Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the Monday, January 12th, 2026 meeting of the Arlington County Planning Commission. I am Commissioner Nia Bagley, chair. Before we begin our hearing, the planning commission will consider a motion to adjourn the meeting for the purpose of conducting an annual closed work session with the county attorney. The meeting will reconvene the public hearing no sooner than 8:00 p.m. I move that the planning commission convene a closed meeting as authorized by Virginia Code section 2.2-3711.8.7 A.7 for the purpose of consultation with the county attorney concerning the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act for meetings and the disclosure of public records requirements applicable to the planning commission under the state and local government conflicts of interests act the statutory basis for the planning planning commission's roles and responsibilities and the provisions of Virginia code section 15.2-2232 2-2232 concerning determinations of conformity with the comprehensive plan. Do I have a second?

Second. Thank you. I will do a vote alphabetically. Commissioner Emodia

I I Commissioner Berky I. Commissioner Garcia. I, Commissioner Luvar, she's away. Commissioner Lanto, I. Commissioner Patel, I. Commissioner Peterson, I. Commissioner Robertson, I. Commissioner Steinberger, I. Commissioner Strider, I. Commissioner Torres. Not here. Um, Commissioner Whitfield I. And me, Commissioner Begley. I so that is uh unanimous for the folks who are here. Can I stop you for

Yes, sure. Hold that thought. Just never fails. They gave me the wrong script. Okay. [clears throat] [sighs and gasps] Whatever. You may have to reread. Thank you. I move that the planning commission amend the motion to read Virginia Code section 2.2-3711.88. Do I have a second?

Second. Okay, let's do a a vote alphabetically. Commissioner Modio, I. Commissioner Berkkey, I. Commissioner Garcia, I. Commissioner Lantelme, I. Commissioner Patel, I. Commissioner Peterson, I. Commissioner Robertson, I. Commissioner Steinberger, I. Commissioner Striner, I. Commissioner Torres, I. Commissioner Whitfield, I.

And Commissioner Begley, that's me. I that's unanimous. Thank you. Okay, we're in close session.

I move that the members of the planning commission certify one that only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under chapter 37 title 2.2 two of the code of Virginia and two only such public business matters sorry that's me as were identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened were heard discussed or considered by the commission do I have a second second

thank you so we'll do a vote alphabetically commissioner Modio. I Commissioner Berkkey. Oh, he left. I'm sorry. Commissioner Garcia. Hi. Commissioner Gavar is not here. Commissioner Lantel. Hi, Commissioner Patel. Hi, Commissioner Peterson. Hi, Commissioner Robertson. I Commissioner Steinberger. Hi, Commissioner Shriner. Hi, Commissioner Torres. I Commissioner Woodfield. I

Commissioner Baggley, that's me. I and that is unanimous. All right. Sorry about that. Tonight we will hear and discuss the following items. Amendments to the Arlington County zoning ordinance for Fort Meyer Heights North Special District and acceptance of the 2847 Wilson Boulevard special gup study document. Presenters and speakers joining the meeting through Microsoft Teams, please keep your phones and other electronic devices muted until you are called upon by the clerk. Please turn off the sound to any devices around you to minimize interference and keep your cameras off until the clerk announces your name to speak. When called upon, you must unmute yourself by clicking on the microphone icon that is in the meeting command bar at the top of the screen. The moderator nor the clerk have the ability to unmute your mic. Once you have spoken, please mute your mics and turn your camera off. If you are dialing in by phone to join the meeting, press star six to unmute. Public speakers will be called upon by the clerk at an assigned time. Pre-registration with email confirmation is required to speak at tonight's hearing. We are not able to accommodate additional speakers. All speakers, virtual or hybrid, will receive two minutes to comment as an individual. Only representatives of a county board appointed advisory group committee and or a commission will receive three minutes to comment. A timer will be displayed on the screen if virtually speaking and speakers in person will follow the timer stationed on the podium. Audio of tonight's meeting is available via phone. If commissioners, presenters, or speakers lose internet connectivity, please reconnect by phone. However, if you are dialing in by phone and unable to see the screen, we will provide an audible 30- secondond warning to wrap your comments to wrap up your comments. You will be muted when your

time has expired. The meeting chat is active for presenters or commissioners who need technical assistance only. Please do not use the meeting chat for discussion, public comment, questions about agenda items, or requests for further information. All public comments must be shared ver verbally for the record during the assigned public testimony period. Tonight's meeting will be available through the YouTube platform. A link has been provided on the planning commission website 24 to 48 hours after the adjournment of the meeting. Although the meetings will no longer be a live broadcast, the meetings will be available for review with closed captioning on Comcast Xfinity channels 25 and 1073 and Verizon Fios channels 39 and 40 24 to 48 hours after the adjournment of the meeting. Lastly, this is a public forum. Tonight's meeting will be recorded and posted to the county website via a link to YouTube as stated. All information associated with tonight's meeting, whether written or spoken, is subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act requirements. Madame Clerk, please call our first item. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Our first item for the evening is ZOA-2026-01, amendments to the Arlington County Zoning Ordinance Section 9.3 for Fort Meer Heights North Special District. We have Anthony Fuserelli, our planning director, to present this item this evening.

Thank you. And uh good evening again, Madame Chair and members of the commission. I am pleased to be here this evening to present this item which involves a proposed zoning text amendment relating to provisions for county board approval of special exception site plans in the Fort Meyer Heights North Special District. As several commissioners may recall, the impetus for this study uh stems from the review of the 1601 Fairfax Drive redevelopment proposal, whose site plan and reszoning uh applications came before this commission uh in September of 2025. Through further review of the project, questions were raised about the impact of applicable existing zone text in the zoning ordinance affecting the county board's discretion in considering site plans that do not fully meet adopted plan goals. And after deferring its consideration of the project in September, the county board approved an initiating resolution allowing staff to undertake a brief focused zoning study for the Fort Meyer Heights North Special District per article 9 section 3 to evaluate and address any inconsistencies with other place-based zoning districts and ensure appropriate flexibility in the board's discretion. [sighs] By way of background, uh, since the early 1960s, Arlington County has used the special exception site plan process to help realize its vision for the primary growth areas of the community. The site plan approval authorities held by the county board allow them to approve development proposals by permitting greater densities, building heights or other flexibilities that would be than that would be permitted by Wright after going through a full public review process and consideration by the planning

commission. Over the past 50 plus years, the county board has also adopted many sector, area, and corridor plans as planning documents that set forth a more precise vision for specific areas in Arlington, shaped by processes that engage the community. These plans help inform both public investment through county projects advanced through the capital improvement program and private investment in informing developers on the type of development the county aspires to see. uh site plan developments provide for in particular locations applicable to tonight's item. After a community process in 2008, the county board adopted the Fort Meer Heights North plan to set forth a future vision and supporting goals and recommendations for this neighborhood. Furthermore, Arlington's adopted plans are typically supported by zoning amendments that allow the county board to approve site plans addressing some but not necessarily all plan goals in applying their discretionary authority to do so. [sighs] For visual orientation, uh we see here a recent aerial perspective highlighting the area of the Fort Meyer Heights North Special District with Arlington Boulevard, North Pier Street, uh portions of Clarendon Boulevard, and portions of North Scotch Street and North Courthouse Road broadly defining the boundaries of the district. Through staff's analysis, uh, we found that Arlington's place-based zoning districts generally allow the county to the county board to approve site plans that meet some, but not necessarily all area plan goals or recommendations. However, uh we confirmed through internal review that as written, the applicable zoning text for the Fortme Heights North Special District lacks this qualifier, effectively requiring

