►
From YouTube: Transportation Commission Meeting | March 2, 2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
It's
7
P.M,
so
we
can
start.
A
Good
evening,
everyone
today
is
Thursday
March,
2nd
2023rd.
This
is
a
hybrid
meeting
and
we
are
joined
in
person
and
virtually
my
name
is
Bridget
obicoya
and
I
am
the
Transportation
Commission
staff
liaison
this
meeting
is
being
recorded.
So
please
turn
off
your
mics
and
teams.
If
you
are
not
speaking
before,
we
start
with
the
agenda,
are
there
any
comments
on
items
not
on
the
agenda
hearing?
None
will
start
by
turning
the
meeting
over
to
Chairman
Chris
Slatt
in
the
first
agenda
item.
Only
agenda
item
is
missing
middle.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
becoya,
I'm,
Chris,
Latt,
chair
of
the
Transportation
Commission,
welcome
to
everyone.
It's
good
to
see
people
tonight
I
only
have
basically
one
announcement,
which
is
that
I
would
like
us
to
welcome.
We
have
two
new
members
of
the
commission,
which
brings
us
finally
up
to
our
full
strength
of
13..
C
D
All
right,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Brian
Coleman
I
currently
serve
as
the
second
vice
president
of
the
Arlington
NAACP
and
I'm,
particularly
interested
in
issues
related
to
housing
and
economic
development.
So
it's
a
pleasure
to
be
able
to
work
with
this
distinguished
body
on
matters
of
Transportation
which,
as
you
all
know,
intersect
with
issues
of
Transportation
housing
and
economic
development.
Thank
you.
E
Okay,
sorry,
my
name
is
Patty
Adair,
my
husband
and
I
moved
into
Penrose
in
1998,
and
we've
seen
many
changes
over
the
past
24
years
in
Penrose,
including
much
more
traffic
on
2nd
Street
South
in
the
entire
neighborhood,
with
more
people.
We
get
more
cars
when
we,
when
I,
hear
Community
leaders
espousing
theories
that
we're
all
going
to
take
mass
transit
or
are
already
doing
that.
So
the
high
density
upzoning
proposal
won't
bring
more
cars
and
traffic
to
Penrose.
It
just
doesn't
jive
with
what
I
observe
and
experience
daily.
E
It
seems
like
magical
thinking,
I
invite
all
of
you
to
take
a
stroll
around
Penrose,
most
of
our
neighbors
have
two
or
more
vehicles
for
many
of
my
neighbors.
One
of
more
of
those
vehicles
are
work,
related,
think,
white,
Vans
for
painting
companies,
trucks
used
by
renovation
contractors
and
landscapers
and
food
trucks.
These
are
not
jobs
which
readily
lend
themselves
to
hopping
on
the
med
trip.
E
Mass
transit
like
art,
buses,
Metro
buses
and
the
metro
rail
system
are
available
now,
but
I'm
still
seeing
my
neighbors
go
off
to
work
in
the
morning
in
their
work,
trucks,
bands
and
cars.
Why
would
we
think
that
residents
of
proposed
multi-units
won't
have
multiple
vehicles
and
where
and
we'll
all
use
mass
transit
as
I
see
it?
Six
new
units
will
mean
12
cars.
E
Where
will
they
Park
I
already
can't
park
in
front?
My
house?
We
purchased
our
home
after
years
of
renting
a
stint
in
the
Peace,
Corps
and
grad
school.
We
finally
got
together
enough
money
for
a
down
payment
in
1998
and
purchased
our
small
Sears
home
in
Penrose.
We
wanted
to
live
in
a
diverse
neighborhood
and
we
do
we
love
the
tree
canopy
and
the
value
and
value
the
Arlington
County
public
school
system.
Like
many
seniors,
we
hope
to
live
in
our
sweet,
little
Bungalow
and
age
in
place.
E
However,
the
upswing
proposal
is
likely
to
have
a
profoundly
negative
effect
on
the
quality
of
life
in
Penrose,
with
even
more
traffic
and
all
the
noise
and
pollution
that
goes
along
with
it.
We
have
a
variety
of
housing
types
in
Penrose,
including
single-family
homes,
duplexes,
townhomes
and
apartments.
It
is
unclear
to
me
what
the
county
is
trying
to
fix
with
this.
With
this
high
density
up
zoning
proposal,
I
can
readily
imagine
investors
snapping
up
these
properties
and
renting
them
out
at
market
prices.
E
F
Good
evening,
can
you
hear
me?
Okay?
Yes,
thank
you.
So
my
name
is
Joshua.
Handler
I
live
in
the
boulevard.
Manor
neighborhood
and
I
have
about
I,
have
concerns
about
the
traffic
that
could
result
from
missing
middle
housing
proposal
a
much
long
lines.
Last
speaker,
my
neighborhood
has
fairly
wide
streets
as
one
of
the
newer
Suburban
neighborhoods
in
Arlington,
but
you
plop
a
few
six
plexes
in
our
neighborhood.
Adding
she
put
it
a
dozen
several
dozens
of
cars.
The
traffic
in
our
neighborhoods
can
become
materially
worse,
it's
already
quite
bad.
F
During
rush
hour,
we
already
have
safety
issues
with
cut
through
traffic.
We've
already
have
speed
bumps
in
the
neighborhood
to
slow
people
down,
so
six
bucks
is
multiplying
across
our
neighborhood
and
the
county
as
a
whole
is
not
an
appealing
Prospect.
When
it
comes
to
traffic
and
safety
issues.
I
think
Theo
mentioned
it
himself
in
terms
of
pedestrian
safety
and
bike
safety.
It
seems
like
it
would
only
get
worse
over
time.
F
So
a
question
I
had
for
you
is
the
Transportation
Commission
is:
have
you
looked
at
the
comprehensive
impact
of
this
missing
middle
housing
study
or
whatever
we're
calling
a
proposal
moment
on
traffic
in
Arlington?
It
seems,
like
we've,
been
doing
it
bits
and
pieces
we're
looking
at
the
parking
question
looking
at
this
at
that,
but
there
hasn't
been
a
comprehensive
look
of
what
does
it
mean
to
multiply
that
level
of
density
Arlington
and
the
traffic
impacts
could
have
in
neighborhoods?
As
I
said,
I
live
in
a
neighborhood,
the
wide
Street.
F
F
On
a
final
note
on
the
parking
I
would
appreciate
an
explanation
of.
Perhaps
staff
can
provide
this
page
823
of
the
recent
step
report.
F
There's
this
curious
exemption
called
out
to
one
and
two
family
dwellings
and
expanded
housing
option
development
subject
to
10-4
should
not
be
subject
to
the
aisle
with
requirements
set
forth
in
14.3.3
point
C1,
page
a23.
What
does
that
mean
if
the
eho
is
Exempted
from
these
kind
of
requirements?
Is
there
going
to
be
proper
parking
on
site?
Is
it
going
to
force
more
parking
off-site
just
as
a
Layman?
Looking
at
this
I
would
appreciate
some
in-depth
discussion
of
that
if
possible.
Thank
you
very
much.
G
Yeah
I'm
virtual.
Thank
you
appreciate
the
time
and
opportunity
tonight.
37
going
on
38-year
Transportation
expert
worked
on
Transportation
issues.
City
traffic
engineer,
Metropolitan
planning
organization,
leader
for
region
worked
at
state
government
federal
government
dealt
with
traffic
operations,
parking
zoning
planning,
Corridor
planning,
Community
planning,
freeway
Corridor
planning
and
dealt
with
Transportation,
as
well
as
all
forms
of
Public
Safety
as
a
part
of
those.
G
Those
issues
object
to
the
missing
middle
housing
proposal
anywhere
in
Arlington
I,
encourage
you
to
object
and
indicate
your
objection
to
it
at
this
meeting
today
also
object
to
any
reduction
in
on
on
parcel
parking,
there's
no
basis,
that's
been
provided
by
staff
or
anyone
that
justifies
reducing
parking
on
on
parcel
anywhere
in
Arlington,
let
alone
within
Transit
corridors.
There's
no
basis
for
that
recommendation
also
object
and
request
you
to
object
to
any
parking
that
would
be
allowed
in
front
of
any
building
in
the
any
unit
that
would
be
proposed.
G
As
an
example
of
version.
Two
of
the
six
Plex
on
the
6
000
square
foot
lot
has
has
two
Park
two
parking
spaces
in
front
of
the
building
that
that
goes
against
and
it'll
kill
the
neighborhood
it
doesn't.
It
goes
against
the
character
of
existing
neighborhoods
and
how
we've
designed
and
built
neighborhoods
across
Arlington
a
couple
key
points.
Eighty
percent
of,
what's
expected
to
be
built,
will
be
renters
they're,
going
to
come
with
over
one
person
per
unit,
one
car
per
unit
or
per
bedroom,
so
assuming
they'll
only
be
one
car
per
unit
underestimates.
G
What
will
be
there?
You
get
a
three
bedroom
Triplex,
that's
nine
nine
cars
at
a
minimum,
probably
more
the
only
that's
six
parking
spots
on
the
street
and
if
you
get
a
60
foot
wide
lot,
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
handle
those
cars.
There's
not
the
capacity
on
the
street
Virginia
State
Fire
code
503.21
requires
unobstructed
width
of
streets
not
less
than
to
be
not
less
than
20
feet.
G
So
your
responsibility
as
a
Transportation
Commission
is
to
to
look
at
these
proposals
and
what
the
impact
is
going
to
be
on
Public
Safety,
any
any
delay
in
emergency
vehicle
response
time
of
one
minute
increases
a
person's
fatality
rate
by
two
percent.
It
increases
the
cost
of
recovery
of
the
seven
percent
for
medical
costs
and
and
that's
for
any
emergency.
Thank
you
very
much,
which
is
five
percent
of
all
9-1-1
calls.
Thank
you.
H
Hi
there
can
you
hear
me:
yes,
hi
boy
I'm
wondering
that
last
speaker
he
should
be
on
the
Transportation
Commission.
That's
mind-blowing,
I'm
gonna
talk
about
what
Patty
Adair
said
earlier,
so
I
live
in
Penrose
about
a
block
and
a
half
from
Columbia
Pike
I
live
next
to
a
bunch
of
town
homes
and
every
single
town
home
has
two
cars.
Some
have
four
literally.
Nobody
takes
the
Metro.
H
We
already
have
severe
parking
problems
in
the
neighborhood.
A
lot
of
streets
are
zoned
and,
despite
that,
there's
illegal
parking
constantly.
H
In
addition
to
that,
the
way
this
is
framed
to
allow
minimum
parking
near
if
you're
near
a
primary
or
premium
bus
to
me
it's
a
equity
issue.
It
is
discrimination
against
senior
citizens
because
we
can't
walk
down
a
quarter
mile,
a
half
a
mile
three
quarters
of
a
mile
to
get
on
the
bus
and
if
you
all
want
to
go
there
and
advocate
for
that
I
think
you
really
need
to
take
a
hard
look
at
what
Equity
means
to
you,
because
this
is
a
serious
problem
and
you
cannot
perpetuate
it.
H
So
for
all
of
that,
this
parking
is
going
in
the
wrong
direction.
You
need
to
have
more
per
unit,
not
less
thanks.
A
I
Hi,
my
name
is
Ann
Bodine.
Thanks
for
letting
me
speak
tonight,
I'd
ask
that
you
dial
back
the
parking
reductions
and
improve
overall
transportation
planning
for
the
missing
middle
effort.
I
have
several
concerns
tonight.
Six
plexes
is
twice
the
density
of
Minneapolis,
with
none
of
the
needed
planning
for
new
transit
for
more
people.
None
of
the
planning
we
did
with
our
own
Tod
when
we
built
Metro
and
sixplex
infill
also
removes
from
the
market
land
that
should
be
looked
at
for
housing
for
those
in
much
lower
income
brackets.
I
Second,
there
are
some
sneaky
add-ons
that
aren't
even
in
the
feedback
form
prepared
by
the
county,
as
noted
just
recently
by
Mr
Handler
that
to
me
that
means
this
entire
proposal
is
not
ready
for
Prime
Time
article
14.3
line
317
inserts
new
language.
Talking
about
the
one
and
two
family
dwellings
and
expanded
housing
option
development
subject
to
section
10.4
shall
not
be
subject
to
the
aisle
with
requirements
as
notified
Mr
Handler.
What
does
this
even
mean,
and
why
aren't
we
asking
about
it
in
the
in
the
feedback
form?
I
Next
research
shows
that
Arlington
Housing
units
of
two
to
nine
units
has
about
1.5
cars
per
unit.
That's
nine
cars
for
a
six
Plex,
yet
density
Advocates
say
we
are
overparked
and
our
and
our
we
are
entombing
that
myth
and
our
missing
middle
plan.
Meanwhile,
we've
seen
some
pushback
even
from
developers
who
are
being
asked
to
reduce
parking
ratios,
witness
the
February
18th
board.
Meeting
the
developer
of
the
Joyce
motor
site
was
pressed
by
the
board
chair
to
lower
his
parking
ratio.
I
The
attorney
rejected
Mr
dorsey's
offer
to
go
below
the
0.64
ratio
and
the
site
owner
noted
during
the
spr
sprc
process.
We
got
extreme
pushback
from
the
neighborhood
on
the
north
side
of
10th
Street.
We
are
not
trying
to
reduce
to
the
point
we
could
be
creating
problems
in
adjacent
neighborhoods,
yet
the
County
May
Advocate
reducing
parking
parking
ratios
to
0.5
for
units
within
three-quarters
mile
to
Metro.
Please
listen
to
the
February
18th
Joyce
Motors
owner,
who
begs
to
differ
with
that
ratio.
I
Next,
a
disability
advisor
to
the
Housing
Commission
about
10
days
ago
was
told
by
cphd
staff
that
if
you
need
a
parking
space
and
there's
not
an
eho
unit
available
that
provides
a
space
you're
just
going
to
have
to
find
a
different
housing
situation.
She
practically
scoffed
at
that
remark
and
told
him
I,
don't
think
so.
So
you
noted
that
some
units
in
a
force,
fourplex
or
a
six
Plex,
aren't
going
to
have
a
parking
space.
I
That
might
be
a
problem
and
she
also
mentioned
the
need,
in
some
cases,
for
wheelchair
accessibility
for
four
unit
buildings.
Next
option.
5E
makes
no
sense
to
remove
off-street
parking
for
homes
that
don't
have
it
now
witness
the
100
block
of
North
Edgewood
Street.
