City Council Regular Meeting

Good evening. I would like to call the regular meeting of September 24, 2024 to order, welcoming everyone into the chamber after that rousing musical delight that was provided by our mariachi band. Council Member Greenfield and I were remarking that we should start every council meeting with a mariachi band because it definitely is so uplifting. I am going to read a motion to conclude a closed meeting to conduct interviews for boards and commissions. At 6.56 p.m. the city council concluded its closed meeting to conduct interviews for boards and commissions and discuss appointments to boards and commissions. I move that each of us certify that to the best of each council member's knowledge. One, only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open

meeting requirements in the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and two, only public business matters identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed, or considered. All council members in favor of the certification motion please signify by voting aye. Aye. Those opposed to the motion please vote nay or abstain. Okay one abstention. The motion passes with four votes and one abstention. All right if you are able and so choose please rise for a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America in two republics for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay we're doing proclamations down in the front and I'm going to ask that the Fiesta Fairfax committee

for the National Hispanic Heritage Month join me down at the microphone. Oh look it's lower this time. Welcome, welcome, love the music. Thank you all so much. All right. Whereas each year Americans observe National Hispanic Heritage Month from September 15 to October 15 by celebrating the histories, cultures, and contributions of American citizens whose ancestors came from Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America. And whereas the observation started in 1968 as Hispanic Heritage Week under President Lyndon Johnson and was expanded by President Ronald Reagan in 1988 to cover a 30 day period starting in the September 15 and ending on September 15 and ending on September 15. It was enacted into law on August 17, 1988 on the approval of public law 100-402.

And whereas the day of September 15 is significant because it is the anniversary of independence for Latin American countries Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. In addition, Mexico and Chile celebrate their independence days on September 16 and 18 respectively. And whereas during National Hispanic Heritage Month we reaffirm that diversity is one of our country's greatest strengths, we also acknowledge the Hispanic leaders who have stayed in the struggle for equal justice to ensure that everyone in this nation can contribute their talents and have the opportunity to thrive. And whereas the city of Fairfax celebrates Fiesta Fairfax event on Saturday, October 5 with cultural performances, music, food, and educational exhibits highlighting the contributions and experiences of the Hispanic, Latino, and Latinx community.

And now, therefore, I, Catherine S. Reed, Mayor of the City of Fairfax, do hereby proclaim September 15 to October 15, 2024 as National Hispanic Heritage Month in the City of Fairfax. And encourage the community to continue celebrating the month and recognize their contributions to the city. I will now turn it over to Elizabeth. Thank you so much, Mayor Reed. Thank you to the members of the council for this proclamation, recognizing the contributions of the Latino community and celebrating and uplifting the Latino culture right here in the city of Fairfax. It brings me great personal joy to be able to be a part of this. So thank you very much. And as Mayor Reed mentioned, our second annual Fiesta Fairfax will take place Saturday, October 5, right in Old Town Square from 2 to 7.

We will have delicious food and beautiful cultural performances, dance, dance lessons, great music. And so as they say in Spanish, que más quieres, which translates roughly into what more could you ask for? So please join this. It's going to be a beautiful event. Thank you. All right. Thank you. It's a photo. All right. Everybody squeeze in for a photo. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on. All the people who have to do. All right. Let's go. Right now. One, two, three. Perfect. Thank you. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.

Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. I would now like to invite Rick Davis, the Dean of the College of Visual and Performing Arts, from George Mason University, to join me here for the Proclamation for Arts by George. By George. All right. By George. By George. All right. Whereas the Arts at George Mason University, or Mason Arts, and the City of Fairfax have enjoyed a successful and mutually beneficial partnership for more than three decades through Spotlight on the Arts, the Center for the Arts, and other programs. And whereas the mission of George Mason University's College of Visual and Performing Arts, CVPA, founded in 2001, is to make the arts a pervasive presence in the lives of the university community and the surrounding region.

And whereas the college and its offerings continue to grow and evolve as it finds new ways to engage with our community, such that Mason Arts makes the largest arts impact of any single organization in Northern Virginia. And whereas Arts by George, the annual celebration of Mason Arts, has raised more than $4 million to benefit student scholarships and the arts in our community since 2006, and will be held on September 28, 2024. And whereas the success of Arts by George and the support of Mason Arts by the City of Fairfax, and in the Greater Fairfax area, have allowed the College of Visual and Performing Arts to provide a wide array of excellent arts experiences to the community. Now, therefore, I, Kathryn S. Reed, Mayor of the City of Fairfax, do hereby recognize and honor Arts by George,

and encourage all citizens of the City of Fairfax to share in the celebration of fine arts that flourish in and around the City of Fairfax. Thank you, Mr. Rick Davis, and I will now turn the microphone over to you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Mayor Reed and Council. Yeah, there we go. Thank you so much, Mayor Reed and Council and staff. This is a true honor. All those whereases are beautiful. They can be boiled down into what I like to call my four-word elevator speech, the arts create community. And we are so lucky, blessed, fortunate, grateful to be in the city of Fairfax, to be in such a supportive community as the City of Fairfax. The partnership is real, it's long, and it's profound, and this is a symbol of it.

So thank you so much all. And onward and upward. All right, thank you. All right, we are now going to do... Thank you. Thank you. I'm now going to invite Martha Huell, Executive Director, and Sheila and George Casey of the National Capital Region Blue Star Families. All right, more whereas's. Whereas Blue Star Families seek to empower military families by connecting them with their neighbors, individuals, and organizations to create vibrant communities of mutual support. And whereas Blue Star Families annually designate the week beginning the second to last Saturday in September and concluding eight days afterward as Blue Star Welcome Week. And whereas during this week we recognized the 600,000 active duty and transitioning military families who have moved to new communities each year.

And whereas nearly half of these permanent change of stations, PCS, moves occur during the summer. And whereas only 41% of military families respondents to the 2023 Military Family Lifestyle Survey reported that they feel a sense of belonging to their local civilian community. And whereas a sense of belonging is essential to the well-being and readiness of military families. And whereas we commit to ensuring that military and veteran families feel a strong sense of belonging to their local civilian communities. And whereas we express gratitude for the sacrifices made by service members, transitioning veterans, and their families. And whereas we encourage civilians nationwide to welcome military and veteran families into their communities.

Now therefore I, Catherine S. Reed, Mayor of the City of Fairfax, Virginia, do hereby proclaim September 21 through September 29 as Blue Star Welcome Week in the City of Fairfax. And encourage the community to continue celebrating the month and recognizing their contribution to the city. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. And I will have you say a few words. On behalf of Blue Star Families and the National Capital Region, we just want to say how honored we are to be working with the mayor and the city council and the public school system. This is for Blue Star Families, our largest event in the region. We have 500 families and young people. We give out backpacks and school supplies. And again, all these things which families coming in new to the neighborhood basically want and receive and are connected with the community.

We are thrilled with our partnership with Fairfax. And I just want to say thank you ever so much. Thank you. All right. Photo now. All right. A photo. Now I'm going to invite the Women's Club of Fairfax to join us here. This august body that has existed in Fairfax for a very long time. Very, very long time. Very, very long time. Ladies, ladies, ladies. Look at this. It's the who's who of women in Fairfax. My goodness. This better be a good photo. Better be a good photo. All right. All right, ladies. All right, ladies. Everybody? Yep. Make sure we can see everybody. Whereas the General Federation of Women's Clubs, GFWC, is a 133-year-old International Federation of Women's Clubs with more than 60,000 members and is dedicated to community improvement by enhancing the lives of others through volunteer service and is located at 1734 N Street Northwest in Washington, D.C.

And whereas the GFWC National Day of Service, September 28, 2024, is a day in which all of the GFWC comes together in service to highlight and raise awareness about food insecurity and take action to battle food insecurity. And whereas the Women's Clubs and food insecurity organizations throughout the region to provide meals, non-perishable food, and food kits for those with food insecurities for school students. And whereas the Women's Clubs and the Women's Clubs will be hosting a food drive at Fairfax High School's parking lot on September 28, 2024, GFWC's National Day of Service. Now, therefore, I, Catherine S. Reed, Mayor of the City of Fairfax, do hereby proclaim September 28, 2024, as National Day of Service to battle food insecurity in the City of Fairfax, and encourages the community to bring a donation to the food drive to help battle food insecurities with our school students.

So, thank you, and I invite you to say some words. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, City Council, for this proclamation, acknowledging the GFWC National Day of Service to combat and help food insecurity and hunger. This club totally embraces that concept, and we're doing many, many things. As the Mayor mentioned in the proclamation, one of the things we are doing is this coming Saturday, the 28th, we will be at Fairfax High School from 10 to 1. We are collecting canned food, which will go to the food pantry in the high school, and we are also providing complimentary shredding of up to five boxes? Yes. Five boxes. So, we invite you to come join us, bring a couple cans of food, get your documents shredded, and come have some fun with us.

Again, thank you, City Council. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. And now, a photo. . . . . . . . . Thank you. All right. Do I have a motion for the consideration for remote participation by Councilmember Doyle Feingold pursuant to the Code of Virginia? Councilmember Staley. Well, I thank you, Mayor Reed. In accordance with City Council adopted policy and as permitted by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3708.2, I move to approve Councilmember Doyle Feingold's request, properly submitted in writing prior to tonight's meeting, for remote participation subject to compliance with the requirements outlined in the City Council adopted policy and applicable law in all or portions of the City Council meeting of September 24, 2024.

Second. The motion has been made and seconded. A roll call vote. Councilmember Greenfield. Aye. Councilmember Ross. Aye. Councilmember Lim. Aye. Councilmember Staley. Aye. Councilmember Bates. Aye. Motion passed unanimously. All right. Agenda adoption. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Councilmember Staley. Thank you, Mayor Reed. I move to approve the agenda as presented. Second. The motion has been made and seconded. A roll call vote. Councilmember Greenfield. Aye. Councilmember Ross. Aye. Councilmember Lim. Aye. Councilmember Staley. Aye. Councilmember Doyle Feingold. Aye. Councilmember Bates. Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We'll move on to the initial general public comment. I had two people sign up prior to 5 o'clock p.m. today.