that a project address all planned goals for it to be properly approved by the county board. So based on staff's understanding and belief on how the Fort Meyer Heights North Special District was established in furtherance of the plan, there was no intention to require more stringent findings for site plans in this district compared with others. Therefore, staff proposes a zoning text amendment adding the word certain in two locations within the district's provisions to align it with other districts and clarify the board's intended discretion in their authority to approve site plan projects. For this study, we've applied the consult level of engagement. Uh in terms of timeline, uh the board uh approved an initiating resolution in September and in December, uh staff brought forward to the board a request to advertise public hearings in January by the planning commission as well as the county board. Beyond meeting our legal notice requirements, we communicated via email to the site plan review committee membership and listener for the 1601 Fairfax Drive project. And given the amendment's narrow scope, uh broader engagement and also a Zoko meeting, uh was deemed not necessary in this case. Um after this evening, staff will be presenting, uh this item to the county board at its January meeting. So, in closing, uh, this amendment would bring the Fort Myer Heights North Special District in line with other districts, uh, ensuring clarity and flexibility in the county board's uh, decision-making process on site plan applications. The recommended amendment uh, aligns with the standard practice for other place specific zoning ordinance uh, provisions and supports consistent and flexible planning practices. Uh therefore, the uh draft staff recommendation is for the county board to adopt uh the attached ordinance

to amend, reenact, and recodify article 9 section 3 uh relating to provisions for the county board approval of special exception site plans in the Fortmeer Heights North Special District. That concludes uh my presentation and happy to uh later address any questions you all may have. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fuserelli. Um, Madame Clerk, do we I don't think we have any commissions or anything on this. Correct. We do not. Okay. Do we have public speakers? We have two speakers on this item this evening. Uh, Leslie Armensky and Steuart Stein. in that order, please.

Turn your your microphone on. Please push a button.

Okay. Good evening. My name is Leslie Arminsky and I represent Ray Pom. When I testified before the planning commission on September 3rd of last year, I stated that Unbalanced Raybomb believes the project should go forward. This is the well, we still believe that it is comp compatible with the Fort Meyer Heights North plan as it is written. [clears throat] Not only do we believe that it complies with the plan, but also with the intent of the plan for the site. During the discussion amongst the commission members and county staff, there was consternation by commission members who voted against or abstained on the site plan and whether a recommendation to the county board could be made to proceed with a project that addresses some but not all of the goals in the north for a Fort Meyer Heights North area plan. If this proposed amendment to the zoning code will allow the site plan to move forward without weakening the Fort Meer Heights North area plan, we would support it. The Fort Meer Heights North plan is very important to our community. It has been very effective and is just as relevant today as it has been in the past. We stand behind it and the many years of work that it represents, not only by our civic association, but all of the many people that participated in the creation of it. Thank you for your consideration.

Hello. Uh, I'm Stuart Stein and first of all, I'd like to totally associate myself with what uh what Leslie just uh said. I worked on the Fort Meyer Heights North plan for many years of very difficult negotiations. A process that I remember was supposed to take just six months maybe. I stand by the plan 100%. In the years that have followed, the plan has done a great job of preserving this community, one that Carrie Johnson so wanted to save when she first proposed creating this plan. We knew that the inn of Rosland site would be very difficult if it were developed by itself, making it an orphaned site. I greatly appreciate the concerns of the staff. It's heartwarming to see them stand up for my community and the importance of the Fort Meyer Heights North plan, its goals, and its vision. After discussing the targeted nature of the proposed amendment with the county, being assured that the change will only impact the idea of balancing the specified goals of any given site without absolutely requiring that all of them be met on any specific site. I would support this limited amendment. It does help solve a problem with a site that we knew would present a number of them if the whole block was not developed together. Thank you.

Thank you. Um since we have no other public speakers, I think this matter is in front of the commission now as a zoning thing. Um and I believe um you want to start okay with maybe some clarifying questions if there are any.

Yes, I actually have only one question. Uh first of all, I'm voting for this. It's I think a very much needed for all the reasons um have been by the public um speakers. Um, is this limited? Is the problem we have here limited to just this plan or do we have other area or sector plans that might have this oddity embedded in it? I'm thinking for example like the courthouse addendum. Is there a rigidity there that we should also at some point being addressed? Uh, you know, the lack of discretion, shall we say? Um, good answer.

No, thank thank you for that question. Um that's actually a question that we since we were taking the opportunity to um fully evaluate and resolve the issue that we found with this district. Uh we wanted to be sure in the process that we were combing through the other districts in the zoning ordinance. So what we found um you mentioned Courthouse Square um but when we looked at Seal Roslin when we look at Western Roslin as well as Pentagon City um and a few other districts all of those other districts um many of them most of them include the word certain when they identify u that the board should find that a project addresses you know certain goals, features, amenities. Um, a few other districts don't use the word certain, but they use other qualifying language that we believe and in consult with the county attorney's office, um, we believe that there's the discretion there. So, this um, through our study, uh, really was identified as the outlier, um, that needed attention and, um, did not find this issue in the other districts.

Thank you. Um, I actually had the same question as Commissioner Lan tell me because in the staff report it says in nearly all examples of the Arlington County zoning ordinance district blah blah blah. So I I was wondering about the words nearly all like is there one or two but those outliers are okay for some reason while whereas this one wasn't um or is maybe you maybe the report was written before you finished the study and it can be updated for the county board. If you could do me the f the favor, Commissioner um Yes, Peter Peterson, of pointing me to that exact citation.

Uh page two, bottom paragraph in nearly all examples of the zoning ordinance districts that relate to a specific plan or place. Um the zoning text establishes that the county board may approve site plans um when they address, realize, or otherwise provide certain goals. So, it was just the the nearly all made it sound like maybe there was another one. Yeah, I don't um that's a great question. I don't believe that was the intention of that that narrative. I think that it was um again to my earlier response to Commissioner Lental's question, certain seems to be the word most favored to provide that discretion and flexibility. Uh a couple other districts provide other um use other phrases to also provide that discretion. So, I believe that was what was in implied or intended through that through that sentence.

Great. Great. I'm also happy to have this before us today. I think this addresses some of the concerns that I had with the project back in September. So, I'm happy to support this today.

Any other clarifying questions? No. Okay. Any discussion? Oh, I guess we're ready for a motion. Commissioner Striner, if you could. Yes, I actually have it ready tonight, which I think is a first for me. Um, I move that the planning commission recommend that the county board amend, reenact, and recodify article 9, section 3 of the Arlington County zoning ordinance as set forth in attachment two of the staff report 2A. clarify provisions for county board approval of special exception site plans within the quote revitalization area designated in the Fort Meyer Heights North plan as set forth in the regulations for the Fort Meyer Heights North Special District. B. Facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive, and harmonious community. C. Protect against destruction of or encroachment upon historic areas. D. promote the creation and preservation of affordable housing suitable for meeting the current and future needs of Arlington County as well as a reasonable proportion of the current and future needs of planning of the planning district. 8 and E for other reasons required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice.

Second and seconded by Commissioner Patel. Any questions or comments before we Yeah. So, I just wanted to go back to the comment that I had just made that when we um saw this project, the Fort Meer Heights project back in September, we had quite an extensive discussion about whether or not we could approve that project um since the zoning text was so um specific about like all elements of the area plan must be met and several of us either abstained or voted against it. And so now we are addressing that problem to make sure that this zoning amendment is um makes the zoning ordinance aligned with the rest of the county zoning ordinances. So it is very likely the case that some of us that abstained or voted against the project in September would now support that project with this change. We will not have that opportunity to vote again on that project. So just when that report is presented to the county board, I want it to reflect that with this zoning change, I am supportive of that project and there may be others amongst us um that would also support the project with this zoning amendment. Thank you. Okay. Um did you want to speak to your motion, Commissioner Strer?

No. Okay. All right. So I guess we're ready for a vote. Oh. Uh okay. He just said so alphabetically. Commissioner Emodia. I. Commissioner Garcia. I. Commissioner Lantel. I. Commissioner Patel. I. Commissioner Peterson. I. Commissioner Robertson. I. Commissioner Steinberger. I. Commissioner Striner. I. Commissioner Torres. I. Commissioner Whitfield. I.