That
block
currently
lacks
any
on-street
parking
sites
and
there
are
veritable
fights
every
day
between
neighbors.
How
will
that
even
work?
If
we
only
even
had
duplexes
it
will
not
when
County
Board
member
gotcha
promised
us
that
this
will
not
be
anything
like
Minneapolis,
we
never
imagined
it
would
be
worse.
I
K
J
We
can
okay,
I'm
John
Ware
I'm,
a
consumer
protection
lawyer
where's.
The
data
on
Transportation
I
was
heartened
about
two
months
ago
to
hear
several
Commissioners
trying
to
hold
the
county
accountable
for
its
lack
of
providing
data
on
the
transportation
impact
from
missing
middle
Your.
Role
after
all,
is
to
take
facts
and
data
that
the
county
collects
to
be
able
to
Vise
the
county
on
Transit
oriented
development.
The
transportation
plan
calls
for
ensuring
minimum
parking
needs
are
met.
County
policy
is
to
ensure
there
shall
be
sufficient
space
for
off-street
parking.
J
I've
provided
Miss
I'll
be
going
at
some
written
comments,
slides
and
data
that
try
to
fill
this
Gap
slide.
Three
of
what
I've
provided
points
out
at
least
two
Freedom
of
Information
requests,
of
which
I'm
aware
when
the
county
has
responded,
is
done.
Absolutely
no
analysis
on
missing
middle
impact,
potential
impact
on
parking
or
Street
congestion
in
Arlington.
Well,
what
does
the
data
show
slide?
Four
of
what
I
provided
is
census
data
on
Arlington
commutes.
J
Over
the
last
20
years,
the
number
of
arlingtonian's
pre-covered
driving
alone
has
skyrocketed,
while
the
number
of
those
carpooling
has
gone
down.
There's
tons
of
hype
and
rhetoric
about
the
car,
free
diet
or
on
the
whole
people
in
big
buildings
or
missing
metal
types,
don't
want
or
need
parking,
but
what
is
the
data
show
Slide
Five
of
what
I
provided
is
census
data
on
the
number
of
cars
in
Arlington
over
the
last
20
years,
which
has
gone
up
30
000.
J
in
that
same
period,
we've
almost
thirty
thousand
in
that
same
period,
we've
added
about
30
000
homes,
housing
units,
those
are
predominantly
large
buildings
near
Metro
and
near
Transit,
as
well
as
missing
middle
missing
middle
building
types.
What
is
the
data
showing
it's
about?
A
one
to
one
ratio
for
every
housing
unit
of
the
missing
middle
types
and
large
building
units?
There's
one
new
car
in
the
county?
J
What
does
the
data
show
about
public
transit
use?
We
hear
lots
of
that.
Pre-Covered
Metro
Rail
use
in
Arlington
was
going
down
steadily.
It
plummeted
after
covid,
our
art
bus
transit
use
was
down
pre-covered
from
2017
to
2019.,
Metrorail
ridership
on
weekdays
and
weekends
was
down
as
well
as
slides.
Six,
seven
and
eight
of
what
I've
provided
show
Slide
9
shows
that,
according
to
VDOT,
miles
driven
in
Arlington
are
up
35
percent
over
the
last
20
years
leading
up
to
covid.
J
J
A
A
L
Services
I
gave
a
presentation
to
this
Commission
in
January
that
provided
background
and
overview
of
the
missing
middle
housing
study
and
its
goals
to
increase
housing
Supply
and
allow
a
wider
range
of
housing
options
in
Arlington's,
lower
density,
residential
neighborhoods
tonight's
staff
presentation
will
be
shorter
than
it
was
in
January
focused
on
parking
requirements
and
the
options
that
have
been
advertised
by
the
County
Board
before
I
get
into
the
advertised
zoning
text.
I
will
briefly
cover
the
proposed
amendment
to
the
general
Landry
plan
or
the
glup.
L
The
draft
go
up.
Amendment
for
expanded
housing
options
would
add
a
new
subsection
to
the
special
planning
areas
section
of
the
booklet.
This
new
section
describes
the
overall
policy
goals
and
objectives
for
enabling
new
housing
options
in
areas
currently
limited
to
single
detached
housing.
The
draft
also
acknowledges
that
land
use
policies
that
restrict
housing
options,
which
were
adopted
many
decades
ago,
have
resulted
in
inequities
in
housing
opportunities.
L
The
draft
glove
Amendment
would
encourage
a
wider
range
of
housing
choices
for
lower
density,
residential
neighborhoods
that
are
compatible
in
scale
and
density.
With
the
existing
pattern
of
development,
the
draft
Amendment
to
the
glove
booklet
sets
forth
three
goals
for
these
lower
density,
residential
areas,
economic
sustainability,
environmental
sustainability
and
neighborhood
vibrancy.
L
Next
I'll
move
on
to
the
advertised
zoning
ordinance
Amendment
as
I
covered
in
my
January
presentation.
The
proposed
amendment
would
establish
a
new
optional
zoning
mechanism,
called
expanded
housing,
option,
development
or
eho.
For
short,
this
approach
allows
for
tailored
development
standards,
though
in
most
cases
those
standards
duplicate.
The
current
rules
for
single
detached.
L
I
I
heard
one
of
the
speakers
tonight
reference
this
in
ensuring
that
minimum
parking
needs
are
not
met,
but
I
didn't
hear
the
second
part
of
that
clause,
which
is
that
excessive
parking
is
not
built,
which
is
an
important
part
of
that
policy.
Mtp
also
has
a
recommendation
to
promote
on-street
parking
in
residential
neighborhoods,
using
the
parking
that
we
already
have
available
and
encouraging
the
removal
of
off-street
parking
in
residential
areas
where
on-street
parking
is
less
than
60
percent
occupied.
L
The
County
Board
advertised
two
base
options
for
minimum
parking
requirements.
These
options
were
all
discussed
at
the
January
Transportation
Commission
meeting
and
have
not
changed
option.
5A
takes
a
distance
to
transit-based
approach
with
a
0.5
minimum
ratio
in
transit,
proximate
sites
and
sites
outside
these
distances
would
have
a
one
space
per
unit
requirement.
L
L
L
The
map
on
the
left
here
shows
the
transit
proximate
areas
that
would
have
a
lower
parking
ratio
under
options.
5A
and
5c.
The
dark
blue
areas
are
within
three
quarters
of
a
mile
of
Metrorail
and
the
bluish
green
areas
are
within
a
half
mile
of
the
master
Transportation
plans
premium,
Transit
Network,
mostly
located
along
Columbia
Pike,
and
then
the
light
green
areas
are
within
a
quarter
mile
of
the
primary
Transit
Network.
L
L
I
mentioned
that
options,
5A
and
5c
are
base
options
for
parking.
There
are
two
additional
elective
options
that
have
been
advertised.
The
board
could
adopt
none
one
or
both
of
these
options.
On
top
of
one
of
the
base
options,
5B
would
eliminate
the
proposed
administrative
process
for
parking
reduction
on
non-transit
proximate
sites
through
a
parking
survey.
L
5E
was
recommended
by
the
Transportation
Commission
and
would
require
no
parking
in
the
relatively
rare
circumstance.
If
a
new
or
expanded
curb
cut
would
result
in
a
loss
of
equivalent
of
an
equivalent
number
of
on-street
parking
spaces.
Your
staff's
recommendation
among
these
elective
options
staff
is
recommending
option
5e.
L
Beyond
parking
space
requirements,
there
are
a
few
other
Transportation
related
Provisions
in
the
proposed
Zone
and
text
that
I
will
highlight
for
you
here.
The
curb
cut
width
is
limited
to
a
maximum
of
17
feet
and
that's
the
same
standard
as
for
single
detached
and
that
the
current
administrative
standard
for
multi-family
that
has
20
parking
spaces
or
fewer
would
be
a
a
minimum
of
20
feet.
L
So
this
sets
a
maximum
of
of
17
feet
and
we
would
have
to
adjust
that
administrative
standard
and
then
the
next
one
is
that
if
an
alley
is
required-
and
we
know
that
there
are
not
many
alleys
in
Arlington
but
some
do
exist-
we
would
require
parking
access
from
the
alley
rather
than
rather
than
a
curb
cut
from
the
street.
And
that
concludes
staff's
presentation.
Happy
to
have
discussion
on
questions.
B
Thank
you
very
much,
Mr
Ladd
to
kick
things
off.
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
the
dry
vial
provision
that
was
raised
by
some
speakers?
My
understanding
is:
it's
essentially
an
attempt
to
not
mandate
a
23
foot
wide
driveway
for
for
some
of
these
ehos
is
that
sort
of
the
the
cut
of
that
that's.
L
Correct
yeah
and
if
I
can
actually
just
go
to
that
page
where
that's
in
the
zoning
text
to
speak
directly
to
that.
L
So
this
is
in
article
14,
which
has
all
the
the
parking
requirements
and
the
zoning
ordinance,
and
so
this
table
here
is
for
off-street
parking
for
all
development
in
Arlington
County,
although
it
does
currently
it
does
not
apply.
None
of
this
table
applies
to
one
and
two
Family
Dollars,
but
it
applies
to
all
of
the
uses
within
Arlington
County,
and
so
it
has
the
the
stall
width
based
on
a
parking
angle.
L
We
mostly
see
90
degree
parking,
so
that'd
be
eight
and
a
half
feet
wide
by
18
and
a
half
feet
deep.
So
that's
a
standard
parking
space
and
then
there's
this
aisle
with,
for
which
is
23
feet
for
a
one-way
aisle
and
23
feet
for
a
two-way
aisle.
L
So
we
think,
if
you,
if
you
parked
in
the
garage
here
in
at
Bosman
tonight,
you
know
probably
there's
I-
haven't
measured
it,
but
I
assume
it's
probably
23
feet
between
for
the
aisles
between
the
the
parking
spaces,
and
so
that's
not
currently
a
requirement
for
one
or
two
family
development
and
in
reviewing
the
zoning
regulations
and
through
the
zoco
process
and
and
working
out
some
of
those
site
diagrams.
We
were
looking
at
that
and
saying
you
know
we're
talking
about
a
Triplex
might
have
three
parking
spaces.
L
A
fourplex
might
have
four.
You
know
I'm
talking
up,
maybe
up
to
six,
possibly
more
than
six
parking
spaces,
but
a
relatively
no
low
number
of
parking
spaces
that
would
be
provided
on
a
site
and
it
just
seems
excessive
from
an
impervious
cover
perspective
and
not
really
necessary
to
serve
the
needs
of
the
development
people
being
able
to
maneuver
in
and
out
to
require
23
feet
between
parking
spaces
or
to
to
provide
that
aisle.
L
So
the
proposal
here
is
to
actually
the
way
that
the
way
that
the
ordinance
is
currently
written,
one
in
two
family
dwellings
are
not
subject
to
the
parking
space,
Dimension
requirements
and
staff
thoughts.
Thought
thought
they
should
be
so
we're
we're
changing
that.
So
one
in
two
family
dwellings
would
be
subject
to
the
the
dimensional
requirements
and
also
would
still
not
be
subject
to
that
23-foot
requirement
and
then
eho
development
would
also
be
except
from
that
23-foot
requirement.
B
L
B
Before
we
get
super
farther
into
conversation,
I
did
want
to
kind
of
try
and
put
a
little
structure
around
our
discussion
tonight.
There's
a
lot
of
options
in
the
in
this
proposal
and
I
think
some
of
them
are
very
Transportation
relevant
and
some
of
them
are
very,
not
and
so
I'd
love
to
get
a
sense
of
what
pieces.
People
are
interested
in,
maybe
making
a
recommendation
on
so
that
we
can
maybe
take
things
piece
by
piece
and
make
our
recommendation
a
little
more
structured.
B
So
we're
not
bouncing
around
from
from
idea
to
idea.
So,
certainly
we
will
weigh
in
on
the
parking
requirement
options.
B
I
think
it's
important
to
weigh
in
on
the
option
two
things:
the
minimum
Site
Area
at
a
minimum
I
think
we
want
to
talk
about
two
e
changes:
the
definition
of
Transit
proximate
from
from
what
was
originally
envisioned
to
something
that
excludes
the
significant
portion
of
the
county.
I
think
we
probably
want
to
talk
about
that.
B
Do
Commissioners
have
other
areas
of
this
that
they
want.
I
think
we
will
also
make
a
recommendation
on
it
should
move
forward.
It
should
not
move
forward
overall,
but
I'm,
not
sure
we
want
to
be
digging
into
the
detail
of
adus
and
some
of
the
more
nuanced
you
know.
Can
you
count
five
percent
of
your
land
area
as
a
house
if
it's
not
a
garage
like
level
of
of
detail,
but
maybe
we
do
but
I
want
to
give
people
the
option
to
to
focus
in
on
just
a
few
things.
B
If
that's
what
the
commission
wants,
so
I
have
option
five,
which
is
the
parking
options
on
my
list.
I
have
option
two,
which
is
the
minimum
site
areas
on
my
list.
Are
there
other
options
areas
that
people
would
like
to
necessarily
weigh
in
on
commissioner
Ludlow
I
think
you
just
turned
yourself
off.
N
There
we
go
yeah
I
did
I
did
think
it
would
be
productive
to
have
at
least
a
short
discussion
on
the
degree
to
which
the
expanded
housing
options,
proposals,
interface
and
support
the
MTP,
since
that
is
our
purview.
So
that
would
be
more
of
a
discussion
on
the
land,
use
and
transportation
side
of
things
more
generally
and
kind
of
getting
into
those
types
of
issues.
B
Anything
else
anybody
desperately
want
to
weigh
in
on
Max
floor
area
or
Caps,
or
anything
like
that
as
a
as
the
Transportation
Commission,
all
right
great,
that
doesn't
mean
we
can't
change
your
mind
later,
but
it
nicely
structures
our
conversation
so
that
we're
not
going
into
into
those
areas.
So
I
would
say
that
land
use,
MTP
conversation
seems
pretty
overarching
and
maybe
that's
where
we
want
to
start.
Is
that
acceptable
to
you,
commissioner?
Do
you
want
to
kick
things
off
on
what
you're
thinking
in
that
regard?.
N
Yes,
so
I
went
through
the
MTP
today
and
kind
of
went
through
it
with
the
eye
of
how
what
what
does
the
MTP
tell
us
about
this
proposal
and
and
what?
What?
What
do
we
need
to
see
here
and
there's?
A
lot
of
highlights.