Our first speaker is Steve R. Okay. He is not with us. So I will go to the second speaker, which is Judy Frazier. Hi. Good evening. I am here tonight because this weekend a survey from the Fairfax City Smarter Citizens for Smarter Growth was published. And I found it very interesting reading, and I encourage all candidates who haven't yet filled that out to do so and appreciate those who have already filled it out. It's very informative. But I do want to – it did actually bring up a couple of things that I think are erroneous. I'll politely call them myths about the George Schneider Trail. Number one, the myth is that this was a culmination of years of work by previous councils and mayors. This is not really accurate.

Maybe at a stretch, David Meyer really wanted it, for sure, but it's not years of work by previous councils. I have witnessed or watched every interaction that councils in the past have had about this project. And I can tell you they were all for getting transportation funds. They were interested in the grant applications and voting for them. They did – almost every council meeting had somebody saying, please ask the community what they think. That did not happen. In fact, what you didn't mention was that there weren't – you didn't mention the legions of volunteer citizens who were out there tirelessly working to get this project to be a reality. And you know why. Because they don't exist. There has never been a group of citizens who have fought for this trail to happen.

And I think that's a fundamental flaw in why we're here where we are today. You also mentioned that you thought that it had actually been fraught with competing interests. And that's democracy, right? Competing interests are what makes this go. And not being beholden to previous councils is also democracy. We elected you all. We're the concerned citizens. A dialogue on that basis is what democracy is actually about. And I will tell you, for the last two years, year and a half, that we have been actively trying to engage all of you on this project. Has been more democracy in this little town than I have witnessed before. So – and although we're not where we want to be, I think that's a positive thing.

I think some people have been intransigent and not listened. But I will say that Council Member Bates, Council Member Doyle Feingold, and Council Member Greenfield have been very willing to work with the community. In fact, all three of them supported a compromise. A compromise that all of us – not all of us, but many people would have supported. And I think there's a lot of opportunity for that. The other thing I want to talk about that I don't have time for is efforts are always made to save old trees. That's us. We are the ones who must save the old trees. Developers won't do it. Nobody else will. It's our laws, ordinances, and the Chesapeake Bay Act that will save the old trees. Thank you.

We can move on to the consent agenda. All right. Do I have a motion for the consent agenda? Council Member Staley. Thank you, Mayor Reed. I move adoption of a consent agenda for agenda number 8A, consideration of the September 3, 2024 special meeting minutes. Agenda number 8B, consideration of September 10, 2024 regular meeting minutes. Agenda number 8C, consideration of board and commission appointments. Agenda number 8D, consideration of a public art mural for Draper Drive Park restrooms. I move to approve the consent agenda items numbers 8A through D and the motion accompanying consent agenda item as printed. Second. A motion has been made by Council Member Staley and seconded by Council Member Lim.

Are there any items Council would like pulled for additional discussion? Council Member Lim. Yeah. 8A, I need to abstain because I was missing from that meeting. Okay. Abstention on 8A. Anything? Council Member Greenfield. Abstention on 8B. 8B. Thank you. Abstention. Anyone else? Council Member Staley. Can I pull 8D, please? All right. Item 8D will be removed for discussion. Roll call vote on the consent agenda minus items 8D. Roll call vote. All right. Council Member Bates. Aye. Council Member Doyle Feingold. Aye. Council Member Staley. Aye. Council Member Lim. Aye. Council Member Ross. Aye. Council Member Greenfield. Aye. Motion passed unanimously for 8C and then with the abstentions for 8A and 8B.

All right. So we'll go to 8D, which is a consideration of a public art mural for Draper Drive Park restrooms. And that staff presentation will be by Megan Dubois. Good evening. It's good to see you all. So this is for a mural that will go on the restrooms at Draper Drive Park, the north-facing facade. The mural is being paid for by funds from the plastic bag tax. And it says in my report, Part 2, providing education programs designed to reduce environmental waste. This mural is created by a local artist. And it indicates deer and raccoons and other woodland creatures cleaning up an area around a pond. And the mural will be attached to the building with screws and a panel so it can be easily cleaned and maintained.

Council Member Staley. Thank you, Mayor Reed. I just wanted to draw attention to this. This is a fantastic collaboration. You know, the Commission on the Arts, working with everyone else to create a fantastic mural. And I don't know if staff is able to pull up a visual for Channel 12 at some point in time or maybe during the replay of it in there. But the mural is amazing with a local artist. So I just I I had to flag it as a great opportunity for collaboration. Great use. Great work together. And just wanted to say thanks all involved. And I look forward to seeing it installed. Love the fact that it's detachable. So we've got long term solutions there. Just a great project over the all. So thanks.

Let me highlight the mayor. Other comments. Well, I will just add it's art, which is wonderful. And it's on a bathroom, which is wonderful. I'm like more bathrooms and more art on bathrooms. I'm all in for that. So do I have a motion? Council Member Staley. Thank you, Mayor Reed. I move to approve of Jessica Piddock to paint the mural at Draper Drive Park. Second. Motion's been made by Council Member Staley and seconded by Council Member Lim. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, a roll call vote. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Doyle Feingold? Aye. Council Member Staley? Aye. Council Member Lim? Aye. Council Member Ross? Aye. Council Member Greenfield? Aye. Motion passed unanimously.

We'll go on to public hearings. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Our first public hearing is a public hearing and council action on proposed amendments to the code of the City of Fairfax, Chapter 110 in Parence zoning to amend portions of the articles and sections contained therein, including zoning districts and regulations, site development standards, and definitions relating to urban agriculture. I'll recognize Eric Foreman, the city plan to provide a staff presentation. Thank you. and agriculture establishments. These amendments would add this as a permitted use in the city's owning ordinance. There we go. And specifically, it would add urban agriculture as a commercial use in the ordinance.

City Council held a general discussion about commercial urban agriculture back in June. and at that meeting, council asked staff to draft amendments in order to permit urban agriculture in our city's commercial zones. The Planning Commission and City Council both held work sessions on this series of amendments in July, and the Planning Commission formally initiated the series of amendments at the July 22nd meeting. The amendment package that we're discussing tonight is similar to the material that we discussed in July, there are a few points for further discussion, and I'll talk about those during tonight's presentation. And finally, the Planning Commission at its meeting two weeks ago recommended approval of these amendments as presented by a vote of 6-1.

And the overall goal here is to allow a type of use that is currently not permitted by the zoning ordinance, and like we discussed at our work session, this topic originated with the city's Economic Development Office. Economic Development staff has talked with some companies who are in this field who may be interested in locating in Fairfax City, and this seems to be a use that would be complementary to Fairfax. It also fits within the city's comprehensive plan goals of diversifying our commercial sector and supporting regionally grown food. You may recall this slide from our work session. I think some kind of an explanation is helpful here, and especially for folks who have not watched our previous meetings on urban agriculture.

Urban agriculture, as we're discussing it, is basically the process of commercially cultivating agricultural products in an indoor environment. So being indoors means that it's essentially a controlled environment, and among other things, it means fewer negative externalities than what's typically associated with agriculture. And that's why this is something that can be well-suited to commercial areas. There's a number of names for indoor agriculture and its processes. It goes by several different names. The illustration here on the bottom right is a very simplified diagram of hydroponics. That's one of the more common types of urban agriculture. Hydroponics involves growing plants in a nutrient solution rather than in soil.

And when this is done on a commercial scale, it looks something like the setting on the top right. The reason for showing these images really is to just give an overall idea of what commercial urban agriculture can be in practice. And again, this is a relatively new type of use. It's something that's not directly defined right now in our zoning ordinance. There are a few forms of agriculture that are currently permitted within the city, principally non-commercial agriculture. Non-commercial agriculture is considered a normal and customary use in residential zones. So that includes backyard gardens. Also includes community gardens. So community gardens, you can think of it as gardening for personal use on a group scale or group use or for donation.

And all of that is permitted in residential districts. So, for example, here on the city hall property, we have a 5,000 square foot community garden. And that's a permitted use because this is a residentially zoned parcel and the garden is not a commercial enterprise. Now, existing zoning ordinances like ours usually need to be amended in some way to allow for commercial urban agriculture. And that is why we're here tonight. So, as we discussed at our work session, a few local jurisdictions have modified their zoning ordinances regarding urban agriculture. Arlington County, Fairfax County, and Vienna have added this use relatively recently to their ordinances. And looking at those examples and other examples nationwide, it's demonstrated that urban agriculture ordinances don't really need to delve into a great amount of detail on the specifics of agriculture or directing the details of this use.

It's really a better idea just to use general guidance, which is what we're recommending here as well. And up here on the screen, these are the elements that are included in tonight's amendments that we're looking at. We'll take a look at each of these elements. And as always, everything that we're discussing tonight is in your packets as well. The first element here is a definition. Definitions are located in Article 9 of our zoning ordinance. And this is obviously important because it describes just what this use is and specifically in the context of the zoning ordinance. And again, we don't need to get terribly detailed in the definition regarding specific operational items. And instead, this is a fairly general definition.

It's really in two parts. The first part here is shown in green. It's a description of the use and it reads that urban agriculture, again, as it would pertain to our ordinance, is an establishment for the cultivation, retail sales, and distribution of agricultural products where such activity takes place within a fully enclosed structure or on the rooftop of a structure. The second part here is shown in blue. This provides some examples of urban agriculture methods. The examples here, we see aeroponics, hydroponics, vertical farming. These are all common terms within the industry. This wouldn't be limited to just these, but it serves as a guidance and an explanation for what is meant by this definition.

Now to the principal use table. Our principal use table is a table in the zoning ordinance that lists what uses are allowed in which zoning districts. Since urban agriculture is proposed to be a separate use, it would have its own entry here in the principal use table. And since this use would have relatively few negative externalities, again, since it's in a controlled environment, it's reasonable to make this a widespread permitted use, and the P's indicated on the table indicate a permitted use or buy-write use. In this table, we have urban agriculture really listed identically as to general retail uses. So that is, it's permitted in the CR zone. CR is the biggest commercial zone, as well as the CG and CU zones, and also permitted in industrial zones.