Commissioner Begley. That's me. Um, it's I and that's unanimous. Thank you very much to staff as well as to our public um speakers who came this evening and uh we appreciate all of your work on this. Um Madame Clerk, could you call our next item? Thank you.

Item number two is the acceptance of the 2847 Wilson Boulevard special general land use plan study document. We have Margaret Tulic Roads, our principal planning staff to present this item this evening. if we could give them a few moments to get themselves situated. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Margaret Rhodess and I'm with the comprehensive planning section and I'm here to speak to you tonight about the 2847 Wilson Boulevard special general land use plan study or special GUP study. And for those of you who are unfamiliar with the special GUP study process, we have a tier one review that really focuses on the question of should we study this or not to study or not to study. And then there is a tier 2 review that we often go through and that looks a little bit more in depth at the land use, density, zoning, transportation, etc. And the outcome of a tier 2 study is typically a request to advertise a general annies plan amendment or not to advertise that amendment. And we also prepare a study document with guidance for the future site development. And then a separate process follow-on process could be a site plan review or another type of special exception review. Um, and then that would be when there would be greater focus on the actual architecture and the more more of the specifics for the site. And what we

did for this study was actually a hybrid tier one and tier 2 review. We're trying to be more efficient in our processes. And so for this small site, we chose to uh look at the site with both a tier one and a tier 2 lens. In terms of the stakeholder groups that were participating, we had the housing commission, the transportation commission, the forestry and natural resources commission, the historical affairs and landmark review board, Lion Village, Clarendon Courthouse, and of course the applicant. The site is located on Wilson Boulevard with at the intersection of North Filmore Street in Lion Village. And the building here you can see is the former Ives funeral home which was most recently the Arlington public schools new directions alternative program site. Um and the school board is no longer occupying that building. The requested amendment is to expand the Clarendon Revitalization District boundary to include the full site. Currently only a portion of the site is included in that district boundary. and also to change the low residential portion of the site to service commercial so that the entire site would be zone would be designated service commercial and this is with the anticipation of a future resoning request from R six and C3 to a C district to enable development under the unified commercial mixeduse district provisions per the Clarendon sector plan and the applicant is looking to redevelop this site with a four to fivetory residential building with ground floor retail fronting Wilson Boulevard and underground parking. In terms of the site, the site is approximately 32,625

ft and it again it's currently occupied by a two-story building uh which had a number of different iterations. So it was a chapel at one point then a store funeral home and then as I mentioned the school building. It is not recommended for preservation in the Clarendon sector plan or on the historic resources inventory and has a substantial surface parking lot which you can see there in the aerial. There's an estimated 32% tree canopy cover with the greatest number of mature trees along that northern edge of the site and it's a relatively flat site. Here we can see an excerpt from the general land use plan and you can see that there are split general land use plan designations. So the front part of the site, the southern portion of the site is the pink service commercial designation and the northern portion of the site is that yellow low residential portion. And you can see the district boundary there in the black dashed lines for the Clarendon Revitalization District. And here we have an excerpt from our zoning map. And you can see this is also a split designation with C3 on the southern portion of the site which is a commercial district and then R six was a residential district to the north. The Clarendon sector plan recommends infill development for this site with a maximum height of 45 ft and a base density of 1.5 floor area ratio or F. It also recommends a 25- ft setback from the abuing R district lots and rear stepbacks when there are two different options that were um enumerated in the plan. So a 40ft option with no stepbacks or a 45- ft option with a 25 ft stepback at the 25 and 35 ft building heights. And we can see here that um the unified commercial mixeduse district is a tool that was established back in 2003 and it

enables redevelopment in service commercial zoning districts with county board use approval appro use permit approval. There are specific pro provisions in Green Valley and then here in Clarendon. Let's see. In terms of historic preservation, uh, this site is ranked notable on the county's historic resources inventory, and the notable charact the notable category indicates properties that have historic elements related to the county's history, but may lack sufficient historic context, integrity, or significance compared to the higher ranked essential or important categories. And the this this property, as we know, has been um extensively altered over time. And this uh this site is also located just south of the Lion Village Historic District boundary on the National Register of Historic Places. And there are several adjacent historic buildings, including the Bank and Gym Building um just to the east. The trees uh the tree and canopy coverage is something that was um very important uh during our LRPC conversation. The site has 32% canopy coverage right now. The Clarendon sector plan calls for a minimum of 15% coverage. Um and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments or COG calls for 30%. And most of that existing ve vegetation is on the north side of the site with some additional canopy along Filillmore and then on Wilson. In terms of the guiding principles that we developed um in collaboration with the LRPC and the community, I'm just going to give a brief summary here. The full guiding principles are in the study

document which is online and in your packet. Um the first is to apply the recommendations and guidelines of the Clarendon sector plan. The second is to apply the UCMUD regulations recognizing that the maximum height of 45 ft um is the county board however has discretion to consider and approve appropriate adjustments. Thirdly, the building scale massing and material should complement and transition well to the adjacent properties with historic buildings. Four, it's important to conserve the existing tree canopy and landscape spaces. And five, an UKMed proposal that allows a five-story development could be considered if there is a setback along the northern edge of the property that exceeds the 25 ft med minimum and is not encumbered by driveways, parking ramps, or building uh footprint. that there are stepbacks at the fourth and fifth stories to provide again an appropriate transition and that the tree canopy meaningfully exceeds the minimum recommendation of the Clarendon sector plan. In terms of our 3D modeling assumptions, we have put together preliminary massing scenarios um that comply with the mass height and massing options under the Clarendon AKMD standards. And it's important to note that these uh scenarios that we're going to see are not intended to convey staff's recommendations, but rather to pro provide a point of dis departure for discussion. And some of the factors that influenced our design was of course the mud um requirements, the conservation of the tree canopy and the undergrounding of parking. The first scenario we looked at was a byite scenario. And under this scenario on the C3 portion of the site, we looked

at a retail use with maintaining the surface parking there. And you can see here um we developed a two-story building with about uh 14,000 square ft of retail. Um by right, however, you could go up to 75 ft under C3 if the byite parking requirements are met, which which could be challenging to meet. The second scenario is again on just the C3 portion of the site and we looked at an UKMUD scenario here for multif family and retail uses and we left the R six parcels as uh surface parking to support the mixeduse development. This is a threetory option with no step back shown and there is also the potential for a fourstory option with stepbacks. This is about 8,000 square feet of retail with n about 19 to 23 residential units. The third scenario is one where we looked at what if we did an AKMOD across the full site. So across both the C3 and R six parcels. And here you can see that this resulted in um a three-story option with no step back shown with about 3,400 ft of retail and about 49 to 55 residential units. We also looked at a four-story option and here we have this the required stepbacks at the third and fourth floors and the retail again around 3,400 with a multif family residential units around 59 to 68 units. And here you can see those stepbacks um in the diagram. Then we prepared another option. So this is a fifth scenario again at the fourstory height, but we looked at what if there were modifications to the setbacks. So here we're not showing a

setback to the adjacent um bank and gym property. We're just showing uh the setback to the north um that property line adjacent to the single family residential building there. Um, and we're showing here that this results in about three again 3,400 ft of retail with about 73 to 85 residential units. And then based on what we heard at the LRPC meeting and the importance of maintaining a clear setback to the north and ensuring that there was an appropriate transition there. uh the applicant came to us with a recommend, you know, an option that for us to explore that would look at a greater setback um on the northern edge, but that with a little bit of extra height on the Wilson Boulevard edge. Um and so that's what you see here. You can see this is a five-story option with a fifthstory um closer to Wilson Boulevard and a greater setback um towards the north. And here this is resulting in about again the retail and then we've got about 82 to 96 residential units. We also looked at the um trip generation that would result from these various scenarios. So here we're comparing what could occur by right and then what could potentially occur with scenario six which was our most dense option. And so you can see here that there was a greater overall number of auto trips with the buy right option than there would be with um the most dense multif family option. And it's important to note that um any uh application that is submitted would necessitate a full um transportation analysis at that time.