N
A
few
other
things
were
aiming
through
here
to
have
more
travel
choices,
to
reduce
the
relative
proportion
of
single
occupancy
vehicle
travel
through
travel
demand
management,
we're
supposed
to
be
implementing
land
use
policies
such
as
Tod
mixed
use,
I'm,
encouraging
environmentally
sustainable
modes,
providing
good
quality
travel
options,
minimizing
the
creation
of
impervious
service
areas
for
streets
and
other
Transportation
facilities,
and
managing
the
collection
and
release
of
runoff
in
an
effective,
environmentally
sensitive
matter
matter.
N
So
those
are
a
few
of
the
highlights
that
I
that
I
picked
out
from
the
the
portion
of
the
MTP.
That
is
the
goals
and
strategies
and
for
a
number
of
those
I
I
think
when
we
think
of
the
expanded
housing
options
and
and
in
places
where
we
do
have
the
the
transportation
infrastructure
in
place.
I
think
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
eho
supports
the
MTP,
and
vice
versa,
where
I
start
to
really
get
into
some
more
trouble
is,
is
the
rest
of
the
county.
N
So
that
gives
me
some
pause
so
I'll
leave
it
there
to
start
I've,
probably
got
other
things
to
say,
but
I
I'm
interested
to
hear
if
other
Commissioners
have
General
comments
about
again
the
MTP
and
how
this
proposal
interfaces
supports
or
does
not
support
it.
Thank
you.
B
M
Good
topics,
thank
you.
The
way
I've
looked
at
it
I
also
I,
do
think
the
missing
middle.
The
eho
does
is
consistent
with
the
MTP
overall,
when
I've
looked
at
the
farther
away
from
transit,
because
it's
something
I
was
considered
because
normally
you're
right,
we
in
this
County
have
for
decades
encouraged
our
density
to
be
on
the
on
the
transit
corridors,
with
tapering
out
and
away
and
I
think
even
with
eho.
M
Arlington
also
is
very
different
than
outside
the
Beltway
as
crazy
as
our
road
network
is,
and
all
of
us
have
experienced
that
it's
nonetheless,
a
pretty
robust
Network
that
is
not
cul-de-sac.
Land
we're
not
having
the
the
in
which
planning
is
moving
against
in
the
state,
no
longer
encourages
or
allows.
But
will
you
have
a
pod
of
800
house,
let's
say
with
only
two
streets
that
go
out
to
to
an
arterial
which
is
a
traffic
nightmare
and
is
ultimately
self-defeating.
We
have
nothing
like
that.
M
Even
an
extra
1500
cars-
or
you
know,
3
000
cars
is
absorbed
easily,
because
our
road
Network
is
such
that
it's
a
traditional
old-fashioned,
Road
Network,
where
everything
interrelates
and
it's
not
in
pods,
so
I
think
the
TR
and
I
would
like
to
know
about
the
VMT
I've,
always
understood
being
on
the
commission
here
that
our
VMT
has
been
pretty
stable
for
quite
a
while.
So
I'd
like
to
have
confirmation
on
the
numbers
on
that
I.
M
Don't
know
who
who
has
that
what
the
Des
is
here,
but
that's
something
in
flagging
that
we
should
we
should
know
about,
but
we
approved
just
a
month
or
two
ago,
a
1400
unit
development
in
Crystal
City,
if
missing
middle
goes
up
by
an
order.
Magnitude,
it's
that
and
we
approve
1400
in
one
place
now
that
we
had
a
0.3
parking
ratio.
So
that's
going
to
be
another
520,
odd
cars,
but
still
that's
in
one
location
and
no
one
raised
any
concern
whatsoever
about
traffic.
M
We
had
the
only
public
comments
were
about
barks
and
open
space.
There
were
no
concerns
about
traffic
and
already
Crystal
City
has
way
more
traffic
than
any
location
in
North,
Arlington
or
in
any
of
our
R
zones.
So
I
think
that
yeah
I
certainly
understand
people's
concerns
about
traffic,
but
I
think
that
even
at
its
most
robust
or
highest
level,
missing
middle
isn't
going
to
have
a
really
a
noticeable
impact
on
traffic
in
the
or
in
the
our
neighborhoods.
Simply
because
the
numbers-
don't
don't
don't
support
that.
M
So
that's
been
my
my
view
on
this
I'm,
certainly
open
to
the
contrary,
view
or
being
told
that
I'm
wrong
because
of
the
data
doesn't
support
that.
But
that's
my
understanding
of
what
the
traffic
is
like
within
VMT
traffic
within
Arlington.
B
Great
yeah,
that's
I,
think
I
largely
agree
with
that
and
I
would
add
a
few
things
to
it
as
well
and
and
the
date
all
the
data
I've
seen,
will
look
at
the
present
the
commenter
slides
and
see
where
what
his
source
is,
because
you
know
right
this
always
matters
where
you're
measuring
to
and
from
and
where
your
data
is
coming
from.
But
what
I've
always
seen
for
VMT
in
Arlington
is
that
it's
been
steady
or
slightly
declining,
like
2006
to
2014.
B
Population
went
up,
10
and
VMT
went
down
six
or
something
like
that.
Yeah
I
mean
if
we
just
had
a
presentation
last
month
of
that
RPP
on-street
parking,
occupancy
study
and
that
information.
Just
when
you
try
and
square
that
with
the
with
the
MTP
I
think,
really
speaks
well
for
expanded
housing
options.
You
know
we
were
seeing
that
any
time
you
look.
Look
at
these
streets
that
have
RPP
on
them
during
RPP
hours,
occupancies
are
almost
always
under
60
and
our
MTP
says.
B
Well,
we
should
look
at
removing
that
parking
and
I
think
when
we're
in
the
middle
of
a
housing
crisis
where
housing
prices
are
going
up
and
up
and
up
and
more
people
want
to
live
here,
because
there
are
great
jobs
here
and
people
want
their
kids
to
be
able
to
live
here
someday
and
that
gets
increasingly
out
of
reaches
prices.
Go
up
that
instead,
we
should
just
add
more
housing
to
to
make.
B
You
know
good
use
of
that
of
those
that
street
parking
because
yeah
for
me
I'm
all
about
smart
growth
right,
we
grow
near
our
Transit
and
you
know
for
me
that
means
that's.
B
Why
the
16
story,
buildings
and
everything
go
on
top
of
Metrorail,
and
then
you
know
you
step
down
to
where
you
have
good
bus
service
and
then
you
step
down
more
to
where
right
now
you
don't
have
service,
but
that
doesn't
that
doesn't
mean
single-family
home
is,
is
where
you're
trying
to
get
to
at
the
outside
edge,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we're
still.
You
know
the
first
jurisdiction
in
from
DC.
B
If
things
hadn't
changed,
we
would
still
be
part
of
DC.
Oh,
you
know,
so
we
are
we're
as
close
to
downtown
as
as
most
of
the
district
and
I'm
just
not
convinced
that
that
low
level
of
you
know
one
housing
unit
on
ten
thousand
square
feet
that
you
get
an
r10
or
whatever
is
an
appropriate
level
of
density.
B
You
know
no
matter
how
far
you
are
from
a
bus,
this
close
to
our
Central
business
district,
so
I'm,
certainly
not
for
you
know,
mid-rises
or
high
rises,
far
from
transit,
but
I
think
a
six
Plex
is
an
appropriate
place
to
bring
the
edge
of
that
Bullseye
down
to
rather
than
you
know,
a
single
family
home
being
where
we
bring
the
edge
of
that
bump
bull
side
down
too,
commissioner
maranovic.
O
There
we
go
yeah
just
to
piggyback
on
your
comment
about
Central
business
district
I
mean
if
we
took
a
take
a
look
at
National
Landing,
the
comparison
in
terms
of
size
of
office
space.
It's
the
my
downtown
Miami,
Central
business
district
and
so
I
mean
that's
huge,
but
the
one
thing
I
wanted
to
discuss
and
would
like
other
Commissioners
input
on
is
there's
been
a
lot
of
talk
about
data.
O
What
type
of
data
would
we
need
to
make
an
informed
decision?
And
if
we
take
a
look
at
rejections
historically,
they've
been
wrong
and
you
would
take
a
look
at
Ashton.
Did
a
did
a
study
2022
about
how
many
miles
Americans
will
be
driving
in
the
U.S
and
they
were
off
by
a
third
a
trillion
miles
in
favor
of
American
Driving.
O
More
research
consistently
shows
that
we
need
parking
more
parking
we
need
for,
and
then
the
real
experience
shows
that
we
don't
that
this
was
an
inflated
thing.
So
I'm
wondering
how
did
we
use
data
intelligently?
Or
do
we
just
look
at
examples
across
the
world
and
there
is
a
queer
example
that
more
density,
less
car
dependency
leads
to
more.
Economically
sound
cities,
better
vibrancy
and
less
traffic,
rather
than
instituting
parking
mandatory
parking
spaces.
O
So
I'd
like
to
hear
some
other
Commissioners
input
on
that
before
you
know
me
commenting
further.
Thank
you.
B
B
That's
one,
not
particularly
large,
multi-family
building
that
we
see
on
a
regular
basis
in
a
site
plan
right.
That's
like
one
eighth
at
most
of
the
development
activity
that
we
see
every
year
and
have
been
for
years
and
years
and
years
and
years
and
years,
and
instead
of
being
concentrated
on
one
spot
right,
it's
diffused
across
the
entire
26
square,
miles
of
Arlington
County,
so
I
I
understand
the
fear
of
change
and
the
the
desire
to
to
understand
every
possible
impact
of
a
change
like
this.
B
But
for
me
it's
just
hard
to
imagine
the
impact
it's
hard
to.
Imagine
it
being
particularly
even
like
noticeable
over
over
time,
given
the
number
of
new
housing
units
that
we
do
absorb
through
these
large
multi-family
buildings
on
a
regular
basis
when
it's
diffused
across
that
and
so
I
feel
very
comfortable
moving
forward.
Knowing
a
that,
you
know,
the
prediction
of
how
many
units
we're
going
to
see
each
year
is
is
relatively
low,
B,
that
the
board
always
has
the
option
to
make
changes
to
you
know
if
we
decide
oh
wait.
B
Actually,
we
are
seeing
this
one
weird
unintended
thing
where,
like
people
are
building
a
six-plexes
in
a
way.
That's
like
super
obnoxious
right
that
we
have
the
opportunity
to
fix
that
over
time
to
change
that
over
time
and
that
you
know
like
I,
don't
love
the
idea
of
caps
because
we
have
a
housing
crisis
and
we
need
more
units,
but
I
do
I
do
think
it's
a
reasonable.
B
A
reasonable
approach
to
to
manage
change
right,
like
change,
is
hard
right.
We
see
that
in
organizations
we
see
that
in
in
residential
communities
right
like
if
this
is
like
what
we
need
to
know
that
we're
going
to
ease
in
to
have
a
cap
temporarily
with
a
sunset
so
that
we
can
like
watch
it
happen
slowly
over
time,
a
little
bit
at
the
beginning
and
get
comfortable
I.
Think
it's
reasonable,
but
it's
a
you
know
it's
right!
That's
the
political
decision
right!
The
policy
decision
is
either
either.
B
This
is
good
policy
or
it's
not,
and
if
it's
good
policy,
then
you
don't
slow
it
down,
but
you
know
we
live
in
the
real
world.
So
that's
where
I'm
standing
on
the
data,
it's
just
I,
cannot
imagine
the
impact
being
insane
given
like
the
just
the
sheer
scale.
P
Yeah
thanks,
probably
gonna
just
Echo
a
little
bit
of
some
of
the
comments
of
my
fellow
Commissioners
but
I've,
been
sitting
on
this
commission
for
six
years
and
when
I
joined,
I
didn't
realize
the
real
impact
of
parking
or
or
travel
in
the
in
the
in
the
county,
because
I
didn't
have
a
car.
P
I
took
public
transportation
and
was
really
happy
and
felt
like
I
could
get
around
everywhere
and
and
having
sat
on
this
commission
over
the
six
years
of,
as
as
mentioned,
we
look
at
development
projects
all
the
time
with
enormous
numbers
of
units
and
and
we
had
and
I've
become
as
as
militant
as
any
member
of
my
commission
about
making
sure
that
we
have
less
and
less
parking
the
closer.
They
are,
the
proximate
they
are
to
Transit
and
the
really
wonderful
opportunities
we
have
for
Transit
here.
P
I
know
all
the
bus
routes
it
feels
like
in
in
Arlington.
There's
a
lot
of
ways
to
get
around
I
lived
in
the
district
for
a
long
time
and
also
got
to
memorize
all
those
places.
It's
very
easy
to
get
around.
If
you
know
where
to
go
but
I
know,
there's
many
many
people
who
are
addicted
to
their
cars
for
all
good
reasons
for
the
places
that
cars,
let
you
go
and
I
appreciate.
P
The
comments
from
the
folks
who've
been
talking
to
us
today
and
I
know,
have
continued
throughout
this
whole
period,
but
we
are
looking
to
create
a
an
environment
where
we
have
less
Transportation
on
the
roads
in
terms
of
cars
and
I.
Think
this
this
is
one
effort
to
get
to
there.
I,
don't
think
it
makes
a
you
know.
As
chairman
said,
it's
not
going
to
be
a
huge
earthquake.
It's
going
to
affect
certain
people.
P
P
Just
going
to
invoke
my
my
friend,
the
former
Eric
guttrell,
who
brought
this
to
the
the
county
and
championed
it
and
I'm
sorry
he's
not
with
us
anymore
but
or
at
least
I'm,
supportive
of
it
in
so
many
ways,
I
think,
there's
things
we
can
do
to
make
it
better,
but
a
lot
of
this
I
think
is
just
the
right
thing
to
do
here.
B
Having
been
a
virtual
participant
in
a
couple
of
hybrid
meetings
recently
and
have
had
trouble
getting
the
attention
of
the
chair
in
person,
I
want
to
just
take
one
quick
second
to
say:
do
any
of
our
commissioners
who
are
online
want
to
weigh
in
on
any
of
this.
Commissioner
yerry
commissioner
Locker
commissioner
Terry
since
I
know
I'm
not
the
best
at
watching
for
the
raised
hand,
I
see,
commissioner
Gary
go
ahead.
Oh.
K
That
was
a
thumbs
up.
I
have
nothing
new
to
add
I
think
my
little
Fishers
have
spoken
very
well
on
this
topic.
For
this
particular
private
conversation.
Q
Just
spoke
a
little
bit
or
shared
my
views
that
I'm,
not
supportive
of
this
we've
talked
I've
heard.
