly
had
some
thought
in
terms
of
how
operationally
and
how
sort
of
over
time
that
phasing
could
occur.
We
certainly
have
other
instances
streets
that
have
been
added
with
new
development
and
elsewhere
in
the
county,
where
the
development
sites
provided
half
a
street,
and
then
the
adjacent
development
site
has
provided
the
other
half
of
the
street
a
number
of
years
after
and
so
I
think
you
know
in
concept.
M
G
On
top
of
for
some
years,
then
you're
not
going
to
be
building
a
nice
pedestrian
priority
shared
street
and
I.
Think
that
that
what
we
sort
of
got
forecast
to
us
from
public
comment
was
that
that
the
neighborhood
might
see
the
site.
The
first
site
plans
to
come
in
and
rightfully
be
very
concerned
when
they
see
streets
that
are
not
that
our
streets
that
are
going
to
be
for
neighbors
to
build
stuff
on
and
not
necessarily
the
concept
streets.
The
are
included
in
in
this
document
that
you
just
added
and
so
I
guess.
R
This
might
be
part
of
the
the
expectation
and
community
benefits,
with
perhaps
specific
goals
set
out
to
address
some
of
these
issues
and
pay
for
them
to
ensure
that
they
get
done
and
I
would
note
as
a
precedent
when
Market
Common
went
in
a
Commons
went
in
up
in
Clarendon
lion.
Village
very
quickly
realized
the
the
great
potential
for
the
cut
through
of
traffic
through
the
middle.
The
neighborhood
to
get
to
to
Lee
Highway
lion
village
is
wide
open.
R
And
perhaps
you
do
something
like
that
here,
as
this
development
occurs
it
may.
This
development
may
have
a
lesser
impact
than
a
major
shopping
center
like
Market
common,
but
on
the
other
hand,
it
may
provide
some
ability
for
the
neighborhood
to
get
some
relief
and
get
it
quickly
without
having
to
go
through
a
county
funding
process
where
there
are
maybe
funds
this
year,
but
not
next
year
and
and
that
sort
of
thing
I.
R
But
it
might
might
be
helpful
that
this
plan
is
amove
x'
forward
in
terms
of
concept,
identify
that
as
something
that
would
be
expected
of
developers
to
help
address,
neighborhood
concerns
and
and
that
sort
of
thing,
as
opposed
to
necessarily
designating
specific
amounts
here,
probably
a
little
early
for
that,
but
but
still
to
recognize
this
and
and
again
I'm
trying
to
see
if
we
can
address
some
of
the
neighborhood
concerns
and
some
of
the
larger
concerns.
Given
the
pedestrian
traffic
between
neighborhoods
and
the
school.
S
H
B
S
I
Looking
at
the
draft
concept
plan
this
item
here
on
page
18,
there
are
a
couple
of
graphics
at
the
bottom.
One
is
a
proposed
28
foot
right-of-way
that
has
two
eleven
and
a
half
foot
drive
lanes
and
a
five-foot,
sidewalk
and
I
was
just
going
to
ask
eleven
and
a
half
foot
for
a
drive
lane
for
what
is
supposed
to
be
a
low
traffic
sort
of
calmed.
Street,
that's
wider
than
the
drive
lanes
that
we
have
on
a
lot
of
neighborhood,
arterioles
and
other
more
aggressive
type.
Ologies.
Do
you
have
any
comment?
Yeah.
S
There's
some
concern.
If
we
go
a
little
less
than
that,
if
we
go
to
something
something
even
narrower
than
that,
an
emergency
vehicle
firetruck
would
probably
have
a
hard
time
dealing
with
a
roadway
that
is
less
than
23
feet
between
the
curbs.
That's
general
direction
that
we
hear
from
our
fire
marshal.
Is
they
really
need
about
that
much
room,
so
I
would
think
this
is
kind
of
appropriate.
I
B
The
attached
resolution
to
amend
the
general
land-use
map,
as
shown
in
attachment
B,
adopt
the
attached
resolution
to
amend
the
master
transportation
plan,
as
shown
in
attachment
C,
and
to
adopt
the
attached
resolution
to
authorize
advertisements
for
notice
of
public
hearings
by
the
Planning
Commission
County
Board.
To
consider
all
general
land
use
plan
amendments
for
three
general
areas
located
on
the
block
northwest
of
the
Washington
Boulevard
and
Kirkwood
road
intersections,
as
shown
in
attachment
D
concurrent
with
the
consideration
of
rezoning
and
final
Saipan
applications
associated
with
each
site.
B
R
M
R
G
An
additional
amendment
recommending
that
the
board
direct
that
the
adopted
plan
include
language.
Clarifying
that,
to
the
extent
site
plans
are
approved.
Consistent
with
these
amendments
to
the
club
and
MTP
are,
to
the
extent
that
that
plans
submitted
can,
under
these
amendments,
anticipate
any
temporary
streets
or
phase
streets
as
part
of
the
construction
process.
That
those
plans
also
indicate
the
final
design
of
those
streets
and
how
they'll
become
shared
streets
and
I.
Offer
that
to
my
fellow
commissioners
again,
both
for
whether
it's
clear
and
for
whether
it's
necessary.
K
Yeah
I'm
not
I'm,
not
very
familiar
about
how
the
process
goes
in
terms
of
when
you're
building
and
you
create
temporary
streets,
but
I
would
have
imagined,
there's
a
there's,
a
an
accepted
method.
Methodology
of
doing
that.
But
I
hear
your
concern
that
it
it
sends
a
message
to
the
neighborhood.
Is
that
what
you're
talking
about
and
wanting
to
clarify
that?
What
they
see
is
not
exactly
what
the
old?
Yes.
B
It's
always
been
made
clear
during
the
site
review,
what
the
ultimate
goal
that
we
were
expecting
to
get
to
was
going
to
be,
and
we've
seen
that,
for
instance,
on
you
know,
you
know
we
saw
that
as
12th
Street
was
built
in
Pentagon
City,
we,
you
know
we
still
have
half
of
a
street
behind
the
Rite
Aid
on
Columbia
Pike,
but
it
was
certainly
clear,
even
in
that
form
based
code
development.
What
you
know
what's
true
we're
gonna
end
up
with
at
the
end
of
it.
B
T
I
This
I
also
don't
understand
where
this
would
be
put
in
in
the
glop
study
plan,
which
is
kind
of
like
a
sector
plan.
We
would
have
a
writer
on
there
that
says
hey
when
you
propose
a
site
plan
under
this
glop
study
that
it
would
be
I,
guess
considered
favorably
if
you
were
also
to
propose
funding
some
neighborhood
traffic
calming.
Is
that
how
this
would
be
interpreted
that.
R
leach
up
here,
if
they've
got
some
better
before
that.
Her
idea
of
how
to
how
to
I'm
certainly
willing
to
consider
it
I'm
just
concerned
that
the
neighborhood
not
find
itself
left
out
ten
years
from
now
with
a
lot
of
extra
traffic
and
nowhere
no
way
to
get
funding
from
the
county
to
alleviate
the
problems
or
reduce
them.
Anyway.
Before.
B
U
Would
strongly
recommend
to
the
commission
that
this
does
not
have
a
place
in
the
globe
study?
This
is
a
higher
level
document,
and
this
Commission
has
reviewed
many
many
site
plans
and
our
goal
as
a
community
and
as
a
staff
is
to
make
sure
that
each
site
plan
works
in
its
environment
and
it
starts
with
what
is
the
proposal
following
the
glop
and
MTP
recommendations
were
charged
with
evaluating
that
project
and
making
sure
that
it
works
and
doesn't
have
adverse
impacts,
and
that
could
take
many
different
forms.
U
There
is
existing
traffic
on
this
block
today
generated
by
strip
commercial
and
a
YMCA.
That's
the
baseline,
and
we
have
to
evaluate
these
proposals
in
terms
of
both
the
land
use,
the
expected
trip
generation.
What
the
infrastructure
proposal
is
in
a
wholesome
way,
so
I,
that's
my
advice
to
the
Commission.
Thank.
B
B
The
study
Oh
concept
plan
principle.
Thirteen
in
the
concept
plan
is
where
I
think
the
neighborhood
can
very
easily
hang
their
hat
during
a
site
plan
review
and
say
you
know,
principle,
thirteen
says
we're
going
to
take
effective
measures
to
manage
additional
transportation
demands
generated
by
future
redevelopment.
That
does
not
excessively
burden
local
residential
streets
and
say
as
part
of
making
sure
this
doesn't
burden.
My
local
residential
street
there
needs
to
be
traffic
calming,
but
in
I
think
there
is
already
sufficient
place
to
make
that
sort
of
argument
very
strongly
in
site
plan.
Mr.
I
The
potential
site
applicants
were
asked
to
make
a
contribution
to
neighborhood
traffic
calming
and
those
funds
were
used
for
neighborhood
traffic,
calming
installation
in
either
construction
or
reconfiguring
of
a
street
that
is
not
immediately
adjacent
to
the
property.
Do
we
run
into
some
issues
where
there
lacks
a
nexus
between
us
asking
them
for
that
money
and
where
that
money
is
actually
being
spent,
yeah.
B
I
During
a
site
plan,
the
local
streets
that
are
adjacent
to
that
property
are
reconstructed
in
some
sort
of
configuration
that
most
of
the
time
represents
some
amount
of
traffic
calming
and
so
asking
the
applicant
for
additional
funds
to
go
traffic
home
somewhere
else.
I
think
we
can
I'm
not
an
attorney,
but
I
think
that,
from
my
understanding
runs
into
some
some
issues.
I
am.
B
R
I
think
what
we're
talking
about
here
are
additional
traffic,
that
it
has
an
impact
where
there
is
a
nexus.
It
may
not
be
immediately
across
the
street,
but
it
may
be
a
block
away
and
it's
and
I
think
there's
probably
a
lot
of
precedent
in
the
county.
For
this
sensing,
not
a
lot
of
support
for
this
I
withdraw
the
motion
all
right.
The
motion.
T
A
few
words
to
the
members
of
the
community
came
here
tonight.
Thank
you
for
for
being
here.
We
appreciate
hearing
from
you.
Please
understand
that
this
document,
they're
talking
about,
is
a
very
high
level
principal
document.
We
take
very
seriously
issues
with
cut
through
traffic
and
in
additional
cars.
We
do
everything
we
can
to
make
sure
things
like
that.
Do
not
happen.
Once
a
site
plan
comes
out.
That
is
more
specific
to
this
site.
T
We
would
hope
that
you
come
back
and
tell
us
about
what
happens,
so
we
can
hear
from
you
and
your
your
input
is
the
most
important
next
well
next
to
staff
the
most
important
we'd
like
to
hear
from
you.
We
need
to
hear
from
you
it's
that
important
at
this
point
you
know:
cut
through
traffic.
I
have
kids
I'm,
very
sensitive,
just
slowing
down
traffic
when
I
cut
through
a
neighborhood
slowdown
like
it's
your
kids
living
there.
So
please
understand
that
and
again,
please
come
back
when
I
have
my.