We had the LRPC meeting um on the 30th of September. There was a general consensus among members that the proposed glove amendments are in the realm of consideration. There is a distinct preference for the clear setback to the north and a preference for both stepbacks and setbacks um to ensure a a good transition. And there was a also a very marked preference for conserving the existing tree canopy on that northern edge of the site. We also had an online engagement session on the draft study document in November and the feedback was very similar to what we uh heard at the LRPC meeting and you can find the full feedback on our web page. Um during this online engagement session we socialized the idea of a potential fifth story with a greater setback to the north. Um we had a number of responses about 114 and 56 comments and again that uh the input was very similar to what we heard at the LRPC and we noticed notice that there is slightly more support for redevelopment up to five stories than not. And this brings me to the staff recommendation. Staff recommends that the county board adopt the attached resolution to accept the special GUP study document and adopt the attached resolution to advertise future public hearings for a GUIP amendment to amend the Clarendon Revitalization District boundary to include the full site and uh change the GUIP from service commercial and low residential to all service commercial. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Rhodess. And now we'll hear from the applicant.

Well, good evening, Chair Bagley, members of the planning commission. My name is Matthew Weinstein. I am a lawyer at McGuire Woods land use attorney. I'm joined by Andy Alman, the president of Firesquares Development, and Michael Abrams, who's a partner at Fires Squares Development. Um, I have been dropping off the team's meeting every five, six minutes. So, I'm going to try to join right now real fast, run through our presentation before I get kicked off again, and then go from there. So, let me try this one more time. All right, I'm on the clock right now. I'm going to share my screen. Scroll down. Everyone see this? No.

Would you mind forwarding your presentation to one of us? Yeah, I gave it to Mr. Lad, so I think he's pull it up. Mr. Lad,

I'll uh I'll do my best. All right, I'll just leave the meeting. Thank you, Mr. Lad. I'll run through this real fast again. Um, so we are here today on behalf of Fires Development talk about the GUP study at 2847 Wilson Boulevard. Staff really addressed most of the, you know, the nuts and bolts of the application. We want to talk to you today just to refresh your memory about who we are and also the evolution we've made on this project since LRPC taking LRPC's feedback into account and also the communities and Lion Villages. All right, next slide. All right, so Five Squares again Michael Andy are two of the main principles. [clears throat] They've been doing some major projects in Montgomery County and also DC. This is the first one in Virginia. As you can see, they specialize in really high quality architecture, but also partnerships with um with community organizations, and they do some really great work in the residential space, residential mixeduse space. Next slide. All right, so context again, the site's in the heart of Clarendon. It's about 876 feet from the Clarendon Metro, intersection of Wilson Filillmore, really in the bullseye of Clarendon. Next slide. current conditions. It's a vacant parking lot in a recently vacated APS building, the Thuran Marshall building. So everything's vacant. It's not an activating use. And what we're proposing today should activate this prime location. Next slide. All right. So again, just to reiterate what staff said, this site is split gupped and split zone, which means it's very difficult to redevelop it to its full potential, which is why we applied for the GUP amendment back in June of last year. Next slide. And we're here because to be eligible

for Nuckmud, you need to be zoned C1, C2 or C3. And you need a service commercial zoning or GLUP designation. We have neither. So to move forward the redevelopment in UKMUD, we have to get a GUP amendment as well. Um and you know the real benefit of this um application this project is it would allow the site to be redeveloped consistent with the vision of the clarinet sector plan but also um in conformance with the recommendations and requirements in the sector plan including the streetscape open space and the design requirements in the sector plan and then as I mentioned before five squares really values high quality architecture and we're joined by siti Abdul Ramen our architect from WGD architect ure who um will be working on this project with the uh art deco aesthetic in Clarendon in mind during the architectural development process. Next slide. So just to show you some before and after of where we were when we came to LRPC and where we are today. On the left is the previous design. You could see the garage ramp was to the north near the single family neighborhoods and that cut into the some of the existing uh landscaping and tree canopy up there. We moved the garage entrance to the middle of the site on Filillmore in response to feedback from LRPC and the community um moving it further away from the neighborhood. We've also increased the landscaping to the north significantly as you can see. And we've increased the setback from 25 ft to 30 ft again in response to the feedback we received at LRPC and from the community feedback process. Next slide. And you know what allowed us to do that is we were able to add an additional story with adding additional height along Wilson in an area where we think the density to height is most appropriate. We're proposing up to 60 ft along Wilson. Uh but we're also recognizing that a taper and setback to the neighborhood is appropriate uh and

would help further the transition to the neighborhood. So, as you can see, originally we had four stories and a, you know, fairly modest taper, and now it's five stories with a 10ft taper on the fourth and fifth floor and a 30 foot setback rather than 25 ft as originally proposed. Next slide. And then along Filillmore, we did add a bit of a taper facing Filillmore. We didn't have that previously. So, that is it. We're happy to answer any questions you all might have. Thank you, Mr. Weinstein. Madame Clerk, do we have public speakers?

We do, Madam Chair. We have two speakers this evening. uh in this order, Dana Small and Jay Brodzky off. Okay. Now, okay. Um thanks that um I am a neighbor. This is what I will be looking at out my front door. So, of course, I'm very interested in it. Um, I think the county did a good job um showing a bunch of the different scenarios. I found it really interesting that well, nobody really likes looking at surface parking. I found it interesting that you say that has um less traffic. Um, that has definitely become a concern though for me as I've been thinking about it because my car has been sideswiped twice in the past six weeks. So, it really is not a a two-way street. And so, while I was thinking like, oh, this looks like a lot of good development, I feel like Edgewood right next door is like looks like it has two-way traffic and parking on both sides. Ours is not. So, I'm I'm hoping that that will come along with this. Um, I also was the person who said I would rather see more density on uh Wilson. Um, and I think then and keep the tree canopy because I never anticipated seeing like we have a huge like 150 year old oak tree and some other trees that are not as great, but they kind of serve as the gateway to the neighborhood and I'd like to see those kept. Um, so I think that uh scenario six that you guys drew sh show showed that and it also uh provided great setbacks that um while the developer did a really great job of getting closer to where I think we need to be. I prefer

how the scenario six on your shows more of a setback. And so I hope that that that will be addressed and that there will be the 35 foot setback, not five feet for um that extra whole floor with with a 10-ft setback instead of what the county showed, which I think is much more appropriate. So I look forward to hearing more from you and traffic and more setback. Thank you.

Thank you. Good evening. Uh my name is Jay Broaddsky. I wanted to start tonight start the year by thanking you all for your contributions to Arlington. We citizens depend on thoughtful, informed cont uh decision-making regarding our built environment, and I appreciate you giving your time and your expertise to this effort. [snorts]

My original intent tonight was to speak and share my thoughts on the GLUP study for 2847 Wilson, but seeing as how the final version of this document was never released and yet you're being asked to vote on it, I'm sort of unable to do that. I'm similarly concerned though about your ability to provide this thoughtful informed guidance to the county board. Have you seen the final version of the document? Did you have adequate time to review its 30 plus pages and the 114 responses from the public comment period? Are you sure that this work follows the IAP2 public participation spectrum that Arlington advisory boards and the CPHD pledged to utilize? Let me quote from the promise to the public made there. We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations and provide public feedback on how public input influenced the decision. I was the civic association representative at that LRPC meeting and presented a dozen concerns about this club amendment, most of which were ignored or treated as impediments to ending the meeting on time. I arranged two gatherings between the neighbors and the parcel's developers. I then ensured that neighbors viewpoints were contributed during the public comment period and yet I have no idea if any of that feedback was incorporated in this study. I must tell you, I hardly feel informed, listened to, or acknowledged by anyone other than the developers themselves, who are very responsive, but don't make any claim to represent the needs of this county. My primary request tonight is that you oversee a meaningful process to add housing to the heart of Clarendon, rather than an accelerated effort on a parcel with immediately adjacent, historically significant properties and a 70-year history of development challenges. Our county deserves your time is up. it tonight.

