Arlington City Planning Commission members voted to forward the Island Crossing subarea development standards (AMC Chapter 20.11) to the City Council as presented, with two commissioners voting yes, one voting no and one abstention.

The decision came after Amy, a city planning staff member, reviewed the proposed development standards and addressed questions from commissioners and members of the public on items including whether tribal lands appear differently on the draft map, how alleys and shared spaces are depicted in figure 7, rules about outdoor storage and display of vehicles, and the city’s approved street-tree list.

The subarea standards are packaged as appendix D of the Island Crossing subarea plan and will be adopted with the plan and incorporated into the city zoning code so applicants consult a single set of standards, Amy said. “These development standards are in appendix D…they’ll be adopted with the subarea plan. But then these will go…into our zoning code,” she said.

Amy told the commission that some properties shown on the map are under tribal jurisdiction and therefore are not always subject to local land-use or design-review requirements. “We don’t have a tribal zone anywhere in the city,” she said, adding that tribal properties “can basically pick and choose what they want to do depending on their needs.”

On alleys and shared space, Amy said figure 7 is intended to show a low-speed shared environment for cars, bicycles and pedestrians and described how alleys could be used for outdoor seating when closed to delivery traffic. “It’s meant to be a living street…designed for people—people friendly open spaces in a shared space,” she said.

A point of contention from public comment and emails was how the draft treats “outdoor storage” for motor vehicle-related sales and service operations. Amy explained the city’s long-standing practice distinguishes short-term outdoor display associated with sales or maintenance from long-term storage of inoperable vehicles. “Outdoor storage…was meant in our code to prohibit people from parking cars at a repair shop that sit there and do not move for 10 years,” she said, while noting that dealerships and repair shops that leave operable vehicles temporarily on site are a common, permitted practice in other zones.

Commissioner Tim said he continued to have “reservations on the design” of the subarea standards but did not block forwarding the package to council. The motion to forward the standards to City Council “as is” was moved and seconded; commissioners Nathan and Jennifer Benton voted yes, Tim voted no, and the presiding vice chair abstained. The motion passed 2-1 with one abstention.

During the public comment period, one speaker urged the commission not to categorically rule out truck-stop developments in the subarea, saying private operators had approached property owners about building larger facilities. The speaker did not request a specific change to the draft standards.

The commission did not adopt any substantive changes to the permitted-use table for IC-1, IC-2 and IC-3 zones; staff noted the draft pulls permitted uses from the existing highway commercial table in chapter 20.40 and carries forward most existing allowances. Amy said if the commission wants a narrower treatment of particular uses (for example, to clarify whether certain equipment-storage businesses are allowed), they could request amendments before council review.

The commission also discussed other implementation details raised in emailed comments from Rebecca (Becky) Goodall, Stewart Skelton, Craig Skelton and David Toyer; staff said they had prepared written responses and would supply them as part of the record.

The forwarded subarea standards will go next to the City Council for consideration; the commission did not set a final date in the meeting.