APS - First Career Center Concept

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

[Anonymous]

We would not even be having this conversation if the school were across RT 50.

Until everyone gets the boards (both school and county) to understand the disparities, all of you advocates will continue to lose. You are already losing your argument with the county board.

[Anonymous]

What happens when the owners of those parking garages decide to use the land for something else? Or that their customers need more parking and they provide less for CC use? Even if the county gets a lease on some of those spaces, it won’t last forever.

I live in NA. Don’t see any of my kids at Arlington Tech given their interests and the distance from our house. But all of Gutchall’s analysis doesn’t consider no one is obligated to attend or teach at this school. They make it too hard and it will fail. And too much of APS’s capacity plan depends on it being successful. All of that must be considered in figuring out the parking situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

[Anonymous]

I have a Zone 6 sticker. Where's Gutshall's house?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a Zone 6 sticker. Where's Gutshall's house?

It's up the street from Clay Park, between the park and 10th St.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

Ding Ding Ding! This is my real problem. Why build this when the other schools are so much bigger and have all those lots? Why not use their parking lots for building new wings? I think Arlington Tech is great, but I don't think any of these school should encourage students to drive or that we should cram kids into this location while other schools have so much space. This is only happening because people won't cross Rt 50 and Arlington Heights invited this disaster to their their hooks into a potential neighborhood school. We do need a 4th comprehensive high school, but not like this. Not when we could give up football and parking and build bigger other schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

Ding Ding Ding! This is my real problem. Why build this when the other schools are so much bigger and have all those lots? Why not use their parking lots for building new wings? I think Arlington Tech is great, but I don't think any of these school should encourage students to drive or that we should cram kids into this location while other schools have so much space. This is only happening because people won't cross Rt 50 and Arlington Heights invited this disaster to their their hooks into a potential neighborhood school. We do need a 4th comprehensive high school, but not like this. Not when we could give up football and parking and build bigger other schools.

You really don't have an understanding of why schools need parking.
1. Teachers and staff need to park their cars. Not everyone lives in Arlington. Not everyone can take mass transit to school. The Career Center is serviced by Metro bus, Uber, scooters - not subway or even direct bus routes from most of the County, let alone from outside the County.
2. Visitors and parents coming for meetings or to pick-up their kids for medical appointments or to take them home when they're sick, etc. need parking.
3. It is unrealistic to expect everyone to take public transportation for events. The school needs parking.
4. High school students are going to be required to do internships and the Tech student have Capstone projects - they may need to have a vehicle at the ready to attend those jobs. They need parking.
5. Arlington Heights did not invite a full-sized high school with no parking.
6. This isn't because people won't cross route 50. It's because Glencarlyn doesn't want anything built at the Kenmore site. Glencarlyn already crosses Route 50 to W-L. They don't want to stay on their own side of Route 50.

[Anonymous]

Parking is an issue at many schools in this county. For example science focus has no parking. Ashlawn has 33 spots for over 100 staff members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parking is an issue at many schools in this county. For example science focus has no parking. Ashlawn has 33 spots for over 100 staff members.

It sounds to me like the already modestly sized school parking lots are not the place to effectively reduce and discourage car use, which is a noble and essential goal. It seems to me some minimal amount of parking should be built on site. And, Efforts to reduce that small number of spaces seems to me to be about money, not climate change. The county doesn’t want to spend another cent on schools and so it’s a matter of robbing Peter to pay Paul, taking money from the career center to pay for other school infrastructure that our leaders on the county board did not acknowledge the need for when they green lighted the residential developments that then cause a need for these expansions.

[Anonymous]

The last thing we need is to build more buildings on Washington & Liberty's football fields and parking lots so that that high school can go from 2,500 kids to 4,000, imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

Ding Ding Ding! This is my real problem. Why build this when the other schools are so much bigger and have all those lots? Why not use their parking lots for building new wings? I think Arlington Tech is great, but I don't think any of these school should encourage students to drive or that we should cram kids into this location while other schools have so much space. This is only happening because people won't cross Rt 50 and Arlington Heights invited this disaster to their their hooks into a potential neighborhood school. We do need a 4th comprehensive high school, but not like this. Not when we could give up football and parking and build bigger other schools.

You really don't have an understanding of why schools need parking.
1. Teachers and staff need to park their cars. Not everyone lives in Arlington. Not everyone can take mass transit to school. The Career Center is serviced by Metro bus, Uber, scooters - not subway or even direct bus routes from most of the County, let alone from outside the County.
2. Visitors and parents coming for meetings or to pick-up their kids for medical appointments or to take them home when they're sick, etc. need parking.
3. It is unrealistic to expect everyone to take public transportation for events. The school needs parking.
4. High school students are going to be required to do internships and the Tech student have Capstone projects - they may need to have a vehicle at the ready to attend those jobs. They need parking.
5. Arlington Heights did not invite a full-sized high school with no parking.
6. This isn't because people won't cross route 50. It's because Glencarlyn doesn't want anything built at the Kenmore site. Glencarlyn already crosses Route 50 to W-L. They don't want to stay on their own side of Route 50.