B
B
That's
one
all
this
post,
that's
six
opposed,
so
that
fails
leaving
the
original
motion
on
the
table,
which
is
the
county
managers
recommendation
with
the
additional
proviso
about
shared
streets
in
the
concept
circulation
map.
Any
further
discussion
on
that
all
those
in
favor
that's
unanimous.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
M
A
S
Good
evening,
this
is
an
item
that
actually
came
to
the
Commission
last
month,
but
it
was
as
a
request
advertised
so
now
what
we
are
moving
ahead
to
moving
to
the
public
hearings
with
the
Planning
Commission
and
with
the
County
Board,
which
will
be
taking
place
over
the
next
month.
So
I
will
give
you
a
very
brief
presentation.
S
Please
ask
questions
on
any
items
if
I
go
over
too
quickly,
so
the
request
is
two
men
named
the
master
transportation
plan
reads:
designate
a
portion
of
13
Street
south,
which
is
shown
on
the
map
of
the
MTP
as
an
alley
and
I'll
talk
about
that.
That
alley
would
not
be
actually
depicted
on
the
map,
because
our
rmtp
map
does
not
show
alleys.
S
This
is
the
illustration
of
the
area.
Is
a
connection
of
13th
Street
south
between
Monroe
and
South
glebe
Road,
some
illustrations
of
the
existing
conditions.
This
is
the
the
connection
that's
there
now
that
is
designated
as
a
street
on
the
MTP
map.
Currently,
as
you
can
see,
it's
very
narrow,
it
has
a
driveway
style
entrance.
It
has
a
paver
path,
adjacent
to
at
about
a
10
foot.
Wide
asphalt,
roadway
and
has,
as
you
can
see,
is
really
restricted
for
access
and
others
that
do
not
enter
sign.
S
That
actually
does
not
prevent
you
to
get
does
prevent
you
from
getting
access
in
from
Monroe
Street
another
view
of
that
same
red
way
from
a
different
direction.
As
you
can
see,
this
was
never
constructed
to
be
a
street.
It
was
indicated
on
our
map,
probably
mistakenly,
but
at
the
time
we
had
discussions
about.
Perhaps
it
should
have
been
history.
So
let
me
just
go
through
the
history
it's.
This
is
from
the
majestic
oak
site
plan,
mostly
townhouse
development
that
took
place
in
2003.
S
Sometimes
we
refer
to
as
a
driveway,
sometimes
an
alley
at
the
time
the
community
adjacent
just
the
media
west
of
this
area
was
concerned
about
cut
through
and
issues
about
access,
and
so
it
was
determined
that
this
segment
would
would
not
be
built
as
a
full
Street.
At
that
point,
and
as
you
can
tell,
it
does
not
possess
the
characters
of
what
we
would
normally
consider
a
street.
S
Our
map
does
show
it
and
I
think
it's
largely
because
when
we
built
our
MTP
map
in
2007,
when
we
first
adopted
it,
what
we
used
as
our
base
was
the
the
glove
plan
and
for
some
reason
this
was
shown
on
the
glove
plan.
I
think
that's
something
we
can
modify
as
well.
In
any
case,
there
have
been
some
issues
with
the
neighbors
about
this
street.
It
has
been
largely
enclosed,
chained
with
a
bollards
and
things
by
the
by
the
homeowners
association.
S
There
have
been
some
issues
about
zoning
violations,
requirements
to
open
it
up,
and
so
now
they
have
come
back
to
the
to
the
county
board
forum,
with
a
minor
site
plan,
amendment
application
to
modify
their
site
plan
and
there
are
some
additional
conditions
that
are
being
added
to
the
to
this
development
and
are
some
that
are
being
language
which
is
being
modified
to
address
access
and
easements.
So
the
public
process
has
been
there
been
all
the
members
of
the
majestic
oak.
Homeowners
association
have
been
polled
and
they
are
in
support
of
this
change.
S
So
does
the
adjacent
neighborhood,
the
Douglas
Park
Civic
Association?
We
did
have
this
item
presented
to
the
Commission
last
month.
For
that
request,
advertised
on
you
did
consent
to
that
and
the
minor
site
plan
amendment
is
to
be
heard
by
the
county
board
in
the
November
meeting
and
is
actually
put
on
the
consent.
Agenda.
Visitor
seems
to
be
unanimous
support
for
it
at
this
time.
S
So
I'll
just
read
the
proposed
resolution
that
the
master
transportation
plan
map
shall
be
amended
to
change
the
destination
of
a
section
of
13th
Street
south
between
South
Kenmore
Circle,
which
is
one
of
the
internal
streets
within
that
majestic
oak
site
plan
and
South
Monroe
Street
from
neighborhood
minor
street
to
alley
and
that
it
and
to
remove
it
from
the
Arlington
County
MTP
map
and
so
the
designate.
The
recommendation
is
simply
to
adopt
that
resolution.
B
V
B
D
But
it
is
very
much
related
to
the
MTP
amendment.
Does
three
things
it
eliminates
those
ambiguities
in
the
site
plan,
condition
requirements.
So
there's
no
more
confusion
about
what
the
alley
is
supposed
to
be
or
what
the
streets
are
supposed
to
be
will
be
amending
the
existing
easements
over
the
alley
and
internal
streets
they're
already
in
place,
but
will
be
a
men
that
language
so
that
the
county
gets
the
level
of
access
that
it
desires.
D
It's
probably
my
first
and
probably
will
be
my
only
zoning
case
where
anything
is
supported
by
every
member
of
the
neighborhood
and
the
reason
for
that
is,
if
you,
if
you
get
out
on
the
site
and
you
look
at
it
and
you
walk
around
a
little
bit,
you
immediately
feel
the
tightness
of
that
12-foot
alley
dimension
and
and
get
a
sense
for
the
difficulty
of
navigating
that
slope
and
those
movements.
It's
just
not
a
public
street.
It
wasn't
built
that
way.
It
can't
be
that
way.
D
B
You,
mr.
almond,
so
when
we
saw
this
for
RTA,
we
just
had
a
staff
report.
We
didn't
have
a
copy
of
the
the
previous.
This
is
a
sight
point
approval,
and
so
the
only
thing
that
jumps
out
at
me
here
now
that
we
have
that
is
in
the
list
of
relevant
conditions
in
the
board
report.
It
doesn't
mention
condition
50,
which
says
that's
on
page
37
for
those
who
want
to
look
at
it
themselves.
The
developer
agrees
that
have
been
30
days
after
request
by
the
county
manager.
B
I
agree
that,
right
now
it
is
functioning
like
an
ally
and
that
we
shouldn't
be
trying
to
get
public
automotive
traffic
through
there,
but
I
certainly
think
in
the
future,
pending
some
redevelopment
some
day
that
it
would
be
a
useful
Road
connection
or
Street
connection
if
it
were
built
out
to
be
an
actual
street.
So
I.
B
B
I
It
appears
that
most
of
the
justification
for
this
is
that
it
doesn't
look
like
a
street
right
now
and
that
it
is
a
incredibly
narrow
and
doesn't
meet
all
the
condition.
It
doesn't
meet
all
the
characteristics
of
a
street,
but
that's
kind
of
like
saying
you
didn't
build
it
as
a
street.
It's
not
a
street.
Therefore
we
shouldn't
call
it
a
street
and
it's
I
think.
I
S
D
B
The
staff,
so
what
I
don't
I
will
admit.
I
don't
fully
understand,
is
how
this
MTP
amendment
interplays
with
when
this
minor
site
plan
amendment
is
considered,
because
I
would
say
long-term
that
we
would
like
this
section
to
actually
be
a
street
sometime
in
the
distant
future,
but
I
would
say,
given
the
current
conditions
on
the
ground
and
the
current
short-term
expectations
that
we
should
expect
it
to
function
like
an
alley.
So
would
with
that
desire
in
mind
what
is
the
correct
sequence
of
events?
B
Does
it
the
MTP
get
updated
to
call
it
an
alley
for
now,
and
we
change
the
MTP
again
in
the
future,
or
does
the
MTP
continue
to
call
it
a
street?
And
we
just
accept
that,
given
the
current
development
and
the
current
site
plan
that
we
are
temporarily
deviating
from
the
MTP
due
to
other
constraints
due
to
other
conditions,
I.
S
Mean
I
think
what
we're
recognizing
is
that
we
don't
have
it
an
opportunity
to
really
complete
a
street
and
through
that
section
there
unless
there's
some
sort
of
significant
redevelopment
of
at
least
one
of
those
two
properties,
23
or
24-
lots,
23
or
24.
So
at
this
point,
I
think
we're
recognizing
what's
reality
and
a
plan
might
be
to
kind
of
consider
whether
there's
something
could
be
done
in
the
future,
but
really
for
now
we
are
trying
to
adjust
to
what
we
have.
R
What
was
this
staff
policy
on
designating
things
as
alleys
back
in
2003?
What
were
we
doing
that
and
and
was
a
policy
against
creating
new
alleys,
so
we
called
it
a
street
but
really
wanted
it
to
function
as
an
alley,
and
so
that
this
would
be
consistent
with
the
original
intent
or
has
something
changed
since
that
time.
S
I'm
not
sure
I
can
recall
what
the
what
the
county's
policy
wasn't
on
that
in
2003,
but
I
believe
we
were
interested
in
seeing
an
actual
street
connection
and
we
work
through
that
matter
with
the
community
and
as
part
of
the
site
plan
and
what
we
wound
up
with.
What
is
is
what
it's
reflected
in
the
conditions
in
this
board
report
from
2003.
I
S
Yes,
through
the
proposed
revisions
to
the
site
plan
conditions,
I
think
that
is
one
of
the
measures
that
is
permitted
as
far
as
some
of
the
revised
language
is
that
the
pedestrian
bicycle
way
would
always
be
open
for
access
and
that
the
12-foot
wide
alley
could
be
closed,
except,
but
what
would
allow
some
sort
of
entrance
by
emergency
vehicles?
How.
S
B
Move
that
we
recommend
the
County
Board
adopt
the
attached
resolution
to
amend
the
MTP
map
to
change
the
designation
of
a
section
of
13th
Street
south
between
Kenmore
Circle
and
South
Monroe
Street
from
a
neighborhood
minor
Street
to
an
alley
and
to
remove
it
from
the
County
MTP
map.
Second,
any
further
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
Bost
mr.
Perkins
all
right.
Thank
you.
A
W
Good
evening,
everybody
I
am
here
with
you
this
evening
to
talk
about
the
guidelines
that
came
out
of
the
residential
parking
working
group
process
and
joined
this
evening
by
Dennis
leach,
our
director
of
transportation,
also
on
the
other
side
of
the
room,
Susan
Bell,
who
has
been
a
consultant
on
this
project
and,
of
course,
James
Croll,
who,
in
addition
to
mr.
Perkins,
was
part
of
the
working
group
wave
of
the
hand,
and
mr.
W
role,
of
course
chaired
that
during
the
period
that
they
were
meeting
as
a
reminder,
this
is
guidance
related
to
off
street
parking
requirements
for
you,
the
Planning
Commission
staff
and
the
board,
as
they
approve
site
plan.