Okay. Thank you. That's all our speakers. Thank you to our speakers. Um, do we have any commission reports? Did this come before transportation? No. Sarah, it came before LRPC. LRPC. Yes. Thank you.

Um, you know, we met back in I believe it was September. um in terms of sort of the I mean overall I think reception to site you know there's understanding that it being a split site that did create challenges and so you know that was sort of an underlying issue with wanting to move forward with um [clears throat] um to pursue the Akmmed. Um I think the massing and sort of moving some of the the more of the density towards Wilson Boulevard was something that we talked about um in the context of the LRPC. Um and overall I think that um it was an engaged conversation. We don't hear a lot of Akmed so I think that was sort of interesting. We spent a lot of time kind talking through what that process would be a bit. Um and you know I think overall there was you know more support than not.

Thank you. Do you have topics that you think we should discuss? Uh I think the general um I think kind of you know massing you know talking you know what um the different scenarios of what the site could support um that county staff kind of laid out makes sense to talk through that transportation concerns um yeah thank you commissioner Steinberger um let us determine what topics we want to talk about here. Um I mean we can go through our typical list. Land use, building height, density, architecture, design, open spaces, landscaping, transportation, sustainability, biophilia, construction timeline, and community benefits.

Well, it's not an SPRC, so I didn't think right. Yeah. Right. This is always it's always modified this way. So that's that's why. Right. Okay. So we would want to talk about land use. Yes. No, that let's just open it up for discussion. Thank you, Commissioner Patel.

Thank you. [laughter] Um I I think the comment on um the width of the road is a point well taken. Um I would have concerns if I were a resident um living across the street from this particular site. um particularly as we start to see the scenarios go up in density, meaning that there's going to be more transportation related um attributes that result from it. Um you know, it's not just the the neighborhood that's using this particular thoroughfare. It is people like me who don't live in your neighborhood who might be coming to frequent one of the marvelous restaurants on the road. And so on Wilson Boulevard, um I actually was there today looking for Mr. Tire and went down the street and continued to remark on how narrow some of the streets are in that area. Um so I think it's a well it's a point well taken and um you know as we go further down this process it is something that you know I am um going to be thinking of um considerably because I do believe that changes need to be made in that space um for the existing neighbors and also for the safety of everybody pedestrians bicyclists everybody that's going to be using um that thoroughare in particular at inter intersection. So, I appreciate take you taking the time today and coming um and making the comment to us. So, thank you.

Uh I too am very familiar with this site. I actually live two blocks from it and walk by it almost every day. Um it is prime for redevelopment. The parking lot is an eyesore and it is not I walk by there and I see the empty beer cans that are crushed there and the other things. So, it it does need to be redone. Um it's just not good for the neighborhood the way it is right now. That said, there are a few things that when we do should we get to SPRC, I will want to be flagging. Uh similar to what Commissioner Patel said, um transportation is one. The um end of the block there at Filillmore and Franklin is an intersection that is really very very bad for people crossing for pedestrians. Um it should be redesigned and if we can get that as part of this, I'll be interested to see if we can um get some improvements there. For trees, this block actually is known because it is lined with cherry trees that in the spring it's a spectacular display. and I'd like to see if we could continue that as part of this site. So, I'll be looking at that. Also, um for the actual um guiding principles, I think they're well taken. Um I'm very happy that we're going to be looking for a significant we'll be getting a very significant green buffer at the north end that will be green all the way and it won't be a garage entrance. Um, I think that's very important for the neighborhood and for the aesthetics there and because we do need for the tree coverage that we have. Um, I'm wondering to what extent the trees that are there now will get by in that. I'm not sure what how old they are. I don't know whether they're invasive. Some of them look like they should be able to be okay. Others I look at and I wonder whether they're particularly safe. So I'm warning the neighborhood that there may be changes there when it happens. But preserving

that for trees is I think one of the big features of this uh of these guiding principles as are the step back uh the stepbacks um facing the north there. I think that is very very consistent with the Claran sector plan um when we extend it uh further out continuing the um the stepbacks. Remember we had this very um argument a couple blocks up with the office building there. It's being converted or being torn down and put into as as res residences. The stepbacks there were an important component of when we made the decisions there. So I think this is within this the guiding principles here are within spirit of what we are looking at along that northern um stretch of Wilson Boulevard as that continues to redevelop. Um I think that's my comments for right now. Um but so thank you.

Thank you Commissioner Shriner.

All right. I will echo uh Commissioner Patel and Lenti on the on the transportation and the tree elements. Um I have nothing more to add on that front. Um but just for the a clarifying question for staff, um just for all of us to get a sense of of the surrounding context, do you have like a rough sense of of how tall some of these buildings across the street on Wilson are? just to get it just to put this in the context of, you know, is is a five-story building something that is in line with what's going on right now? Is it not? I know you're obviously backing up against the residential neighborhood, too. Um, but, you know, on the other side, the Wilson side, you know, what are we kind of looking at generally? We have a Heights map. Um, one of the slides with the Clarendon Spector Plan Heights map. Let me see what's that is. Thank you. Thanks for

Oh, that's wonderful. 39. Great. Okay. So, you can see here, these are the heights that were envisioned in the Clarendon sector plan. And so you can see across from the subject site which is circled there. Um you can see 60 ft across from that. And then the block further to the west across sort of caddy corner from the site you can see 76. Um and then the site uh further to the east across from uh the site 60 ft. So those are the general heights that we're looking at in this area. Okay. Yeah. So, it's a combination of three three floors, four floors, and then one sixth floor basically. Right. Okay.

It's good context. What used to be Whitlo's is right now across the street on Wilson. So, it's one story with um a bar on the roof. Right. Right. Right. [laughter] Right. And then these are the heights that are called for in the sector plan. So, Jim's correct that some of them are actually lower than that now, but this is what is envisioned. Yeah. Maybe two stories with a rooftop, I think. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Steinberger. Um, I do have a clarification question because I went back looking to see where the final study document was and what's linked in the report seems to link to something that says draft. Should that say final?

No, it's still a draft document at this time and then it would become the final document once the county board approves it. And that's what we did with Melwood and Okay. So that's the correct process. Okay. I just wanted to Okay. So this wouldn't go final until after the county board approved it. So what we're voting on is still the draft one tonight.

Correct. And so we did not make any changes after the LRP uh well actually we made changes after the LRPC meeting because we were drafting it. Um we did not make any additional changes after the um community online community engagement session. Got it. Most of the comments that we saw, and you can see they're all posted online, um were stating preferences for one scenario over another, and there did not seem to be anything that staff at the time felt necessitated a change to the document itself since it had been developed post LRPC.

Okay, appreciate that clarification. I think that's also helpful for the community to understand that we should not be expecting to have a final version of the document at this point in time. that's not how the process works and that that is something that will become final down the line. So for my fellow commissioners, what we have is what we are voting on. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else comments, questions? Nope. On any Mr. Peterson? Um, I just wanted to um confirm that this uh potential future resoning would not allow a storage facility in this spot because that would be Cth and we are not considering Cth. We are considering C1, C2 or C3. That's correct.

Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. So, not seeing any other questions, points of discussion. Um, Commissioner Steinberger, do you have motions for us? Maybe. Do you need a copy?

That would be good. I was trying to pull it up. Thank you. I believe I have two motions. Um, first motion is to adopt the attached resolution attachment one to accept the 2847 Wilson Boulevard special uh general land use plan study document attachment two. I move that we adopt

Yeah, I move the planning commission recommend. I approve that the planning commission recommend that we adopt the attached resolution attachment one to accept the 2847 Wilson Boulevard special general land use study plan document attachment two. Second. Any discussion on this motion? No. Okay. Well, let's go to a vote alphabetically. Commissioner Modio, I. Uh, Commissioner Garcia. Hi, Commissioner Lantel. I Commissioner Patel. I Commissioner Peterson. I Commissioner Robertson. I Commissioner Steinberger. I Commissioner Striner. I Commissioner Torres. Hi, Commissioner Whitfield.

I Commissioner Begley, that's me. It and I am an I. And that is unanimous. Uh, Commissioner Steinberger. Uh, the second motion.

Yes. I move that the planning commission um recommend that um the county board request to advertise future Nope, I'm looking at the wrong thing. Never mind. [clears throat] We do. I move that the planning commission recommend um that the county board adopt the attached resolution attachment three to advertise future public hearings by the planning commission and county board on dates concurrent with consideration of future unified commercial/mixeduse development UC/MUD Akmed use permit and reszoning applications to consider and resolve to amend the general land use plan GLP from service commercial to and low residential um 1 to 10 units per acre to all service commercial and to incorporate the entire site into the Clarendon Revitalization District as being in the realm of consideration for the area located at 2847 Wilson Boulevard and 1421 and 1425 North Filmore Street RPC number 15-065-002-004- 015 and 019 as shown in attachment 4.

Second and that was seconded by Commissioner Patel. Thank you. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, we will move to the vote. Commissioner Emodio I. Commissioner Garcia. I. Commissioner Lantel. I. Commissioner Patel. I. Commissioner Peterson. I. Commissioner Robertson. I. Commissioner Steinberger. Hi. Commission. Commissioner Striner. I. Commissioner Torres. I. Commissioner Whitfield. I. Commissioner Baggley. That is a I for me as well. That's unanimous. Are there any other motions?

No. Well, I want to thank staff um for all their efforts on this. Commissioner Steinberger as well and the applicant and especially to the folks who uh came out from the neighborhood and I hope in this process you will continue to stay engaged. So, thank you very much. Madame clerk, uh could you pull up uh I guess we don't really have an agenda item at this point. It's just the p um PC business. Correct. Yes. Uh first order of business is to approve the December 2, three, and four meeting minutes. Okay. Okay, you follow along on the agenda. Uh question. Can I uh ask for unanimous consent for all three of them at the same time? Goody.

I request your unanimous consent for the minutes from the December meetings and your approval.

I'm sorry. Uh December 2, 3, and 4th. Yes. Thank you. I love all the coaching up here. Um, so yes, I don't hear anything. So I guess we're going to be okay on that. Thank you. So moved. Okay. And then we have um planning division current matters, Mr. Feifer. Uh uh the only thing to report, yeah, I'll be very brief. Uh we do have a new staff member that joined us today. Uh who's our new um uh urban design um specialist. Uh I forgot the specific position. Uh her name is I'm going to get this wrong. Uh perhaps Mr. Fuserelli can help me out with her name. Uh first day today.

I've not actually met her in person yet. Uh happy to assist Mr. Feifer. Um, no, we're um super pleased to um announce uh Eveina Kenodal um joined our team uh this morning as our new senior urban designer/principal planner uh position. So, she joins uh Chris Krider and Laura Sha on our urban design team and we're thrilled to have um that team back up to full capacity. Excellent. We look forward to that. Thank you. That's great news. Um and we do I believe Mr. Mr. Fifer, have some rosters?

We do. Yes, we have uh one new roster for the uh 4420 Fairfax Drive project. Um let's see. Yeah. Do we uh Miss Johnson, do you have Can you put that up or would you like me to? Let's see. Okay, that's correct. That's Waverly. Is that the right one? That is not the right one. That is the amendment for Waverly Ridge. Okay, it's the other one. All right.

Yes, that is the right one. Okay. Um and then we have the other one which is an amendment for the Waverly Ridge site plan. Uh and this is to add the two new commissioners um and a few neighborhood representatives. Awesome. As Yeah. As well as the C2E2 representatives. So I seek unanimous uh consent and your approval of this roster. Hold on one second. That says in of Roslin. I think that's a typo. Okay. I just I was going to say that sign up for that one. It is correct. It just says the wrong project. [laughter] It's 4420. Yes. Yeah.

Yeah. That's that is a typo. It's I believe the right Yeah. Do I have to do an amended something or other? We Why don't we have that amended with the title? Yes. I seek your unanimous consent and approval to amend this roster to read 4420 Fairfax Drive. So move. Great. Thank you. And then the second roster is just an update. Oh, so [clears throat] we've I seek unanimous consent to approve the 4420 roster. Oh, so so we ex we I sought the unanimous we have done it.

We amended it a correctly and now we just need to

and now we need to do it again. Okay. So, one more time with feeling, we now need to I seek your unanimous consent to uh uh accept and approve the um the uh amended roster. So, move. Thank you. I'm glad that some of the people have done more of the reading on this than I have. Okay. Good. Um so, then the updated roster for Waverly Ridge, correct? Okay. So, I seek unanimous approval for the um amended roster for Waverly Ridge. Okay, fantastic. So, moved. Lovely. Thank you. All right. Next, let's see. Um we have the uh first we have a special thing to do. I want to present the the gavl to our outgoing chair for the planning commission. So, congratulations and thank you again. And uh just let's give her a big round of applause, which is very nice. Thank you. Um, and then uh do we need to vote on the draft annual report as a can we do it as a

it was circulated? Yes. Is that correct? That's my deadline. I believe we circulated it on Friday, but I did receive some edits from Tenley today that I was not yet able. Okay. So, we can't really do anything with that tonight. I think uh traditionally you all review it in January and vote to finalize it in February. Correct. Okay. Very good. So if you haven't taken a look at that now, will you be sending out a revised one for us? We can do that. Yes.

Okay. Great. Thank you. So thank you to those first of all who are paying attention to the emails. I know that for many of us this is a third or a fourth email that we have to check all the time, but um you know it's particularly helpful to madame clerk. So thank you. Please continue to do so. Um, let's see here. And then, uh, the we have the draft. Can you pull up the draft for the committee assignments? Oh, you know what? I think I skipped one thing. The adoption of the 2026 meeting schedule. Meeting schedule. You all got that? Um, please note that. Yes. Do you have a question?

So, Madam Chair, I just have a concern about July 6. I feel like I perennially have a concern around the July date, but July 6th I feel really concerned about because it's the Monday after the 4th of July holiday and um that's going to be a very sparsely attended meeting. Well, do you recall those of us who were here on July 3rd, what two years ago? The night before the we were here. Yeah. Well, I just I caution once again that perhaps that when the items are being developed for the July 6th meeting that perhaps voting matters are on the Wednesday and not on the left day

or just have if it's a light schedule just have the Wednesday meeting and not a Monday meeting. Okay. But it's generally not a light schedule because we're in recess for August. So everything that needs to get done is like pushed and into the July and we had three hearings and people were cancelling vacations in order for us to get gorum.

Yes. So I think staff it will take this under advisement and we will hear if there are any changes down the road. Okay. Thank you. I know this is not the first that this has come up. So thank you. All right. So let's get um Madame Clerk, could you pull up the uh we're going to do this as quickly as possible tonight. the um committee liaison assignments. Oh. Oh yeah. Um in circulated some there was a circulated

well it was given to Commissioner Lantel I understand. Okay. It is being circulated based on Yes. So yes I knew it was being circulated. Yes. Thank you. Okay, while we're doing while that's being circulated, could you um Madame Clerk, could you pull up the liaison while we're circulating in order of seniority here? I've also put copies at everyone's seat so that they could read through it um as we go along. Okay. Yes, we're going to read through it while we go along. So, if you could pull it up, I'll read through it.

Got it. Thank you.

