City Council Meeting

who is also joined by Sri Namputhiri, I hope I said that right, from NVTA. She is going to do a presentation for us on NVTA's Bus Rapid Transit BRT Action Plan. So good evening. I am Monica Backman, as the mayor stated, the CEO of the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority. I have a very brief presentation for you tonight talking about the region's Bus Rapid Transit Action Plan for Northern Virginia. So before I get into the specifics of BRT, NVTA to date has invested $5 billion regionally. Of that $5 billion, $125 million has been invested right here in the city of Fairfax. And that's from the authority 70%. From the 30%, we've distributed to the city $33 million for your own public transportation purposes.

Some of the key projects, not all, of course, have been identified, and they're noted on this slide, Germantown, Blenheim, North Fairfax intersection improvements, North Fairfax network improvements, intersection improvements at Eaton Place, Cambridge Road, and Q bus system. The point is that we try to make sure our investments are spread out and that they are truly multimodal, and, of course, that they reduce congestion. So to speak about the BRT system, two years ago, or about, give or take, when we adopted the region's current long-range transportation plan, which is transaction, the authority adopted that plan in December of 2022. Transaction is a needs-based plan and is fiscally and geographically unconstrained.

But that's our opportunity to see where the gaps are in the network. What projects do we need to create a more unified, seamless transportation system? And that is essentially how BRT was born. We've identified 28 routes. Of those 28 routes, five are in various stages of development, and we have a few that are actually operating. What this BRT action plan is, it is a blueprint for the jurisdictions and agencies in northern Virginia to develop future BRT lines. Now, that means everything will not happen overnight. It will not happen in the next five or ten years. It will take place in incremental steps. But the goal is to have a seamless, integrated BRT network, something that will provide safe, reliable, efficient, frequent service.

And this is not in lieu of Metro. I do want to note that. But this is something that we can put on the ground a lot quicker and at a lower cost. So our BRT action plan, like I noted, identifies up to 28 routes to expand capacity across the DMV. When we took this task on, we had a working group that consisted of our member jurisdictions, the nine members, five cities, four counties in the region. And we had Maryland. We had the District of Columbia. We had WMATA. Because, of course, as a traveler, as a commuter, you don't want to be stopped or hindered by jurisdictional boundaries. So the five BRT routes that we're currently investing in, the one in Fairfax County, Envision Route 7, which MBTC is working on,

West End Transit Way and Duke Street Transit Way in the city of Alexandria, and then Metro Way in Arlington. Those five routes, we have a total investment of $883 million. Now, I will say, is that a big number? It's a big number. All numbers are big this day and age. However, the benefits that we get will truly, truly result in 47 million riders by 2045. 47 million riders. 27,000 daily car trips shifted to transit. And 23 tons of carbon dioxide avoided. These numbers are very important because not only does it help reduce congestion, it helps air quality and really get people into other modes that helps improve the quality of life. You, at the city of Fairfax, you're in the middle of these regional routes.

You have three routes that are a part of this plan that go through the city of Fairfax. The Little River Turnpike, Cambridge Road, and Fairfax Boulevard. And I do want to note that Route 21 is the I-66 Express connects Haymarket with Vienna Metro Rail Station. Some of the next steps and why I'm here before you tonight. We really want to make sure that our member jurisdictions are aware of this plan and the next steps. The authority adopted the action plan of July of last year. So what we are doing now is we're updating the region's long-range plan, and we are making some tweaks to the action plan based on some of the responses and comments that we've heard from the member jurisdictions and agencies.

We would like to incorporate these BRT routes, stations, and facilities into your comp plans, mobility plans, transit strategic plans, or plans that you are working on. Because once you do that, that means that you can put that information in the next update of our long-range transportation plan. And please know, if you don't get it in the one we're working on now, the authority adopts the long-range plan every five years. For staff, it's an every two-and-a-half-year effort, so you are not missing out on an opportunity. Continue to advance a coordinated regional strategy. I don't need to read all of the points, but again, we have some of the lines that are underway, and others are in their preliminary stages.

We want to make sure that there's regional buy-in beyond the authority, regional buy-in from our member jurisdictions and agencies. And then the big one that I'm often asked about, explore funding opportunities. When these routes are in your plans, it only puts it on the radar for other plans. We have to make sure that there is a plan that the local governing bodies endorse. I spoke with the Secretary of Transportation, and I said, hey, we need to get some of these routes in the state's long-range transportation plan. And he said, why, to gear it up for funding? And I said, exactly. So that's another conversation that we're in the process of having. But not only have it state-funded or regional-funded, we're doing things to put this in place for potential federal funds as well.

This last slide, which is my favorite, really shows the regional collaboration when we have our BRT working groups coming in a working group coming together. It's representative of the agencies, the member jurisdictions, the people that are across the bridge, all of us as a true DMV region to have a seamless integrated system. Thank you very much. That concludes my presentation. And thank you very much. Looking at all of these different bus systems, it kind of highlights the fact that there is a lot of bus transit in the region. We have our own Q-Bus, which is a closed system. And I think that what we're starting to talk about, in addition to the rapid transit routes, is simply how we lower the barriers and the challenges to more people riding buses.

And I know WMATA is working on that. And there's just a lot of discussion throughout the region for how do we make this more frictionless. So I think in the next decade or so, we're going to have a lot of proposals about how to make transit something that those 47 million people in 2045 are going to find it more desirable to use than a car. Absolutely. So I will ask the dais if there are questions of Ms. Backman. Any questions? Yes. Yes. Yes. Councilmember Hardy-Chandler. Well, thank you. You indicated that part of your goal tonight is awareness. So thank you for the presentation. Just curious, you mentioned that you're also looking for integration into local comp plans, local transportation plans.

Can you talk a little bit about your strategy to, you know, support that kind of communication? Because I would imagine it's a bit complicated for all of these various regions to integrate this into their local plans, even though it's clearly needed for that seamless. Sure. That's a great question. So some are much further along than others. But I will say, when we were doing this study, we had public involvement, public involvement. We went out to the people, which is one of the more effective strategies. And we also had the member jurisdictions and the agencies involved. And then we add to that, we have our own two, we have two statutory committees. One, which consists of elected officials who do not serve on the authority but represent the 14, if you will, member jurisdictions.

That's the nine of cities and counties and then the five largest towns in the region. And then we have the authority. So we may outreach one of our top priorities because you can have the best plan, so to speak. But if no one buys into it, you really just have a plan that sits on the shelf. Now that we have the plan adopted, we want to go further because I told my team we don't do plans that sit on the shelf. We need to be proactive about this. This means coming to all of the local governments more than once, to be honest. So, but what we do not control, we don't control land use, nor do we want to. We want to work in tandem, hand in hand with you and where you are. For some of these lines, there may be land use changes that are needed.

There may be comp plan amendments that are needed. We are there to support you to help implement some of these routes. And that's why I said it's not going to be overnight for a lot of these routes. Again, the five that we're currently funding, they're in various stages. But the other 23, we are here to help those get further along as well so that can lead to implementation. Council Member McQuillan? Yes. Thank you, Mayor Reed. How can we find information to better understand specifically how this plan will affect our city residents and how it benefits them? So, we do have the plan on our website. And did we bring copies, Sri, for the council? I have a few. Yes, I have a few. Not that if you so choose to read a hard copy.

But you can go to our website. We do have a plan. And then you can pull up how those three routes that we have identified particularly impacts you. The other thing I want to note, just because we have a route, that doesn't mean that route has been defined in a way that, hey, this goes through an area that we don't want it to. That's a general area for the particular route. And that's another area we want to hear from you. And you tell us how to really execute where the route should go when we get to that level. That's excellent information. Thank you. I did have one more question. In this description with the return on investment features that you guys outlined here, have you ever considered presenting the percentage of decreased time in traffic or wait times?

Is that conveyed anywhere? So, thank you for that. Thank you. And I'll just take a little plug that includes the BRT plan. The authority, we adopt our six-year funding program every two years. With every adoption of the funding program, we actually contract out with an economic impact analysis firm, a firm that does these studies. So, we can really see the benefits of these transportation investments on the economy. And we have the numbers on travel time savings, what the dollar and every dollar that's spent for transportation, what that means, the number of new jobs that are created, the number of new jobs that are created and stay in Virginia. We can get you that information. We do it with every funding program.

Fantastic. Thank you so much. Thank you. Council Member Peterson? Good to see you. You too. I think the other night you may have mentioned that Virginia received a special award regarding commuting recently. We did. We did. Can you tell us about that? Sure. So, last week, the NVTA, we hosted the celebration for best workplace for commuters. And Virginia was recognized nationally, including Canada, I have to know, that Virginia is the number one place for best workplaces for commuters. And then, to take a personal point, NVTA has received this recognition twice. But that really speaks to providing options. And what I told my team and told the authority, we practice what we preach. We invest in multimodal solutions.

And we do that for the commuting public. But we also do it for our staff as well because we are members of the public. And we want to be able to provide those options for our team. So, thank you for that, Council Member Peterson. But, yeah, Virginia is number one. I told them we've got to do it again next year. And then, just to think a little bit about the big picture, we also talked about the range of investments you make on our behalf for transportation alternatives, which include various forms of transit and bus rapid transit as a part of that. When you look at that whole mix of things, how much does this kind of transit move the needle in terms of the adoption of commuting in a different format than people normally do with cars?

So, I will say it comes off, not even comes off. For us, we're always looking for alternative ways of commuting and alternatives to taking a single occupied vehicle. That's what we're all looking for, ways to get people out of their cars as a single occupied vehicle and take other forms of transportation to get to and from their destinations. You know, we care about air quality. We care about safety. We care about all of those things. But then there's also a quality of life connection as well. When you're spending time commuting and you can't go anywhere, studies have shown that that does impact your quality of life and health. So, we want to make sure that we are making those investments to get people out of their SOVs.

And we see that throughout the region. There's no particular locality that says that's what we should do. All localities are saying that's exactly what we need to be doing. So, help us go about doing that. And when BRT goes in place, I'm guessing that that has required frequently the improvement of various types of connections to make it maximally effective. And that that's one of the areas that localities have to look in really on their own basis to see what that involves. Can you comment a little bit on how that has looked for localities that have seriously begun the adoption process? How much of these secondary investments in infrastructure and modal change have taken place to enable BRT?

I would say, first of all, you have to look at the densities and what areas are the most dense, what has the activity centers and the employment and where the people, the bulk of the people, if you will, are going. Because that's what we've seen for those five lines, if you will, those five routes. People are looking at where are the people going, where are the densities. Because trying to put something like BRT in a less dense area, that's maybe not what you want to do. Maybe that's best for more local service. But when you're looking at centers of employment, centers of high residential and where you have this mixed-use development, these are the types of places where BRT really, really works.

But you have to be mindful for BRT to truly work. You can't have a lot of stops because it needs to be frequent. It needs to be on a schedule to incentivize people to use it. It's a little different than local bus service where you see, you know, a significant number of stops. This has to have some spacing between stops, looking at the headways, what headways would be best. And, like, I will give an example for Richmond Highway, which Fairfax County is doing, their BRT system is fixed guideway, meaning nothing will run in that fixed guideway except the bus rapid transit. What Alexandria is doing, their BRT will run on the street. Now you have to look at signal preemption and making sure that there is no violation and things like that because you don't want something that will incentivize or slow the bus down.

And so BRT comes in various forms. But to start, you need to look at the densities and what kind of uses will the system serve. Well, thank you. And it really leads to my last question, which is how have jurisdictions approached the potential dilemma of having to reserve a lane for BRT? It has to be fast. It has to be frequent. And in some cases that means allocating a lane to BRT that otherwise is currently used for current automobile use. Can you comment a little bit on how that has been approached? Well, I will say Fairfax County is right now the jurisdiction that says, listen, we're going to have this lane only for BRT. But because VDOT owns most of the roads in the Commonwealth, we have to have conversations with VDOT.

But not every jurisdiction is saying we're going to reserve a lane exclusively for BRT. And that's what I'm talking about when we're talking about frequencies and signal preemptions and trying to control violations and things of that nature to make sure you're getting true BRT. I will say I used to work in Prince William County. And at that time when I worked there, and it seemed like it was many moons ago, they had BRT in their comp planned on Route 1. Then they took it out. Now there's conversations about putting it back in. Now, will it look like what Fairfax County has? Well, I'm not sure about that because when you have fixed guideway, you have to talk about expanding the road and then having that BRT there so it's dedicated.

But that's not, again, the only definition of BRT. You can have signal preemption. You can have on-road dedicated lanes. It's really what is the best fit for your jurisdiction. Thank you. Any additional questions? Council Member Bates? So you mentioned collaboration with stakeholders, including the Q system. Did that include consideration of the potential revisions that we've had presented here in the past? Oh, absolutely. And, again, because we're doing what we call BRT 2.0, integrating a lot of the suggested changes or modifications, I should say, for BRT that resulted from the action plan, we are in close contact with your staff. And, again, as the BRT working group that meets regionally because the changes you make impact the system.

And that's why we need everyone at the table. So the long answer is what I just said. The short answer is yes. And so we have a discussion later tonight about the process for reviewing the small area plans. Would you see, and this might be a question for our staff as well, but would you see this as something that might be considered as part of that or more for a review of the comprehensive plan overall? Yeah, I think that's a question that I would defer to your team. For us, the reason why we say put it in a comp plan or mobility plan, because that makes it easier to submit to us for inclusion in the region's long-range transportation plan, which means that we can fund it at that point in time.

