Planning Commission Regular Meeting/Work Session

James FeatherGood evening. Welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Fairfax Planning Commission for Monday, February 10, 2025. Our first order of business is Pledge of Allegiance. Please join me.

Matthew RiceI pledge allegiance

James Featherto the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. It's so good to hear so many of you recite that with us. Good to see you this evening. We do have a quorum. We're known to be a couple members short. I think we're waiting for But we do have a quorum, so we will proceed with the meeting. First order of business is discussion adoption of the agenda. The agenda was issued ahead of this meeting as required. Are there any comments on the agenda?

Paul CunninghamMr. Chairman, I move the agenda be adopted as presented.

James FeatherIt's moved and second to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Passes unanimously. Next order of business is presentation by the public on any matter not calling for a public hearing. We have no public hearings this evening, so in our work session items there will not be opportunity for public comment. But if anybody is here who would like to address the Planning Commission on any matter, now is your time. You will have three minutes. And we will first acknowledge and recognize folks who have signed up previously. Are there any such signups?

Speaker 1We have Bill Fort.

James FeatherMr. Fort.

Bill Fortpublic commentThank you and good evening. My name is Bill Fort. I live at 3425 Preservation Drive in

Paul CunninghamPickett's Reserve, and I'm here representing the Pickett's Reserve Homeowners Association.

Bill Fortpublic commentAnd the topic is the Highlands at Mantua, which is a proposed development that 14 townhomes that will be directly adjacent to the north side of Pickett's Reserve. We've been following the development of this project for more than a year now, and we have some concerns that we hope you will take into account. First, the plot is 2.12 acres, which is really quite small for the size and height of the townhomes that the developer wants to put there. There won't be enough buffer against the Pickett's Reserve property. It's very close to several homes in the development, so we're very concerned about the height as well as the distance from the homes that are standing there. The developer has been asking for planned development residential zoning for the plot

rather than the RT6 general zoning that would, I think, typically be for a townhome development. We're thinking the motivation is that that lets them really violate several requirements of the normal zoning. It doesn't meet the requirements. There are presumably 13 criteria that one uses to decide whether it can be RT of a PDR rather than RT6. We've looked at those. We don't think the developer meets enough of those requirements to justify the change. So the third thing is that the developer plans on removing more than 100 trees from this two-acre plot. this is quite excessive. It doesn't make any sense. We count on the trees for buffering, for sound, and for vision, and we would hate to see us lose all of those trees. So we hope

you'll take all these things into account as you consider the developer's request.

James FeatherThank you. Thank you, Mr. Park. Any other sign-ups, Madam Clerk? Okay, others who are, feel free to come forward. And if you have a form already, you can present it to the clerk,

Bill Fortpublic commentand that'll be fine.

James FeatherOtherwise, just please give us your name and address for the record. Thank you.

Stacy Langtonpublic commentMy name is Stacy Langton, and I live at 3804 Daniels Run Court in the Farcroft subdivision. Our neighborhood just became aware last Thursday about the plan by Ox Hill Development Company to develop the Five Chimneys House property, which is adjacent to our neighborhood, and it is located at 10 230 Main Street. And the property is owned by Ann Farr Lewis, and it has the historic Five Chimneys House, which was built in 1880. so needless to say our homeowners are really not happy with the idea of this development so it's a 9.3 acre property and it's zoned rm and it is intended for only single family homes the request from oxhill development is for rezoning to commercial status to accommodate a proposed 96 room three-story hotel and a 20,000 square foot convention center

I think I speak for everyone I've spoken to in our 270 home neighborhoods so far, and everyone agrees that this would bring a distinctly negative change to the character of our neighborhood. We are a quiet residential neighborhood of homeowners who do not want to live mere yards away from a busy hotel and its associated problems, which would include noise, traffic, and crime. This would decrease our quality of life and our home resale values. there's something important that I think the public probably doesn't know and probably most of my neighbors as well the Ox Hill Development Company currently has another proposal much farther along in the city's process which is called the Ox Block A this includes a 170 room

seven-story hotel operated by Hilton Hotels and it has a 4,000 seat concert venue and a 27,000 square foot convention center. This complex is only three-fourths of a mile down the street, down Main Street, from the proposed hotel on the Five Chimneys property. It goes without saying that the presence of a much larger Hilton hotel at the Ox Block A renders the Five Chimneys property proposal utterly unnecessary. It is offensive to the residents of our community who want to preserve the peaceful nature of our beautiful neighborhood of Barcroft. In the event property is ultimately developed, our residents would prefer that the land be kept to its original zoning with only single-family homes in a style similar to Farcroft. A plan proposed by our builder,

Bashir and Edgemore, in 2018 would be acceptable if a similar one came along from another residential home builder. And I think it's important to note that the Ox Hill Company has not done any outreach and their video with all of this information on the internet has only 96 views so thank you

James Featherthank you for your comments are there others who would like to address the okay seeing none we will move on in our agenda which is consideration of the january 27 2025 meeting minutes. Those were issued prior to the meeting. Any comments or corrections to those minutes? Mr. Rice.

Matthew RiceI propose that we approve the meeting minutes from January 27th, 2025 as distributed.

Speaker 1I second.

James FeatherIt's been moved and seconded to adopt the minutes as issued. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Moving on in the agenda, we have no items not requiring a public hearing, nor do we have any public hearings, so we will recess our regular meeting and go into our work sessions. First item is a pre-application briefing for a hotel with 96 rooms, spa and pool, center and a restaurant on 9.38 approximately acres located at 10230 Main Street. Just so those in the room know, this is a pre-application briefing, so we will have only a report from staff. We will not be hearing from the potential applicant this evening. Mr. Frederick.

FrederickstaffGood evening. This is a pre-application briefing for a concept plan for Far House, also known as Five located at 10230 Main Street. Staff met with the potential applicant to discuss the preliminary plans and have provided some initial feedback on the concept plan. Staff will provide a brief presentation outlining the proposed concept. So the subject property, again, is located at 10230 Main Street on the north side of Main Street, west of Barcroft Drive, Street marketplace and north of the terminus of Locust Street these subject property is one of several parcels listed in the comprehensive plan detailed for parcel specific considerations and subject property again is not 9.4 acres some of the highlights from the comprehensive plan parcel specific

considerations speaks to resource protection area in the rear of the property although no historic designation exists it should be explored for inclusion within a historic overlay district and our alternative use may include single-family attached neighborhood neighborhood and any additional any development should retain the existing house minimize disturbance in there in the RPA and consider appropriate relationship to the farcroft neighborhood to the east uh draw your attention to the map in front of you is the area photo of the subject property with the farcroft neighborhood to the east and slightly to the north to the west along main street is the marketplace shopping center and there's a residential

or an office park a resident a residential neighborhood to to the west to the northwest the subject property has single-family detached neighborhood place type with a current zoning of residential medium and again the subject property has floodplain and research protection to the rear to the north of the home north and west of the home the proposed concept plan shows a hotel and hospitality venue with 96 rooms located on the eastern property line adjacent to the farcroft neighborhood especially restaurants closer to the western property line lobby and bar area as well as a spa an indoor outdoor pool area, conference event center, and underground parking. So the positional applicant also plans to retain the home.