We've
talked
there's
a
couple,
different
things
that
kind
of
resonated
with
me
some
of
the
speakers
today.
You
know
we
talked
about
the
data
and
data
and
parking,
and
we
sit
on
these
Commission
on
sit
on
this
commission
and
really
try
to
focus
on.
Q
You
know
large
buildings,
and
can
we
do
reduce
parking
because
we
we
see
that
the
data
is
there
that
they're
being
underutilized,
and
so,
however,
we
also
see
where
we
have
people
here
who
are
saying:
I
live
close
to.
Q
You
know,
Transit
Transit
amenities,
and
we
have
issues
with
parking,
because
it's
already
a
dense,
neighborhood
and
there's
some
concerns
and
that's
more
of
maybe
not
a
there's,
no
data
there,
but
there's
just
you
see
it
every
day
and
so
I'm
not
comfortable
that
we
can
just
go
full
Full,
Speed
Ahead.
Without
doing
maybe
some
additional
thought
put
more
additional
thought
on
this,
and
also
when
it
comes
to
you
know
a
six
Plex.
How
would
you
feel
if
you
had
a
six
Plex
next
to
you
and
it's
like?
Q
Oh
yeah,
you
know
what
oops
this
this
this
building
has
been
built.
It
actually
maybe
could.
We
could
have
maybe
thought
about
this
a
little
bit
more,
but
they're
allowed
to
build,
build
it
by
right
right
now,
so
yeah
they
can
fix
it
later
for
the
next
project,
but
for
right
now,
there's
still
a
building
that
we
haven't
really
thought
or
you
know
not
that
we
haven't,
but
that
there's
there's
still
some
concern,
and
so
that's
that's.
Just
a
couple
of
thoughts
says
we're
talking
Phillips.
O
I,
just
like
some
clarification,
because
commissioner
Walker
referred
to
as
six
bucks
as
a
building
and
is
it?
Is
it
true
that
all
of
these
buildings,
so
to
speak,
housing
things
are
going
to
be
the
same
size
as
the
maximum
house
that
you
can
have
right
now
correct?
Yes,
that's
correct
all
right!
Thank
you.
C
C
That
I
mean
cars,
equals
Death
in
many
cases,
statistically
speaking,
I
would
love
to
see
an
Arlington
with
fewer
cars
out
on
the
road
with
more
miles
traveled
by
alternative,
safer
means
and
I
understand
that,
as
mentioned
earlier,
this
is
sort
of
a
chicken
and
egg
problem,
because
how
do
you
get
people
from
relying
on
their
cars,
their
personal
vehicles
to
switching
over
to
bus
and
Transit
and
biking
and
walking
as
much
as
possible?
C
And
it's
sort
of
That
Awkward
transition
phase
that
we
seem
to
be
in
I'm
as
much
as
I
would
love
to
sort
of
rip
the
Band-Aid
off
and
go
to
that
car
free
Arlington
right
away?
That's
of
course
not
possible
I
mean
that's,
not
the
real
world,
I'm
personally
quite
happy
with
a
of
sort
of
a
compromise
of
where
we
have
zero
parking
minimums
near
Transit,
as
currently
defined.
C
I
have
issues
with
the
sort
of
attempted
redefinition
of
what
a
premium
Transit
network
is
with
the
2E
option,
as
proposed
I
would
much
rather
stick
with
these
priming
premium.
Transit
options
as
they
are
currently
understood
and
so
I
mean
I,
would
love
to
see
the
5c
option
with
the
5e
option
as
well.
I
think
that's
the
the
best
compromise
right
there.
It's
a
sweet
spot.
B
I'm
sorry,
people
get
people
are
like
being
real,
subtle
and
signaling
that
they
want
to
talk,
and
it's
it's
getting
a
little
tough.
So
if
people
can
like
actually
hit
their
hand
or
whatever,
that
would
be
great
because
otherwise
I'm
going
to
end
up
bouncing
to
the
like
the
least
subtle
people.
First
and
I
want
to
be
fair.
So
let's
hear
from
Krishna
Hussein
because
we
haven't
heard
from
him
yet
and
then
commissioner
Coleman,
because
we.
R
R
Is
these
higher
density
cities
like
in
Europe
and
parts
of
Asia
there
you
do
see
a
like
less
Reliance
on
cars,
I
think
the
the
issue
there
is,
if
we're
looking
at
other
places
outside
the
US
I,
think
the
context
is
different,
where,
like
personally
I,
yeah
I
like
the
idea
of
higher
density
right,
but
in
the
United
States
we
just.
We
have
a
love
affair
with
cars.
R
So,
as
my
fellow
commissioner
was
saying
like
how
do
you
get
that
mindset
to
change,
to
get
people
out
of
their
cars
and
onto
let's
say,
mass
transit
and
I?
Think
that
brings
me
to
something
that
Fairfax
County
does
I?
Don't
know
if
you
guys
know
about
the
it's
called
the
transit
options
program
and
Services
Program
the
tops
program.
R
Basically,
it's
like
a
I
did
a
little
bit
of
research
on
it
and
it
seems
like
it's.
It's
it's
a
almost
like
a
voucher
program
for
people
that
generally
don't
have
access
to
public
transit,
so
people
with
access
to
like
people
with
that
are
registered
users
of
metro
access,
those
that
are
below
a
certain
income
threshold
and
senior
citizens,
especially
those
above
50
years
or
older
and
I.
R
And
so,
if
we're
trying
to
get
higher
density
but
with
fewer
cars,
I
think
the
question
is,
then:
how
are
we
getting
that
higher
density
that
folks
living
there
to
not
have
to
have
cars?
And
then
how
do
they?
How
do
they
get
access
to
Transit?
Let's
say
you
live.
You
know
a
couple
miles
from
like
Metro
Rail
right.
So
how
do
you
get
to
that
point?
R
If
you
need
to
use
it
and
then
how
well
integrated
is
the
Metrorail
and
the
metro,
metro,
bus
and
the
Arlington
bus
system
like
how
those
are
three
different
systems
in
my
eyes
right,
but
we
should
have
it
so
that
they're
all
working
I'm
sure
they
I
mean
they
do
in
a
sense
right.
They
have
to
right,
but
I,
think
the
question
of
higher
density
brings
that
question
of
like
Transit
access,
which
I'm
sure,
like
I,
appreciate
that
I
think
we
are
talking
about
that.
R
But
it
would
be
nice
to
see
maybe
a
little
more
in
the
proposal
like
just
like,
in
terms
of
like
being
a
little
bit
more
explicit
and
defining
things
like
Transit
proximity,
I'm,
just
kind
of
curious
as
to
what
that
is
and
like
the
the
Tui
option.
Just
doesn't
look
like
like
it
doesn't.
Look
like
Transit
proximity
like
half
the
map
is
as
outside
Transit
proximity.
That
doesn't
make
any
sense
to
me
in
terms
of
where
we
are
right
now,
thanks.
B
B
My
understanding
is,
is
it
shrinks
the
distance
from
Metro
Rail,
that's
considered
current
approximate
and
it
completely
discards
what
is
called
the
primary
Transit
Network,
which
is
basically
like
the
core
of
our
bus
system,
except
not
to
accept
buses
that
don't
have
premium
features
like
you
know,
dedicated
right-of-way
like
Metro
away
has
and
that
sort
of
thing
so
like
every
bus
on
Langston
Boulevard
is
primary
Transit
Network,
it's
not
premium
Transit,
Network
or
metro
rail.
B
The
you
also
have
to
hit
frequency
targets
to
become
premium.
Yes,
commissioner,
Coleman
I
believe
next.
D
Thank
you
just
to
Echo
what
an
earlier
commission
mentioned,
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
keep
in
mind
how
well
integrated
our
Metro
services
are,
and
in
particular,
when
you're
dealing
with
communities
that
rely
upon
their
vehicle
to
get
to
work
or
drop
off
kids
and
and
take
care
of
things
that
unfortunately
may
require
easier
access
to
Transportation,
especially
as
we
look
at
the
wait
times
for
our
Metro
buses
and
and
rail.
D
If
those
are
unreliable,
it's
not
in
my
mind
a
a
reasonable
Avenue
by
which
we
should
expect
our
our
fellow
arlingtonians
to
interact
with
the
community
as
they
tend
to
be
dependent
on,
but
something
to
the
issue
of
traffic
and
Public
Safety
we've
had
a
conversation
about
earlier.
I
recently
saw
that,
according
to
VDOT
from
2004
to
2021,
Arlington's
average
daily
BMT
was
down
about
43
on
primary
roads
like
Libra
and
Wilson
Boulevard
and
17
on
interstate
highway,
Rose
from
14
on
secondary
roads,
which
are
local
neighborhood
streets.
D
This
is
despite
the
fact
that
Arlington's
population
Grew
From
about
26
percent
during
the
same
time
period,
so
I
think
there
are
two
areas
we
need
to
be.
Looking
at
one
is
a
public
safety
Dimension,
which
the
data
I
think
pretty
clearly
shows
that
increasing
the
amount
of
population
doesn't
lead
to
a
dramatic
increase
in
traffic
and
VMT,
but
we
do
need
to
be
conscious
of
how
reliable
our
services
are
and
whether
or
not
having
a
a
Metro
focused
approach.
D
B
Are
there
other
thoughts
commission
tell
me
back
to
you.
M
Yeah,
well
we
one
of
the
commenters.
We
talked
a
lot
about
data
and
one
of
the
comments
versus
raising
that
you
know
we
had
30
000,
more
people
and
30
000
more
cars
according
to
the
census.
They
may
be
true,
but
I
had
also
looked
at
similar
data
and
not
recently.
This
is
pre-covet,
but.
M
When
you
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
one
to
one
because
of
our
Metro
corridors
right
now,
the
new,
as
we've
mentioned,
we
have
a
large
number
of
projects
going
up.
They
all
have
less
than
one
space
per
unit
and
units
have
more
than
one
person,
often
so
we're
having
all
those
new
new
people
moving
in
are
not
bringing
one
car
per
person
to
those.
So
where
are
the
cars
going?
M
Well,
one
thing
that
I
did
see
in
the
Census
Data
is
that
as
the
income
levels
rise,
the
number
of
cars
per
household
also
goes
up
and
there's
a
pretty
clear
correlation
there
right
now
in
our
single
family
neighborhoods.
The
unfortunate
thing
is
all
the
new
houses
are
two
million
dollars
plus
when
I
walk
around
my
neighborhood
and
I
see
the
new
houses
that
have
gone
up.
There
are
multiple
cars,
you
know.
Occasionally
it
is
just
one,
but
it's
often
two
three
four
cars.
M
So
as
we
go
up
the
price
points
with
the
single
and
remember,
we
have
to
compare
missing
middle
eho
proposals
to
what
is
allowed
Now
by
right
for
a
single
unit.
Those
single
units
are
all
expensive
and
they
come
with
multiple
cars
because
they
are
wealthy
people
that
are
buying
these.
So
all
the
new
cars
coming
in
aren't
in
the
Metro
corridors,
aren't
in
the
multi-families
aren't
in
the
lower
price
points.
M
They
are
in
these
expensive
houses
that
are
going
up,
and
that
is
even
when
they're
proximate
to
Metro
again,
unfortunately,
because
wealthy
people
can
pay
the
freight
or
people
with
means,
I
guess
that's
a
better
way
to
put
it
can
pay
the
freight.
The
other
thing
we're
seeing
is
more
and
more
of
our
single
unit
houses.
Detached
houses
are
being
rented
out
to
groups.
M
People
have
roommates,
they
can.
When
you
get
a
five
thousand
dollar
per
month
house
being
rented
getting
four
roommates
makes
it
reasonable.
M
They
often
have
guests
and
plus
ones,
I've
seen
that
in
my
neighborhood
too,
so
they
often
will
have
then
four
cars
for
that
house.
That's
a
quad!
That's
what
we
that's
happening
now
in
our
single
family
neighborhoods.
Now,
when
we
have
rental
houses-
and
we
have
more
rental
houses
than
people
may
realize,
and
they
most
typically
have
multiple
cars,
so
I
throw
that
out
here
as
data
also.
N
Sorry,
so
just
a
couple
of
points
wanted
to
follow
up
for
my
initial
remarks
as
as
I
went
through
the
MTP
I
read
some
of
those
sections
because
on
some
of
those
I
wrote
big
question
marks
as
to
whether
eho
was
or
was
not
in
working
in
the
spirit
and
in
line
with
the
MTP
and
I
think
it's
kind
of
a
tale
of
two
arlingtons
I
think
it's
probably
more
clear
that
this
does
advance
MTP
goals
in
areas
that
are
proximate
to
Transit
and
I.
N
Know
we're
going
to
talk
more
about
what
that
means
and
get
into
that
in
a
little
bit
more
detail,
but
I
think
it's
a
lot
less
clear
in
other
places,
I
mean,
as
commissioner
Lan
tell
me
just
said.
If
we're
getting
four
cars
per
household
on
these,
you
know
the
two
million
dollar
houses
we're
going
to
have
at
least
four
to
eight
If.
Instead
of
a
two
million
dollar
house,
it's
a
two
Plex
or
even
a
three
or
four
Plex
and
in
the
parts
of
the
county
that
don't
yet
have
the
infrastructure
to
support
it.
N
N
I
am
not
sure
that
we
have
on
this
issue,
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
is
that
the
traffic
can
be
absorbed
and
I
I.
Think
that's
largely
true.
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
this
is
an
issue
where
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
graphic
jams
because
of
this,
especially
at
the
scale
that
we're
talking
about,
but
I,
think
we
do
need
to
observe
it
carefully
over
time
and
consider
the
data
I
agree
with
commissioner
muradovic.
N
That
models
are
almost
always
wrong,
but
observations
are
almost
always
correct
and
we
have
very
good
data
now
in
the
transportation
space
to
observe
real-life
behaviors
and
how
people
are
moving
and
I.
Think
that's
where
we
draw
our
lessons
from
I.
Think
that
there's
momentum
politically
this
will
move
forward.
N
There's
no
doubt
that
that's
the
track
that
this
is
on,
despite
reservations
that
that
anybody
might
have
and
I
would
only
ask
that
as
it
moves
forward,
we're
very
conscious
and
cognizant
in
collecting
the
proper
data
and
the
kpis
to
allow
us
to
know
what
the
true
Transportation
impacts
are,
especially
if
we
get
to
that
five-year
Sunset,
Point
and-
and
there
are
more
dramatic
changes.
