APS - First Career Center Concept

[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.

So 5 year olds can walk up to a mile to get to school (according to APS) but grown adult teachers can't walk 1/2 mile from their car? And plenty of people in this area don't get free parking right on site at their place of work. Doesn't anyone else here work in downtown DC? I realize there are better transit options downtown, but the vast majority of DC workers still drive every day. They just pay to park in garages near-ish their offices or get lucky and find a spot on the street.

tl/dr: Why is Gutshall's email a big deal?

Because providing ZERO on-site parking for a site with 2400 students in a small neighborhood bookended on the other end by a community center and 1800 additional students plus staff would create a traffic NIGHTMARE. On-site parking doesn't have to be free - you can charge staff to park. But let's face it: how many 5 year olds in reality are actually walking one mile to and from school? or even 1/2 mile to and from school? EVERY day, rain or shine, snow or wind?

And what about visitors? and users of the public library?

Very few, I'm sure. But we as a county have accepted the 1-mile marker as a measure of "walkability" because busing is expensive. We had to draw the line somewhere in the name of fiscal responsibility, so we drew it there even though it's not realistic for those actual students and their families. Building extensive parking at the CC site would be very expensive, so the line might be drawn at asking teachers to park in nearby garages or on neighborhood streets. Is that an ideal situation? Nope. But neither is asking kindergartners to "walk" a mile to school every day. This is the reality in Arlington in 2020. There are no perfect options.

And what happens when those garages fill up or get sold? Or parking in the neighborhood becomes so difficult teacher turnover rises and CTE enrollment declines? You're looking at spending something like 60 million dollars building a new facility for a program that will founder because you didn't want to spend enough money to make the whole thing work. What happens then will be a lot more expensive than shelling out for underground parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To PP above: Just out of curiosity, how do you think north Arlington would react if they got rid of all the parking at Yorktown and built another school there instead?

HB in North ARlington has no parking. Did that outrage you?

They are building a garage with a field on top when the temporary fire station is removed. It’s already in the CIP direction paper and has been presented to the planning commission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually think this is a long game to force it to become a neighborhood school. They know the surrounding neighborhood will revolt if they call it a neighborhood school and refuse to build facilities equal to the other schools. They don't want to spend the money to do that but do have a hs-wide crowding issue. If they don't build parking, then when they can't get enough kids to go there willingly they can site under-utilization of capacity, over crowding at other schools and lack of parking as a reason to turn it into a neighborhood school.

This also avoids complaints from the rest of South Arlington that making the CC neighborhood pulls out many of the high income communities from Wakefield. Again - using under utilization and lack of parking as a reason it has to become neighborhood and crying that housing patterns aren't their fault.

i think you give APS and the County too much credit for clever strategy.
APS would like to take that money away from the Career Center project and put it toward other projects because they need to pursue other additions/rebuilds/new builds.
The CB just wants to keep pretending they're great progressive, forward-thinking leaders leading their County into the future. And, it's easy to keep up that act because it's Columbia Pike and they don't give a ****. Columbia Pike is their dumping ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually think this is a long game to force it to become a neighborhood school. They know the surrounding neighborhood will revolt if they call it a neighborhood school and refuse to build facilities equal to the other schools. They don't want to spend the money to do that but do have a hs-wide crowding issue. If they don't build parking, then when they can't get enough kids to go there willingly they can site under-utilization of capacity, over crowding at other schools and lack of parking as a reason to turn it into a neighborhood school.

This also avoids complaints from the rest of South Arlington that making the CC neighborhood pulls out many of the high income communities from Wakefield. Again - using under utilization and lack of parking as a reason it has to become neighborhood and crying that housing patterns aren't their fault.

i think you give APS and the County too much credit for clever strategy.
APS would like to take that money away from the Career Center project and put it toward other projects because they need to pursue other additions/rebuilds/new builds.
The CB just wants to keep pretending they're great progressive, forward-thinking leaders leading their County into the future. And, it's easy to keep up that act because it's Columbia Pike and they don't give a ****. Columbia Pike is their dumping ground.