Yeah. Well, yeah, we can talk about that later then. And, lastly, just to comment, you know, the big thing, the big takeaway for me from this presentation is just how large of a role Fairfax City plays, despite its relatively small size, in regional connectivity, not just for bus rapid transit, but also for motorists and for pedestrians and bicyclists. And I think that's a large opportunity for us, but also a significant responsibility. Thank you. Thank you. And, again, I think you hit the nail on the head. Just because you're small doesn't mean that you're small in comparison to what this study will do. We need you because you're so centrally located. And so while we'll have three routes that will go through the city, other routes will be impacted by what the city chooses to do.

Thank you. Council member Amos? Thank you. There we go. Thank you. So great presentation. I think this is extremely necessary considering that I think for public transit to be successful, it needs to be convenient. And so very happy to see this. My only question really comes down to expectations or future advocacy and legislative efforts. We do a ledge program every fall, just like many other jurisdictions. You mentioned that's additional state funding, maybe even for helping localities try to make that transition. What are some things that you anticipate that we may need to start involving in our ledge program or start addressing as part of a regional body? So I would say once you've decided and taken action to put it in your comprehensive plans, that's the point that it can really be flagged for funding.

And what I mean by that, when I talked to Secretary Donahue, he was like, oh, then we can put it in and be trans, which is the Commonwealth Long Range Transportation Plan, which is the vehicle for them to fund eligible projects. Now, I'm not saying guaranteed funding because that's a separate conversation. But once you take action in putting it in your comp plan and making a decision on, okay, these are the routes we want to proceed with, it becomes more than a blueprint. It becomes something that's more ready to be implemented. And that's when we can have that funding discussion. And I shouldn't say at that point, because we're always having the funding discussions like we don't want to come out to you and say, oh, you've done it now.

Hey, I don't know how you're going to fund it. That's not our problem. No, it's our goal to help you with that. We can help on the capital side, but getting the operational funding is something that we're discussing now. Where would those funds come from? I know this administration is in support of BRT, which is a huge plus. But, again, a lot of these routes will outlive, if you will, the administration. So we want to make sure that whomever we're talking to, whoever is in the offices in Richmond, that we're doing an outreach. But same for D.C. Whoever is in these federal positions having these conversations. I was at USDOT a few weeks ago meeting with some of the heads of FHWA and FTA and, hey, BRT, BRT.

And they were like, okay, so what do you have? So we are in the process of trying to lay that groundwork. Just a quick follow-up. So, I mean, in terms of timeline and on top of that, prioritization, how does that work with BRT? I mean, I'm assuming you have certain routes that might be higher priority, or are you trying to do this more as a blanket? What is your approach to this? So for us, you tell us, okay, we have three routes identified for the city. You tell us which ones are more viable or which one is the most wanted, if you will, or is the highest priority for the city. And that's something we would want to get from you. Again, it's not our job to come here and tell you this is the one you need to move on first.

Because you know the things that we don't know. You know you hear from the community. You hear from the people. You know what's in your plans. And, again, we do talk to your staff. Ms. Block Sanford has been great. But you know that. So it's not for us to tell us this is what you need to prioritize. We want you, you know, to tell us. Did I say that more? It's not for us to tell you. It's for you to tell us. Excuse me. Thank you. Other questions? Council Member Hall. Thank you. I think most of my questions have been answered. It's nice to see you. I see your name on emails a lot. I was just curious for the five routes that are in process in some way. Are they, you'd mentioned before that sometimes there are additional things that need to be done in addition to BRT and not having a dedicated lane.

Sorry, my son is calling. And so I was up in Toronto. And they had rapid transit lanes. But they were not solely devoted. Yes. So I was trying to understand how that, you know, would work. And in some areas, I think when you have a lot of traffic lanes, obviously, there's plenty of room for it. But the five routes that are currently in action or in process, are those specifically BRT, just dedicated lanes? Or are they inclusive? I know you'd mentioned the Fairfax County one. But, like, I don't know what the one is. I can imagine some of the other ones. But the transit ways, are those other multimodal ways of transportation? Or are they just buses? So I would say yes and no. For the one, and that's what Fairfax has called it, because they are building or redeveloping Richmond Highway around this BRT system.

When that BRT line's open, it will be the longest, if you will, BRT in the Commonwealth to date as of now until something else happens. So they are doing a whole redevelopment around Richmond Highway BRT. And that's the one that will be fixed guideway. The others are not fixed guideway. They are on the road, and you have other traffic that may be able to use these lanes when the buses are not in them. And that's a key component. And you can have a system, or BRT, where you don't have fixed guideway, because that does come at a cost, but they're exclusive to buses only. And, again, these are the types of conversations you have. So while it's not fixed guideway, meaning that there are barriers, so nothing can infringe that lane because you have the buses there and you have physical barriers, you can have exclusive bus lanes.

Or you can have BRT that runs in the commuting periods. You know, it runs in the AM peak, and I'm using air quotes because the AM peak has really changed since COVID, and the PM peak. And then off peak, you can have cars using those lanes. So these are the types of conversations that we would have because we would need to hear from you on what is the best fit for your community. Thank you. Yeah, I was also thinking about how I used to commute into D.C., and, you know, there are certain lanes that are only operational certain times a day. Or the Bay Bridge, how they give you that extra lane on the other side of traffic. So certain things like that, I think, you know, tend to work when you don't have a physically divided highway in some ways.

But also, I think, you know, could be considered in other areas as well. So thank you very much. Thank you. Other questions? I think one of the greatest things about seeing these maps and having you explain this is the fact that NVTA, NVTC, you know, WMATA are all invested in transit. And a lot of this is going to change. You know, we're building new projects here. Where people want to go as things get developed, look at Tyson's Corner. Things get developed. So it is all subject to change. And that's the other thing to keep in mind about fixed lanes, too. It's great. I mean, it makes sense to do it on the Route 1 corridor. But the rest of the region might change dramatically in the next 20 years.

And so what we need to do is come up with the system for how we adapt to where people want to take the bus from and to. And I appreciate very much that NVTA is at the center of this. I appreciate our staff looking at you, Ms. Wendy Sanford, Ms. Wendy Block Sanford, and the fact that we do have a wonderful staff. And Council Member Peterson and I are on NVTA. And the member jurisdictions are working very hard to make sure that transit becomes an important part of the foundation of our economy here in northern Virginia. I appreciate you coming out to talk to us today. And best of luck as you do your tour. Well, thank you, Mary. And, again, I want to thank you for your service on the authority.

I mean, you really have been a supporter of this from day one. And Council Member Peterson on our Planning Coordination Advisory Committee. You have great people here. So it makes our job easier. So thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Ms. Shinneberry? We can go to the adoption of the agenda. All right, then. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Council Member Hardy-Chandler? I move to adopt the agenda as presented. Second. The motion has been made and seconded. A roll call vote. Council Member Amos? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McClellan? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We had nobody sign up for initial general public comment, so we can go to the consent agenda.

Okay. I will ask, are there any questions on any of the items on the consent agenda? Any questions? Okay. Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? I move to approve the consent agenda items A through C. Second. A motion has been made by Council Member Hardy-Chandler and seconded by Council Member Peterson. A roll call vote. Council Member McClellan? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Amos? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. So we will go to the public hearings. Our first one is a public hearing in Council Action on the Adoption of the Green Building Policy. I'm going to recognize Stephanie Kupka, our Sustainability Program Manager for the staff presentation.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. Tonight, we're here to hold the public hearing for the Green Building Policy, which is being considered for adoption. During my presentation, I'll first provide background information on the development of the Green Building Policy. I'll provide an overview of the research and community engagement that was conducted. I'll then provide details on the Green Building Policy standards for both the public and private sectors. And then we'll discuss the administrative and implementation procedures for the Green Building Policy. And then finally, I'll provide a recommendation to Council pertaining to the adoption of the policy. I'll first start with background.

So why does a Green Building Policy matter now? So when a building is constructed, that locks in 30 to 50 years of operating costs, which includes utilities, maintenance, and repairs. And right now, the city is facing multiple challenges regarding buildings, one of which is rapidly rising utility costs. For example, electricity rates are projected to increase more than by double in the next 20 years. And this year alone, we're anticipating to have a 32% increase in electricity rates. So this is a challenge for ongoing costs associated with utilities. We're also experiencing high development pressure, which is putting a strain on our natural resources. And we're also seeing increasing climate risks associated with extreme weather events, flooding, and extreme heat days.

So the Green Building Policy is about responding proactively to these challenges by improving resilience, reducing long-term costs, and helping the city achieve our goals. The development of the Green Building Policy has been in progress for years. So in 2020, the city council directed staff to develop the Green Building Policy. And staff did so in accordance with the city's plans, policies, and state and federal guidelines. Staff has spent multiple years researching best practices, working with consultants, George Mason University, engaging stakeholders, and aligning this policy with the Virginia High Performance Building Act and regional standards. So the scope of the Green Building Policy includes both public sector and private sector green building standards.

So the public sector applies to new construction, major renovations, and existing buildings. And the private sector standards applies to new construction and major renovations. So what does the city get for this investment? For the public sector, there are substantial cost savings and long-term benefits for the city. For example, a LEED-certified building typically saves 20% to 30% on electricity bills due to energy-efficient design. It also saves 11% on water bills due to low-flow fixtures, rainwater harvesting, and native landscaping. And it also saves 10% to 20% on reduced maintenance and repair costs due to the durable, high-quality materials used in green buildings and also the use of smart building management systems.

This policy also will promote renewable energy. And on-site renewable energy can reduce electricity costs 20% to 50% over 20 years. This policy also helps improve indoor environmental quality, which is shown to boost productivity by 6% to 9%. And this policy also will help reduce disposal fees associated with race reduction due to construction waste and sustainable material choices. On the private sector side of things, there's benefits to that as well. So the policy creates clear expectations with developers and provides multiple benefits to the city. The policy catches us up with other jurisdictions in the region and provides predictability with developers working in northern Virginia. It gets us higher quality development, reduces development impacts on our tree canopy, water resources, and habitat through smarter design and building performance.

It reduces demand on public infrastructure and utilities, lowering the long-term strain on our infrastructure. It improves building quality, comfort, and resilience. And also aligns with the city-adopted environmental and economic goals. And then last but not least, it also helps promote access to the commercial PACE program that's available to commercial properties so they can get long-term financing and then also help pay for those green building enhancements. So as mentioned earlier, the green building policy will help the city achieve its goals. It helps support climate and environmental goals by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving energy efficiency, promoting renewable energy, and minimizing environmental impacts.

It helps our city become more resilient and healthy by enhancing indoor environmental air quality and improving resilience to heat, flooding, and extreme heat days. It also helps support smart growth by encouraging sustainable building design, encouraging growth that aligns with infrastructure capacity and environmental constraints, and helps support fiscal responsibility by lowering long-term operating costs and reducing future infrastructure demands on the city. And it also helps us align, as I mentioned earlier, with jurisdictions in the region, aligns us with regional best practices, and puts us in compliance with state requirements. This policy directly helps us achieve some of our targets.

So it helps us reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, and it also helps us achieve our target to achieve 100% renewable electricity for city operations by 2035 and community-wide by 2050. On the pie chart on the right shows our total greenhouse gas emissions for each sector, and you can see that buildings shown in green account for almost half of our greenhouse gas emissions. And the commercial buildings account for a quarter. So this shows that it's really important to have both public and private green building standards to help reduce those emissions and help us achieve our climate goals. The development of this policy has been a deliberate and inclusive process, as you see from this timeline.

From stakeholder committee formation in 2023, to conducting research, holding council work sessions, public meetings, obtaining advisory committee input, and developing multiple draft iterations, and approving that based on feedback from the community. This policy reflects an extensive review, refinement, and stakeholder engagement. I'll now provide an overview of some of our research and community engagement. So this policy is grounded in best practices. Staff worked with a consultant to evaluate peer jurisdictions, Virginia building codes, the Virginia High Performance Building Act, and reviewed nationally recognized green building rating systems. We also had the privilege of being part of the U.S. Green Building Council's Green Building Policy Accelerator cohort,

where we received free technical guidance, and they helped provide recommendations for how we could improve our policy. So with all this research, it ensures the policy is legally sound, technically feasible, and aligned with what is already working across the region. For stakeholder engagement, we had an internal stakeholder team made up of representatives of various departments within the city. We also had an external green building advisory committee, which included representatives from the development community, subject matter experts, George Mason University, Environmental Sustainability Committee members, and also members of the public. So the stakeholders met three two-hour meetings each, and these stakeholders provided a lot of input into the development of the policy.

Throughout the process, we also did a significant amount of public engagement. We engaged with over 250 stakeholders during our outreach process. We held meetings with the city council, the planning commission, the economic development authority, the environmental sustainability committee, parks and recreation board, etc. We held a public meeting and also attended the development industry meeting. And we also tabled at public events and had an online engaged Fairfax page. All of those, we were able to gather input and feedback from our community, which really helped shape the policy to ensure that it's feasible, equitable, and implementable. So here's how that feedback that we received shaped the policy.

So first, we balanced ambition with feasibility by focusing on the high-impact practices while ensuring that we were still remaining practical. We also received feedback on building size requirements. We wanted to prioritize larger buildings for maximum impact and also make sure that our building threshold aligned with the Virginia High Performance Building Act. And another thing that was added was that we added public schools to the policy because that was not first specified. So now schools is part of the policy. For green space and tree canopy, stakeholders wanted us to encourage green space, tree canopy, dark sky compliance, and stormwater best practices. We took that feedback to heart and we added special requirements for credits to ensure that we achieve those.