And madame clerk, you know what I don't have is the list of beniority of the planning commissioners. Do you have that? He said, clerk, I'm sorry. Thank you. No worries. We're getting it together here. you know, for the first time out, this isn't bad. And could sorry, could you pull up the um and madam clerk will now pull up the leone assignments so we can do this really quick. Y

All right. So, let's see here. Um the first one that we will have is public facil facilities review committee. Um uh I have been chairing that. I don't know that they're going to have a lot with that anyway. I'm not sure at this point. I don't think so. And chair. Yes. Can we go by name and choose the one we want? We do like that's fine. All right. So let's just do this then. Um, I mean that was we can do

for the ones on the first page. We don't usually do that for the the official committees like Zoko and those like those are usually not chosen just by people signing their names up next to something.

Yeah, those are not we're not going through those. I started at county facilities, but I'm not really sure that we've done that in the past. I mean, is anyone you know I mean I could go through this whole Why don't we just do that? We'll just start here. I'll come back to county facilities. So, um, all right, let's go, let's go to page two first and get these knocked out, then we'll come back to the others. All right, other commissions and committees. Arts Commission. So, first of all, uh, I'm going to pass. Karen is not here tonight. She did ask for, however, E2C2. So, let's go down there to E2C2. We'll just put her name in there. Commissioner Vara. Okay. So, what we're doing now is going by seniority on the list that uh the clerk has provided. Madame clerk has provided us. We're going by each one of you will get to pick when your name is called if something isn't already filled. And if you're interested, you could certainly be a co-chair if somebody else hasn't. Sorry, we just Yes.

I'm I'm sorry if you already said this and I and I my I just wanted for our new commissioners. So we have a list of all of the different commissions that we act as liaison to so you can reach out to them, attend their meetings, just be a per a point of contact for them um in case something comes up over the year related to planning commission. So we're going through this list now and um taking turns signing up for different commissions. So usually each commissioner takes like two or three and then you can reach out to those um commissions or or fewer. Uh but you can reach out to those commissions and just introduce yourselves. Hi, I'm your PC liaison. Um, I'm happy to be your point of contact for the year. They might invite you to attend all of their meetings. They might invite you to attend one of their meetings and just explain how planning commission works. Yeah. And typically what I do is I try to attend the virtual sessions. I don't make an effort to be there in person. So, and and sometimes they overlap and that's fine. I will reach out to the chair and let them know I can't attend if I've been a regular attendee. So, if you have any questions about that, let me know. So, Commissioner L, tell me what's your first pick?

Yeah. Transportation Commission. Transportation. Okie dokie. We'll do that. Okay. I Okay, great. That's so good. All right, Commissioner Patel. I'm going to go with Boston bid. See you, Peter. Okay. Um, Commissioner Steinberger.

Very good. Okay. HB. Got it. Okay. Um, Commissioner Peterson, Bicycle Advisory Committee. Okay. Still there. Okay. Um, don't know. I'll have to check back with um, Commissioner Berky. Commissioner Strainer, can I do the housing? Sorry. Housing. Housing. Very good. Okay. Okay. [clears throat] Very good. Um, Commissioner Robertson, Forestry and Natural Resources. Okay.

Ready? Uh, Commissioner um Torres. Do we only mention one that has no name in it or No, you can mention anything. No, you you Yeah, we're going to fill them all up tonight. This is who did it last year? Yeah. Okay. Uh, Columbia Pack Partnership. Sorry. Um, CPP. Got it. Okay. Okay. Doesn't have date. Great. All right. Um, Commissioner Modio. Um, I am Well, I'm interested both in the Arts Commission and the Economic Development Commission. So, I don't know pick one.

Which one do you want? Because you're we're going to come back around to you. There's somebody at the arts commission and there's nobody in the economy. No, there's no one in the arts commission right now. I'm sorry. The names here are from last year. So, I don't think that one's been called yet. Yeah. Do you want to arts commission? Um I I don't know either one. So, that's why I'm like I'm interested, but I don't know where I would be. You could do more than one. I understand that I have to pick one, but I have to live with it. So, if I don't mind three minutes for me to discuss. Um, I would like to understand the the the I'm I just go to the meetings and then I just report to you.

You don't even report to us. A lot of times what what might happen is there might be something that will be discussed at that commission um that might be relative to a site plan or something like that. And it's just sometimes you're asked by when you're attending these meetings um on an advisory basis, you know, the planning commission, but it's not it's not you don't even vote. You don't really you're not on the roster to vote justify on the wall. You're basically advisory. Yes. Okay. Yeah. So, I I'm going to pick the economic development. Economic development. All righty.

Got it. All right. Thank you for letting me discuss it. No problem. Um, Commissioner Whitfield, thank you. Oh, you said me. Yeah. I'm so sorry. I thought [laughter] I don't know what I heard. I'm so sorry. I don't know what I'm talking about at this point, but yeah, I think you can I go with national landing bid? Of course. Go here. So, this would be Thank you for that. Um, and um, I just went blank. Garcia, Commissioner Garcia, I've only called it 20 times tonight. Go ahead.

Uh, one quick question. So, if I wanted to join her later on National Landing B, I talk with them a lot in my civic association role. Is that a conflict or No, that would still be fine, I would think. Okay. Just making sure. Just applying. You can be like a co-chair on that if you want. That's fine. I mean, I won't sign up now. I'll sign up now for the public spaces mastermind.

Public spaces. Okay, hold on. Public spaces. Oh, I see. Here it is. Got it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Back around the other side. Um, Commissioner Rivera wanted Linkston Boulevard. Now I think, um, for that one, you're our like appointed person, right? for the public spaces master plan leazison. That's your So that's like a special project.

What's the question? This is like a special project like how Tony does right. So I don't think that um Commissioner Garcia should sign up for it because that I will change my selection to the arts commission. Okay. I'm sorry. So, what's the other one? The Arts Commission. Arts Commission. I'm sorry. Excuse me. Why are we stating that Commissioner Garcia cannot sign up for that item? Because what?

It's like a special project like the comp plan update um transportation element that like Commissioner Striner is the longtime uh liaison for that project. So, similarly, the public spaces master plan element update is on here. So, we can't have a new commissioner for that item. Well, would we put Tony Striner's transportation element on here then, too? I'm just asking a question. I just switch those out. Okay. I don't Well, I don't think we had even gotten to that one yet. We were working on the other ones first. No.

Yes. Right. Well, she chose, didn't she? Did she not choose? She chose it. Yes. Correct. I think so, too. Yeah, I think so, too. Thank you. So, then does that transportation plan update get on here, too? Sorry. Does Tony's transportation element update go on here, too? Because it's the same sort of Yeah, I hope not. I like that one. Tony, you might go into Put your microphone on. Commissioner Patel, turn

is this. Okay, fine. Thank you. Um, this particular study thing Robertson can still continue and Garcia can join him. She can be a co-chair. She can join and and there and it's probably best to do it that way. I would agree because you should more senior commissioner there. But thank you. So you two are fine. Thank you. Fine. commission too. Okay, I'll take both. All right, so Langston Boulevard, we want Lara. Okay. And Berky also said he would like to have E2C2 also him. Okay, hold on a second. Let me just note that before I forget it. Okay. Is Karen staying on LBA then? And this is Gada is going with Langston Boulevard, you said.

Okay, because um Emodio is also on economic or I'm sorry, I'm looking at the wrong thing. C2E2. What am I doing? Madam Chair, does this mean that um uh Miss Gvara, Commissioner Gavvara staying on LBA? Yes. Yes. Then I'll stay as the alternate. Okay, very good. Hold on. Let me just get caught up here. LBA. Thank you. Because you were next anyway. Fine. Get back to the schedule. Uh Commissioner Patel. Um I'll stay with the National Landing Bid.

Okay. and Whit Commissioner Whitfield also will be on that. Okay, very good. Thank you. Um and uh Commissioner Steinberger. I had a little trouble keeping track of what doesn't have anyone yet. Apologies. Um Clarendon Alliance I see just looking at this. Um so is Nayup. Nayop is open Sarah. Yeah. Um, Crystal City and Pentagon Cities Councils formbbased Code. I don't know if Commissioner Berkkey wants to stay on that, doesn't he?

Does he want I don't know. Does Are you texting back and forth with him? Berky wants E2C2. That's already taken. It's taken, but he can be on it as well. Is he staying with formbbased code, too? He is um unable to continue texting. So, all I know is E2C2. Okay. But he probably would stay on form based code. I think I was thinking he would. That made sense. I would assume he would, too. Yeah. Yes. And Commissioner Begley, we said we were going to deal with like um the like the public facilities review committee and that custo. Do I need to pick that or am I already assigned PFRC? I because I'll stay with that as co-chair. That's fine. That's perfect. Thank you. Okay. So, is that mine then? I'd pick that. Yeah, you can take that one. Great.

And I think I'll co-chair with you. Okay. Just in case I don't know that anything's coming out. But don't forget, Commissioner Bagley, you are now LPR. Oh, no. You No, I'm staying on SPRC. Um, yeah. Okay. Um, Commissioner Peterson. I did last year. I haven't gone to I used to be on I'll do pedestrian advisory committee, please. I don't. All right. Let's focus people. Okay, great. Um, let's see here. Commissioner Striner, next one. So, I have So, because I have Zoko, the transportation piece and some site plans coming up. Can I Yeah, tap out here.

You can. You got I got enough going on. And I just want to I just want to while we're here and I I know that we had an earlier part of the meeting, so don't judge me that you're not out by 9. Um, but I just want to call out that he sat at the county board through Melwood for hours and then in December I stood through three hours because I had a back issue and he came in and he was here for three and a half hours uh for Riverhouse. So, I think he deserves a round of applause. So, and you've earned a pass. So, there you go. All right. Um, thank you,

Commissioner Robertson. like Commissioner Steinberger, I've completely lost the thread of what's available. You can feel well and you if there's something of interest to you, you can also co-chair if you want. It looks like Clarendon Alliance, correct me if I'm wrong, Madam Chair, I'm following along here. Uh looks like uh Crystal City uh Crystal and Pentagon City's Council, which you did last year. Uh let's see here. It also looks like uh JFAC um NAOP. Exactly. NAOP uh National Capital Planning Commission. The Rosland bid. Sorry, the what? Roslin bid.

National Conservation Advisory Committee. I'll take the the Roslin bid then.

The Roslin bid. Okay. Hold on. Great. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Sto Torres. Oh, she's not there. That's right. Oh, she's currently like at the Academy Award, not at her seat to pick up the award. Okay. Um, Commissioner Modio. No. No. Okay. Um any of the other ones that we have here? Alston. Okay. Okay. So, you'll be working with Commissioner Patel. Okay. Great. No worries. Commissioner Whitfield.

Can I work um with housing? Housing. Okay. So, working with Commissioner Shriner. Okay. Um, Commissioner Garcia. I will do JPEG. JFK. Okay. Very good. Thank you for that. All right. Going back around to the top. Uh, Commissioner Lantel. Uh, NYOP. Huh? NOAP.

NAOP. Thank you. Commissioner Patel is passing. Okay. So, let's see here. Tell me. All right. Um, Commissioner Patel, anything pass. Thank you. Um, Commissioner Steinberger. Um, Commissioner Patel, are you keeping National Capital Planning Commission? Negative. Thank you. [laughter] So, that's open for anyone. is up for grabs. What did someone already take Crystal and Pentagon City's council?

Um I I think I was going to take it. Oh, go for it. [laughter] You're fine. Okay. So, Commissioner Robertson, how how were they last year? [laughter] Five stars. Crystal mission. I I wasn't I didn't do that last year. It's How are you on here? Perform is mistaken. Oh, who had it last year? Okay, I'll learn something new. I'll take it. Crystal and Pentagon council. Sure, whatever. Okay. I think they um I did it for a couple years. I think they only meet like four times a year, five times a year. Not very good kind of people. Great. [laughter] Okay. Um Commissioner Peterson next. Sure.

Um I'm going to do the LRPC as the immediate past chair. Yes. Thank you. Um Commissioner Striner, are you passing? Thank you, [clears throat] Commissioner Robertson. Um, how many of these are we supposed to sign up for? Just until we're finished. Yes, we're gonna we're gonna [laughter] So, here's the thing. I mean, I mean, let's let's be realistic here. You don't Commissioner Robertson Commissioner Robertson, we have gone several years without that list being fully completed. I mean, it's not Yeah, we can fill it all out and then if we're too busy to do it, what's the point? You never give a pass. All right, fine.

Um, I only Well, Commissioner Torres, you were absent when we called your awardwinning name. So, go ahead. You give us another one. Can we tell her which ones are left to help? Can we tell her maybe some You can figure it out. [laughter] Don't just want you I just want to know which one I signed up for. [laughter] And yes, a cleaned up list will be coming from Madame Chair. We survived the evening. Yes.

Okay. I just saw park and wreck is um open. I was a co-chair on that with Commissioner Berky. He was fine with that as he told me tonight. I'm looking at all the other stuff. I think National Capital Planning Commission. Who took did who took that? Did anybody We have Clarendon Alliance still. Is that one still open? Clarendon Alliance is open. National Good. We have Clarendon Alliance. Capital Planning Commission. Yes. So, we we're really close. Association. Well, does Commissioner Torres know what she know what she's assigned to yet? Commissioner Torres, did you have another pick? Um I thought the economic was open but it's full. It's full. We've got um I think we have two on that one.

This is open. Okay. So right now according to what I have um madam chair we have the Clarendon Alliance is still open and national capital Planning Commission is still open. neighborhood cons. Um, NCAC is still open and I think that's it. Correct. Claron Alliance. Clarendon Alliance. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. Are we close enough at this point or you want them all filled? I'd like for them all to be filled.

Okay, there you go. Point fingers back there. Thank you so much. Okay. And I don't blame you. We don't want to revisit this next month. Um, Mr. Chair, by the way, for our February 9th um uh [clears throat] uh PC meeting, we will be discussing um Leky Gardens. So, that will probably be a a longer kind of thing. Just so you know that we expect that a lot of discussion. So, your question Berky and Gabat still have to pick. So, there's only three left. Burkie and Gata can share. All right. So, Madam Chair, do we have anything left vacant at this point? First, let me just say I love that you're calling me Madam Chair. You're speaking it.

I don't even know anymore who I am. Where's my badge? I'm not sure you all would want me to be Madam Chair. Sit right on over here, babe. I'm not sure y'all ready for that. That's true. It would beatingly efficient. Madam clerk, you're not ready. Yes, ma'am. Madam Clerk, would is there anything left open at this point that we need to do? No, ma'am. give yourselves all of and we'll and for those of you who are not even sure what you signed up for at this point, we will clean up the list and madame clerk will uh just be ready in February. So, I just want to before I gave us out of here, um thank you so much to all of you for being here that I'm sorry. Go ahead. Sorry. Um is the meeting schedule still going around for the county board sign up?

The meeting schedule did we mean we need to do that before? Who signed up for the meeting schedule last? Where is the meeting schedule? Pass it around. Commissioner schedule that. Did you pass it around? Okay. Who has it now? Is it all filled in? It's over here. Should we fill that out? Please pass it around and fill it out before we leave tonight. Thank you. Oh, sorry. Can you pass this down? Who has not seen it? Thank you. Too much sugar.

All right. So, while we're making sure that madame clerk doesn't go bananas because we don't have this done, which we really do need to have it done, uh I just want to thank staff and um all of you again for being here tonight. All of the applicants, staff, and every the speakers and particularly Madame Clerk and u Miss Harrison for all their support and help and u Mr. Feifer and again Mr. Fuserelli for being here with us this evening. So, thank you all very much. I appreciate the little tips from everybody as this was my first time as chair. Um, this meeting is now recessed.

Crystal and Pentagon City. I've literally never heard of the meeting is adjourned. I don't