And again, this tracks with general retail. This is allowed wherever retail is allowed. Now, zoning ordinances that allow for urban agriculture tend to have some general use standards associated with the use. These use standards are important for limiting potential negative effects of a specific use. There's a lot of uses in the ordinance that have use standards, things that could adversely affect neighboring properties or neighboring uses. There are four standards in this amendment that you see here, and since there's just four, I can go over these individually and explain their rationale. The first one, I'll just read number one here. All growing and production activities shall be conducted wholly within a fully enclosed building.

Or on the rooftop of a structure. Most urban agriculture zoning ordinances tend to have a standard similar to this. And even like in this case where similar wording is in the definition, it's just an important point to reiterate that production activity for this use needs to take place within specified areas. Number two here relates to the keeping of animals. And keeping of animals is a topic that generated some discussion at both of the work sessions that we had. It's an area where there's little consistency among other zoning ordinances that allow for urban agriculture. They really tend to be all over the place in this regard. Just in our three local examples, the keeping of animals ranges from a strict no in one case, no animals, no insects, and so on, to a permissiveness in some cases to a maybe because it's just not dealt with at all.

Now, the proposed language that we have here, and I'll just read this, urban agriculture shall not include the keeping of animals except as accessory to the principal use, such as for aquaponics. So I'll explain this a bit. So I'll explain this a bit. This permits animals as accessory to the urban agriculture use. So the principal use would be the growing of plants. So if there are insects or if there are worms, that would be permitted as an accessory use. Or aquaponics, which is listed here as cultivating fish and plants in an integrated system, something like that would also be allowed. The language limits the principal use to being cultivation rather than raising of animals or animal husbandry.

So the reason for this is that many people consider the actual raising of animals as a principal use to be more intensive than the growing of plants. This was discussed a bit both at the Planning Commission and at City Council work sessions and specifically about whether, for example, to permit aquaculture, aquaculture is the raising of fish, to permit aquaculture as a principal use. During Planning Commission's work session, the Commission recommended remaining with the language here, reasoning that the raising of fish could bring up issues such as high water consumption and generally suggest a more intensive use than what's contemplated under this urban agriculture definition. At this month's public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the text as presented here, meaning no changes to the text.

City Council discussed this as well at the July work session, did not appear to have a consensus. Some council members expressed a preference to allow the raising of animals and particularly fish, aquaculture, as a principal use as part of commercial agriculture. And we can certainly discuss that topic later on as well. I'll move on through the other use standards for now. Number three here concerns waste and odors. Waste and odors can be a potential negative effect of any agricultural process. This use standard stipulates that urban agriculture operators need to control odors that are discernible offsite. This language for number three is identical language to a use standard that we have in the zoning ordinance for animal care facilities.

This is kennels and veterinarians and that's another use that's subject to potential offsite odor problems. This use standard works well for animal care facilities and this is the same language applied here. Number four, finally, this last of the four use standards reads that in commercial districts for facilities located on the ground floor of a building, 25% of the building frontage associated with the subject use must be dedicated to retail purposes. This is also not uncommon for urban agriculture in commercial areas. Both Arlington County and Fairfax County have some sort of retail requirement in their ordinances. It's a way to ensure that there's a benefit to the public realm from this type of business in a commercial area rather than just a cultivation business that doesn't draw people in as a retail enterprise.

It really gives the retail feel that we would look for in a commercial area. And the last element of this proposed amendment package is that of a minimum parking ratio. All uses in the zoning ordinance have a minimum required parking ratio. In this case, what's proposed is one space for per 300 square feet of floor area. Like it says here, that's less than the retail parking ratio. The one to 300 ratio is equal to the general office ratio. And what that means is that this use would be suitable for conforming sites in retail settings and in office settings. So it was important to have a flexible situation so that these kind of facilities could locate in the maximum types of commercial structures possible.

Now, after the June work sessions, both planning commission and city council were supportive of commercial urban agriculture as a use in the ordinance. And as I mentioned, there were a few points for additional discussion. We talked about the topic of raising animals. We can certainly discuss this more if needed. In case it helps, the picture here, this is a picture of an eel farm. But this is an example of a recently built indoor aquaculture facility. So just to give it an idea of what an enclosed aquaculture, modern aquaculture facility looks like in case it's of any help, this tends to be typical of the type. Another topic that's been discussed regarding this use involves the potential cultivation of cannabis products.

As the draft is written right now, there's no limit on the types of agricultural products that could be cultivated under this use. And that could potentially include marijuana, but assuming future state legality to do so, which is currently not present. At our work sessions, there was some concern about potential commercial marijuana cultivation under this urban agriculture use. There was not consensus about this, either from planning commission or from city council. This was discussed at the planning commission's public hearing two weeks ago. Planning commission decided not to limit the cultivation of cannabis or the cultivation of any other crop at this time. Commissioners thought that it's too early to comment on cannabis in this regard.

They noted that if or when there's a change to state legislation, that we'd be in a better position as a city to respond to this issue of potential urban agriculture, marijuana cultivation, if it's in the city's desire to do so. And finally, at the bottom here, at our public hearing, the planning commission on September 9th, planning commission recommended approval of these proposed amendments by a vote of six to one. One planning commissioner thought that he didn't have enough information on this use since it's a new use. The other planning commissioners recommended approval as presented in your packets. And that concludes our presentation for tonight. And with that, we'd be glad to answer any questions that you all may have.

Are there any questions of staff? Questions? Councilmember Ross. Minor questions, but thank you, Mr. Foreman, for this report. As you noted, we've discussed this at prior work sessions. It's come before the planning commission. The question seems to be that there may be some things we'd have to look at again in the future if this goes through. Could you share again with us a process that, for example, if there are changes in requirements for cultivating and dealing with marijuana or in the issue of the animals, would we be able to come back and amend the ordinance at a future date as needed? Right. It can be amended just like any other amendment. Marijuana would most likely be relatively simple if council decided to limit it.

It could be just an added sentence in the definition, for example. Animals depend, and there's a few different options for going with animals, but it could be eliminating or rewording that use standard, use standard number two that's in there. Both are relatively simple. If the need arises, then they can be amended like any other. But to put that in perspective, it's a fairly routine process that we would do if we needed to, just amending the ordinance to change that at some future date, and that would be accompanied by a public hearing and public information going out and that sort of thing. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. All ahead, Mayor. Thank you. Councilmember Lim. Thank you, Mayor. So, you know, currently there is no law in Virginia about cultivation of cannabis?

Commercial cultivation of cannabis. Yeah, commercial. Correct. But that means that we need to be proactive, right? I mean, the law could change, and if we somehow drop the ball and don't change our zoning law, then somebody could do this by right. That's correct. So assuming that the state legislation would change in the future, which it may or may not, but if it would, then a commercial grower could grow cannabis in an urban agriculture situation unless it is excluded first. Right. The planning commission thought that it was a complicated enough topic that proactive might not be the best approach, but that would be proactive and that would eliminate the possibility of that. Right. So the planning commissioner thought that, you know, this subject would be complicated enough that we would be aware and that we would make the change when it happens.

That we would discuss the change when it happened. I think that they felt that the potential for state legislation could go in many directions by itself. So it was unclear whether acting now would be in the city's best interest or not. Yeah, but, you know, I don't know. I guess I feel like if somehow we don't address it right away, then someone could do it by right. Yeah, go ahead. Mayor. Mr. Lovekerman. Yeah, so there's any one of a number of circumstances where we have laws, regulations, ordinances in the city and the state then changes the law. And we are very good at monitoring and recommending changes at that point. So, I mean, there's an intentionality to what's been proposed here. But obviously you all have flexibility there at the dais or, you know, to tell us to come back and do something different.

But we're recommending the ordinance is drafted. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Other questions from the dais? All right. I will open the public hearing. Ms. Shinneberry, has this public hearing been advertised? Yes, it has. No one has signed up prior to the meeting. If there's anyone in the room that would like to speak on this item, you may step forward. Okay. I will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion, Councilmember Staley? Thank you, Mayor Reed. I move the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 110, in parentheses, zoning, to amend portions of articles and sections contained therein, including zoning districts and regulations, site development standards, and definitions. Second.

A motion has been made by Councilmember Staley and seconded by Councilmember Ross. Is there any discussion on the motion, Councilmember Staley? Thank you, Mayor Reed. First off, I want to thank the Planning Commission and my colleagues in the dais for a great discussion about figuring out how we start with urban agriculture. I hear that this is an area that's going to continue to evolve. I would like to push for more of an aquaculture lens to it, but I understand the idea of go slow and build forward. So when I read the ordinance, I don't see that there's zero opportunity for some type of fish action or eel action. It's just associated with some growing. So I think there's a way to start the conversation.

And then if a future council needs to take a look at it, I think we've at least opened the door from there. I'd be willing to go further tonight, but I feel like we've at least opened the door. Regarding marijuana, I completely hear what my council colleague is saying, Councilmember Lim, in therein. I have zero intention to necessarily open the door for someone to grow marijuana commercially in the city of Fairfax without having to go through a myriad of applications and permitting that I think the state would end up coming up with. I also know that some of the commercial growers look at things like hemp in a way that's really hard to define what we're actually looking and growing for. And then I am learning more about CBD oil and the way it grows and builds out to there.

So I like the approach of being monitoring of it and putting it in there so we can see what elements are there. Because I do think that the state, if and when it acts, we will be in good position to decide, do we need to also then act to deal with it as a city, regardless of whether it's grown in a urban agriculture or in some other fashion that our friends in Richmond, who seem to have lots of mystical understanding of the world might decide to do to all localities in Virginia. So I'm comfortable there, but I absolutely hear that concern and I feel confident that a future council and staff would be able to look at it. But I just wanted to raise that. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Councilmember Greenfield.

Thank you, Mayor. Two items. I was going to say I can't see our colleague, but she just now popped up, so maybe she wasn't there before. I don't know. I guess I'm curious why we couldn't put in our zoning regulations now the requirement for an SUP for any type of actions around marijuana. And if the state does something that supersedes that, then we can adjust our zoning ordinance. I don't know if staff has any comment on that. I mean, it's certainly permissible, but. It would be permissible. I think the easier approach would be to exclude marijuana from the definition rather than having a two-tiered system with a special use permit for cannabis growing. I don't know. I'm looking to Mr. Lubcom in on this one.

