Let me welcome everybody to the Tuesday, July 8, 2008, meaning the Fairfax City Council. We actually went into a quick close meeting for the Council to do some interviews for the boards and commissions and I need to read a motion to get us out of that closed meeting. At 7 p.m., the City Council concluded its closed meeting, conduct interviews, and discuss appointments to boards and commissions. I move that each of us certify that to the best of each council members knowledge only public business matters, lawfully exempt them from the open meeting requirements, and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, and only public business matters identified in the motion, convening the closed meeting, were heard, discussed or considered. All council members in favor of the motion, please signify by voting aye. Aye. Opposed? And it passed unanimously. If you now stand for the invocation, which will be presented by Councilwoman Cross, remain standing for the pledge of allegiance. The spower heads. The past weekend celebration of our nation's independence reminds us that thanks must be given for the great country in which we live and those who serve her so faithfully. We are thankful for the United States of America, to our forefathers whose courage and vision set this nation on firm footing and lit a beacon of hope and opportunity throughout the world. Even 250 years later, the blessings of living in this land are man's best hope for civilization and human rights. We are thankful for the City of Fairfax and our forefathers who also have the vision and courage to establish a city which just enjoy independence and self-government for nearly 50 years. As the current leadership of this unique city, give us strength to guide the city on a path that is honorable, trustworthy, and true. We are thankful for the many individuals who serve the city as our dedicated staff members, our fire department, and our public safety officers. Their service provides the backbone for this great community. All this we ask in my name, Kim. Amen. I play with the allegiance to the people of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God and individual with liberty and justice for our own. We have one very important and very special presentation for us. I could ask Dr. Hill to please come forward and For those of you who have been anywhere in this community for any period of time certainly Dr. Hill is no stranger in the area of arts and music and just in the community For those of you who participated in the spotlight of the arts not that long ago He was also recognized as the honorary chairman of spotlight in the arts and the city council was also recognized as the honorary chairman of Spotlight in the Arts and the City Council. Certainly didn't want to be left behind and wanted to make sure that we had an opportunity to also recognize all the wonderful things you've done to our community. And so if you would, I'd like to read the following proclamation. Whereas Dr. Thomas Hill moved to the City of Fairfax in 1954 with his wife Ruth, where they have raised three daughters, and whereas Dr. Thomas Hill along with with his wife 61 years have instilled in their children the value and appreciation for music and the arts. And whereas Dr. Hill learned to appreciate music and the arts at a very young age listening to the Metropolitan Opera and the New York Philharmonic with his family, then moving onto study at the New England Conservatory of Music and later teaching in the public schools as well as George Mason University, where he coordinated the graduate music program. And whereas after 22 years search as a conductor of the City of Fairfax Band, Dr. Thomas Hill was appointed to the Commission of the Arts on April 25th, 1995. And whereas during Dr. Hill's tenure, the Commission of the Arts developed the Old Town Hall Performance Series, the Children's Performance Series, the Summer Band Series, published the Biennial Arts Scene newsletter, enhanced the grants program, created a public art project and published a new arts directory. And whereas the City of Fairfax is deeply indebted to Dr. Thomas Hulland for his years of volunteer service to the commission and the arts and for elevating the profile and weariness of arts in the City of Fairfax. Now therefore,, I, Robert, have lettering Mayor of the City of Fairfax to hereby commend and express appreciation to Dr. Thomas Hill for his outstanding leadership as a long-time standing Mayor of the Commission on the Arts and for sharing his knowledge of the music in the art with the citizens of the City of Fairfax. And certainly, this says it all, but on behalf of my colleagues in the entire community, thank you so very much for what you've done for our community over a many, many year period. And we wanted to just give you this frame of population. It's been a quick authority here because. Thank you. As I was lying in bed this morning, sort of with the idea that if the mayor gave me a few minutes to say something, I didn't know where to start. Well, so there's so many people I've worked with over the last 53, almost 54 years now in the community and many of whom are here tonight and I just want to acknowledge the fact that you know my colleagues in city band are here. We have a great debt owed to the people who have been in the band Daria Rick Porello, who are charter members of a band only three of you left but, but just great to have them here. I just think it's been a wonderful experience. When we came here, there was very little actually. Now we're a maturing community, and I think the real essence of a maturing community is its arts activities, and we are certainly in that realm right now. And I want to thank the council members of both past and present and hopefully future council members and Bob Sisson. For all of the support they've given the arts, this is an unusual circumstance, especially since we are in rather dire financial strates, but the arts have not been left behind and we deeply appreciate that. But I want