The applicant has stated that the home would be preserved and moved approximately roughly 15, 20 feet. once the structured parking the buried structure parking is buried underground the home would still be preserved on site and would maintain the home in the middle of the site and the additions would be wings on either side of the existing home here's conceptual rendering of the proposal so a couple of renderings show looking at this at the site the rendering on the little on the left shows the hotel addition rendering on the right shows the the main private drive leading to the existing single-family home additional renderings show the the the hotel and the in the restaurant area also the existing

single-family home and then the picture on the right the rendering on the right shows it from the from the looking from the north the back side of the proposed concept staff provided preliminary staff comments on your packet will not go through all of the the comments provided by staff but they are in your packet if you have questions related to any of these comments we more than welcome to uh to uh to discuss but one of the things that should be noted is that staff uh mentioned switching the hotel location from the east property line to the west property line placing the the mot the hotel further away from from the single-family neighborhood to the east a archaeological assessment is warranted

also tree protection and tree preservation plan and guidance for preserving as many trees on site as possible was also mentioned to the potential absent the application would require a complaint amendment and rezoning and also a RPA study in a WQIA assessment again street trees would be required open space would be required meeting the tree canopy requirements depending on the zoning district the proposed zoning district one of the out from staff is that a transitional yard to the um broccraft neighborhood would be critical and encourage the applicant to start community outreach with the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of pedestrian activity sidewalks are required along the main street along main street as well as street street improvements along main street

in terms of access transportation would only support one drive from Main Street and their realignment would would probably be the best location would realign with the entrance to Locust Street the minimum driveway would be a 26-foot minimum driveway with in order to ensure that the largest emergency apparatus would be able to to enter and exit the site and there would need to be turnaround locations for the largest apparatus and finally staff provided information on sanitary sewer sanitary sewer and stormwater management those details would need to be provided as the application moves forward if the if the application moves forward so in terms of the potential land-use requests again the applicant would need to seek a comprehensive plan

amendment a rezoning water quality impact assessments application an RPA site-specific study a major certificate of appropriateness for architecture and landscaping and of course those would go to the board of our Board of Architectural Review with recommendations to City Council in terms of next steps the applicant has a pre-application meeting set for February 25th followed by potential land use applications based on feedback from tonight and also from City Council and if the potential applicant wants to move forward we would receive an application take it through development review process work sessions and ultimately in public hearings going forward and I'll stand for any questions you may have

James Featherthank you mr. Frederick commissioners any questions or comments for staff mr. rice

Matthew Ricemr. Frederick are you aware of the elevation change between the east side and the west side whether it's up I believe to some extent it drops from the east side toward the west side I'm height of the existing structures over the property line that are in Farcroft and the top of the three-story structure adjacent has there been any analysis of

Frederickstaffat this point we have not received any any any analysis it that goes with the the elevations or anything okay contours

Matthew Riceall right the renderings have a nice full tree canopy and I know under our guidelines there's a requirement to preserve mature trees it to make the impact on the neighborhood less and certainly to help the ecology of the area um has there been any estimation from the urban forester about whether it will be possible to keep the trees that are shown in the packet intact while construction is happening

FrederickstaffI don't think the packet had enough information in it to determine exactly how many trees that would be saved it was just a general comment to make sure that there are enough that save as many trees as possible but as if there is an application that comes forward and of course we would get into you know the transitional yards and how many trees could actually be saved based on based

Matthew RiceSafford's review of this, deep review, would be super helpful. I spent part of my August with students going through this area with urban heat sensing equipment. And the drop in temperature was so remarkable as you exit Main Street and the shops, and then you dive down into the Danielsman Trail. It was so dramatic. Some of my faculty colleagues didn't believe that data was real. They said, your device must not be calibrated. And I took offense and shook my academic hand at them, and I said, no, it's actually pretty dramatic. If you walk it, you'll suddenly see. What we don't want at any cost is a change in that dynamic, which is helpful not just within the Daniels-Ren Woods, but in Farcroft and the areas nearby.

That cooling effect is substantial, and we'd want to, at all costs, there was a flip to get the hotel on the west side structure on the east side we really would need to make sure that we understand the dynamics well enough that we don't mess that up it is one of the few large in track parcels of tree canopy in the center of the city we may be losing some others we don't want to lose all of it my armchair quarterback kind of thoughts are just that the suggestion by staff to put the hotel on the west side perhaps changing its configuration just a little bit and having the green roof and some of the parking and other amenities on the east side would be quite a beneficial change I'm sure that part of this is avoiding encroaching into

the RPA the current plans do a great job of you know skirting the RPA on both sides but it seems like there is a solution here that would work when I first saw the plans I thought that adhering to a traditional design kind of a colonial style was appropriate it was good I think color wise the you know copper roof and the red brick and the gray next to it to me was a little incongruous the style was correct the colors weren't but we have a board of architectural to go through issues like that and I can't pretend to have expertise in that area but there are some things about this that are positive but things that certainly do have to change and I think we just want to assure that every single developer that comes in that has a proposal one of our first questions is

have you talked to the neighbors what have they said you know what's their feedback and so at least I will be listening for that I do want to comment The efforts made by the developer to implement really good practices specifically green roof ideas is to be applauded and we should Every developer that comes in should be encouraged to do things like this because it's not just you know The heat and the impact on the heat, but it's water quality. It's making sure that the runoff kind of stays in that green roof long enough for the contaminants to settle and the water to run into the watershed so there are a lot of good things but certainly um changes would need to be made that's all I have

James Featherthank mr. rice others it's great any comments questions mr. Cunningham

Paul Cunninghamthank you mr. chair as usual I guess I'll have a few comments one I will we get a proposal we dig into the details and we head down and we we enumerate all of the details and the things that have to be worked on and while i will commend staff for doing that i guess the bulk of my comments tonight are going to be in terms of why don't we step back sometimes and take a look at what we're actually going to dissect and dig into the details ah A few years ago, we had a situation arise in the city when something came up that no one had given a thought to. And it was a process that ended up in some major changes and a lot of consternation and effort and how do we look forward to change this. And I'm talking about Paul VI and the redevelopment of that property.

because nobody in the city up to that point thought anything was ever going to happen with the school. And all of a sudden it was happening, and we didn't have a game plan for what to do with it. One of the things that we did in the comprehensive plan was look at certain specific properties within the city that we felt we should look at. and I will ask staff is this one of the specific properties that's on our list of things that we should look at

Naphtistaffyes this is one of the sites identified in the partial specific recommendations in the comprehensive plan

Paul Cunninghamand have we done any specific study and looked at it to see how it should be treated going forward if we were going to get any further and it were to actually come into being as a site that we would have to deal with for an actual proposal.

NaphtistaffWe haven't done any additional study on it. The purpose of those sites is not to recommend further study, it's to recommend alternatives if a proposal for an alternative use is submitted.

Paul CunninghamOkay. Well, now we're up with one more of those sites, and there are a few more in the city, and we need, I think, to be looking at what is the right way to use some of these designated properties, I guess, to see how we should deal with them. And that's a wider study than just the comprehensive plan or the planning commission or the staff looking at the properties. but I think getting community input and other things in advance on what we should be doing in certain areas so that we're building the kind of community that people want to live in as it develops around them. It saves, I think, some time when developers come in and we end up dealing with specific properties. We just completed a five-year comprehensive plan review.

and in that we talked about these kind of properties and we talked about many general things and we studied it but we did not come up with a wide range of alternatives that we recommended in the comprehensive plan because we didn't have feedback so one of the things that we need is a planning commission especially when it comes to dealing with some of these specific properties that are going to draw large attendance at our meetings and having been on the planning commission for a long time i appreciate great attendance and community interest in what we're doing i wish we could get it in the early stages of a process as we're doing it now rather than the later stages when we're dealing with the controversial aspects of the project so i would

invite everybody to be involved with this kind of thing before it happens and have input as well as just in the immediacy in the five-year comprehensive plan as i say we looked at this we didn't recommend a change in zoning we didn't recommend a change in the comp plan for how to deal with it so those are things that are now being suggested in the details of how we work with something like this Next, I guess my comment is that at a recent work session talking about some other properties in the city, our mayor made the observation that zoning ordinances have been around for about 100 to 125 years now. And maybe it's time we just throw them out and start all over. I don't know if that is something that's practical or that the community really wants to go back to square one

but each time we come up with a process like this and we're talking about what we have built a vision to put in place we find out that we haven't quite gotten it right it's not supposed to be single family residential it's supposed to be densely commercial it's supposed to be something else that causes us to go back and say what did we get right what did we get wrong as we built a zoning ordinance and have reviewed it and updated it as we build a comprehensive plan and talk about looking at these kinds of properties so I think there's a challenge there that we have to try to get the vision for where the city is going and keep that more in focus than trying to deal with what I'm going to call bright shiny