Multifamily
developments
as
well
as
unified
commercial,
mixed
use,
development
use
permits
in
the
to
Metro
corridors.
So
this
is
what
we
hope
to
accomplish
with
you
this
evening.
W
We
hope
to
see
receive
the
same
kind
of
fulsome
support
for
the
policy,
as
we
did
in
the
request
to
authorize
advertisement
as
a
very
brief
reminder
of
what
got
us
to
this
point.
There
was
a
recommendation
or
a
directive
from
the
county
board
to
the
county
manager
in
December
of
2013,
to
examine
the
guidance
that
we
use
to
recommend
and
approvals
related
to
off
street
parking
in
the
site
plan
process.
As
you
know,
because
you
have
approved
them
over
the
recent
years.
W
The
Transportation
Commission,
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
board
have
on
staff
recommendation,
approved
projects
with
parking
at
rates
lower
than
required
in
the
by
right.
Portions
of
the
zoning
ordinance
in
accordance
with
the
site
plan
and
use
permit
provisions
of
the
same
zoning
ordinance,
and
this
process
is
really
about
creating
a
policy
or
guidelines
that
will
give
more
clarity
to
that
existing
practice
of
allowing
parking
that
is
approved
at
rates
that
are
sufficient
for
the
site
and
in
consideration
of
site-specific
conditions.
W
Our
policy
making
practice
was,
of
course,
informed
both
by
broader
policy
in
the
comprehensive
plan,
as
well
as
the
expanding
range
of
transportation
options
in
the
to
Metro
corridors,
and
in
addition
to
that
backing,
we
used
data
on
parking
demand
in
the
county,
as
well
as
best
practices
and
current
practice
in
other
communities,
to
formulate
a
policy
recommendation.
Of
course.
W
Central
to
that
as
I,
as
you
or
know,
is
the
working
group
itself,
which
was
11
members
I,
believe
there
are
two
additional
members
in
the
audience
with
us
this
evening
and
then
in
addition
to
the
working
group,
which
meant
six
times
or
I'm
sorry
11
times
over
the
course
of
six
months.
We
engaged
with
the
public
through
a
variety
of
in-person
and
online
methods,
as
well
as
various
presentations
to
Commission's.
W
Again,
I
want
to
point
out
what
both
the
working
group
and
we
as
staff
sees
the
potential
benefits
the
community.
For
this.
We
believe
that
this
policy,
if
enacted,
would
continue
to
foster
the
development
of
transit,
oriented
housing
in
the
Metro
corridors
by
allowing
developers
to
build
housing
that
is
geared
towards
low
and
no
heart
no
car
households.
W
Finally,
we
think
that
this
will
help
create
a
more
predictable
approval
process
and
I,
always
repeat
these
potential
benefits
in
these
presentations,
because
one
of
the
clear
messages
we've
received
through
the
feedback
process,
if
the
engagement
process
is
that
the
perception
that
this
policy
is
a
giveaway
to
the
development
community.
And
we
want
to
be
clear
that
we
think
that
there
are
real,
tangible
benefits
to
the
county
and
that
it
is
not
some
sort
of
benefit
to
developers
of
the
expensive
residents.
W
In
terms
of
where
these
guidelines
would
apply.
This
map
shows
in
the
pink
or
purple
land
area
the
parts
of
the
two
metro
corridors
where
the
zoning
code
currently
allows
multi-family
residential
by
site
plan
or
akhmad
around
those
areas.
You
also
see
where
we
have
on
street
parking
management
in
the
form
of
meters
and
residential
permit
parking.
W
So
the
central
element
of
this
policy
instead
of
guidelines
is
what
you
see
here,
of
course,
which
is
a
set
of
new
minimum
guidelines
that
are
related
to
a
potential
projects,
distance
to
metro
and
then
also
the
mix
of
market
rate
and
committed
affordable
units,
as
you
get
further
from
Metro,
the
minimum
expectation
for
parking
increases.
If
you
are
producing
more
committed,
affordable
units,
the
minimum
requirement
declines
or
it
goes
down.
W
The
cars
that
are
then
driven
I'll
also
note
going
back
to
the
slide
before
that
we
are
setting
the
minimum
number
of
accessible
spaces
higher
than
what
is
actually
required
in
the
building
code.
In
this
case,
we're
setting
it
equal
to
the
number
of
type,
a
accessible
units
which
is
higher
than
what
is
usually
required.
It's
usually
a
function
of
the
number
of
spaces
provided
not
a
number
of
units,
as
we
have
discussed
before.
This
policy
allows
greater
flexibility
than
the
by
right
zoning
requirements.
W
W
First,
we
have
set
them
lower
than
recent
demand
because
of
the
phenomena
of
induced
demand
and
the
fact
that
more
parking,
especially
if
it
is
cheap
or
subsidized
that
will
attract
more
vehicles.
So
we
expect
that
some
of
the
parking
demand
is
simply
because
it
is
attracting
households
that
own
more
cars.
W
Many
of
the
districts
in
the
buy
right
section
of
the
zoning
ordinance
had
their
parking
ratios
lowered
in
anticipation
of
the
further
expansion
of
the
metro
rail
system
or
in
tandem
with
the
installation
and
opening
of
the
metro.
Rail
system.
I
also
want
to
answer
some
of
the
concerns
that
we've
heard
from
many
about
the
fairness
of
this
policy,
as
it
relates
to
committed,
affordable
units.
W
Multiple
data
sources
have
also
shown
that
here
and
elsewhere,
low-income
households
are
less
likely
to
own
a
vehicle
than
those
with
higher
incomes.
The
master
transportation
plan
calls
on
us
to
reduce
or
eliminate
minimum
parking
requirements
for
affordable
units.
Of
course,
the
cost
of
that
parking
itself
can
make
affordable
housing,
less
feasible
and
less
likely
to
be
constructed,
or
only
at
greater
expense
to
the
county
and,
while
certainly
an
affordable
unit
that
is
produced
with
very
little
parking
may
not
serve
the
needs
of
every
family
that
qualifies
for
a
committed,
affordable
unit.
W
We
believe
that
if
it
serves
the
needs
of
at
least
some
families
who
otherwise
would
not
have
an
apartment
to
even
choose
from,
then
that
is
a
benefit
to
the
community.
Finally,
we
have
inserted
as
a
relation
to
this
concern,
an
element
of
the
policy
wherein
the
management
company
or
the
manager
of
the
property
would
not
be
able
to
discriminate
or
denied.
W
Excuse
me
denied
access
to
parts
of
the
garage
based
on
whether
a
family
lives
in
a
committed,
affordable
or
market-rate
unit,
and
that
they
would
not
be
able
to
charge
the
committed,
affordable
households
more
for
parking
than
the
market
rate
households
for
context,
as
I
think
I
shared
with
you
this
last
time.
This
is
a
map
of
parking
minimums
in
the
three
core
jurisdictions
of
the
region,
the
District
of
Columbia,
our
Arlington
and
Alexandria.
W
The
lighter
areas
show
land
where
there
are
lower
parking
requirements
or
no
parking
requirements,
as
there
is
in
many
parts
of
the
district.
The
darker
shades
indicate
land
where
parking
requirements
are
higher.
The
upshot
is
that
this
set
of
guidelines
would
put
us
somewhere
between
the
District
of
Columbia
and
Alexandria.
I'll.
Also
add
off
this
map.
Tyson's
Corner
has
reduced
its
parking
or
Fairfax
has
recently
reduced
its
parking
requirements
for
the
Tyson's
Corner
redevelopment
area.
W
To
go
through
a
few
other
elements
of
the
proposal,
we
would
allow
developers
to
exchange
a
few
parking
spaces
for
investment
in
bike
share
bike,
parking
and
car
share
services
or
car
share
spaces,
with
service
guarantees
of
at
least
three
years.
Some
limitations
that
we
put
on
this
since
the
working
group
committed
it
completed
its
work.
We
said
that
the
minimum
parking
requirements
could
not
be
exchanged
by
more
than
50%
under
this
policy.
Also,
there
could
only
be
one
bike
share
station
supported
through
this
mechanism.
W
You
couldn't
simply
support
five
different
bike
share
stations
on
your
same
property
and
there
would
be
no
exchange
permitted
of
accessible
spaces
for
bike
share
or
bike
parking.
We
have
added
a
visitor
parking
space
requirement
to
this
proposal,
which
I
know
gave
some
concern
to
members
this
commission.
W
As
long
as
it's
within
800
feet,
off-site
shared
parking
would
only
be
possible
in
structured
parking
garages
within
the
two
metro
corridors
and
visitor
and
handicap
spaces
or
accessible
spaces
would
not
be
permitted
to
be
fulfilled
through
off-site
shared
parking.
Finally,
there
is
a
provision
for
special
reductions
in
parking
requirements.
Should
there
be
some
sort
of
site
condition
where
building
the
necessary
parking
is
so
impractical
that
it
makes
the
development
of
that
parcel
in
accordance
with
our
general
land
use,
plan
unlikely
or
impossible
some
of
the
conditions
that
might
prompt
a
recommendation
for
a
waiver.
W
These
requirements
include
underground
utilities,
something
about
the
site,
size
or
configuration,
and
so
on.
There
was
a
10%
cap
on
this
that
the
working
group
recommended,
but
at
the
request
of
the
board,
we've
removed
that
cap,
of
course,
as
with
all
the
elements
of
this,
these
are
guidelines
and
it's
still
up
to
county
board
approval.
But
to
be
clear
on
this,
we
didn't
limit
what
staff
would
recommend
there
are,
as
we
discussed
last
time,
a
few
related
recommendations.
W
First
of
these,
of
course,
is
to
determine
whether
or
not
there
are
some
ways
in
which
to
streamline
the
process
of
shared
parking
between
two
site
plan
or
use
permit
buildings.
There
are
two
related
recommendations
about
on
parking
policy
which
again
you
called
out
in
your
letter
to
the
board.
There
is
also
request
the
board
to
direct
the
manager
to
explore
amendments
to
the
RC
zoning
district.
Our
policy
would
not
apply
to
the
RC
zoning
districts
unless
those
are
amended
to
allow
the
board
to
modify
their
parking
requirements.
W
It
is
a
district
where
the
board
can't
we
modify
the
parking
requirements
below
one
space
per
unit
and
then
some
longer-term
recommendations
that
were
putting
forth
that
wouldn't
be
completed,
at
least
until
after
the
completion
of
a
review
of
the
RPP
program
are
to
take
a
similar
approach
or
us
another
exploration
or
study
of
these
kinds
of
policies
in
our
other
major
planning
corridors
and
then
finally,
perhaps
consider
some
changes
to
the
by
right
section
of
zoning
ordinance.
Our
list
of
next
steps
grows
shorter.
W
O
Since
the
start
of
this
study,
we
have
not
been
in
favor
of
assigning
new
minimum
parking
standards
as
they
assume
all
the
affected
areas
of
the
county
have
the
same
access
to
public
parking
facilities
in
the
Crystal
City
area,
for
instance.