Because that may be something we would have to come back with because that would be an entirely separate use. It would be urban agriculture cannabis. Mr. Hardin is rapidly approaching the microphone. And really rapidly approaching this to echo Mr. Foreman's sentiments. I think a special use permit process is certainly something that staff could explore. Just given the nature of the subject, I think we may want to look at whether there are standards associated with a special use permit that we would want to have the council consider. So if there's a desire at this point, it would be to include some language, it would be to just exclude cannabis completely at this point. And we could revisit that to Councilmember Ross's point earlier.

We could revisit a text amendment to allow that through a special use permit. Okay. I appreciate what you're saying. I live very close to the medical marijuana facility beyond hi or hello, whatever it's called. And I hear from more people who say, how did that go in there and how was that allowed to be in such a prominent location? And of course, I said it was by right. It's medical marijuana and it's allowed. You can't, no one, not everyone can just go in and get it. But that doesn't change the frustration that that's in such a prominent location. And that's why I raised the issue about, you know, is there, do we want to have a special use permit process? Something that we're still demonstrating to the community that we're, we're hearing their concern.

We're, we, we share that concern and we're trying to, to be balanced in our approach, but I'll, unless there's the will of the council that they want to do it, I'll leave it alone for now. But I do think we, at some point, should talk further about that or we will have unintended consequences happening in the city. And we'll hear from more people beyond what we do for the location of 123 and Fairfax Boulevard. Understood. Thank you. Okay. Council Member Lim. Thank you, Mayor. Personally, I can't support the amendment as is. I would rather have the exclusion now rather than dealing with it later when there is a law in Virginia. Because then at that point, we would have to go another work session, public hearing, and you know, take several weeks, several, several months possibly.

In the meantime, we have a law that's already existing here in the city of Fairfax that people could build cannabis plantation indoors by right. So I would rather have that exclusion now. So as is written, I will not be able to support it. Thank you. Council Member Doyle Feingold. Do you have something? Yes. Thank you, Mayor. I echo some of the same concerns that Council Member Lim has, but also recognized what Council Member Staley mentioned. There are a lot of different types of things in that category that can be grown and some things create less impact to neighbors than others. So I would lean more towards the special use permit option that Council Member Greenfield mentioned. That could allow the use if they can show the community that we're not going to have the negative impact, which may also be a good approach for things like aquaculture.

But those are just my thoughts. Thanks. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Harden. Thank you. Certainly, amending the definition of urban agriculture that has been presented to you tonight would be a very easy amendment to make tonight. We could simply add language to the end of that definition that says something to the effect of urban agriculture shall not include the cultivation and production of cannabis, or whatever the Council may choose. That's certainly a relatively straightforward amendment. Again, I think some of the concern about a special use permit is that also signifies that there's a process for something that isn't permitted currently through state law. And so again, that's something we could go back and revisit.

But certainly very, very straightforward to make that clear that that is not included in tonight's amendment if that's the desire of the Council. Council Member Greenfield. Council Member Greenfield. Thank you. I appreciate the feedback on the SUP piece and will yield on that. But I will accept staff's friendly amendment to the definition to exclude any reference to marijuana cultivation, production, et cetera, and hope that my colleagues will support that. So I know we probably need a second to make the amendment to the language as proposed. Unless you're about ready to tell me no. No. No. I've just lost the sequence here. I don't know if there's a motion on the floor yet to approve. There is.

If the maker would accept it as a friendly amendment, Mr. Hardin could you could amend it to include that language. But I need Mr. Hardin to read it again because he said it much more eloquently than I did. Or someone else could make the motion. Actually, I'll go ahead and read it, which would be similar to other exclusionary items in the definition section. So to start out saying that the definition of urban agriculture shall not include establishments that cultivate cannabis. So that's the only reason is that's similar wording to other definitions that exclude a particular act or product. Council member Staley. I was assuming that Council member Lim was going to second Council member Greenfield.

Okay. I was going to let her do that. Okay. Let that start the process. Okay. I second. Okay. Jeff Greenfield has. So the amendment as made by Council member Greenfield has been seconded by Council member Lim. Now we turn to Council member Staley. Thank you, Bear. I, again, my interest is to start the process somewhere. And if it gives my colleagues comfort level to have that language in there and come back there, I'm more than happy to support it. I'd be interested in what my other colleagues think because I'm comfortable voting for it here. But the last thing I want to do is create unintended consequences that slow the process to let us start what our economic development said is a good idea.

So I'm more than willing to go along. You can't do it anyway right now under the wording. I do think that Council member Doyle Feingold's note about there is some type of cannabis that you probably can grow in there. And I would rather have someone come to us in a future state if it gives us warmness up here and say, hold up. I got caught in a definition. What do we need to do and attack it from that end if that gives us more comfort. So I'm very comfortable to go either direction. Thank you for my non sequitur answer of nothingness there. But I think the answer is I'm in. Okay. So, yes, Council member Roth. Yes. I would be happy to support the amendment. I think the important note, footnote here, if I understand what we've been talking about is, and we know that this is going to be a continuing issue for the General Assembly to deal with and the legislature to give us additional guidance and to deal with the whole issue of cultivation and the legal requirements go with it.

So I think whatever we do tonight, we're probably going to face additional changes as we get more work from the legislature. So I'm prepared to support the amendment to get this through. I agree with my colleagues. If this will help alleviate those concerns, I'm in. Thank you, Mayor. Council member Bates. Thank you. And I've raised this before, but just want to reiterate that we do allow by right establishments that sell alcohol and establishments that sell tobacco and vape products. And now that we're starting this conversation, I'd also encourage us, the council and staff, to think about possibly SUP processes for those. I've heard concerns from residents about having tobacco shops nearby.

And then additionally, I'm happy to support this amendment with or without that exclusion. But I also see this, like Councilmember Staley, as a first step. I hope that city staff will continue looking at other ways that we can expand opportunities for urban agriculture and for food production more broadly, especially nonprofit efforts at food production. And I'm happy to support this zoning ordinance amendment. Thank you. All right. Anything further? Councilmember Doyle Feingold. No, Mayor. Thank you. All right. So, Councilmember Staley, would we like to do an elegant? I think we're good to vote on the amendment and then we can vote on the whole one. I think it's really good. Okay. So, we have it.

So, the amended, with the amended, yes, roll call vote. Greenfield? Aye. Councilmember Ross? Aye. Councilmember Lim? Aye. Councilmember Doyle Feingold? Aye. Councilmember Bates? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. I'm going to do one on the main motion now. Okay. So, now we're going to the main motion. Do I have the, Councilmember Staley? I believe we're good to vote on it. Okay. Roll call vote. Okay. Councilmember Bates? Aye. Councilmember Doyle Feingold? Aye. Councilmember Staley? Aye. Councilmember Lim? Aye. The main motion, the original motion. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. No, it's okay. It's the amended. The amended. Aye. Councilmember Ross? Aye. Councilmember Greenfield? Aye. Motion passed unanimously.

Okay. We will go on to our second public hearing, which is a public hearing and Council action on a resolution for the re-appropriation of general forward slash operating capital and enterprise funds that were appropriated in FY 2024 and have not yet been spent or committed as of June 30th, 2024. JC Martinez, Chief Financial Officer, will provide the staff report. Mayor, Council, good evening. As presented during the September 3rd, 2024 City Council Work Session, each year the finance team presents to the City Council a list of general and operating capital and enterprise funds with a recommendation as to whether or not those funds should be re-appropriated. This situation occurs when funds are either one, appropriated, but at the end of the fiscal

year have not been spent or obligated, or two, a purchase order was issued but not fully expended and the remaining encumbrance balance should carry over to the new fiscal year, in this case FY 2025. The re-appropriation of general operating capital and enterprise funds is presented to Council at this time of the year in order to take into consideration any year-end adjustments and final audit work. of note, as part of the year in closing process, we did review and evaluate all open purchase orders for all funds and collectively the departments identified over 312 purchase orders, equaling about $1.7 million that needed to be closed in the encumbrance release that stayed in FY 2024, going towards the fund balance.

Happy to answer any questions. Are there any questions for Mr. Martinez? Does anyone have any questions? Okay. I will open the public hearing. Ms. Shinaberry, has this public hearing been advertised? Yes, it has. No one has signed up prior to the meeting. Is there anybody in the room that would like to speak on this item that you may come forward? All righty then, I will close the public hearing. Is there a motion? Council Member Staley. Thank you, Mayor Reed. I move to approve a resolution to re-appropriate general slash operating capital and enterprise funds to FY 2025 as detailed on the attached list. Second. A motion has been made by Council Member Staley and seconded by Council Member Lynn.

Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, a roll call vote. Council Member Greenfield? Aye. Council Member Ross? Aye. Council Member Lim? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We'll move on to our second general public comment. No one had signed up to speak. Is there anybody in the room that would like to speak? Okay. I guess not. Move on to the work session. All right. I will now recess the regular meeting to go into the work session. We will stay in the room for the work session. We will stay in the room for the work session. дедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедеде

half of my team, including Mr. Frederick, that will present entitlement applications to you. She's been with us for about seven months, made the move smartly from zoning to my team. Welcome. Thank you. Yeah, I was going to introduce myself. Yeah, I'm Clara Schweiger, planning staff. Yeah, I've been here for about seven months, but I'm happy to finally have the opportunity to present to you all tonight. So this is a work session to discuss the request for eight special exceptions at 10300 Willard Way. We're currently in the post-submission phase of the development review process. The applicant has submitted one revision of the proposal, and staff has provided comments on this second submission.

Here are the eight special exceptions being requested with this proposal, and I'll go into detail on each of these later on in my presentation. The subject site is located in the Old Town Transition Overlay District, so upper story residential or mixed-use buildings are permitted by right. The applicant is the owner of an 8.73 acre parcel, also known as the Courthouse Plaza Shopping Center. The subject site is located in Old Town Fairfax and is bounded by University Drive and Blinnem Boulevard, and to the north of the site are the Flats on University. The owner of the subject site also owns a parcel to the southeast of this site, where two long-term vacant restaurants are located. This property is not part of the proposal we're discussing tonight.

The site is zoned CR Commercial Retail in the Old Town Fairfax Transition Overlay District. The uses surrounding the shopping center are commercial and office uses, and one residential use, the Flat Zone University, to the north of the subject site. To the north are property zoned planned development residential and commercial retail. To the south and east are property zoned commercial retail and commercial office. These are the existing conditions on the subject site. The future land use designation of the subject site and all surrounding properties is the activity center place type. The subject property falls under the guidance of the Old Town Fairfax Small Area Plan. Highlighted on this slide is the general location of the proposal as shown in the Small Area Plan.

There are a few things that I'd like to point out on this map. This map shows a north to south street going through the site that does not currently exist. The streets highlighted in red are the streets that the Small Area Plan has identified for retail frontage. And shown here is also a large interconnected network of green space. In general, the Old Town Fairfax Small Area Plan supports a mix of uses. A height maximum of six stories, an increase in residential and retail uses, a connected and multimodal street network, connected open space, infrastructure improvements, and on-street and structured parking. These two graphics from the Small Area Plan go into more detail and show the existing surface parking

and recommended locations for connected green space in Old Town Fairfax. So the one on the left is showing current surface parking, and then on the right is showing the connected green space. This map from the Small Area Plan shows recommended retail frontage locations. So the red lines here are showing where retail is recommended from the Small Area Plan. And this map indicates recommended building heights. In this location, a six-story maximum is recommended. The Small Area Plan indicates projections for near-term development of 15 years. So for residential development, the Small Area Plan projects an increase of 1,240 residential units. The applicant is proposing to develop 315 residential units,

with 6% being affordable dwelling units. For retail development, the Small Area Plan projects an increase of 60,000 gross square feet of new retail space. The applicant is proposing to develop 5,000 square feet of new retail space, but the applicant is proposing to demolish 25,000 square feet of existing retail space for a net decrease of 20,000 square feet of retail space. The applicant is proposing to develop a six-story mixed-use building with 315 residential units and 5,000 square feet of ground floor retail space, with 775 parking spaces, including surface, street, and structure parking. 6% of the residential units will be designated as affordable dwelling units. I included this slide to show the existing conditions on the site and the proposed conditions.

And so everything existing to the left of the Safeway is going to be removed, and everything to the right is going to remain. The applicant is proposing a roughly 9,000 square foot park, roughly 10,000 square foot courtyard, and a bicycle room, providing 20 spaces within the parking garage, the applicant is also proposing 18 additional bike parking spaces outside. The applicant is providing 487 total parking spaces for the multifamily residential use, with 473 spaces being in the parking garage and 14 spaces designated as street parking along proposed Street 1. The applicant is keeping 288 spaces for the existing and proposed retail, for a total of 775 spaces. The applicant has provided pedestrian access surrounding the proposed building along Democracy Lane,

University Drive, proposed Streets 1 and 2, and through the proposed park. The applicant is also providing pedestrian access throughout the site. The only vehicular access to the parking garage is from Democracy Lane, and the primary pedestrian access to the newly proposed building is off of proposed Street 2. The applicant has proposed a building coverage of roughly 40%, lot coverage of 90%, and 10% tree canopy. The subject site is served by WMATA and the streets, Q, bus, golden, green routes. Stormwater management is being proposed. The existing development on the site precedes local and state stormwater regulations, and so the site does not have an existing stormwater management system, but a stormwater management BMP is proposed.

So the applicant is following some of the recommendations of the Old Town Fairfax Small Area Plan. The applicant is proposing a mixed-use building. They're starting the east-to-west street connection with proposed Street 1. They're filling a void of parking in Old Town by adding new on-street parking spaces. They would be adding residential units to the activity center, and they are proposing to widen the sidewalks along University Drive. While the applicant is meeting some of the needs outlined in the small area plan, other recommendations have not been followed with this proposal. Staff advised the applicant and the applicant's representatives prior to application acceptance that the redevelopment of the subject property should not be presented in a piecemeal manner.

Staff asked the applicant to demonstrate immediate and longer-term improvements, as well as phasing for those improvements. Because a site plan is required, compliance with the zoning ordinance is necessary. So these comments have not been addressed, and there are several other major deficiencies with the plan as proposed, and I'll go through those now. The proposal does not provide the connected street network envisioned in the plan, the small area plan. Specifically, the applicant is not providing a connection from proposed Street 2 to Democracy Lane. The locations of retail at the corner of University Drive and proposed Street 1 does not follow the recommendations for retail frontage in the activity center,

which, if you can think back to the map I showed you earlier, would roughly be located along proposed Streets 1 and 2. The small area plan does not support surface parking, and much of the surface parking is to remain. The small area plan supports infrastructure improvements by recommending the undergrounding of utilities, and the overhead utilities along University Drive are proposed to remain. The small area plan envisions interconnected, publicly accessible open space, and the open space, as proposed, is disconnected from what could be a larger network of open space. The small area plan, multimodal plan, and zoning ordinance all either require or recommend wider sidewalks, and the applicant is not proposing to widen sidewalks along Blundon Boulevard.

Historic preservation is important on the site and could be improved with historic signage or an archaeological assessment. The plan on the left is the pedestrian connectivity plan, and on the right is an aerial that shows the properties to the north of the site. I just wanted to show how this is connected. Let's see if I can do this. Okay. Okay. So this is the proposed park, and the small area plan would recommend the interconnected open space to roughly be, like, in this location. And so you can see that the open space does not connect to the north, and staff has not heard from the applicant that any coordination between property owners to the north or south of the site has taken place. Also on the pedestrian connectivity plan,

you can see that pedestrians walking through the park from the south will end up in a safe way loading zone, which is this area. I tried to highlight it. It's the hatched area right to the north of the park. Or pedestrians coming from the north would have to walk through the loading zone to get to the rest of Old Town, which is to the south of this property. Okay. Now on to the land use requests. So the first special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify the residential use standards for upper story residential mixed uses to allow more than 25% of the ground floor to be residential uses and or residential accessory uses. The applicant is proposing to develop approximately 5,000 square feet

of retail space on the ground floor at the corner of University Drive and propose Street 1. This will result in more than 25% of the ground floor to be used for residential or residential accessory uses. Once again, it's worth mentioning that while the applicant is proposing 5,000 new square feet of retail, they're proposing to demolish 25,000 square feet of existing retail space on this property. And also, as I already mentioned, the retail frontage as envisioned in the small area plan should be along proposed Streets 1 and 2. And there's an opportunity here to activate the park space along the east side of the proposed building and proposed Street 2. The second special exception the applicant is requesting

is a special exception to modify the non-residential district's dimensional standards table to allow for greater than 24 dwelling units per acre. Improvements could be made to the building size to accommodate the north to south street envisioned in the small area plan. And density is not prescribed on a parcel-by-parcel basis. And this density is partially achieved by a footprint larger than envisioned in the small area plan, which prevents the north to south street from being provided with this proposal. The applicant is utilizing the total site acreage to determine density, but is proposing minimal upgrades to the rest of the site and is not proposing to bring the entire site into conformance with the small area plan

or zoning ordinance. The third special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify the Old Town Fairfax Transition Overlay District dimensional standards to exceed the maximum height of 48 feet in the Transition Overlay District. The applicant proposes a maximum building height of approximately 65 feet, which is consistent with the recommendations of the small area plan. One thing I'd like to point out here is looking at the south elevation, the one on the bottom of the screen, there's approximately 15 feet of grade change from Safeway to University Drive, so that would be like from the right of the image down to the left of the image. And this is just showing the east and west elevations.

The fourth special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify the Old Town Fairfax Transition Overlay District dimensional standards to exceed the front and street side yard maximum of 10 feet. This includes the existing building, which doesn't comply with the 10-foot maximum yard requirement. This requested special exception is inconsistent with the building orientation and typologies outlined in the small area plan. A building that is distanced from the sidewalk and oriented away from the street is inconsistent with the small area plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented activity center. The fifth special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify

the Old Town Fairfax Transition Overlay District dimensional standards to reduce the required 10-foot sidewalk. The applicant is not providing any improvements to the Blenheim Boulevard street frontage, including providing 10-foot sidewalks. The multimodal plan requires a 10-foot sidewalk and the Transition Overlay District and the small area plan recommends wider sidewalks to encourage multimodal transportation. The urban forester has examined the trees along Blenheim Boulevard and has determined that they do not merit preservation due to their significantly declining condition. So, the sidewalk could be widened to 10 feet and new trees could be planted. The sixth special exception the applicant is requesting

is a special exception to modify the landscape requirements to allow street trees to be 18 feet from back of curb. The locations of trees along University Drive are inconsistent with the Active Streets street section recommendations of the Old Town Fairfax Small Area Plan, which recommends sidewalk and landscaping 12 to 16 feet from back of curb. Utility lines conflict with the proposed street trees. Staff recommends undergrounding the overhead utilities along University Drive or otherwise mitigating the impact of overhead utilities in a way that would accommodate the future holistic undergrounding along University Drive. So, I included some pictures here. I tried to get photos that showed the existing utility lines

that we would like the applicant to underground to be in compliance with the small area plan. The seventh special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify the landscape requirements for perimeter parking lot landscaping to not provide a contiguous landscape hedge, wall, or fence supported by masonry piers, which would allow the existing conditions along Blinnem Boulevard to continue. The eighth special exception the applicant is requesting is a special exception to modify the landscape requirements for interior islands, to not provide an interior landscaped island for every 10 parking spaces, and to allow the existing parking lot conditions to continue. All surface parking on the site may be utilized

by the new development, and the parking data included in the application take this into account. And I would again like to mention here that because the site plan is required, conformance with the zoning ordinance is also required. Okay. That concludes staff's presentation on the proposal, and I believe that the applicant is here to give their presentation now. Thank you. Thanks. Great. Good evening. My name is Molly Novotny. I'm an urban planner at Curata Partners, and I'm pleased to be here before you tonight, and thank you, Clara, for that presentation. As you heard, there are a lot of special exceptions with this application. I will go through some of those, but I do want to start the presentation by saying

that is because this is an existing site, and a lot of those special exceptions address existing conditions. Additionally, some of those special exceptions are needed to meet the small area plan goals. So I just want to kind of start the presentation to level set a little bit. This, the property, Courthouse Plaza, ever since I've been doing work in the city for 15 plus years, this has been a key project for the city. For mayors, council, city staff has always focused on this property and how we can redevelop it, how we can reinvest in it. It is so important to the city because of its central location, right? It's right just north of the historic district in that Old Town Transition Overlay District.

The property, although having frontage on Blenheim all the way to university and stretching for eight acres, this application area only affects the three plus acres on the west side. And that is very important. It's a very important point because combined properties owns the parcel, but they don't actually control the entire parcel. And that is because there are long-term leases, namely with Safeway. Safeway still controls its building, the surface parking lot, and really has oversight of everything that goes on in the center for another 10 years. But what combined has been able to do over the last 10 years has been able to align leases such that no lease goes longer than Safeway. And the leases to the west of Safeway

are now at a position that they control that space. So we are able to start the redevelopment now rather than wait another 10 years and have the property sit as it does today. And so therefore, we have been able to focus this redevelopment effort on the area that's shaded here, which we've called the project site. Staff showed several pictures. You are all very familiar with this center, right? It has long, it's ready for an update, right? Cedar shakes, shingles, really dark overhangs. It does not meet the needs or the goals of the small area plan. Lots of surface parking. This area, what you can see on the far right side is CVS. So this is the area that's going to be redeveloped with this project.

And here's one more image. And what you see is it is a sea of surface parking for the most part. And then some square footage, some retail square footage that would come down as well. As this project, from the very beginning of this project, we looked at that small area plan for guidance. These are the goals established in that small area plan. And I have been a part of several small area plans that this city has drafted. And text has always been the driving factor, is my understanding. The drawings on the image are just that. They are ideas and drawings. So our buildings do not align exactly with the buildings in that small area plan. But the goals and the impetus behind the small area plan,

we are squarely meeting or starting to meet for this property, right? We're introducing residential units. We are reactivating vacant retail space. Our building, no more than six stories. It's six stories along the university and tapers down to five on the interior of the property. We're starting that grid network. We continue to have a grocery store, which is specifically called for in your small area plan for this property. We are adding public open space. We're creating a quarter acre park with this. And all of our new parking, all of the new parking will be in a structure. The only surface parking that is at the property today that will remain is there today. We're not adding new surface parking.

And we are creating those new activated streets. This is just a note from your small area plan talking about starting to transform it. And we're very happy to do our part here. Staff showed this overall development plan from the small area plan. Our entire parcel is outlined in orange with the buildings that I would point are illustrative in the small area plan. What we are doing here, here's our site plan. So again, everything to the west of Safeway or the left of Safeway, Safeway being that bigger white roof, would be new. So immediately next to Safeway would be that quarter acre park and then our multifamily building. What you can see is there's a courtyard at the lower portion of the building

and there is fully structured parking for the northern portion. That structured parking is wholly wrapped. So you will not see that parking garage from any side, which we think is really important. You also can see the new street network that we're starting. So street one and street two are both new streets that would go through the project. We wrestled a lot with street two. We know the small area plan calls for a street connection to the north. We thought at this phase it was more important to create a public park space there than to have that street go to kind of a back of house area. So that's why we really wanted to focus on that public open space there. And just a little bit more of a close in view

to really see how this area could be, how the green space knits together with the interior courtyard space as well as that public park. Throughout the small area plan, there are very direct and clear guidance on street sections and residential streets, which we would argue our streets are primarily residential, call for a 12 to 16 foot street section. This is from the small area plan. Our streetscape here is a 15 foot section. So we're squarely in that 12 to 16 foot goal. And our street section along our new street one has a sidewalk and landscaping strips on both sides, as well as that on street parking. Street two, which is more interior to the center, calls is a 12 foot streetscape. And then University Drive

is about 30 feet. University Drive, we do have a special exception because University Drive is only supposed to have a 10 foot setback, but we've got existing underground and overhead utilities there and a host of other things that we need to widen that street section there, which we think is a good thing. Staff has focused a lot on Blenheim Boulevard. And yes, we understand that our sidewalk that exists today at five feet is under what the small area plan and what the ordinance would call for in terms of a 10 foot sidewalk. But that sidewalk exists today and is not being affected by this project. We've done a tree study. This is staff gave us their analysis today. Our arborists have been out there.

And if we were to impact, if we were to widen that sidewalk to be seven feet or even 10 feet, it would impact the critical root zone of those trees. And so those trees would need to be replaced. And so it's really a question, right? We always strive to save trees. So it's really a question of is that sidewalk that exists today and has been serving the public adequately, is that fine to keep those trees? Or is the council more focused on creating a wider sidewalk there and then losing those trees? Pedestrian circulation. We have worked very hard to create and enhance the network that's there. We had a community meeting last night with the folks in Layden Hall and Old Muse. And we know how they use this property.

We know that they walk over from university down Democracy Lane. And so we really work to make sure that their connection, importantly, as well as others' connections, can still thrive and actually be enhanced with our project. And we're excited about that. As I mentioned, parking, we are adding no new surface parking. There is an abundance of surface parking today. I would argue that's kind of what this center is best recognized for. And so with our project, we will be greatly reducing the surface parking here, but not reducing the overall supply in terms of the needs at the center. And so the good stuff, like what's this building going to look like? We've worked very hard on the architecture.

So we've got several images to show you. We've been to the BAR once. We've received some feedback. We'll go back to them. But this image is, I'm at the north on university, looking south on university drive. The flats is on my left. And so that is their sidewalk section that exists today. And you're looking at the building. As I said, it's six stories along university. But what you can really see here is it's a well-articulated building. It's got balconies, both interior and exterior balconies, varied roof lines, quality materials. And it wraps, kind of it aligns university. You can see there's room for the streetscape, landscaping and sidewalks. And the blue car, kind of to the left of the image,

is showing the entrance to the parking garage. We've been very focused on keeping the parking off, or keeping the parking garage entrance off of kind of the primary roads. And so we've located a long democracy, which we think is a good thing for the overall walkability and functionality of the project. This is just kind of continuing the walk along democracy lane. So again, that blue car is leaving the parking garage. You've got the flats on the left. You can see it's a very nice, easy walk up. And this is now as we wrap the corner of the building. So Safeway is to the left. And what you see, those trees on the left is really the backdrop for this new public park. Now, as staff mentioned, this is a loading area, right?

Every building needs a back of house. And so we do have a loading zone here. We have placed it directly across from Safeway's loading zone. And we've enhanced that experience with the trees to really help kind of buffer that commercial use, which happens in mixed use areas from the residential use as well as from kind of the public space. So now I've just turned around and now I'm looking at those trees that are the backdrop of that public park space. So Safeway is on the right and our new building, which is now five stories at this angle, is on the left. You can really see that that park space creates space for the residents, for retailers. It can be amenitized in a number of ways. And this image just steps

a little bit farther to the south, again, seeing the same park space, but now you can see our main residential entrance that really faces into the shopping center. On-street parking here, these would be kind of targeted for those short-term deliveries and sidewalks here to lead folks into the rest of the retail. And now I'm back out at university. I'm on the very southern part. This is our new street one that's going up into the existing shopping center. This image is important for a number of reasons. Number one, it shows the new 5,000 square feet of commercial space down in the corner here. This would most likely, we're targeting more like a boutique gym. It's not going to be a coffee shop.

It's not going to be a high traffic generating use, but it is going to be that sort of retailer commercial space that attracts people into the project and lets them know there's more to see here. The reason that space can't continue along this road is because of that significant grade change that Clara mentioned. There is 15 feet of grade change here, and so that building, that's where we lose that floor. So what we've done is we've focused the retail in a highly visible area, but then recognize that that retail does have to fade away as the building slopes or as the grade slopes. And so again, just an overall site map view of the project and to note all of the small area plan goals that have guided the project.

I will just note a few things, as I said, about those special exceptions that we have requested. You know, several of them affect Blenheim Boulevard, which is not part of the application area. It is part of the parcel, but not part of this application area. So we are asking for special exceptions for existing conditions to continue. Same thing with the parking spaces, the landscaping on that surface parking spaces that are going to remain. There's also the special exception for the street trees along university. We are affecting university, but there are existing easements overhead and underground that prevent us from planting the trees closer to the street. We're still planting the same number of trees.

They're still along the streetscape, but they do need to be a little bit closer to our building, and that's why there's that special exception. If we put them closer to university, then it could potentially affect the overall undergrounding project that the city wants there because you can't plant trees in the easement. Our expectation, just like flats, would be to contribute to that undergrounding project. We are not affecting those poles. We're not actually moving those poles with this project. So with that, we are very excited to be able to start this redevelopment. And we ask to come to council to get your all's opinion on it. We have heard from staff that they would like us to be able to phase this project,

but I can't sit here before you all tonight and tell you I know what this project's going to look like in 10 years, nor what that future council in 10 years is going to want this project to look like. What I can tell you is the building on the left is something that we control. It's land that combined properties controls and they are ready and anxious to be able to start meeting your vision for the small area plan. Does it meet every single aspect? Not necessarily, but does it start to? 100%, right? We are working very hard to meet that goal. And so we're excited for this council to be able to give us some feedback and have that dialogue. With that, I'll take any questions. All right. Thank you very much.

Questions from the dais. Council Member Ross? Yes. Actually, thank you, Mayor. I would start with, excuse me, I apologize. I didn't have the mic in front of me. I did add a couple questions that I wanted to clarify and then I may have some, hopefully I'll have an opportunity for further comments at the end. First off, this was one of the first things I recall seeing when I moved to Fairfax City in 1980. As I explored from my new neighborhood, which was over on 236, I came upon Courthouse Plaza and I would say that long ago, 44 years, it was still, I think, economically very viable and sort of a main location in the city. I recognized that pretty much right at the beginning. We all know it has a lot

of challenges today. It is a prime or one of the prime locations in the city for development and for redevelopment. And it will set so much in motion as we look to the future because this is obviously a long-term kind of redevelopment. And there's going to be a lot of other things happening elsewhere in the city, hopefully in Old Town, in areas east and west of this location that will have major implications for what goes on here. So, to me, it's really important that we get this right. Timing-wise, I'm assuming this will not be coming before this council. The likelihood is this probably will be coming into us next year. Am I correct on that, staff, time-wise? So, yeah. Like, I know what we would like.

Yes, that's correct. I can imagine. It'll be in the new year. It'll be the new year. So, you'll be facing, obviously, a new council. Some of us will no longer be at the dais, myself included. but I care deeply about what goes on with that site because, as I mentioned, I will continue to be a reactive citizen concerned about what goes on there. So, timing-wise, it will require a lot more work, I think, to get to the point where it should be approved. And the questions I had were, am I understanding correctly, the surface parking that is there now will not be reduced? It'll be essentially the same surface parking now that will be there in the future? No, the surface parking will be greatly reduced.

so the new building will be replacing a lot of surface parking. But on this image, there currently today is surface parking that stretches all the way from Blenheim all the way to University. So, where the pool is shown here, that is surface parking today as well as next to Blenheim, there is surface parking. I've got, I'm going to go back several slides. Do we have any estimate of the reduction of surface parking and the impervious surface that would be? done through this? I don't have that right now, but I, we can calculate. I think that would be valuable to have. Because all of this, Councilman Ross, is surface parking today and this is where that new building would go, what you see on this image here.

Okay. You mentioned this does not involve the properties to the south, which are currently, although I believe there is one restaurant moving in to one of the vacant buildings there and there's an old McDonald's site that exists. Are those under the control of combined properties or are those separate management? That is a separate parcel wholly owned by combined properties and they are working to re-tenant both of those buildings right now. Okay. So assuming this moves forward, there would not be any additional modification to those two building sites at this point other than redevelopment of whatever goes in there. So one of the things that we did do to make those two buildings more attractive

is we have recently created an interparcel connection between that pad site and this shopping center. I don't know if you've been out there to see it. So it does improve the circulation through there. But those are both retail uses as I think you're all familiar one does have a drive-thru. We are looking at a tenant without a drive-thru so it would not need council approval. It would be a buy-right retail for retail use in those two properties. I know there's a lot of concern in the community about those being vacant as long as they have. It'll be nice to see at some point that those are occupied and viably operating places. You mentioned and I was a little confused by this the relationship with Safeway.

Could you clarify for us again what that consists of? You mentioned that there's a 10-year lease I believe with Safeway or is it longer than 10 years? And obviously it's very important in that location to continue to have a tenant that would be a grocery kind of location whether it's Safeway or somewhere else. but clarify for me if you will what that consists of and why this is part of the discussion we're having tonight. I'm going to invite Aisha Hill with Combined Properties up to talk about that. Good evening everyone. So Safeway has been at the center I believe since the 70s. They have rights to remain until 2033. They also have approval rights over anything we do at the center. so we will be going

to them to ask for consent to do what we're talking about today similar to the cut through. They have to provide their approval for us to do that. So until 2033 they control the center pretty much. So in some ways this is me saying this not you but they sort of have veto rights over what's being proposed. absolutely they do. Yeah. Okay. I guess I find that a little disconcerting because it certainly limits what can be done there in particular again this is being sort of a major flagship location in the city it places some restrictions there. that's another another question later on but I guess the other question I had was going back to if we could well it's actually up here the map of the open space

really the only open space and I see that in the enclosed area you have what looks to be this would be servicing or serving the residents of the apartments or the housing it would not be a public place the one on the left right the interior courtyard right interior courtyard that would not be accessible to the public so really the only accessible public space you are adding is and this is me editorial sort of the small piece between the two buildings because there's a roadway that goes through there and then there's a public park what is the conceptual size of that park do you say it's about a quarter of an acre quarter of an acre for that that park space now one other area of new open space

that will be considered here is there is a bank drive-through on the end cap closer to Blenheim and that drive-through space is not being used and we would repurpose that we're hopeful to get a tenant who could benefit from some outdoor patio space if you think like a restaurant or if not it could be kind of overall community space but if you recall with the picket and turnpike renovations which are two other properties that combined properties owns and when those two sites were renovated there was a lot more focus on bringing in retailers with outdoor spaces and it really started to reshape and create a lot more energy at those centers even though that that new space with those centers wasn't

quote public park space but it did create community gathering areas and we would see the same thing happening here with the facade renovations right and then again to clarify the reduction of retail space would go from what were the numbers that were quoted again and either by staff or by there would be about 20,000 square feet of retail space that would be reduced here and I do want to know as you've said there are two pad buildings that have been vacant for years right and there are other vacancies within the within the center so we are not taking offline while spaces that are fully occupied right now so we are really working to right size this property and so often there is a goal to replace

retail one for one but it doesn't there isn't a magic to that number it's trying to figure out what is the right mix of retail what is the right mix of residential to create a vibrant center here and we do think by doing all of these facade updates to the existing center it will help to attract some newer retailers and also help fill those vacant spaces so yes there will be a loss but we think you'll get some higher quality but you're also adding 315 potential new units which bring by its own nature an additional component to the retail buying market so there's going to be an increase in that the other point I would raise is I'll come back to that later that's all I have for now mayor thank you

other questions council member greenfield thank you mayor I'm just going to put this out there I think before this comes back to whatever body is going to sit here in January combined pose an explanation on how this is going to be different and what they've learned from what they put the city of Fairfax through when Scout on the Circle was built that project was approved then they realized they couldn't build it and it sat empty with a chain link fence around it for two years and the community was furious and rightfully so because a lot of times when projects get approved on a dais like this folks think that construction is going to happen right away right and sometimes you've got to go through and

get your building permits and so there's always that normal delay built into the process but that doesn't always make sense to folks who tune in watch go away and say well why isn't that started but in that case we had to be the ones to explain and I don't blame the folks who were here because you weren't here when that happened but we had to be the one to explain that combined historically is a plug-and-play retail shopping center one renter goes out another comes in first time they had done residential right and what they designed they couldn't finance and they couldn't build and they couldn't get the anchor signed and so nothing moved forward until then and so I lived that nightmare and so I don't know if

I'll sit up here in January but I share a lot of Mr. Ross's concerns you know it's unfortunate back in the day apparently you know a lot of leases were signed long term and so so what what used to happen at what's now Main Street Marketplace was Safeway and TJ Maxx and so when Safeway moved door to Courthouse Plaza Safeway continued to control the strings for 25 years on that box and it was false craft factory store and all kinds of different you know mega books all kinds of different things that sat there until finally that lease expired and that allowed that shopping center to be redeveloped but then TJ Maxx still sat there and controlled how many seats could go in a restaurant how many parking

spaces were dedicated to TJ Maxx etc so now we move over and I'll be honest with you staff over the years has heard from from Safeway oh yeah we want to do something no we don't want to do something oh yeah we want to put a gas station and no we don't want to put a gas station so we've been at this cat and mouse game for a very long time you didn't own the two sites that that had Joe's Pizza and Pasta and and McDonald's for a very long time which I get but we asked for that inter parcel connection for years for safer movement of folks trying to go in and go to those restaurants instead of doing illegal U turns at that light to no avail so I think before we go too far we ought to level set and

understand from a reputational perspective how things are going to be different when you come forward because I got to tell you I have a aside from and I don't disagree with anything that Mr. Ross said I have great concerns about how this is going to work and how it's going to be different and we're only doing part of the site I understand Safeway but that means we are going with part of a plan and and then at some point in the future we're going to try to tie in the other side and see how it looks I think you ought to be coming forward with a full plan even if you build it in phases a full plan so the community understands exactly what you're committing to for the entire site and not just one parcel and

let me say one last thing and I Mr. Votney you and I have dealt with each other for a long time so this is not directed to you if Mr. Half were sitting here I would have a conversation with him and we had many conversations around Fairfax Circle and so you know it is a challenge and I get it but we've got to have significant retail when we're talking about our downtown core and doing a small little piece and saying it's going to be a gym we have a gym right next door that's tied to the flats no it's internal to the community right it's not something that's for rent but I personally to get on board with anything need to see a whole lot more here than what I'm seeing so I'll just stop there because I

really think in fairness to staff in this body it's going to be another body that's going to be dealing with it and and so we ought to get to the point that we put this to one side until until there's a new council and then we pick it back up again so again I have the utmost respect for you I want to make sure you understand that we've worked on a lot of things together over the years but you too have to recognize that there's frustration in the community over what happened at Fairfax Circle the quality of the apartments that are there the complaints that we get regarding those apartments and now here comes the same property owner looking to do the same thing in the downtown those are some of

the issues that I think we ought to be able to have a an honest dialogue about thank you mayor and we're happy to have that down thank you for raising those I will just note that this project is different from Scout in term it part of the reason we are phasing this is so we can lease up the building at one time so we can develop the site at one time so we're not presenting to you an eight acre project that we can't tell you when the rest of it will be so we have learned some lessons right from those other experiences but happy to have that conversation we have not heard all of the concerns that you've raised tonight but we're happy to have those conversations thank you other questions from the dais council member Bates

thank you I just like to add to that I share the concerns have been raised by council members Ross and Greenfield and I've brought up retail before and I just want to reiterate that I want to see more retail here and additionally on the small area plan we see three buildings throughout this parcel here not counting the the ones on the south side but three that are where the you know this strip mall is right now but it looks like you all are sort of merging the the western building and then that sort of slender middle building from the small area plan into this building that we see here plus the green space and with that in mind I know that for the western building we had a recommended retail frontage along

the southern edge of it then for that middle sort of strip shape building we had a recommended retail friends along the eastern edge of that so I would like to see especially given that all we're seeing proposed here is this one building at least most of that eastern edge of that building and then at least most of that southern frontage to be retail at the very least thank you Councilmember Lim Thank you mayor yeah I agree with all of my colleagues and I think out of the eight special exceptions the one that bothers me the most is lack of commercial and I have a question to our staff about the the 10 feet sidewalk requirement on Blenheim Boulevard you know the what that the Blenheim Boulevard multimodal

construction that will be starting where does that start I mean the 10 foot sidewalk requirement on Blenheim Boulevard just you know goes in goes in line with the multimodal project is that I'm just trying to get a clarification I think I see movement in the back by Mr. Hardin Rapidly approaching the dice Bring him in from the outfield Getting my steps in the multimodal project along Blenheim that will come as far south as the intersection with Layton Hall Drive a future phase is intended to extend from Layton Hall down to North Street but that is not designed and not funded at this point So when we are requiring the new application to have 10 foot sidewalk is it to Layton Hall? It would only be along the frontage

Frontage of this property so it would be a portion of that length that's envisioned Okay all right thank you so again I guess out of the eight the one that I mean many of them I dislike but the one that bothers me the most is the lack of commercial space Thank you thank you Mayor Councilmember Doyle Feingold Yes thank you Mayor I have a lot of the same concerns when this first came forward for preliminary work session I think a lot of these were raised the commercial space is a big one I think the cohesiveness for the entire lot and property is important and I think it makes sense to do the 10 foot sidewalks now but I think you know another concern is the quality of the apartment buildings that are built

and also a discussion of how they're managed you know Scout on the Circle uses rent setting software I don't think it's beneficial to the city to have apartments that use that and so I think that can also be part of the discussion and information as we move forward on this but I echo what Councilmember Greenfield said that this will be dealt with by a new council and so I think that it makes sense to make sure there's a full discussion with whoever that new council is after January thank you Okay Councilmember Ross Yes Thank you Mayor it sort of scares me when my colleague agrees with me on so much I find that It's a historic night right? It is Make sure the record accurately reflects that It is historic

Well I it is interesting and again I think what you're hearing is some frustration with what has happened in the past and obviously there one of my colleagues especially has been through this many times and I certainly respect the comments he made and don't disagree with those conceptually I think that site really lends itself to a mixed use development no question about it right now it's just a retail space and I think the key to this is finding the right balance for a mixed use development because we know those are very viable we look at even with all the problems and issues and concerns we had in Scout Circle today it appears to be working well there are people going in and out the retail space is all developed I go down there

pretty frequently to go shopping or my wife does and it's busy are there still some issues of course but that's a good location and a proper location for the kind of mixed use development that went in there so I think that is to your your credit I do feel and I didn't bring this up in the in my opening comments is the scale needs to be looked at old town still has a lot of residential housing in that area and you mentioned two of them that you met with and got some feedback but I look at the drawings and it strikes me it's a it's it's it looks pretty massive and I think that if we're talking about the maximum height and density for this location it means we need to expect from the developer in this this site some ways to mitigate the size and the

dimensions there are ways to do that there are ways to make it attractive there's ways to make it fit in there was a lot of concern I know from the muse when the flats went in about what they were going to be looking at and I think the same thing applies here how do you look out your window and all of a sudden see what even though it was it's commercial and it's there's some parking spaces there you see more open space than you would as I see it under the some of the drawings you presented tonight so I think that's something to think about how is it designed in a way that fits into that area with neighborhoods the muse light and hall and other developments that are down in that area so I think scale is a really important question as

you go forward with this and then finally the other point I wrote down was the pedestrian access the area plan envisioned a pedestrian area intersecting north to south and I think that still needs to be the vision here I think that I don't have the answers on how that can be done given the constraints you've got with that site but I think it's really incumbent upon combined properties just take a step back and look at what might be done with consolidation of other parcels in the area or other land property owners again this is a really crucial site to the future of the city and I mean it when I say it's a flagship area because of its location because of its access to Old Town because of its access to public transportation this can be an incredibly exciting project

but it has to have the right components to it and I know you've got some constraints you're trying to work with and I commend you for that but I think it needs a lot more work and I hope that as you move forward and present this to a new council you'll have some new ideas and some new thoughts on those things so thank you mayor I'm done okay so this this is a very complicated project and for those you know for those of us who've been looking at the Safeway for 40 years or we understand that the community definitely wants it to be redeveloped I think I think this was a robust conversation to start to help you know council member Greenfield gave us a backstory about other related parcels you have a unique relationship with Safeway

that I think the community needs to understand that there are constraints to why you're doing it this way and some of the impediments but I don't think that anyone wants to see these asphalt parking lots for another 10 years as well so I mean I think there's a desire for redevelopment I think there's a desire here for redevelopment in the community for redevelopment and again trying to find that balance of what is going to work in this space is you know I think there's something here I think there's something here I don't want you to feel like we are rejecting this outright like we don't want this but we've got to figure out how to make it work but this was a great very good discussion especially for the public

to be in on exactly why this property has been this way for such a long time but I don't think we want it to be this way for another 10 years so I think there's a dialogue that needs to continue and and they're right that it needs to continue with the next council and so thank you we appreciate the comments the conversation and the questions I think central to us is there were lots of comments raised that we think we can dig in and address but the there is a central element here in terms of can we expand this project beyond what we're showing and we just can't because of the Safeway lease and what it has so to be able to meet that overall redevelopment of the entire center I think we would disappoint the community if we pledged to do an entire to develop redevelop the whole center because we can't make that commitment we know we can't touch part of that land for at least 10 years

so we you gave us a lot to think about that I think we can work to address that some of those concerns that you've all raised tonight but I do want the councils I would appreciate a little bit of feedback and I understand that it will be going to the next council but for this council here on focusing the redevelopment efforts on the western portion like we've shown which would come in tandem with a facade update to the existing retail tenant retail spaces Comments? Okay well like I as I said you know you really revealed the complexities of this I think what it comes down to is do we want this to be this way for another 10 years and I'm not sure that we do but you are making it very clear that there's a hard line in the sand for you as well because of your lease relationship with the

Safeway Mr. Foreman I just want to be clear for the record that I've heard twice that there would be facade improvements to the center coming in tandem nothing has been filed with staff we've seen no improvements Right because we want to figure out the design of the building first before we do the renovations to the center but that we are committed to doing that we've I would not say it on the record if I were not committed to doing it so we will make sure that's more details included in the next submission Okay I think going forward we need to continue to work on this I don't know what in what iteration but I think you've heard from the council that for this council this is not this is not where they want this to be

Understood yep so we appreciate it obviously a lot of a lot of work and thought went into this and I do think it's important for the community to understand because a lot of people are in and out and go by there and have for years to understand why it continues to be what it was in the 1970s I think you shed some light on that I think that's important for the community Great so thank you thank you all All right I will now reconvene the regular meeting that brings us to the manager's report out Nothing to report tonight thank you Then we'll just go down and see what else everyone else has to say council member Greenfield Nothing tonight mayor thank you Council member Ross Surprise I have three items one of which is personal I'd like to add at the end

I hope everybody has seen in the city scene which is a really great document for our city goes out to every resident in the city it's mailed to them I hope everyone reads it thoroughly because it's great information and great stories about our community and the kind of place we are And I want to cite I have the honor of serving on the board of the Fairfax Village in the city which is one of our newer initiatives in the last few years which is designed to assist people who are aging in place that includes me I want to be clear to stay in their homes and be able not to be forced to move out or face issues where they can't get done what they need to be done the village in the city is handled in our human services area we have a lot of

12 advisory board members in fact we're meeting tomorrow night and one of those members is here in the room tonight They conduct a number of activities during the year including the senior expo we'll have a volunteer recognition event this week If you're interested in volunteering Please do not hesitate to get on the website contact Jason Skadron who is our administrator for this program It does a tremendous amount of good it provides a tremendous amount of information to people who desire and want to stay in their homes and be part of the community So please read that and get involved I also serve this is not about me but I got this in the the mail recently I serve as the council rep to the transportation planning board which is an important committee in our Washington COG region

We are not a community by itself we survive and function and prosper because of our relationships with the community at large People's Guide to Transportation Decision Making provides an excellent way of describing the community at large And how anyone regardless of their age or background can get involved in being part of the planning process If you're interested please feel free to contact me contact Washington COG transportation decision making We are part of a much wider world we benefit enormously from that But it also means we have to be active in making sure that we're making wise transportation decisions for the region and for our area Finally a week ago I had one of those moments in my life when I thought I never thought this would happen to me but it did

I have been as I have aged realize it's important to be proactive in making sure one is aware of what's going on I've never had any heart related issues that I've been aware of I've always been very active I've been healthy I've been very fortunate but there's family history associated with cardio in my family And I found out after a recent visit to a cardiologist and some testing that the cardiologist concluded that recently I had a heart attack And it was one of those oh wow moments you know exactly what you were doing and what you were wearing and what you were thinking when you're told that The good news is because I was proactive and because it was identified early on I can start medication I can start treatment I feel very healthy I feel very fortunate

But the important message I want to convey is not about me but about each of us in the community and who's listening To be proactive about your health look at your family history if you see issues that may come up Talk to your doctor get the tests evaluate what you're at what's going on in your body because it's so important and there are so many Excellent medical things that can happen and help us to to continue to be healthy and we live in a region region rich with resources So I encourage everyone check your family history be proactive Don't be afraid to go out and ask for some tests because in my own case I wouldn't have found it and I could have Fallen over somewhere on the sidewalk so I'm glad I'm here and I will keep on kicking thank you mayor

We're glad you're here to councilmember Ross councilmember Lim no comment mayor thank you councilmember Bates Thank you no comments councilmember Doyle Feingold no comments thank you Well, then I will just wrap it up by saying that tomorrow there is the women's empowerment luncheon at the Sherwood Center at 1130 It's going to be awesome. We are celebrating women entrepreneurs and business owners here in the city and tomorrow night at 730 There is a candidate forum that is sponsored by the League of Women Voters and the Central Fairfax Chamber of Commerce So if you want to come and meet the candidates for mayor and city council that's 730 tomorrow night at the Sherwood Center and with that I will conclude this meeting at 913

913