objects proposals that come in because developers and people with money can get great graphic artists and the graphic artists will give you beautiful pictures of what something is going to look like and if you get a beautiful picture that's a bright shiny object to see that's really cool but the next question is where is it why is it what's the context how does it fit with the bigger picture of what's around it as opposed to just being a single point that really looks nice and so getting sold on the bright shiny objects in the long run may or may not be good for what we're trying to do in building a city where we still can all work together you know where we can transition from really appreciating this city and the fact that it has hills and streams that go through it and

as dr rice alluded to has cool places because of tree canopy and other things like that and where cows walk up and down hills i don't know if anybody remembers cows walking up and down hills many of you may be living on those cow paths now and never knew that that's what happened there so things are going to change and as we're changing how are we doing it to to be moving forward and keeping us the kind of community we all say we like to live in process at this point when I see another project that has great detail work but none of the details fit any of the guidelines that have been laid down I have to ask what are we getting right and what are we not getting right in our comp plan and in our zoning ordinance so that we move forward on its own merits

taken in the context of only one property this may be a very good proposal taken in the context of the neighborhood and the environmental some other aspects that fall into dealing with this kind of development, it may be not so great a proposal. And I guess my question on this one tonight is, where do we fit in all of that as we get into the detail work of only dealing with the details and not dealing with the greater context? And as we've said, we've identified things to look at. How can we get back to looking at these so that we're proactive instead of totally reactive when they get into this sphere? Because now that you have a proposal, we're tied into dealing with it. We're not tied into laying the groundwork that would make this a proposal.

the developer would come in and say, yeah, I can fit within the box that you've said, within the rules that you've laid out for what you want to see with anything like that, as opposed to here, all of my stuff is different than what you want. You just make enough exceptions, and maybe we can make this happen. And I don't know that we get what we want out of that situation or that we don't create more friction than isn't sometimes necessary. I guess those are my comments on this. I'm not going to say it's a good proposal. It's a bad proposal. I'm going to say we're going to have to do a lot of work to move forward.

James FeatherThank you. Some of my sentiments have been expressed already. I'll repeat a couple. Mr. Rice, I appreciate your comments again about the tree canopy because my reaction initially to the staff comment was about moving to the west side would make sense if this was a proposal we wanted to pursue. But concerned with the tree canopy and loss of that, recognizing the urban heat we have, that's an important consideration. But I actually go back to some of Mr. Cunningham's thoughts as well. When we review the updated, when we're revising the comprehensive plan, we looked at parcel specific considerations again and this was one we chose not to make any change to. The proposal is for single family attached homes is the

notion. These are townhouses. Alternatively I could see a community like the one I live in which has a mix of townhomes and single family homes. There is a standalone home on the site as it is. that's our base case and this proposal doesn't really address that the other thing that we haven't heard anything about is whether in fact we might need two hotels, two conference centers in the city of Fairfax I'd like to hear from our economic development office about that and whether there's such a demand for this kind of use that it warrants us changing our comprehensive plan so I'm very concerned about protecting the RPA we don't want to move too many things but this the scale of this against the far craft community is a

concern we haven't seen enough detail to know whether they comply with the other requirements of the zoning ordinance there's some concern about compatibility being that this is adjacent to a residential area. We also recognize it is on a commercial main street, so there's some thought that it could be commercial, but that wasn't the vision of those who prepared the comprehensive plan before I was on the commission and those of us who are on the commission now when we review it. So again, I share the concerns that Mr. Cunningham mentioned, those that Mr. Rice had mentioned as well. It's a nice shiny object, an exciting concept, I do ask the same question. Do we need it if the other proposal goes through?

I'd like to hear from our economic development folks to see whether there would be a market for such a thing. So I think there's work to be done to make this something that we really should consider reopening our comp plan about. But Mr. Rice, it looks like you have some other thoughts.

Matthew RiceNot to restart any discussions. Mr. Cunningham always has excellent comments that kind of set context. I have a lot of visitors to the Mason campus. When Mason closed their hotel, it was really a problem for us. We end up driving folks out into Camp Washington beyond the city boundaries to hotels or, you know, to North Facts. It was an issue. It's a problem. I think the need for at least additional hotel space is Real, I don't know where it belongs. I don't know if there are other locations. It would be a much better But I think at least on just an anecdotal basis not a well-studied economic basis there is a need for hotel space This particular parcel zoned as residential medium could develop 36 to 40 single-family homes,

and perhaps more if it were as dense as some of the single-family homes up on Farcroft. If we traded this idea for residential medium single-family homes, we'd lose a vast amount of surface right now that's grass and that's vegetated, and it will remain so the entire front half of this development going to remain intact. That's quite valuable on its own. So I think there are some alternatives that could happen given the zoning and no change in the zoning that might not be as preferable from an environmental standpoint. This is a relatively modest proposal for this particular parcel given what other things could possibly happen. The height that's proposed in the lot coverage and the green amenities kind of built in do at least to me seem

attractive but again right next to the RPA they've skirted the RPA with this and I'd be very interested in seeing if there was a kind of reconfiguration of the location of hotel whether that we could end up with a better result particularly for the residents just to the east that distance is not far and someone with a home that had development you know within 40 feet of my back wall an impact quality of life changes when you can no longer look out across the far property and see a beautiful green open space so we had that happen and so we want something good and i think recognizing this is a very unique parcel i could be mistaken but by value it's the very largest in terms of assessed value in the entire city largest single parcel it's an outlier

by a significant degree on its economic values. So I understand there's going to be interest in seeing this change because of its value and its location. And hopefully changes in discussions with staff and discussions with residents will see things kind of reconciled and decisions made by the developer in the community. And that's all I have.

James FeatherThanks.

Matthew RiceThank you.

James FeatherLast word of the apple. okay thank you do you feel you have enough feedback from the Commission

Frederickstaffyes sir

James Featherthank you we will move on to our second work session item this is a post submission work session it's with a discussion on a request to amend the existing general development plan and a comprehensive plan amendment from commercial corridor place type to townhouse single-family attached place type, a rezoning from PDC, that's planned development commercial, to planned development residential in the architectural control overlay district, and then approval of a master development plan for 14 townhomes on approximately 2.12 acres located at 9431 Silver King Court, 9450 and 9464 Silver King Court and 9495 Silver King Court and more particularly described as tax map parcel 58-2-10-001B tax map parcel 58-2-11-CG-000

James Featherand tax map parcel 58-2-10-001-CG a one welcome back mr. Frederick

Frederickstaffokay good evening again this is a post submission work session for our jail associates Inc incorporated David Houston with being Kenny Corman is representing the applicant

Paul Cunninghamthe

Frederickstaffapplicant submitted a formal application on April 8th 2024 the plans under consideration for tonight's discussion were submitted on January 7th 2025 the applicant is requesting an amendment to the existing general development plan a comprehensive plan amendment from commercial corridor place type to townhouse single-family attached neighborhood place type a rezoning from plan development commercial to plan development residential and approval of a master development plan the line use application is subject to a major significant of appropriateness for architecture and landscaping the applicant seeks to replace approximately 21 1,500 square feet of office space with 14 front-loaded townhomes on 2.12 acres so the subject property is

commonly known as Mantua professional center and is located on Pickett Road about a half mile south of the intersection of Fairfax Boulevard on side of the property is a city county boundary with single-family homes that detached homes in Mantua subdivision and Fairfax County on the west side of the site is Pickett Road and the Army Navy Country Club south of the subject property is Pickett's Reserve a single-family detached neighborhood and to north of the site is the ice park the subject property is outlined in the comprehensive plan as a parcel specific consideration the comprehensive plan amendment from commercial corridor place type to townhouse single-family attached neighborhood place type the maximum of three floors and landscape setbacks for that portion