For state and regional consistencies, the standards were aligned with the Virginia High Performance Building Act and also aligned with what's going on with the region. For the tax abatement incentive, as we discussed earlier, we did look at a variety of incentives. Part of the feedback that we received was the tax abatement was the most attractive to developers. However, we did get a lot of feedback and concerns from the rest of the population about equity concerns and fiscal concerns. So we did, after discussions with the council, we did decide to not include an incentive as part of this iteration of the green building policy. So we could further study that to ensure that whatever incentive we had had the best impact and also address those fiscal and equity concerns.

For technical definitions, we heard from stakeholders they wanted more definitions and so there was less technical jargon and made it more easy to read, which we did. We also streamlined the certification process to simplify that to reduce the administrative burden and to make it easier for private industry to follow. For the next few slides, I'll provide an overview of the public sector green building standards. For applicability for the public sector, it is existing buildings that are 1,000 square feet or greater, new public construction or major renovations for buildings that are 5,000 square feet or greater, and major interior renovations that are 5,000 square feet or greater. So for all existing public sector buildings that are 1,000 square feet or greater, the city shall conduct energy benchmarking and energy audits of those buildings,

achieve LEED building operations and maintenance silver certification, and then track and publicly disclose the public sector building energy performance for each of those buildings on an annual basis. This ensures that the city is being transparent with the community and also identify the areas where we can make improvements in our buildings and then also achieve that certification. For new construction and major renovations, these apply to any new city buildings that are 5,000 square feet or greater. The building shall align with the Virginia High Performance Building Act, so we need to be in compliance with all of those requirements. We will achieve LEED building design and construction goals, meet electrification ready and zero emission standards,

demonstrate a 50% reduction on modeled energy use above the current Virginia Uniform State statewide building code, and then earn key sustainability resilience credits. And for major interior renovations for buildings 5,000 square feet or greater, the city shall achieve LEED interior design construction goals. So this standard ensures that even a partial upgrades improves the efficiency and occupant comfort. All right, now I will discuss the private sector green building standards. So for the private sector, the green building standards will apply to developments subject to special exception, variance, rezoning, planned development review, or special use review procedures. And our new construction or major renovations where the building's floor area is 5,000 square feet or greater.

So for private development, this policy only applies to those seeking discretionary approvals. This will not apply to buildings that are being built by right. So for the applicable buildings, they shall obtain certification at the silver level, and they have flexibility with either using LEED building design and construction or earthcraft. And then they will also be required to obtain the key sustainability and resilience credits shown here. For administration procedures, the development of the staff will develop an annual green building policy report, which will provide an update on how the green building policy implementation is going. And then at a minimum of every five years, the policy will be reviewed and updated.

And then also with each of these reports, key performance indicators will be measured, tracked, and reported to show how we're making progress towards reaching our goals. This slide shows the implementation procedure for the green building policy. So tonight, the policy is being considered for adoption. If it is adopted, the public green building standards will become effective immediately. In September, or sometime this fall, we anticipate to hire and onboard our brand-new energy programs manager. This position will be responsible for implementing and managing the green building policy. In fiscal year 27, staff will be working on tasks for the pre-launch planning, preparation, and coordination for the private sector standards.

So this does require a significant amount of coordination between departments, finalizing standard operating procedures, building the website and forms, work with developers to train them. So this does take a significant amount of effort. So once that is ready to be launched, we anticipate the launch will be launched and enacted in July 2027. And ongoing, as mentioned on the previous slide, each year we'll provide a progress report to council regarding the green building policy. And then for incentives, I mentioned earlier that incentives are not included in this iteration. However, we have scheduled to do further analysis and research on incentives to see which ones would have the biggest impact,

while also addressing fiscal and equity concerns. And we're scheduled to conduct that in fiscal year 31. And then in fiscal year 32, that would be the five-year mark to update and present the revised green building policy to council. And if council directs it, that policy would include those incentive measures. So in conclusion, the green building policy is a practical tool that advances city goals, improves building performance, reduces long-term costs and environmental impacts, and aligns the city with regional best practices. Staff recommends that council pass a resolution to adopt the green building policy. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Okay. Before I open the public hearing, I'm going to ask if there are any questions from the dais at this time for staff.

Council Member Peterson? Thank you so much. The training program for developers, I'm guessing, will include training around the financing of these investments for green buildings. And you have an earlier slide that shows return. I think they're return on investment numbers. And one could imagine adding payback periods in there that are particularly helpful as a matter of focus. I think the payback periods for green buildings policies are two to eight years, something like that. And everything after that is profit. I raise this because I think it's an information gap. We want to be sure we close on behalf of developers. But I'm also curious to know, as we do that, do we have any sort of outreach or training program for financial institutions, including banks,

so that they also understand financially how this would impact their lending decisions? Because these payback periods would be very favorable to lenders if they're aware of them and can incorporate them into their terms. Do we have anything planned along those lines? So I guess there's two things. So one is we will be working with the Fairfax Housing Renaissance Corporation, but I think that's only for residential. So I guess that doesn't pertain to the commercial sector. Sorry, I'm thinking out loud here. And then for commercial PACE, we have been working with the PACE Authority, who runs the Virginia Commercial PACE Program. And we've reached out to their new economic development director to help promote that program with commercial property owners.

So we don't have any plans to work with banks, per se, at this moment, but that's something we can look into. I just raise it because oftentimes the way this works is a developer has a capital partner when they come forward. And to be able to develop those capital partners and for the capital partners to be able to seek and support developers is something that might benefit from some technical education around this. So I would just offer that as something to consider. Thank you for that suggestion. Thank you. Any other questions? All right, then. I will open the public hearing. Ms. Shinneberry, has this public hearing been properly advertised? Yes, it has. We had nobody sign up prior to the meeting.

So if there's anybody in the room that would like to speak on this agenda, I may come forward. And when you come forward, just please state your name and address with your statement. Hello, Mayor and Council. My name is Ben Rhodes. I live at 3704 University Drive. I'm a member of the Environmental Sustainability Committee and have gotten to hear over my year with the committee, you know, the progress that's been made on the green building policy as it's been developed. Incredibly heartening to see how much it's been improved over that year. And I really look forward to being able to have sort of consistent environmental features, particularly in public buildings, right away as, you know, this gets rolled out.

And then, you know, seeing as our city develops and flourishes, having consistency, particularly in the habitat, natural resources features, tree canopy, stormwater features in private buildings. So that's all I'll have for now. Keep it short. Thanks, guys. Is there anybody else in the room that would like to speak? Okay. Good evening, Mayor and Council. It's a pleasure to be here at this moment to kind of speak on with multiple behalf as a ESC member. Sorry, I didn't state my name. Faiza Alam from 10112 Radcliffe Manor Drive, Fairfax. And I'm a member of the ESC committee, science teacher at Katherine Johnson Middle School, where my students presented because for me that's the most powerful piece here.

We are educating our students and giving them the platform to speak. And they came to you multiple times to different bodies here in the city. And they did talk about green building policy and the heat island effect and all the stuff in their presentation for North Facts and Courthouse Plaza. Unfortunately, they couldn't come today because summer break was more important right now, and rightly so. And they were very, very happy. I spoke to them today that this is happening. They might be watching live right now that this is up for adoption today. So it's really, really important that what we do here, we are leaving a mark for our young ones, and they see this. So a seventh grader and eighth grader sees this as very important.

So for us adults to see this, that is very important, is really, really the connection we are making here and leaving it a better place. So ESC has worked really hard to, you know, give our feedback, and it's a pleasure to be part of this. And as a resident, it's just really good to see that, as we just heard from the transportation person, that city is right in the middle of Fairfax County. What we do here, even though we are small, we make a huge impact, right? And we need to kind of have this policy, and this is the right step forward to build the momentum, and things will fall in the right place. As we are developing, as Mary, you said, you know, things will change in the next five years, ten years, as Tyson's Corner has changed.

We have changed. We are building. Are we building impervious only, or are we having some green space, and that will help our stormwater management, our runoff, our heat island effect? I mean, it just is a win-win situation. So thank you so much for this consideration. Anybody else in the room that would like to speak on this item? Okay. All right. I will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion, Council Member Hardy-Chantler? I move to approve the resolution to adopt the City of Fairfax Green Building Policy. Second. A motion has been made by Council Member Hardy-Chantler, and seconded by Council Member Peterson. Is there discussion on the motion? Seeing none, a roll call vote. Council Member Amos?

Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chantler? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We will go to the next public hearing, which is a public hearing in Council action on the proposed amendments to the Code of the City of Fairfax, Virginia, Chapter 86, MPRIN Subdivisions, to amend portions of the articles and sections contained therein, including administration. I'm going to recognize Eric Foreman, our Senior Planner, for the staff presentation. Okay. Thank you very much. This agenda item is a public hearing for consideration of amendments to the subdivision ordinance. It's not often that we amend the subdivision ordinance.

The last time was four years ago, and that was in response to updated floodplain standards. What these amendments pertain to is a relatively minor update. It's in response to state legislation from 2025 that changed the mandatory time frame for subdivision plat reviews, and that particular section of the subdivision ordinance mirrors state code. So what these amendments do is they synchronize the city's ordinance with those state code provisions. There's two components to these amendments. One changes the first review period of an application from 60 days to 40 days, and again, that changes to make this consistent with state code. The other component to this amendment deals with subsequent submissions of subdivision applications.

So if an application is resubmitted for a second time or a third time or so on, for this component, we're amending the text to read that those submissions, those resubmissions, will be reviewed in accordance with the relevant state code section. So just one other thing to note here, most subdivision actions are administrative, and staff's action is guided by this document, by the subdivision ordinance. Larger subdivisions, and this is defined in state code as being more than 50 lots, larger subdivisions do require planning commission review, but mostly these are administrative actions. So again, this amendment ensures that our ordinance stays consistent with state code. The planning commission held a public hearing on these amendments last month.

The commission recommended approval of these amendments, and we do have a sample motion here in your packets, and with that I'd be glad to answer any questions if there are any. Are there any questions for Mr. Foreman? Council Member Peterson. I think we covered this earlier, but just to double check, does this have any impact, and if so, how much, and what do we do about it in terms of public outreach, public involvement, and awareness, because it's shortening the period of that? It is shortening the period. Since these are typically administrative reviews, there's no public notice to a subdivision. For any larger subdivision actions, that would be a planning commission recommendation, and that would be unchanged.

Thank you. All right. Any other questions? All right, then. I will now open the public hearing. Ms. Shinneberry, has this public hearing been properly advertised? Yes, it has. No one has signed up prior to the meeting. Is there anybody in the room that would like to speak on this agenda item? All right. Seeing no one rushing to the podium, I will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion, Council Member Hardy-Jandler? I move to approve an ordinance amending Chapter 86 subdivisions to amend portions of articles and sections contained therein including administration. Second. A motion has been made by Council Member Hardy-Jandler and seconded by Council Member Peterson. Is there any discussion on the motion?

Seeing none, a roll call vote. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Jandler? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Amos? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We've gone to our last public hearing, which is a public hearing and council action on an ordinance amending and reenacting Chapter 2 in Prince Administration, Article 2, in Prince Mayor and Council, Section 2-31 of the Code of the City of Fairfax, Virginia, pertaining to the compensation of the mayor and the members of the city council. I'll recognize Brian Lubkman, our city attorney for the staff report. Good evening, Mayor and Council. You all have spoken about this several times already.

This tonight would be the public hearing and council action, if it so desires, on an ordinance that would increase the salaries for mayor and council from the current $13,000 and $12,000, respectively, to $24,000 and $22,000, respectively. As we've noted and as the staff report sets forth, an increase cannot take effect until after the next election, so there's always an intervening election requirement. And an ordinance for it to be effective July 1, 2027 needs to be enacted at least four months before the election, so this is the last regular meeting before that could be done. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Are there any questions of Mr. Lubkman? Okay. I'm seeing none, so we will open the public hearing.

Ms. Shinaberry, has this public hearing been properly advertised? Yes, it has. No one signed up prior to the meeting, so if there's anybody in the room that would like to speak on this item, may come forward. Seeing no one, I will now close the public hearing. Is there a motion, Council Member Hardy-Chandler? I move that the city council enact the attached ordinance amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article 2, Mayor and Council, Section 2-31, pertaining to compensation of the mayor and the members of the city council? Second. Motion's been made by Council Member Hardy-Chandler and seconded by Council Member Peterson. Is there any discussion on the motion? Council Member Bates. I just want to reemphasize that I hope that the salary increase will make it more feasible,

more realistic for early career professionals, perhaps single parents, et cetera, to run for office who might otherwise need to reduce their hours worked and their daytime careers. And also that I hope that the next council will consider this, take this into consideration as they look at the results of the classification and pay study and think about future budgets and how we're paying our staff and taking care of our staff as well. Thank you. Thank you. Any other? Okay. A roll call vote. Council Member Amos? Aye. Council Member Hall? Aye. Council Member Hardy-Chandler? Aye. Council Member Peterson? Aye. Council Member Bates? Aye. Council Member McQuillan? Aye. Motion passed unanimously. We will go to second general public comment.