to thank all of you for being here and thank you. Okay. We're going to jump right into our regular meeting of the Fairfax City Council. So for those of you who came for that presentation, this is probably as good a time to exit. Although we'd love to have you stay here and enjoy the entire meeting. Thank you all for coming out. We're not going to jump down to agenda item number four, which is presentations by the public and any item that is related on tonight's City Council agenda, but does not call for a public hearing. If you're here to talk to us about item 7a, b or c, which are public hearings, that opportunity will actually come up in just a few minutes. But any of the other items on the agenda, again, that do not call for a public hearing. If you'd like to address the City Council, this would be your opportunity. First, to sign up as Rick Leeds. And if you'd give us your name and address as you come to the podium, we appreciate it. Thank you. Okay, Rick Leeds for Avenue. I'm here about a noise problem. Is this good, Diane? Mm-hmm. We have some businesses on the highway that have four metal dumpsters about eight feet wide that are emptied about three times per week. The legal start time is 7 a.m., but after that there's still a reasonable noise standard that they have to adhere to. The 60 DBA decibel limit is one way of determining this. I'd say the time and decibel laws have been violated over the past two and a half years, about 200 times. The sound levels have often been horrendous, probably two times of the legal limit. This is, okay, the trash company is there for only a short period of time, so it's very difficult to witness the noise level. Enforcement of the start time is easier. Trash company picks up throughout the city, so I'm not primarily here for me or my area. Two years ago, they were coming in the middle of the night at three or four in the morning. Slamming these dumpsters against the top of their trucks and they'd go all the way down Lee Highway and the sound would be lesser in this and lesser in this and lesser in this. It's a little funny now, but actually when you're there, when you're in bed or if it's early morning, it's not that funny. Let's see, one night I called the police in the middle of the night, we caught the driver, the officer let him get away with it. And so they continued to break the law, albeit at about five or six AM. It took another half year approximately for them to finally get them to start coming after seven. The legal start time for tow trucks to load and unload vehicles and for the use of power gardening tools, power leaf lowers, et cetera, is 8 a.m. But those could theoretically at least be enforced because they're at a location for at least 15 minutes. The dumpster emptying takes about three minutes and they're gone. So due to the quip nature of the pickups, the negligent track record of the trash company, and the city's ineffectiveness in enforcing the law, I'm requesting that you consider a start time of 9 a.m. I'm pro-business, limited government. If the decimal law is broken after that time, I don't care, I don't think most residents care. But bear in mind that not everyone is up at seven or even eight. Many work late, there are students, people who work from home, retired people as well. Even if a person is awake at seven or eight, they don't want to be subjected to an 80 or 90 DBA decibel level. At an 8 a.m. start time would be a 50% solution in my opinion. I think most residents at all of these locations would vote for 9 if one were to take a poll. Also, what other jurisdictions have as their stock time is irrelevant to me. The main responsibility is consistency with sections 381 and 110, the S1131. You should also know that there are two new homes on Warwick Avenue being offered for sale at only 900,000 a piece. I've had to inform the broker that under full disclosure, any prospective buyer must be told that there is an unresolved long-term noise problem in the area. There are also other owners throughout the city located close to a pickup location who may also have their values reduced if potential buyers knew of the problem. I think we need a list actually of all the pickup locations by this particular company. After spending so much time dealing with the city uncompensated, I think you should consider an unresolved complaint process for noise or any kind of problem, possibly a form on the website or and or in the newsletter. So the average busier resident won't have to call the city a hundred times like I did. Or even four or five times for that matter. There has to be a trigger for a process that's bitterly implement the solution. It has to be a trigger for a process that's be to the implement the solution. Also, many city personnel don't know the code well enough. Very few residents will go online to do the research. Another problem which hung me up for a long time was the split in responsibilities on noise issues between zoning and police. The residents shouldn't have to figure out whose job it is to enforce the law. I'm just going to read section 381 loud disturbing and unnecessary noises. It shall be unlawful for any person to make, continue or cause to be made or continued. Any loud, unnecessary or unusual noise or any noise which either a noise disturbs the injuries or dangers, the comfort, health, peace, or safety of others. Section 110, 1131, there shall be reasonable restrictions on noise for the health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens. I have been asking for strict enforcement for a long, long time. I've also asked if these companies were ticketed for three dates, specific dates, but never received an answer on that. We have proof the time loaves broken on at least April 4th, 11th, and June 20th. Section 110, 1137, violations and penalties, any violation of the provisions of this article shall constitute a misdemeanor, and any person violating this article shall upon conviction be punished by imprisonment up to 30 days or fine up to $1,000. Sit. Thank you, Mr. Green. But anybody else like to address the City Council? If not, we'll close the agenda item number four. We'll move on to agenda item number five, which is the adoption of the agenda. So moved by Mr. Greenfeld, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen. All in favor of the motion is signify by voting aye. Opposed and it passed unanimously. agenda item number six, which is the approval of the consent agenda? Mr. Greenfeld? Thank you Mr. Mayor. Move the adoption of the consent agenda. Mr. Greenfield. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Move adoption of the consent agenda for agenda item number 6A, initiation of the zoning text amendment, establishing standards, including height and placement for fences in the R1, R2, and R3 residential zoning districts. And for agenda item number 6A, move to approve the suggested motion and the staff report. Second. Does anybody with, it's been moved by Mr. Greenfield, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen, to anybody wish to have Jack to abstain from the hailing of any of these items on the consent agenda? Ms. Cross. Yes, I do. Okay, we'll remove 6A from the consent agenda that now takes this to item number 6A, which is the initiation of a zoning, tax a minute establishing standards for fences in the R1, R2 and R3 residential zoning district staff report, please? This is, I could just very briefly, an action to initiate a zoning text amendment to refer to the City, to the Planning Commission for Public Hearing and for a recommendation to go back to the City Council. It was prepared as a result of some comments and complaints that we've received over the past several months as it relates, particularly defenses in front yards. And this would serve to place more restrictions on the fences, the height and design offenses that could occur in front yards primarily. Questions as to Ms. Cross? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The question I had was not about the traditional fence, but plant material that used as a fence. I had some sort of plant fanning around the home. And would the same height restrictions follow? Or do you define plant material as a? No, it would not apply to plant material. I mean, there is a provision where there's some overlap and that is on a corner lot. There's a line of sight prism, it's called. And basically what you do is you develop a sight triangle by measuring from the corner point back I believe it's 25 feet and it creates a triangle and within that area there cannot be a visual obstruction or substantial visual obstruction. So there is an overlap of hedge versus fence as it relates to that those those portions of cornered lots. But really beyond that, it does not apply to, to, uh, plant materials. So you could let a hedge, uh, grow to six feet in the front, six feet or better in the front of the home. Under this, and there's no, no, uh, provision for that. Right. Do you think that that's something we need to look at or are you satisfied that it's okay? Yeah, I don't know that we've actually received complaints about the height of vegetation in front yards and as a result we didn't respond to that. I could certainly make a note of and we can bring it up with a planning commission as they begin to discuss this and forward its recommendation back to that. I could certainly make a note of it, and we can bring it up with a planning commission as they begin to discuss this. And forward its recommendation back to you. Thank you. That's all I have. Mr. Steinway, Mr. Schumer, thank you. Just one brief question. Would this require any current residents who own fence, tear down current fence that might be in violation of this? So it would be subject to, they would become non-conforming if they don't comply. And as a result, they could keep their existing fences, they could maintain their existing fences in good order. It could not erect new fences that would be inconsistent with these regulations. Thank you. Okay. If there are any other questions, I assume we need a motion to direct the Planning Commission to take action with cross. I move the City Council adopt a resolution to initiate and refer to the Planning Commission a zoning text amendment to City Code Chapter 110 to add appropriate standards for the height, design and placement of things but it's located on properties within the R1, R2, and R3 zoning districts. Second. Moved by Mrs. Cross, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen, any discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by voting aye. Opposed? Aye. And it passed unanimously. We're now going down to item number 7a, which is a public hearing and council action or request by James R. Michael, to allow a telecommunications facility and propose screening at a height of 71 feet, where 12 feet is permitted by Rida. And the premises known as 104-00 eaten places. This can properly advertise staff report, please. 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. existing structure located at 104.0, Eton Place at a height of 71 feet. The red lines indicate the subject site, Eton Place to the south, Chambers Road located out to the west, is surrounded on three sides by commercial properties to the north, is city open space on R3. And the arrow indicates the location on the building where the proposed co-location of the equipment would be located. Currently as per 2001 City Council approval, Nextel has an existing equipment facility located on the rooftop at a height of 71.33 total feet. The penthouse, which would be the normal highest elevation on the existing structures at a height of 65 feet and singular proposes a height of 71 feet for their enclosed screened equipment located toward the rear of the structure. This is a top-down view. Illustrates two things. Red lines show that the equipment would be fully enclosed by screen walls that would be of the consistent color and architecture style, matching the existing penthouse. The penthouse extends this way, so it would be an extension