Commissioner
Locker
said
earlier-
you
know
what,
if
you're
the
person
who's
all
of
a
sudden,
there's
12
new
cars
in
front
of
your
house,
I
mean
that
that
could
be.
N
That
could
be
alarming
and
and
that's
that's
something
that
I'm
also
concerned
about
is
you
know,
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
be
concerned
about
gridlock
on
some
of
our
streets.
I
think
the
issue
is
going
to
go
back
to
the
parking
and
and
some
of
the
parking
in
in
areas
and
on
streets
that
may
not
be
ready
to
accommodate
it
and
I
I.
Think
we'll
have
a
good
discussion
about
that.
N
I.
Don't
think
we
need
to
measure
every
little
thing,
but
I
I
did
not
see,
and
maybe
staff
can
clarify
what
kpis
are
in
the
are
in
the
documentation.
What
things
related
to
Transportation
will
be
tracked
and
what
will
be
collected?
What
will
be
what
will
the
county
be
observing
over
the
next
few
years
so
that
we
can
more
richly
inform
the
decisions
that
we're
making
in
the
future,
because
I
I
do
tend
to
agree?
L
Thing
sure
I
can
address
that
I
think
you
know,
but
before
I
address,
that
I
might
ask
Angie
de
Libera
from
from
Des
just
to
to
follow
on
to
some
of
the
conversation
that
the
commission
has
been
having
on
the
expected
traffic
impacts
from
as
I
as
I
believe
the
the
chair
referred
to
it.
You
know
relatively
low
density,
dispersed
development,
that's
happening
so
and
and
then
I
can
come
back
around
and
we
can
talk
about
tracking
and
monitoring.
N
I
I
would
just
want
to
clarify
again
I
I,
don't
think,
there's
grave
concern
about
I,
don't
even
know
if
traffic
impacts
is
the
right
terminology
here.
I
think
the
issue
is
about
land
use,
livability
parking
on
street
parking
issues
and
congestion,
as
as
many
of
the
the
participants
have
brought
up
earlier
today
and
car
dependency,
which
I
think
in
parts
of
the
county
will
increase.
L
Okay,
well,
I
think
in
that
case
I'm,
maybe
I
won't
ask
to
come
on,
but
yeah.
N
L
Yeah
well
she's
available
to
address
that
question,
but
if,
if
that's
not
needed
that
that's
fine
I
would
refer
you
to
page
32
of
the
staff
report
and
we
do
have
a
section
on
tracking
and
Reporting
and
there
are
a
number
of
anticipated
data
points,
most
of
which
don't
relate
to
Transportation.
L
But
as
this
is
a
draft
report,
I
think
we'd
be
interested
in
hearing
from
the
the
commission.
Is
there
something
that
is
measurable,
that
that
we
could
track?
And
if
it's
something
like
the
number
of
parking
spaces
that
are
being
built?
Yes,
we
can
track
that
if
it's
the
number
of
cars
owned
within
eho
developments,
that
might
not
be
something
that
we
could
track
or
how
has
you
know,
how
has
the
situation
changed
on
a
specific
block
might
not
be
something
that
that
we
can
actually
track.
L
So,
if
there's
something
that's
measurable,
that's
not
on
this
list.
We're
interested
to
to
hear
about
it.
B
Yeah
I
mean
for
me,
you
know,
I
find
the
RPP
parking
occupancy
study
that
we've
done
to
be
the
most
useful
bit
of
information,
and
it's
my
understanding
that
we'll
be
continuing
to
do
that
every
few
years
to
keep
an
eye
on
RPP
occupancy
and
as
long
as
we
have
data
on
the
locations
of
where
ehos
are
getting
built,
and
we
are
continuing
to
measure
our
on-story
parking
occupancy
with
RPP
I.
B
Think
there's
a
very
straightforward
combination
there
to
try
and
look
at
you
know
our
ehos
having
a
disproportionate
impact
on
on-story
occupancy
and
that
sort
of
thing.
So
again
that's
kind
of
why
I'm
comfortable
moving
forward
there
I
would
invite
commissioner
Ludlow
if
he
has
other
questions
or
comments
on
on,
what's
been
put
forth
by
staff
there.
As
far
as
data
yeah.
N
No
I
was
actually
looking
for
a
recommendation
for
staff
on
other
ways
to
to
track
it
to
just
attract
some
of
the
impacts.
I
mean
one
thing
I
would
be
interested
in
is
just
net
impervious
surface.
That's
an
explicit
goal
in
the
MTP
and
something
that
I'm
pretty
concerned
about
and
I
know.
A
lot
of
people
are,
after
the
flooding
of
2019
and
other
potential
flooding
incidents
and
I'm
sure
we're
going
to
talk
more
about
impervious
surface.
N
In
a
few
minutes
when
we
get
to
parking
I'll,
let
you
know
if
I
think
of
others
I
hope
other
Commissioners
can
can
help
structure
what
those
those
those
monitoring
points
would
be.
B
Great
this
has
been
super
great
I
want
to
jump
to
commissioner
Shannon
because
we
haven't
heard
from
him
yet
and
then
I
do
want
to
kind
of,
or
just
to
kind
of
maybe
move
into
the
concrete
portion
of
the
conversation
just
in
the
interest
of
everyone's
time,
because
all
of
us
love
transportation
and
can
get
up
here
and
talk
about
transportation
for
any
number
of
hours.
B
But
that's
not
in
the
best
interest
of
the
people
who
are
waiting
to
hear.
You
know
a
recommendation
at
the
end
of
this.
So
commissioner,
Shannon.
S
I
want
to
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
to
commissioner
Len.
Tell
me
I
think
we
live
in
a
culture
where
we
reward
our
growing
wealth
with
depreciating
assets,
which
is
a
little
backwards.
Sometimes,
if
you
think
about
it
guilty
here
and
so
the
and
to
the
piece,
the
common
of
experiential
right.
It's
at
a
certain
point
like
politically
there's
gonna,
be
a
decision
made
and
there's
gonna
be
adjustments
that
come
in.
This
is
not
just
a
hard
line
drawn
that
says
this
is
what
we're
going
to
be
right.
S
There
are
there's
a
housing
shortage.
You
may
have
two
families
living
in
one
room
in
certain
parts
of
Arlington,
where
they
they
really
shouldn't.
So
there's
other
underlying
problems
there.
So
I
think
when
we
look
at
this,
you
know
the
word
that
we're
really
tackling
here
is
cars,
not
the
livelihoods
of
others,
and
and
that's
some
balance
that
we
need
to
maintain
here
and
there's
going
to
be
more
work.
S
That
comes
there's
going
to
be
learnings
and
adjustments
that
we're
going
to
have
to
make
or
recommend
recommendations
that
will
have
to
be
made
to
to
ensure
that
you
know
what
are
we
heading
towards
in
the
future?
Are
we
heading
towards
a
county
that
is
primarily
a
parking
lot
and
it's
over
generalization
here,
but
are
we
heading
to
a
county
that
is
a
parking
line,
or
are
we
heading
to
a
county
that
is
of
community
and
people
and
and
and
that's
those
are
the
decisions
that
we're
making.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
Shannon
any
looking
for
wrap-up
comments
and
we'll
just
kind
of
start
from
this
end
and
head
this
way
and
then
we'll
move
into
the
the
nitty-gritty.
B
So,
commissioner
Jeff
for
any
wrap
up
for
this
portion.
Yep.
C
Keeping
it
really
short
I
like
where
this
is
going,
the
fact
that
we
seem
to
be
looking
at
The,
Sweet
Spot
compromises
to
where
we
can
get
parking
and
traffic
and
everything
else.
So,
thanks.
D
Agreeing
with
an
earlier
statement
made,
we
need
to
be
careful
that
we
are
creating
a
community
of
people
and
not
cars,
and
so
I
think
it's
important.
We
constantly
weigh
that
in
mind
and
ensure
that
there
is
a
balance
truck,
but
within
that
balance
we
don't
lose
sight
of
the
fact
that
this
policies
overarching
goals
to
ensure
that
families
that
were
traditionally
excluded
from
certain
communities
are
able
to
live
here
and
be
able
to
do
so
recently.
So
I
think
that's
core
is
our
conversation.
B
One
of
the
reasons
that
I
support
eho
development
is
because
I
think
Penrose
is
awesome
and
we
already
have
duplexes
and
townhouse,
and
many
of
the
types
that
were
we
could
potentially
legalize
here
in
eho
in
Penrose
is
great.
So
why
wouldn't
we
bring
those
expanded
housing
options
to
other
parts
of
Arlington
into
the
other
pieces
of
Penrose?
B
Some
of
my
best
friends
live
in
duplexes
and
I
have
to
wonder
if
that
had
been
built
as
a
single
family
home
instead
of
a
duplex,
would
they
have
moved
to
Arlington
and
become
one
of
my
good
friends?
So
I
am
excited
about
the
option
of
more
neighbors,
who
might
also
become
my
good
friends
with
that
said,
I
also
like
at
the
core
of
it.
B
You
know
we're
letting
people
build
a
building,
that's
exactly
as
big
as
the
single
family
home
that
they
could
have
built
instead
and
essentially,
if
we
require
it
to
be
a
single
family
home.
We're
really
just
legislating
like
what
a
family
is.
B
You
know
because
six
people
could
live
in
that
single
family
home
and
they
just
have
to
share
a
kitchen
or
we
could
let
them
build
it
with
six
kitchens,
and
they
could
all
you
know,
live
separately
and
not
have
to.
You
know,
be
bothered
by
each
other.
All
the
time
and
I
just
have
real
trouble
at
the
end
of
the
day,
saying,
like
you
know
those
six
people
living
in
that
single
family
home
who
are
unrelated,
and
these
six
people
living
in
the
six
Plex
that
looks
from
the
outside.
B
B
O
I
think
part
of
the
reason
why
we're
in
this
situation
of
housing
and
affordability
and
car
dependency
is
precisely
because
of
what
I
believe
to
be
incessant
and
unnecessary
government
intervention
and
regulation
based
on
two
things:
faulty
models
so
I'm
glad
glad
you
talked
about
the
kpis
and
everything
and
I
and
I
really
hope
that
the
county
will
follow
up
on
the
data
and
I
think
I
think
it'll
prove
that
a
lot
of
the
alarmist
rhetoric
was
not
true
and
that's
another
reason
why
we
have
a
lot
of
these
regulations
or
Mr
rhetoric,
whether
it
was
in
the
1930s
having
a
minority
living
next
to
you
or
right
now
having
your
street
change.
O
You
know,
maybe
you
have
more
neighbors,
so
those
two
things:
faulty
models
and
alarmist
rhetoric,
and
it's
really
made
our
housing
overly
expensive
and
it
locks
Us
in
to
development
where
we
have
to
have
cars,
so
I
mean
and
to
transition
to
more
concrete
things,
I'm
for
the
option
of
no
minimums
and
and
let's
measure
the
data
and
come
back
with
actual
facts,
not
not
alarmist
rhetoric
or
or
faulty
models.
O
And
then,
after
a
certain
period,
we
can
we
can
introduce
these
these
other
mandatory,
perhaps
mandatory
parking
thing,
but
I
suspect
that
we
won't
need
to
do
that.
So
that's
my
comment.
Thank
you.
B
All
right,
this
has
been
great.
Oh
commissioner,
obakoya,
oh
thank
you.
I
do
keep
trying
to
look
over
to
see
if
hands
go
up
and
I
haven't
seen
any
hands,
but
commissioner
yerry
or
Locker
or
Terry
have
any
final
bits
to
throw
in
here
on
this
portion
of
the
conversation.
K
B
All
right,
seeing
or
hearing
nothing
from
our
other
two
Commissioners
shall
we
move
into
making
recommendations
on
individual
portions
and
then
take
a
final
vote
at
the
end
on
those
individual
portions
and
yes,
we
think
eho
should
move
forward
or
no,
we
should
not
does
that
seem
workable
for
folks.
B
Nobody
looks
very
mad
at
me,
so
I
think
we'll
move
forward.
That
way.
Why
don't
we
start
with
parking,
since
that's
the
one
most
clearly
in
our
bailiwick
and
the
one
that
we've
had
the
most
public
comment
on,
so
there
are
kind
of
four.
There
are
two
base
options
and
two
optional
add-ons
in
the
RTA
to
to
recap:
there
is,
let's
see
if
I
can
get
this
right.
5A
or
5C
are
sort
of
Base
options.
B
5A
is
what
originally
came
forward
from
staff,
which
is
a
half
half
a
parking
space
per
unit
in
transit,
proximate
one
space
per
unit,
not
trans
approximate,
and
you
can
do
a
parking
study
in
the
non-transit
proximate
areas
to
potentially
there
we
go
with
a
slide,
so
I
don't
have
to
fully
summarize
excellent
administrative
parking
reduction.
B
If
you
do
a
parking
survey
and
occupancy
is
below
65
percent,
and
then
there
is
what
we
suggested
should
be
added
as
an
option
to
be
advertised,
which
was
five
C,
which
is
exactly
like
5A,
except
there's.
No
minimum
requirement
for
Trans
approximate
sites,
not
to
say
those
sites
couldn't
build
parking.
B
They
certainly
could
experience
in
other
cities
has
shown
that
they
will
some
of
them
and
some
of
them
won't
were
we
to
go
in
that
direction
and
then
you
could,
we
could
potentially
add
on
either
5B
or
5e
or
both
5B
removes
the
parking
survey.
Option
does
5B
also
increase
the
parking
requirement
to
one
space
per
unit
for
all
trans
approximate
sites.
I
feel
like
I
may
have
missed.
B
That's
like
this,
that's
not
not
my
recollection.
B
Yeah
there
we
go
and
then
5e
would
remove
the
minimum
parking
requirements
in
those
few
potential
spots
where
adding
the
curb
cut
to
access
that
parking
space
would
remove
an
equivalent
number
of
on-street
spots.
So
I'm
gonna
I'm
gonna
make
a
motion
to
start
the
conversation
and
then
we
can
edit
that
motion
to
to
our
hearts
content.
B
It's
gonna
be
like
a
starter
motion
and
we're
going
to
keep
adding
on
to
it
over
time
until
we
have
a
motion
at
the
end
that
we
make
a
final
vote
on,
so
don't
freak
out
that
it's
just
about
parking
ratio,
so
I'm
going
to
move
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommend
that
the
County
Board
adopt
options
5C
and
5e
and
explicitly
not
adopt
option
5B.
B
Is
there
a
second
to
that
motion?
Second,
all
right!
So
there's
the
second.
The
motion
is
on
the
floor.