There
are
many
public
parking
lots.
However,
if
you
look
at
Boston,
we
got
one,
it's
the
mall
and
Virginia
square.
It's
the
mall.
O
When
a
developer
has
the
option
to
start
very
low
with
proposed
parking
standards.
We
believe
it
will
be
far
more
difficult
for
us
to
work
out
solutions
during
the
SPRC
process
for
new
development,
which
will
ensure
adequate
parking
for
new
residents,
especially
given
our
lack
of
public
parking
options
there
guests
and
nearby
neighbors,
as
well
as
encourage
walking
biking,
public
transportation,
car
sharing,
etc.
To
date,
no
two
developments
have
been
the
same
regarding
parking
opportunities
as
well
as
challenges,
and
we
believe
this
will
be
true.
O
Moreover,
as
we
look
to
the
future
within
VVS
CA,
nearly
a
third
of
our
residents
and
growing
are
over
55,
while
some
of
the
condos
at
Virginia
Square
have
higher
parking
standards
for
residents,
guests
are
forced
to
find
on
street
parking,
which
is
our
difficult.
Is
it
truly
realistic
to
assume
these
guests
will
either
park
at
the
mall
use,
Metro
or
uber
or
bike?
O
X
My
name's
Ben
D'avanzo
I,
am
a
resident
of
the
Clarendon
Court
has
neighborhood
Scott.
Our
president
will
be
speaking
about
our
neighborhood
stance.
Briefly,
I
just
wanted
to
speak
from
my
personal
experience
about
this
proposal.
I've
actually
been
kind
of
surprised
at
my
concerns
that
have
been
risen
out
of
it.
I
took
the
survey
staff
presented
a
terrific
Association,
but
the
more
I've
thought
about
it.
X
The
kind
of
more
concerns
have
had
about
the
really
low
minimums
and
the
standards,
the
really
low
minimis,
particularly
our
metro
stations
and
the
standards
being
proposed
for
how
those
minimums
can
be
brought
even
lower.
So
from
my
personal
experience,
I
am
I.
Am
a
metro
user
I,
don't
own
a
car
myself.
X
I
might
remember
a
car
to
go
member
cetera,
etc,
but
my
wife
is
a
car
user,
and
so
we
are
presented
pretty
common
I
think
family
dynamic
in
Arlington,
where
you
have
someone
who
commutes
to
DC
and
someone
who
commutes
to
these
suburbs,
in
which
case
using
public
transportation,
is
not
realistic
and
I.
Think
the
kind
of
vision
of
the
scenario
that
family
doesn't
really
work.
You
you
either
can
be
all
transit
or
all
car
and
could
have
live
in
less
developed
areas
and
I.
X
Think
personally,
this
this
scenario
and
these
kind
of
point
two
or
one
space
for
every
five
units,
dozen
envisioned
families
or
even
one
space,
every
10
units
as
a
new
vision.
Families
who
live
like
that
and
I
think
that's
really
concerning
the
other
aspect.
I
want
to
speak
to
is
about
the
proposed
offsets.
There's
nothing
in
there
about
Metro
funding
or
ways
that
developers
would
use
reduce
parking
spaces
to
contribute
to
public
transit
and
I.
X
Urge
you
to
really
think
about
that
and
recommending
that
as
an
option
or
as
our
Civic
Association
is
recommending
think
about
just
letting
SPRC
processes
go
through
the
actual
master
of
process
of
figuring
out.
What
the
right
offset
should
be.
I
was
actually
on
the
SPRC
representing
her
Civic
Association
for
the
Hyatt
building
and
that
building
does
have
reduced
parking.
X
It's
a
hotel,
of
course,
not
under
this
plan,
but
similar
concept
that
parking
was
reduced
in
that
plan,
and
this
transportation
commission
approved
that
and
in
exchange
for
a
number
of
things,
but
in
exchange
in
part
for
the
contribution
to
a
new
elevator
for
the
courthouse
metro
station.
It's
something
that
a
few
other
site
plans
around
there
have
contributed
and
is
now
set
to
be
built
over
the
next
couple
of
years.
X
Y
R
Y
To
send
to
the
board
in
advance
of
their
meeting,
it
is
still
going
through
draft,
so
we
identified
some
concerns
that
we
presented
before
the
request
advertised
to
the
board,
and
we
have
come
up
with
some
proposals
that
we
are
going
to
present
to
mitigate
them.
I
will
read
them
orally
and
would
offer
them
for
your
consideration
as
well.
In
beginning
I
want
to
note
that,
as
we've
discussed
this
with
our
membership,
we
have
concerns.
That
does
not
mean
we
are
opposed
to
the
whole
concept.
We
think
there's
a
lot
of
positive
in
here.
Y
We
like
that
it
is
forward-looking.
We
like
that
it
is
looking
for
flexibility
to
a
degree.
We
are
with
the
concept
that
oversupply
can
lead
to
some
induced
card
demand,
and
that
is
why,
in
our
earlier
letter,
we
did
not
object
to
any
of
the
proposed
minima
greater
than
a
quarter
mile
from
a
metro
station
there
about
not
point
to
spaces
per
unit
below
the
lowest
observed
demand.
We
figured
that
might
be
getting
at
some
of
that
induced
demand,
but
inside
of
a
quarter
of
a
mile,
which
is
a
lot
of
the
multi-unit
residential
buildings.
Y
So
that's
one
space
for
every
two
units.
We
note
these
are
all
site
plans.
We
will
have
an
SPRC
for
all
of
them
if
a
developer
has
a
workable
plan
for
less
than
one
space
for
every
two
units,
how
they're
gonna
mitigate
to
track
trends
or
need
I
want
to
hear
it
I'm
eager
to
have
that
discussion.
Well,
ask
questions.
Will
challenge
assumptions
we'll
get
to
something
that
can
work.
Y
We
fear
that
if
we
go
with
the
naught
point,
you
not
point
three
ratios,
we
run
the
risk
of
having
them
come
and
say
well
we're
with
policy
end
of
discussion.
The
second
concern
we've
raised
relates
to
the
trade-offs
for
bike,
share
bike
parking
and
car
share,
and
we
have
two
concerns
with
them.
The
first
is
that,
despite
multiple
times
asking
we've
yet
to
get
a
sense
that
these
are
based
on
a
real
study
of
how
much
of
these
amenities
are
needed
to
get
people
to
give
up
their
cars.
Y
So
if
we
knew
that
having
X
number
of
bike
share
stations
or
X
amount
of
car
share
led
to
a
reduction
in
private
vehicle
ownership,
that's
a
worthwhile
trade-off.
We
don't
feel
we're
there
yet
so
we're
not
against
the
idea
of
the
trade-off,
but
we're
gonna
propose
to
the
board
that
we
make
that
more
of
a
conceptual
item
that
we
could
have
these
trade-offs.
Let's
go
through
as
PRC's.
Let's
do
more
study
make
sure
it's
working
that
we
don't
get
caught
out
with
a
bad
ratio
there.
Y
Secondly,
and
been
alluded
to
this
a
moment
ago,
a
lot
of
people
who
live
here,
car
free-
and
this
includes
me-
I've-
been
here
ten
years
without
a
car,
feel
comfortable
doing
that
because
of
transit
because
of
Metro
Rail
Metro
bus
art,
bus.
None
of
these
trade-offs
relate
to
transit
infrastructure,
and
so
we
would
like
to
see
the
flexibility
perhaps
to
build
a
bus,
shelter
Ben
gives
some
other
examples
as
well.
Y
That's
not
envisioned
in
the
plan
we're
gonna
recommend
to
the
board
that
they
add
that
as
a
potential
vehicle
again
to
be
decided
in
a
site
plan
review
process-
and
that
brings
me
to
the
third
and
final
concern
that
we
have
and
it's
one
that
really
motivates
all
of
this,
and
that
is
a
week
ago
tonight.
We
discussed
this
topic
in
our
meeting
and
just
spontaneously
in
the
room
people
raised
why
they
have
in
need.
Cars
been
gave
the
example
of
a
mixed
couple
where
one
spouse
needs
to
drive
and
one
needs
to
use
Metro.
Y
We
had
a
number
of
seniors
talk
about
the
need
for
vehicles
for
shopping,
or
even
today,
one
of
my
neighbors
called
me
up
and
said:
I
worry
that
we're
signaling
to
seniors
that
they're
not
welcome.
They
can't
come
if
they
don't
have
a
car.
I
worry
that
if
we
focus
exclusively
on
people
like
me
who
feel
comfortable
living
car
free,
we
run
the
risk
of
losing
diversity
in
this
neighborhood
diversity
is
what
makes
my
neighborhood
great
it's.
Y
V
Good
evening,
I
am
John,
O'connor
I've
lived
in
first
colonial
village
and
now
in
the
courthouse
for
30
years,
I
agree
with
the
preceding
speakers
about
the
concerns
with
the
policies,
particularly
I
am
concerned
with
that.
Unlike
the
office
policy,
there
is
no
financial
buy
down
in
the
structure,
so
the
the
office
policy
creates.
You
reduce
parking.
You
give
a
contribution
to
some
kind
of
transit
infrastructure.
There's
no
mechanism
for
that
kind
of
mechanism
here.
V
I
also
believe
that
the
2.2
and
the
point
four
are
too
low,
because
people
have
varying
needs,
but
I
want
to
address
kind
of
specific
things.
That
I
would
like
you
to
put
in
your
letter
to
the
manager
and
instructions
to
the
county
board.
I.
Ask
that
you
ensure
that
the
county
is
adopting
a
countywide
policy
without
expedient
cutouts,
and
that
is
transparent
in
its
embrace
of
unbuilt
site
plans.
The
report
should
contain
examples
of
how
the
penalty
will
work
and
explain
the
basis
for
the
1.65.
V
V
There
should
be
an
actual
example
of
how
this
would
play
out
and
I
would
suggest
a
block
like
the
Wells
Fargo
back
in
Clarendon,
where
you
say
if
it
has
200
units.
This
is
how
many
parking
it
would
probably
get,
and
then
I
think
that
it
should
be
compared
to
the
previously
approved
site
plan
at
red
top
and
across
the
street,
and
I
want
to
emphasize
that
this
policy
impacts
not
new
site
plans,
but
all
unbuilt
site
plans.
So
a
site
plan
like
red
cap
could
come
in
the
day
after
it's.
V
This
policy
is
approved
and
reduce
its
parking
from
463
for
580
units
to
what
100
150
and
they
wouldn't
have
to
contribute
the
3
million
that
they
have
pledged
to
do
so.
If
I'm
a
businessman
and
I'm
a
lawyer
in
this
county,
I'm
going
to
encourage
applicants
to
rethink
those
site
plans
and
and
do
not
believe
that
that
has
been
transparently
laid
out
here,
I
think
that
it
hasn't
been
clear.
Why
East,
Falls
Church
is
not
in
the
plan
and
it's
not
even
in
tasking
5
for
studying,
Columbia,
Pike
and.