of the penthouse toward the rear of the structure. And all antenna panels, all equipment, associated equipment is inside the walls. Looking from the best western to the left of the property back toward the east, you can see the small addition to the existing penthouse which would enclose all of the proposed equipment. And viewing it from eaten place, the penthouse and the proposed equipment enclosure is not visible. Mainly the only thing that is visible is the existing next tell equipment. And standing in the parking lot at the rear of the site looking south, you would see the projection that would be the enclosure for the proposed equipment. The orange coverage area here illustrates a gap of service that is currently exhibited by the applicant. The black symbols indicate current locations and the area in the middle is a target of a periphery area that they're trying to establish to fill in gaps and it mainly serves the North Facts area coming down both left and right down Perfects Boulevard and North and South on Chamber Trove and in conclusion staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions that ensure that any damages to the roof or pinhouse are restored. That the applicant comply with all FCC regulations. That the applicant submit for architectural review. That the use of other providers is not repeated upon. And that the removal of all equipment is pondered. that providers is not repeated upon, and that the removal of all equipment is pondered. And I welcome any questions. Questions and staff, Mr. Rice-Smudson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This may be kind of a silly question, but does any of the equipment on the roof with this special use permit emit noise? No. Typically, generators are associated with these types of proposals. There's no generator proposed for this is no noise to be generated and no air conditioning. No. Thank you Any other questions is staff Hearing none. Thank you very much. We'll open up the public hearing and invite the applicant to address the city council Even mr. Mayor mayor of the members of the council, Jim Michael for New Singular Wireless, we concur with staff's report and the conditions they set forth on the special permit of approved by the Mayor and Council. I wanted to say that we came out of this with this application and closing everything from the get-go as some of the council members may be aware. The existing other telecom facility up there has antennas that are visible to the public. They're actually pipe mounted on the rail. So comparing our facility to the existing one from the other carry-ars, I can honestly say is invisible and deemed to be almost a part of the existing building to the outside world. No one would know that we're going to be up there. At first blush when we came in, we had our antennas on the corners of the building, fully screened, but staff, including our contextual board staff, wanted us to try to centralize everything in one location. We were able to go back to the landlord, redo our proposed facility, and essentially added an extension to the existing pen house so that we could fit all of our antennas within the enclosure as well as our ground equipment. So what we've done is create an invisible site to provide better service by new singular wireless. It's desperately needed by us because we've got severe coverage and capacity problems in this area of the city. And it will tie in well with all our existing sites in and around the city, as shown by Jason's picture. No noise, no emissions, no on-site personnel. Someone might need to go up there once a month just to make sure everything's operating effectively. And at the end of the day, what the end result is going to be a reliable wireless service by using the wireless to this important area of the city. You have your answer. Any questions, Mr. Mayor? Any questions of the city. You have your answer, any questions, Mr. Mayor? Any questions of the out? Mr. Drummond? Thank you for preparing tonight. Singularism by AT&T. Yeah, correct. Correct. It's the name of the licensee is in the name of New Singular Wireless, PCSLC, trading as AT&T mobility. That's correct. Little history lesson, I guess there was an old AT&T mobility. That's correct. Little history lesson, I guess, there was an old AT&T, which was purchased by New Singular. And then when New Singular decided, the marketing people said, what name is more recognizable to the outside world? And they deemed that the name AT&T mobility was a better way to market everything. And so that's the way it is, but technically the licenses in the name of new singular wireless PCS. My fault, please. The reason I asked it just from a maintenance standpoint that whoever the entity is that purchases the next company, the next iteration of whoever are 18 TAs or whoever are around the power, and such, it'll be maintaining those facilities. Oh yes, absolutely. We've got this in our lease obligation to landlord. We've got that obligation. If there are no other questions, the applicant, thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Nobody has previously signed up to address the city council on this item. Would anybody like to address the city council? If not, we'll close the public hearing. I'll entertain a motion. Miss Cross? I move City Council approve the request of new singular wireless PCS LLC by James R. Michael Attorney Agent for a special use permit pursuant to City Code Section 11035C to allow a telecommunication facility and proposed screening at a height of 71 feet where 12 is permitted by right. On the premises known is 1,000, 400, Eton Place, and more particularly described as TexMap parcel 47402002C, subject to the following conditions. When the applicant shall ensure any damages or changes to the condition of the exterior wall of the penthouse and our rooftop to the building of the building are repaired and the surface restored to its original condition to the applicant and its successor or assigned shell, provide evidence of compliance with