Now
we
can
talk
about
it.
So
what
that
would
do
5c
is
the
No
Parking
minimum
trans
approximate,
but
the
parking
minimum
when
you're
far
from
transit.
B
Five
e
is
that
you
know
little
don't
have
to
add
a
off-street
parking
space.
If
it's
going
to
take
away
the
same
number
of
on-screen
parking
spaces
and
then
not
adopting
5B
would
basically
make
sure
that
we
retain
the
ability
to
do
the
parking
survey.
So
if
you
are
in
a
non-transit
proximate
site-
and
you
come
in-
and
you
say
like
hey
County,
can
you
please
take
a
look?
It
really
seems
like
there's
just
a
ton
of
on-story
parking
here.
B
It
doesn't
make
sense
for
me
to
pave
all
of
this
area
to
put
parking
on
my
site.
I'd
have
to
remove
a
bedroom.
I.
Think
people
want
that
bedroom.
They
could
do
the
study
and
if
there's
a
small
enough
amount
of
parking
utilized
on
site,
they
wouldn't
have
to
build
as
much
write.
The
parking
survey
can
only
take
them
down
to
0.5
is
the
lowest
they
can
go.
That's
correct!
Thank
you.
B
So
I
think
this
is
the
way
to
go
for
a
number
of
reasons.
One.
It
gives
flexibility
right.
Some
sites
are
more
constrained
than
others.
B
We
can't
really
legislate
all
of
those
individual
little
constraints
now,
but
the
person
doing
the
building
is
going
to
be
the
person
who
is
most
interested
in
making
the
right
call
on
their
site.
It
gives
them
the
flexibility
to
build
as
much
parking
as
they
want,
and
also
the
flexibility
to
build
as
little
parking
as
they
think
is
necessary.
I
think
that
is
the
most
in
line
with
the
MTP
as
a
I
think
reasonable
compromise
to
those
who
are
concerned
about
parking.
B
B
Given
that
parking
is
something
that
we
always
hear
the
most
about
right
when
we're
talking
about
these
sort
of
things,
also
right,
if
we
don't
allow
some
housing
to
be
built
without
a
parking
space,
we're
saying
if
you're
car
free
and
you
want
to
buy
a
unit
in
Arlington,
you
have
to
you-
have
to
buy
a
parking
space,
even
though
you're
not
going
to
use
it.
Even
though
you
don't
have
a
car
and
I'm
not
interested
in
doing
that,
I
think
we
need
some
units
out
there.
B
Some
units
available
options
available
for
people
who
are
car
free
to
come
in
and
buy
that
unit
without
having
paid
for
somebody
to
build
a
useless
parking
space
with
it
so
setting
the
stage.
That
is
why
I've
put
that
motion
on
the
table.
Now
we
can
discuss
the
motion,
amend
it,
etc,
etc.
Commitment
tell
me
yeah
I
have
a
question.
M
For
staff,
following
up
on
you,
you
know
for
it,
because
the
point
your
race
is
a
very
good
one,
that
you
know.
Why
do
you
have
to
buy
a
space
if
you're
never
going
to
use
it
in
Arlington?
Our
policy
has
been
and
all
of
our
new
developments
when
they're
rentals,
you
separate
out
the
parking
from
the
lease
that,
if
you
don't
want
a
parking
space,
you
don't
pay
for
one.
You
only
pay
for
a
parking
space.
M
If
you
want
to
do
so
with
the
with
the
ehos
and
the
multi-unit,
you
know,
let's
say
the
the
three
fours
and
fives
sixes.
If
those
are
built
to
be
rental
units,
are
we
going
to
require
a
separation
of
the
parking
from
the
unit
or
is?
Are
these
considered
different
than
all
the
other
multi-families
that
we
are
building
in
the
county
with
the
and
these.
L
Are
rental
units
right
so
so
I
think
when
we-
and
you
know-
maybe
someone
can
correct
me
if,
if
I
have
this
wrong,
but
the
the
hook
that
we
have
to
require
that
unbundling
of
the
parking
space
from
the
unit
is
in
the
site,
plan,
conditions
and
so
I.
Don't
think
that
that's
something
that
we
could
do
for
for
buy
right
to
Ability.
M
Okay,
good,
thank
you.
I
think
we
needed
to
know
that
information.
These
are
also
minimum.
So
if
we
have
a
condominium
situation
with
a
six
Flex
where
each
of
the
units
is
being
sold,
that
that
Builder
can
in
fact
build
six
parking
spaces
because
each
unit
it's
a
market,
each
unit
gets
its
own
space
and
the
individuals
can
then
decide
how
they
want
to
divvy
them
up
differently.
If
they
want
to
sell
them
around,
but
they
could
choose
to
do
six,
could
they
even
do
more
than
that?
M
N
Yeah,
so
let
me
maybe
throw
a
little
curveball
in
here.
We
have
a
lot
of
really
wide
streets
in
Arlington
in
our
residential,
neighborhoods
and
I.
Think
some
of
them
are
wider
than
National
highways
in
some
countries
and
to
me
it
I.
N
It
makes
little
sense
to
build
more
impervious
parking
surface
in
those
places
can
we
possibly
incentivize
a
developer
to
repurpose
or
work
with
the
county
to
repurpose
part
of
very
wide
underutilized
residential
streets
into
parking
and
maybe
even
putting
in
some
EV
Chargers,
and
if
we
need
to
allocate
it
in
the
future
for
parking
of
autonomous
vehicles
which
will
whisk
us
away
to
our
destinations?
Those
could
be
stationed
around
the
neighborhoods
too.
I
think
we're
missing.
N
Some
I
mean
I
mean
maybe
we'll
fix
all
of
this
in
five
years,
but
there's
some
interesting
opportunities
here
for
us
to
consider
and
I
think
I.
Don't
think
it
makes
a
lot
of
sense
in
those
situations.
Now
there
are
other
streets
that
are
very
narrow
in
Arlington,
where
maybe
we
have
to
think
well.
N
Can
we
accommodate
any
more
cars
on
the
street
and
does
it
work
with
I
guess
Virginia
fire
code,
which
seems
to
be
a
major
limitation
and
probably
not
something
that's
going
to
change
so
we'd
just
like
to
introduce
that
I,
don't
know
if
anybody
else
wants
to
discuss
that
or
not,
but
I
think
if
one
of
our
main
goals
is
reducing
impervious
surface,
why
not
try
here.
C
I'll
just
say
that
I
think
the
motion
as
it
stands
right
now
with
5C
and
5e,
is
great.
It's
pretty
much
exactly
what
I
like
so
no
complaints
here.
O
I'll
say
I
also
support
this
motion
because
I
think,
like
you
said
it
provides
this
flexibility.
It
also
will
allow
us
to
collect
the
necessary
data
to
make
policy
Corrections
if
needed,
whereas
the
other
ones
will
already
walk
us
into
outcomes,
and
everything
else
will
just
be
hypothetical.
So
so
I
think
this
is
a
nuanced
proposal
and
I
think
it
yeah
I
supported.
B
All
right,
I
think
we
are
we're
moving
rapidly
to
to
a
vote
on
this
particular
motion
and
then
we'll
have
many
more
motions,
I'm
sure
before
we
wrap
this
up.
I
did
want
to
speak
to
my
Commissioners,
because
often
most
of
our
votes
here
are
tend
to
be
pretty
unanimous
or
not,
and
I
think
there's
certain
given
conversations
we've
had
in
previous
months
and
tonight,
they're
not
all
going
to
be
that
tonight.
B
I
always
want
to
put
in
our
letter
to
the
board
both
the
reasons
given
for
support
of
the
motion
that
eventually
passed
and
also
the
reasons
given
for
those
who
voted
in
opposition,
so
I
just
want
to
to
strongly
encourage
anyone
who
is
intending
to
vote
in
you
know
in
any
way,
but
especially
if
you're
going
to
vote
against
a
motion
that
may
eventually
pass
that
you
be
sure
to
speak
to
why?
B
Because
it's
really
helpful
to
the
board
to
understand
not
just
hey
this
past
12
to
2..
Well,
that's
not
possible.
We
only
have
30
team
members
eleven
to
two,
but
why
those
two,
because
often
people-
you
know
they're
two
very
different
reasons.
So
that's
very
useful
color
to
the
board
so
before
we
get
into
those
votes,
I
did
want
to
put
that
out
there,
commissioner.
B
Extended
I
feel,
like
maybe
that's
a
residual,
because
commissioner
yerry
just
spoke
there
we
go.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
though,
other
commissioner
thoughts
on
this
motion
before
we
vote
all
right.
Seeing
none
I
will
call
the
vote,
which
is
on
the
motion
before
us,
which
is
to
recommend
options
5C
and
5e,
and
exclusive
explicitly
not
adoption
of
five
commissioner
Bros
aye,
commissioner
Coleman.
O
Q
Nay,
and
the
reason
why
that
I
am
putting
nay
for
this
is
I
believe
that
the
minimum
of
0.5
spaces
is
still
not
adequate,
ORS
and
and
so
is
detrimental
to
the
existing
homes
and
neighborhoods,
and
so
I'm
voting
a.
B
Thank
you
very
much,
commissioner
modeler.
Hey
commissioner
moradovic.
O
T
I
and
then
can
I
just
add
that
I
think
we
should
really
think
about
that
definition
of
Transit.
B
B
B
Cool
all
right:
let's
talk
about
option
two
next,
which
is
minimum
Site
Area,
which
I'm
I'm
interested
in
talking
about
one,
because
I
think
the
best
transportation
plan
is
a
good
land
use
plan
in
the
minimum.
Site
Area
matters
as
far
as
what
we're
going
to
get,
but
also
because
I
really
think
we
don't
want
the
weirdly
change
to
trans
approximate
definition,
that's
into
e,
so
does
anybody?
Does
somebody
not
me
want
to
kick
off
that
conversation
or
should
I
kick
off
that
conversation.
S
L
I
can
pull
up
the
board
report.
Thank
you.
Okay
and
I.
I
would
also
say
well.
I
do
have
the
mic
if,
if
the
commission's
primary
intent
is
to
signal
to
the
board
about
the
transit
proximity
standard,
you
you're
certainly
welcome
to
weigh
in
on
the
option
two
series,
but
you
could
also
just
you
know.
Let
the
board
know
that
you
support
option
5c,
as
you
just
voted
on
specifically
with
the
transit
proximity
standards
and
not
with
a
different
Transit
proximity
standard
noted.
G
B
We
can
we
can
start
with
the
discussion
I'm
having
like
having
a
motion,
helps
kind
of
concentrate
the
conversation,
but
go
ahead.
Okay,.
N
If
that's,
where
we're
going
anyway,
yes,
yeah
I
I,
think
we
we
discussed
in
January,
where
kind
of
the
quarter
mile
half
mile
three
quarters
of
Mile
rules
came
from
and
I
think
staff
responded
and
staff
can
respond
again
if
I'm,
incorrect
or
misrepresented
here,
but
I
think
it
was
from
common
studies
and
research
again,
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
data
out
there
to
allow
us
to
immediately
observe
how
people
are
moving.
N
People
allow
location-based
services
to
be
on
their
cell
phones
and
the
that
data.
Those
data
are
sold
to
vendors
and
can
be
analyzed.
It
sounds
a
little
creepy,
but
that's
what
Transportation
planners
can
do
if
they
want
to,
and
that's
certainly
What
retailers
do
so
I,
don't
know
if
a
half
a
mile
is
I
mean
I,
think
a
quarter
mile
is
clearly
close
and
then
a
half
mile
is
pretty
close.
I,
don't
know
where
that
cut
off
really
is
and
I.
Don't
think
any
of
us
do
so.
N
C
So
Mike
come
on
comment
on
this,
isn't
so
much
or
at
least
my
approach
to
like,
say,
2E,
specifically,
which
sort
of
redefines
the
priority
and
proximity
Transit
Networks,
recognizing
that
there
isn't
any
way
right
now
that
we
can
accurately
say
how
people
move
around.
Like
is
half
a
mile
too
close
too
far,
three
quarters
Milestone
on
and
so
forth.
My
perspective
on
this
is
one
of
consistency
and
making
sure
that
we
have
one
sort
of
rule
or
set
of
guidelines.
C
B
Yeah
I
I
would
push
back
a
little
bit
on
this
notion
that
we
don't
know
because,
for
instance,
Metro
Rail,
Metro
wamada
has
studied
this
quite
a
bit
when
it
comes
to
how
far
do
people
walk
to
Metro
Rail
and
they
have
data,
for
instance,
the
median
distance
that
somebody
walks
to
a
metro
rail
station
is
just
under
a
half
a
mile,
so
which
tells
you,
given
that
we
know
that
a
lot
of
people
walk
from
much
closer
than
half
a
mile,
that
there
must
be
a
fair
number
of
people
walking
from
more
than
half
a
mile
to
bring
the
median
to
just
under
half
a
mile.
B
B
It
was
0.65
miles
to
the
Boston
Metro
from
Washington
Boulevard
and
Glebe,
the
Ava,
where
I
lived
right
after
I
got
married,
so
yeah
intuitively
from
what
I
have
seen
other
Transit
agencies
do
and
other
people
do
three
quarters
of
a
mile
from
Metro,
Rail
and
half
a
mile
from
a
really
frequent
bus
and
a
quarter
of
a
mile
from
a
not
so
frequent
buses
about
right.
Commissioner
Bros,
you
look
yeah.
P
Yeah,
yes
and
I
filled
out
those
Metro
surveys,
so
I
know
they.
They
have
that
data
and
I
know
my
90
year
old
parents
will
walk
a
quarter
mile
to
the
metro
and
I
I
know
people
choose
where
they
want
to
live
based
on
the
proximity
to
the
Metro,
so
I
I
think
there's
data
out
there
and
I
think
there's
actual
experience
that
we
can
refer
to.
C
I'll
say
that
I
think
it
is
important
to
weigh
in
on
it
part
of
giving
advice
to
the
County.
Board
is
saying
what
we
like,
and
also
what
we
don't
like.
B
The
nice
thing
about
having
one
item
on
the
agenda
is
it's
not
quite
so
tight
as
it
sometimes
is.
L
But
I
could
yeah
I
can
speak
to
them.
Generally,
we
do
have
a
some
maps
on
the
staff
report
that
I'll
share.
B
Thank
you
I'd
like
to
extend
us
a
special
thanks
to
Mr
Ladd,
who
was
not
initially
planning
to
be
and
I
dragged
out,
Transportation
Commission
and
now
we
will
force
them
to
present
on
things
that
were
not
in
his
presentation.