Is there anybody in the room that would like to make a general public comment tonight? Well, all right, then. I will now recess the regular meeting to go into a work session. We will take a five-minute recess to move into the work session room. Number one. деде Take the pain away Step to the back, step to the right How you feeling, baby? Move it like that, bring it on back Get a little crazy Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh So come on, leave it on the top Your worries are behind and left at night Take the pain away Come on, leave it on the top Your body comes to mind Don't bite Just let the night Take the pain away Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh

Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. But there wasn't really the end-time traffic study that projects how it will impact intersections

nearby and those types of things. And so the thought here is that we could do some kind of a high-level traffic analysis. We have to be very careful with this, though, because of a couple of reasons. First, with traffic studies, the base figures that go into them, being traffic counts and those types of things, get outdated very quickly, so they can become obsolete very quick. They also require a lot of assumptions. So when you receive a development application, you receive a traffic study with it. It's usually provided by the developer. And the factors that they put into their assumptions for those studies, they know exactly where different uses are proposed. They know exactly where their driveways are proposed, which streets they're directed on,

and those types of things. When we do this on a more comprehensive basis, we won't know all that detailed information, so we'll have to make assumptions, which means we're going to lose a little bit of that accuracy. And then lastly, these can get very expensive if we put too much into them. So we need to really think about what questions we're trying to answer and if it's worth it to invest to certain extents on that. Third item here is utilities. And so there are two utilities in particular that we would focus on. That would be sanitary sewer and storm sewer because we have had cases come up where development products have come forward. And the utility lines that serve those particular sites might be at or nearing capacity.

Now, in the case of some smaller utility lines, the developer can make the investment to improve that line. But if there is a larger line that is affected, then the city would have to decide if we want to invest in improving that line or if we want to regulate development in a certain area so that line doesn't have to be upgraded. The smaller plans have, again, a high-level analysis of this. But it has shown that there have been cases that have shown up that weren't necessarily identified in those analysis. So we'll want to do a little bit of a deeper look at that. And then the last two items here are things that we have already done or are able to do so we wouldn't necessarily need outside support for.

This includes the level of service study. So this is something that is underway. You'll be receiving a presentation about this in a couple of weeks where we are looking at the impacts of development on various types of city services and what the costs associated with that would be. The goal of that study is to help set a standard for us to put out standards for profit contributions from developers. That's not something we want to try to address through the smaller plans. However, the analysis that is going on to that level of service study provides us a lot of data that can help us understand the point at which we might receive an amount of development that will require investment in new facilities.

And that's something we should think about when we're thinking about how much we want to grow in certain areas. And the next item is fiscal impact analysis. This is something we do with each development project that we do in-house. Similar to the traffic study, we have to be careful here with doing a larger scale of fiscal impact analysis. Because again, we have to make a lot of assumptions. So with the development reviews that we do, we know exactly the mix of units that are proposed, the types of units, the amount of commercial space, and that type of thing. So if we're going to do it on a larger scale basis looking at an entire activity center, we'll have to estimate the types of units because that can have a significant impact on the

fiscal impact analysis. And even estimates on the mix of bedrooms and those types of things. So things to be aware of with that. And then lastly, this is an item that was recommended in the Northfax Small Air Plan and has been supported by some other historic resource studies that we've done. And that is to conduct what is called a mid-century commercial theme analysis for the city, particularly focusing on those activity centers that are out on Fairfax Boulevard. The mid-century commercial is kind of a key period of growth for the city. And there are some structures located along that stretch that still hold some architectural characteristics that are considered important with that characteristic.

The 29 diner, as everyone is aware, is listed on the Federal Register of Historic Places. But there might be other locations. I don't think there are any other locations that would qualify for that register. However, there might be other locations that have architectural qualities that we might want to consider protecting. So we hear mixed reviews about this. This would require some outside consultant support on. But it would also help us to identify specific properties that we might want to maintain as is rather than encourage redevelopment on. So that is a summary of what we propose to include. Again, we're looking for feedback from you on whether or not this is going in the right direction.

Other things in here you think are really important are the things that are missing. Also, I want to just share with you, we had a work session on this with the Planning Commission a couple weeks ago. Some of the key recommendations they included were to use existing studies and plans when we can. Suggesting that traffic studies don't have to be detailed but try to be productive. Suggests that we look at urban heat island effect and ways to mitigate that. There are some comments that the mid-century commercial theme study was a lower priority. And a suggestion that we prioritize Old Town. And what was meant by that is, as I mentioned, we plan to review all these plans at once. But there was a suggestion that there's a lot of activity and interest in Old Town right now.

So when we get to wrapping up and finalizing the documents, we shouldn't wait to do all of them, that we should take Old Town as soon as we can. And we'll certainly be gauging development activity and city investments at that time. But we don't have to necessarily carry all four of these plans at the same meeting. We can prioritize some if there are urgent needs. So that's all we have for the presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions. Wonderful. Thank you for that presentation. Councilmember Amos. Thank you. Yeah, just a couple of questions. Great presentation and just off rip. I think this is heading in the right direction. I think nothing wrong with updating our plans, making sure the most accurate information,

and then applying that so we can continue to try to get to that central vision for the city that we want. Three things that I wanted to identify. Firstly, and all three might be a little too granular for this discussion, but just something to kind of flag. We've seen a lot in Old Town specifically a lot of focus on market rate projects coming in with an affordable component to it. But considering we adopted the affordable housing strategic plan, is there any space or possibility for emphasizing key locations like Layton Hall or NOAA projects or key sites that might be more accommodating for, let's say, affordable workforce housing? So it's 30 to 60 percent AMI, 80 to 120. Maybe that's a little too in the weeds for this type of plan, but maybe it would be helpful

to start identifying sites that we want to hold for. Thoughts on that? Yeah. So I didn't touch on it, but I had to mention in the slide there that one of the earlier things that was already listed in the comprehensive plan was the naturally occurring affordable housing. And so those locations are identified in the smaller plans currently. Actually, the only one that I would say stands out is Foxtrot Colony and Fairfax Circle. Layton Hall is technically outside the smaller plan. But if we want to, we could have some language that supports that. But then separately, thinking more about workforce housing, which is not something that is really mentioned at all in the smaller plans at this point, there may be opportunities to identify

locations, as I mentioned, through the market study at where are those properties that have the least value to them now where we would want to encourage development versus those where there might be something that's slightly productive that we'd want to have go on further down the line. And so this is something that has come up as part of the affordable housing strategic plan. Also, as we discussed, it could come up as part of our market analysis. And when those two combine, we can help to kind of pinpoint what those locations might be. As I mentioned earlier, with the only guidance we had in the smaller plans was religious institutions and publicly owned property, which there really isn't much of in the activity center.

So this will be kind of opening a new window for us. Yeah, no, I appreciate that. I think identifying these sites, and obviously there's a lot of financial components that go into it that's for a separate discussion, probably one we're going to have relatively soon. But I think it would be helpful to at least start making that more of a priority or at least having some distinguishing element in our plans moving forward. The other thing, so two other items, when it comes to the historic preservation piece and kind of like the mid-century theme, I think that we've talked about it briefly, probably more behind the scenes. Have we considered some type of capital infrastructure or land bank or land acquisition, some type of

fund to start acquiring properties as it become available? Especially, like, for example, I know we had a lot of discussion about Route 29 Diner, but just in general when we have these sites come up or even the grocery store right across from Mount Calvary Baptist Church. I know it's come up, and I assume this would happen to the EDA. I don't know if you have any thoughts on that. We've certainly been talking about what that would look like to be in whether or not we want to say land banking or land acquisition. But right now we're just trying to identify critical areas. So that could certainly be part of this discussion is where are those critical corridors and critical individual properties?

Because then we'd have to determine, is that even an option for that property? Are there other underlying factors that would make it untenable for us to purchase? So we will be looking at that. Thank you. And then my last question, going back to the sanitary sewer line and that brief conversation, I know with, I think it's Fair Oaks Business Park, one of the SSPAs that the county was doing, the two developers who were developing in that area were required to upgrade that sanitary sewer system in the pump station as a part of their redevelopment. Have we been exploring that or in these areas that have capacity issues requiring developers to maybe pay into a fund for upgrading that system over time?

We have not developed a fund specifically for increasing capacity. However, the system's charges for connection, the connection fees are intended to pay for future, pay towards future capacity upgrades and operation. Council Member Hardy-Chandler. Council Memberдедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедеде

is when we have developer applications and them understanding how projects might align with the plan or not, some sort of a contribution, I think, in this review would be some sort of guidance in how to navigate the spirit of the small area plans as people are considering development applications because that seems to be a sticking point. Any thoughts on that? Yes, and that comes down to the formatting task, which is something that we would propose doing in-house. And the goal there is that we would seek feedback from property owners and developers who have tried to use the small area plans for the first time, other people who are kind of outside of the people who put it together and see what the confusion has been

and then try to make sure that we structure it so that you're not lost when you're getting into it because we often get into those kind of discussions with developers where they come in, they think that they're showing something that's consistent with the small area plan, and we say, well, if you look at detail on page 37, that's different than detail on page 18, so they're kind of losing that. When you say the overall spirit of the small area plan, that's something that we can try to emphasize as well. You know, there are general goals and visionary ideas in there, but if that's not being conveyed strong enough, hopefully that's something we'll hear during the review process and we can try to strengthen that.

Thank you. Council Member Peterson. Big picture question. I'm just trying to get a little bit of clarity on how far down the pike this effort takes us towards a complete update for smaller area plans. So the very first slide lists a series of, what are these being? I guess they're not really being called anything, but it's a clear demonstration of a desired mix of uses, et cetera, et cetera, that read a bit like a set of goals and objectives. Is the intent at this stage to update that list and the definition of the list of things that we are trying to achieve, in other words, a set of goals and objectives, or is this not the intent of this? Is the intent of this something more custodial, at least initially, clarity, consistency,

and then some freshening up of foundational analysis that could be the basis of something that would happen later? Is that the way this should be understood? Yeah. I say that the latter, what you suggested, is more what this is going in the direction of. It's more of a review and update. This list of items is from the comprehensive plan itself, not the small area plans. And so if we wanted to amend this and kind of change some of the overarching goals of the small area plans, the first step would be to change the comprehensive plan to kind of redirect them, and then we could go back and review that. Within the small area plans, would we, at what stage would we be formulating, whether individually or collectively,

a set of goals and objectives that we would have for small area plans? Other than this umbrella that we have from the comprehensive plan, it sounds like we don't really have that in place. Is that right? Right. Well, each of the overarching goals are what's in the comprehensive plan, which is what's shown here. There's a little more detail in the comprehensive plan, but it's not a lot. Then each of the small area plans has guiding goals, but those are kind of big picture things, such as establishing North Facts as a sustainability prototype or something like that. And so that's the extent of the goals that we have. We aren't proposing updating that at this point either. If there is desire to revisit that,

certainly the things that are within the small area plan, we can make that a part of this effort. We just want to be careful that we're not redirecting things so much so that every time we review these, you know, we're changing direction a little bit and we never really go towards a consistent vision. Good to know. Again, I'm just trying to get a feel for how much we do here. So just to push that maybe a step or two further, when we do, so the proposal here is to look at all four of these as a package, right? And there's a lot of efficiency and strategy and sense that's involved in that. And one of the things that was noted was conducting fiscal impact analysis, which happens for individual sites.

At what stage would we be doing a cumulative impact analysis for fiscal impacts of the development of the small area plans? Would that be happening now? Is that something that would happen later? Is that something that's not planned yet? That is one of the items that's listed in, what staff is proposing to include in this effort. Where exactly that falls on the timeline is something we'll have to figure out as we go forward. Because all of those analytical items are leading toward the overall development or projected amounts of development of different types as opposed to the individual site type things. So we haven't identified how we're going to make all those things come together to kind of clarify what our resulting long-term vision will be

in terms of numbers. But that will have to be figured out as we go forward. But it would be part of that process. Will you be coming back to us then to talk about the game plan for that? Yeah, certainly. I expect that we'll be later in the game. And so I think we'll be talking to you multiple times before we even get to that point. Well, part of the reason I raise it is just, and I think you alluded to this, to be careful about not getting ahead of ourselves. And what we have is a set of goals. And there are some logical foundational analyses that support the development and implementation of those goals. And it could be fiscal impacts, environmental impacts, traffic, you name it. And there's a huge value in getting a cumulative impact version of that done

so we can see what happens if we embark on this journey down there. And so what we, and we haven't done that yet. We haven't updated the formulation, and certainly not the results of the foundational analysis. It's designed to support all that population growth, household growth, et cetera, to do that. So you will be coming back with further thoughts about how that can be done and when that would be done as a part of this. It's very helpful, again, because the one reading of this is we're jumping forward without that. But the real reading, I think, that you're saying is, no, we're not. We're going to try to take a look at what would be involved in that and how we would approach it. Good to know.

As we do this, even if we're not at the stage where we are starting to identify material changes to the goals and objectives of these plans, it still seems to be really important to find a way to involve the public so that they can be a part of the thought process on what we're looking at and how we are looking at it. There are different ways to do that. This doesn't need to be a series of public hearings. That's not the top on my list of how you actually go through co-design and all that. But I'm wondering, will we be hearing more about how we might bring residents, the public, and stakeholders into this thought process as we're beginning to scope further these small area plans? Yeah, I think as we come back and refine the scope with you toward the end of this year,

we can start to talk more about the community engagement process. And the further we go along, I said we don't actually plan a beginning work until early next year. So as we get closer to that, that will be more refined. And then to pick on our economic development director, I know that you're busy on formulating analysis around commercial and economic development opportunities here that presumably will make a heavy contribution here, et cetera. What's your vision of how best all of that can be integrated? Because I know you're kind of turning over a new page here in terms of having a look at all these things. Yeah, I think one of the things that was mentioned was looking at existing reports.

So, for example, within the last year, the EDA commissioned a report specifically on office conversions. And so that would be one of those reports we'd want to make sure is incorporated so that we can take all this disparate data that we have, plus what we're hearing and what's coming out of the market right now as we look at these individual plans. So the intent is for us to be in this discussion fully invested both on those individual projects as we go along, but in the overarching because, you know, when you like North Vax, for example, that plan came out in 2020. So since then, we've had COVID and massive changes at the federal level that impact our office environment greatly. So we have to go back and look at what the market has done.