all federal communication, regulation and prohibitions, prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall submit for our architectural review for the applicants, shall not in any way impede shared use of the facility by other telecommunication providers or the city of Fairfax. And five, the applicant shall ensure that all equipment is properly installed and maintain that any defunded equipment is properly repaired, promptly repaired or removed in providing a construction and removal. Moved by Miss Cross, seconded by Mr. Stombries, any discussion? All in favor of the motion signify by voting aye. Aye. Opposed and a passed unanimously. We're now down to item number 7b, which is a public hearing and council action. On an ordinance approving a second amendment to lease between the city and Northern Virginia Christian Academy for properly owned by the city located at 1-1-0-0-0, Berry Street Fairfax, Virginia. This has been properly advertised? Staff report, please. Mayor and Council, brief staff report. Before you this evening is a proposed amendment to the existing lease with the Northern Virginia Christian Academy for the former Westmore School property. Under the proposed amendment, the monthly rental amount would be reduced to $20,000 per month. In addition, the academy would commit to payment of a total of $60,000 toward the existing rent, the legal policy for the property. And this amendment would also provide an absolute termination date under the lease of June the 30th of 2009. And that will be happy to answer any questions. Questions and staff. Hearing none, thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Nobody has previously signed up. Would anybody like to address the city council? Would you like to address the city council? Please. Go ahead. David and Gary Perryman, 1108 Westmore Drive. I'm also the president of Westmore Citizen Association, which include all the communities that live around the school with the exception of the villa, which is Fairfax County. We've talked about this amendment amongst ourselves, and I've talked to the city staff. On one hand, it does look like a bad proposal because they have gotten screwed in the past. But the other side of the coin is, it makes perfect business sense to go ahead and do this. Because if we don't do it, that property will end up vacant. And we'll stay that way probably for quite a while because we've tried to get people to see if anybody else was interested in leasing this space. And it hasn't been, and our community's really concerned about that property being vacant. For the reason of the homeless people or vandalism done by people around the area. We look at the fact that you can leave it empty for a year and get nothing and have to spend the money to maintain that property and care for the grounds, or you can lease it to these people for the one year and get the 240,000 plus the 60,000, which would be a total of 300,000 to go into the city's coffers. The other side of the coin that we would like to see happen, which probably is going to be said, no, is that that money be put aside for future use of that property for the possibility of turning that property into a park down the road. We would, that's what our community would like to see happen. Of course, I know in these trying times of money that, you know, wish will think on our side. But I would like everybody to think, don't think of the past. Just look at what's going to happen in the future. And if we leave that place empty, I think it's going to cost the city a great deal of money. And if we do leave these people in there, at least the city will be getting some funds from it. Thank you. Thank you. But anybody else like to address the city council? My name is Vicki Hall. I live at 5610 Pickwick Road in Centerville and I am one of the members of the Board of Directors friend, BCA. And I just want to thank everyone for their consideration of this proposal. Happy to answer any questions you may have. And I just wanted to reiterate that we had done as the city requested and we had been looking for space for our school early in 2008. And we had been searching and we had found space for our high school and offer our grades K through 8. And it is at that time that as we, dealing with special use permits and other buildings and county of Fairfax that we understood that perhaps the building would remain empty. And so we asked if a proposal would be considered by the city for us to remain in the building to maintain it as we have done and that would enable us to continue as a school for the coming year grades K through 12 and to provide funds to the city in that rent that we've maintained this past year at 20,000 per month. And in addition, we would also then be able to pay the city beginning to pay the city some of the background and we've outlined that in our proposal as well. So I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else like to address the City Council on this side? Very none will close the public area. Place it. Excuse me. Hands of this council. Like to entertain a motion. Anybody? Mr. Greenfield? Like Mr. Murray, I moved to approve an enactment ordinance authorizing the city manager to execute on behalf of the city's second amendment to lease with Northern Virginia Christian Academy for premises located at 11000 very street Fairbanks, Virginia. Second. Move by Mr. Greenfield, seconded by Mr. Meyer discussion. Mr. Esmeralzen. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am going to vote for this motion tonight because of the point of the city needing to consider the revenue implications of this. But I truly am troubled by the fact that the Academy owes the city $700,000. The only money that we're going to get paying down that $700,000 is the interest that's carrying the $700,000 debt. The city really should not be in the business of subsidizing private education, in my opinion, and that's what it's doing. I would hope they would make a sincere effort to repay that debt which was legally contracted by the academy. Thank you. Any other comments? Miss Cross? I just want to concur with Mr. Rasmus and I too will hope for this, but with grave concerns about the debt that the school owes the city, I rather than get into any kind of debate on that, I'll just say that it's it's discreshing and I would hope that in the summer resolution of that amount in the future. Thank you. Any other comments? All in favor of the motion signify by voting aye. Aye. Opposed and it passed unanimously. We're now down to item number 7c, which is a public hearing and council action and proposed zoning text amendment. Daded to the list of actions which may be approved administratively individual signs that substantially conform to adopted historic district or transition district guidelines or to master sign plans previously approved by the Board of Architecture Reviews. This has been property advertised. Staff report, please. Thank you, Good evening, Mayor Letter. Members of the City Council. This is a zoning text amendment that was referred to the Planning Commission by the city council on May 13th. The planning commission held its public hearing June 9th and we're holding the city council public hearing this evening. Our current city regulations create a process by which the Board of Architectural Review looks at structures, improvements, landscaping and signage, most particularly in the old and historic district and in an architectural control district throughout the city. In November 2004, the council amended the zoning text to create a list of minor actions that had a very limited effect on the character of Old Town Fairfax, and that could be approved administratively. You have in your package this evening the text that is list of items that are approved administratively. What is proposed here and recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission is that we add to that list individual signs in the Old Town Fairfax, both the historic district and the transition district, that are in substantial conformance with adopted city design guidelines. The purpose of this text amendment basically is to streamline the process for applicants who are conforming with adopted city policy, and also to relieve the BAR docket of minor actions that could be approved administratively based on policies that the city has already established. These are examples we're showing here of signage that could have been approved administratively as it is conforming with our historic district guidelines. It would have saved a meeting and a longer waiting period for these tenants. With that, that concludes the staff report. Questions and staff. Ms. Cross. Thank you, Ms. Mayor. Could you go over the appeal process on this? Should the administrative judgment go against the applicant? Certainly. If an applicant applies under as an administrative process, and it is determined by the Director of Community Development that the sign as proposed does not meet in his opinion, the adopted City Guidelines, the next step, it would then be to go to the Board of Architectural Review for their full review of the proposal. That board can approve the applicant's request, approve it with modifications or deny it. If the board denies the request, the applicant has a further appeal to the City Council. Thank you. Any other questions or staff? Hearing none, thank you very much. We'll open up the public hearing. Nobody has previously signed up. Would anybody like to address the City Council on the side? Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. Entertain a motion, Mr. Greenfield. Like Mr. Mary move that the City Council adopted proposed. Portance and Mending Chapter 110 zoning of the code of the City of Perfax Virginia specifically. Arkel 19 section 110-195 to add to the list of actions which may be approved administratively individual signs that substantially conform to adopted historic district or transition district guidelines or to the master sign plans previously approved by the Board of Architecture for review. Second. Moving by Mr. Greenfield, seconded by Mr. Restmussen, any discussion? Mr. Greenfield, seconded by Mr. Restmussen, any discussion? Mr. Greenfield? Just briefly, Mr. Mayor. I hope our friends at Central Perfect Chamber of Commerce are watching tonight. I think this is a step in the right direction in terms of the business friendly and trying to help small businesses that are opening in a city that can get their sides approved administratively rather than having to go through the B.A.R. process and tie up that docket and the time it takes to get that approved. So I'm happy to support the vote. Any other discussion? Mr. Mayer? I concur in Mr. Greenfield's comments. Anyone in business knows the time is money. I do believe that there is a need for all participants in the economic life of the city to create signage that is responsible, tasteful, and while effective also in their business that I would support this action. Thank you. Any other quick comments? If not, can I? All is a favor to signify voting aye. Sorry. I now brings us to item number actually actually we're moving down now to item number nine presentations by the public and any item that is not on tonight's agenda. Again this is any item that's not on tonight is agenda that's of interest to the community. Nobody has previously signed up with anybody like to address the city council. Nobody has previously signed up with anybody like to address the City Council. Hearing none, we'll close that in number nine. Go down to, we actually have no minutes for approval. So we're now going to recess our regimen and go into a work session, discussion of closed zoning, amendment and creating a new section to revise the regulations with respect to hotels and motels and to provide for extended stay hotels. Mrs. Sisson, staff report? Please. Thank you. In April of this year, the City Council referred to the Planning Commission discussion about extended stay hotels. Our current zoning regulations allow hotels by right in our commercial