L
I'm
happy
to
be
here:
oh
so
there
are
five
minimum
site
air
standards,
and-
and
this
is
basically
the
difference
among
the
five-
is
in
a
nutshell-
and
obviously
there's
nuances
to
this,
but
I'm
trying
to
be
brief.
Two
to
four
unit
development
under
all
these
Site
Area
options
would
be
allowed
basically
on
any
legal
lot
it.
L
Obviously
it
has
to
meet
all
the
standards
and
everything
and
not
you
might
not
necessarily
be
able
to
fit
three
or
four
units
on
every
single
lot,
but
it
would
be
allowed
if
it
can
fit.
So
the
difference
between
the
five
is:
where
would
five
and
six
unit
development
be
allowed
and
option?
2A
would
be
again
any
any
legal
law
that
meets
the
minimum
size
for
that
zoning
District
would
be
allowed
to
build
five
or
six
units
subject
to
all
the
standards.
L
The
difference
between
2B
is
just
sets
a
straight
Site
Area
requirement
of.
If
the
zoning
district
has
a
has
a
minimum,
Site
Area,
that's
less
than
ten
thousand
square
feet,
then
for
five
units
you
would
be
required
to
have
nine
thousand
square
foot
lot
to
build
five
units
and
ten
thousand
square
feet
to
build
six
units.
L
So
there
would
be
a
higher
minimum
Site
Area
requirement
for
five
and
six
under
two
B
2C
follows
that
same
metric
of
nine
thousand
and
ten
thousand
square
feet
for
five
and
six
plexes,
except
within
those
Transit
proximate
areas
that
are
the
same
as
in
option.
5C
that
you
just
voted
on.
You
would
also
be
allowed
to
two
five
and
six.
L
So
2C
is
basically
2B,
plus
a
Transit
proximity
layer.
2D
does
not
have
a
Transit
proximity
layer
and
it
is
basically
you
can
build
five
or
six
in
the
minimum.
Site
Area
across
the
board
is
6.
000
square
feet
would
be
higher
in
our
our
10
R20
that
have
a
natural,
higher
minimum
Site
Area
requirement.
But
you
can
see
on
the
map.
L
2D
results
in
you
know
most
of
the
county,
except
the
smallest
lots
that
are
less
than
six
thousand
square
feet
being
able
to
to
to
have
the
option
for
a
five
or
six
units,
and
then
2E
is
so.
2E
is
the
one
that
has
the
different
definition
of
Transit
proximity,
and
so
that
is
a
half
mile
from
Metro,
rather
than
three
quarters
into
C.
L
L
That
standard
is
reduced
from
a
half
mile
to
a
quarter
mile
and
then
the
primary
Transit
Network,
as
I
think
was
referenced
earlier,
is
is
not
considered.
Transit
proximate,
there's
no
distance
standard
for
the
for
the
primary
Transit
Network
on
2E
and
then,
as
you
get
to
the
very
large
Lots,
once
you
get
to
12
000
square
feet,
then,
regardless
of
Transit
proximity,
you
would
be
able
to
do
five
or
six
units
on
those.
L
So
2E
is
only
five
and
six
units
in
the
narrower
definition
of
Transit
proximity
compared
to
2C
and
the
parking
options
and
then
also
on
12
000
and
up
square
foot.
Lots.
B
All
right,
I'm
gonna,
try,
I'm
trying
motion
here
and
see
where
things
go.
I
would
move
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommend
that
the
board
adopt
option
2A
and,
furthermore,
that
the
commission
explicitly
recommends
against
redefining
Transit
proximate
to
to
match
T
to
e
and
stick
with
how
Transit
proximate
is
outlined
in
option
5c.
B
Seconded
I
heard
somebody
else
say
something
else.
At
the
same
time
with
somebody.
Yes,
the
Transportation
Commission
recommends
the
adoption
of
option
2A
for
minimum
Site
Area
and,
furthermore,
the
commission
recommends
adopting
explicitly
not
adopting
the
redefined
Transit
proximate
that
is
outlined
in
2E,
but
sticking
with
Transit
proximate
is
designed
defined
in
5c
was
the
motion
that
has
been
moved
and
seconded.
It
is
before
us
and
I
see
commissioner
Terry
jumping
at
the
bit
to
talk
about
talk
about
that.
So
go
ahead.
Commissioner
Terry.
T
B
So
there
are
two
recommendations
in
this
motion.
The
first
is
to
adopt
minimum
site
area
of
2A,
which
is
the
version
of
minimum
Site
Area.
That
has
the
least
restrictions
it
says.
If
you
can
fit
that
number
of
units
inside
what
would
be
a
single
family
home
in
that
District,
then
you
can
do
it
as
opposed
to
the
other
versions
of
minimum
Site
Area
that
say
like
yeah.
Even
if
you
could
fit
six
inside
this
house,
you
can't
it's
the
lot's,
not
big
enough
and
then
further
it
explicitly
says.
B
B
D
Thank
you
if
I
could
take
some
moment
just
about
this,
as
we've
heard
earlier
from
commissioner
Theo
I
think
consistency
is
extremely
important,
as
we
don't
have
clear
understanding
of
some
of
these
parameters,
and
so
I
think
adopting
to
e
would
simply
introduce
more
uncertainty
in
this
conversation,
whereas
two
A's
consistent
with
what
we've
laid
out
with
option
5c.
M
Tell
me
yeah
I,
concur
that
I
think
two
e's
effectively
trying
to
just
say
no
fives
and
sixes,
because
there
are
not
a
lot
of
12
000
square
foot,
lots
that
are
approximate
to
transit
in
this
County
and
the
only
ones
that
there
are
are
in
the
r
10
and
20
zones,
which
are
not
very
aren't
a
lot
of
not
a
lot
of
areas
owned.
Those.
So
that's
sort
of
trying
to
kill
it
by
the
back
door.
M
So
yeah
I
will
be
in
favor
of
the
2A
and
the
and
the
2C.
The
2C
definition
of
Transit,
not
two
c,
but
the
2C
definition
of
Transit.
The
5c.
O
I
have
a
question:
sorry,
this
all
kind
of
a
lot
of
options
here.
So
what
would
according
to
according
to
option
2E?
What
does
it
classify
the
future
16m
bus,
that
is,
that
was
promised
by
the
County
Board,
which
would
have
had
ways
of
six
minutes?
What
type
of
Transit
does
that
count
as.
B
No
Ms
Del
Barrera
may
come
in
and
correct
me
on
this,
but
my
understanding
is
that
the
16m,
based
on
its
Corridor
of
Columbia,
Pike
and
its
frequencies
and
its
span
of
service
would
be
considered
premium
Transit
and
so
5c
would
say.
If
you're
within
wait,
they're
both
half
miles
premium,
Transit
right.
L
B
The
difference
would
be
5c
would
say
that
you
could
build
the
larger
units
of
two
e.
Sorry
that
you
would
be
considered
trans
approximate
if
you're
within
half
a
mile
of
the
16m
on
Columbia
Pike.
L
O
I
think
what
this
indicates
all
of
this
confusion.
All
these
restrictions
is,
in
a
sense,
an
already
watered-down
policy
and
a
watered-down
policy.
Almost
to
the
point
of
absurdity,
I
mean
we're
like
we've
spent
I,
don't
know
how
much,
how
many
months
talking
about
missed
the
middle
now
eho
and
now
there's
this
proposal
to
introduce
all
of
these
restrictions.
I
mean
I,
think
I
think
we
need
to
allow
these
options
and
and
and
see
what
happens
with
the
with
the
market.
O
Otherwise,
it
looks
like
you
know,
California,
before
their
their
recent
housing
laws,
which
is
tons
of
restrictions
and
an
ability
to
build
anything
people
moving
out
and
homelessness
so
and
and
and
I
mean
within
the
last
legislative
session.
They
realized
the
faults
of
these
policies
and
have
amended
some
of
them.
So
I
support
the
the
the
motion,
as
he
proposed.
B
Great
and
this
map
is
quite
Illuminating,
if
you
take
a
look,
make
sure
you
got
everybody's
got
their
monitor
on,
you
can
see
how
much
narrower
the
band
is
along.
Columbia
Pike,
that's
the
quarter
mile
versus
half
mile
and
how
much
of
the
light
green
you
know
goes
away
because
it
doesn't
count
primary
Transit
at.
O
B
M
Have
a
quick
question
and
I
just
lost
it.
I'll
come
back.
N
Commissioner,
yeah
I
just
wanted
to
associate
myself
with
at
least
the
the
general
Sentiments
of
commissioner
moradovic.
It
seems
like
this
proposal
has
gotten
to
the
point
of
splitting
hairs
and
and
either
it
stands
on
its
own
as
a
solid
proposal
to
allow
the
market
to
make
decisions
about
how
much
housing
and
Retail
and
mixed
use
should
be
in
Arlington
in
places
that
we
haven't
had
it
before
or
or
not,
I,
don't
think
we
really
know
what
the
limits
or
the
bounds
are,
so
we
either
just
have
to
decide
or
let
the
market
decide.
N
But
if
we
decide
it's
got
to
be
something
that's
consistent
and
clear,
but
I
I,
again,
I
think
we're
splitting
tears
here.
Eight
units,
six
units-
three,
you
know,
there's
there's
been
so
much
debate
about
this
and
it's
like
well.
If
this
stands
on
its
own
as
a
solid
policy,
then
it
should
be
a
simple
and
clear
policy
that
everybody
can
kind
of
get
around.
B
M
Right
now,
when
we
say
premium
Transit-
and
we
say
primary
Transit,
of
course-
those
are
the
bus
lines.
Bus
lines
are
notorious
for
changing
the
the
frequencies
can
go
up,
they
can
go
down,
they
can
change
the
route.
If
that
happens,
and
of
course,
Metro
right
now
is
we're
looking
at
a
lot
of
its
routes.
M
If
that
changes,
does
the
zoning
change
with
it
does
do
we
change
these
Maps
so
that
something
that
previously
was
allowed
no
longer
will
be
or,
conversely,
something
that
wasn't
allowed
will
then
be
allowed?
And
so
how
does
that
going
to
work?
Because
I
mean
the
subway
lines
are
fixed?
They
know
where
the
stations
are
they're,
going
to
be
there
forever,
but
for
the
buses.
Is
this
going
to
be
fluid,
and
this
will
this
be
changing
as
the
buses
change.
L
So
short
answer:
no
the
way
that
this
is
written
into
the
zoning
ordinance
is.
We
have
the
primary.
We
have
the
premium
Transit
Network.
We
have
the
primary
Transit
Network.
Those
are
mapped
on
the
MTP
that
goes
back
to
2016-2017.,
that's
not
to
say
that
we
couldn't
redo
the
MTP
and
have
different
Transit
routes.
But
if
that
happened,
it
would
be
the
action
of
the
County
Board
to
amend
its
Master
Transportation
plan.
And
then
the
zoning
is
referring
to
these
corridors
that
exist,
and
so
it
would
change
automatically.
L
But
just
because
a
bus
route
changes
from
one
block
to
another
block
or
maybe
the
stop
moves.
It's
it's
not
going
to
it's
not
going
to
change
it,
but
it
would
be.
These
are
the
areas
where
the
ca
it's
the
county,
board's
policy
to
invest
its
Transportation
dollars
into
Transit
infrastructure,
on
the
premium
and
primary
networks.
And
so,
if
that's
a
policy-
and
it's
not
real-
it's
not
based
on
okay.
M
B
T
Sorry
about
that,
just
so
I
think
one
of
my
concerns
since
I
saw
this
map
a
couple
of
months
ago.
Is
that
I
think
even
with
the
the
transit
proximity
on
the
the
left
here,
it's
still
a
fairly
conservative
mapping
of
what
is
transit
in
in
Arlington
and
it
my
view
doesn't
really
take
into
account
a
lot
of
the
best
options
that
are
that
are
available
for
residents
of
the
county.
T
Nor
does
it
really
take
into
account
other
Alternative
forms
of
transportation
and,
of
course
that
would
impact
a
lot
of
what
we're
discussing
here
tonight.
T
I
know
this
is
not
something
that's
going
to
be
fixed
tonight,
but
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
think
about
what
what
is
access
to
transit
in
this
County
actually
mean
I
live,
probably
about
a
mile
from
a
metro
stop
and
routinely.
Every
morning,
I
see
people
walking
a
mile
to
get
to
the
train
and
they
could
also
get
on
the
bus.
That
runs
right
here
too
so,
and
some
of
them
do
that
so
I
would
definitely
encourage
a
broader
look
to
Define,
better
Define
transit
in
in
Arlington.
B
B
So
I
like
the
approach
of
referring
to
the
mdp,
which
is
our
planning
document
about
what
corridors
we
kind
of
are
committing,
are
going
to
have
good
Transit,
but
yeah
plenty
of
people
feel
super
connected
to
Transit
who
do
not
live
within
what
this
outlines.
Commissioner,.
O
That
wanted
to
follow
up
the
the
previous
point
about
the
definition
of
Transit
and
I
think
some
points
to
keep
in
mind.
More
people
ride
the
bus
overall
than
the
Metro,
the
actual
trains
bus
ridership
has
been
pretty
resilient.
I
think
this
policy,
you
know
narrowing
down.
O
The
walk
sheds
excludes
a
lot
of
people
that
use
Transit
and
and
and
also
we
want
to
try
to
Future
proof
of
our
policies
as
much
as
possible,
and
not
only
are
people
walking
to
Metro
stations,
some
are
biking
and
or
increasingly
e-biking,
and
it's
and
that's
broadening
how
many
people
of
all
ages
and
physical
abilities
can
can
ride
a
bike.
So
I
think
want
to
focus
on
just
keeping
policies
as
flexible
as
possible
and
and
I
think.
The
current
motion
allows
for
that.
Q
Oh
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
am
also
supportive
of
option
2A,
as
well
as
spy
to
see
I
think
that
with
trans
that
it
may
I
agree
with
the
others
that
we
are
not.
We
are
not
incorporating
some
of
the
but
other
bus
routes
that
that
may
not
be
taken
into
consideration
so
I
I
am
so
even
though
I
am
generally
not
supportive
of
the
parking
minimums.
I
am
supportive
of
2A
as
giving
of
the
broadest
opportunities.
Q
B
B
All
right
anything
else
before
we
call
the
vote
on
this
particular
motion,
all
right.
So
right
now
we
were
voting
on
the
recommendation
that
the
board
adopt
2A
and
the
keep
the
transit
proximate
definition.