One of the reasons for an outside consultant on that market analysis is the intensity of the changes to the commercial structure right now. So to answer your question, we are going to continue to do individual analyses as they come up, but then continue to feed that into the process because each property is bringing its own challenges to us. So we're going to kind of come at it from both sides, the individual side and then the larger market analysis. And just as a part of that, how would you handle the question mark that was raised earlier about the possibility that there is underutilized office space that could convert to affordable housing or any other different use? How do you do that? Is it just a site-specific review or is there more to it than that?

I think it's, again, I think it's a bookend approach because we have a study that shows us that identify, I have in front of me that identifies the existing office buildings and what maybe the risk factor is for each of those buildings, then it's going to be actually looking at each individual building. So we know that in the market right now, in the Northern Virginia market, in Q1 of 2026, there's not a single office building under construction. But you've got 35% vacancy in the Crystal City Corridor, and they are still commanding almost $40 a square foot in rent. So we know that there's a pent-up desire for flight to quality for office, even as the market is downsizing. So this is the critical timeframe for us to figure out which of our office buildings have the highest potential

to attract some of that, of what's still happening in the office market. So, again, it's bookends. It's individual properties, but also keeping an eye on that market movement. If financing starts to shift to commercial, having a plan that gives us the flexibility when the projects come in. So it's going to be both sides of that question. And you mentioned the change in intensity, and I think probably embedded in your comments is the change in timing. So the market is stretching here. And if I understand it, the good news is that it gets us a little bit of time here to figure out the best approach. And so I gather you're taking full advantage of that with all the assessments you're doing. Yeah, we're seeing deals happening at smaller square footage than we've seen in the past and taking longer to go through.

So companies with the larger square footprints are staying longer, and the ones that are moving are going to smaller spaces. That makes us a really valuable market because we have those spaces. What we have to decide is of the buildings we have, I don't think we have any building built, any office built past 2000, if I'm remembering correctly. And most of our office product was built in the 70s and 80s. So we need to make decisions on what to preserve, what to update, and what is perfectly acceptable at this point to go because we won't be able to compete in the market with it as it is. So that's going to be part of this analysis. I think it's really critical that we know that. Well, great. Just the last thought to share is that the general – we could see a shift in general strategy for economic and commercial development,

but housing development and growth in general that could be shifting away from accommodation of growth and much more towards aggressively targeting the kind of growth that we have. So I would expect this effort could help us identify what a targeted strategy would be in all of these different areas. And let me just check with Mr. Nabdi again. Is that the kind of thought process that we would begin supporting in this to understand how we would identify the best strategies going forward that ultimately could be incorporated in the small area plans? Yeah, you mean strategies dealing with all the topics that we talked about or focus – Well, there's a big picture thing here, which is we've had a pretty significant reconfiguration of the timing, intensity,

and characteristics of demand for a lot of different things. And it changes perhaps the way that we approach our responses to that and certainly is encouraging jurisdictions to take a pretty targeted view of exactly what they want to accomplish and not simply relying on supply to answer that question for them. It sounds like we're headed in that direction with the kind of clarity that you're trying to achieve here. Yes, that's correct. And I will say with the first round of smaller plans, the overall numbers that are shown in there are projections. That's all they are. There's no strategy behind them. There's no city goals of what we want to do or anything like that. So we are trying to hone this in on how we want to handle the issues that we're dealing with.

And so we hope to get more targeted with this. So my reaction is based on this dialogue and this conversation, I think it's a good way to move forward. But I think these dimensions of that moving forward are really important for us to incorporate. Thanks. Thank you. Council Member Hall. Thank you very much. Thank you for the presentation. And I'm glad to have so many stakeholders at the table. I think it's really helpful to come about this from a bunch of different angles. And I think it's clear that that is what is happening. I love the EDA analysis on these things. And I was happy to hear you bring up the fact that, you know, we are, we're small. And so we can pivot easily, much easier than larger spaces can.

But I also think that one of the benefits that we really have is that we do offer smaller square-footed spaces. And the ability to, you know, start off in something that's small and then we help them move up into different levels as they need it. Or people can stay in the small spaces and maybe be a little bit more transient than some other locked-in long-term leases. And I do worry sometimes that with this big push of make many things that are commercial into residential, that we lose some of those things in the mix. And so I understand some things were built a long time ago and some things are a little bit more recent in the 2000s. But I think understanding, you know, where we want to be when we grow up essentially is a really, really helpful tool.

And not one that we jump into very quickly, but one that we really do a good amount of research on. And like you said, things from COVID have significantly changed the landscape in, you know, many, many areas. For the plan itself, I'm very happy to hear about the changes to the general formatting. I think that's one of the things that is frustrating for people. And, you know, when we did our renovation, you know, nearly a decade or over a decade ago now, it's one way in this document, but it references something in somewhere else. Or you read this and you think it's this way, but then, no, you go to page 37 and that's not what we were saying. So I think that that has been a primary concern of developers as well as just regular people trying to understand what some of our policies and procedures are.

So that's really helpful. I know height is one that always gets talked about, and it's one that I do struggle with as well. I feel like if we set up our policies that we are on the lower end, it gives us the ability to make the changes. But I think what happens is when you give someone six stories, then they want seven. And then the next person says, well, they did seven, so we're going to do nine. And then I think you end up with a much taller landscape than maybe was originally intended. So I think keeping on the lower side, at least for our small area plans, is a suggestion that I would certainly make. I am curious about the traffic studies. I know they're expensive and I know that they are easily outdated.

But I would also be curious. I know we used to do in our neighborhood a lot, not a lot, but frequently we had those little, they always called them the Reader's Digest. The older people that talked about them, they're like, oh, it's the size of a Reader's Digest on the ground. That did kind of the traffic counts. And I am curious, how often are we checking some of those traffic counts or measures for some of our bigger area roads and then comparing back to what we thought in 2020 or 2022, let's say? I can address that. So VDOT actually on many of our major roads is updating our traffic counts for us. And so we are getting updated counts through VDOT. We also do periodic counts on some of our more minor roads.

So we are doing those. We're not doing them regularly. We don't have a set program necessarily, but we are going back and taking counts of some of our roads. To address your earlier question about the traffic study, we will be taking an approach that's very similar to the one that Colleen identified for the economic development, sort of that bookend, looking at it holistically and also looking at some of the parcels. It's really difficult to get into the weeds on some of the parcels because there are so many details that go into a detailed traffic analysis for any specific property. It is, in theory, an objective analysis. That said, there are so many subjective assumptions that need to be made when doing a traffic analysis.

So as soon as the development comes in, if it differs from what you've identified when you've done that traffic study, your traffic study is really not that great. So what I would recommend, and this is what I've talked about with the planning department, is that I would recommend us looking at this holistically, revisiting some of the bigger ideas. If we take North Facts, for example, we originally had a roundabout proposed at Eaton and Chambridge Road. We looked at doing a road diet on Eaton Place. Some of those big ideas have changed. We know that we can't accommodate a road diet on Eaton Place. We know that we're doing a different intersection design for Eaton. So some of those big ideas are absolutely what I think we should be looking at.

I don't believe that we should be looking at assumptions for every parcel and doing that kind of in-depth traffic analysis. It's extremely expensive, and I'm not sure that it's worth it. I would agree with that, and I know that our residents are not traffic experts per se, but I do think that if you collectively ask people that live here, drive around here day in and day out, again, not experts, but they can tell you where the problem areas are, where they're sitting, and where things could or should be improved. And absolutely, those are the kinds of things we should be looking at. So the problem areas, the intersections, and identifying access points. Where do we want access? So again, those are sort of the bigger picture things.

I believe, though, that when the specific development proposals come in, those big picture ideas can guide that. But I don't think that we should be doing the nitty-gritty traffic analysis at this point. And I would agree with you in my very limited traffic knowledge. But I do think that you have the Davies property, which it's going to change things on its own, and then you have the next development next to it and all these different things. You can only predict what you know at that time and what you think is going to happen. And I just think it does make it really challenging. I am disappointed to hear about the road diet uneaten not being a thing. I still feel like there are some opportunities there.

But I do also think that the fact that the botanist was able to build out so close to the road, I mean, I think we probably should have seen that one coming and back them up a little bit in order to try to keep some availability for a bike lane or something else on there. Sure. So this is when we can pivot. We had talked about doing a road diet to accommodate bicycles on road. So in light of the fact that we need to potentially, again, this is something that we'll be revisiting. We don't think at this point that we'll be able to accommodate that. And this is just an example. This is where we pivot, and instead of saying let's have bike lanes on the road, maybe we have a wide shared use path that's behind the curb.

And so we still want to accommodate bikes, but maybe we're doing it differently. So that's the kind of thing that we'll look at more holistically when we're reviewing the small area plan. Yeah. And just to piggyback on that, because I think that's a really good idea, and I know there's lots of areas for shared use paths as opposed to double sidewalks, double this, double that. Not everything can be as wide as what's going to be done on Blenheim. I know we brought up the bike lanes on University the other day, and I actually was surprised to hear that there's not bike lanes being considered for that, because I thought that we were using that as a spine to offset some of the Cambridge Road traffic and volume,

and I was just surprised to hear that there weren't bike lanes on there. I understand we have the chicanes that are kind of making it a little bit difficult there, but I really did think that that was supposed to be an alternate route for bikers, despite the somewhat large hill. That is the ultimate goal. Is there a specific portion of University Drive that you're referring to? Yeah, specifically from Leighton Hall Drive down to 50. I thought that was supposed to be part of that big conversation of bike lanes. That is, so what you have heard is correct, that right now what we are proposing on that stretch is the Sharrows. What we have been talking about for the spine up to this point has really been from Mason to Leighton Hall Drive,

and we're about, as you know, to implement the portion from North Street to Leighton Hall Drive, which leaves the center section still up for discussion, which is something we're looking at as part of the Old Town Circulation Plan, how we can get the bike lanes in that center part. Yeah. And ultimately, it's not off the table that we could look at that as a subsequent step. Yeah, okay. Thank you. And then just a couple more comments. The sewer situation and the proffers, I think that's something we really do have to hit heavily, because I think that with all of the increased development here, I know you'd mentioned this before, Mr. Ito, with regard to the amount of water that we get from the Nomenkul plant,

and I don't remember all the numbers exactly, but I think roughly what we have as far as millions of gallons or something would accommodate up to like 35,000 people or 34,000 people. And as we continue to add high density and mixed use, we're obviously growing at a much faster rate. And so I know it's hard to tell a developer, hey, if you do this, you're going to have to put in this bigger sewer line, and maybe that's not the way to go at that specific time. But I do think recognizing that added density adds additional strain on the utility system is something we really do have to think about, because we're still dealing with so many old pipes and things that have never really been updated or upgraded,

and that we're trying to do on the city's dime, despite having an influx of residents that I think should be helping out in some ways. And my last two final things, if I can read my handwriting. Oh, we already talked about that. It's a look forward to the 2050 plan. I know, you know, 2035 still seems so far away in so many ways, but I think really having a focus on that 2050 plan and starting to gather resident input, and I know we do resident input in so many ways that I know all these little conversations and surveys and questions lead to that next step. But I do think having that formal goal and expectation is probably something that is definitely on your radar, and I think it's something we really should be focusing on.

So thank you for all the information. Council Member Bates and then Council Member McQuillan. Thank you. So first off, as I recall, the botanist does include a 10-foot-wide sure-use path. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. Yeah, yeah. And I believe the other project on Eaton Place that's proposed would also include that as well. Is that right? Yeah, although that's on the other side. So and I hope that we see that continue and maybe fill in the gaps in the future. And thinking about what we want to see reviewed as part of the process. So first off, I think that most of what was kind of on my mind is listed in the staff report, including height. I do believe that height should be considered,

but I believe that whether height is revised downward or revised upward should come up from the review process itself as opposed to being prescribed. Now, thinking about, I was excited to see the idea of property-based searchability being considered. I think that's really exciting. And as I recall, the intention behind how the targets for office space, for residential units, et cetera, I saw that mentioned on one of the earlier slides. And the thought behind that, I believe, was that those were not to be hard caps or anything of that nature, but more the projected demand that we might see there. And then if we kind of hit that, then we kind of reconsider. Is that sort of what the thinking was up to this point?

That's correct. And in all honesty, the way we use those projections isn't defined very well. I think when we were developing the smaller-year plans, we wanted something that projected where we were going, what we should expect with this. And so that's why it was really driven by market demand. But then the language in each of the smaller-year plans and how it refers to those is slightly different. And part of the reason for that is because we didn't really know how we wanted to use them. It was like, okay, this is a good starting point. But it seemed so far away that we would reach that point that we say, okay, is this a hard cap? Is this just when we get to this point, we kind of review things and those kind of things.

And that's kind of how it's worded in there. So that's the way it's used now. It's not meant to say that we will stop development when we reach this point. As we review the smaller-year plans, we can think a little bit more closely about how we want to use those numbers because we're a little bit closer to achieving them. And so I think we are already, like everyone in the back of their mind, is starting to think, you know, what does that actually mean for us? Yeah, yeah. So I'm glad to hear that that's being considered. I do recall that being a bit ambiguous in the smaller-year plans as they're written now. So I'm glad to hear that, you know, your attention to detail is bringing that forward.