of the site that is just in a single-family detached homes so in this case it applies to to the single-family homes to the south and we treat the single-family homes to the to the east as the same so the setbacks and then maximum three floors would would apply to the south and to the Townhome single-family attached neighborhood supports up to 14.4 dwelling units per acre. So that's the proposed change to townhome single-family attached neighborhood. In terms of the zoning district, the applicant is sticking near zoning from planned development, commercial to planned development. Residential and architectural control overlay district requires a minimum of two acres. for a master development plan with substantial conformance with the comprehensive plan and at

least 20 percent of the area as recreation and open space so change to pdr here's the master master development plan so you're looking at 14 front loaded townhome units with a density of 6.6 dwelling units per acre the general development plan has a density of 2.2 units per acre the townhomes are 24 feet in width by 40 feet in depth with a maximum building height of 47 feet the applicant is proposing four spaces per unit with 25 surface parking spaces a private one-way street off of silver court our silver king court with open space and amenities on site in terms of the circulation the applicant has proposed a one-way vehicular access through the townhome subdivision that connects to the new school and the enclave

condominiums you also see the production and connections from picket road throughout the site sidewalk connections interior to the site just north of the parking spaces and also a sidewalk in front of the units the applicant also proposed a sidewalk connections interior to the site between the two recreation areas that connect to the existing open space in the general development plan of the existing general development plan in terms of trip generation you'll see a reduction in a.m. total counts p.m. counts and as well as the daily traffic so going from general office to townhomes you will overall trips the open space as I mentioned before the two areas highlighted provide open space for the general development plan the applicant

is proposing roughly 40% of the site to be open space of that 40% 0.5 acres 23% of the site meets the minimum requirement 50 by 50 according to the master development plan regulations and the site is the two open space areas are connected so it also meets the uh the six percent the 60 of the requirement for these sites to be connected in terms of landscaping the applicant is proposing a 10-foot buffer around the site the applicant is seeking a waiver to eliminate the six-foot fence or wall requirement along the along the northern side and the southern side and as well as the eastern side so the applicant has proposed 28 tree canopy with a combination of new plantings and tree preservation exceeding the 20 percent canopy requirement in terms of

setback the applicant has proposed a typical layout shown in the master development plan front yard of 18 feet on the side five feet and rear yards of 15 feet and so in terms of the overall setbacks the nearest property lines you're looking at 15 feet to the north it's not on your screen here but 15 feet to the north 43 feet along the eastern property line 28 feet identified on on the screen in front of you to the south and 51 feet to the west so in in comparison to the rt and rt6 districts the applicant is proposing yards and setbacks that are greater than what would be required in the rt in rt6 district so the applicant has had conversations with the board of architecture review they've gone

to a work session and got feedback from the from the board one of the items that staff has pointed out to the applicant and it's also in your packet is the height for the for the proposed townhomes and based on the comprehensive plan the height requirement is three stories so the applicant will need to make sure that they're in compliance with the with the place type height limitations of three stories next to single-family homes so there's pictures of the rear of the 14 units so you'll see the the uh the image shows uh what appears to be a four-story townhome and again so the applicant will need to um conform to the three-story uh maximum requirement in terms of items to be addressed um and it's in

your packet uh we'll not go through all the items but there are some items that i you know think that we can talk about. I'll walk you through a few of them. So in terms of, again, the elevation requirements of the two sticks of four stories being above the three-story, the applicant will need to address that. No more than two or any 10 or one of three budding dwelling units should have the same front yard setback. the applicant will need to address the variation and setback there are a few buildings or a few units that have the same front front setback so there is some adjustments that need to be made in terms of the sidewalk requirement on both sides of the street staff does not support the

proposed stamped asphalt path flush with the street as an alternative to a sidewalk on the on the south side of the private drive and then the applicant would need to provide information as to provide the width of the right-of-way for picket Road right now the plans show that it's a variable width and staff would need to know the the details of the width of the road and that would maybe generate a a dedication if the requirement if the width of picket road is does not meet the requirement in terms of screening the applicant should provide screening for all ground-mounted mechanical equipment a few other items to be addressed is uh the utilities uh the applicant has requested a modification for the for the requirement in section 411 the applicant is

seeking to to propose a payment in lieu of the required underground utility work staff is reviewing the request for the modification and what further discussions with the applicant going forward and finally the applicant would need to provide a lighting plan that demonstrates compliance with section 4.8 providing illumination within the plan they provided a plan sheet but it didn't have enough detail to determine whether or not if if they're in compliance with 4.8 of the ordinance in terms of next steps the applicant has a work session scheduled for the 25th of February followed by development review team meetings resubmission of plans and associated materials and then the public hearing process with planning Commission Board of Architecture review and City

Council again the next work session for the applicant with City Council was on February 25th and I'll stand by for any questions you may have

James Featherthank you Mr. Frederick was there any pressing questions for staff we'll invite the applicant to come forward if they'd like to make a presentation

David Houstonapplicantthank you chairman feather my name is David Houston with being Kenyon Corman I'm happy to be here tonight with this application. This property has a long history. It was first rezoned in the 1970s. The first development didn't come until the 1980s. And then in 2004, the new school took over a third of the project. And in 2015, the Enclave condominium took over another third of the project. The original development were these four multi-level office buildings. And the original plan from the 70s was to have like 22 of these buildings. but with the development of the new school and the enclave and the general malaise of the office market especially not in the central business district areas the four existing office buildings have struggled so Cam Lewis with me here

tonight is his family. His father was the original developer of the property and Cam is the applicant and that company is the applicant tonight. Also we have Clint Good our project architect and Eli Goldman of IMAG Engineering. We were last here I think it was June of 2023 three, and we're still plugging along. As Fred mentioned, the project's 14 high-quality townhouses to replace the four older office buildings. And to make it clear, the current plans that were submitted are three stories. It was dropped from four to three after the initial BAR work session and with the submission, resubmission of plans in early January, it's three. You know, in trying to figure out what would be appropriate as far as a redevelopment option,

Mr. Lewis looked at the current comprehensive plan and as Commissioner Cunningham mentioned in the earlier matter, there are a list of properties in the current plan that talk about the possibility for replanning and different uses. This property is one of those. And the current master plan, comprehensive plan, says, you know, the original approved plan has been amended several times, including separate amendments that converted portions of the site to be used as the private school and multifamily condominiums. As a result, the original complex is now occupied by three distinct uses. Alternative uses could include multifamily residential or townhomes in the portions of the site currently designated as commercial corridor.

This site is designated currently as commercial corridor. one option to redevelop would be to stick with the commercial corridor and build up to a five-story office building on the property. Didn't think that that was a good use and not appropriate. But this, the current plan talked about either multifamily or townhomes. And again, Mr. Lewis looked at it, and we remember the enclave hearings and the concerns about height and density, and we came upon the townhouse idea. the reason why the application is for PDR is the Mantua Professional Center has private streets and to have any new residential development you have to have access to a public road the only avenue to have residential development in this

instance this would be through the P zones which do allow private streets for access that's the sole reason we have we're continuing to work with the staff we need to go back to the BAR are, and we're talking to the community who you've heard from tonight. We think it's a quality project. Townhouses are the type of use that are undersupplied in the city currently. We think it makes sense, and I'd be happy to answer any questions or have our team address any specific issues.

James FeatherThank you, Mr. Houston. Commissioners, questions or comments? Mr. Cunningham.