Always. Those of us who live here know it best.

[Anonymous]

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

What a pompous ass. His writing style says it all.

[Anonymous]

I gotta say, that all looks really nice. Can't wait to see where they go with it

[Anonymous]

Community meeting tonight at the Career Center, 7-9, come see plans, ask questions, demand parking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Community meeting tonight at the Career Center, 7-9, come see plans, ask questions, demand parking

And tell APS and the County that they’re not going to steal money from this project. If they don’t spend the money on parking, they can build additional facilities on this exact site, or improve what’s currently there in a shorter timeline, but NO FUNDS shall be diverted to other projects. It’s the CC’s turn. The Pike is sick and tired of being an afterthought and having money diverted to “more important” neighborhoods.

[Anonymous]

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

What a pompous ass. His writing style says it all.

I love how Gutshall thinks, that he, as an elected official, is somehow doing constituents a favor by “taking the the time to share with you my thinking.” That’s the baseline expectation, Erik. It’s your job. You’re not the executive director. You’re a county board member.

[Anonymous]

If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.

That’s the collective chuckle from Yorktown. That whole neighborhood is restricted parking. No way will they ever lose it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.


That’s the collective chuckle from Yorktown. That whole neighborhood is restricted parking. No way will they ever lose it.

If Career Center is built without a garage I will spend all of my time lobbying for a County-wide ban on restricted parking within a mile of all schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.


That’s the collective chuckle from Yorktown. That whole neighborhood is restricted parking. No way will they ever lose it.

If Career Center is built without a garage I will spend all of my time lobbying for a County-wide ban on restricted parking within a mile of all schools.

I never understand people that take this tactic: "things suck for me, so they have to suck for you too. Because equity!" You know that making things sucky for other people in no way makes your life any better, right? What a silly thing to spend "all of [your] time" on.

Also, as someone who lives on a street with restricted parking right next to a busy commercial district, I can attest to the fact that the county does not enforce parking restrictions. Cars are parked outside my house all day, every day, long past the time limits. So this fight is even more of a waste of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.

That’s the collective chuckle from Yorktown. That whole neighborhood is restricted parking. No way will they ever lose it.

Yeah, and those hundred(s) restricted residential parking spaces surrounding Yorktown are EMPTY all day long! Why can't the county let staff parking stickers be valid on residential streets during the school day? Parking spots would be empty before 4pm, causing minimal hassles for the residents.

I own a home by a high school- never did I delude myself that my street was going to be quiet and restricted to the coming and going of the HIGH SCHOOL COMMUNITY. That would have been pretty UNREALISTIC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
If Arlington is going to essentially claim street parking surrounding this school as a county resource by banning or removing any and all neighborhood parking restrictions, does that mean that they will also do so in all other Arlington neighborhoods that have them?

There is certainly a problem if only certain neighborhoods lose protected parking but others don't.


That’s the collective chuckle from Yorktown. That whole neighborhood is restricted parking. No way will they ever lose it.


If Career Center is built without a garage I will spend all of my time lobbying for a County-wide ban on restricted parking within a mile of all schools.


I never understand people that take this tactic: "things suck for me, so they have to suck for you too. Because equity!" You know that making things sucky for other people in no way makes your life any better, right? What a silly thing to spend "all of [your] time" on.

Also, as someone who lives on a street with restricted parking right next to a busy commercial district, I can attest to the fact that the county does not enforce parking restrictions. Cars are parked outside my house all day, every day, long past the time limits. So this fight is even more of a waste of time.

I mean the prevailing viewpoint in North Arlington seems to be "things are awesome for me. I'm ignore that things suck for you and act like anything South of 50 is its own self-contained County." I think if half the stuff the County pulls on South Arlington was ever tried in North Arlington there would be massive pushback. Imagine if literally anything about the Career Center was being tried north of Lee Highway. It would have been shut down immediately.

Since South Arlington has no political clout and thanks to County entrenched housing policy will never accumulate the wealth to change that, the best possible play is to push, hard, for every negative thing happening in the South to happen equally in the North with the hope that it will lead to county-wide solutions.