And then lastly, as we discussed earlier, the BRT plan, would that be something that might be considered as part of this review process or more the overall comprehensive plan review process? I have some thoughts, but I'll also defer to Ms. Stanford. The fact that it's out there, I think the – at least incorporating the general idea in the form of a text reference in the smaller plans would be a good thing to do. But in terms of how far we take it, in terms of guiding street widths and things like that, I think we're going to need some more information, but I'll see if she has thoughts. The thing about the BRT plan is that it requires the cooperation of Fairfax County because these routes that are proposed run through the city

for just a small portion of the proposed routes. And, again, these are large regional plans. So I do believe that we should reference these in our comprehensive plan. I don't believe they're necessarily for the small area plans. I think they are larger concepts that will take a while to come to fruition if they do, given that we're probably the minority player in these because the majority of the route is outside of the city. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. The one thing I will say, I recall from the Camp Washington small area plan, it's been a while since I've leaped through that one, but I believe there was a transit hub or transit center proposed there. I don't know if that's something that we might want to consider

if the BRT plan presents any kind of opportunity to pivot on that or just continue in that direction. Yeah, I think that's something we can look at. I don't know if we'll get much more detail than we have now, but maybe this is an opportunity to say, is this the right location for that? Is there any additional information we should be thinking about when thinking about BRT? Fairfax Circle smaller plan, I think, obviously, has a similar. Yeah, thank you. Council Member McQuillen. Thank you, Mary Reid. So just to confirm, it sounds like the process is to analyze what we currently have going on, collect all the analyses, bring them together, and then create our goals for these small area plans.

Is that correct? Is that where the goals are going to come in? We aren't proposing necessarily revising the goals. I think it's more about everything you said, collecting data and gathering information, and then looking at refining the more detailed recommendations in the plans. I wouldn't want to say, though, if we had a community meeting and there was a lot of feedback about a particular goal in the plan, that we would be opposed to changing it. I think we would certainly be open to that. But we're not necessarily setting up the process to achieve that. I just want to ensure that it's being driven through data and the analysis of data, not just public outreach, so that we actually are basing it on current and then the analysis that we have.

Yes, that's correct. And that's one of the main purposes with this process, is to bring a little bit more data background into it. Excellent. Okay, so going through the presentation, I also support including a reference to the BRT plan. I think it's just smart for us to recognize what the plans are and to try to be a good regional partner, to at least have some expectation that these might happen. Also, just to make sure that it's communicated to developers and to our residents as well through that. Again, with the formatting, just ensuring that everything's as consistent as possible. The analysis for traffic and infrastructure, I believe, is important. Some analysis on coming from the school board,

often it was student yields was a large concern of ours. So I'm just thinking ahead about the, that's the number one thing I hear from all of our residents, is the traffic. So having, and again, not detailed, but if you look at an area, you should have an idea of if this is the expectation, we're expecting this many individuals here, this many developments, developments, you should have some idea of how that should affect the traffic in that area. I also, other reoccurring issues, I agree with everything you have here, building height. I also would like to include setback because I think those go hand in hand. A lot of the concerns I hear from residents, it's the feeling of the height, not necessarily just the height.

And I think that is connected to the setback. When you're really close to a building, it feels a lot higher and taller. So I think that needs to be included in that. I also agree with the ground floor retail. That is a concern I hear often. Parking, was that addressed as well? I think I saw that. Parking isn't really touched on very much in the small area plans. There are general recommendations about providing or encouraging shared parking and those types of things. But for the most part, discussion on parking is deferred to the zoning ordinance. And we will be discussing that with the zoning ordinance amendments that we will have a work session with you on a couple of weeks. Wonderful. Okay, great.

As far as slide eight, let me get there really quick so I can be on the same page with you. Under the tasks, number one, does this include safety? Do we consider safety elements? Is this the right slide? That's up on the screen. Yeah, under one, anticipate variations and impacts to individual properties, open space streets, others. What about safety impacts? So this is looking at physical impacts to properties. For safety issues, does that mean like vehicular access? I'm kind of taking into consideration pedestrian flow, traffic flow, and how that kind of gets disrupted and changes depending on the developments and how things are working and travel time kind of plays into that. I was just kind of thinking big picture.

Okay. Yeah. So that's not really what's meant here, but that is something that will be incorporated throughout as we develop these types of plans. We're always, pedestrian access is one of the primary things that helps drive the way these are laid out. So that's certainly something that will be included with this. And also, you know, one of the general reviewers of this, you know, even without a traffic study, our traffic engineer does look at these. And so if we're proposing something from a traffic management perspective that he thinks is unsafe, then, you know, he'll provide feedback on that and we'll adjust. Excellent. I was just trying to figure out where it falls into the process, I guess,

in the analysis area. The mid-century commercial theme, I really like this idea. It's the corridor is right as you enter our city. Having just visited historic Fredericksburg, a lot of these little locations really create the culture and uniqueness of a community. So I think that's, I like that idea. And I hear from a lot of longtime residents that they really, you know, they have a fondness of these locations and these places. They all have a story that goes along with it. There's an entire social media page about historic Fairfax City where they discuss these things and the evolution of the businesses. And since this started, this is such a small little close-knit community, I think it's something

to definitely consider. And then I also just wanted to support the formatting and ensuring that the end result is easier for both developers and our residents to understand, follow, and really get the information that they're looking for from it. It does seem, I echo my colleagues' concerns about, it does seem that developers struggle with that a lot or that there's a lot of confusion between comprehensive and the small area plans. So I just wanted to echo those comments as well. But overall, I think it's, you're on the right track here. So thank you. Council Member Amos. The only thing I'll add to what Council Member McQuillan brought up, which I believe is also in part what she was referencing,

which we had the data from the move Fairfax City Steering Committee was the pedestrian level of stress analysis. And I know we currently already have that as a part of the committee, but we'll also, and I'm not sure what mechanism we have in place to track how we're improving over time. I know you can't do it site by site. That, to your point, that's a little too much. But having data points on how we're doing, like let's say where we are at in five years. Like are we making progress on our pedestrian safety targets? Any other comments? Well, it's a wonderful presentation and I think this is the way to go about it. Speaking just about bus transit, regardless of BRT, is that we've got WMATA, Q, and Connector

who all come through here. And based on how these small area plans change, there might be some flexibility on how we move people through so they can transfer buses. I mean, I just think depending on the developments that come up is going to have an impact on how the buses in the short time they're in our city move through the city in order to maximize the number of people we're carrying from one point to the other, but also allows them to change buses. Pedestrian safety, paramount, I mean walkability for the city. I think if we go back to the community survey, I hope that becomes a tool. We've done one and I hope that becomes a tool that we use regularly as a way of getting feedback from the community.

That's one way we do it. Walkability, I think, has always been a goal for the city. And some of the things that we can't anticipate as well but has come up recently is things on automatic enforcement of things where it comes to traffic, pedestrian access. The Commonwealth of Virginia seems to be moving in a direction that says that technology can help with some of the safety issues that we have. It's very narrow right now what we can do with automatic enforcement on intersections and stop signs. Right now it's just in school zones. but I think there is sophisticated technology that is moving forward. I think the state legislature is also going to have legislation that enables localities to do more

to make things safer to Council Member McQuillan's point about how people in transit stops and pedestrians and bicycles and scooters organize themselves in the city. I mean I think these plans are so helpful and I think the review of them is so important but there's so much we can't predict. So as we move forward we're going to have to be agile which given our size and the amazing amazing staff we have here given our sizes we are in a position to pivot and be more flexible and to be early adopters on some things more than larger localities where it makes sense. So I hope everybody remembers we can only do what we can do with what we know today but you always have to leave space for the things

that we can kind of see are there that are going to have a really big impact. I mean we just don't know until we get there but these things will make a difference in how we think about these activity centers and these small area plans too. You just have to kind of leave space for the unknown. But as far as what is known I think there seems to be a general consensus and agreement that this framework and how you're going about doing this the steps the protocol and the timeline all seems to be I hear agreement. I'm seeing I'm seeing heads nods so thank you so much for the presentation. I hope this has been helpful for you too. Very helpful. Thank you. All right. Our next work session item is the Northbacks

Lanier Park Design Guidelines introduction. I'm going to recognize Paul Napty our Division Chief of Planning for the staff presentation. Thank you again Mayor Reed and members of council. The purpose of this work session is to introduce you to a effort that is going on to implement one of the or support implementation of one of the recommendations of the adopted small area plans. This is the Northbacks Lanier Park and I'll first provide a little background of what the park is and then what the city is doing right now to help support with that implementation. So looking at the Northbacks small area plan this is the general concept plan that's included in that plan for that area and one of the

key components of this plan is what's called the Northbacks Lanier Park. that area is highlighted here. In general this is described as a public open space a connector of neighborhoods and green infrastructure. This is one of the five goals of the Northbacks small area plan is to establish this linear park. The condition across the length of this proposed park varies in some places. It really functions just as an enhanced streetscape with improved stormwater measures and visible open spaces that can be used and those types of things. In other places it has functions as an urban retail plaza. Other places it functions as more of a larger programmable open space or park and in some places it really just

functions as a natural area. The extent of the park traverses multiple private parcels as well as overlaps with public streets and many locations. Some of the development projects that have moved forward as well as some of the public projects that have gone forward in terms of implementing new streets have implemented some of the recommendations of this park from the small area plan. However, this has been inconsistent and in some places the overall vision is intended to be met but it might not be implemented the same way as it is on a site located in another part of the park. In order to provide better guidance to future projects that might be coming forward the goal of this effort that we're working

on now is to establish design standards. No matter where our property is or a public area is along this linear park we are implementing elements that make it read as a cohesive element. As an example this map shows the Northfax small area plan with all of the parcels that overlap with the proposed linear park that have some kind of a development proposal either underway or completed. So the blue ones are those that are still coming forward either in a pre-application phase and then the red ones are ones that have been approved or are complete. And then the dashed line area is the location of the Northfax East-West Road. This is a city-led effort that will complete the connection from University Drive

to Chambers Road that also overlaps with the linear park and this is one of those locations that I mentioned where what's called a park really function as an enhanced streetscape. So as I mentioned the goal with this effort is to establish design guidelines that will be used by all parties whether it be private developers or public entities such as ourselves when designing various elements of this park to be consistent with each other. So to support this we are using our on-call consultant Timmins who does a lot of the engineering work for various transportation projects in the city to help develop these design guidelines and they are also the designer of the Northfax East-West Road. So they have

developed this list of project goals and I won't read through all of these but I just want to point out that the first two are really the two that I would consider to be actual goals for the project and really defining what is intended through the Northfax Smaller Plan. The last three are more process elements about how we'll go about doing this and what we hope to get out of it. And then the fourth item actually references the implementation of key ideas from the Northfax Linear Park page in the Northfax Smaller Plan and just to highlight what that includes there are general descriptions of the design area types describes it as a natural urban setting discussions on stormwater strategies language that calls

it the heart of the community and that it should be a major identifying design feature for Northfax. So the product we hope to get out of this effort is to establish again design elements and design guidelines. This is not proposed to actually develop a design for this park. We're leaving that to happen on a case by case basis. But we do hope to establish certain character areas. As I mentioned there are different types of characters that are proposed in the plan. And then establish design standards for those. Those will include things such as ideal dimensions for certain types of elements. Ideal types of tree plantings and other types of plantings. Certain furnishings to make sure that they read as consistent

across the length of the park. Stormwater measures including those measures that are ideal to be visible and operate at the surface level as well as identify how the stormwater system will function as development happens on a piecemeal basis. include recommendations on materials and patterns again to create consistency and location for amenities such as public art. This is intended to be functioned more as a technical document rather than a guiding policy type of document. So the process that we are working on is in discussion with our consultant and at this time we have a meeting coming up with our first stakeholder group which is a property owner group but then later in July we have a meeting

scheduled with other stakeholders which are representatives from city divisions and boards and commissions. The list of divisions is shown there. We have asked the following boards to appoint someone to represent them. Board of architecture review, environmental sustainability committee, parks and recreation advisory board and the planning commission. After these meetings then the consultant will prepare draft design guidelines and then heading into September the plan is for the city to review and recommend revisions to those and then hopefully be ready to finalize this by October. Again this is not a significant effort. This is really just establishing these design guidelines so it doesn't have to be a lengthy

process. In the end we don't think that council formal approval in the form of adoption is necessary but we do hope to get in front of you to get some kind of informal support and so you'll at least be able to kind of share your thoughts on that. So that's all I have on this. Just wanted to make you aware of this effort and to see if you have any thoughts or suggestions for us as we go forward and begin the design process. that's all I have for the presentation. Thank you so much. Council Member McQuillan. Thank you. I just wanted to share a thought that I'm really grateful to see that Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is involved in this as they just did a lot of work with signage in their

parks and they did a lot of this kind of collecting and information from stakeholders regarding you know what kind of looks and I think working with them to find and use some of that information to create some cohesiveness might be a really good idea. I mean they discussed a lot of things from you know just the color patterns and the materials used so they've done a lot of that work ahead of time. But that's all. Thank you. Council Member Peterson. Remind me what's the history and the status of this stream? Of the stream? Well the stream in Northfax is separate from the Northfax Linear Park but that is something that I'm not sure what you mean by the history. So is this creating a stream where there was none before?