V
Z
All
commissioners
have
my
fing
doubts,
because
my
name
is
Alexander
billion,
ski
and
I'm
Mountain
resident
and
I'm
also
professional
information
consultant,
and
this
is
a
short
search
which
I
think
could
give
a
local
audience
what
happened
seven
years
ago
about
exactly
when
currently
made
decision
to
adopt
parking
in
court.
My
management
elements-
and
this
is
just
who
is
don't
have
come,
though
this
is
a
link
to
hand
out
his
old
life
link
next
slide,
please.
This
is
a
screenshot
from
staff
presentation
and
it
was
interesting
just
for
for
sense.
What
was
there
this?
Z
It
was
a
view
of
the
outside
of
street
pro
parking
from
the
neighborhood
perspective
to
consider
existing
parking
parking
capabilities,
and
it's
interested
in
even
affordable
housing.
Here
is
a
way
how
to
achieve
this.
Using
for
the
using
parking
at
night
next
slide,
please
so
parking
ratio
is,
it
was
proposed,
is
well
known.
Its
combination
of
TDM
and
addition,
it
was
requirement
of
developers
to
study
existing
parking
requirements,
based
as
it
was
written
upon
expected,
needs
next
slide,
please.
Z
At
the
same
time,
it
was
objection
from
all
my
job
and
they
say
that
when
this
policy
accepted
parking
ratio
should
be
accused
as
policy,
and
it
should
be
based
on
ranges
to
proximity
to
mass
transit.
The
next
slide
shows
the
staff
response.
They
don't
conclude
that
time
and
they
say
that
so
in
materials
they
say
that
they
would
not
postpone
the
scienter
probe
etcetera
until
the
study
would
be
made
in
a
final
final
slide.
It's
a
modest
point.
Z
It
was
request
for
deferral
or
the
developers
of
this
mission,
but
both
decided
to
go
ahead.
In
fact,
in
its
enforce
the
provision,
parking
requirement
is
also
started.
Tdi
matters
and
finally,
it's
not
related
to
this
provision.
Both
decided
that
no
a
community
process
should
not
be
planned
until
both
would
not
notified,
and
this
is
taken
lesson
the
more
will
be
just
for
that.
But
what
was
decided
at
that
time
in
trying
to
solve
this
problem
from
very
beginning.
Thank
you
for
your
attention
and.
B
G
I
just
want
to
observe
one
thing,
and
that
is
that
I
noted
during
the
staff
presentation
that
these
proposals
would
place
arlington
between
the
district
of
columbia
and
the
city
of
alexandria.
I
just
want
to
observe
that
of
those
three
jurisdictions.
Arlington
is
the
least
densely
populated
alexandria
is,
and
the
district
are
both
about
16
to
20
percent
and
I'm
more
densely
populated
than
the
Darlington
is,
which
is
just
an
interesting
note
as
to
parking
the
minimums.
R
R
Another
concern
is,
and
one
of
the
speaker's
alluded
at
this
to
are
we
by
implication
creating
a
bias
against
multi
out
old,
adult
households
where
people
work
in
different
places
and
they
choose
to
live
in
the
corridor
for
a
number
of
reasons,
but
do
need
two
cars
to
get
to
work
or
because
they
do
have
to
make
house
calls
once
or
twice
a
day.
They
need
that
other
car,
but
can't
live
here.
For
that
reason
is
is
do
we
want
to
restrict
things
so
much
that
they
can't
live
here?
R
Third,
concern
is
demographics,
sometimes
change
and
with,
according
to
some
of
the
latest
statistics,
Millennials
starting
to
move
out
of
the
area
who
is
going
to
fill
apartments
in
some
of
the
areas
where
a
lot
of
Millennials,
let's
say
like
in
Clarendon?
It
may
well
be
that
as
the
the
baby
boomer
population
ages,
they
find
this
attractive
housing,
but
they
still
need
cars
for
one
thing
or
another.
They
can't
get
on
a
bicycle
and
go
someplace
they're
stored
there.
R
Their
trips
are
consists,
largely,
let's
say
getting
to
the
grocery
store,
but
it's
not
practical
to
bring
things
home
on
the
metro
from
the
grocery
store,
particularly
if
there
isn't
a
grocery
store
within
a
short
walk
to
where
they
are
right.
Now
there
are
we're
fairly
well
served
by
grocery
stores,
but
we
may
not
be
in
the
future.
R
Another
issue
is
visitor
parking
and,
and
when
you
tighten
up
the
parking
available,
where
do
the
visitors
go?
I
think
it's
a
practical
matter.
It's
almost
impossible
for
visitors
to
get
in
any
of
our
existing
buildings
just
because
the
parking
access
is
pretty
tightly
controlled,
particularly
in
apartment
buildings,
and
they
wind
up
on
the
street
and
again
to
the
extent
you
reduce
your
parking
requirements
and
you've
got
the
residents
themselves
parking
on
the
streets.
There's
no
parking
for
the
visitors.
R
B
B
You
know,
if
not
having
a
parking
space
for
every
residential
unit
is
going
to
severely
curtail
the
market
for
those
units,
then
no
sane
developer
is
going
to
do
that
and
I
know
often
the
concern
there
is
oh
well
they're,
just
gonna.
Do
it
and
assume
that
people
can
go
out
and
park
on
the
street
and
to
that
I
would
say.
The
best
way
to
manage
on
street
demand
is
to
manage
on
street
demand
to
have
on
on
street
parking
policy.
B
One
thing
that
we
have
learned
I
think
in
Arlington
over
the
years
is
that
it
does.
You
could
build
five
parking
spaces
per
unit
in
a
residential
building
and
if
people
and
if
you
charge
for
those
spaces
but
there's
a
free
spot,
two
blocks
down,
somebody
is
going
to
go
Park
in
that
free
spot
on
the
street
two
blocks
down,
even
though
there
are
five
parking
spaces
per
unit
in
the
residential
unit.
I
will
say
the
the
concern
that
I
am
most.
B
But
I
think
everybody
recognizes
that
to
dick
some
extent,
it
will
just
result
in
more
profit
for
the
person
building.
The
building
and
I
am
I
am
certainly
sympathetic
to
mr.
Zimmerman's
point
that
someone
has
to
pay
for
that
spot
on
the
bus
that,
yes,
you
know
having
people
drive
on
our
roads
has
a
cost
to
the
county
that
has
to
be
borne,
but
also
having
people
take.
B
Our
transit
has
a
cost
of
the
county
that
has
to
be
borne,
and
so,
if
we
require
them
to
build
parking
spaces
for
the
people
who
are
driving
shouldn't,
we
require
them
to
do
something
for
the
people
that
are
taking
transit.
But
with
that
said,
this
is
the.
This
is
where
the
working
group
got
to
after
a
lot
of
deliberation
and
a
lot
of
careful
thought
and
a
lot
of
weighing
multiple
viewpoints,
and
so
at
this
point,
I'm,
comfortable,
I'm,
enthusiastic
and
supporting
the
policy
is
outlined.
I
Chairman
I
served
on
this
working
group
and
I'd
like
to
thank
my
colleagues
on
the
working
group
for
what
I
thought
was
a
very
thoughtful
process.
That
involved
us
reviewing
a
lot
of
data
and
presentations,
and
this
process
was
lengthy
and
it
involved
a
lot
of
careful
scrutiny
of
the
data
that
we
have
available,
some
of
which
was
better
quality
than
others.
So
I
wanted
to
state
that.
I
Parking
minimums
are
one
of
the
places
where
the
government
has
kind
of
the
heaviest
hand
in
our
economy,
in
terms
of
basically
forcing
people
to
buy
expensive
products
that
they
don't
necessarily
need
a
parking
space
built
underneath
a
building
in
Arlington
can
cost
$60,000
or
more
which,
when
you
think
about
the
construction
cost
of
a
one-bedroom
apartment,
can
be
something
like
thirty
or
forty
percent
of
the
cost
of
building
the
apartment.
So
these
aren't
small
amounts
of
money
that
we're
asking
people
to
spend
on
building
a
parking
space
that
they
may
or
may
not
need.
I
So
this
increases
the
cost
of
building
housing.
This
is
a
very
expensive
area
and
we're
dealing
with
the
housing
affordability
problem
here
in
Arlington,
so
I
think
that,
to
the
extent
that
we
can
alleviate
the
cost
that
it
that
people
are
being
asked
to
pay
for
a
building
that
can
help
out
with
the
housing,
affordability
problem.
I
I
Buildings
have
to
be
marketable
and
during
the
meetings
that
we
had
with
our
residential
parking
working
group
a
lot
of
times,
the
people
that
were
representing
the
developer
community
stated
that,
even
if
the
numbers
were
this
low
most
of
the
time,
they
would
find
it
very
hard
to
build
and
market
a
building
with
parking
requirements.
This
low,
so
I
found
that
it
was
generally
unlikely
that
we
would
see
the
majority
of
buildings
built
this
low
and,
in
fact,
for
a
lot
of
buildings.
I
They
said
that
just
the
economics
of
how
you
can
market
a
building,
that's
a
condo
as
opposed
to
an
apartment.
You
know
a
condo
building,
there's
the
expectation
when
people
buy
a
condo
unit
that
they
generally
buy
a
parking
space
as
part
of
their
condo
unit
and
so
for
the
ones
that
the
developer
was
intending
to
build
and
market
as
a
condo
unit.
We
might
even
see
them
build
one
to
one
as
the
parking
ratio
or
something
very
close
to
that.
I
So
I
think
that,
even
though
the
numbers
on
this
presentation
state
zero
point
two
or
zero
point,
four,
it's
not
that
every
single
building
would
be
built
in
that
manner.
I
think
that
if
you
build
buildings
with
very
low
parking
ratios
that
we
do
need
to
make
sure
that
we
get
the
on
street
parking
policy
right
because
having
off
street
parking
requirements
that
require
the
Builder
to
build
a
minimum.
I
The
origin
of
that
was
during
a
time
before
parking
meters
and
before
the
laws
that
allowed
people
to
have
a
rest
permit
program,
and
so
this
was
basically
the
only
manner
that
a
city
had
to
make
sure
that
the
streets
were
not
clogged
with
cars
was
to
basically
force
a
developer
to
build
parking
for
people
so
that
they
wouldn't
just
leave
their
cars
everywhere.
Now
that
we
have
the
tools
since
1975
Arlington's
had
a
resident
permit
parking
program,
we
have
in
essence,
I
think
the
first
resident
permit
parking
program
in
the
United
States.
I
We
took
this
permit
park
program
to
court,
to
defend
it
and
I
think
it
is
one
of
the
more
successful
programs
in
the
United
States.
In
addition,
the
invention
of
the
parking
meter
has
made
it
so
that
we
can
regulate
how
people
use
parking
on
the
street
for
a
short
term.
I
think
that
if
we
get
those
programs
working
well,
as
the
staff
is
proposed
to
evaluate
them,
that
a
reduction
in
the
need
to
regulate
how
much
parking
people
build
at
significant
cost
can
happen
in
terms
of
metric
contributions.
I
It
has
been
several
years
since
I
did
the
calculation,
but
at
one
point,
I
did
a
calculation
where
I
attributed
people's
Metro
fares
to
the
jurisdictions
that
they
came
from
and
what
I've
and
you
know
in
a
way
saying
how
much
do
the
people
who
live
in
Arlington
contribute
towards
metros
operating
cost?
How
much
do
the
people
who
live
in
Fairfax
County
are
Prince,
George's,
County
or
the
District
of
Columbia,
and
what,
if
we
were
to
redo
how
the
jurisdictions
had
to
pay?
I
You
know,
and
what
I
found
was
that
Arlington
in
the
District
of
Columbia,
the
people
who
live
in
Arlington
in
District
of
Columbia,
basically
fully
support
Metro
in
terms
of
how
much
it
costs
to
run
Metro
in
Arlington
and
so
by
providing
more
buildings
where
people
can
live
and
are
encouraged
to
ride
Metro
by
having
let's
say
less
parking
available
than
fully.
You
know.
I
One
car
per
adult
I
think
that
is
part
of
our
Lincoln's
contribution
to
Metro,
which
is
basically
transit,
oriented
living,
supports
Metro,
so
I
think
that's
saying
a
lot,
but
I
also
would
just
say
that
I
thought
that
the
working
group
came
to
something
that
I
can
support
and
then
I
I
would
feel
happy
supporting
this
Thank
You.
Mr.
B
T
I
want
to
first
congratulate
Mike,
I
and
Jim
and
staff
on
this
report.
I
think
it's
fantastic
I
think
the
policies
absolutely
pushing
Arlington
in
the
right
direction,
but
to
talk
about
the
issue
of
regarding
the
buy
down
or
getting
money
extracting
money
out
of
potential
future
developers
for
things
like
metro,
stop
and
bus
stops.
Has
that
was
that
discussed
during
the
deliberations
and
what
was
that?
What
happened?
What
occurred
and
was
it
just
nixed
that
I
did
good
idea.
W
In
some
ways
it
was
the
site
plan
process
inherently
always
includes
some
discussion
of
what
is
done
with
in
transit
infrastructure,
immediate
to
the
property.
So
we
did
not
have
a
discussion
well,
I'm,
not
recalling
to
what
degree
we
had
a
discussion
about
that
with
the
working
group,
but
I
think
some
of
the
staffs
consternation
around
this
issue.
Since
we've
been
talking
about
the
public
about
it
has
been,
but
there's
always
a
discussion
about
whether
or
not
there's
some
sort
of
improvement
to
pedestrian
bicycle
and
transit
infrastructure
around
the
property.
I
Mr.
chairman,
I
can
say
that
when
I
came
to
the
resident
parking
working
group,
that
was
my
initial
reaction
was
that
we
were
looking
to
see
a
fair
process
by
which
we
can
take
a
developer
who's.
Looking
at
spending
$60,000
on
building
a
parking
space
and
basically
figuring
out
what
fraction
of
that
value
we
can
extract
out
of
them
and
get
you
know,
basically,
a
spending
on
transit,
oriented
benefits
for
the
community
or
whatnot
after
thinking
about
it
more
and
thinking
about
the
cost
of
housing
in
our
area
and
the
cost
of
affordable
housing.
I
I
think
that,
in
contrast
with
the
commercial
parking
working
group
which
does
have
that
sort
of
proffer,
we
don't
have
a
policy
for
affordable
housing
for
commercial
like
we
only
have
we
don't
have
businesses
that
are,
you
know
not
able
to
to
live
anywhere
because
an
affordable
housing
but
I
think
that,
in
terms
of
being
able
to
find
people
places
to
live
and
for
people
to
be
able
to
for
places
to
live,
that,
a
different
approach
was
necessary.
That
didn't
involve
extracting
some
of
the
value
Thank.
G
Following
up
somewhat
I'm
Commissioner
prices
question
mr.
Krim,
you
you
point,
you
went
right
to
talking
about
site
plan.
What
about
by
right?
Development
is
is
by
right
development,
something
that
happens
much
in
these
areas
and
if
it
is,
is
it
doesn't
happen
enough
that
we
should
be
thinking
about
buy
downs
and
buy
right.
U
G
U
Think
it's
I
think
the
reasons
why
the
development
community
goes
site
plan
are
broader
than
that
that
it
is
providing
more
program
on
the
site.
It
is
allowing
for
more
flexible
design.
Better
design
are
by
right
is
basically
1950s
Euclidean
zoning
and
it
is
a
bad,
suburban
pattern
by
and
large
and
fortunately
our
development
community
isn't
there
they
want
to
produce
good
urban
mixed-use
projects.
Thank.
B
W
The
reasons
are
the
while
this
East
Falls
Church
is
around
a
metro
station,
but
it
has
not
had
the
general
land
use,
planning
or
transportation
infrastructure
that
the
Rosslyn
Ballston
portion
of
the
corridor
has
had
so
it
is
served
by
Metro,
but
you
know
it
has
a
park-and-ride
lot.
It
is
certainly
of
lower
density
and
it
seemed
that
the
Rosslyn
Boston
corridor
was
more
similar
in
the
way
that
the
transportation
system
and
land-use
patterns
have
developed
than
East
Falls
churches
in
comparison.
W
B
I
moved
the
Transportation
Commission,
adopt
the
off-street
parking
policy
for
multifamily.
Sorry
I
moved
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommended
that
the
County
Board
adopt
the
off
street
parking
policy
for
multi-family
residential
projects,
approved
by
special
exception
in
the
Rosslyn
Boston
and
Jefferson
Davis
Metro
corridors
and
related
recommendations
as
set
forth
in
attachment
1.
B
And
we
recommend
that
the
county
board
direct
the
county
manager
to
explore
a
similar
policy
for
site
plans
and
use
permits
in
the
Columbia
Pike
and
Lee
Highway
areas,
and
that
we
recommend
the
county
board
direct
the
county
manager
to
explore
amendments
to
the
buy-rite
minimum
parking
requirements
and
the
zoning
ordinance
designed
to
implement
the
provisions
of
the
proposed
policy.
Mr.
T
W
So
we've
also
heard
interest
from
others
in
the
community
of
like
well.
Why
aren't
you
paying
this
kind
of
attention
to
our
area
or
there's
opportunity
and
a
lot
of
vision
around
Columbia
Pike?
There,
of
course,
is
in
the
work
study
of
the
Lee
Highway
area,
so
with
both
the
work
that's
gone
before
on
Columbia,
Pike
and
potentially
in
the
future,
with
Lee
highway.
We
at
least
want
to
put
on
record
the
idea
that
we
should
look
at
this
in
those
areas.
There's.
W
So
to
the
extent
that
the
Lee
Highway
process
is
faster
than
us,
we
don't
want
to
slow
that
down,
but
you
know
we're
only
two
floors
away
from
C
PhD,
so
it's
the
extent
that
we
can
provide
input
or
they
can
provide
us
input
back
based
on
what
they've
talked
about
with
the
community.
That
could,
of
course,
could
be
inputs
for
a
more
concentrated
parse
process
on
parking,
so
I
mean
in
an
ideal
world.
B
A
H
AA
Well
good
evening,
mr.
chairman
and
members
of
the
Commission,
my
name
is
Matt
Roberts
with
the
law
from
a
beam
Kenyon
Corman
I'm
here
tonight
representing
the
applicant
and
we're
very
excited
to
be
here
discussing
the
major
site
plan
amendment
to
site
plan
number
three
with
you.
As
you
know,
from
our
information
item
hearing
a
couple
months
ago.
AA
AA
We
are
located
at
the
intersection
of
Lee
Highway,
north
Underwood
Street,
as
well
as
very
near
the
intersection
of
Lee
Highway
and
Washington
Boulevard
just
to
the
south
of
the
site
for
a
little
bit
more
context
or
approximately
a
half
mile
from
the
East
Falls
Church
metro
station.
As
you
can
see
in
the
diagram
in
front
of
you,
we
have
the
Charles
a
Stewart
Park,
located
to
our
West
single-family
housing
across
the
street
on
Underwood
the
Fenwick
Court
townhouse
community.
AA
To
our
south
on
the
adjacent
property
line,
as
well
as
the
various
commercial
and
retail
uses
that
are
located
across
Lee
Highway
from
this
site
next
slide,
please,
the
site
is
currently
developed
with
a
SunTrust
Bank
site.
There
are,
as
you
can
see
in
the
diagram
in
front
of
you.
The
site
does
not
currently
operate
in,
probably
the
optimal
manner.
You'd
want
from
a
transportation
perspective.
AA
There
are
four
curb
cuts
located
on
the
site:
two
on
Lee
Highway,
as
well
as
two
on
North
Underwood
Street,
there's
a
large
surface
parking
lot
on
site
with
approximately
73
spaces,
and
if
you
were
to
go
and
view
the
sidewalks
in
landscaping
area
today,
there's
not
much
landscaping
area
at
all
and
approximately
five
foot
sidewalks
on
both
frontages
next
slide.
Please,
before
we
get
into
some
of
the
ways
we've
laid
out
the
site
since
the
Commission
last
solid
I,
do
want
to
highlight
two
major
changes
that
we've
done
in
light
of
SPRC.
AA
When
the
Commission
last
saw
this
project,
the
units
were
oriented
on
the
site,
as
you
see
them
on
the
left
and
one
of
the
major
changes
that
we've
done
in
response
to
SPRC
comments
and
to
better
bring
inline
the
project
with
the
East
Falls
Church
plan
is
we've
both
flipped,
so
that
they
face
directly
onto
north
Underwood
Street
and
we've
also
rotated
an
internal
stick
of
units
away
from
Fenwick
Court,
and
so
that
they
run
parallel
to
Lee
Highway.
This
does
two
things.
AA
First,
on
north
Underwood
Street
we're
now
able
to
create
that
residential
edge
along
the
build
to
line
that's
called
for
in
the
East
Falls
Church
plan.
So
this
makes
North
Underwood
Street
a
lot
more
like
the
Lee.
Highway
frontage
puts
those
doors
and
steps
directly
out
onto
the
street.
The
other
thing
we've
done
by
rotating
the
units
nearest
to
Fenwick
Court
is
we've
been
able
to
open
up
the
views
for
the
for
our
federal
court
neighbors
at
least
four
to
two
or
three
units
adjacent
to
the
site.
AA
So
now,
instead
of
looking
into
the
rears
of
these
units,
they're
going
to
be
looking,
you
know
deeper
into
the
site.
It
allows
more
light
and
air
into
their
units.
Next
slide,
please,
but
outside
of
that,
the
project
still
continues
to
propose
27
townhouse
units.
We
are
approximately
16
units
per
acre.
AA
We
plan
to
accomplish
that
as
I
mentioned
before,
by
both
our
rezoning
to
the
r8
8/8
eighteen
district,
which
is
in
line
with
the
East
Falls
Church
plan,
the
glup
and
in
fact,
calls
for
the
site
to
be
low,
medium,
residential
and
the
East
Falls
Church
plan
calls
for
this
site
to
permit
townhouse
development.
The
site
plan
amendment
that
we've
asked
for
is
the
requirement
to
go
from
a
bank
site
to
a
townhouse
development
as
we're
proposing
with
this
plan
as
before,
the
units
are
roughly
22
feet
by
50
feet.
AA
When
the
Commission
previously
saw
you
know
this
development
again,
we
were
proposing
units
that
were
inward
facing
along
north
Underwood
Street,
as
opposed
to
facing
outwardly
with
the
change
in
terms
of
flipping
the
unit
we've.
Now,
we've
now
created
a
situation
where,
as
called
for
in
the
East
Falls
Church
plan,
both
lee
highway
and
Underwood
are
full
brick
along
the
major
frontages,
including
the
sides
of
each
unit,
all
the
way
up
through
into
the
gables.
AA
As
you
can
see
in
some
of
the
sketches
adjacent
to
this
there's
brick
again,
going
all
the
way
up,
so
we're
maintaining
the
same
facade
as
you
as
you
come
around
the
major
street
frontages
internal
to
the
site,
there's
a
mixture
of
materials
with
brick,
going
up
to
the
first
floor,
separated
by
a
band
into
hardiplank,
siding
as
you
continue
to
go
up
the
unit.
Again.
AA
Some
separation
between
us
in
federal
court
there's
a
large
retaining
wall
that
we
will
be
replacing
with
this
development,
going
from
basically
a
wood
structure
to
stone,
over
top
of
an
aluminum
fencing
to
kind
of
create
that
separation
in
distance.
One
thing
we
highlighted
for
the
Commission
last
time
and
continues
to
be
the
case
with
this
development
is:
there
is
a
private
pathway
that
exists
between
Fenwick
Court
and
this
project
that
gets
you
into
Charles
a
Stewart
Park.
AA
We'll
continue
to
have
a
set
of
steps,
though,
for
you
know,
enter
parcel
access
to
and
from
Underwood
Street.
Next
slide,
please,
with
this
project,
we're
providing
a
pretty
heavy
revision
of
the
streetscapes
in
the
area.
All
is
all
in
accordance
with
the
East
Falls
Church
area
plan.
Most
immediately,
you
can
see
we're
going
to
be
eliminating
the
two
lee
highway.
Curb
cuts,
we're
also
going
to
be
providing
internal
private
streets
that
are
roughly
between
23
and
26
feet
in
any
given
place.
That's
a
requirement
of
the
fire
marshal.
AA
As
we
discussed
at
the
information
item
hearing.
As
you
can
see,
we
have
to
have
the
ability
to
bring
in
a
truck
with
a
ladder
it's
able
to
service
these.
You
know
these
units
in
the
event
of
an
emergency,
so
we
have
to
provide
those
turnarounds,
we're
also
making
pretty
substantial
revisions
to
both
the
sidewalk
network
on
the
major
frontages
which
we'll
see
in
the
next
slides.
So
the
next
slide,
please
very
quickly.
This
is
just
a
cross-section
of
our
proposed
lee
highway.
AA
Next
slide,
please
slightly
different
visual
of
that
we
will
be
providing
taking
the
right-of-way
in
landscaping
area
from
seven
and
a
half
feet
roughly,
if
you
were
to
add
it
all
up
today
to
19
feet
in
total
between
the
back
of
the
curb
and
I'm
sorry,
the
the
curb
to
the
building
face,
so
we're
increasing
that
sidewalk
to
8
feet,
we're
adding
a
six-foot
tree
furniture
zone
nearest
alley
highway,
as
well
as
a
5
foot
planting
strip
between
the
sidewalk
and
the
units.
Next
slide,
please!
AA
Similarly
on
Underwood
in
this
cross
section,
you
want
to
look
Center
to
left
and
again
we're
similarly
adding
the
right-of-way
and
landscaping
area
behind
the
curb
next
slide
on
this
side
of
north
Underwood
Street,
the
East
Falls
Church
plan
calls
for
a
5-foot
tree
infirmed
for
zone
six-foot
sidewalk
and
a
5-foot
planning
strip
between
the
sidewalk
in
the
face
of
the
buildings.
Again,
if
you
were
to
go
out
there
today,
it's
really
just
the
six-foot
sidewalk,
so
a
pretty
large
improvement
for
the
public
right
away.
AA
Next
slide,
please,
as
we
discussed
at
the
information
item
hearing
the
site,
is
pretty
well
served
by
alternative
transit
modes.
There
are
three
bus
stops
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
the
site,
one
occurring
directly
on
the
property,
we're
again
within
a
half-mile,
the
East,
Falls,
Church
metro
and,
as
many
of
you
know,
there's
a
pretty
substantial
bike.
Network
in
the
area,
we
will
be
providing
on-site
bike
facilities.
You
know
bike
racks
things
of
that
nature.
Next
slide,
please!
This
slide,
you
know
summarizes
for
you.
AA
When
you
go
from
the
bank
to
the
townhouse
development,
particularly
at
the
worst
intersect,
the
worst
operating
intersection
at
North
under
woodenly
highway,
so
the
levels
of
service
that
you
see
on
the
screen
in
front
of
you
currently,
the
F
and
E-
exist
regardless
of
this
project,
and
in
fact,
when
you
add
this
project
into
the
background,
we're
reducing
a.m.
peak
trips
by
74%
and
p.m.
peak
trips
by
roughly
67%.
AA
So
while
the
level
of
service
doesn't
change
it,
certainly
it
does
not
get
worse
with
this
project
and
in
terms
of
TMP
and
the
conditions
we
continue
to
work
through
the
site
plan
conditions
with
staff,
but
we
do
intend
to
commit
to
the
standard,
TDM
conditions
and
so
with
that.
Well,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
we're
happy
to
answer
any
questions
they
might
have.
AB
For
the
two
point,
two
requirement:
I
think
we
all
know
where
the
site
is
located
and
the
context
and
Matt
did
a
great
job
talking
about
the
design.
So
the
main
guiding
principle
document
for
this
project
was
a
search
area
plan
which
was
approved
in
2011
and
I
know.
This
is
a
little
bit
difficult
to
read,
but
it
talks
a
little
bit
about
the
if
I'm
focusing
my
presentation
here
on
recommendation,
24
and
25,
which
speaks
to
the
pedestrian
network
that
will
involve
the
frontage
of
this
site
on
the
highway.
AB
Here's
another
graphic
so
currently
there's
an
informal
walking
path
for
our
site
and
areas
north
across
the
highway,
either
at
a
crosswalk
at
Sycamore
or
Washington
or
illegally
crossing
somewhere
in
between,
through
the
private
property,
on
the
Verizon
site
through
their
parking
lot.
And
then
you
get
to
Washington
Boulevard
and
either
cross
legally
at
a
marked,
crosswalk
or
illegally
across
Washington
Boulevard.
To
get
then
to
the
metro
station.
AB
That
path
is
approximately
it's
a
1/10
of
a
mile
shorter
than
the
the
solid
red
line
path
which
it
which
is
on
sidewalks
and
marked
crosswalks
I'm
down
Sycamore.
And
so
it's
the
difference
about
0.4
miles
versus
0.5.
If
you
use
marked
crosswalks
so
about
two
minutes
of
walking
difference,
but
it
is
a
very
important
path
to
the
neighborhood
and
one
that
was
brought
up
through
the
SPRC
process.
AB
AB
But
it
was
a
concern
that
had
been
brought
up
by
the
neighborhood,
so
I
wanted
to
touch
upon
it
tonight
and
then
finally,
some
of
the
key
transportation
or
des
related
conditions
are
highlighted
for
you
here.
If
you
have
any
specific
questions
about
these
I'm
available
to
answer
them
and
I
have
highlighted
the
staff
recommendation
for
the
Transportation
Commission
to
recommend
approval
to
the
County
Board.
Thank
you.
A
B
I
This
I
was
the
member
of
the
SPRC
that
was
on
this
process.
Most
of
the
changes
that
came
out
of
SPRC
were
architectural
or
in
the
case
of
the
stick
of
townhomes,
it
was
aligning
the
townhomes
along
Underwood.
I
will
note
that
when
you
change,
I
learned
something
during
SPRC,
and
that
is
when
you
change
a
townhouse
from
front
loaded
to
back
loaded.
I
For
us,
he
also
agreed
to
change
the
exterior
look
of
the
units
and
other
things
there
weren't
that
many
transportation
related
items
that
came
up
other
than
my
strong
desire
to
have
a
signalized
pedestrian
intersection
and
many
questions
that
resulted
for
why
we
cannot
do
that
at
that
time.
The
only
other
transportation
related
issue
was
a
general
neighborhood
concerned
that
the
bank's
parking
lot
is
generally
used
to
support
the
extreme
amount
of
soccer
playing
children
at
Charlton.
I
I
Well,
you
can
see
from
the
price,
it
was
probably
twenty
or
thirty,
so
it
was
quite
a
bit.
The
policy
that
we
have
for
parking
at
parks
is
that
people
can
park
along
the
block,
face
that
adjoins
the
park
and
then
on
Saturdays
and
Sundays.
The
streets
in
the
area
are
not
really
a
part
of
any
RPP
zone,
so
they
are
free
for
all.
So.
B
My
question
is
these
Falls
Church
sector
plan
calls
for
eventually,
hopefully
getting
to
some
sort
of
bike
infrastructure
on
Lee
Highway.
Does
this
as
design?
Does
this
development
support
that
eventualities
assuming
a
bunch
more
development
in
the
future,
or
does
it
forestall
that
from
ever
happening?
This.
AB
Development
does
not
change
the
right-of-way
width,
so
we
should
be
able
to
accommodate
bicycle
infrastructure
in
the
future.
That
type
of
change
would
necessitate.
Looking
at
all
the
lane
markings,
obviously
across
Lee
Highway
and
there's
enough
there's
sufficient
width
there,
depending
on
how
many,
like
you
know,
lanes
we're
gonna
have
so
we
are
confident
that
we
can
fit
something
in
if,
in
the
future,
that's
what's
gonna
happen
along
the
entire
corridor.
We.
B
B
AB
I
H
AB
B
A
AC
Given
given
the
lateness
of
the
hour,
I
think
I'll
get
started
as
my
presentation
loads.
Mr.
chair
members,
the
Commission,
my
name
is
Kendrick
Whitman
with
Venable
and
I
represent
the
applicant
for
this
matter.
Jb
G
Smith
this
project
before
you
this
evening
is
an
informational
item
related
to
development
on
the
square
block
in
Crystal
City.
It
is
the
first
of
two
projects
that
you're
gonna
see
in
this
area
in
the
coming
months.
It's
great
timing
on
the
next
slide.
AC
You'll
see
the
block
highlighted
there
in
blue
in
the
context
of
Crystal
City
and
the
larger
surrounding
area.
The
next
slide
zooms.
In
a
little
more
closely.
You
can
see
that
the
block
is
bounded
on
the
west
by
Jefferson
Davis
Highway
on
the
south,
by
18th
Street,
on
the
east,
by
Crystal
Drive
and
on
the
north
by
15th
Street.
There
are
five
existing
buildings
on
the
block,
four
of
which
are
office
buildings
owned
by
the
applicant.
AC
You
can
also
see
that
both
the
existing
metro
station
on
the
upper
left
side
of
this
shot,
as
well
as
the
proposed
metro
station
at
18th,
Street
and
Crystal
Drive,
are
located
on
the
block
and
will
be
located
on
the
block.
We
see
this
block
is
a
really
key
element
in
the
overall
development
of
Crystal
City.
Before
the
true
vision
of
the
sector
plan
can
be
realized.
AC
There
are
some
serious
gaps
on
this
block,
most
notably
along
18th
Street.
Where
that
large
loop
road
is
and
then
along
Crystal
Drive
between
the
two
office
buildings.
It
leads
to
some
dead
zones
and
it
really
makes
for
kind
of
a
difficult
and
isolated
pedestrian
experience,
and
we
think
it
makes
it
difficult
to
create
the
kind
of
critical
mass
we
want
to
have
an
in
a
great
urban
space.
So
on
the
right
side
is
our
proposed
condition.
AC
I
should
point
out
that,
as
I
mentioned,
there
are
two
separate
applications
that
will
be
coming
forward,
that
on
the
left
within
the
dotted
line,
is
going
to
be
in
a
subsequent
application
that
includes
a
corner
retail
building
along
18th
streets,
open
space
and
a
conversion
of
an
existing
office
building
to
residential
so
put
that
aside.
Obviously,
this
is
going
to
operate
as
a
single
project,
but
that's
gonna
be
in
a
any
later
submission.
The
items
before
you
this
evening
with
this
submission
are
on
the
right
side
and
they
include
a
theater
building.
AC
That
is
the
kind
of
square
box
being
dropped
down
there.
That
covers
up
that
large
gap.
That's
going
to
be
an
Alamo
Drafthouse,
theater
kind
of
a
boutique
specialty
movie,
theater
that
we're
very
excited
about
and
then
adjacent
to
it.
It's
going
to
be
a
low-rise
brochure
kind
of
bump
out
from
the
existing
building,
as
well
as
some
additional
retail.
That's
going
to
be
turned
to
face
Crystal
Drive,
a
little
more.
So
then
the
next
slide.
You
can
see
the
plan
view.
This
is
again
the
existing
block.
AC
You
can
really
see
those
gaps
there,
even
a
little
more
pronounced
there
along
18th
Street
and
along
Crystal
Drive.
One
of
the
things
you
can't
really
see
is
a
real
great
difficulty
from
South
Bell
Street
dropping
down
to
Crystal
Drive,
there's
a
significant
grade
change
that
really
creates
a
pretty
difficult
physical
condition
for
this
block.
The
other
physical
challenges
are
a
little
more
obvious.
You
can
see
that
the
internal
road
network
is
a
fairly
confusing
series
of
loop
roads,
both
along
18th
Street
and
15th
Street.
AC
If
you
go
to
the
next
slide,
you
can
see.
This
is
the
plan
view
of
the
proposed
the
proposed
condition
on
the
block
again
on
the
left
side,
which
is
the
south.
Those
are
the
the
the
subject
of
the
future
application:
the
corner
building
at
18th
and
crystal
the
open
space
to
the
north
of
that
corner.
Building
and
then
the
building
marked
1770
Crystal
Drive
JVG,
that
is
all
surrounded
by
the
dotted
line.
AC
That
again,
will
be
in
a
future
presentation,
but
we
think
will
work
very
well
with
the
proposal
that
we
have
before
you
here
today.
As
you
can
see,
we've
got
the
theater
and
1550
Crystal
Drive
in
front
of
that
there
is
the
grocer
building
a
couple.
Other
things
to
point
out.
We
are
addressing
that
significant
grade
in
the
area
between
the
corner
building
in
1770,
with
a
monumental
stairs
going
to
really
help
to
connect
the
grade,
the
ground
level
and
crystal
drive
with
the
plaza
level
above.
AC
It
should
also
point
out
that
the
loading
and
parking
on
18th,
Street
and
15th
Street
are
significantly
simplified
compared
to
what
you
saw
in
the
prior
slide.
The
loading
for
the
proposed
grocery
store
is
also
going
to
be
in
that
15th
Street
area.
Finally,
the
changes
are
gonna
really
enhance
the
pedestrian
experience
considerably.
We've
added
a
couple
of
cross
walks
across
Crystal
Drive
and,
as
you
can
see,
that
the
buildings
are
slightly
pulled
back
from
crystal
from
Crystal
Drive
compared
to
what
they
are
in.
AC
The
current
condition,
which
is,
if
you've
been
down,
there's
not
it
not
a
great
walking
condition,
so
the
last
thing
I'd
point
out
is
that
there
are
some
also
some
significant
entrances
to
the
underground.
So
if
you
take
a
look
at
the
next
slide,
this
shows
what
the
underground
network
looks
like.
This
is
an
important
part
of
Crystal
City
and
an
important
part
of
pedestrian
connections
through
and
and
within
this
block,
you
can
also
get
a
better
look
at
the
loading
here
on
this
level
at
18th
and
15th
so
on.
AC
The
next
slide
is
some
information
about
the
the
transit
options
here.
This
is
a
really
well
served
site.
You
can
see
within
this
one
mile
radius
we've
got
about
a
dozen
bus
stops
to
metro
stations
and
in
several
bike
share
stations.
The
next
slide
will
give
you
a
little
more
granular
level
of
the
transit
near
this
site.
You
can
see
again.
There
are
multiple
local
and
regional
bus
lines.
There
is
a
transit
way
and
the
existing
metro
station.
So
the
next
slide
gives
you
a
little
more
information
on
the
bicycle
facilities.
AC
It's
pretty
well
served
today,
we're
also
proposing
some
new
bike
lanes
on
15th,
Street
and
South
Clark
and
has
great
connections
also
to
the
the
county's
bicycle
network.
The
next
slide
talks
about
the
pedestrian
connections.
We
have
a
fairly
good
environment
through
a
lot
of
Crystal
City,
but
there
are
a
couple
pinch
points.
There
are
a
couple
of
narrow
areas
here
that
we're
going
to
address
through
the
proposed
development
next
slide.
These
are
the
the
sector
plan
recommended
and
proposed
streets.
AC
We
are,
we
are
pretty
much
in
the
same
location
as
the
as
the
recommendations
we
have
tried
to
neck
down
the
lanes
a
little
bit
on
crystal
drive
to
make
it
easier
crossing
for
pit
treants.
So
that's
the
crystal
drive
section
in
the
next
slide
will
show
you
the
15th
Street
connection.
Now,
if
you
move
to
the
next
slide,
some
information
I
won't
belabor
this,
but
the
bus
bus
facilities
here
are
pretty
heavily
used.
I
think
we
can
go
to
the
next
slide.
Here
are
our
trip
generation.
AC
We
assumed
50/50
mode
splits,
which
is
done
typically
throughout
Crystal,
City
and
and
we've
looked
at
both
the
pedestrian
and
multimodal
use
of
transit
in
this
site.
Next
slide,
please.
So
we
did
our
ti
a
and
in
that
we
found
out
of
the
20
intersections.
We
studied
only
three
of
them
were
impacted
by
the
proposed
development.
AC
It
just
so
happens
that
these
three
intersections
are
all
physically
on
jbg,
Smith,
private
property,
so
we're
very
heavily
incentivized
to
to
mitigate
these
these
circumstances,
and
we
do
believe
that
the
signal
optimization
is
going
to
really
be
helpful
in
mitigating
these
conditions.
Next
slide,
we're
gonna
be
providing
the
standard
TDM
suite,
which
you
off
seen
many
times
next
slide.
This
is
just
a
loading
slide.
I
won't
spend
time
on.
AC
It
shows
you
the
loading
pattern
into
the
into
the
grocer
along
15th,
Street,
and
so
the
next
slide
provides
some
of
the
information
about
the
transportation
recommendations
that
we
believe
we're
meeting
here.
Supporting
the
multimodal
system,
expanding
county
control
over
streets,
I
should
mention.
There
are
really
significant
street
dedications
associated
with
this
project.
If
you
all
are
where
majority
of
Crystal
Drive
and
the
other
streets
within
Crystal,
City
or
actually
privately
owned,
with
easements
we're
making
fee
dedications
with
a
lot
of
those
areas
and
the
next
slide
is
yen.
Thank
you.
F
F
The
next
steps
are
there's
SPRC
on
November
20th
str3
on
December
14th,
and
we
are
continuing
to
coordinate
with
the
applicant
on
the
county
project
was,
was
the
Clark
Bell
extension
15th
Street
south
from
12th
Street
style
to
18th,
Street,
South
and
15th
Street
south?
That
is
the
official
name
of
it.
B
F
Before
the
applicant
adds
that
we're
actually
still
we're
still
in
the
process
of
discussing
the
crosswalk
locations
across
Crystal
Drive,
this
is
a
I
know.
It's
a
little
small,
but
this
right
here
is
the
existing
crosswalk,
that's
signalized.
Today
this
is
the
VRE
and
the
loading
entrance
for
the
apartments
they
are
proposing.
One
at
this
location,
you
know
generally
from
a
staff
opinion
it's
a
bit
too
close
to
the
other
crossings,
so
we're
a
little
weary
of
having
the
two
crossings,
and
so
you
are
sort
of
conceptually
we're
thinking
just
one
between
this
area.
F
B
H
A
B
Two
quick
things
very,
very,
very,
very
very
briefly
one.
We
need
an
S
PRC
rep
to
that
site
plan
that
we
just
saw.
If
anyone
is
interested,
please
let
me
know
also
Commissioner
Perez
sends
his
kind
regards.
He,
unfortunately,
is
closing
on
a
house
in
Alexandria
and
is
no
longer
able
to
be
on
Transportation
Commission.
So,
unfortunately,
since
he
was
out
of
town
tonight,
his
last
meeting
as
a
transportation
Commissioner
has
already
passed.
B
So
if
you
have
thoughts
on
other
people,
we
should
be
inviting
seeking
out.
We
do
have
two
open
spaces
at
this
time
on
the
commission.
So
please,
let
me
know
on
that
and
I
will
put
one
more
plug
in
that
we
still
desperately
need
a
liaison
to
the
neighborhood
Complete
Streets,
Commission
and
I
continue
to
be
bugged.
We
don't
have
one
neighborhood
Complete
Streets.
It
is
a
neat
little
it's
the
thing
that
came
after
the
neighborhood
traffic
calming
Commission.
It
is
doing
targeted.
B
For
instance,
they
have
some
money
to
do
pedestrian
and
bike
and
whatnot
improvements
on
residential
neighborhood
streets,
not
arterioles,
not
the
big
commercial
ones,
fixing
the
targeted
little
issues
where
people
live
there.
Their
charter
requires
them
to
have
a
TC
rep
and
we
have
not
appointed
them
one
all
right,
fantastic
I
will
send
you
details
anything
else
for
the
good
of
the
Commission,
all
right,
we
are
adjourned.
Thank
you.