No school in an urban setting needs 700 parking spots. Supply parking for staff and ADA. Don't have a problem with that, but the days of every student parks needs to end. Parents don't need 700 spots to get their kids, unless helicopter parenting is worse than I thought. I've lived here for 15 years. The area is accessible by bus and if that's not enough, bikes, shuttles, and other means are better than building all that parking. Stop enabling people to drive cars to places. If we encourage high school students to not drive, they will be less likely to do so as adults. If people can commute through Arlington into DC, I think they can make it to the CC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

Ding Ding Ding! This is my real problem. Why build this when the other schools are so much bigger and have all those lots? Why not use their parking lots for building new wings? I think Arlington Tech is great, but I don't think any of these school should encourage students to drive or that we should cram kids into this location while other schools have so much space. This is only happening because people won't cross Rt 50 and Arlington Heights invited this disaster to their their hooks into a potential neighborhood school. We do need a 4th comprehensive high school, but not like this. Not when we could give up football and parking and build bigger other schools.

You really don't have an understanding of why schools need parking.
1. Teachers and staff need to park their cars. Not everyone lives in Arlington. Not everyone can take mass transit to school. The Career Center is serviced by Metro bus, Uber, scooters - not subway or even direct bus routes from most of the County, let alone from outside the County.
2. Visitors and parents coming for meetings or to pick-up their kids for medical appointments or to take them home when they're sick, etc. need parking.
3. It is unrealistic to expect everyone to take public transportation for events. The school needs parking.
4. High school students are going to be required to do internships and the Tech student have Capstone projects - they may need to have a vehicle at the ready to attend those jobs. They need parking.
5. Arlington Heights did not invite a full-sized high school with no parking.
6. This isn't because people won't cross route 50. It's because Glencarlyn doesn't want anything built at the Kenmore site. Glencarlyn already crosses Route 50 to W-L. They don't want to stay on their own side of Route 50.

No school in an urban setting needs 700 parking spots. Supply parking for staff and ADA. Don't have a problem with that, but the days of every student parks needs to end. Parents don't need 700 spots to get their kids, unless helicopter parenting is worse than I thought. I've lived here for 15 years. The area is accessible by bus and if that's not enough, bikes, shuttles, and other means are better than building all that parking. Stop enabling people to drive cars to places. If we encourage high school students to not drive, they will be less likely to do so as adults. If people can commute through Arlington into DC, I think they can make it to the CC.

Who said anything about 700 parking spaces???!!!
"encourage" all you want. The fact remains, not everyone can feasibly take mass transit everywhere they need to go. Parents may need to drive to work and then go from there to the school - parking space needed. You take a look at the bus routes and see how simple it is to get to and from the Career Center at various times of day from various places. There isn't even an ART route down George Mason to get students to Wakefield. Now, while you're at it, figure out the public transit options from various places across the County for Yorktown. Yes, people from south Arlington go to Yorktown and Greenbriar Park.

Would you really lug your saxophone or euphonium or trumpet on a bicycle?

Your comment is key: "commute THROUGH Arlington into DC." Yes, it's fairly simple from most parts of the County to take public transit to DC. But Arlington's public transit system does not match the urban setting it has become.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posting from AEM and a variety of emails going around the neighborhood. Here is the full email from Erik Gutshall:

You may receive a formal reply from Chair Garvey on behalf of the entire Board, but because this is an issue I care deeply about and recognizing that I may have a different take than my colleagues, I wanted to clarify my approach:

NEED FOR PARKING: I think it's safe to say that not one Board Member wants the CC to be under-parked, which I will define as an insuffucient number of spaces that drivers find themselves with no other viable option than driving (see TDM below), but no access to a reasonably available space. "reasonably available" does not mean free, or within a 1-block radius. It includes market rate fees, whether incorporated as a compensation benefit or not, and walkable distance can include up to 1/2 mile and certainly within 1/4 mile. Need for parking is not the same as demand for parking. Drivers will always gobble up free and convenient parking, as was the model for APS until relatively recently.

AVAILABLE PARKING (on-street): I support the notion that every household should have access to parking within walking distance of their home. Sometimes parking is free (or very low-cost) and sometimes it has a cost, usually depending on how the housing was developed, with space limitations per household increasingly more common. Some amount of parking for staff, faculty, students and visitors should be accommodated on neighborhood streets. Just as I would expect neighbors to reject the notion that all parking can be accommodated in the neighborhood, I reject the notion that the neighborhood can't support any of the needed parking.

AVAILABLE PARKING (nearby garages): Consistent with #1 above, nearby available parking in existing garages can and should be used to satisfy parking needs for CC.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): Arlington has had great success with using TDMs to lower the demand for parking throughout the County, despite constant protests that "it'll never work." I respect that staff/faculty may have different habits than a typical office commuter, but I have not seen any analysis that demonstrates barriers that can not be overcome. Guaranteed Ride Home was created to address one common barrier for all commuters. I support further exploring the efficacy of APS TDM measures to encourage walking, biking, transit use and carpooling for commuting.

NEW PARKING (on-street): I do not support "wishful planning" to hope that parking just takes care of itself. To the extent that items 1-4 still leave a deficit of needed parking, I support exploring adding on-street parking with measures that could include angled parking on surrounding streets, esp Walter Reed Dr, 9th St S, and Highland St (convert to one-way).

NEW PARKING (on-site): The very last option that I could support would be constructing very expensive, permanent parking underground at the CC. However, if all of the above failed to accommodate truly needed parking, I would be compelled to support structured parking. Frankly, I think this is unlikely to come to pass, but my mind is open, provided all the other options are fully explored.

My hope is that the only "machine" driving our decisions will be sound policy. I appreciate you feel worn down. I think that speaks to your passion and commitment, in honor of which, I have taken this time to share with you my thinking.

Thank you,

Erik Gutshall (he/him)
Vice Chair, Arlington County Board

Let’s all go and park in front of Eric’s house. He is a nut if he thinks a bunch of arlington boomers are going to agree “reasonable” parking is up to 1/2 mile from your house.

You’d better have a zone 6 parking permit to park in front of Gutshall’s house during school and working hours. The rules are different for those who make them.

I'm perfectly fine with getting permits around this school. I think it's wrong this neighborhood might be denied them. It would certainly make less parking on site easier to sallow. But I also think there are enough buses that transit and shuttle service is a great option. A bit of coordination should negate the need for a huge parking garage.

If there were extensive parking zones around the CC, there’s no way the neighborhood streets could satisfy any of the CC’s parking needs. There will be no zones. That’s why I pointed out Gutshall’s hypocrisy — his own neighborhood residential parking is zoned and protected, but he wouldn’t extend that to someone else’s. It’s ok to privatize his curb front, but not other peoples.

And to be perfectly serious: if the CC doesn’t need parking, why does any other school? Really, if you accept that we shouldn’t build parking and should discourage it, then we should be building on the extensive surface lots present on schools county wide. Why is the career center special. Land is scarce.

Ding Ding Ding! This is my real problem. Why build this when the other schools are so much bigger and have all those lots? Why not use their parking lots for building new wings? I think Arlington Tech is great, but I don't think any of these school should encourage students to drive or that we should cram kids into this location while other schools have so much space. This is only happening because people won't cross Rt 50 and Arlington Heights invited this disaster to their their hooks into a potential neighborhood school. We do need a 4th comprehensive high school, but not like this. Not when we could give up football and parking and build bigger other schools.

You really don't have an understanding of why schools need parking.
1. Teachers and staff need to park their cars. Not everyone lives in Arlington. Not everyone can take mass transit to school. The Career Center is serviced by Metro bus, Uber, scooters - not subway or even direct bus routes from most of the County, let alone from outside the County.
2. Visitors and parents coming for meetings or to pick-up their kids for medical appointments or to take them home when they're sick, etc. need parking.
3. It is unrealistic to expect everyone to take public transportation for events. The school needs parking.
4. High school students are going to be required to do internships and the Tech student have Capstone projects - they may need to have a vehicle at the ready to attend those jobs. They need parking.
5. Arlington Heights did not invite a full-sized high school with no parking.
6. This isn't because people won't cross route 50. It's because Glencarlyn doesn't want anything built at the Kenmore site. Glencarlyn already crosses Route 50 to W-L. They don't want to stay on their own side of Route 50.

No school in an urban setting needs 700 parking spots. Supply parking for staff and ADA. Don't have a problem with that, but the days of every student parks needs to end. Parents don't need 700 spots to get their kids, unless helicopter parenting is worse than I thought. I've lived here for 15 years. The area is accessible by bus and if that's not enough, bikes, shuttles, and other means are better than building all that parking. Stop enabling people to drive cars to places. If we encourage high school students to not drive, they will be less likely to do so as adults. If people can commute through Arlington into DC, I think they can make it to the CC.

Who is calling for a 700 spot lot? No one. Where does one exist in our county? Nowhere.