This wouldn't be a stream. It would be a series of stormwater measures that will serve the development around it as development comes online. So yeah there are graphics in there that look like there's water but essentially that's kind of like peak rainfall period is what it's showing. Okay. All right. So these are water management areas as opposed to a free flowing stream. All right. Correct. Will they go totally dry then at some times and other times they're wet? Is that what's going on? Yes. I think most of the time they are completely dry but I'll let Mr. Ito describe. Most stormwater management facilities are intended to be dry during and drain completely when it's not raining and they'll fill and then slowly

drain. That's how they control pollutants and water quantity. Okay. So we're taking advantage of the opportunity to create that water management infrastructure infrastructure and in a way that helps to enhance an area and provide an attraction at the same time. Is that really the idea here? Yes. That's a general idea and that was that stems from the general recommendations in the North Vax small area plan. I mean it's a great idea. I would look forward to the way that it's done to make it as productive as possible you know in terms of the little bit of natural space that's in there between vegetation and if there's any opportunity to attract birds and pollinators and anything else in there to make it you

know just as live as possible. I think it would really help add to that whole anchor asset. Thanks. Councilmember Amos. Thank you. I only had two quick questions. So on the amenities side of things I saw that there was a for example artwork there two things related to that one when we say amenities is there going to be like a list of potential items that we'd be considering like we've seen on some other presentations. Yeah I think eventually we'll get there so there could be things like gazebos or other types of things and I think through this process particularly including a representative from PRAB as was mentioned getting idea a sense of what types of things the city lacks in these types of spaces that could be

added as this goes forward and so. With that in mind I'd probably also recommend adding the commission on the arts. If that's an opportunity to help spruce up the artwork there I think that'd be a worthwhile venture. The only other question I had and just let me know if this isn't applicable. When it comes to materials are we also going to potentially discuss permeable pavers as an option? Is that on the table or is there like a configuration on why that would not be possible at this time? It's not infeasible. I don't recommend it for travel ways. It is maintenance intensive but it is appropriate for parking spaces or lightly trafficked areas so it is an option that can be considered. Council member Hall and then

council member Hardy Chandler. Thank you. This is a spot that's especially near and dear to my heart since I live in Cobdale. Just a couple things. On slide two I recognize this existing trail and thank you for getting that cleaned up by the community the other day. I will say I don't know if there's ever an opportunity to make that ADA accessible. It does cross over the creek there and has little cement things that you can stand on. But moms do manage to get strollers over there and bikes can go but you really could not get a wheelchair or a bigger baby carriage of some sort. So I was definitely disappointed with how that totally turned out just with the lack of accessibility for some. So I think as we maybe look into doing

this further maybe there could be an opportunity to try to add a ramp or something over there. But on to the positive part of this I think this is great. I know we've discussed this at length and this definitely needs to be an activated area of the city. It's got so much potential. In addition to the boards and commissions that you outlined I do wonder if maybe inviting a representative from Cobdale, Fairchester Woods, the assembly and the new townhouse community that's there and then potentially the new senior living center just to kind of get people that live there and will be utilizing this in a way that might just be different from a board and perspective. I'm sorry board and commission perspective.

So that would be my only suggestion. Thank you. Council member Hardy-Chandler. Thank you for bringing this to our awareness. I love the use of atypical spaces and the natural enhancements and the kind of connectivity these kinds of environments can support. There have been a couple of comments about boards and commissions for this presentation and for the previous one. I'd like for us to go beyond the typical boards and commissions. The commission for women. Other commissions I think can also act as focus groups because they are representatives from the community and that's a reoccurring thing. I know it's natural to go to the commission that seems most affiliated with the topic but all of the commissions I think can support buy-in

and bridge community engagement. So I encourage for all projects to use all of the boards and commissions as a resource for information and as a way to get word out about awareness and to foster engagement. So that's just my push in support of boards and commissions generally. In the picture it looked like some of the projects were proposed to sort of project into the project. Will there be any kind of displacement or any disruption in any way for any of the affiliated properties? So yes but the intention is that this is implemented as development occurs and so the idea is not that the city is going in and acquiring land for park space and things like that. We do that for transportation infrastructure but not for anything that goes beyond

what's needed for that right of way. Anything that goes beyond that is this would become a tool that we would give to a developer who is developing the site adjacent to this and say okay the part of your site is shown as linear park. If you're going to design part of this linear park these are the design standards you should use. And so it would be kind of a voluntary participation. Gotcha. Gotcha. And are there other sort of economic impacts anticipated? You can say no. I would say I don't know. I mean eventually as this starts to come together I hope it's something that can will have a positive economic impact on surrounding properties. I just can't say that with confidence. Mm-hmm. All right.

And that wouldn't be a driver per se but just a sort of ancillary consideration. Correct. But I appreciate the thinking behind this project and look forward to other similar projects for other spaces throughout the city. Thank you. Councilmember McQuillen. I just wanted to echo the accessibility concern by Councilmember Hall. I have also used that area and I know there is a lot of families over there. When we did door knocking to that newer community over there there were a lot of young children and families with littles so we saw a lot of strollers out. So I just wanted to echo that as someone who likes to travel throughout the city and especially did so when my children were little. So thank you.

Councilmember Bates. So thinking about the broader connectivity context we talked before about the importance of Fairfax City to connectivity throughout the region at the confluence of multiple state and federal highways and this right here is basically right at the gateway to the city from I-66 and from the I-66 trail. So beyond this you know we have the I-66 trail spur that connects down to the Cambridge Road Shared Use Path that connects down to the North Fax East West Roadway and the University Drive Extension which I believe both include Shared Use Paths. And then I believe we also have a Shared Use Path along the southern side of Point 50. And then the canceled Snyder Trail would have connected to that far corner of Willowood Plaza and then possibly

with the potential for another connection up here at this near corner of Willowood Plaza. So do you have any thoughts to share on next steps to in some way replicate that connectivity over toward Cardinal Road and the Fairwoods Parkway Neighborway Project and the Wilcoxon Trail Project and up to Fairfax Circle? We're working on it. We're working on it. So because we without the George Snyder Trail we're looking at ways to make those connections without that project. So one of them is through the Wilcoxon Trail extension that we're talking about and pivoting that project up to Draper and using Beach Drive. We're also talking about and we mentioned it a few minutes ago the idea of putting Shared Use Paths on Eaton.

So that if you're coming down I-66 on the spur and you get to the intersection you then have a Shared Use Path to go from that intersection to University Drive which has the Shared Use Path to get down to Route 50. So we are working on bridging all of the Shared Use Paths and the different connections that we have. So this is something that we're working on all the time and thinking about where these missing pieces are and how can we accommodate them. So I was actually just speaking to Mr. Nabte a few weeks ago about the potential for a Shared Use Path on the south side of Eaton Place between University Drive extension and Chambridge Road and whether this is something we should pursue, is this something that a developer could do, but either way this is something we would like to see in place potentially on both sides of the street.

So I don't know if that answers your question but the answer is that we are working on it and these are connections that we are constantly looking for. Okay, anything else? The thing I would just add is talking about the permeable pavers. You know, there are a lot of materials that might be desirable from an environmental standpoint but create mobility issues. And to accessibility, yes. I mean, we always, walkability is one of the things that people in this community have said that they want. And it's not just people with strollers. It's people who just can't walk on uneven surfaces. So something you could park a car on that is, you know, it wouldn't matter so much. But for paths and choosing the right materials, we have to balance true ADA accessibility and true safe passage with environmental concerns too.

And I mean, I think that was really the struggle, a lot of the struggle with the George Snyder Trail was creating an ADA accessible way for people to get through the city. So I do think we always have to keep that uppermost when we talk about wanting to be greener and be environmentally sensitive. We are still trying to create a walkable city for people to safely, of all ages and mobility issues, to be able to get through the city. And sometimes that's going to mean people having to share space with bicycles, right? And these are just all considerations. And Councilmember Hardy Chandler pointed out that we need to use all the boards and commissions, and that includes Village in the City. Because Village in the City also represents older people who want to stay and age in place here.

So it's easy to see the kids with small children in strollers, you see them. But what you may not see are older people because maybe older people are not actually out. And so I do hope that we can ask our boards and commissions to weigh in from their perspective. And I don't know if we can create a system that says we're looking at something and does your board want to send us feedback, analysis, their perspective, just to get a fuller representation of the work these boards and commissions are doing. But walkability, safety, accessibility, and being ADA friendly is really important, I think, to all future planning for this park and everything else that we do. And with that, we will thank you for your presentation.

And I'm now going to reconvene the regular meeting and kick it over to our City Manager. Thank you, Mayor and Council. We'll get into our future City Council agenda items, largely moving into the month of July already. So of note, on the seventh and a work session, we have a discussion on land use application at 4117 Chainbridge Road. Also want to bring back an update on MediaScribe, which would be our enhanced language access tool for meetings. Also, a lot has happened in Richmond over the last day or so regarding budget. And so we're going to pivot a little bit from the 28th to the 7th. I'll have Assistant City Manager Martinez speak a little bit about the 1% sales tax item and some of the logistics and planning that might be necessary regarding that issue.

JC? Sure. Thank you. So as the manager noted, the General Assembly has approved budget language that may provide localities with the authority to pursue an additional 1% sales tax subject to voter approval. While the City is still waiting for final enrolled HB 30 language and any related implementation guidance, current indications are that revenues may be used for school construction and renovation projects and in Northern Virginia may also be available to support public transportation and transit related investments. Although staff will continue to review the final legislation once available, the timeline for placing a referendum before the voters requires action in advance of receiving all final guidance.

For a November 3rd, 2026 referendum, City Council would need to adopt a resolution and request an order from the circuit court no later than July 21st, 2026. Given the statutory deadlines and the potential opportunity to secure a dedicated local funding source for critical school and transportation infrastructure needs, staff recommends that the July 7th, 2026 meeting be advertised as a special meeting and that City Council consider and take action on a resolution requesting placement of the 1% sales tax referendum on the November, the 1st, 2026 ballot. This action would preserve the City's ability to move forward should the final enacted legislation confirm the anticipated authority and eligible uses.

Happy to answer any questions. Any questions for Mr. Martinez? Councilmember Hull. Thank you. I was actually very disappointed to see that it included funds for transportation to be used in there. And my understanding after speaking with the superintendent is that we may have the ability or authority to continue to devote those funds exclusively to schools as they were originally intended. Is that something that we can do as a council if there is the will of the council to do that? Or are we required to devote some sort of percentage in some way? Mr. Martinez. As of now, we're not reading anything in the legislation that would indicate a commitment to either or. Brian will probably step up and intervene if I speak out of turn.

But as of now, the language does not appear to suggest a percentage to one or the other. Okay. I also thought it was interesting that it's Northern Virginia when we already have the, I think that's a .7% sales tax that already gets applied. So, hey, schools. I think it's coming out of the desire to have dedicated funding source for WMATA and also some adjustments to the formulas that are going to create some issues potentially for municipalities in Northern Virginia related to that. In terms of use of the funds, and again, we're waiting for the final signed budget. It'll be a two-step. The referendum obviously would need to pass. The referendum question, I think, would include all of the options because that doesn't seem to be the flexibility to not include it.

So, it confuses things because it's going to say in all likelihood to be used for new capital construction for schools, for transportation projects, or for both. So, that'll be the sort of the referendum question. If the referendum passes, then the City Council would have to enact an ordinance that would provide how the funds would be used. So, I think that would be the opportunity if the Council or future Councils would want to dedicate funds for certain purposes. And, again, there's a lot to be determined in this. But for the resolution that would authorize placing the referendum on the ballot for November, I think the options are going to be limited. And I think it's probably going to be the broad, it will have to be the broad language that would allow for one, the other, or both.

And I completely understand that, and I thank you for pointing that out. But I also think that we collectively as a Council, and I don't mean to speak for anybody else here, but Council School Board, we've been very heavily focused on this 1% for schools. I mean, that's when we did the referendum, when we did the bond referendum, I mean, all of that was really focused on, let's get this passed. We're hoping the 1% will pass to go here. So, I recognize that a future Council would be able to have determination on that. But I also think that for the messaging for our residents for getting the word out on the 1% sales tax, and please vote yes for this, I would love to see our attention focused on using that for schools and getting that wording out, saying, yes, we know it says this, but our intention has been this.

The state provided this other transportation option only in Northern Virginia, but this gives us roughly $13 million a year for schools. We need this for our four schools. And so, again, not trying to speak for anybody, but that was where we've been focused this whole time. So, I'm just curious what others think about that. Thank you. Mr. Martinez. Just one clarifying, and this has not been solidified yet. And I think one of the reasons why they're allowing Northern Virginia to potentially use the 1% in addition to or in conjunction for transportation is there is also legislation that in fiscal year 2029, so starting July 1, 2028, there will be additional funding requirement from localities in Northern Virginia to WMATA.

And they're also potentially doing away with the 3% cap. That now puts potential additional burden on the jurisdictions in Northern Virginia to come up with additional capital and operating needs. For WMATA, this was unassuming a negotiating tactic to try to say, well, we'll give you access to this. But to your point, Council Member, the amount of revenue that would be generated from the 1% basically covers the two school, the two elementary school renovations and the high school roof. There's really not much left for anything else, given that we may have additional financial pressures, given a pending upcoming WMATA increase. Yes, and I think if you assumed the 1% didn't pass, and we weren't able to use it for transportation, we would still have to find those funds.

So as far as I'm concerned, mentally, this money should go to the schools. That's my take. Thank you. Thank you. Well, yes. And I agree. Except that the broader language means that for however many years we use the revenue for schools, there's succeeding years where we have the flexibility to use the same 1% for any further funding for transportation, which I think is the idea. So the 1% is not just unless they sunset it or something happens in the General Assembly and they're like, we're taking it away. But this enabling legislation that allows us to do this 1% sales tax for either or, it will be a budgetary process here in the city and the budget is passed by the city council. So every city council every year is going to have the opportunity to say, we're using 100% of this for the schools until these schools are renovated.

The bill is paid. But it also gives us flexibility because you can't always see into the future. And future councils, I think, need the flexibility down there. But it's a budgetary process. It totally is. But I also think that we are trying to or we're going to need to try to get the word out and say to our residents, we really want you to vote for this. We really want you to understand what this goes for. And I think if you said to your residents, hey, we're going to pass this 1% sales tax and we're going to buy some new buses or we're going to do this. I think the enthusiasm, the desire, the drive is going to be hitting much less than it is for we passed this school bond, we need these renovations, and now we have an opportunity for the money.