Paul CunninghamThank you, Mr. Chair. Good evening, Mr. Houston. And the questions I have, I guess, are both for you and for staff. The first one is one of interest to me. road and our need to worry about something with Pickett Road and yet I need an explanation on that because I don't see where the driveway as it's proposed has anything to do with Pickett Road so what is what is the implication with the width of Pickett Road is that plan for future widening or is there something there that causes this to have to address Pickett Road

David HoustonapplicantI'll take a stab at that, Fred. First, there's no changes proposed to the existing entrance. I think what the issue was is our plans didn't give a dimension for the width of Pickett Road. They would like us to put that dimension on the plan and then compare that dimension to what the ultimate right-of-way width would be. and if it does require additional right-of-way I'm sure that could be accommodated through a dedication so I don't think there's an issue I think there's just some missing information at this point

Paul Cunninghamokay

David Houstonapplicantbecause I can correct me

Frederickstaffnow I was actually a pretty good summary of civil terms of the the public details so we have a right away with requirement for arterials and we need to make sure that the the width is has already been provided if not we'll need to get additional five feet or whatever it is I'm going to turn to mr. step and find out what the what the required width is for for arterial

Speaker 3thanks I'll take my standing position here in bar mr. Frederick's Mike an arterial street requires a right-of-way with 100 feet from center line to property line is 50 feet so what we what we would be relying on is a field survey that identifies center line and then the measurement I the plan, say, variable width.

Paul CunninghamOkay. Did we require the same thing of the enclave when we went through that process? Because I don't remember it.

David HoustonapplicantThere was a small dedication with the enclave, but it wasn't a lot of, like, 2,000 square feet. Okay. And I don't remember where it was located.

Paul CunninghamAll right. So this is a minor issue that you're talking about there. uh the next one i'll ask then is on trees when pickett's reserve was developed and you look at one of your earlier graphics that shows essentially the lot lines there is space between the back of the lot lines on the two single family homes that would directly abut this property uh and and what is the property line? Was tree canopy left on the picket reserve side for future growth and buffering?

David HoustonapplicantYou're asking what they did?

Paul CunninghamI'm asking what they did because the next question I'm going to ask is the other side of the property line where I look at your townhome lines for that and say that there is space there. And between those two, have we left existing trees for buffering between the houses in either side or both?

David HoustonapplicantPickett's Reserve has a 30-foot wide conservation easement going up to the property line. And then there's another 20 feet rear yard to those houses that you're referring to.

Paul Cunningham20 feet on the individual townhouse properties or 20 feet from the property line to the back of the property line for the townhouse?

David HoustonapplicantI was talking about Pickett's Reserve. They have roughly 50 feet area there. And then we have a rear yard of 15 and then a buffer area of about 10.

Paul Cunninghamokay are there trees in that area and what is their likely disposition i know we should go to mr effort to get better information from an arborist but yeah but what kind of buffer are we leaving between the two properties between the residential units

David Houstonapplicantmany of the existing trees are not necessarily healthy, but we're leaving some and removing some. I can show you a picture of Pickett's Reserve where everything was treed, and they cut down every tree to build that development. But there will be plenty of vegetation, but we are removing some trees.

Paul CunninghamOkay. I think my question is what kind of vegetation are we looking at since we have property, we have conservation easement, we have a small easement, then we have property. So what do we have for buffering in there? And is this a buffering that's going to be there in 25 years, or is this potential buffering that we'll be filling out as development goes and respects where construction is going to occur to try not to damage any more than possible? cutting the entire lot to the line and just moving forward i

David Houstonapplicantthink the latter but unfortunately our landscape architect has covered and you could not attend tonight i don't know eli eli goldman okay

Paul Cunninghamand if he's going to answer that then he can go to the mantua side because you've got a significant elevation difference and explain what the the buffering is going to be between houses that i don't care how many stories they are they're going to tower over as the mantua residents are going to explain it the neighbors and so what are we going to have for for buffering on those

Eli Goldmanapplicanttwo sides so i'm eli goldman civil engineer at imeg and to start off answering your question we have looked at a detailed cross-section at the pinch point so that's the westernmost townhouse with the westernmost house and at that point it's about 90 feet from the corner of the townhouse to the to the house and so about just under 40 feet is on our Mantua side and just over 50 feet is on the picket reserve side and kind of looking at the buffer of the 50 feet I believe 30 feet is the tree preservation area the 20 feet is back a lot for the picket reserve and then over on our Mantua side we've got about 14 feet of buffer area and then 15 feet for back of lot so our 15 feet with the 30 feet of tree buffer area is about 45 feet 44 feet of tree preservation area and as you

go south it kind of widens out with the wedge and I don't know if you're aware of this we've got a retaining wall on the south side of our lot so that's going to be a segmental block wall and the good thing about constructing those walls you can pretty much cut your limited disturbance there and install your wall back onto your site so that can limit any kind of disturbance down in the tree preservation area on the south side so

Paul Cunninghamon the east side or the south side the south side is pickets reserve yeah on the

Eli Goldmanapplicantsouth side of the townhouses

Matthew Riceokay

Paul Cunninghamas you get is that immediately at the westernmost townhouse or is that as you get further to the east toward the property line

Eli Goldmanapplicantyes on the west side our townhouses are sunk below the retaining wall and then as you go east it transitioned to no retaining wall and then the townhouses are higher than the trees on the to the south in the southeast corner so kind of we can the next submission we're going to include this detailed cross-section but the Pickett Reserve House will be above the top of the townhouse from south to north if they're looking towards us.

Paul CunninghamOkay, thank you. How about on the east side with the houses down in Mantua?

Eli GoldmanapplicantOn the east side, I know we've got a little more buffer there. I think we're about 43 feet from our townhouse to the property line. from property line to that adjacent house right there so we we'd have to spend some more time on cross sections on the east side

Matthew Ricethere's a big elevation drop to the east side as well

Eli Goldmanapplicantat the side our townhouses are will be elevated on top of the retaining wall

Paul Cunninghamokay I think that the question of how the buffering is going to work with the trees and what will remain as opposed to it all being clear cut to a line and we're going to put some small trees in in 25 years will give me some buffering yeah that's yeah

Eli Goldmanapplicantthe intent will be to kind of preserve everything that's not that's below the retaining walls and then add some more understory and also other screening trees down in that area and then I guess just to clarify for the tree removal along the south property line area there's only about about a dozen trees coming down that area most the trees that are coming out in the center and east side of the property

Paul Cunninghamokay thank you yeah I guess another question I have comes with underground and utilities and it would seem at this point with what's there and and the ability to work in there that underground utilities would be preferable to having above ground wires running back and forth uh all over the place

David Houstonapplicantmr goldman

Eli Goldmanapplicantum so to clarify for underground utilities um everything on our site feeding the new townhouses will be underground so the undergrounding is referring to the overhead lines on uh on picket road on yeah so there is one pole that is on our property and um we have a meeting i think next week

Frederickstaffyeah next week it's the the pole is um just south of the entrance um off of picket so if you can follow my cursor it's roughly in this area up in here

Paul Cunninghamand that foot all continues to the south above

Eli Goldmanapplicantground and to it cuts across the street to the west and it also goes north along enclave which those poles all remain and power lines remain along the enclave um so just based on preliminary numbers from dry utility team it's hundreds of thousands of dollars just to take around one pole yeah and a lot of a lot of time under the street and come back up and go above ground again is that what we're talking and one thing we'll get into is if you remove the pole sometimes you have to set two new poles to offset that so right pros

Paul Cunninghamand cons

Eli Goldmanapplicantokay

Paul Cunninghamso so essentially the existing power poles on the road are going to continue but you're going to come down off of that and go underground so that correct the entire townhouse complex as underground yeah that would seem to make sense

Matthew Riceso I'm actually concerned about it there looks to be a utility easement or some lines that run east-west close to the south property line your largest mature trees the most beautiful ones that can provide the most screening will likely be negatively impacted by an undergrounding that happens on that south side i'm i i can't see the exact routing of that utility line but it is not the pole that mr Frederick talked about, but it's very, very close to the southern border of the parcel and looks to run to the east toward Mantua. Is that correct, that there's an existing telecommunications line at least that runs through there?

Eli GoldmanapplicantSo there are a lot of utilities running through the site there in existing easements, and we'd be abandoning those easements, vacating them, leaving those utilities in place, and then all of our new feeds would stay kind of within our disturbed area on site. so we wouldn't be going down in the trees just to rip out those utility lines so everything would just be on site within the LOD.

Matthew RiceOkay sorry you do have utility lines in an easement that run east-west along the south property line and you would be able to underground those without disturbing the mature trees that are sitting on that property line providing the screening to the Pickett's Reserve homes.

Eli GoldmanapplicantWe wouldn't touch them so we'd be putting our new lines on within like the new private street, and then any existing lines that are down in that area, we would just abandon and not touch.

Matthew RiceRight. So the line I can see... Mr. Cunningham wasn't through with this. Okay. I understand. Maybe we can just finish it. I'm just concerned about... It sounds like

James Featherwe're

Matthew Ricenot

James Featherall on the same page

Matthew Riceyet. An undergrounding project on that south side would be actually detrimental to the screening.

James FeatherYeah. I think you were talking about the long picket, though. Mr. Cunningham, please continue.

Paul CunninghamWith the undergrounding and that it affects trees and one observation I'll make that may not be That's of interest from a perspective standpoint when pill pickets reserved Was built as a community it started out as the development of two communities Which then ended up being merged a southern one and a northern one when the northern one was developed there is a house that is just beyond the purview of this that is an old farmhouse that is still visible from the road from picket road one of the reasons or the principal reason for preserving that townhouse in the approval process was a tree there was a state record tulip poplar tree that was just south of that white farmhouse and that drove the development of that property so that the house was preserved because the tree

needed to be preserved as opposed to taking both of them out and putting in a new house consistent with the rest of the development so how long did that tulip poplar tree last or have No, it is long gone. So preserving trees is one element of building a good property and respecting your neighbors, but it can't be the only element because the trees have a lifespan also. And that's where the questions of what kind of buffer come in, because it's important to save those trees and the buffering that can be done in a prudent manner. But you have to respect the fact that if it can't be, then find a better contractor to do your digging so that he doesn't have to take everything down to the border. but preserve those trees that can be and recognize that some rebuffering is going to have to occur

with new trees and other planting so i understand what you're trying to say from that standpoint uh and i recognize that there's a very good example as to why it sometimes doesn't work out that's very close to you but that's my that's those are all my questions thank you

James FeatherDr. Rice take take away yes, I'm still not sure I follow where you're talking about okay

Matthew Ricestaff is talking about sorry, let me just try to Summarize that thought that was a little scatterbrained and kind of getting in mr. Cunningham's way which I apologize for there appears to be a utility easement that runs across the south side of the property and the hugely mature trees towering above the site on that south side would potentially be impacted with anything that happens in that corridor and we'll just have to wait till we see more in terms of buffering and specifics and elevation transects and so forth to see how that works out but I think any sort of contrary to Mr. Cunningham's preserving mature trees does seem like a very good idea and some intact canopy for 10 years maybe it's only five years I think 11 oaks

over my back fence mature trees lasted two or three years but I think all of us appreciated the effort to keep on there was kind of a symbolic move by the developer to sacrifice money in exchange for preserving trees which is a nice thing to see I think in seeing this last time I was really under a misimpression about the relative elevation of this parcel with regard to neighbors my just looking at elevation contour data sets on the city's website which has great public data very worthwhile to use it looks like the townhouses are 10 to 12 feet above in terms of ground elevations above this site and I would have guessed it was the other way around so the townhomes are actually excuse me pickets reserve homes on the south side

are actually higher in elevation as a starting point by a story and as you move though toward I think the name of the streets Glenbrook over on the Mantua side there's a substantial drop it's um it's significant it's several stories in terms of elevations down the single-family home so I think outreach to that neighborhood and making sure we don't have a jurisdictional kind of crisis would be worthwhile just making sure that those residents are well aware of the plans and so forth that we do outreach to city residents as a default making sure we do that just to mention that some of those neighborhoods are being impacted by some of the Tice Park redevelopment activity that would be happening over the next few years so they I think there's already issues

city has done a great deal to change the lighting plan and change the sort of directionality of the ball fields and all sorts of things to kind of minimize the impact on the neighborhood it's a great efforts to kind of do that and I wouldn't want to unwind that goodwill that we built over changes in Tice Park with something here that may not be acceptable the more trees we leave intact even if you know they're there for ten years and then replaced them it of our urban forest or all of us listen very closely to that has chief sites or member of the kind of fire marshals office the head of the office has he reviewed the plans and the turning radii and so forth

Frederickstaffthe the submission that we are discussing tonight I we did not receive comments from chief sites okay

Matthew Ricethat'll be a must that we get their feedback I think the concern is that if people end up especially on the section that's on the far east side if they park in their driveway apron

James Featheryou

Matthew Riceknow we assume sometimes that people are not going to be in the garage that they're going to be sort of hanging out in the street and a fairly narrow street with parking on the other side will cut close what they can do with their apparatus as they come in and with a entrance over on the west side that's a bit narrow getting feedback from them will be real important to make sure this is viable there's only five or six or seven things that are like absolutely must have and the fire marshals signature is one of them

Eli Goldmanapplicantyeah with that we have run turning movements for fire trucks accessing it and all right even though it's one way we do have 23 feet width so it's like a full width road for the fire trucks

Matthew Riceokay so it's 26 or 23 is the minimum for

Eli Goldmanapplicanttruck okay okay yeah

Matthew Riceall right could you um explain to me perhaps the idea behind no walls on three sides you did mention the construction of the wall on the south side and how that might be a preferable kind of way of building a retaining wall but the requirement for walls and the other places what's the advantage of not having those walls in place and waiving that requirement

David Houstonapplicantso

Eli GoldmanapplicantI think the requirement talking about is the defense for the transition yeah yes

Matthew Ricethat's right

Eli Goldmanapplicantso I think we were just going more of the natural landscape buffer for that whole area and I think if a fence was recommended and requested as part of this process we'd be open to installing the fence but we just see being a vegetated area kind of not going in there to install anything then help preserve those trees was kind of the best bet for moving forward on this

Matthew Riceokay All right, so it will be worth hearing from the residents on both the east side and the south side about what they prefer. And I know there are options that would not, you know, provide a detrimental kind of viewshed that, you know, you could put in nice architectural fences that kind of can see through and so forth. But perhaps if there's another reason, you know, wildlife or other things passing through, I don't know. But, yeah, I think that covers my questions. patience with me interjecting and asking a lot of stuff so great thank you thank

James Featheryou mr. rice just to the underground utilities is what step Mike keeps dropping out about the south the southern property line or along picket Road was that the nature of the staff comments this

Frederickstaffstaff got weird we were looking at the poll on the along picket road okay so yeah we I don't know that the comment was related to on the south side it was okay more or less on the road

James Featheryeah you might just want to make sure that you're all on the same page regarding that question then

Frederickstaffbut we are having a meeting next week okay so we'll be discussing the utility and taking a look at the plans with I

James FeatherAppreciate my geospaceman here having easy access to all these things that can raise the questions. Thank you So

Matthew RiceI think there's a

James Featherutilities running north-south and utilities telecom at least running east-west good to know okay All right a couple other comments I like the nature of the development is consistent with our comprehensive plan and our parcel specific considerations and indeed there is a need for townhouses in the city when you look at our excellent fact book. It shows a relatively small proportion of these kind of residences in the city, which indeed are good first-step housing for some folks to get into the housing market. So I appreciate that. Relatively good green space and tree canopy. I will talk a little bit more about trees in a moment. The accessibility options, I think very important. The fact that there's an

option to include elevators very important as a owner of a home that has an elevator in it which my wife recently need to use that first surgery very appreciative that we make those kind of things available I want to come back to the question about the zoning district to make sure it's very clear this is proposed to be planned development residential the whole site is already a planned development district and a residential townhouse zoning district is not appropriate because of access to the major main road is that correct

Frederickstaffthat's correct and also that it's already a planned development district so you're looking at a PDR is appropriate district

James Featherright and very very many sites around the city to have PDR zoning including the development to the immediate south for these kind of reasons so just want to make sure it's very clear the reason for going in this direction first of all preserving the existing plan development which makes a lot of sense of course some of my questions have already been asked and answered I want to talk about parking the site is well We've had a lot of discussions on recent development applications about that. I understand there's a shared parking agreement. I didn't find anything in the narrative about what is your required commitment to the other parties in terms of parking spaces.

David HoustonapplicantSure, I can address that. When the enclave was approved in 2015, they were asking for a parking reduction at the time. And one of the conditions of the council's approval was that they had to go seek overflow parking from either the school site or the office site. And the office site was the likely candidate. And I think the final number was over 30. and we actually approached the enclave some board members probably a year ago about whether they would actually need that number and could we reduce it and they were not willing to give any up although in actuality those spaces are rarely used they're only for nighttime and weekends so not during the work day. And even with that, they're rarely used,

but they didn't want to move from that. And it is a condition to their approval, so we honored it.

James FeatherOkay, and I came up with the number 32, what was approved versus what? Was it 32? Something like that. Yeah. But you're still well over parked. The new school parking, as the staff report indicates, required. So it seems like there's no need for a shared parking agreement with the school. Not with the school,

David Houstonapplicantno.

James FeatherBut even so, this is well over parked. Let me tell you why I bring this up. You've asked for an exception to buffer islands in the parking lot. If you've got more parking than you need, I don't see any reason not to meet the requirements for providing the islands and whatever additional green space comes along with that. so

David Houstonapplicantwe'll we'll look at that

James Featheryeah

David Houstonapplicantso

James Featheri'm just looking i'm looking for opportunities one

David Houstonapplicantisland short but we'll take

James Feathera look at that you've got well more than one parking place excess

David Houstonapplicantyeah each townhouse will have two garage spaces and then their driveway

James Featherand their are all that's one of the question are all driveways a minimum of 18 feet yes deep excluding the sidewalk

David HoustonapplicantNo,

James Featherthe sidewalk, I think. There's no sidewalk along the townhouses?

David HoustonapplicantOr

James Featheris this the stamped asphalt? We were proposing

David Houstonapplicantthe stamped asphalt.

James FeatherDoes that count as part of the driveway? Well, you can

David Houstonapplicantdrive over it.

James FeatherCan you park in the driveway and not overhang the stamped asphalt sidewalk? Are these really parking places? That's the question. Yeah. That's the concern. Because we've had these discussions in the past about parking in townhouse. But there is also a sidewalk

David Houstonapplicanton the other side.

James FeatherI understand.

David HoustonapplicantYeah.

James FeatherPeople are going to want to walk along from townhouse to townhouse. They're not going to walk across the parking lot and go to their neighbor five doors down. So that's my question about whether the driveways really count as excess parking. But I would look at really the parking demand. and to the extent that excess parking invites bad behaviors. I've lived in enough communities where that has occurred. People decide to just park in the street. It's easier than getting the car out of the garage if they haven't filled their garage with stuff, which would be a violation of the covenants, but I don't know of any HOA that actually enforces that. It just invites bad behavior. To the extent that we can maybe promote

better neighborliness, and provide some additional green and trees. Again, I appreciate that you exceed the requirements of zoning ordinance. I think there's opportunity for more. Roadway width is a question that was in my mind, too. Recent developments, we've talked about 26 feet, even though I read about 30 feet in the zoning ordinance. So where are we getting these various numbers? I

David Houstonapplicantthink we got the 26 from the Davies property and the alley that they're proposing. I get that that's

James Feathertwo-ways traffic. And that's a two

David Houstonapplicant-way situation.

James FeatherBut it looks like this... I'm not exactly sure how people access the new school. Are they going to have to come in, turn right, drive by the townhouses to do rob-offs? They

David Houstonapplicantdo.

James FeatherBut they will. No, they will. So I'm a little concerned about getting too narrow with school drop-off traffic, people getting in out of driveways, and whether that's

David Houstonapplicantappropriate. feet one way is pretty wide.

James FeatherAgain, I'm thinking other numbers we've talked about, 30 feet, 26 feet. So we'll leave that to staff to manage. I did have concern about the height. You did say these will be three stories. Does that meet also the 35-foot height that the zoning ordinance talks about?

David HoustonapplicantI don't think it's 47. have what Fred showed. One of your colleagues here

James Featherwould like to address

David Houstonapplicantthat. Yes.

Cam LewisapplicantSo we met with BAR and they had the same concern. I think originally we showed four stories of conditioned space with a flat roof kind of your urban townhouse look. So one of their concerns, they don't, four stories are allowed but they would prefer three stories I think was their language. They said they would entertain four stories in certain places. So another point was they wanted to introduce some other traditional elements of design such as a pitched roof instead of a flat roof so our newest design actually is three stories of conditioned space and a pitched roof with a rooftop deck we've since moved the hvac equipment up to that roof as well instead of ground mount at the pedestrian level so they are three stories the roof structure has an attic storage area it probably doesn't

like that in the rendering because it shows glass, but that's not an inhabitable space in that roof area.

David HoustonapplicantI think one more back, Fred. I'm

Cam LewisapplicantCam Lewis, by the way.

David HoustonapplicantThank you, Mr. Lewis. So, the top, which you think is the fourth level, is actually... Can you go to the mic,

Speaker 12please?

David HoustonapplicantWell,

Cam LewisapplicantClint Good is our architect. He can speak to

Speaker 12Drew

Cam Lewisapplicantit.

Speaker 12in that it shows glass on the top level double doors. Those are simply storage, attic storage doors. So those were corrected, and we didn't get the information to you. But it is uninhabited space for attic storage, and then a bit of a terrace, a roof terrace.

Cam LewisapplicantAnd also on the height issue, this says, I think in our plan, 47 feet height. That's actually to the peak. in the city of fairfax it's measured in the median so you take seven feet off of 43.9

Speaker 12is the height to the peak and the mean is 36. so we're getting close to that

Cam Lewisapplicantand and it's 43 to 47 because of our grades as well but

David Houstonapplicant30.

Cam Lewisapplicantbut take back seven feet off of that to the median so it's 36 to 39. So if that makes any sense.

James FeatherThat does. Mr. Suckman, do you have a comment? All right,

Speaker 3sorry. I might be able to clarify, although Dan, the zone ordinance has two different provisions when it comes to height. One is, as Mr. Lerner just explained, that height is measured when there's a gabled roof to the midpoint of that sloped roof. stories is a bit different both of which stories and height are referenced in the zoning ordinance as following the building code the building code has a very specific definition of story where when you have a dable roof if the rafters sit on the plate of the wall the top plate of the wall if they sit flush with the floor below certainly that's not a story underneath that gable if there's an e-wall or some extended wall that's two feet or higher than that space under the gabled roof would be considered a story

here we just don't have the level of details that we need at this point it's something that they'll have to give us becomes a little unusual maybe and that you have access to the terrace we're gonna have to work with the building code officials see what their determination of story is in this case to use for guidance for the zoning ordinance definition of story.

James FeatherI think it's sufficient to reinforce the concerns with height, visual impact on the neighbors and so forth. How we manage the neighbors to the east that are so far below, that's a whole other matter. I did go over to the site today to kind of understand the elevation change from the west side to the east along the south property line, and there's definitely a difference, but my understanding is that the townhouses themselves will be pretty much at the same elevation. Second,

Speaker 12yes.

James FeatherLet me see if I have anything else. I asked about the grade difference. height comp plan got that oh rear yard 20 for the zoning ordinance 15 is provided so that's an exception request that council will have to deal with no

Frederickstaffit's since it's a plan development district the applicant actually there isn't a set requirement to actually provide the

James Featherdimensions. We often go back to the underlying home type zoning, general district for guidance, but I get that. Okay, thank you. All right. Talked about that. We talked about that. All right. What was that? Oh, okay. Yeah, you've included estimated yield for the schools those are kind of hard really to come by townhouse communities I when I first moved into the city I moved into a townhouse community and the student yield was greater than what staff estimated for what it's worth it's a it's a good stepping in point for young families so we may see more children but you know if it's three or if it's six I don't imagine it's gonna be a big impact on the schools but it's just something to keep in mind in any conversation with the school folks and

all right I think that covers my comments where the other mr. rice yeah

Matthew RiceI feel like tonight I'm just muddying the water a little bit with some of my questions and I apologize for that if the rendered fourth floor windows not windows and they're not doors how does a resident get onto the terrace they

Cam Lewisapplicantare they are doors so there is a their doors but you don't have a floor plan but there's a stair that goes to the attic is and it's an accessory

Matthew Ricebut it's not conditioned space it's not livable space but it's still space that is used to access the terrace

Speaker 12correct

Matthew RiceOkay. Let's actually, let's wait for the next meeting and we'll just look closely at it when the time comes.

David HoustonapplicantYeah. I think that

Matthew Ricejust is still maybe some more details about what that actually is. Yeah. Yeah. We'll get that in like full briefing materials. We'll look Thank you. Thank you. Mr.

James FeatherGunningham.

Paul CunninghamThank you. My sense from that comment is that that area up there in that attic space is a great place to store my table and chairs that I'm going to sit out on the deck on in the summertime, but I want to get out of the weather for the wintertime so I can put them back in and move in and out because that deck space, I presume, is usable to go out and just sit and enjoy the sun and whatever. the other comment that I would have is that recently in our discussion we've talked about the loss of commercial space and commercial space being replaced by residential space in the city and yet I am very appreciative of the fact as you pointed out Mr. Houston in the comp plan that we have looked at this site before and we have mentioned this as something that was

anticipated as a possibility so that we're working within a realm of something that we by possibility and know that it was going to happen and coming, which I think makes it easier for us to work with the detail and the transition and doing that than something that comes out of the blue. So I will thank you for that, even though we're getting more residential and losing commercial in the process. And

David Houstonapplicantwe have spoken with and coordinated with the Economic Development Office Mr. Lewis has kept the tenants informed. Most of them are on very short-term leases. But the city does offer a program called lift. And if the tenants want some assistance moving to another location in the city, there's some funds available to help.

Paul CunninghamWe understand there might be some office space coming available in the near future elsewhere on Fairfax Boulevard perhaps. Thank you. That's all I've got.

James FeatherThank you. Anything after all that discussion? Stimulate? Okay. Do you have enough from us? Thank you. Frederick? Mr. Sutton? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you all. Good discussion.

FrederickstaffThank

Paul Cunninghamyou.

James FeatherAnd I appreciate the input that we've gotten from the community as well. Do stay engaged with them. All right, we will reconvene our regular meeting and move to the staff report. Mr. Naphti.

NaphtistaffThank you, Chair Feather, members of the Planning Commission. Quick review of a couple of the past City Council meetings going back to January 28th. They had a work session on the proposal at the Davies property. This is the same proposal that the Planning Commission received a work session on January 13th. a number of items that are related to the Planning Commission first off the Planning Commission or some Planning Commission members presented your recommendation on the capital improvement program to the City Council thank you to chair Feather vice chair Lockhart and Commissioners Rice and Cunningham for coming and participating in that discussion they had a work session on a pre-application briefing for the ox block B this is the site at 403

one chambers road where a mixed-use residential project is proposed this is one of the sites that is that can be accommodated just with a special use permit without a rezoning and so it does not require a Planning Commission review they had a work session on the Gatewood Plaza proposal that the Planning Commission discussed on your meeting on January 27 and they had a work session on the ongoing potential zoning ordinance amendments related to accessory Planning Commission last discussed this topic back over the summer at the same time City Council had a work session on the topic at that time with a new City Council that was decided to give them an update. Essentially the staff was given the direction to prepare immediate amendments related to

the current age and disability requirements for accessory dwelling units. So this can move forward fairly quickly and over the longer term to begin reviewing potential the potential to accommodate detached accessory dwelling units this will require more of an effort because there had to be some community outreach we'll have some public meetings on that type of thing we'll keep you posted as that moves forward for tomorrow's meeting the City Council assuming tomorrow's meeting happens because of the weather if it does City Council will review we'll have a second public hearing on the proposal for pathway homes in the Joshua Dunn on Stager Avenue as you may recall this was approved by City Council in the fall

for a total of 10 units because of a technical error it should have been proposed for 15 units so they're going back to request the additional five units otherwise the proposal remains the same they'll have a work session on the Christopher Fairfax proposal this item of the Planning Commission discussed on January 27th they will review the two-year transportation program this a couple of months. If all is well, it will be considered for adoption by City Council at their next meeting on February 25th. And then lastly, they will have a discussion and update on the transportation project at Chambers Road and Eaton Place. This is one of the major transportation projects that is listed in the comprehensive plan.

A side item, Fairfax County is moving forward with a review of their policy plan component all of the general guidance not anything that is specific to certain areas of geographic context this is there if you go to the website just search Fairfax County plan forward you'll find information there about the different aspects of that they have some research papers it might be of interest to you and you can sign up to receive updates and they have a series of public meetings that are going on over the course of this month some virtual some in person I sat on one today it was very informative that explained what some of that they're doing i'll actually send an email to the planning commissioners with a link to this

so you can see but i definitely recommend taking a look and lastly certified planning commissioner programs the next one is coming up again i try to highlight the virtual ones because i think they're more attractive the next virtual option will be again in two phases the first phase is april 7 and April 8th and then it concludes on June 2nd and June 3rd. The next option will be in person. This will take place in Richmond with the sessions taking place in July and September. If any planning commissioners are interested, please let us know and the city will cover your attendance in that. That's all we have for the staff report.

James FeatherThank you. Any questions for staff? Commissioner comments? Spriggs, anything?

Speaker 1It's been an interesting evening.

James FeatherThey are interesting, thank you. Mr. Cunningham.

Paul CunninghamI hope everybody who attended the Chocolate Lovers Festival this past weekend, or on the weekend of the first and second, excuse me, got their fill of chocolate. I noted that we were down in the number of people attending this year from previous years, so I didn't know whether chocolate was going out of favor. It was just too far removed from Valentine's Day. but we'll wish everybody a happy Valentine's Day and look forward to seeing you at the end of the month

James Featherthe meeting

Matthew Riceschedule kind of aligns occasionally the crab meeting after the Planning Commission meeting sometimes before and this is an example of it being after and so I'll have more to report next time but the Old Town Hall you for chocolate lovers festival and many other great things will be offline for oil for renovations and so I think during our last prep meeting that start of those events which were scheduled to be immediately after the chocolate lovers festival will now happen at some point in March or April but it should be about a 12-month closure so I'll have more to report next month thanks

James FeatherOkay, thank you. From me, I mentioned last time I was going to be attending a breakfast with the chairs. This was the planning commission chairs or equivalent to some of our nearby jurisdictions that was organized by the planning board chair in Montgomery County. There was reasonable representation. Everybody who could have been there was there but the representatives from Frederick County, Montgomery County, which, interestingly, does not have a planning commission. They have some other structure that the mayor actually, apparently, is the planning commission equivalent chair. But there was a representative from their zoning organization. Very interesting to hear that. City of Alexandria, which just by the nature of its jurisdiction

is similar to ours. It'll be interesting to make some contacts there. their chair is turning over here within the month. So I look forward to meeting the new chair and being able to compare notes. And the chair of the Fairfax County Planning Commission was also there. So I made a connection with him. I'm actually going to be meeting him for some further discussions. So I'm looking forward to that. And I have a meeting coming up at the end of the week office just I do that periodically so be interesting to have some discussion with them particularly light of some of the recent development projects that we've had on our plate as well so and I will report back to you on how that goes and what I learn and what we might be able to how we might be able to better

interface with the county as well I appreciate your bringing up what they're doing right now so I imagine we'll have some interesting discussions as well projects like what's going to be going on in the courthouse complex and perhaps even the one we spoke this evening about in Mantua because of the adjacency to county residents. So anyway, I look forward to those connections. So if nothing else, we are adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.