That's
in
5c,
not
the
one
in
two
e
commissioner
Bros,
commissioner
Coleman
commissioner
Hussein
aye,
commissioner
Lane
tell
me
aye,
commissioner
Locker
hi,
commissioner
Ludlow
aye,
commissioner
moradovic
aye,
commissioner
Yuri
aye,
commissioner
Shannon.
S
B
Are
there
any
other
detailed
recommendations
that
folks
want
to
make
before
we
wrap
this
up
with
one
final,
we
recommend
that
eho
should
go
forward.
We
don't
recommend
that
eh
should
go
forward.
Any
other
detailed
bits
that
anybody
wants
to
100.
Commissioner
Ludlow.
N
B
You
great
all
right,
then
I'm
going
to
recommend
that
the
trend
I'm
going
to
move
it
is
one
of
those
nights
move
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommend
that
the
board
adopt
the
missing
middle
eho
program,
making
no
particular
recommendation
about
any
of
the
options
other
than
those
otherwise
outlined
in
our
recommendation
that
has
been
moved
and
seconded
so
that
will
essentially
read
once
we
combine
all
of
the
bits
together
if
it
were
to
pass
that
the
Transportation
Commission
recommends
that
the
board
adopt
the
missing
middle,
expanded
housing
options,
specifically
that
they
adopt
5C
and
5e,
not
5B,
that
they
adopt
to
a
and
keep
the
5c
trans
approximate,
not
the
2E
definition
of
Transit
proximate
and
that
we
explicitly
don't
make
any
recommendations
about
all
of
the
other
things
like
Max
floor
area
and
caps
and
all
of
that
kind
of
stuff.
D
C
Just
second,
commissioner
Coleman,
with
even
greater
emphasis
of
finding
some
opportunity
to
sort
of
advising
rejection
of
2e,
because
it
does
add
too
much
complexity
and
inconsistency
in
the
matter.
N
N
So
that's
the
reality
of
the
situation.
I
really
feel
strongly
that
we
do
need
to
monitor
it.
If,
if,
if
this
goes
forward,
the
cap
is
interesting,
it
almost
turns
it
into
a
pilot.
N
I
also
think
that
it,
it
reflects
the
trepidation
of
the
community
about
this
issue.
There's
a
lot
of
of
there's
a
lot
of
feelings
that
are
raw
even
around
the
transportation
side,
which
was
what
we're
focusing
on
tonight.
N
So
I'm
I'm,
still
very
much
on
the
fence
here.
I
I
think
that
for
a
lot
of
the
county,
this
makes
a
lot
of
sense,
I
think
for
other
parts
of
the
county,
especially
after
the
five
years,
and
we're
trusting
that
the
the
correct
adjustments
would
be
made
after
five
years
and
I
I
there's
no
guarantee
that
they
will.
Who
knows
so,
we
haven't
done
any
of
the
analysis
that
you
would
need
to
do
yet
to
look
at
the
long
term.
N
We're
we're
going
into
this
in
good
faith
that
we're
going
to
collect
good
data
they're
going
to
we're
going
to
watch
things
and
that
it
we
think
it's
going
to
turn
out,
but
there's
a
lot
of
people
who
say
that
it
won't
there's
a
lot
of
data
that
says
that
it
won't
there's
a
lot
of
data
that
says
that
it
will
so
I.
Think
it's
really
going
to
be
important
for
us
over
the
next
five
years
to
look
at
this
very
carefully
and
to
see
what
happens
if
it
were
a
slam,
dunk
really
great
proposal.
N
N
I
like
the
idea
of
retail
and
mixed
use.
If
we're
going
to
go
all
out
with
missing
middle,
let's
go
all
out.
Let's,
let's
relax
our
zoning
and
let
things
go
and
see
what
happens
and
what
amazing
surprises
the
market
provides
for
us,
but
we're
it
doesn't
seem
like
we're
willing
to
do
that
on
the
transportation
side
or
on
any
of
the
other
side.
So
I'm
just
telling
you
that
I'm
very
much
on
the
fence
here,
I
realize
this
is
going
to
go
through.
N
We
need
to
collect
good
data
and
and
and
really
monitor
things
and
be
serious
about
any
changes
that
need
to
be
made
after
that
five-year
period,
especially
in
the
parts
of
the
county
where
we've
got
the
Chicken
and
the
Egg
hope
that
Transit
and
densification
may
take
place
there
I
think
also
largely
we
don't
really
I.
Don't
think
anybody
really
knows
what
we
want
Arlington
to
look
like
in
the
future.
At
least
I've
never
heard
anybody
clearly
articulate.
N
Do
we
want
all
of
Arlington
to
look
like
Ballston,
I
I,
don't
know
I,
don't
think
so,
but
I've,
never,
you
know
I,
don't
think.
There's
consensus
around
around
that
yet,
and
maybe
this
moves
Us
in
that
in
that
direction,
but
again
that
that's
those
are
some
of
my
overall
concerns
about
about
the
proposition
at
hand
and
what
we
need
to
do
to
to
watch
how
it
progresses.
B
R
Yeah
I
just
want
to
Echo
that
I
think,
like
I'm,
really
excited
about
this,
just
because
the
idea
of
changing
the
way
we
essentially
the
way
we
Zone
is
something
that
like
I've,
only
read
about
you
know
we
see
in
other
places,
Japan
zoning
codes
are
very,
not
very
strict,
right
and
so
I
think
it's
very
cool
and
exciting
to
see
that
basically
being
tried
in
the
U.S
here.
R
But
again,
that
being
said,
I
think
because
it's
such
a
big
change
to
the
way
we've
been
operating
for
I,
don't
know
80
years
right.
Our
zoning
codes
that
we
have
to
really
take
a
lot
of
care
in
designing
that
policy
and
looking
at
data,
because
if
this
doesn't
go
well
or
rather
I
should
say
if
this
does
go
well,
it
acts
as
a
model
for
other
cities
in
the
United
States.
R
R
You
know
five
plexes
and
you
know
that
level
of
density
and
that
level
of
flexibility,
rather
than
just
having
a
single
used,
a
single
family
Zone
just
have
a
single
family
and
nothing
more
so
I'd
like
I
want
this
to
go
really
well
and
for
that
to
happen,
I
think
the
policy
that
the
planning
that
has
to
go
into
that
has
to
be.
R
R
I'm
willing
to
put
that
sacrifice
in
because
this
project,
this
proposal
has
as
immense
value
and
immense
impact
for
not
just
Arlington
County,
but
the
way
we
understand
housing
just
in
general,
so
I
just
want
to
say,
I'm
excited
to
see
this
become
successful
just
because
of
what
it
can
provide,
but
being
very
careful
and
how
we're
designing
that
policy
and
how
we're
implementing
and
tracking
that
I
think
that's
extremely
important
as
well.
Thanks.
O
Like
to
follow
up
on
that,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
do
monitor,
but
in
terms
of
the
broader
relevance
for
the
country
as
a
whole
I,
you
know
I,
don't
share
your
assessment
of
the
importance
of
this,
because
I
feel
like
Arlington,
is
already
behind
the
curve
behind
a
lot
of
other
cities
that
have
already
upsoned,
and
this
I
think
it's
very
important
is
even
in
its
most
liberal
form
a
very,
very
constrained.
O
Well,
it
doesn't
allow
many
options,
so
I
I,
think
I,
think
it's
it's
a
conservative
approach
and
and
we'll
see
we'll
keep
monitoring
I'm
assuming
the
county,
we'll
there's
a
lot
of
pressure
on
the
counter.
You
did
provide
the
data
and
we'll
see
what
it
turns
into.
B
Thank
you,
professional
radovich,
I'm,
very
excited
to
see
this
go
forward.
I
think
people
in
20
or
30
years
are
going
to
be
really
grateful
that
we
did
this
one.
We
did.
B
B
But
if
you
look
around
Arlington
today,
what
are
what
are
the
last
remaining
affordable
things
they're,
the
duplexes
that
were
built
in
the
50s
or
the
townhouses
that
are
old,
and
you
know
a
new
townhouse
of
course
is
expensive
because
it's
new,
but
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
using
a
smaller
piece
of
that
very
expensive
land,
and
so
you
know
as
things
age
and
that
Old
Town
House
is
now
going
up
against
new
construction.
B
That
is,
has
its
you
know,
newness
and
it's
modern
conveniences
or
whatever
it's
those
aging
missing
middle
units.
I
think
that
are
going
to
be
the
the
Bedrock
of
affordability
in
Arlington
in
20
years.
So
I'm
excited
to
be
part
of
that.
B
B
So
I'm
looking
forward
to
seeing
this
move
forward,
I
think
it
will
make
Arlington
more
livable,
not
less
I,
think
it
will
make
our
LinkedIn
more
affordable
and
not
less
and
I.
I
should
have
some
final
portion
of
that
sentence
that
really
sums
things
up
and
I
just
don't
so,
unless
there
is
anyone
else
who
wants
to
throw
a
final
thing
here,
commissioner
Locker
absolutely.
Q
Yeah
I
I
realize
this
is
going
through
and
you
know
I
sorry
excuse
me.
I
have
my
seven-year-old
here
in
the
background
I
realize
it's
going
through.
This
is
going
to
go
through
and
I
I
want
to
just
reiterate
a
couple
things
that
others
have
said.
Just
I
do
support
the
cap
and
you
know,
while
we're
trying
to
get
things
going.
Q
I
also
support
the
data
collection,
I,
I,
support,
missing
middle
and
I,
do
support
adding
more
housing
and
the
ability
to
add
more
housing
in
Arlington,
because
we
I
realize
and
I
think
we
all
realize
that
there
is
a
housing
shortage
in
the
the
Washington
area
and
we
and
we
live
in
a
great
Community.
We
want
to
share
and
bring
others
in.
However,
I
am
my
biggest
concern.
Is
the
parking
minimums
are
reducing
the
parking
requirement
and
so
that
that
is
my
major
concern.
Q
I
worry
it's
going
to
really
impact
the
already
congested
neighborhoods
that
are
currently
in
the
areas
that
are
in
the
transit
proximity
maps
that
are,
you
know
the
the
greens
and
the
flues,
and
it
seemed
a
little
bit
inequitable
to
me.
You
know
I
think
that
if
these
areas
are
already
congested,
they
already
have
many
people,
many
cars
well,
there's
probably
more
opportunities
in
the
areas
in
the
yellow
to
to
have
more
more
builds
and
more
and
maybe
cars
parked
on
the
street.
Q
So
I
think
these
are
kind
of
some
of
my
major
concerns,
but
again
I
want
to
be
on
record
to
say
that
missing
middle
on
them
even
very
supportive.
It's
just
really
the
parking
requirement.
That
is
my
major
concern.
So
that's
all.
Thank
you.
N
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
or
associate
myself
with
commissioner
Locker's
comments.
I
am
also
supportive
of
missing
metal,
but
I
still
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
work
that
we
haven't
done
yet,
maybe
we'll
be
able
to
do
it
I
hope
we
can
thanks.
B
One
last
chance,
one
last
chance:
okay,
calling
to
vote
on
the
final
recommendation,
which
is
recommending
that
the
County
Board
adopt
missing
middle,
enhance
and
expanded
housing
options,
as
outlined
specifically
in
our
other
two
motions,
but
explicitly
not
taking
a
stance
on
any
of
the
other
portions
where
there
are
options.
L
E
B
Commissioner
Ludlow
nay,
commissioner
moradovic
aye,
commissioner
Yuri
aye
commissioner
Shannon
aye
commissioner
Terry
I,
commissioner
Theo
aye
and
I
also
vote
Yes
that
passes
ten
to
two.
Thank
you,
everyone
who
came
out,
thank
you
to
our
speakers.
Thank
you
to
staff,
both
virtual
and
in
person,
and
thank
you
to
Ms
obakoya
for
expertly
dealing
with
accommodating
all
of
our
speakers
and
getting
them
up
to
date
on
the
link
to
join
and
how
to
speak
here
in
person.
B
That
concludes
that
agenda
item.
I
think
all
we
have
left
is
other
items
not
on
the
agenda.
Other
commission
business.
Our
next
meeting
is
March
30th.
So
less
than
a
month
away
very
exciting
I
imagine
we
will
have
more
than
one
agenda
item
I,
think
a
couple
things
probably
got
pushed
a
little
knowing
how
much
of
the
time
missing
middle
was
going
to
take
up
for
the
board
we
need.
B
There
is
a
site
plan
review
committee
coming
up
for
Sunrise
Assisted
Living,
South
Glebe
Road,
not
to
be
confused
with
Sunrise
Assisted
Living
project
North
Glebe
Road,
which
has
been
moving
forward,
which
is
an
lrpc
because
it
needs
a
glup
Amendment.
But
anyway,
this
would
be
a
new
assisted
living
facility
at
the
site
of
the
old
Methodist
Church,
South,
Glebe
and
7th
South
7th
I
think
we
need
a
lead
person
and
a
backup
an
alternate,
so
either
speak
up
now
or
email
me
after.
B
If
you
are
interested
in
talking
about
taking
that
on.
For
the
commission,
we
also
TC
has
a
rep
a
liaison
to
the
Crystal
City
Review
Committee,
that
I've
done
a
very
bad
job
of
covering,
since
commissioner
price
left
he
was
our
previous
CC.
No
commissioner
radic
was
our
previous
CCC
RC
rep.
This
is
an
interesting
little
commission.
That
kind
of
just
keeps
tabs
on
implementation
of
the
Crystal
City
sector
plan
and
it
weighs
in
on
the
world
of
Crystal
City
development.
B
B
Was
there
one
other
open
liaison
thing
that
you
raised
misopicoya
Transit
advisory
committee?
Yes,
commissioner
price
did
what
was
our
fantastic
liaison
to
that
little
committee,
that
is
like
bicycle
advisory
committee
or
pedestrian
advisory
committee,
but
exclusively
focused
on
Transit.
B
They
get
into
the
weeds
more
on
Transit
than
we
usually
have
an
opportunity
to
do
here.
We
deal
more
at
a
policy
level.
They're
often
talking
about
nitty-gritty
implementation
details,
so
if
you're
interested
in
being
the
tce
liaison
2
the
tech,
because
of
course
we
like
to
pronounce
our
acronyms
in
Arlington
again,
you
can.
Let
me
know
here
in
person
after
the
meeting
or
shoot
me
an
email
or
whatever.
Is
there
any
other
commission
business
for
the
good
of
the
order
before
we
wrap
this
up?