So I understand 5, 10, 15, 30 years down the road, it could be great to have the extra 1% to do with transportation projects. But right now when we're trying to get the word out, I think we need to be strategic in what we're doing. And I agree. I mean, I think that was the whole point when we really, when we did the school bond referendum and the messaging around that and how we talked about the school bond referendum and the outreach we did in the community about what it could cost people as far as a rise in taxes, up to 12 cents. We talked about that. But I think ultimately it was over 70% of the voters said sign us up for renovating the schools. I just, I don't underestimate our voters, our residents' ability to understand that the legislation coming out of Richmond says it can be this or this, but that we have looked at this as a tool for funding school renovation.

And I mean, I think it's up to us to message that regardless of what the enabling legislation says, our commitment is to, is to this. But Council Member McQuillen. Yeah, then I think we're saying the same thing. I don't disagree with any of that. However, I think it's, I, I, I think it's completely prudent to put the vote to the residents. And as a referendum, like we did with the school renovations, we've done a, our school board has done a fantastic job of educating our public. And so, I think that's a really important thing that everyone understands, as has our CFO, to educate the public on what our expenses are, what's going on. It is a rent, renovation. It can only be used for renovation.

And in this case, expansion. We run, we understood that it had to have expansion included. There were specific boundaries. So, I don't have a problem with the language of that. I don't have a problem with putting it to the voters. I have no problem that transportation is potentially included in there because we don't know what's coming up. So, I personally feel that that's going to be the city's job to, you know, let the voters know what's going to be on the ballot and to move forward with the process. Thank you. Council Member Hardy-Chantler. I just don't want to miss the deadline. So, this means that we're going to be talking about this on the 7th. We're going to be adding this to the- What we're going to recommend is advertising for a special meeting on the 7th, which was initially scheduled as a work session.

Work session. So, I think what we're being asked at this juncture, does everyone agree we should have a special meeting on the 7th? I agree. Council Member Bates. Yeah, just to follow on from what was said earlier, I think it's important to point out that we've been asking the General Assembly for greater flexibility, in terms of taxation. And they gave us exactly that with this. So, I don't think that they should be faulted for giving us additional flexibility with a certain tax. Now, that being said, I think that the- to my mind, the messaging is that we have to pay for our school infrastructure, regardless of what that money is used for years from now, or what have you. And so, I think that from that perspective, you know, this money will offset that because that is something that we have to use it for because we have to fund those commitments of ours.

I agree. Council Member Amos. Council Member Amos. Council Member Amos. Yeah, I think we just- just need to be clear. We already have a school bond referendum that was passed, I think, in the broader community, but also, as we've discussed as a council, that has to be the priority. It's already passed. We've been trying to figure out funding for it. We're really patiently waiting on funding for it. Now, it's arriving. So, I think we understand that piece. The transportation piece, that's going to be- have to be handled in the future. We'll need to see what exactly is coming down the road. We don't know what the WMATA payment's going to look like, and if it's going to be significant enough where it almost eats up that whole 1% sales tax, or if we have flexibility for transportation projects.

We- there's just too much we don't know about the transportation piece, and it sounds like for the referendum in November, it would be schools, transportation, or both. So, people will make their selection regardless. Is that my understanding, or did I misunderstand that? No, no, no. The referendum would say the funds could be used for- Okay, so it's still yes or no. It will not ask the voters which they prefer. That might actually be easier. Yes. No, that decision will be left to future councils. Yeah, I think what we- we can trust that we've communicated efficiently and we've talked about it as much as we possibly can. And I think our community's involved aware, and we'll trust them to make the right call.

And assuming that this goes forward, the other thing we will be doing is obviously providing the appropriate cautions as to what you can say publicly about the referendum before it's voted on. There are restrictions under Virginia law as to what can be said publicly. It has to be neutral. Am I in trouble? No. We good? No, no. Nothing's been done. Nothing's been done yet. Referendum hasn't been set yet, so everything's fine. I didn't like how you brought that up. No, no, no, no, no. Just setting the table. Setting the table. And I agree, and I think it's important because it's on the ballot in November, and so are people who are running for office. So when you are talking to voters about the election in the city for mayor and council, you can say there is, you're going to see a referendum.

You're going to see a referendum on the ballot. What we need guidance on is how you talk about the referendum on the ballot. But you should tell people they're going to see it so that they're looking for it and they know it's there. But I do think when we talk about the fact, you can talk about the fact that the community voted overwhelmingly for a school bond referendum to renovate the schools. This is a mechanism. This ballot initiative is a tool to fund the renovation of the schools. All good points. I might just suggest we put a little pin in this for now and save the discussion for another day. Another day. Yeah, like on the 7th. Like on the 7th during that special meeting of ours. But yes, let's let's help the let's help the public to understand.

Mr. City Manager. Okay, so that wraps it up for the 7th. On the 14th, we're bringing back the urban forest master plan to give you an update on the one year plan and five year outlook. We have the housing trust fund and a presentation on that. We'll have a continued discussion on small area plan zoning ordinance amendments and a follow up discussion is scheduled for you on code of ethics for the 4th. Moving to the 28th consideration of a contract award for an owner's rep for school construction projects. The ADU pieces we've talked about is coming back to you and for a public hearing. And then we have work session wise pre application for 3541 chain bridge road and a discussion on the courthouse plaza project.

That essentially takes us up to the break. Notably, a correction for you city wide level of service will come back to you on September 1st. Note also that you see a number of items listed on the first that is our first foray into an earlier start time. And so we will do our best to schedule as much work session wise on that first Tuesday. So that hopefully takes us to a place that council is comfortable, happy to address any calendaring items. Questions for the city manager on future items? Yeah, council member Hall. Thank you. Mayor, you brought up tonight the stop sign electronic monitoring and I had saw I saw something about that passing and I was talking about pilot programs. Is there a way that we could have a work session item on what that might look like in the city or if there's an opportunity to do any electronic monitoring?

I know you mentioned before the decibels and the vehicular stuff. Yeah, there's some recent legislation on automated enforcement around loud mufflers that we're evaluating now. And we certainly can evaluate anything else related to our district and safety related automated options. So I've already have a meeting scheduled with PD on one of these items. So we'll wrap that in into that and bring it back to you. Okay, great. Thank you. Council Member Amos, did you have something? No. Okay. Anything else on this? Are we all good? Always subject to change, but for now it looks like we're good on this. Okay. So we're going to do the manager report out and council comments. Anything else to add? Mr. Alexander.

Very quickly. We're excited about upcoming events. Obviously, Rock the Block continues weather permitting this Friday. And then, of course, the fourth and the parade and fireworks. I'm sure you'll mention that, but I don't think we're meeting again in this manner before then. So appreciate staff community work up to this point on these important events for our community. That's all I have, Mayor. Thank you. We'll start with Council Member Amos. Only one thing. I just wanted to say a big congrats to the Fairfax Rehabilitation and Nursing Center. They held an open house literally right before this meeting. Managed to squeeze it in real quick, so walked over since they're not far. They had a lovely open house.

The renovation to their facility is really beautiful. Highly recommend swinging by and checking out, but everyone was very excited. And it's really stunning and ongoing. So continued success to them. Yeah, absolutely. We love our city-based businesses. Council Member Hall? Just want to wish everyone a happy belated Father's Day. I will say, fathers, you seem to get the best day of the year every year. It was beautiful. It was sunny. It was warm. It was great. So I hope everyone had a great time. And I do want to apologize. I've been on my phone way more tonight than I normally am. My dad's having some health issues out in California. So just checking in and doing a bunch of things. So thank you.

Council Member Hardy Chandler. I would like to acknowledge all the work that went into a fabulous Juneteenth, starting with the invitation from Mount Calvary Baptist Church. I really wish more of the community could support that event because it really is very heartfelt and very meaningful, I think, as part of Fairfax history. But also leading into the evening celebration. So much work by the Juneteenth committee. Congratulations to the Legacy of Freedom awardee. The amazing talent. The spoken word performer. Bone chilling. Amazing performance. And so I'm always impressed by the hard work that goes into our city celebrations and the engagement our various committees are able to get from the community and beyond to contribute to such an important celebration.

So thank you for that experience. Council Member Peterson. Well, it was great to have Monica Backman here from NVTA. And as Mayor Reed and I both know, that's a hard working crew. Goodness gracious. So they have just completed awards under the six year program. And I think awarded $76 million for 27 projects or some such. And couldn't begin to tell you how much work goes into that by all of the jurisdictions that submit applications. We didn't have any applications in this time. A lot of other jurisdictions did. A huge amount of design work. A huge amount of analysis. A huge amount goes into that. One of the things that they shared with us when we received a briefing last week on this was that there was a record number of applications for bike and pedestrian paths.

And I know there was a lot of conversation tonight about that. Six of them made the grade and got it into the final recommendation mix. And I had an opportunity to talk with Sri, who was here earlier, about what went into that process. It's really complex analytically. It's not just a simple every single option, every single application for a shared bike path or a bike pedestrian project works. Quite to the contrary. And they run two grades on them. One is the degree to which they reduce congestion and how cost effective that is, cost of congestion relief. They run another grade which has like 14 different variables on it that can score it additionally. And one of the key things that stands out on that is safety.

Well, I raise this because one of the projects out of that, first off, all of the transportation bike pedestrian projects that were approved were street based projects. Most of them were sidewalk widening and sidewalk improvement projects. All of them were street based. And where they scored the highest in terms of congestion relief and oftentimes safety was where the most people and the most cars are. But I wanted to share that one of those projects is a sidewalk widening project on Arlington Boulevard Route 50. It's at Glebe Road that includes a physical barrier. And the presence of the physical barrier improved the scoring of that project because of its safety enhancements to the level that it was actually able to get funded, get in the mix.

It will now receive a $15 million award. This is the beginning of what NVTA, Sri in particular, would expect to happen more often when we've got a lot of cars and a lot of people in the same place, particularly when the cars are going fast. So these physical barriers are being used increasingly. They are used quite a bit in Baltimore. Brooklyn has said that they want to be the world leader in this. We see Portland, Seattle, et cetera. And they're all over the place in Europe. We were looking at that very option on Fairfax Boulevard during the course of the George Snyder Trail conversations and the potential for adding a physical barrier there as a part of a sidewalk widening project. I think there was some skepticism at the time, but it is, in fact, the case that an almost identical project is moving forward through this process,

the six-year project in Arlington. And I think we can look forward to more of that. I think that what NVTA is expecting is also a lot of variations around it and for jurisdictions to be increasingly creative in the way that they institute these shared bike paths with various types of physical barriers to put more of them in place. And I think it's a real opportunity we'll have here in the city going forward. We are, one of the things they pointed out is that most cities, whether they're large or small, just don't have room to create new bike paths in areas where there is nothing at all. And so the focus is really taking advantage of the street infrastructure. And this is one of the big things that came through.

So I think they were really very pleased to set the precedent with this and to look forward to more of it. So that's the transportation news for the week. Thanks. Councilmember Bates? So I think that the skepticism around that, at least from my perspective, was also about the possibility of using funding that had already been approved for a different project for that, which, as I understood it, we could not. And now, you know, we don't have guarantee of any funding for something like that. But certainly look forward to further conversations about increasing multimodal connectivity. Any who just want to echo the previous comments wishing all the fathers in the city among the city staff and city residents happy Father's Day.

And also want to wish echo the comments wishing everybody happy Juneteenth. And agreed, you know, it's a very beautiful, very poignant event on Friday. And glad I was able to be there. Thank you. Councilmember McQuillen. Councilmember McQuillen. I also want to thank Monica Bachman from NVTA for the briefing on the bus rapid transit action plan and to our staff for their presentations this evening. I also want to briefly recognize a few recent upcoming community events. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the Juneteenth ceremony last week, but was encouraged to see all the pictures of the participation and attendees and just want to thank all that made the event a success. I was really sad to have to miss that.

Looking ahead, summer's a busy time. And if you haven't already done so, please consider signing up for Fairfax City Alert and City Clips on the city's website to stay informed on all the events we have going on coming up this summer. Since I'm also talking about ways to stay involved, I want to give a quick plug to our local arts community. The city currently has several calls for artists opening through the Office of Cultural Arts. This includes submissions for the mini art vending machine project. It closes tomorrow at 4 p.m. The Theis Park mural and recycled art benches. They all look like some really neat projects to get involved in. I'd love to see some new local artists come out and show your work.

Please consider taking a look by searching for the public art program. Public art program in the search bar on the city's website pulls it right up. So you can access it easily and wishing everyone a safe and happy week. Thank you. All right. All right. So, yes. Many thanks for the people, the Juneteenth committee and our Parks and Recreation department who put together Juneteenth and Mount Calvary Baptist Church. And I would also like to see us figure out how to engage more with Mount Calvary as well. The 4th of July is coming up and I just want to give a shout out to Katie McCammon. People who are seeing that amazing 250th logo that is just the best looking 250th logo ever to be seen in America was designed by our own Katie Mack.

And I just, whenever you see it, I want you to remember that that's in-house talent. And we have got incredibly talented people on our staff, but particularly Parks and Recreation know how to throw an event and to market it as well. So I'm going to see everyone, I hope, on the 4th of July along the parade route or from the viewing stand. And with that, I am now going to adjourn this meeting to go into a closed meeting. Or I'm just going into the closed meeting. However I do that. So I bid the rest of you a good night. дедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедедеде