City Council Meeting

Catherine ReadGood evening. I would like to call the regular meeting of July 28, 2026 to order. If you are able and so choose, please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Speaker 10I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

Catherine ReadUnited States of America

Ms. Shinneberryclerkand to the republic

Catherine Readfor

Ms. Shinneberryclerkwhich it stands,

Catherine Readone nation, under

Ms. ShinneberryclerkGod,

Catherine Readindivisible,

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerwith liberty and justice for all.

Catherine ReadI would now like to invite the Parks and Recreation Department to come down for the proclamation acknowledging July is Parks and Recreation Month.

Speaker 10Oh my goodness. Everybody looks wonderful.

Catherine ReadAll right, then. Whereas. The City of Fairfax Parks and Recreation Department is dedicated to developing and maintaining beautiful, safe, and environmentally friendly open spaces for the public to use and enjoy. affordable, comprehensive, and amazing experiences, a sense of community that enriches people's lives, contributing to the well-being of the individual, family, and visitors to our city. And whereas a strategic master plan for parks and recreation was passed unanimously by the Fairfax City Council in 2014, committing city resources to ongoing investment in our 25 public parks, walking trails, open space, recreational programming, cultural arts, and events. And whereas programming is offered to serve children through camps,

older adults through the Senior Center at Green Acres, and classes for all ages held year-round at locations across the city, offering opportunities for educational enrichment, skill building, and recreation. And whereas Fairfax City events draw people from all over the region for our Chocolate Lovers Festival, our Independence Day Parade, most years, Fall Festival, and other celebrations including Rock the Block from May to October all made possible by Parks and Recreation staff and their collaborative partnerships with other Fairfax City departments. And whereas cultural arts events such as the Spotlight on the Arts, City of Fairfax Band performances, and other theater and dance performances

held at venues throughout Fairfax City are facilitated and supported by the work of our parks and recreation staff. And whereas environmental sustainability and stewardship is central to our parks, trails, and open spaces, prioritizing a healthy tree canopy and working to implement best practices regarding the planting and care of the city's green spaces. And whereas a vibrant community with events and parks is central to sustaining and growing our economic development, drawing visitors to our city, and attracting new residents who choose to make their home here. And whereas playgrounds, ball fields, practice fields, and pavilions within our city provide children and their families a safe, accessible, and well-located area

in which to enjoy outdoor play, sports, and celebrations. And whereas the U.S. House of Representatives has designated July as Parks and Recreation Month, Now, therefore, I, Catherine S. Reed, Mayor of the City of Fairfax, on behalf of all residents of the City of Fairfax, declare the month of July, with celebrations extending through August, as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Fairfax. And I encourage residents and visitors to enjoy all that our city has to offer through our investments made in parks, trails, programs, cultural arts, and special events. Let's give it up for Parks and Rec.

Speaker 15thank you we just want to thank mayor and council for acknowledging us through this proclamation and we we are also lucky to work in a community that is so supportive of parks and recreation and our parks facilities trails and programs are so amazing because we have an incredible team so thank you

Catherine Readabsolutely

Speaker 15and now a

Catherine Readphotograph right all right sir

Speaker 10everybody Everybody squinch it. Squinch it. Short people in the front, short people in the back. All right, and big smile. Just a couple more. Perfect. Okay. Thank you.

Catherine ReadNot you, Katie McCammon. I need you back here.

Melody Bentleypublic commentWho's taking this?

Catherine ReadSo, Catherine McCammon, also known affectionately throughout the city as Katie Mack, we have something special for you. And let me just start by saying for people who do not know Katie Mack, She has been with us for almost 15 years. She started out here 14 years ago, for sure, as a camp counselor, was hired as an intern, was hired in cultural arts and events management, have worked your way all the way up to recreation manager. And in that time, she has committed herself to so many things in this city that are not even part of her job description, which is why today we are going to honor Katie for this right here. The beautiful design you saw all over this city for the 250th anniversary, the celebration was designed by Katie Mack because she is talented,

because she is talented and she is generous and she does things for the city because after almost 15 years, everything she does reflects how much she cares about all of us. I'm going to show you this right here because it has the logo on it. Katie McCammon, for your exceptional talent, creativity, and dedication in designing the official logo of the city of Fairfax, commemorating the 250th anniversary of the United States Declaration of Independence, your contribution will serve as a source of community pride and a meaningful emblem of this historic milestone, helping to unite residents in the celebration of 250 years of history, achievement, and progress. Thank you, Katie, for all you do for us every single day,

but particularly for your gift and your talent that really set us apart in this national celebration. Would you like to say a few words?

Speaker 10Thank you, I guess. I did not know this was happening, so I appreciate it, and I love working here, so thank you all for everything that you do to support our department, allow us to make all these things happen.

Catherine ReadOkay now a picture

Speaker 10and a picture!

Catherine Readyes hang on to it for those of you who got a yard sign and for those of you have t-shirts you know the emblems on the t-shirts hang on to those things really we have the best looking logo in the entire nation i i feel firmly confident about that we will now move on to um the agenda motion to approve the agenda I'm moved to adopt the agenda as presented second okay a motion has been made and seconded a roll call vote

Ms. Shinneberryclerkcouncilmember Amos aye councilmember Hall aye councilmember Hardy Chandler aye councilmember Peterson aye councilmember Bates aye councilmember McQuillan aye motion passed unanimously we will go on to initial general public comment I had three people sign up by 5 o'clock p.m. today and I'm gonna call the first speaker up which is Stacy Langton.

Stacy Langtonpublic commentGood evening. In the fall of 2020, this city council apparently went along with the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors to remove so-called offensive monuments and landmarks. They voted on September 15th of that year to remove two U.S. Navy Civil War-era howitzer cannons, which stood on the lawn of the historic Fairfax County Courthouse here in Fairfax City, along with a large stone monument that marked this place as one of the locations of the first battles of the Civil War. and it marked the death of John Quincy Marr on June 1st of 1861, the very first Confederate soldier to die at the hands of a Union soldier in the Civil War. That summer, 2020, was the summer of woke when political correctness ran amok nationwide

along with all of the looters and protesters of Antifa and other leftist groups who burned the downtown areas of several cities across our land. The idea of political correctness is a distinctly communist phenomenon. It was created by the Bolsheviks in 1918 when they murdered the Tsar and the royal family in Russia and took over the government. Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin emphasized that strong adherence to the ideology of their new regime was an essential requirement of citizens. If you deviated from their political correctness, you would be severely punished. You would lose the ability to buy or sell, and you might even lose your life. The Bolsheviks' promulgation of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto destroyed their society for the next 70 years and starved 60 million people to death.

Now, here we are, 100 years later, and our country, the one that was founded upon the ideals and the bedrock of personal freedom and liberty, is doing exactly what the communists did. Lenin had an agenda he called the Plan for Monumental Propaganda. His monuments policy called for the removal of all monuments and statues dedicated to the czars as they were of no historic or artistic interest. Sound familiar? I believe that was the exact excuse given in 2020 to remove the cannons. Here's a photo of them being taken out under the cover of darkness in the middle of the night. President Trump's March 27, 2025 Executive Order, Restoration of Truth in American History, Executive Order No. 14253, states,

we must take action to reinstate pre-existing monuments, memorials, statues, or markers that have been removed to perpetuate a false reconstruction of American history. I submit to you the general public is now sick of wokeness in society. It is communist in origin, and it is fundamentally un-American, and it is time to put the cannons and the monument back. Thank you. Our next

Ms. Shinneberryclerkspeaker is Melody Bentley.

Melody Bentleypublic commentGood evening. I am president of the Old Fairfax Muse Homeowners Association, and I would like to address the combined properties proposal for the redevelopment of Courthouse Plaza. Our community of 74 townhomes is situated diagonally across University Drive from Courthouse Plaza. Everyone who lives there appreciates the proximity of this plaza which provides us walkable access to retail, especially the desirable convenience of a nearby grocery store. We have a keen interest in any changes to this plaza. We appreciate several things about this new proposal that combined properties has submitted. There will be additional retail. The mixed use will provide much needed housing in our area, and a park is included in the plan.

However, we have the same concerns now as with the first proposal that combined properties submitted, and which was detailed in a petition we sent to City Council last September. The building proposal is still six stories. It is two stories taller than the small area plan allows. It will dwarf and overshadow the rest of Old Town. A further reason to respect the four-story limitation concerns traffic. University Drive will soon be reduced to one lane in each direction in the vicinity of the plaza to accommodate bike paths. It will be quite enough to ask this road to handle the additional vehicles of three stories of apartment dwellers and retail. Five stories of apartment dwellers will introduce too much traffic congestion to this neighborhood.

Finally, there is the proposed architecture which has barely changed from the first proposal. It is modern, busy, stark, and depressing with its large swaths of black facing. It is a jarring contrast to Old Town and can hardly be considered transitional architecture. architecture. I think combined properties is missing a huge opportunity. Their site, with its proximity to Old Town, if designed well, could become a locus of downtown activity. Imagine for example a public square surrounded on three sides with retail below and apartments above, with restaurants and outdoor seating. A public square where community gatherings then Courthouse Plaza could really live up to its name. Thank you so much for your attention.

I appreciate it.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkOur last speaker under this item is Katie Johnson.

Katie Johnsonpublic commentKatie Johnson and the clerk has my address. This is a quote from Mr. Cunningham from one of the previous planning commissions. perspective of zero residential units we are now essentially at 2 000 bedrooms in this space with the possibility of adding more smart growth is just a euphemism for density back and i'm saying please please please when you are discussing this afternoon or the later this evening um the major density projects i ask that your decisions be made to put everything on hold until the city-wide level of service study comes back it's not prudent to put commitments to things that we don't know how much they cost we shouldn't be committing our city without fully understanding the true cost and the impacts of them so also a

month subscription to capital bike share and a prepaid MetroCard is not adequate traffic medication so of those two thousand if just fifteen percent of those 2,000 bedrooms are school-aged children that would add seven million one hundred and fifty nine thousand two hundred dollars per year to our budget and that's only going to go up so please do not sacrifice our our little city's cherished community character for the sake of density so thank you

Ms. Shinneberryclerkwe can move to the consent agenda

Catherine Readare there any questions on any of the items on the Are there any items council would like pulled from the consent agenda? Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerI move to approve the consent agenda, item 6A through C, as presented July 28, 2026, accompanying motions in the staff reports and the accompanying motions in the staff reports. Second.

Catherine ReadA motion has been made by Council Member Hardy-Chandler and seconded by Council Member Peterson. A roll call vote.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkCouncil Member McQuillan?

Catherine ReadAye.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkCouncil Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Amos? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We will go on to consideration of appointments to boards, commissions, and advisory committees.

Catherine ReadIs there

Ms. Shinneberryclerka motion

Catherine Readto approve the appointments to boards, commissions, and advisory committees? I move to

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerappoint the following applicants. Reappoint Sucha Kemsuwan as the architect and business representative for a three-year term extending through June 13, 2029. Commission for Women. Reappoint Amini Bonani for a three-year term extending through July 1, 2029. Reappoint Brenda Coleman for a three-year term extending through June 30, 2029. Commission on the Arts appoint Kirk Knoll for a remainder of a three-year term extending through December 11, 2026 with an extension of a three-year term extending through July 28, 2029. Fairfax Commission on Aging reappoint Manisha Maskay for a two-year term extending through July 9, 2028. Fairfax County Public Library Board of Trustees reappoint Suzanne Levy for a

four-year term extending through June 10 2030 second the

Catherine Readmotion has been

Ms. Shinneberryclerkmade and

Catherine Readseconded a

Ms. Shinneberryclerkroll call though councilmember Amos aye councilmember Hall aye councilmember Hardy Chandler aye councilmember Peterson aye councilmember Bates aye councilman McQuillan aye motion passed unanimously we'll go on to public hearings the only public hearing tonight is a public hearing and council action on proposed amendments to the code of the city of fairfax chapter 110 and print zoning to amend portions of the articles and sections contained therein including introductory provisions zoning districts and regulations and definitions relating to detached accessory dwelling units i'm going to recognize eric foreman our city planner for the staff presentation

Eric Foremanstaffwell thank you very much good evening this agenda item is a public hearing it's for a series of zoning text amendments that would permit detached accessory dwelling units or adus in fairfax city if you recall city council held a work session in may to discuss this topic and at that work session council requested that a public hearing be scheduled to consider these amendments and Council also asked for analysis of certain data requests. So tonight's presentation is really in two parts. The first part is an overview of the amendment itself, and this is largely similar to what we had reviewed at the May work session. The second part looks at the specific data requests that Council had asked for in May.

We've held quite a few meetings on the topic of ADUs with various amounts of detail. We held some high level work sessions and a community meeting in 2024. Last year we held work sessions with planning commission and with city council where we reviewed options to potentially accommodate detached accessory dwelling units. in the fall council asked staff to draft potential amendments to modify our existing adu standards in order to permit detached units and that's what we discussed back in may focusing on potential amendment details for detached accessory dwelling units i should mention as well that the planning commission held a public hearing on these amendments last month the commission recommended

approval and i'll discuss the planning commission meeting a bit more in a few slides from now and as you likely know accessory dwelling units are currently allowed in the city under certain conditions specifically adus currently need to be within the home itself or attached rather than detached. ADUs were first permitted in 2003 in Fairfax City. They were at that time considered a special use, meaning that homeowners needed to come to City Council and ask for approval. That lasted until 2016 when ADUs became a permitted use, meaning that they're permitted with subject to conditions. There also used to be an occupancy limitation limiting ADU residents to seniors or to disabled people. City Council removed that provision last year.

Now, detached accessory dwelling units didn't just pop up out of last year's work sessions. The comprehensive plan recommends to look at expanding ADUs, important while ensuring that they do not negatively impact surrounding neighborhoods. And like we talked about at our work sessions, this is really the critical element when it comes to creating standards for ADUs. Now, the main characteristics of any amendment to allow detached ADUs would really be physical standards for the structures themselves. And there are other elements as well, but these physical standards, these are really key to making this work and reducing any kinds of negative externalities that the comprehensive plan mentions.

Like we had talked about in May, the subtlety from a policy perspective is that this is a balancing act. So trying to juggle that flexibility, flexibility for property owners, juggling that with the neighborhood impact that that flexibility might bring. So most of the standards that you see here today are similar to those that we discussed in May, and I'll point out where they differ. The first of these that we'll talk about is setbacks. And in our single-family zoning districts, the required rear yard setback for most houses is 25 feet. The required side yard varies by zoning district. It's 10, 12, or 15 feet, depending on where it is. We had mentioned in our last work session that there are provisions in our zoning ordinance for affordable dwelling units.

This was added as part of the affordable dwelling unit ordinance back in 2020. And those affordable dwelling provisions include slightly reduced setbacks from what we call the general or standard setbacks. And the rationale is to provide some extra flexibility, but provide that flexibility without overly impacting the surrounding neighborhood. And as we talked about in May, these accessory dwelling unit amendments recommend setbacks really that correspond to those affordable dwelling provisions. And for the same reason, this is a way to balance that flexibility to give some preference to accessory dwelling units, but at the same time keeping the guardrails in place to reduce those negative effects on neighbors' properties.

So like it shows here, those recommended setbacks, and this is what's in the amendment before you, the recommended setbacks are 20 feet in the rear, so that's as opposed to 25 feet, and about a 20% reduction or about a 2 to 3 foot reduction on the side lot line, So 8 feet in most zoning districts, 12 feet in the RL district. And as we can see on the screen, you can see what it means to ADU placements. In this kind of hypothetical scenario, an ADU could go anywhere in the unshaded area. So it can go here or here or here and so on. So like it says here, this looks to balance, again, that property owner flexibility, neighborhood impact. Now, Planning Commission did have a recommendation at one of their work sessions that's been incorporated into this proposed amendment.

That involves ADUs that might be located on the side of houses where there's enough space to do that. The commission was concerned about the aesthetic effects of having a detached accessory dwelling unit in a side yard and recommended standards to ensure that any side yard ADUs would be located near the rear of the house. And that, again, has been incorporated into these recommended amendments. Now, for setbacks in general, I think it helps to show how the proposed ADU setbacks compare with setbacks for other structures. So this shows a sample lot. This is in the RH district. shows three examples of behind-the-house setbacks. On the left here, this is the setback for main dwellings themselves.

So if this house's owners were to build an addition or if the house itself were torn down and replaced, the house could not extend into that green shaded area. So that's the setback. That's the required yard. Again, four dwellings, four houses. in the middle here these are the side and rear setbacks for accessory structures so things like garages and like it says at the bottom here these are less intense uses than a dwelling than a house and the reason is because no one lives in a garage no one lives in a gazebo and and so on so these are permitted to be closer to the lot lines than the dwellings themselves and and in this case a minimum of five feet from the rear lot line or the side lot line.

Now, on the right here, this is what's in the proposed amendment for detached accessory dwelling units. And again, this mirrors the ordinance's existing standards for affordable dwelling setbacks. And this recognizes that accessory dwelling units have similar levels of intensity as other dwellings, but it provides more flexibility it provides flexibility by permitting these structures to be a little closer to the lot line than the main house can can be just one more slide on on setbacks here at our fall work session City Council mentioned that detached ADUs can be thought of as an alternative to building a very large houses and that that alternative might be able to fit neighborhoods. And that's a significant guiding principle because these standards view ADUs

as that kind of alternative. And importantly, the setback standard that's in these amendments would avoid cases of property owners maximizing both house size and having an ADU on, having a detached ADU on the same lot. Again, part of that balancing act, this slide shows an houses side by side on identically sized lots. The house on the left is a newer house. It doesn't completely maximize the buildable area, but you can see it comes somewhat close. The house on the right has a smaller overall footprint for the house itself. It has a more open lot. These amendment standards would enable that house on the right to build an ADU. Now, that house on the right could also build an addition. It could be replaced by another house and so on.

But as it is now, that house could build an ADU in the yard. For the house on the left, these standards basically say that the square footage that could have been used for an ADU has already been used for the house itself. So again, avoids the instance of having a maximum-sized house with a detached ADU on the same lot. Now, the other significant physical standard is height. There is a good amount of discussion on height standards at the work sessions, the main issue being implications for neighboring properties. These amendment standards set a limit of 20 feet or the measured height of the main house, and whichever is less. Now, 20 feet, this is roughly one and a half stories. The intent here is to ensure that detached ADUs don't overwhelm the lots that they're on,

don't overwhelm the main house or neighboring properties. One and a half stories would still provide for design flexibility, provides for the structure's placement on the lot and layout, and so on. This gives kind of a quick visual representation of what we're talking about. So for a multi-story house like the one on the left, a detached ADU would have a maximum height of 20 feet. So again, that's about one and a half stories. For houses like the house on the right here, houses that are themselves less than 20 feet, the maximum ADU height would be equivalent to the house's height. So again, the recommendation in these amendments is that ADU height may not exceed 20 feet, height of the house and again whichever is less.

There are some other physical standards that are currently in place. These amendments recommend keeping those standards. I won't spend too much time on these right now since we talked about these standards at previous meetings, but these standards are all proposed to remain the same as they are now. You can see here there are standards for accessory structure footprint, also standards square footage and again these are recommended to be kept like it says at the bottom here these standards really can work together to account for different sized lots different house sizes multiple stories and so on the zoning ordinance also has standards on lot and building coverage so both for lots in general and also for lots with accessory structures so these likewise are

proposed to remain the same and you can tell these are all interrelated and again each of these addresses a specific issue the amendments again proposed keeping these standards intact moving on to parking as you may recall our zoning ordinance right now does have a standard for adu parking but that standard is based on vehicles that are used by adu residents it's just not effective it's not enforceable in our work sessions both planning commission and city council were interested in exploring a different approach to adu parking so the standard proposed here takes a different approach so like it says here it says that a lot a property with an adu must provide no less than the minimum number of parking spaces that are specified in the off-street parking section of the ordinance, which is Section 4.2.

So that standard for detached houses and for duplex houses, that standard, like it says at the bottom here, is a minimum of two off-street parking spaces for a house. And that means two driveway spaces, effectively. What that means is that if a house already has at least two driveway spaces, then that house would comply with this standard. Now, some houses don't have a driveway or like the house that's shown here, have just a small driveway that just fits one car. So in those cases, the house would need to be brought up to the city's regular parking standards in order to have an ADU. So this house that's shown here, if the owners were to add an ADU, they would need to enlarge the driveway so that it could fit another vehicle before getting, before the city would issue an ADU permit.

The reason for this standard is to not automatically trigger a parking shortage with the addition of an accessory dwelling unit, but still to guard against parking shortfalls where they might be more particularly problematic. Now, Planning Commission did express some concern about parking at their public hearing. The concern was that this standard may not go far enough. Planning Commission's hesitation seemed to be that some neighborhoods already have not enough parking. And that adding the possibility of more ADUs might make that kind of situation worse. Now the flip side, and this was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting as well, is that it's tough to make the case that an ADU would generate more parking demand than an addition to a house.

So, for example, right down the road from City Hall, we have a house that has 10 bedrooms, for instance. That kind of addition can be built without having any parking requirement. So it's a difficult leap to make to say that that kind of thing can be built without a parking requirement, but adding a 500-square-foot cottage in the backyard triggers a parking requirement. So there's a lot going on with the parking discussion. A few planning commissioners felt uneasy about this. Now, not enough to suggest changes to the amendments, but just a feeling that there's an existing problem that might be made worse, might be made more problematic, I guess, by allowing detached accessory dwelling units.

now one more topic here and then we'll move on to some of the analysis that city council had asked for we had talked before about how to best deal with the potential conversion of existing structures to adus and specifically existing structures that do not meet whatever standards are in place for adus themselves meaning that they would be considered non-conforming So under these proposed amendments, if a property owner would wish to convert an existing non-conforming structure to an accessory dwelling unit, that property owner would go through the Board of Zoning Appeals. And this is the same as we had discussed in May. I bring it up because one of the City Council's requests has to do with accessory structures.

BZA is set up really to handle exactly this kind of situation, special exceptions. that can be dealt with on a case by case basis. And this is really the default set up with our zoning ordinance. And there are just so many potential variations of non-conformities like this, that it's an issue that's best addressed outside of rigid type of standards. So those are the main standards for what's proposed here in the detached ADU amendment that you have before you. The full amendment text is in your packets. I went through kind of quickly. I can always go back and explain some more of this. But as I had mentioned, council requested additional analysis on certain topics, and staff has done that analysis,

and the next few slides will summarize the results. City council, and again, this is back in May, had asked a few questions regarding potential impacts that detached ADUs may have on real estate assessments. So both on the ADU's property itself and also in general or citywide. Like it says up here under direct impacts, when a detached ADU is built, that ADU would be assessed similar to other structures or similar to other additions. And what that means is on a per square foot basis. So there's no set amount for valuation. It would vary, like it says here, it would vary based on the details of the ADU itself. Now, council also asked if a jurisdiction allows detached ADUs. Would that permissiveness result in increased property values citywide?

So not just for the properties that have ADUs, but a general increase in property values. The concern here was whether that by enabling property owners to build these kind of structures, would property values increase in general? And really since there would be a new option for essentially monetizing properties to a greater extent. Would that raise property values, raise property taxes, and harm affordability? Our real estate staff examined this question, determined that across the board, property value impacts due to a detached ADU ordinance is not something that we would expect. Now, to reach that determination, our assessor's office reviewed existing studies on ADUs, did not find evidence of this kind of effect. They also conducted their own local analysis,

so based on Arlington County. Arlington is the jurisdiction around here that's had detached Like it says here, our staff, again, the real estate staff analyzed neighborhoods in Arlington that have had detached ADU property sales. So properties that have detached ADUs and have sold, analyzed these neighborhoods over a five year period. And the finding was that the general property appreciation in those neighborhoods tracked extremely close to the countywide average for appreciation. And countywide is Arlington County because that's what this is looking at. So by extremely close, I mean within one-tenth of 1% of the countywide average. So these neighborhoods actually went down by one-tenth of 1%, but really that's so close to the baseline that we would consider it, like it says down here, just not indicative of ADU influence.

Just to put it in a dollar amount, that one-tenth of 1%, which we would consider really a plus or minus, is about $10 in property tax payments. Another request from City Council was to see for other Northern Virginia jurisdictions or jurisdictions that have already approved detached ADU ordinances, how many of these units have actually been approved within those jurisdictions. The most instructive localities around here are Arlington and Alexandria. Both of those have had permitted detached ADUs now for five or seven years. You see the numbers up here. This is the number of permits issued. What's perhaps most instructive here is the average annual number of permits issued. And you see that here it's 11 in Arlington County and

this goes back a five year period of 2021 to 25. 14 annual average in Alexandria. And you see at the bottom how that translates into annual permits per 1,000 homes. So that's helpful because it accounts for the difference in size between the jurisdictions. Now, council also asked for information on Falls Church and Fairfax County. Fairfax County allows detached ADUs right now on properties that are larger than two acres. The county has issued 10 permits for these types of ADUs since 2021. Falls Church is the most recent jurisdiction locally to allow detached ADUs. They have issued one permit so far. Now, that number per 1,000 houses, if you take these two numbers that are on the screen for Arlington and Alexandria,

if you combine those two with Fairfax County, so again, two-plus acres, but Fairfax County has 7,000 homes over two-plus acres, so that's a pretty big data set. If you take the ADUs per 1,000 houses, apply that to the city of Fairfax, I hate to make direct comparisons because each jurisdiction is different. But that would get us in the area of about 50 detached ADUs over a decade. Now, I said I'm a little bit uncomfortable saying that, but of course I just said it. I'd give it a bigger window, I'd say a few dozen over a decade, make that a pretty big plus or minus. but hopefully that gives some kind of indication of the prevalence of detached ADUs locally in Northern Virginia in places where they're allowed.

Another question like I had mentioned before involved existing structures. Council wanted to know just as a frame of reference how many of these kinds of structures are in the city right now. So for this we looked at property records, all existing residential structures, so of all types, not just garages, but any structure that, but with a minimum of 350 square feet in size, which are more likely to be converted to ADUs. In total, there are slightly under 400 of such structures in the city right now on residential lots. about a quarter of those are like it says up here 104 are within what we would call the buildable setback area for detached ADU so if you think back to the previous slide with the green area that would be outside of the green area so

104 are within that buildable setback area the remainder are like it says here outside of that buildable area so that gives some kind of an idea of the number of these structures in the city it is very important though the point that's at the bottom we can examine the number we can examine the size and the placement of these structures but like it says at the bottom here not all of these are really convertible to someplace where people would would want to live so either from the standpoint of the type of construction the foundation uh the cost of modifying the structure and and so on so uh just an important thing to keep in mind that's something that's non quantifiable but we gave you here the

information that can be quantified on the number of existing structures now finally there were some questions about the permitting process and specifically whether the city the main question that came up in May's meeting was whether the city would verify that properties containing detached ADUs are in fact It's required in the zoning standards, it's current requirement that we're recommending to keep in place. That the property owner live in either the main house or the accessory dwelling unit. Now, first of all, city staff will update the permit procedures if detached ADUs are allowed by city council. So this will be updated. And one area where detached ADUs would differ from attached ADUs is that they would be subject to the city's rental occupancy permit program.

So this is a program, it's an existing program in the city where rental houses are registered and are periodically inspected. Because detached ADUs are separate structures, they would be made part of this program. Periodic inspections would include a verification that the property is owner occupied. So this is not a verification that would happen on a annual basis. It's a verification that would happen when the property is inspected. But that is one additional level of check that would not ordinarily be there. And aside from that, city staff would still be able to respond to complaints about potential zoning violations, and that includes potential occupancy violations as well, as is currently the case.

So that concludes staff's presentation for tonight. I had mentioned that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on these amendments in June. The Commission recommended approval. It was a unanimous recommendation. The Planning Commission did express some concerns about parking, like I had mentioned. Planning Commission also expressed some concerns about overcrowding and occupancy enforcement. So regarding overcrowding and occupancy, some of that discussion pertained to whether, really similar to the parking issue, whether the option of having detached accessory dwelling units overcrowding issues worse and whether the city's enforcement mechanisms for all rentals were sufficient to be on guard for overcrowding types of situations.

Some of the discussion really drifted into a more general overcrowding and inspection type of discussion. Planning commissioners did realize that that's somewhat outside of the boundary of what's being discussed here, with a specific focus on detached ADUs. So outside of the boundary of these amendments, but it was identified as a concern by several planning commissioners, and there was a bit of a discussion on this topic at the public hearing. So with that, we'd be glad to answer any questions that you all may have.

Catherine ReadThank you so much for the presentation. Council Member McQuillan.

Rachel McQuillenThank you. Thank you so much. fantastic. I am looking at slide five about the setbacks. Can you explain why eight feet versus ten feet was chosen for the ADUs?

Eric ForemanstaffSo we did want to align it with the existing affordable dwelling unit setbacks. You know, the affordable dwelling unit setbacks were put in place, again, to give a little bit more flexibility to something that was considered desirable but to still maintain neighborhood character and maintain a decent amount of separation between one property and the other. Eight feet was considered to be appropriate with the affordable dwelling unit ordinance that achieves the same type of goal that we're looking at with accessory dwelling units.

Rachel McQuillenOkay, so for the flexibility, just the extra flexibility.

Eric ForemanstaffBut additional flexibility while keeping those kind of guardrails, not letting these dwellings, and the dwellings have a higher bit of intensity than other structures, not letting those dwellings being too close to the property line.

Rachel McQuillenThank you. I was just curious as to why they didn't choose the 10-foot like they do with the, but it sounds like they need more flexibility. Was there consideration regarding topography of the lot? And we're discussing the height. I'm thinking about the height and how you mentioned you didn't want it looking over or looming onto the permanent dwelling that's there already. So was that already taken into consideration?

Eric ForemanstaffAs far as height, yes. And that's part of the reason why the recommendation was 20 feet was basically one and a half stories instead of two stories. Because if it is built on a hill, that one and a half stories would look bigger than one and a half stories. We didn't want anything too large. Two-story accessory dwelling built in that situation on a hill would just be too looming.

Rachel McQuillenSo one and a half felt that was perfect. Okay, good. So you did consider that.

Eric ForemanstaffSo as far as that kind of topography, yes. The kind of topography that we just can't consider is if a certain portion of a yard is sloping to the point where it makes construction difficult. Well, on a map like this, it might seem like there's plenty of room to build an ADU, but there may not be. Same kind of thing with trees in the way in that there are certain types of things that we just can't account for. Topography and trees are two of those.

Rachel McQuillenThank you. I just want to make sure that that was considered exactly what you said with, you know, if the lot was increasing in height in the back. Is there a financial cost for the applicant to convert the existing structure to an ADU conversion?

Eric ForemanstaffThere is a zoning permit cost, which I believe is $70 or so. Now, depending on what is required, there would be inspections from code administration as well. these things would really pale in comparison to the actual cost of construction or the cost of providing utilities and whatnot. It is a minimal city cost to some of this, but it's very small in the overall picture.

Rachel McQuillenOkay, good to know. And then of the local cities that you used to make a comparison, which one most closely aligns with the ordinance that were currently being presented this

Eric Foremanstaffevening i would say arlington and falls church would most closely align uh alexandria is much more permissive in terms of setbacks and i think that has to do with the types of houses and the types of neighborhoods they have in alexandria and a lot of existing structures that were built long long ago uh and and are already there but arlington and falls torture

Rachel McQuillenexcellent thank you that's all my questions i appreciate it council member amos

Anthony AmosThank you. Excellent presentation, the more comment than question. The only thing I would flag, I do echo the planning commission's concerns with parking. I know that came up in our one on ones as well. And I imagine that's a concern that many of us share. The main thing I would recommend just because it's very, and I do appreciate the language you added to make it more enforceable. I think that does a good job. I would just recommend tracking code violations over a certain period of time. that tracking the number of permits that are applied for and comparing the two. We also don't want it to be a case where we have a certain number of violations, but they're all attributed to similar properties or one or two outliers.

Eric ForemanstaffBy code violations, what kind of code violations do you

Anthony Amoshave? Rather than code violations, just violations, for example, for not providing adequate parking or over parking in certain areas.

Eric ForemanstaffSo applications that trigger that need for an additional parking space? Gotcha.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member Hall?

Stacy HallThank you. And thank you for the extra time and energy that went into asking or answering the questions that we had posed previously and the other concerns. So I'll be honest. I thought you were making a mistake when you called them affordable dwelling units, but then you made a reference between 8 feet and 10 feet for affordable dwelling unit versus accessory, detached accessory dwelling unit. So I've been over here trying to do some additional research, but can you?

Eric ForemanstaffThere is an affordable dwelling unit ordinance. Folks aren't very familiar with it as it pertains to single-family houses because we haven't had anything like that since 2020 when it was approved. But the affordable dwelling ordinance that you all are more familiar with requiring a certain percentage of 6% of multifamily residences be affordable. There is an equivalent for detached homes as well. and just like the building standards were relaxed a bit for the affordable dwelling unit or affordable dwelling units in multifamily they were relaxed a little bit for single family as well and that was increasing the setbacks or decreasing the setbacks

Stacy Hallokay so that

Eric Foremanstaffthat's that's that's where that comes from thank

Stacy Hallyou

Eric Foremanstaffyes

Stacy Hallyeah i feel like we need new acronyms that are not identical.

Speaker 13Excuse me.

Stacy HallPage seven, with regard to the parking, I do, I know we like to think that people are going to bike everywhere and walk everywhere and take shuttles, but I really have concerns about the parking, especially in neighborhoods that already have parking issues. I don't think it's too much to ask to move this to three spots as opposed to two spots. I think the picture prime example as you were saying you know there's a requirement to do this for the two required spots i was thinking to some of the neighborhoods that are in the city where they don't have a driveway at all or they have a short driveway just like that and i was like well those don't that's not how things are right now so i recognize that it would need to be brought up to code in

order to do that but i i don't think it'll hurt in most cases to add a third spot instead of just two. And then page 11, I think, oh, sorry, that was the same thing. Yeah, bring up to code for two spots. And I'm, okay, so I'm flipping back and forth a little bit between the staff report and the presentation. So on page eight of the presentation, it talks about the height of the houses here. so I think you know in the city we have a lot of houses that might not be cookie cutter in some ways or they might have like my house specifically we have you know we put in like 16 foot ceilings which you don't see from the outside because it looks like the same height but then in the front when we did our

garage we did a peak I guess whatever I don't know what it's called like the one roof goes this way the other one goes that way hipped I think yes thank Thank you. A hip,

Speaker 13yes.

Stacy HallHow do those hips get decided? What's the height that you're looking at when you see a tall portion of a house versus the majority of the roof is another height? How does that work?

Eric ForemanstaffA hip roof and a regular peak roof are measured the same way that the height is measured halfway between the eave and the peak. So in this case, a house can be 35 feet tall. that 35 feet is not measured to the peak. It's measured to the halfway point between the eave and the peak. Same thing with the 20 feet here. It's measured halfway between the eave and the peak and also halfway between the slope of the ground, if the ground slopes. It is a complicated procedure. We don't feel that it's something that we're dumping on residents as much because if you have one of these built, you have an architect who has to take those measurements all cases so the same architect can take measurements of the house as well.

It's not a bit of information that property owners would tend to have at the ready for their own property, but it's something that in the course of construction is routine.

Stacy HallOkay, and so then let's picture that you have a lot where the back is significantly higher or lower. How does that factor into the roof of that space? space so

Eric Foremanstaffso the measurement is taken if the ground slopes like this the measurement is taken from the halfway point of the high point and the low point of the structure so the halfway point of the ground to the halfway point of the roof

Stacy Hallokay

Eric Foremanstaffso that's your 35 feet or your 20 feet

Stacy Hallokay so let's say my house out front is normal when it comes to my neighbors but then my yard significantly goes up am i going to be able to build a house that is as tall as my house which means now this house is significantly taller or am I limited to the height even with the additional hill in the back?

Eric ForemanstaffSo if your house is on a slope and if the measurement for your house comes out that your house is 25 feet tall, for instance, the maximum height of the ADU would be 20 feet because that's the tallest that it could possibly go.

Stacy HallOkay. So I understand you're explaining the same thing to me multiple times in different ways. not visually height

Eric Foremanstaffheight measurement is not easy to understand

Stacy Hallno it's not

Eric Foremanstaffthe two the two structures would be measured independently of each other so if if your house is measured at over 20 feet your adu could be a maximum of 20 feet regardless of what the topography is

Stacy Hallokay so it is possible then if you have a very large hill in the back that your secondary adu could be taller than your front house

Eric Foremanstaffthat that would be extremely unlikely I'm I don't want to say it can't happen okay I I feel I feel it would be very unlikely it would be a you know like if you had this house on the right and then you had the property sloped down a lot in the back then you may have a situation where that looks the case, but it would still have to keep to 16 feet. And the reason that we have it as that is to build in some additional flexibility because we didn't want a situation where an ADU would have to be an unreasonably small number.

Stacy Hallright and but on the flip side we also don't now that this house is going to be significantly closer to a side yard

Speaker 10right

Stacy Hallwe also don't want it to be towering over where the front house wasn't already just because of a topography thing so just trying to understand that those nuances okay

Speaker 18um

Stacy HallUm, on, uh, in the staff report, I think this is on page six, um, item L, it's on page seven. Um, it talks about the zoning administrator may inspect the property if there is a complaint registered with the city, or if the official has other reason to believe that the owner or occupants are in violation of the accessory dwelling unit approval. from what I understand of our enforcement abilities there's not a lot of teeth to them and I totally support people's right to do what they want with their own houses but I also don't want to see that right impede upon their neighbors and so I I know we've had issues in the past where we as a council have been notified that you know there might be x number of people living in a

house and they're like no it's boyfriends girlfriends but they're really there all the time but they don't qualify as house residents but there's a parking situation that comes or other things that come with that so I I would like to see a little bit more enforcement ability whether or not we have enforcement power or enough staff members to do that I think that's likely not going to be something that we need to add in order to manage this but that's The next one also goes then to item N as in Nancy, where it talks about if there's a change, sorry, they took that out. If an accessory dwelling unit no longer complies with the conditions, then the use of the space as a separate dwelling unit shall cease.

The physical arrangement of the space that created an independent housekeeping unit shall be integrated into the primary dwelling unit, and the space shall not be independently leased as a separate dwelling unit. where we tell someone they can't do something because they violated a rule or an ordinance. But again, we don't have a lot of ability to go back and actually follow up on it. So I just think there needs to be something in there that's a little bit stronger. Because from what I understand, if we go and we knock on the door and no one answers, well, we might go back another day and no one answers again legally. And we shouldn't have the ability to enter their yard to do things. but if they're not complying with something, it seems like there needs to be some other way to have some additional enforcement.

So I'm not suggesting, you know, I mean, tax levies, like there's all these different things that people can do, like they boot your car, right, like all those things that they do when you don't pay your parking tickets. I just think that there needs to be some other conversation that is in place to be able to move forward with this.

Eric ForemanstaffAnd that's not dissimilar to the conversation the Planning Commission had last month. And we reminded Planning Commission of this as well. And occupancy enforcement is awfully tricky from the city's perspective, because there's no way to check on the occupancy of a dwelling without having city staff go into that dwelling and look at the beds and look at the bedrooms. And that's something obviously that's not taken lightly by the city. There's just no other way of doing it. So it does kind of wander into another discussion on occupancy in general, but it's a pertinent discussion.

Stacy HallYeah, well, I know like with the noise ordinance, right, if you're not getting the response you need and the neighbor is still continuing to do things, there's an option now to go to the courthouse and swear out a warrant and go that legal route. Obviously, a disgruntled neighbor is not going to be able to go and swear out a warrant against their neighbor for not having the right number of people in their house or whatever it is. things are just a slippery slope and I think the the more we can be on top of them and try to have stronger language where needed again just gives us a little bit more opportunity to have that conversation rather than realizing it was too soft and then we can't go back and do anything about it my also my

other question about that section and it talks about like when the I'm sorry it was section K talks about the they do an initial inspection of the accessory and then in addition to any renewal of the accessory dwelling unit, use or transfer of ownership. So when would a renewal apply? Are people applying for an ADU for one year, three years, five years, or it's for the life of their property in which they live and then it transfers to the new owner?

Eric ForemanstaffI think the renewal applies to the transfer of ownership. I'm not sure why it's written as an or situation. The zoning permit, the applicant signs an affidavit acknowledging that it has to be renewed when the property transfers.

Stacy HallOkay. I will say the wording of this made me think, and I guess similar to what the Planning Commission was saying, and I also, you know, I think people are landlords for a very long time and people don't always check up on the house or make sure that it's being maintained in the way that it should be, especially when you might have college kids renting and there's a lot of transiency and things like that. But maybe we do, as a separate conversation, need a little bit more of a stronger conversation around making sure that when a tenant takes possession of the home, that it really is truly in a good, safe, rentable, smoke detectors are working, all of that kind of thing. You know, I know that they pay an annual fee to have a rental unit, but I think we could potentially be doing our renters a disservice by not making sure that things are up to date.

do it in college and all that. So it's just a thought. Page 17. I guess I already asked this, was how do we respond to a violation if no one answers the door? Okay. And then my last question, and I've been asking this since I think the beginning, is why are we so afraid of doing this by special use permit i recognize that we think there's only going to be a handful you said that there might be did you say 50 over 10 years right okay so we're doing special use permits for chickens we're doing them for daycares this to me is something that it impacts you as a homeowner that lives there but it also impacts every neighbor that's around you and i know that when we were doing our renovation and we wanted to get an exception to the, which is now it's even

smaller than what we asked for, but for the side yard, I mean, we had to send out certified postcards and have all of our neighbors not really have a problem with it and have that conversation. To me, this is a really big decision that you are making as a homeowner that is impacting all of those around you and I just I would have a much easier ability to accept this if it was a spy special use but just willy-nilly by right I think I'm hopeful that there's not going to be an extraordinary amount of these but I don't think it hurts to do the special use I think it makes sure that we just have that extra layer of you know rubber stamping it essentially to make sure that it it is what it is and I think it gives like I said the neighbors around

a real opportunity to understand what's going to be happening next to them and what they're going to be living next to. So I would really, really like to see that added in here.

Eric ForemanstaffI think the aversion to having ADUs be a special use permit, just drawing back to 2016 when that was discussed, because ADUs used to be a special use permit, I think council felt uncomfortable about having individual homeowners come to a meeting like this at city council to explain improvements that they wanted to do in their home while other, you know, a brand new home could be built, three-story, 35-foot high, 5,000-square-foot home could be built without coming to city council, but adding an accessory dwelling unit brings people to city council to a meeting like this. The chicken, this was before chickens.

Stacy HallBefore the chicken. i

Eric Foremanstaffi i think the uh you know the thought is that council doesn't necessarily want more individual property cases coming to public hearings like chickens i

Stacy Hallthink this council member does to be totally honest um and i you said back in 2016 when they did this but we didn't have detached accessory dwelling units we had attached accessory dwelling units so you're saying that that um requirement was removed in 2016 for attached dwelling units correct okay and i understand too what you're saying about tear down and build a 35 foot house i mean i think we've all seen the one on warwick um but again i think you have very angry neighbors that are really unhappy with what happened there so i think if we're really only expecting 50 over a 10-year period to me check the box special permit special use permit easy breezy and we get it going so i'm not sure that i can support this without that

Catherine Readthank you council member bakes

Billy Batesso uh with regard to height um well uh well actually both height and setbacks uh the requirements that are proposed here are actually more strict than uh the existing requirements for non dwelling unit

Speaker 6accessory structures.

Billy BatesIs that right? Correct. Yeah. Um, and then, uh, um, which you know also certainly don't require any additional parking. Granted they don't have anybody living there, but, um, you know, and additionally residents are able to, as you mentioned, build additions onto their house, add additional bedrooms. Um, and then of course we have, uh, attached accessory dwelling units allowed. Um, So really, to my mind, this is taking what is already allowed and providing some simply additional flexibility in terms of where it can be located and perhaps even additional flexibility to allow for it to be even less overwhelming to the existing structure since it can be separated a bit from the existing house. and additionally as you mentioned someone can can build a you know a house without a permit

and of course we've seen additional houses built on lots that have been subdivided and sold off and so this to my mind also provides an alternative to that you know that is perhaps a bit less or less impactful to the, you know, the streetscape, the existing aesthetic of the property. And with regard to the question of requiring a special use permit, would that require the applicant to pay the special use permit fee as well? Correct. Yeah, yeah. So I have concerns about that, given that, you know, for chickens, for daycare, you know, that kind of thing. You know, certainly you can say that, you know, hens produce eggs, daycare provides an income stream, but it's not something that is directly necessity for the, you know, the people living there necessarily.

but of course housing is for the you know the people who live in the accessible dwelling unit itself and so from a housing availability perspective I would have concerns about the burden that that fee might place on people who want to do this and also I would imagine that the process for that would be a lot more labor intensive right than you know for chickens or daycare because a matter of building an additional structure on the lot. So there would be, you know, a process involved for that. So, yeah, and then, again, you know, parking, we can, you know, of course, an additional house on, you know, a subdivided lot does require additional parking. But other than that, you know, additions or attached dwelling units,

I believe, are under similar conditions. the park requirements for you know the house um but don't have to add additional spots for those is that right yeah so from that perspective i see what's proposed as really only fair to the homeowners in the city

Catherine Readcouncilmember hordi chandler

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerso i want to thank you for the report and i also want to thank you for certainly following up on the wide array of questions that we had i know i I was particularly interested in looking at our neighbors and what's happening around there. I was surprised at the load numbers that are pretty consistent across this region. So we're talking about 50, possibly 50, over the course of 10 years. When we go back to the parking, is there any indication that the existing dwelling units that are attached, city in any way or are they spread dispersed throughout our city right

Eric Foremanstaffthey they are spread out there's about two dozen or or so and and there's no

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerneighborhood

Eric Foremanstaffpattern no geographic pattern to where they are

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerand and there's the expectation that this would follow that same pattern or there's no information to indicate that these might be just clustered in one neighborhood causing some kind of parking problem for at five a year

Eric Foremanstaffright there's no there's not a unique element to say that certain neighborhoods would only you know be suitable for these or not

Stacey Hardy-Chandleryeah and I go back to just sort of our general desire to have a wide variety of housing options and our policy of our desired policy our aspiration of wanting to have people who are single-family owners accommodate renters those kinds of things I see this as another viable option it isn't a huge option clearly the data that we requested looking at the region shows that this is a possibility for some but it opens up an opportunity for some families I know of a neighbor who has an attached dwelling unit and the prior owner of the house is living in that and her children are living in the main house it's a wonderful arrangement these kinds of opportunities for homeowners are ones that I absolutely support we're not

talking about large volumes we're not talking about you know every household having a hill that's going to distort the height but I do think we're talking about an opportunity that's going to make a major difference for families that choose this option so thank you for your report I appreciate all of the information that you gather to answer our questions

Catherine Readcouncilmember Peterson

Thomas Petersonso what is the list of different permits that the homeowner would have to obtain to actually put in place a detached a to you

Eric Foremanstafffrom a zoning perspective there would be a zoning permit and then there would be code administration building needed. So just like any other construction project.

Thomas PetersonAnd that is the equivalent of a construction permit? Correct. Okay. So those are two. All right. Just I think one quick note on the special use permit question. One thing that seems a little bit different here is a detached ADU has proximity implications for neighbors that are different than an attached ADU. and that may raise the bar a little bit in terms of reactions that people have in terms of something being proposed and built. So it's probably worth considering as we think about whether or not a special use permit is something that we should do. I would like to go back to the parking issue, and I know we've said a lot about it, and I just want to say also I appreciate very much we had an opportunity to have some staff briefings on this

street parking. And I'd like to go back and just understand there's a potential, at least in some places, that there's a risk that the amount of street parking would increase in certain locations. It could be for a couple different reasons. There just isn't sufficient expansion capacity on the lot, whatever. What's the remedy if that does appear to be the case?

Eric ForemanstaffSo a remedy from a neighborhood perspective would be to petition the city for a parking So that would be if a neighborhood has a parking problem that is a remedy that the city has established. Is that the answer that you're looking for? Well,

Greg TremorapplicantI'm not sure what the answer is. I'm just needing to

Thomas Petersonunderstand for those situations where that could be a problem where that goes in terms of being able to address it. I'm not sure what's involved in becoming a parking district, but I just wonder, maybe this gets back also to the question, Mark, about a special use permit. Is that a way in which that kind of a situation would be caught and addressed? Is that one of the options for that or no?

Eric ForemanstaffI suppose that's a consideration that council could use in a special use permit situation if it was a special use permit?

Thomas PetersonOkay. And the issue is not that there would be so many detached ADUs in one place that it would contribute to volume. The issue is more site-specific where you'd have a circumstance where there just isn't a configuration for off-street parking sufficient, so you're forcing it on street where you already may have it, so it stretches that.

Eric ForemanstaffYeah. So the special use permit being at the discretion of council, council can pick and choose, Plus, and that's the minus of the special use permit. The plus side is the council can make that spot determination. The downside from a homeowner's perspective is the unknown that they have to go to city council and petition for this to be done.

Thomas PetersonRight. If I could just switch gears to the numbers game a little bit. I think the thank you for doing the assessments. that I think we asked for that very helpful. One is the effect on property assessments for people who choose not to bill just because the legal option is created. It looks like that's a non-issue, but there's a little bit of a caveat in that I think our comparative data on this is coming from places that are inside the Beltway, predominantly the outside the beltway with Fairfax County is a little bit different because those are two acre lot minimums so we're a little bit different territory. Sounds like it doesn't look like there would be an issue here but I just want to note there's a little bit of

variation in the data sources here. The other thing is the numbers and if I understand at the end of the day our best estimate again with some of the same uncertainty because of apples and like maybe five a year. Is that where this landed? Right.

Greg TremorapplicantOkay.

Thomas PetersonHelpful to know for a couple of different reasons. It doesn't look like there is likely to be a land rush, but it also looks like five a year is a manageable number if it was determined that we did need to do a special use permit so it wouldn't be an overwhelming surge. I'm not arguing for or against at this stage, except I'm sympathetic to the concerns that arise and lead to the need possibly for a special use permit here. I think the other thing that when we discussed this was just helpful to know is this, while we do have attached ADUs, we have a lot of experience with that, the detached ADUs are a little bit different ball game. Not exactly the same. And it sounds like there is some merit in taking it a step at a time in terms of how

we implement a new policy so that we are going through a process of discovery in terms of how this works and being cautious at the early stages until we get a better feel for what we are really in for in terms of the volume, the complexity, the impacts, and all that. I don't want to overplay it because at five a year, it doesn't sound like a big deal. on the other hand, that it does sound like it would be prudent to approach this in a way that is a little bit step at a time and helps us get the feedback we need to determine whether or not and at what point this can be a more automated, if you will, approach to this. That would argue, again, back for at least considering the possibility of a special use

permit in the early stages to see how this goes. But I did want to just bring that conversation forward because I appreciate the fact that We talked about that and that from a policy implementation perspective that it's almost like treating this as a pilot and taking some special care in its early stages. Otherwise I do want to thank you for all of the work that you've done here. There's been a lot of assessment. It's been responsive. And there's been a lot of work done on both the design and the assessment side of this that I think has been very helpful. So much appreciated. Councilmember

Catherine ReadHall

Stacy Hallthank you excuse me thank you I just had one follow-up question I just did a quick search and it looks like the special use permit is $600 does that sound

Eric Foremanstaffokay that might might be correct I'm not okay certain offhand

Stacy Hallokay yeah no I just wanted to see what it was and I also did some additional research and it looks like to build a 400 square foot house you're looking between a hundred and seventy five thousand and two hundred and seventy five thousand dollars and to build an 800 to a thousand square foot adu looking at 300,000 to 450,000 so I do recognize that 600 is an extra fee but I feel like for people that are likely going to be doing this $600 is kind of a drop in the bucket with all of the other costs so I still strongly support a special use permit thank you

Catherine Readthank you for the presentation I do agree it was thorough and you did answer in the work session as far as the parking goes there is a parking problem we have a lot of rentals in this city that have college students in them and there's no mechanism for enforcing limitations on how many vehicles a rental can have so what we're basically saying is if there's a parking problem in a neighborhood because we have a rental with no mechanism for limiting the number of vehicles whether it's three four five or six instead we're going to put the burden to meet these requirements. We have a parking issue, I grant you, but giving a free pass to renters in this city and putting the burden on renters of an ADU or not even renters because I think we're

overlooking the fact that a lot of these ADUs may be for family use and they're not rental properties at all. I don't think there should be a greater burden on properties with an ADU than we are placing on lots of rental properties that have lots of vehicles. would be my feedback on that and as far as is the by right use of a of building an adu the city is full of yards that have sheds and garages and lots of external uses that are the basic footprint now maybe not the height of the square basic footprint of we're talking what we're talking about with an accessory dwelling unit and while there might not be people living in there the fact of the matter is the city is full of yards that have sheds and garages in

And no one came to us to ask if we like the design or the location or anything else. We can do it by right. We can do it by right because we own the property. And so I do have an issue with thinking that this dais or any dais or every dais that's elected every other year should have an up or down vote on what people want to build in their yard because we don't do that for the other structures they're currently building in their yard. So I fully support the fact that two parking spaces is adequate, Parking is not an insignificant issue for neighborhoods, but we've already got a problem with vehicles for rental properties anyway, and the fact that it should be by right, because at $300,000, we are not going to have a lot of people who invest in that.

Think to yourself, if you build something for $300,000, how many renters you'd have to have over what period of time to make your investment back? My feeling is probably that people are going to choose this because they have significantly greater reasons having to do with their family to invest $300,000 and that it is not a money-making enterprise because that kind of money-making enterprise makes no sense financially. So just putting that out there. And with that, I will ask if there is a motion. Oh, sorry. I skipped

Melody Bentleypublic commenta step. Sorry.

Catherine Readhearing mission a berry has this public hearing been properly advertised

Ms. Shinneberryclerkyes it has someone has signed up prior to the meeting to speak and then after that person speaks we'll open the floor if there's anybody else in the room so the one person that spoke is Katie Johnson or we'll be speaking with Kate Johnson

Katie Johnsonpublic commentKatie Johnson and the clerk has my address I came tonight to ask that adios permit. I'm happy to hear Councilmember Hall's concern. I share those concerns. I generally support ADUs, but only with very strong guardrails. I ask the city to retain the ability to ensure appropriateness and ensure no negative impacts on neighbors or neighborhoods. Parking is absolutely a concern and should have a plan for enforcement. City should also have in place a process, much like the city retains the right to inspect chickens coops the city must have the ability to enforce the ordinances the shed on my at my house I there are places that I cannot put my shed I cannot put my shed in the RPA I cannot put my shed I had to get special

exception to put my shed where it is so there are rules about where sheds belong but my concern also is we have the ability to inspect chicken coops to ensure that the chickens are safe. Why do we not have the same ability? Why can't the city retain the same ability to make sure and ensure that the people living in these small places are safe as well? Thank you.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkIs there anybody else in the room that would like to speak on this agenda item?

Jim Gillespiepublic commentGood evening, Mayor Reed, members of council. I'm Jim Gillespie. I live at 3604 Colony Road. I'm speaking tonight on behalf of the ADU ordinance amendment. As we all know, there's a regional shortage of housing, housing at all price points. There's a shortage of housing for young adults. There's a shortage of housing for seniors. There's a shortage of housing for everybody in between. And the ADU ordinance would be a modest but meaningful step in the direction of providing housing for some people who need it. Now you may think 50 housing units over a decade or so, does that really do anything? Well, it does a lot for those 50 people. They are getting a home when they did not have it before. And I think a little bit about a situation in my own extended family.

I have a close relative who is roughly my age, who is disabled, and at this point is living in a senior living residence and barely affording it. And I think about what it would be like and live in my home. And we could make it work, but it would be difficult. It would be a sacrifice for us. It would be a real sacrifice to the dignity of this person to be a boarder in my home. And an ADU kind of arrangement would provide that person with more autonomy, the feeling of living independently, of having more responsibility for their own life. So I thank you for all of the work that staff has done, for all the many efforts that you have done to study this issue, to assess it, and I hope you will vote yes.

Thank you.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkIs there anybody else in the room that would like to speak?

Catherine ReadIs there a motion?

Stacey Hardy-Chandleri move to approve an ordinance amending chapter 110 zoning to amend portions of the article of articles and sections contained therein including introductory provisions zoning districts and regulations and definition is

Catherine Readthere a second

Stacey Hardy-Chandlersecond uh

Catherine Readmotion has been made by council member hardy chandler and seconded by council member peterson a roll call vote hang on are

Thomas Petersonwe

Catherine Readgoing have discussion is there a discussion on the motion councilmember Peterson

Thomas Petersonyes is this something that we need to do tonight or is it possible that this could be allowed some further public review of what we just saw tonight before we make a decision here

Brian Lubkermanstaffcouncil always has the discretion to defer action on an item with an appropriate motion

Thomas Petersonand I would be interested in the sense of the body here whether that's something that would be acceptable it we're voting on something we just saw I know it's been around for a while on the other hand we've seen some new information do

Catherine Readyou want to make a substitute motion is that how we would proceed mr. Lubkerman that

Brian Lubkermanstaffwould be the mechanism

Catherine Readthe do you want to make a substitute

Thomas Petersonmotion yes and I will need help from mr. Lubkerman to get the exact word incorrect so

Brian Lubkermanstaffif I may I assume you'll just be asking to defer action on this item to a date certain of blank

Thomas Petersonit the next time we get together next earliest time we get together i believe

Brian Lubkermanstaffthat'd be september the 8th

Thomas Petersonthat would be fine from my standpoint but i'm

Brian Lubkermanstaffyou'll need to make a motion

Thomas Petersonlet's defer consideration until september 8th is there a second

Stacy Hallsecond

Catherine Reada motion's been made by council member peterson and seconded by council member hall a roll call vote

Stacy Hallis there a comment available at this time

Catherine Readdo you want to yes discussion on the motion

Stacy Hallyeah i just i i really i think that we gave a lot of time for the noise ordinance and then the city of fairfax government put out a post and people are all up in arms about it um and i i just think that something of this magnitude while it very well may pass and people might be very very supportive of it i think that the timing of the more finalized versions of this came out in june these are historically vacation months people are not here so i just think that we need a little bit more time to be able to give people to understand this i'd love to see the city put out something about this so that we can you know share it all around and really garner some additional support whether in favor or against just so we know that we're making a decision with more information

thank you council member amos

Anthony Amosuh just two quick comments the the first being you know part of it is we're not going to know what needs to be fixed until it's implemented, unfortunately, especially when it comes to parking, to the actual number of ADUs, and we gauge interest on where this is popping up, and if we're going to hit that 50 target in the next 10 years or maybe lower. If it's higher, that's something we'll need to track. I'm very hesitant on the special use permit, particularly because I just feel like that people have a right to their property, should be allowed to develop it within reason. I do feel like the Board of Zoning Appeals is capable of assessing that. The point about deferral and the discussion on the motion,

I guess my question would be, why wouldn't we defer more actions that happen over summer in general when people are traveling? Unfortunately, business has to get done. It's my personal feeling on that.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member McCoolham?

Rachel McQuillenI would like a defer because I would like to ask a little bit more information gather more information regarding the special use permit process my understanding is that it can take quite a long time for some people so I want to better understand that process more this is something that just came up this evening this isn't something that we really discussed in detail prior so deferring this to the next meeting would allow me that ability thank you

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Bates

Billy BatesSo first off, this is something that, as I recall, has been in the works since at least last year. Is that right? If not earlier. And so it's not something that was introduced, you know, just a month or two ago. You know, it's been on public agendas. We've received feedback about it. with regard to the special use permit first off a is a resident required to pay that fee regardless of whether or not the city council ultimately votes it up or down yes that's correct so again you know we don't know what the financial means of the applicant you know every single applicant is going to be they may have an agreement with someone who may first occupant of that unit where you know they pay to build it what have you

and then they're in a situation where they're out almost thousand dollars and plus the you know whatever additional costs they may have incurred through having somebody help prepare whatever documentation they might need or what have you don't know what goes into that and you know without anything to really show for it and additionally the you know the I recall from reviewing the language of the ordinance that and I believe was also actually mentioned here tonight if the the property is you know due to whatever circumstances gets to a point where it's no longer in conformance with the requirements set they're no longer allowed to use that ADU. Is that right? Yes, that's right. And that exists regardless of whether or not there's a special use permit process.

And would there be any difference in enforcement of that if there is a special use permit process or not?

Eric ForemanstaffWell, that's up to council. The bare minimum for a special use permit, what the changes would be in the zoning ordinance, table in the zoning ordinance called the accessory use table. Accessory dwelling units are listed in there. Accessory dwelling units are listed as permitted uses in the RH, RL, and RM zones. That could be changed to a special use permit to cover all ADUs, or it could be split into accessory dwelling units attached and accessory dwelling units detached. One would be special, one would be permitted. In that case, we would need a definition of each in the definition section. But that's the bare minimum and the standards that we reviewed today could stay the same if that's council's wishes.

If council wishes to add other standards, you all could do that as well.

Billy BatesYeah. Yeah. Yeah, but so with regard to the enforcement mechanism, would that be any different in terms of, you know, occupancy?

Eric ForemanstaffThere's similar enforcement mechanisms to SUPs that the SUP is permitted, you know, for whatever is applied for. And if that changes, then that would be out of conformity and the property owner would have to come back for a new SUP if that changes. Mm

Speaker 10-hmm.

Billy BatesBut in terms of how that's enforced with regard to, you know, what's proposed, it's, would you say that it's similar to, you know, that provision that's currently in there, you know, and it's not in conformance and it no longer functions?

Eric ForemanstaffCorrect. That would be similar. The difference would be if council imposes additional requirements as part of the SUP process, that that would be something that's above and beyond what's in the zoning ordinance.

Billy BatesAlso, if we wanted to amend or, you know, set the requirements as is, you know, regardless of whether there's an SUP or not. Correct. Yeah, yeah. And so we've already discussed those requirements previously. Anyway, so just, you know, some clarification. That's very helpful. Thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Hardy Chandler.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerI think put simply what concerns me is adding a burden to people who may want to pursue this option and a burden that wouldn't be in place if they were doing something else like simply improving their property in a different way. So the added burden that does not feel fair to me is not something that I'm wanting to consider. I want it to be an encouragement for people to consider this when it's right for their family and right for their financial circumstances, rather than sort of punishing them and adding extra hoops for them to jump through in order to have this happen. So I'm in support of continuing with the vote today.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member Peterson. Just

Thomas Petersonto clarify, my interest here was actually not to address the special use permit issue, which sounds like there's still some conversation around, but

Greg Tremorapplicantreally to give residents a chance to digest this a little bit,

Thomas Petersonsometimes it seems like it's a little bit much for us to receive new information. People are giving, we invite people to do a public hearing the same night, and they've just seen it and in some cases have not even yet seen it. to be able to access some of this information ahead of time and digest it. We're actually getting explanations here that help them do that. And then we turn right around and we vote. And if there's no harm in giving a little bit more time for people to digest this in case there is something out of that that's meaningful, I don't see why we wouldn't delay. And I, in terms of the July timeframe, I mean, people are busy all the time. I will say, however, I have received some comments from residents who have expressed

the concern that they've been out of pocket pretty badly in July and are having a hard time keeping up with what's going on in terms of city business. So this is a time when it's been a little bit tougher probably than normal to do that. Again, I would think because of significant new information that we're having in front of us tonight and the lack of the opportunity for people to really have time to digest it and for us to be able to hear from them. And again, there may be no feedback whatsoever, but as in the case of the noise ordinance, there may be quite a bit of feedback. In any case, it would be great to give us that opportunity if possible. And I don't think it's a major burden in terms of a postponement here for another decision.

And I also don't think it would require a particularly large amount of time to act on this when it does come back. So that was really the intention that I had here. Thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Hall.

Stacy HallThank you. i do also want to remind everyone that this was the body earlier this month who delayed the implementation of an otherwise agreed upon council um uh code of ethics to allow our boards and commissions time to review it when it wasn't even decided that they were going to be subject to it so i just have a hard time not allowing additional time for our 24 000 residents they've wrapped their heads around this potential change to their neighborhoods councilmember Amos

Anthony Amosand just for a clarification on that in that meeting I asked mr. love come in if the timeline was affected if we did that action and he said no so the timeline was not changed because of that

Catherine Readso if there's no further discussion on this motion to defer can we take a roll call vote mission a berry

Ms. Shinneberryclerkcouncilmember Amos

Anthony Amosneck

Ms. Shinneberryclerkcouncilmember Hall yes councilmember Hardy Chandler nay councilmember Peterson all right councilmember Bates councilmember McClellan yes motion failed three to three

Catherine Readso the original motion which was made by councilmember Hardy Chandler and seconded by council member Peterson is there discussion on the original motion before we take a roll call vote councilmember Hall

Stacy HallI'd like to make it very clear that I think that this could be an excellent opportunity for our community for our residents I simply do not feel that those that are away and that have spent the summer since their kids have been out of school have sufficient time to truly understand and digest what is included here which is why I strongly supported and was going to ask for a delay myself so my vote tonight is not a no against adus it's a no against the process that is not allowing our residents sufficient time to absorb this information thank you

Catherine Readany other discussion on the motion and i will simply say we've been working on this adu amendment i believe since i was elected mayor so it is not something new we have had work sessions on it there may not have been work sessions you saw previous to being on this council but we have been talking about this adu ordinance since at least 2024 if not 2023 so with that a roll call vote okay council member mcquillen

Rachel McQuilleni too wanted to state on the record that i um will be voting no on this because I too in our last meeting was convinced and in being collaborative and trying to ensure that everyone and my colleagues had enough time to speak with their constituents and do their due diligence, I decided to go ahead and agree with the rest of council that we would delay adopting our code of ethics. And this evening I was also kind of in the same boat here where I was going, okay, a That's a lot of money. I know some of the timing, the process can take a long time. However, I'm not even given enough time to speak with constituents and talk to them about this to ensure that they understand that this is what's going to happen when this is approved

this evening. So I just want to let everyone know that I'm not saying no to ADUs because I actually support them fully. I'm very frustrated that the process tonight that we're saying that we don't care about what our constituents think about this we have all of this set out really nicely now we know exactly what it entails and our constituents can look it over and give us really good accurate feedback they're all on vacation everybody is gone this summer we know this they're gonna return next month because school starts in August can we really wait for one month yes we could but we're not going to tonight so my vote will be a no but it's not against ADUs because I do want affordability and i want housing here however i'm very frustrated that we feel like it's okay

to just push things along and not give a deferment thank you

Catherine Readcouncil member peterson yeah

Thomas Petersonit is i think a little bit frustrating for everybody to be in this position i um i support the detached adu approach i do think there's a little bit of unfinished business here and if we're not going to give ourselves some breathing room to let people give us feedback and tie this up with a nice bow and we get back the way we really ought to. I would just say that I would hope that our city manager and city staff would move forward in a manner that would retain flexibility as needed to address needs that may come up as a consequence of public feedback that we receive after this evening's vote, and that we stay flexible and responsive every step of the way. And that could be special use permit, but it could be any number of other things.

As I mentioned earlier, this is going to go into an early implementation phase. It will be an early period of discovery. It will be much like a pilot, and I will support this, that we will take seriously feedback that we receive and that we will act on that feedback without hesitation as necessary and retain the flexibility we need to do that. And so I will be supporting this, but I must say I have real reservations about the way in which we're doing this and we're not giving people a chance to have a last look at something that has some new elements to it.

Anthony AmosThank

Speaker 13you.

Catherine ReadAny other comments? Seeing none, a roll call vote.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkCouncil Member Amos?

Catherine ReadAye.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkCouncil Member Hall? No. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McQuillan?

Rachel McQuillenNo.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkOkay, motion passed 4-2. Okay, we will go on to second general public comment. Is there anybody in the room that would like to make a general public comment tonight?

Catherine ReadOkay. All right, seeing none, we will now recess the regular meeting into a work session we'll take a five minute recession recess to move into the work session room Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Speaker 10Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Catherine Readand welcome to our work session before we begin the work session I want to give a background on the development review process for applications the development review process was established through a series of mayor and city council retreats to ensure development concepts are presented to the mayor and city council as a whole rather than through individual meetings. This approach promotes transparency by ensuring all elected officials receive the same information at the same time. Pre-application briefings occur before a formal application is submitted. At this stage, city staff provides a high-level overview of a proposed concept, to answer questions the plans are conceptual and the mayor and city council

may offer general observations as guidance once a formal application is submitted and accepted city staff conducts a detailed review for compliance with applicable codes and policies post submission work sessions include an in-depth staff analysis and typically occur after the applicant has addressed initial staff comments and before the application proceeds to public hearings. The process has been reviewed and refined over time by successive mayor and city councils. Changes have included clarifying materials to distinguish pre-application briefings from post-submission work sessions and allowing potential applicants to answer questions during pre-application briefings to provide additional context for conceptual proposals.

for where we are with this work session. Ms. Shinneberry what is our first work session here?

Ms. ShinneberryclerkOur first item is a pre-application briefing on a request by Network Realty Partners for the redevelopment of 3541 Chambridge Road. I'm going to recognize Clara Schweiger our city planner for the staff presentation.

Clara SchweigerstaffGood evening Mayor and Council. First up tonight for work sessions is a discussion on a potential redevelopment at 3541 Chambridge Road. We are currently in the pre-application stage of the development review process, so a formal land use application has not yet been submitted. City staff have met with the potential applicant and provided initial feedback on the potential proposal. So the top left image here is an aerial of the site. The site is located at the southeast corner of Chambridge Road and Eaton Place, west of University Drive and north of Fairfax Boulevard. Future land use designation for this site is the activity center place type and the site is located in the North Facts activity center and is subject to the North Facts small

area plan. The site is currently zoned CR commercial retail and the potential applicant proposes to rezone to CU commercial urban. This slide shows proposed residential development in the North Facts activity center. is also provided in your briefing packet but just to give a quick summary and Northfax the small area plan estimates 1,400 new residential units in the near term to date there are 1,088 units currently in some phase of the land use process in the Northfax activity center in all activity centers the small area plans estimate 4,700 new units in the near term to date 2,753 units are in some the land use process in all activity centers. Outside of the activity centers, 3,022 units are in the land use pipeline. And then the table on the bottom here shows each project in North

FACS with the status and the number of units proposed. Now, going back to the potential project for tonight's discussion, existing on the development site are two two-story office buildings and 124 parking spaces on approximately 2.09 acres. This is the concept plan. The potential applicant proposes 29 townhouses and eight two over two units with a proposed height maximum of four stories. They propose 2,750 square feet of retail on University Drive, a new private street, a widened 10-foot sidewalk on Eaton Place, and an 8-foot sidewalk on University Drive, and an internal 6-foot sidewalk leading to units. The potential applicant proposes a 4,200-square-foot linear park, 8,300-square-feet of open space, and an interparcel connection to the south.

Here are renderings of the potential proposal. So these are looking at the stacked townhouses, so the two-over-twos. And here are more renderings. On the left is a retail building, and then on the right you're seeing the townhouses. So city staff met with the applicant, the potential applicant, and has provided preliminary feedback on the potential proposal. This list was included in your briefing packet. And on June 22nd, the Planning Commission held a pre-application briefing with the applicant and gave the applicant feedback. A summary of this feedback has also been included in your briefing packet. Potential land use requests for the proposal would be a rezoning from CR commercial retail

to CU commercial urban and the architectural control overlay district, a special use permit for townhouses and multifamily, a general development plan, and a major certificate of appropriateness for architecture and landscaping. so the next steps are a land use application submission staff review work sessions with the planning commission the BAR and city council and then public hearings and that concludes my presentation I'm here to answer any questions that you have the potential applicant is also standing by for questions thank

Catherine Readyou for the presentation council member Amos

Anthony Amosthank you very much for the very brief presentation. Just to quickly go over what I liked that I saw, the sidewalk widths I think are appropriate. I think 10 feet on Eaton, 8 feet on University, I think that makes a lot of sense. I do like the University connection and access from Cambridge. I actually, my understanding based on what I saw on the plan, the access point to the property from Eaton is removed, correct? I do like that element of it as well, taking that off. I Yes, right there. Thank you. I also like the linear park and green space concept. So I do like to see that you have a good amount of green space proposed from this initial application. Just a few questions. It might be a little too early, but I imagine in terms of stormwater, if I recall correctly, this is kind of on a slope.

In terms of stormwater, are we looking at an underground tank? Is what's there sufficient or what would be implemented for that? I guess that would be to the applicant. just early thoughts

Bob Rantapplicantthank you madam mayor members of city council bob rant with the law firm of walsh collucci on behalf of the applicant this evening i'm joined by greg tremor from network realty partners and appreciate the opportunity to come before council and get feedback answer questions and hopefully begin this process council member amos you asked about stormwater management we have not yet fully this is the concept plan. This is really the extent of what we designed so far, but make no mistake about it. There will be stormwater management facilities provided on site. What we're anticipating is exactly what you described, underground facilities, detention, stormwater quantity, quality controls, things like that. It will be a significant benefit over

what's there today. This property was developed in the early 1970s, and I think it's safe to say is probably entirely lacking in terms of stormwater controls so that's one of the several benefits that the redevelopment of this property will just inherently bring forward.

Anthony AmosThank you. My next question in terms of height so the what's currently there I think I saw on the plane it was 28 feet if I'm correct and then you have proposed four stories what's the the gap there what's the difference?

Bob RantapplicantThat's correct the two-story buildings I think you're you're you're What we are proposing at this point is a maximum height of four stories or 60 feet. The 60 feet would be the two over two units, the stacked townhouse units on the left side of your screen, the west side of the site, fronting on Chambridge Road. Those will be a little bit taller than the single family attached, the townhouse units. One of the reasons we did that was to kind of establish that frontage, establish that bookend of the site, create kind of a gateway as you're coming into the city by concentrating that mass there. But that four-story 60-foot height would be the maximum The townhouses would likely be a bit shorter than that. But again, we're early in the process

And so all that information will be provided if and when it moves forward

Anthony AmosAbsolutely. And I know it's early in the process. So for example, you know I'd be curious our economic development director's thoughts. What exactly is driving this? Is it vacancy rates? Is it? I mean, what are we what are we looking at for this?

Bob RantapplicantAnd I'll ask Greg to chime in with a little bit more detail, but the reality is these these buildings are really approaching or at the end of their useful life. They're about 50 years old at this point and they're deteriorating. And frankly, the costs of getting them back to where they need to be to release these spaces are, it's approaching to the point where it's cost prohibitive. And so that's why the property owner's in the position now where they're looking to the next phase, the next step for this property. And so what we've come forward with is what we think and what we hope council agrees is a step in the right direction, something that's consistent and continuing the progress of development here in Norfax.

Greg, do you want to add to that?

Greg TremorapplicantThat's exactly right in terms of the condition of the buildings. In terms of the product mix and the direction of the plan, we looked kind of holistically in this broader market and we're really excited about kind of the canvas that's been painted already. We have a senior housing building. We have a rental apartment building coming out of the ground. What we don't have is home ownership opportunities. And in this small little plan, we fit a lot of, we think, great things. will be the smallest of the units, and then a mixture of 16-foot-wide and 20-foot-wide towns. So in this plan, you have three different types of home ownership opportunities that will be the first kind of in this broader area.

And we think that all of that residential activity, in addition to the two hotels that already exist, brings kind of a nice diversity of pedestrian activity and will kind of start to activate it as a whole. So we're really excited about that.

Anthony AmosThank you. My last question is related to the retail portion, and there's kind of two things built into that. I mean, when you say retail, do you mean more commercial office space or do you more so mean, for example, restaurant usage or something like that? Just for clarification.

Greg TremorapplicantYeah, so our hope is that it's neighborhood serving retail. We intentionally had it front on the linear park because we like that interface between that activity in the park interacting with the retail. It's very, very early to try and determine what we'll lease in that space. our hope would be though it would be neighborhood serving retail rather than commercial uses.

Anthony AmosUnderstood and part of the reason I asked that is because it just felt a little odd to have that retail space fronting well not fronting technically but closer to the chain bridge roadside I would think considering of an adjacent shopping center on the University Drive portion you might get more consistency putting that on the University Drive side I wasn't sure what went to your thought process on that.

Bob RantapplicantYeah so the retail Retail actually is on the right side, east side of the site,

Anthony Amoson

Bob RantapplicantUniversity Drive, correct. And the reason for that, just so you're aware, when we first met with staff about this, they emphasized the importance of having that retail frontage there because that's what the small area plan recommends. If you look at this site, the hotel site to the south and even points to the north across Eaton Place, it's envisioned in the small area plan that that linear park has a retail frontage. And so what you see here is the product of several conversations we had with staff early on. to advance that design

Anthony Amosi am very happy to hear i was wrong about that so thank you

Bob Rantapplicantso i didn't say you were wrong per se

Anthony Amosi'll say it to myself uh no that's good to know um and that was it for my questions thank you thank you

Catherine Readuh councilmember quillen

Rachel McQuillenthank you um how much commercial will be preserved uh

Bob Rantapplicantso the the existing office buildings are about 16 000 square feet a little over that councilmember mcquillen those will be those will be retail that we have here which is just over 2,700 square feet.

Rachel McQuillenOkay. And then how much, how much room is there for, I'm looking at the renderings and they, I actually really like this plan a lot. I'll be honest with you. I really like this plan a lot. I like the retail on the side. But the renderings, is there a lot of room for changing the look to look less square and modern and like everything else I see in everybody else's city that's being built?

Greg TremorapplicantAbsolutely. And this is Bob and my first opportunity to work together. And he said, you know, you don't really need renderings at this point. It's just conceptual. And I said, let's put something in there and facilitate a conversation. So the answer is absolutely. And we want that feedback. And we want this whole project to feel like it's part of the fabric of the city of Fairfax.

Rachel McQuillenGreat. I do like the setup. I like the green space. I like where you have the retail. I'd like to see a little or the commercial. I'd like to see a little bit more preservation for commercial, but the renderings and the look of the appearance, I think you could go a long way if it really matches our community well and keeps to the character. So thank you. Great.

Catherine ReadThank you. Council Member Peterson?

Thomas PetersonYeah, I've got for staff a couple of questions here. Just on page one, and just a couple quick math questions for you. On the far right bottom, activity centers plus outside of number of units. And you drop down, you go to a total of 3,022. What is that number?

Clara SchweigerstaffOkay. Sorry. Can you repeat your question? I was looking at my presentation, not the staff report. That's okay.

Thomas PetersonSo I'm going to the staff report. Yes. And I'm going down to bottom right corner of page one. And so you've got a couple tables here that give you the tally of what are known, what's your benchmark estimates. But I'll circle back to them on the very far right. And they have numbers for the first two for North Facts and then activity centers plus combined. The last one is activity centers plus outside of. And it's blank. you drop down to the very bottom it's 3,022. What does that mean?

Clara SchweigerstaffYeah, that's all like one table. So that means the projects that are in a land use process right now, including activity centers and those outside of activity centers.

Thomas PetersonThose are in a land use process. How do you reconcile that with the first two boxes, one for north facts and one for activity centers combined the north facts one has 1400 and the small area plan benchmark estimate for activity centers is 4700

Speaker 6and and miss schweiger if you could pull up that slide oh yeah as well i think

Clara Schweigerstaffthat might forgot it's in there might be

Speaker 6helpful so the 1400 units council member peterson is the benchmark estimate for the north facts small area plan and so that's what's identified in the plan in terms of a benchmark estimate over the near-term development in North Facts. So there is not a benchmark estimate for areas outside of activity centers. So in that final table on the far right of this slide, you don't see a benchmark estimate. So what's included there is in total number of residential units at some place within the development review process that could be considered by City Council at some point in time if those proposals or projects proceed those are the figures associated with that so under construction approved under review and in a pre-application phase and so those are

the units that are somewhere in the development review process with the city.

Thomas PetersonThat's the 3,022? Yes, sir. All right. So just to check my math. So if you look at current population in the City of Fairfax, which is 26,340 or something like that, and you add 47 to it, that's 4,700. That's knocking the door at an 18% increase. If you add another 3,000 to it, it's like a 29% increase over base. So just adding the numbers up, again, just a math thing. We have a current population. I'm trying to get a sense of how much that current population expands.

Speaker 6I'll take your word for it, Council Member Peterson. Blame

Thomas Petersonit on the iPhone if it's wrong, okay? And my thumbs, which I have too many of right now. All right, so there's that. Then you said near-term. What does that mean?

Speaker 6So the small area plans identify a 10 to 15-year near-term development window. And so as shown in those plans, there's a full illustrative build-out of what redevelopment in those areas, which are designated redevelopment areas in the city, might look like. As those plans are being developed based upon market conditions, what is included is what is estimated redevelopment activity could result in over that 10 to 15-year period. So for Northfax, it was 1,400 units.

Thomas PetersonGreat. But so and we've talked about this so you'll correct me if I don't exactly get it right, but those benchmark estimates are What market conditions could result in that is not however a public policy goal that's been adopted by the city

Speaker 6That is correct.

Thomas PetersonAnd that's a very critical point for everybody recognize. So I think we need to be cautious about Any presentation and I'm not pointing fingers at this one that might suggest that we are trying to attain These particular goals that is not the case. We're simply tracking metrics, but I'm curious also I don't see our economic development director here although maybe she's hiding somewhere But we have a metric here which is housing units are we also estimating expansion market potential and for that matter retail and I don't even talk about industrial but let's just talk about commercial and retail over the same period I don't see those benchmarks here

Speaker 6we are and and that's information that we can provide to City Council moving forward I think this table is put together in response to a previous request so we included it in this presentation but we can add additional information regarding commercial square footage as well.

Thomas PetersonIt gets to a strategic question I think for the council in the city as it is trying to address public interest and that is the goal that either we have or we've certainly discussed of expanding the presence of commercial redevelopment and or development in the city and we don't have parallel numbers here look like next to residential numbers, so the conversation is a little bit one-sided. We're just talking residential. We're not talking commercial here. This is a case where we're reducing the... So there is certainly an interest in expanding commercial, and in this case, we're actually reducing it from 16,000 to 2,700 square feet. I think that's a really big hit on a commercial square footage.

And again, our economic development director is not here, I'm sure be listening in on this it's my understanding that just across the street At Brightview one of the objectives there to address this very problem is to add 7,000 square feet at least of commercial there, so I guess my question is if we are trying to expand commercial in this area Why aren't we focusing the approach on this particular site in a manner that's consistent with that? because that would seem to be consistent with the city's goals I'll

Speaker 6defer to the applicant or the potential applicant regarding this potential site

Bob Rantapplicantsure thing thanks thanks mr. Hart and thanks councilmember Peterson for the question I think it's a good one right you know this site has been a commercial use for the last 50 or so years for the reasons I described the the existing facilities on the site the the buildings themselves are just they're at the end of their And so the question then becomes what's next and so when we looked at this property and working with the owner Trying to figure out what made the best sense for North fast What made the best sense for the city as Greg was mentioning earlier? We thought that introducing opportunities for homeownership here were appropriate now I acknowledge that there will be a reduction in the amount of commercial space certainly compared to what's there today

We are bringing forward what I do believe is a meaningful number 2700 square feet but i think looking at the bigger picture here what these these future residents will do is support the existing commercial uses that are already in the area the shopping centers down the street the future growth yet to come in north facts and so i do think that this application this proposal which is a relatively small piece of north facts and the bigger picture does have a role to play you've got the botanist coming online right now it's under construction i think that's I forget if you mentioned that or not, Council Member Peterson, but looking at this site and working through this development program, we felt that this was the highest and the best use for it

and certainly something that can be a valuable part of the overall North Facts community.

Thomas PetersonSo I think it would be great to maybe have an expanded conversation that I would like, if possible, to have the benefit of our economic development director to be a part of to understand the commercial status mix and potential goals in that area, because right across the street there is, of course, quite substantial commercial redevelopment going on, and I don't think the issue here is trying to make use of the 50-year-old buildings. I think it's pretty clear that this is a redevelopment scenario under any scenario here that's taking place, but I think the question is whether it's really the right time and place to be knocking out so much commercial given these circumstances. And I'd certainly like to understand that more clearly.

The other thing that factors into that is in terms of the type of commercial development that is consistent with future market conditions and could actually, those conditions could be shaped a bit by proactive things that we might do here. My understanding from our economic development director is that where the city shines and could shine is smaller scale commercial sites that would be of interest to firms that don't want to go into the really big office building developments that are outside of the city, but are looking for smaller scale, more, and by definition, more affordable, also that are amenitized, and it creates a set of conditions that those firms are looking for. And we have some competitive advantages there, and this would be a case where, you know,

this is a site that could potentially be acting on them. I'm not sure how much of the formulation of this proposal has involved conversations around economic development and commercial development in the city, but to me, that's kind of the white elephant here. I appreciate what you've brought forward, but I do want to acknowledge that we have kind of a big-picture issue here for the city in this particular location that I would feel more comfortable if we had a chance to unpack that a little bit here as we decide what works best here. Thank you.

Bob RantapplicantThank

Catherine Readyou. Council Member Hardy-Chandler.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerThank you. I really appreciate slide four because I think as I mentioned in a previous meeting sometimes we look at projects individually and we don't consider what else is going on in the area. So I think that we did ask for particularly on the residential side what else is going on and where this falls. So in Northfax is this proposal included in the the upper left side okay thank you um the other question that i had was for retail you mentioned neighborhood serving what does that mean specifically can you break down what that means for me sure

Bob Rantapplicantsure and i think

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerit's

Bob Rantapplicantshop there it's things like small small boutiques perhaps a coffee shop a cafe a small restaurant things that could as i was mentioning before you know, be used by the future residents here. And so I'm sure Greg would agree with me. It's still, again, we're on step one of 100 of this process. It's still relatively early. I think as we move forward, hopefully that vision gets fleshed out a little bit more. At this point, anyway, we're hoping to maintain as much flexibility as we can to expand the universe of potential uses. But what we're thinking is most likely is something like I described, a small restaurant, cafe, store, something like

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerthat. Thank you. I just wanted to understand the category. report where you were talking about the buildings being at the end of their life. So can you talk a little bit about the current tenants? And so it's at the end of its life. Something is going to have to happen, right? These buildings are not sustainable at all. Some choice is going to have to be made. So for the current tenants, I guess a couple of questions there. Any very early thoughts about what might happen with them in terms of a plan? and also what is the current vacancy of those buildings?

Greg TremorapplicantYeah, the current vacancy is about 40% and that's going to grow to, the buildings are set to go entirely vacant over the next 18 months. The buildings are structurally, you know, I don't want to say unsound, but in poor condition and it no longer makes sense to continue to reinvest them. So in any scenario, those buildings will be closed here in the next 18 to 24 months. Okay.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerAnd you mentioned, if I heard you correctly, in another response, you mentioned this as being different from some of the other projects that you're involved in. Is that what went into the decision for this particular kind of proposal? Because I think there was a mention of rental properties and other properties. So was this to diversify?

Greg TremorapplicantWell, in terms of this particular plan, it was diversifying the housing opportunities in this sub-market. Right now there's a rental product coming up and there's the senior housing and so forth. And

Anthony Amosso we

Greg Tremorapplicantsaw a distinct opportunity specifically in townhouses that are smaller, more attainable. The two over twos will be even a lower price point. So we felt like that hit a real sweet spot that wasn't an opportunity there. So having differentiated product was very interesting. The other thing that's about the site that is important to note is it's a small site. It's just over two acres. With the hotel to the south, there's no real opportunity to grow that to do a more substantial project. And so this was an opportunity to kind of pack a lot into a small bag. So I've checked a lot of boxes. Thank you.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerI appreciate that. Those are my questions for now. Thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member Hull? sorry can you give me another minute please thanks councilmember bates

Billy Batesum i certainly do overall um like some aspects of this project the the layout of overall the sidewalks and site access i will say that the smaller plan envisions this site being all commercial understanding that you know there might be room for compromise here but I would like to see ideally at least half the commercial space that's there replaced. And, you know, there are things that could be done in terms of perhaps structured parking. You know, we've seen other sites in the city where there's, you know, a small office filling with a small parking garage or something like that. And in addition to, you know, the retail frontage is certainly needed there, you know, But the small area plan envisions that fronting onto the linear park, which I think is perhaps maybe just a matter of moving that sidewalk around to the other side and, you know, having it front onto that sidewalk on that side.

But, yeah, again, more commercial space, office and or retail. But still certainly, you know, I think that having some for sale units here add some diversity to the housing stock in this part of North Fax. Thank you.

Stacy HallCouncilmember Hull. Thank you. Sorry, I forgot my reading glasses. I'm having to like zoom in or go over to the screen. Sucks getting old. I have a couple, I don't know if they're Clara questions or not, but back to slide four. I know we're spending a lot of time on that. The benchmark estimates of 1,400 for North Vax and 4,700 for the activity centers combined, combined, that equates to 6,100 units, correct? You are adding those two together or is the 4,700 inclusive of the four?

Speaker 6Inclusive.

Stacy Hall4

Speaker 6,700 total among all of the activity centers.

Stacy HallOkay. Sorry, we are going to have to do math real quick because I did it the other way. What I found, sorry, wrong buttons. Okay, so 4,700. Okay, so what I found with a quick search was that in 2024, the total dwelling units in the city was 10,467. So these proposed residential development plans to add 4,700 units, which is 45% of what we currently have available for dwelling units. So we are adding an extraordinary amount in this overall proposal, not your specific proposal. Let me be clear on that. And then of the 914 units that are currently under construction, or am I doing that wrong? It should be 430 under construction, or is it 484 total under construction?

Speaker 6484 total under construction among all four of the activity centers.

Stacy HallSo then 484 divided by 467 gets me to, let's call it about 5%. So there is 5% of the total dwelling units in 2024 that is currently under construction in the city.

Speaker 6I trust your math.

Stacy HallI didn't at first, but then I went back and did it the right way. Okay, so what I'm hearing is that we're going to be adding, based upon this slide, 45% of our existing housing stock. we're going to be adding an additional 45% of that total based on what we have on this slide. I think those are really important numbers. Now to your specific proposal, and this might be, again, a clear question first, but on page 6, the residence inn that is right near this, I believe that is a four-story building, which is roughly 48 feet tall.

Speaker 6I believe it's five. I'm going by memory.

Stacy HallI Googled it, but it said four, but is it five? I

Speaker 6think so. I believe so.

Stacy HallOkay, so five feet would be roughly 60 feet tall? 60

Speaker 6feet.

Stacy HallOkay, so your building then for that frontage there is going to be similar to the residence in?

Speaker 18Correct.

Stacy HallOkay. I will say that makes me feel a little better, but still not great. So I actually live across the street on Eaton Place. If you go across and down, I'm in that neighborhood there. So this is very, very close to home for me. You might be surprised, based upon my other comments along the way, that I actually do like this. I do have some suggestions, though. I do feel, even though the residence inn apparently is taller than I thought, I do feel personally that townhouses where the stackable units are would make more sense. I think it would keep the height a little bit lower there as you're driving along Chainbridge Road. and then maybe you could potentially repurpose some of the interior townhomes to be the stackable

units. That way you have that extra height, but it's not looming over the street there. I know across the street from there is the assembly townhomes. I believe, again, someone can correct me, I think they are three stories tall. So it might give a little bit more balance to what's there. I like the green space. I cannot wait until those connections on that service road so this gets us there a little bit faster. Very happy to see the 10-foot sidewalk on Eaton, the 8-foot sidewalk on University. The parking that is available, the 88 parking spaces, again, my old eyes are failing me today, but it looks like there are some guest parking spots, Amazon drop-off deliveries, those kind of spots available in addition to what's at the residences themselves.

Bob RantapplicantCorrect. So the surface parking spaces are really they could be used for both. So the ones on the left side, so the west side of the site adjacent to the stacked townhouses, I think there's eight or nine spaces there, but some of those would be kind of dedicated to the stacked townhouses. The stacked townhouses will have one-car garages, and so the rest of the parking would be provided in that surface parking area on the left. The surface parking area on the right primarily would be devoted to the retail, the commercial uses, but you know after hours in the evenings on weekends when that space is maybe not maybe not functioning those would be theoretically available for guests visitors things like that

Stacy Hallokay all

Bob Rantapplicantright while I have the opportunity to speak with you councilmember Hall just real briefly one of the reasons we provided that open space area on the south part of the screen here was to serve as a buffer between those units and the residents in it's about 8,000 square feet give or take and we thought it was the right move to provide a little bit of a buffer there, but I appreciate your suggestions about potentially looking at shifting things around a little bit. We'll look at that. I just didn't want to miss that.

Stacy HallOkay. No, I appreciate that. And I do also appreciate the buffer, and I'm sure people that live there will also appreciate it. These are all going to be for sale units, correct? Correct. Okay. And based upon the number that you're putting in, 6% of them will be affordable?

Bob RantapplicantI believe for the townhouses, it's 10%. Mr. Harden's nodding his head, correct? 10%. 6% would apply to multifamily.

Stacy HallOkay. I wasn't sure if the combination of the townhouses and the...

Speaker 6And it would be split. So 10% on the townhouse and on the two over twos, the stack to those would be multifamily per zoning. And so that would be 6%. Okay. So I think it's three or four? Three or four. Three or four, I think.

Stacy HallOkay. And I don't mean to be naive about the two over two units, 8 2 over 2 does that mean 16 units total or that means 8 units like 4

Bob Rantapplicant8 total okay

Stacy Hallcorrect okay I'm happy to see the dwelling units per acre at a reasonable 17.7 in my opinion the private street you're referring to is this the trash and all of those things would be handled entirely by the complex itself because they're townhouses right so they don't know so they do get city

Speaker 6correct the townhouses would get city services yes

Stacy Hallbut the stacked units would not

Speaker 6that's correct

Stacy Halli don't know how that's going to work

Speaker 6um similar situation in mount vineyard at the corner of oak and main street has similar set up townhouses and two over twos and and condominiums in that development so it is split okay different colored trash cans on different units yeah i

Stacy Hallthink it's Okay, I was going to say, I was going to imagine fighting over some dumpster space, but maybe not. And again, I know this is step one of 100. I do think, again, I live right near here. What I think we are lacking is, like you said, a cafe-style place, a place that does sandwiches, a place that does a nice lunch. You can get some stuff for dinner takeout. I love coffee shops, but when they don't serve sufficient food, like, we have enough coffee shops right now. So again, I know that that's in the weeds, but I live here. I have a vested interest in seeing something like that succeed. But I have to say I am pleasantly surprised, and I'm sure those that are watching at home are like, wow, she's actually supporting something, right?

And I am. Again, I would like to see maybe the shift of the stackable over to the back, but I think there's a lot of really good things here. you did mention that the current tenants were 40% 40% vacant right now and expected to transition out in the next 18 months is that simply because the owner of the building knows he or she wants to do something and is not renewing leases?

Greg TremorapplicantThe value of the leases are far below the cost to fix the building up to the state where we remain leasable so it doesn't make any economic sense any longer

Stacy HallOkay, and what is currently in there? space it's

Greg Tremorapplicantabout third medical and about two-thirds office okay kind of local small office users okay

Stacy Halldo do we know if we anticipate the people that are there currently wanting to remain in the city other options for them or is that just they're likely gone yeah

Bob RantapplicantI think and you know the owner is not with us this evening but you know we've had conversations with them I think we would be absolutely very open to working with economic development and facilitating the city if that that is a possibility um the the ownership group that owns this this these buildings today have owned it for quite a long time and so um you know they have they very much want to do right by their attendance as they as they move on as they move out and so that's something they'll be working through throughout this process and and beyond um one more thing while i have the microphone and i'd be remit with that at the risk of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory here um green space you mentioned on on chambered road here just to be very clear what we did there is we

We took what's in the city's plans right now for the intersection improvements at Eaton Place and University, and we kind of overlaid what that's going to look like in the future, just to be very clear.

Stacy HallOkay,

Bob Rantapplicantso

Stacy Hallnot a pocket park there. Correct.

Bob RantapplicantThat's really for illustrative purposes. That's going to be done in the future when the intersection improvement project goes forward. And so what we did is we just simply overlaid the city's plans onto these drawings to show what it will look like in the future when it's all said and done.

Stacy HallI appreciate your honesty and transparency on that one.

Bob RantapplicantBut the other spaces on the site, we'll take care of those.

Stacy HallGreat. Thank you very

Bob Rantapplicantmuch.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Peterson?

Thomas PetersonYeah. I was wrong on my math. Councilmember Hall was kind enough to recut the numbers. I just wanted to reinforce that the 45% growth in households over 10, 15 years, but let's call it 10 years, is more than four times, it's four and a half times the rate of household growth that occurred in the last, in the period of 2020 to 2025 in the city. So this just, again, this is not an issue with this particular proposal, but it is a general question and concern about the overall volume and rate of growth for residential units because it far surpasses both in rate and volume. and what we've seen in the last five years. Of course, the backdrop is we're down economic and population growth, so it's even more reason

to be wondering how best to approach these things. I think it underscores the need to have this conversation about the commercial strategy for this area and what that looks like and whether there are yet opportunities that you all haven't been able to capture yet that might tap into that. And I think it also makes us think a little bit twice about how we're approaching the residential unit additions across the board and small area plans. Appreciate what you all have done. And I appreciate your flexibility and openness here. And this is a first swing at what you've done. But I think it is good and fair to give you sort of some feedback in terms of this whole commercial issue and hope that we maybe can look into that a little bit more clearly as

we go forward.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Bates.

Billy BatesJust an additional comment. In the interest of perhaps having some give and take here, I could see, you know, maybe this is something that you might not necessarily even want to do, given marking conditions, but I could see in exchange for a more significant amount of commercial space going to all two over twos, for example, to maintain the number of units roughly that you've proposed in exchange for providing additional commercial space here. Again, ideally at least half what's there. But I also just want to point out that in addition to the five-story hotel that's directly to the south, The office building next to the assembly on the west side of Cambridge Road that basically backs right up to the community

there is also four stories. So very in keeping with the current character of that area. And additionally, the small area plan recommends a maximum of seven stories here. So you even have some additional flexibility. But I think that four stories throughout the site would certainly be reasonable.

Catherine Readother questions or comments okay so I think this is a good project I like it I think townhouses and two over twos in this location is going to be very appealing because of its proximity to I 66 I predict they will be sold before they're completed it also backs it gives access to the I 66 trail a very additions and implementation for the i-66 trail and this housing is right there as far as the retail what i see i see what you see which is you've got two hotels you've got uh the botanist over here and the re the retail is probably going to be the services those people want to walk to at that just makes sense that that's the kind of commercial retail that's going to be there is the kind that serves that community I like the fact that it's so few units because

these smaller units on these small parcels give a better opportunity to create a closer community I mean you look at some places in northern Virginia that have townhouses communities that are just hundreds and hundreds of townhouses and I think with the number we have other small townhouse developments it just gives a greater sense of community I think but the proximity to I 66 and I 66 trail are going to make them highly highly desirable I believe and so I really like the project I know you've gone above and beyond on the green space in the linear park and you're paying attention not only to what the small area plan calls for you're paying attention to what you've historically heard the feedback from this council on other projects dpi adaptive

fitness is in this complex they're on the first floor I don't know what other businesses are there vacancy in the city for like accountants and medical space and things like that but dpi adaptive fitness is a very unique space that has been configured in a specific way and so i think i haven't spoken with devon or anyone else over there but the city obviously has plenty of time to work with them to find another location in the city but you know so it's important that we know who our businesses are I believe that they'll want to stay here in the city but we're the first step of a hundred people are now on notice that we need and I think our economic development team will in fact find spaces for the

businesses that want to stay here and I hope they all want to stay here but I think the fitness definitely will want to stay here so I have confidence I really have confidence in this project and look forward to seeing you come back based on the feedback you've gotten. So thank you very much. Ms. Shinneberry?

Ms. ShinneberryclerkBefore I announce the next item, and it was a little early, but I'm just doing a time check at 945. Okay. So our last work session item is a discussion of a request by Combined Courthouse, LLC, C slash O combined Columbia Glade LLC dash two zero zero four nine for the redevelopment of one zero three zero zero Willard Way and prints five seven two two zero zero zero four D and three nine two to Blenheim Boulevard and prints five seven two two zero zero zero three A I'm going to recognize Claire Schweiger, our city planner for the staff presentation.

Clara SchweigerstaffOkay, moving right along to Courthouse Plaza, this is a work session to discuss a redevelopment proposal at 10300 Willard Way and 3922 Blenheim Boulevard. We are currently in the post-submission phase of the development review process, so the applicant has made two submissions of the plan and staff have given the applicant comments on their application. A work session was held with the Board of Architectural Review on June 3rd and with the Planning Commission on June 22nd. On the right here is an aerial of the site. The site is bounded by Blenheim Boulevard on the east and University Drive on the west. To the north is Democracy Lane and Plaza Drive and to the south is the library. The site is located in the activity center place type and is subject to the Old Town

Fairfax small area plan. This site is currently zoned CR commercial retail and CG commercial general in the transition overlay district and the applicant proposes a zoning change to PDM plan development mixed use. The applicant proposes a phase development with phase one including 315 residential units, a 72-foot height maximum, which does require a special exception. The applicant has submitted a special exception request to exceed the 48-foot height maximum in the transition overlay district, and the small area plan recommends a six-story height maximum on this site. phase one also includes 12,500 square feet of first floor retail roughly 30,000 square feet of open space a plaza to the east of the existing retail new landscaping and two new streets

it also includes new and widened sidewalks the applicant is also requesting a special exception for sidewalks to allow some sidewalks to be narrower than 10 feet The plan also shows 741 parking spaces in service and structured parking. The applicant is also requesting a special exception to reduce the minimum parking ratio from 1.5 to 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit. The plans also include facade updates to the Courthouse Plaza Shopping Center and public art along the proposed Street 1 facade. phase two would require a future amendment to the master development plan so if this application is approved phase two would need to come back to this body at a future time for approval in phase two the applicant proposes 315 residential units a new north to south street 50,000

square feet of first floor retail in addition to one of the the pad buildings 90,000 square feet of open space and 980 parking spaces across surface and structure parking here are some renderings of the proposed building for phase one these are more renderings these are renderings of the center that would be refaced and then on the right image you can see a proposed plaza to the east of the existing retail and then next steps for this application are plan resubmission and staff review public hearings with the Planning Commission City Council and the Board of Architectural Review. And that concludes my presentation. And the applicant is here to present next.

Stacy Langtonpublic commentYeah, do you want to switch or do you want to,

Clara Schweigerstaffyeah. Sorry, one moment. There you go.

Speaker 13I'M AN URBAN PLANNER WITH CURATA PARTNERS. I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE WITH THE COMBINED PROPERTIES TEAM. I HAVE AESHA HILL AT THE TABLE WITH ME. SIGNIFICANTLY TO THIS BODY, COMBINED PROPERTIES OWNS FOUR PROPERTIES IN THE CITY, SCOUT ON THE CIRCLE IN THE UPPER PORTION OF THIS IMAGE, PICKET AND TURNPAKE SHOPPING CENTERS, AND COURTHOUSE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING WITH YOU ABOUT TONIGHT. this image you saw when I was here before it shows the area in magenta which will be removed that is the only portion of the building that would be removed with this first phase and then rebuilt with the mixed-use building everything in green is existing retail that would be renovated with this project we have made significant significant revisions to this application before this body saw

it since this body has seen it in 2025 additionally we've made significant REVISIONS SINCE THE IMAGES THAT CLARA PRESENTED IN HER PRESENTATION. SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE IN MY PRESENTATION. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ADDITIONAL COMMITMENTS THAT WE'VE MADE BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BAR, OVER THE LAST SIX WEEKS TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THEIR COMMENTS. SO SIGNIFICANTLY WITH THIS APPLICATION, WE'RE NOW REZONING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO THE PDM DISTRICT. WE'VE ALSO PROPOSED THAT SECOND PHASE, WHICH WAS SOMETHING STAFF HAD REQUESTED BEFORE. We have removed several of our special exception requests, including the request for parking. We have upgraded our architecture.

So you're going to see a lot of red brick integrated into the buildings. You're going to see the commitment that the Safeway gets refaced with this Phase 1. We've also reduced the height of the building at the corner of University and Democracy. Some additional things with landscaping. We've added a central park in Phase 2. We've added a linear park along Blenheim. AND ESTABLISHED NEW OPEN SPACES AND ALSO ADDED INTERIM OPEN SPACE IF PHASE 2 GETS DELAYED. AND THEN FOR SITE CONDITIONS, WE HAVE REMOVED THE PINCH POINT AT THE SIDEWALK, SO OUR SIDEWALKS FACING PUBLIC ROADS ARE ALL 10 FEET, AND WE HAVE WIDENED SOME STREETS FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC. BUT TO SET THE STAGE, THIS APPLICATION IS HERE BEFORE YOU

BECAUSE YOUR SMALL AREA PLAN IN 2020 ASKED FOR THIS APPLICATION. It identified this site to be redeveloped to include multifamily apartment buildings up to six stories in height and to be grocery anchored. The area in this image in this part of Old Town had 0% residential in 2020, and that plan called for a 58% mix of residential. And that's, again, from your small area plan. And so what we've done with phase one is we've focused on the left portion of the project. We've got the parking garage, the interior courtyard, and a mixed-use building. That building will have 12,500 square feet of new retail. And all of this green space will be all open space available in phase one with new pocket parks throughout.

And then when we come to phase two, what we've done is we've established the street network. We've established the street trees. We've established the building envelope. We hadn't had these details before you when we were here in 2025. But we have now committed to this as a phase two plan to start to show you how the full site could redevelop and this entire site would be rezoned. Additionally, we've shown an additional building on the pad site. That building could locate in different areas along that pad site. We could put it along Street 2 or along Blenheim as we've shown. Architecture. This is an image that was in Clara's presentation and is what was included in our second submission to staff back in May.

since that time we've heard from your BAR and staff they would like more red brick so what you're going to see is a significantly revised building what this building does is it removes the white brick and it converts any black brick to be an accent material and it integrates red brick throughout these facades democracy university and Street one are primarily brick the only element on these buildings besides accents that isn't brick is that champagne colored SO WE'VE REALLY DONE A SIGNIFICANT OVERHAUL WITH THE MATERIALS AND THE COLOR PALLETE. THIS IS A CORNER OF DEMOCRACY AND UNIVERSITY. YOU CAN SEE HOW WE'VE LOWERED THAT BUILDING HEIGHT TO HELP WITH THAT TRANSITION AT THAT CORNER. AND THEN AGAIN JUST LOOKING UP DEMOCRACY.

THIS IS THE SAFEWAY. THE TOP IMAGE IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY. THE BOTTOM WOULD SHOW A REFACE SAFEWAY WHICH WOULD OCCUR PRIOR TO RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY. AND THEN THE OVERALL CENTER BEING A COMPLETELY RENOVATED IN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT. Existing tenants, yes, we will be relocating existing tenants that are there. We have commitments in our application that commit to rent subsidies for tenants in good standings to help them relocate to find other properties in the city. We also have a commitment that we're going to reserve some smaller space in our building for startup customers and to continue to work with your economic development. We think those are important commitments, and we're proud to have made them.

In terms of connectivity, this site is incredibly porous. IN ORANGE ALL THE VEHICULAR ROUTE THROUGH THE SITE AND THEN ALL OF THE PEDESTRIAN ROUTE THROUGH THE SITE REALLY INTERLINKING ALL COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT. THESE ARE JUST GOING TO SHOW SOME IMAGES OF THESE SIDEWALKS AROUND THE SITE. WE'VE GOT AT LEAST SEVEN FEET OF WALKING AREA ON STREET ONE AND THEN IT ENLARGES TO AT LEAST TEN FEET OF WALKING AREA EVERYWHERE ELSE IF NOT 12 FEET OR WIDER. YOU'VE GOT LOTS OF ROOM FOR OUTDOOR SPACE, LOTS OF ROOM FOR TABLES. AND THEN WE'VE GOT SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE. TODAY THE SITE ONLY HAS 4.3% OPEN SPACE. IT'S RIDICULOUS. IT'S A SURFACE PARKING LOT. AT THE END OF PHASE ONE WE'LL HAVE INCREASED THAT OPEN SPACE TO 12.3%.

AND THEN WE'VE ADDED INTERIM OPEN SPACE IF BY 2035 WE HAVEN'T MOVED FORWARD WITH THE NEXT PHASE THAT BOLSTERS THAT OPEN SPACE TO 13.4% BEFORE BRINGING IT TO THE 20% WITH THE FULL BUILDOUT OF PHASE TWO. JUST SOME IMAGES TO SHOW YOU AND GIVE YOU articulated and really activated the open space retail park along Safeway proposed linear park along Blenheim and then again a reminder of the significant revisions that we've made to this application since 2025 and I'm happy to answer any questions

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Amos

Anthony Amosthank you this was a great presentation just to go into some of the likes the the open space plus the linear near park, that's pretty impressive. So I appreciate that. I'll come back to the tenant relocation plan shortly. My understanding is also you've been in communication with our economic development team, and I see that's included in here. That makes me very happy to see. And I think you'll probably hear it from my colleagues as well, but the color scheme is a significant improvement. So I'd really like to see that. For the tenant relocation plan, just for clarification, and this is more just interest rather than anything substantial, for the graduated rent tenants. So in terms of where did that idea come from and what's your ultimate goal with

accomplishing that?

Speaker 18Good evening. So the idea originally came from the current situation at Courthouse Plaza. Because we knew that we wanted the opportunity to redevelop it, we were left with below market lease terms. So ultimately for less than market rent, you could lease our space and instead of 10 years, you might get three or five or seven, depending on the timing. And so there are some tenants that have this gap between what's technically market rent and what they're paying today. And so recognizing that difference, we wanted to be able to help people along the way and help our tenants along the way in the event there isn't another below market space available for them that we can help them get there. So over a three-year period, the details still need to be worked out how it would work with

landlord and that sort of thing, but that we would fill that gap for them. And then on the other side of that, that there could also be an opportunity for new small businesses coming in or businesses that are currently there today that want to come back that might also need, you know, similar assistance as they get started and, you know, are early in their business that this could be a place they could come and start and grow.

Anthony AmosAnd would this be just for three years or are you saying this is kind of like a process you want to implement moving forward over the long term?

Speaker 18So for our existing tenants, it would be for three years. It's not something that we could financially handle, you know, into infinity. We could give it a little bit more thought on the new small businesses. Our original thought that it would be a similar three-year period. and they could choose to stay though in the space but that their rent would gradually increase over time and if they chose to stay they could.

Anthony AmosSorry, I asked my question poorly and that's why there's confusion. What I mean is, for example, you have a business that moves in there and they're there for 10 years and they decide to relocate. Does the new business coming in get a similar program or would they just go, I'm assuming, at the rate that's existing at that time? So yeah,

Speaker 18after 10 years it would be that new market rate.

Anthony AmosOkay, thank you.

Catherine ReadOther questions, comments on this? Council Member Bates.

Billy BatesThank you. So certainly, you know, I think that there have been some improvements here that are much appreciated, as well as perhaps some lingering minor questions and issues to be addressed, and I understand that you all, you know, have another submission coming up. And but I mainly just want to ask do we have the current tree canopy percentage as well on the site Under current conditions

Speaker 13We are working on getting you that current tree canopy on the site today. It's The way tree canopy is calculated doesn't necessarily measure the the survivability or the quality of that tree. And so rather it takes into account the canopy of the tree, but if you go out to look at that tree, the health of the tree is not always at the standard you would want. And so we want to be able to paint an accurate picture for you, and so we will be providing that calculation.

Billy BatesBut at any rate, I think that the significant increase in open space, particularly where there was simply pavement before in a lot of cases represents significant opportunity to reduce impervious surface on the site in addition to I believe that there are additional stormwater management improvements proposed as well. So I think that's really important for environmental sustainability going forward as well as stormwater management. Thanks.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Hall.

Stacy HallThank you. So I want to start with saying this is, in my opinion, very, very much improved. I'm really happy to see the changes to the brick. I feel like you're incorporating a lot more of what is our historic Old Town and so many areas throughout the city. Sorry, my voice is going away. I'm having some trouble visualizing some things and I'm hoping you can maybe help me a little bit. I'm also curious did you side note did you happen to meet with the old Fairfax Muse HOA

Speaker 13we did a

Stacy Hallwhile ago or recently

Speaker 13two weeks ago three weeks ago

Stacy Hallokay because the but

Speaker 13did they see this updated no so when this is a work in progress and this is part of what happens in this cycle right so we had been to the Planning Commission and the BAR before we met with the old Fairfax Muse we told them that those bodies had asked us to revise the them an interim option that we had shared with the Planning Commission but said we are still working on this so they have not seen these latest ones you guys are the first to see them

Stacy Hallokay I appreciate that and knowing that I think some of the concerns that the the HOA I'm sure you heard them yeah I'm hopeful some of those have have been I think moderately addressed in here and this is where I'm going to need a little bit more of a visual so looking at this Democracy Lane looking east. The flats

Speaker 13are on

Stacy Hallthe left. Is that the flats

Speaker 13on the left there? Yep. I'm standing at university looking up Democracy Lane here.

Stacy HallOkay.

Speaker 18Okay.

Stacy HallSo right now we're at five stories on the front side as opposed to the six that had been previously. yes so let's let

Speaker 13me

Stacy Hallgo back a slide

Speaker 13so this image now I've moved down a street so sorry for the confusion I've moved down a street this is looking to the left is university and the flats are in the background behind that ghosted out tree street our new street one is to the right here and so this is kind of our front entrance I The old Fairfax Muse is going to be up and to the left.

Stacy HallOkay,

Speaker 13so I'm

Stacy Hallon university

Speaker 13now. You're on university now. Okay. And so you have here a six-story building along university. It drops to five stories at that corner of

Stacy Halldemocracy. On the left side, it drops to five. Okay. Yep. Is it, so I appreciate that the, I'm sorry, not the landscaping, the, the, use your words, the darker brick, I guess, is there in the forefront, and then the whiter is in the back.

Speaker 13I feel like

Stacy Hallthat visually helps a lot with the height feeling. I do still feel like that one section there where it says retail in the apartments is still a little tall. I would love to see that knocked down by one story, if at all possible. But I do understand that, you know, you need to make a profit and all of that. I still think it's a lot of units. But visually, I think this is much more appealing and in line with what our residents have been asking for there. This is going to be a Clara question or maybe a Dan question, but I don't think I realize that University Drive is going to be going down to one lane to accommodate bike lanes. I thought we were putting bike lanes on there, but we were still keeping two lanes of traffic.

Sorry, we're making you get up a lot tonight.

Speaker 6Quite honestly, I'm not sure I should be answering this. I believe it's a four-lane section as you get toward North Street, and then as you come back, headed north, going by this property, down the hill, and so forth, it transitions to a three-lane section where you have a center-turning lane travel lanes, but we'll check that.

Speaker 13Our traffic engineer is here and they're nodding their head. In agreement. Okay. For the city's plans, not our plans. We've just shown them, but they're the city plans.

Stacy HallYeah. What I will say for the city as large, whether it's you guys or the city, but we have these nice 10 foot wide sidewalks, which could also be called a shared use path. To me, that could be a great place for a bike to go recognizing not your situation but I think we're gonna get a lot of pushback when that starts to come out a little bit more I don't know who I'm looking at but all of you so I I think this is not depressing looking anymore to quote the woman that came earlier and I have to agree with her I mean I think before it was very it's just too new it's too fancy it was to all of the things that I don't think were great I still think it's a lot of units and I know I've said different times and I'm not going to change my mind on that but I really do

want to give you credit for adding in as much of the open space that you have adding in the green space I don't know what your plans are for like the parking but if there's any way to do some impervious no pervious parking spots in some of those areas with you know the fancy things as opposed to concrete or asphalt or whatever I think that's another opportunity to take what is still large parking lot out in the open. I appreciate your efforts to do the kind of the pocket park along Blenheim and some of the other things. Is this? Yeah. Sorry. There's a lot of pages. Thank you. But there was another spot where you were kind of doing a little bit more of a park feature. There we go. Thank

Speaker 13you. So we have this is our phase one commitment that when the multifamily opens and then the darker green on the blenum side here would be an interim park space if for some reason we don't move forward with phase two. Okay. So right now, if you recall, Safeway controls the entire parking field with its lease. So we can't affect those parking spaces any more than what we've already done. But when that lease expires at the end of 2034, we can control that space and so we can commit to turn that into additional open space at that time haven't filed a phase two plan.

Stacy HallOkay. And does any interior Safeway work get done in any of these proposals?

Speaker 18So that's Safeway's decision. It is our hope that they will do work on the inside of the building, but they are completely in control of that and not combined, unfortunately.

Stacy HallOkay. I figured that was going to be your answer. I do like the brick. I like all the things that you have proposed there Remind me again because it's a lot of pages here. How many units total are we talking in phase one and phase two?

Speaker 13It's a total of 315 units per building and so phase one would be 315 and then if we come forward with phase two It would be 315 It's important 630

Stacy Halltotal. Yes, over

Speaker 13years significant time period right and we're not we're not asking for the approval of phase two of those details now we are merely committing to the buildable envelope the street network the street trees the open space commitments but we want the market we want the city's growth to be able to be absorbed and to really give us guidance on that phase two

Stacy Hallokay um and i i think again it's a lot of units but i do think it's reasonable in the layout and the things that have come out of this newer design with it. Do you know roughly what your breakdown is going to be for one versus two versus three units, bedroom units?

Speaker 18We can get you the specific breakdown for now. I don't have that in front of me, but we will have the majority one-bedroom units. One-bedroom? Yes. Okay. Okay. Okay.

Stacy HallAnd will there be any, like, amenities on site? Can you remind me for the residents that live here?

Speaker 13Yes. So there's a structured parking garage fills the upper part of the interior building, and then it's an interior green courtyard that would have a pool. We've committed to a pool. Indoor? Outdoor pool. Outdoor pool. Okay. But it's a courtyard that is internal to the building, right? So it really creates that privacy for those future residents.

Stacy HallOkay. And

Speaker 13I was happy... center and kind of co-working space and a lobby and your traditional pet spa, bike room, traditional class A apartment amenities.

Stacy HallI'm sorry, was that pet spa?

Speaker 13Yeah, so a spot to wash your dog.

Stacy HallThat's called my shower right now. Right?

Speaker 13I know.

Clara SchweigerstaffOkay.

Stacy HallSorry, question just left my head. Oh, I did want to thank you also for reaching out to every single tenant that's in there. I have actually heard from a couple tenants this week. I haven't had a chance to respond yet, but I think that the outreach was I'm happy to see the plan that you've put in place. And just to make sure I understand what that is, it's a commitment of low for up to three years with pre-negotiated increases of 3% per year. So this would allow them to temporarily relocate, come back into your new space for three years with a 3% increase.

Speaker 18So whether the relocation would be up to the tenant. So we've committed to helping them find a new space if they would like, or if they do want to come back into the space, then we could help them in that situation as well. But it is challenging for tenants to move twice. Right. So there probably wouldn't be very many that do that. But we are open to them coming back if they would like to do that. Okay.

Stacy HallAnd is there any way with the construction, and the answer might be no, but is there any way that these businesses could stay in place during some portion of the construction? Like when you're working on the, I'm going to use the word left because I'm not good with East and West, with the left portion and those kind of things? Or is it once you start, you start and everything to the left of the Safeway is kind of instantly gone? More than likely,

Speaker 18everyone will have to vacate. More than likely, everyone will have to vacate for safety reasons. We usually have to cut off gas, power, water, and make sure things are safe. Okay. Okay.

Stacy HallWell, it's never perfect for everybody, right? But I do appreciate what you are doing, and I think it's clear that you have gone above and beyond. I know Phase 2 was not something that you initially wanted to kind of commit to at this point. I know there was a lot of pushback on that from city staff, from members of council as well. SO I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I CAN TELL A LOT OF EXTRA WORK HAS GONE INTO THIS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

Catherine ReadCOUNCIL MEMBER MCQUILLEN?

Rachel McQuillenTHANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS IS A MUCH BETTER FIT THAN PREVIOUS SUBMISSIONS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU ALL DID ON CHANGING THE COLORS AND THE ARCHITECTURE LOOK TO IT. IT LOOKS MUCH MORE LIKE IT FITS IN this area of our community. I also like the reduced height at the corner of university and democracy. I think that that really does make a huge difference. The 10-foot sidewalks, thank you, really appreciate that. And the green spray spaces, I like that as well. The only concern I have, I do like your explanation about your approach and your strategy for phase two and the safe way if you could do that, that would look great. The only concern I have is density still. It's still a lot of units there for me.

However, it looks like there's, I guess the only question I have then is what community benefit beyond just housing do you see this offering?

Speaker 13So we have a commitment statement. Within that statement, we've made commitments to financially fund the schools, financially fund Parks and Rec. I'm trying to get to the right page. We've made our tenant relocation. Sorry. I skipped right by it. So the city school fund, we've committed to $1,600 a unit, which is more than other applicants have committed to when we studied this last time. We've got $367 a unit for city recreational amenities. to $305,000 toward undergrounding utilities. We've added $10,000 for commemorative signage on the site and a variety of things like that.

Rachel McQuillenThank you so much. And then my last question was that the small area plan in this area, what is the top amount of stories that you can go for this spot? It calls for six stories. It's six. And that's what this says, right? Yep. And that's what we proposed. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member

Thomas PetersonPeterson? MR. Yeah, just a couple of clarifying questions. I may need a little help from staff on this. I got the presentation this morning at 9 and really didn't have a chance to go through this in detail. So pardon me if I have not been able to capture everything in here and that I'm not able to capture everything with the questions right now. But just a couple of clarifications here. you said there's zero residential density or zero residential what were you referring to again

Speaker 13so in the small area plan when that was adopted in 2020 it identified that there was no residential i can pull up the page number no residential in this portion of the small area plan so it's page 25 the small area plan it has pie graphs on it and it noted existing mix of uses and proposed mix abuses.

Thomas PetersonThis portion, are you talking about the

Speaker 13property? The Old Town Fairfax Small Area Plan.

Thomas PetersonAnd there's no residential in that area?

Speaker 13That is what the Small Area Plan document identified on page 25 with a pie chart.

Clara SchweigerstaffSo when the plan was completed in 2020, there wasn't any, but now on page 8 of my staff report, I have the same table that you saw in my last presentation. so there has been plans approved since then.

Thomas PetersonYeah, I think the Planning Commission commented on 2,000 bedrooms in that area, so some such figure. I was just a little surprised to hear that. It's my neighborhood, so I'm familiar with a lot of residences there. Maybe to go back just to be a little clearer, And again, I got the presentation and I noticed something in it that said the small area plan I think it was calls for 1250 units and it's my understanding This sort of goes back to the earlier discussion this evening that that 1250 is Potential under market conditions, but it's not a goal

Clara SchweigerstaffRight. Yep. That's just an estimate from the small area plan

Thomas Petersonnot really calling for that. It's just saying that's a possibility under market conditions. MS. Correct. MR. It also is not requiring six stories. It is permitting up to six stories. So there's flexibility around that. Okay. So then the other thing, and not to be totally nitpicky here, but the guiding principles for redevelopment I think are really focused on the kinds of design considerations that you've brought to the site. And I think you've been working really hard on that. It's clear. But I'm just wondering, I mean, we're acting as a body here to make a public policy decision and are driven by community interest and public interest in this. And I'm wondering, are there, perhaps this is for staff,

but there ought to be another set of principles here, or a principle anyway, related to the public interest. would you express that in terms of how this meets as a matter of principle public interest to put this particular proposal in place? And I'm particularly noting there's been a lot of concern about height and density. There's also been a lot of concern about the shift here towards residential versus commercial and the city's overall need for expanding commercial. In light of that, what is the principle here in terms of the public interest for this?

Speaker 13So this shopping center has been not the city's crown jewel for decades. And so we think the public interest will be represented by redoing this shopping center and creating it to be an active and vibrant community with strong pedestrian and particular connections through it, lots of new open spaces, and a wider and improved street presence along two central drives to the city,

Thomas PetersonSo we certainly hear a lot. There's been a lot of comment on this. You know, people love the grocery store, et cetera. I think the thing that is being raised that perhaps raises inconsistency with public interest is the heightened density here. And the athletics have come a long way, but still, this is a lot in this particular spot. There is a lot of development here already, a lot of residential development. So I just want to acknowledge that I think we've all heard that there is a lot of concern about that. And it's really been raising the question of whether there's some modification that could address the concerns that have been raised about that. I recognize there have been some changes here.

You all have worked very hard on it. But the first blush, it looks very similar in scale to the proposal we've been seeing for a while. So I'm hearing that from others in the community who are seeing this. and the general reaction is essentially the same. While there have been some modifications involved in this and improvements, it is essentially the same proposal as was originally presented. And that, you know, is a concern to a lot of people. I look forward to spending more time with this and getting a chance to digest this a little bit more. But I would hope that there would yet be a way for us to address some of those concerns. I also think that the Phase II thing, it is very helpful to have made additional commitments around Phase

II, but they're certainly not guarantees. And I'm not sure we're yet at the stage where we've seen a layout for what this area would look like under a fully developed approach here. I know that was a recommendation slash concern of staff. I'm interested in looking further to see to what extent that's actually been addressed. But it would seem to me it's valid request to have a closer understanding of what a full build out would this look like with of this place would look like as it particularly pays attention to commercial and retail development. Thank

Catherine Readyou. Councilmember Hardy Chandler.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerSo there is a great deal of evidence that you have been listening and integrating what you've been hearing into this next iteration of I WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE POSITIVES THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THE GREEN SPACES AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, AND ADD TO THAT LIST THAT YOU ALSO LISTENED IN TERMS OF CONCERNS ABOUT CONNECTIVITY AND THE ROADWAY SPACES AS WELL AS THE PEDESTRIAN SPACES. I DO THINK THAT, AND I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. I do think that you are making an attempt to balance what's needed in terms of development against what would happen if you did nothing, right? And I want to highlight what you were starting to say about that being the public policy of it not being the crown jewel and really looking at how we're uplifting the whole activity area.

I get the concerns about density. DEFINITELY AN ONGOING BALANCING ACT. AND YET AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED BY THE MAYOR SEVERAL TIMES, JUST IN TERMS OF HAVING PEOPLE NEAR THE SPACES TO SUPPORT THE RETAIL ASPECTS, I THINK IS AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTION. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE THERE. AND I THINK THAT EVERY ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ORGANIZATION WHICH HAS INVESTED IN THE CITY, WHICH THAT IS ANOTHER POINT I INVESTMENTS IN THE CITY. I TRY NOT TO LOOK AT THINGS IN ISOLATION. THIS IS YET ANOTHER INVESTMENT THAT YOU'RE MAKING IN OUR CITY TO KIND OF COLLECTIVELY ELEVATE OUR CITY. SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE. I APPRECIATE LISTENING. THAT'S EVIDENT TO ME. DOING NOTHING IS NOT AN OPTION. AND I THINK I SUPPORTED THIS

PROJECT IN ITS PRIOR ITERATION. SO WITH THE ADVASMENTS THAT AND SHOWING ONCE AGAIN THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO LISTEN TO THE FEEDBACK. I APPRECIATE THE CHANGES THAT YOU'VE MADE AND I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT. AND AGAIN, FOR ME, NO DEVELOPMENT ON THAT VERY CENTRAL SPOT IN OUR CITY IS AN OPTION THAT I THINK GOES AGAINST PUBLIC POLICY FOR OUR CITY. THANK YOU.

Catherine ReadOTHER COMMENTS? COUNCIL MEMBER PETERSON? Yeah,

Thomas Petersonjust underscore. I don't think I'm hearing from anybody. There's a preference for zero redevelopment here. I think everybody, like many other spots in the city, virtually everybody is interested in that. The question is how? And that's really where the feedback has been. So, again, I would hope that we would be able to focus a little bit more on the fundamentals of what that question really involves from the community in terms of what happens here. Thanks.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Amos.

Anthony AmosLast comment I'll make and it's a quick one just because I see some similarities to it and a lot of this dependent on phase one getting approved and then phase two ideally happening but that phase two location does give me elements of Fairfax quarter in it and I do appreciate that

Catherine Readother questions or comments I like the project I've been looking at the Safeway now for you know since 1981 and it is right in the center of our city and when we talk about getting feedback from the public that is the point of having a public hearing and I do expect that we will hear from residents who have a vested interest including the people across the street who are residents but I hope we have a robust feedback from our businesses I hope our businesses step up to say what it means to have 360 units right next door or right behind their buildings the flats at University was our first foray into having housing in the downtown which is great but those students aren't there 12 months out of the year so our summertime doesn't look nearly as active

is our fall and our spring. And so I hope our businesses will come out to talk about the economic impact of having housing in this location. We need to hear from everyone, and I do think that is why we have a public hearing. And I do want to acknowledge the fact that you didn't have to come back and give us another chance, but you did, and you incorporated so much of what you heard, including the people from the muse who said, I don't like the color. you have you have done your best to negotiate what works financially and from a property ownership standpoint what works for combined properties again I agree with councilmember Hardy Chandler you've been deeply invested in our city for six decades and we appreciate the fact that you keep

improving the properties that you own here it's a long-term relationship and I want to acknowledge that we appreciate all the work that's gone into this and I think there is an opportunity through public hearing for people to come and give us more information on this project but I do like the project I do I believe it is in the best interest long term of the city to redevelop this piece of property so close to our downtown it is just it's something something has to happen there so thank you so much for the presentation and we look forward to seeing you again. Ms. Shinneberry. Okay, I will now reconvene the regular meeting and kick it over to our city manager, Mr. Alexander.

Mr. AlexanderstaffThank you, Mayor and Council. As you know, after this meeting, it'll take us into a break for a month, and then we will be back for a robust work session on september 1st reminder that is scheduled to start at four o'clock you will see a number of items on that work session for a reason and we certainly wanted to try to do as much workshopping as we can on those sessions so you'll see pre-application briefings listed there for 3250 blenum 10 560 and 3570 Chain Bridge Road. We will also bring back citywide level of service and dynamic capital impact modeling for discussion. We will make a full way into our legislative program and then we will have a discussion, which you'll see on consent later,

regarding the reappropriation of general operating capital and enterprise funds carrying over to 2027 from 2026. So again, that'll be pretty robust work session on the first. Looking ahead to the eighth on consent, you will see a construction contract for University Drive bike lanes and the consideration of resolution to cancel the project project listed there. And then, um, as I mentioned, you'll see the introduction or consideration of the resolution for the re appropriation that would have been workshopped on the meeting prior. Also items not requiring public hearing will be the consideration of adopting the code of ethics on the eighth, looking ahead to finishing out September, um, public hearing and council action on a redevelopment of existing office into 14

townhouses at Mantua 94-95 Silver King Court and then if needed a public hearing and council action on the resolution for reappropriation on that night and that would wrap up September October would be our second work session starting at four o'clock happy to answer any other questions on items that we've discussed or otherwise are ahead of us

Catherine Readall right questions on future uh council member hall

Stacy Halljust two questions i think um the university drive bike lanes that's the same conversation we just had a few minutes ago can we get a refresher on that did we see that as this counselor was that a previous council am i that

Mr. Alexanderstaffwe've talked about it for a while I

Stacy Hallknow but did we do a recent public hearing and all those things I mean I'm sure that was closed out a while ago since we're at the consideration phase but I'm just really wondering and in light of the ten-foot sidewalks that they're considering is there maybe a better solution to a shared use path there well

Mr. Alexanderstaffwe'll what we'll do is come back with some information generally about our plan and more information specifically about this ahead of this meeting, well ahead of this meeting, so you have that information?

Stacy HallYeah, I mean, we don't really have a lot of time, because I know we have the August recess. I'm certainly open to receiving information in August.

Speaker 10Yeah.

Stacy HallBut, okay. And I will also do my due diligence and go back and try to check that out. My second question, and it's just a logistical one, is that we have a meeting on October 13th, which I think is the final day of the VML conference. Are we, is there any actual conference that day and then we're coming home? It's only half day, so they wrap up about noon that day. So we should be home in time then for a minute. Okay, perfect. Thank you.

Anthony AmosCouncil Member Amos. Just one quick follow-up question. For September 22nd, the Highlands of Mentua project. If I'm remembering that correctly, I remember, gosh, I don't know if that was a pre-application that we did or was it a post-submission? last year if i recall correctly and that's the one where we have the conversation about whether to keep the tree landscaping there or they wanted to put in a park if i recall

Speaker 6yes i believe you are correct that application has now gone to the planning commission there will be a communication to each of the members of council and the mayor for individual meetings to give you an update on that project from the development team and then any questions you may have.

Anthony AmosThank you. Just because it feels like it's been a pretty significant gap in time between when we spoke with them. Again, I think it was last year versus this coming up in September. So thank you. Yes, sir.

Catherine ReadOther questions? Council Member Hall? Are

Stacy Hallwe going to talk about the buck slip at another time or is this the right We can talk about it then. That's fine. Thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Peterson.

Thomas PetersonCan you clarify the purpose and scope of the citywide level of service and dynamic capital impact model? I want to set expectations for what we will be receiving. What is the actual purpose and substantive application of that? Yeah,

Mr. Alexanderstaffwe previously, I think, presented in a work session to Council, but I'll go to the bullpen and ask Brooke to come up again. And this would be

Greg Tremorapplicantan update to

Speaker 6that previous work session that Council held, which was more of an introduction to the project and a review of what the effort would be undertaking and what factors would be analyzed as part of the project. this is to come back and share results of that analysis it would not be a moment where we would ask for council approval in terms of considering proffer policy or anything of that nature we would anticipate that based upon this discussion the council would give staff feedback on those results and whether there's a desire forward with considering policies in terms of level of impact to various city infrastructure and so that would be a future discussion and so this will be to share the results to give a sense of what those impacts are how those numbers

calculate and whether there's a desire to continue to move forward to look at policies that would be part of the city's development review process let

Thomas Petersonme AND IF I MIGHT, A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY, IS THIS PROVIDING GUIDANCE AND BENCHMARKS RELATED TO PROPHERS?

Speaker 6POTENTIALLY.

Thomas PetersonOKAY. SO POTENTIALLY THAT. IS THIS DESIGNED TO BE A REGULATORY IMPACT OR PUBLIC POLICY IMPACT ASSESSMENT TOOL?

Speaker 6It is a development impact assessment tool. And so the team has analyzed what expenditures are associated with development proposals, what that means in terms of the city infrastructure, and whether or not there are, you know, what those financial impacts are. And so a level of service study would provide to the city on a per project basis what those impacts would be to things like parks and recreation facilities, school facilities, transportation infrastructure, public safety infrastructure. and that analysis could guide the city toward a proffer policy for all of those items. You know, what the approach has been to this point has been those have been negotiated on a case-by-case basis. And not to get too deep into the proffer thing, I think we've talked a little bit about that before,

but the Commonwealth of Virginia in 2016 rewrote the rules in the state for proffers, which severely limited locality's ability to negotiate for proffers since that time we've instituted some measures that have given us a little bit more flexibility to do that and so we've seen the potential for for proffers to be offered particularly in our activity centers because the code of virginia carves out special provisions for areas covered by small area plans And so that gives us some more ability to negotiate these things. What we would like to do is be a little bit more systematic in how we do that. And so it's not an unknown to the council. It's not an unknown to a property owner or developer coming in as to what those expectations are.

But that will be totally at the discretion of the council. This first discussion is to merely share the results of that analysis. FROM THAT POINT FORWARD IS YES STAFF WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO TO LOOK AT CREATING SOME POLICIES THAT AGAIN COULD COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL AND WE CONSIDER WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO ADOPT THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO

Thomas PetersonIS THIS AN ACCOUNTING TOOL SO THAT WE KNOW WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT A PROJECT FROM AN ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT WHAT THE OUTLAYS OUTLAYS AND EXPENDITURES ARE FOR A PARTICULAR DECISION WE MAKE? IS THAT

Speaker 6CORRECT? ACCOUNTING ON WHOSE BOTS?

Thomas PetersonCITYWIDE ACCOUNTING. I MEAN SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FROM AN ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT, THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT, WHAT ARE WE SPENDING AS A CONSEQUENCE OF A DECISION ON A DEVELOPMENT? IS THAT THE QUESTION THIS IS ANSWERING?

Speaker 6NOT NECESSARILY. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY DOES CURRENTLY. SO THE CITY DOES A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR EACH ONE OF THE SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS THAT COME FORWARD TO THE staff report that you see at a public hearing that accounts for anticipated revenues and expenditures for any development and looking at the city's budget and what those costs are to the city and then in terms of the development proposal, what revenues that we anticipate coming in. So that's a part of what we do today. And that looks at city costs kind of across you know across the entirety of the budget the level of service would look at physical impacts we'll look at infrastructure impacts things that the city can potentially get proffers for city can't get proffers for operational

costs the localities can get proffers for physical infrastructure and expansion of capacity of physical infrastructure that's associated with the development THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. THE LEVEL OF SERVICES LOOKS MORE AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE SIDE OF THE EQUATION, NOT SO MUCH THE OVERALL FISCAL IMPACT. THAT IS PART OF WHAT THE COUNCIL RECEIVES AS WELL.

Thomas PetersonIS THIS SOMEWHERE IT ALREADY IS SCOPED AND WE CAN LOOK AT ITS CURRENT STATUS IN TERMS OF WHAT IT'S COVERING? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT I COULD READ, FOR INSTANCE, OR ANYBODY ELSE COULD READ ABOUT THE SCOPE OF this we

Speaker 6can certainly share the the materials that we brought forward previously we don't have necessarily have the materials that will be presented in September ready to to bring forward yet but we'll share we'll share those as soon as they're available as well well

Thomas Petersonthat'd be real helpful I mean I think the general thing is on February 14th I think we had a discussion about development land use applications and the city manager listed out a whole series of impacts that could and typically are included in assessments of the full suite of impacts associated with the development or land use application safety crime risk you name it right down the list here and that What sounds like that, you know, it's a set of socioeconomic impacts, public impacts here. This would provide only the fiscal dimensions of that with respect to services and infrastructure, but it's not, this is really not what impact are we able to determine in terms of the effect of these decisions on elevated crime risk and the response that we'll have to, you know,

engineer in terms of that, things like that. Is that a fair understanding? Yes. Okay. So there's a broader piece of this that this really is not

Greg Tremorapplicantlooking at.

Thomas PetersonI would like to see if I might, and I'm sure everybody would, what that is because I think there is a broader question mark about how we assess from a public interest standpoint impacts and the opportunities associated with these decisions we make. And it would be great for that to be as inclusive as possible. So.

Jim Gillespiepublic commentChair

Mr. AlexanderstaffGreg Musil I

Jim Gillespiepublic commentthink we send you what we have up to this

Mr. Alexanderstaffpoint. I'd also say at this point also that we'll offer each of you an opportunity to have a conversation with us ahead of the work session, which will benefit the conversation at the work session.

Thomas PetersonDr. John A. That would be great, and it would be great if there could be, with respect of the fiscal impact analysis that we do now, a little bit of transparency in terms of what's actually in that. I would love to see that. Thanks.

Catherine ReadAny other questions or comments on the future meeting topics? Seeing none, we will go to the manager's report app.

Mr. AlexanderstaffThank you, Mayor, Council. As was mentioned earlier, we did send you this morning a what's called in buck slip informational item buck because it's the size of a dollar that we would like to maybe include in the personal property tax bills that will be mailed out in September the idea is to give us some more transparency and information on how our general fund dollars are spent and investments are made both in operating and capital we provided you an example and the the timeliness uh issue really is one of i know the treasurer's office wanted to know we had consensus from council before we coordinated with them in order to push that out and so this is an opportunity to get some feedback from you on that item so that we

can quickly turn it around and again coordinate the process of getting that out to our residents so happy to take any feedback from you on what you saw and what you might want to see out of that understanding it's it's this big so

Catherine Readcouncilmember Hall and then councilmember Hardy Chandler

Stacy Hallthank you I know I've been asking for this for a while and I think actually with the interim so I'm really really happy to see that this is moving forward I really just have two suggestions one is maybe just add a thank you for paying your taxes and also on the back side of it there's an area on the bottom right where it had the percentages of certain things and there was a bit of a area available I'm wondering if maybe we could add a QR code that would direct people to the fiscal year 2027 budget and just say you know here's here's a link to this hopefully that won't add extra effort but that was just my suggestion to you know kind of here's the basic information and then if you want more information here it is nice

easy ready to go

Catherine Readthank you and councilmember Hardy Chandler

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerI think I responded that I absolutely support this I think the visual helps people understand that it's not going into a black hole it really is going to services and how those services are divided so I absolutely support that is there any Any question of the cost of adding that to the mailing of the bills? No, we just wanted to, again,

Mr. Alexanderstaffensure that we got consensus from Council before we approach the Treasurer

Stacey Hardy-Chandleragain on

Mr. Alexanderstaffthis process.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerWell, I think it will be very beneficial to all of the residents of the city, so thank you very much.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member McQuillan?

Rachel McQuillenYeah, I love this idea ever since Council Member Hall brought it forth. I think this is great. Thank you so much.

Catherine ReadAny other feedback? Council Member Peterson?

Thomas PetersonWell, I think this is a separate thing. It kind of gets to the last conversation, but it would be great to kind of boil this down to a communications format. Because every time we make a decision here, it has, well, not every time, but very often it has out-of-pocket expense implications on residents. And I like to use the term neighborhood math. People need to understand if you do this, what's coming out of my back pocket next year. and it would be great to be regular about lifting that information out of the decisions we make so that people who are tuning in can know and we need to invite other people to tune into that so I don't think this is exactly the same thing but I think they're related I would say also it's not

just a matter when we make decisions of the out-of-pocket expenses that you know people are facing as a consequence of it. But just a reminder, we're also helping people save, reduce those out-of-pocket expenses. We've done energy, you know, clean energy things that are actually cost savings things. And then we've done things that proactively are designed to increase revenues, commercial economic household, et cetera. It just would be good from a communication standpoint for a resident to know when we make decisions, what's the plus and the minus that's going on here. And again, that has to be in terms they can understand and what they typically understand very well is what's coming out of my back pocket this year. So I know we don't have that exactly and that

may be ground for further creative thinking but I just wanted to suggest it.

Catherine ReadAny other comments? I think I think we have consensus that the idea is good. It is helpful people for people to visualize where their dollar goes so I think you've gotten feedback and other than that I think we're all nodding in agreement that this is a go thank

Mr. Alexanderstaffyou

Catherine Readanything else mr. City Manager that's

Mr. Alexanderstaffa thank

Catherine Readyou that's it for you okay then we will do the council comments council member Amos thank

Anthony Amosyou so looking over to Melissa she wanted to quickly go over the BACs and setting up that for August, I believe.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkThank you. Council Member Amos. So each of you have a printout of the first two pages are our vacancies that's going to be advertised in the August city scene. As you see on the second page, it's the HCAB 17 positions that are coming up for a reappointment or appointments. On the third page is the applicants I have on deck that would be ready to be interviewed. There are 20 people listed on here. And I'm bringing this forward because a council member had brought this up last week about maybe doing an August interview night. So I wanted to get feedback if there would be a consensus or at least four council members that would be available in August. And I would say either the, we keep it on a Tuesday, either the 11th, 18th, or the 25th.

Because next week's National Night Out.

Catherine ReadOkay, so feedback and we'll just start with councilmember Amos

Anthony AmosAugust is a bit of a rough month for me, so it's unlikely I'll be able to however If I were to be able to finesse it it would need to be towards the end of the month So the 18th of the 25th if we stick with Tuesday

Catherine ReadOkay, councilmember Hall,

Stacy HallI would prefer not the 25th as our kids go back to school the day before so I am otherwise the 11th or the 18th work fine for me

Catherine Readokay councilmember Hardy Chandler I

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerbelieve I can do the 18th

Catherine Readokay councilmember Peterson I'm

Stacey Hardy-Chandlerflexible

Catherine Readokay councilmember

Billy BatesBates any of those work for me

Rachel McQuillenoh sorry

Ms. Shinneberryclerkthe 11th or the 18th please okay

Catherine Readit looks like the 18th is the winner

Ms. ShinneberryclerkTHE NEXT QUESTION, LIKE I SAID, I HAVE 20 PEOPLE ON DECK. IS THERE A CERTAIN AMOUNT YOU WANT TO BRING THAT NIGHT? BECAUSE WE DO FOR AN HOUR, SO THAT'S A LONG TIME.

Catherine ReadCOUNCILMENDER PETERSON?

Thomas PetersonSO I'M LOOKING AT THE LIST, AND IF I'VE GOT IT RIGHT, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, LIKE 12 OR 13, our Housing and Healthy Communities Advisory Board. Did I get that right?

Ms. ShinneberryclerkSo some of them have long titles because they represent a certain position on there. So really on there, there's – let me get my glasses on.

Thomas PetersonOkay, yeah, my eyes are not working.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkThere's like six right now. Okay. Thank

Thomas Petersonyou. Gosh, that was hard to figure out.

Ms. ShinneberryclerkI didn't want to just put names on there. I wanted to at least show what position they represent.

Thomas PetersonBut I wonder whether that's sort of a stack that we might set aside and do. That's a bunch of folks. And if we split it so that somehow or another we weren't doing them all at once, that would be an option for that being set aside.

Catherine ReadSo their terms are not open until January, yes?

Ms. ShinneberryclerkSo on the last page, I have a list of all the applicants who would be reappointments for the rest of the year. they vary some terms and in September October November or December okay I

Stacy Hallthink my suggestion would be pull out the health and house I'm sorry housing and healthy communities advisory board and do them separately and then we could probably get everybody else in one night

Speaker 15okay

Catherine ReadI agree with that everybody else

Speaker 15agrees with that

Catherine Readyeah all right

Ms. Shinneberryclerkthat's all I need I'll get back on the date or We can do the 18th since everybody's pretty much on the 18th. Okay. We can start at 7 or we can start at 6. Your preference.

Speaker 106 works for

Ms. Shinneberryclerkme. 6? Okay.

Speaker 10Don't

Rachel McQuillenchime in unless you're definitely going to come.

Catherine ReadRight.

Anthony AmosRight. Oh, right. I forgot. It's still on me. Okay. Thank you. All good. So pivoting back real quick. another I guess calendar clarification doesn't need to be during council comments I know Brian Lubcomen responded to us about the Pickett's Reserve visit on Saturday so if folks want a message on how we want to go about that we can handle that separately so I'll just mention that last two items national night out just want to celebrate our police and thank the communities who are hosting for them next week and shout out to courtside tie on your 20 years of activity in serving the great citizens of Fairfax City. So thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncil Member Hall.

Stacy HallI want to thank Ornery for many, many years of service to our city. Very, very sad to see them close. It seems to be a tough spot there. And I loved you when you were upstairs. I loved you when you were downstairs. And I'm just sad to see you go. And And I don't really have much else prepared. I wish everyone a quiet month in August while we don't have council meetings. I'm sure staff will appreciate the somewhat hiatus of dealing with all of us on a weekly basis. We'll make sure to check in, I promise. And as I said earlier to my colleagues, I just want to thank you all for your flexibility, for our remote participation policy with the things that were going on with my dad. Things are definitely looking up.

and things are good. And if I owe you an email, it will be coming this week, I promise. And I know we had difficult conversations tonight with regard to the ADU conversation, but I do want to say that I think we had respectful conversation. I think we were all able to share our thoughts and feelings in a way that, you know, is what we should be doing on council here, whether we disagree or agree at the end of the evening about it. WE ARE ALL ABLE TO STILL GET TOGETHER AND LAUGH AND DO THE OTHER THINGS. WHICH MAKES ME THINK WE ARE ALSO DUE FOR A NIGHT OUT. TO OUR PLANNER OVER HERE ON THE RIGHT.

Anthony AmosI GOT YOU.

Catherine ReadCOUNCIL MEMBER HARDY CHANDLER.

Stacey Hardy-ChandlerI HOPE EVERYONE ENJOYS A RESTFUL BREAK EXCEPT FOR BREAKING THE BREAK FOR OTHER TASKS. LOOKING FORWARD TO NATIONAL NIGHT OUT. I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO TRIVIA NIGHT DAY IF WE DO GET TOGETHER. HAPPY SUMMER.

Catherine ReadCOUNCILMORE PETERSON.

Thomas PetersonLIKEWISE. I THINK EVERYBODY DESERVES A GOOD BREAK. I HOPE THEY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT. I BELIEVE IT OR NOT WAS THE LAST CUSTOMER TO LEAVE ORNERY ON ITS LAST NIGHT ON SUNDAY. VERY SAD. I HAD A LONG CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER AND AS IT TURNS OUT IT'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF A BUSY WEEK. because just happenstance had long conversations with other restaurant owners in Old Town, some past recent and some current. And I think the kind of sense that came out of all those conversations is that there is a conversation that hasn't exactly happened yet with that community about what their needs are and how they might be met. I think in their view, ain't so easy. There are multiple factors at play here, and I just wanted to suggest that we find a way somehow

or another to have that conversation. That is perhaps something our economic development director could help with. I'm not sure, but I think my sense from talking with all of them, and these are people who are pretty capable business analysts, entrepreneurs, they had kind of an advanced sense of the challenge that they're facing, and they're looking for a way to kind of unpack that in some meaningful way. So I'd like to encourage us to find a way to do that because it's tough. People put their lives into these businesses. It's interesting. The one thing that small business people have in common, according to McKinsey, is that they work all the time and they go to the gym regularly. And this is a set of people who's an example of folks who work all the time.

And to see this cycle kind of happen where people have to check out because they're not able to keep up is a hard thing. So I just want to shout out for them. I certainly feel their pain and want to do everything we can here to be helpful for them. Thanks. Council Member Bates.

Billy BatesI just want to wish everyone a happy national night out and echo Councilmember Amos' comments, thanking our local police. Thank you.

Catherine ReadCouncilmember Quillen.

Rachel McQuillenI, too, am looking forward to National Night Out, and I also was able to visit Ornery before they closed their doors this weekend, and we'll be sad to see them go. Wishing all of our staff a great month off. Thank you.

Catherine ReadOkay. and I want to remind everybody that Frozen, the City of Fairfax Theatre Company's production, is currently playing and we'll be going with the grandchildren to see that on Saturday the 1st. So I encourage everybody to go see Frozen. I know you know all the words to the songs. We also have Restaurant Week from August 20th to 30th. So please, please support our local restaurants. Speaking of our local restaurants, get out there, try some new ones, take friends and family. We did that in this particular time period because the George Mason students are returning to the campus on August the 26th. And please always keep in mind that Fairfax City is, in fact, George Mason University's hometown.

So we need to kind of represent out there, welcome the students and their parents back when we see them around town. And with that, I am going to adjourn the meeting at 10.57 p.m. on Tuesday. Thank you. Thank you.