zoning districts, C2, C3, and in the plan development and commercial plan development districts. Motels in several places in the code are fairly inconsistently addressed and defined. And hotels have been defined to include motels and are limited to transient accommodations for travelers. No kitchen facilities, not designed for long-term occupancy. Well, we have kind of a new animal that's come on board in the last few years, three decades really, but we're just seeing them now arriving near and into the city of Fairfax. These are extended stay hotels, which are meant to house long-term business travelers, families as they await new houses to be built or in the process of relocation to our area, long-term tourists, all of which are users that we're seeing in our area. These extended stay hotels often find themselves near business parks or major highways. They give a corporation a place to put their employees as they stay here for long periods of time and they generally offer advantageous weekly or monthly rates. You can do several things with extended stay hotels with respect to zoning regulation. Some jurisdictions treat them the same as transient hotels, just treat hotels in one category. Others permit their location either in commercial or residential areas or both and you can also create as some jurisdictions have done separate definition for extended stay hotels and operating standards for them. Why would you want to create standards for them? Well first you want to make sure that this is maintained as a commercial and not a residential use. Make sure that you include an appropriate level of public spaces, amenities that are appropriate at a good level of services. Make sure that we're located or convenient to and supportive of surrounding businesses and restaurants, making sure that there's enough parking and that the structure itself is a good quality and has good size rooms. This the City Council did refer it as I said to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held both the work session and a public hearing and recommended approval of the ordinance that you see before you tonight. This ordinance separately defines motel, hotel, and extended stay hotel. And it provides for extended stay hotels as a conditional use. It does add parking requirements that are appropriate to extended stay hotels and establishes operational standards for them. The types of operational standards which are listed in here as a series of items that the City Council will look at in considering any special use permit for an extended stay of hell. It does say at the beginning of that list of standards that the Council in its judgment believes it's appropriate can wait those standards, but it provides the laundry list for you all to look at as you go through checking the quality of the proposal before you. These include access through an interior hallway with no direct room egress to the exterior. It's staff remain on duty 24 hours in the lobby, and which should have a minimum area of a thousand square feet, a public gathering area. There might be tables, there might be chair seats. That the rooms have 400 square foot minimum space each, and that the self-contained kitchenettes within these rooms would have a sink, a range, a full-sized refrigerator, dishes, flatware, things that are appropriate to support your longer stay folks. Also some upscale things, such as a fitness or recreation center, some kind of meeting or conference room or business center, a laundry room, a swimming pool, wireless internet access or similar type of access. It was pointed out by the planning commission that over time what we now know as wireless internet access might in fact be something a little more generic and might have a little different name But the idea was to approach something that offered current technology and that no more than 50% of the rooms should be continuously occupied by the same tenant for 30 days or more Several points to consider and looking at extended stay hotels, it does provide an alternative for some of our visitors, residents and business travelers. This would ensure that it's a strictly commercial use in some communities where extended stay hotels went in. They were later converted to rental housing. This ensures that they remain commercial. It also ensures that there's a hybrid model. Some of the lower tier extended stay hotels do not all have some of the features of a standard hotel like a lobby that's open 24 hours or meeting space or some of the things that you've shown here. The physical impacts as addressed in your cover sheet are addressed with the 50% limit on stays of more than 30 days. As we noted when we first brought this to you, trends in C is identified in the state code as less than 30 days. And once a person in a room has stayed the 30th day, all of that 4% occupancy tax from day one now is no longer collected. So in order to ensure that we didn't lose too much of that, you know, occupancy tax, this 50% limit was placed, industry wide in the current type of extended stay hotels, we understand that they're anywhere from 20 to 30% is fairly common in terms of those that are staying over 30 days. So this caps it, but we don't necessarily expect it to reach that size. As a conditional use, the extended stay hotel will allow for a case by case review of the specific proposal. the state hotel will allow for a case by case review of the specific proposal. The staff recommends approval and the Planning Commission is recommended approval. That concludes the staff report. Questions of staff? Mr. Restmessen. Thank you, Mr. Rang. In some way we already have an extended stay hotels or motels in the city like the breezeway and the anchorage. Is there anything that we're doing here that will adversely affect the city's ability to control those kinds of properties? Now, where extended stays occur in those types of properties They're not legal and we have enforced upon that. Right. In order for them to be able to operate as an extended stay hotel, they would need to come before this council get a special use permit and meet these criteria. An operation that does not do that is not would not be legal. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Marat. How then would we be able to put something in place that would make sure of another local government, a private nonprofit, whatever would not be able to rent a room in an extended state facility and then put someone else in there that would essentially be that same clientele that's in a breeze-wire in Anch anchorage and we're now moving them to an extended state facility. The tenants in an extended state facility, we would not regulate, we would regulate only the number of rooms that were occupied for an extended period of time. As a practical matter, we are requiring that extended stay hotels in the city be of a certain quality and a certain level that then will go on to command a certain price point level, which are not as likely to attract long-term stay at lower level rentals. But in fact, we would not be addressing what specific tenants are in there, just how many would be there for that period of time. Is there any way we can work to address that? I mean, we all know that there's ways around that you're not supposed to be in one of the motels that we have now for more than 30 days. And the answer is 30, 30th day, you move out and go across the street, spend the night, someplace else, and the next day you come back and your stuff is still in the room and you move back in. Well, it's interesting to note I did check with family services in Fairfax County, and there was a lot of discussion there about the cost of maintaining families in hotels. And the county has acted itself to cap as I understand the number of families that are housed in hotels throughout the county and city combined to 15. So the expectation is that throughout the county and the city and there are families housed as well. For example, in the extended state facility in Ferroks, there's a homestead, there are some families there. But that the total number of families served throughout the county and city would be no more than 15. If I could, Mr. Greenford, just to follow up on that, that's today. And we all know times change and economics change and issues change. And I want to make sure, I think I am on the same page with Mr. Greenfield and the concern is, OK, what this ordinance does is it says it has to be a nice place. And then they can do extended stay, which is identified by all the things that you've outlined there, gems and swimming pools and all the things go with it. But there's nothing that says that an entity couldn't come in and cut a group discount rate during a slow time of the year and use it for purposes other than for their own employees or their own individual uses. And that's my concern. And we know that it could happen and I'm wondering if we couldn't put a provision in something like that that says the extent that they use could only be used for your own company in Pueez or your own personal use or some verbiage that would prohibit a third part of the entity and non-profit or another government agency from just running it for the reasons that we know their disporionates and we've had problems. I find it hard to believe that right now in all the county there's only 15 rooms. That may be some minutes of some meeting where they talked about money, but you just have to drive down Route 50 and any morning when the school bus stops out in front of the hotels to know there's probably more than 15 in the city alone So is there a way that we could address that and I obviously would want to talk to the business involved to make sure There's not some group business that this would exclude but in the spirit of it I have no problem with this facility and type of facility in the city as long as it's an I have no problem with this facility and type of facility in the city as long as it's an individual customer that wants it for their use or an individual corporation that's cutting a block of rooms for their employees who are relocating or come and go on an extended period, which I think is the spirit of what we're doing, but have a major problem if this gets circumvented for other reasons, which I believe it will. Is there a way to put some verbatine that would restrict it to, has to be either your own individual use or your direct employees use or some way to connect the nexus so it's just not, and it ain't going out and getting their friends or clients or, in this case, other residents throughout the region that would use it. It's certainly something that I think we would need to discuss with the city attorney before we bring it back to you just to get the word on that. I think that would address Mr. Green. And I know how the hotel businesses in the slow times they cut deals. And we don't want to become the deal cutting in the city of Fairfax to compliments and hurts our school system and cost us money and all the things that go along with it. Yeah, the second part of what you said gave me a little more comfort. I think when I was listening to it at first, I thought what you were saying. I could say it at third time. No, no, no, but I think. But when I first was listening to what you were saying, I thought you were talking about prohibiting businesses from actually running the rooms, but what you're saying is limiting it to employees, direct employees, or contractors of those businesses. And I feel a little more comfortable with that. I think we can probably work through some language. It may be for you that before they were in the business involved and talk to it. We want to see what the impact is because obviously, you know, the extended state has its own business model. We'll just have to make sure it all works. We'll bring it back. Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One point and then a question. The first point I'd travel a good deal for my own profession and I take a price point to be pretty high. And I was wondering if you might be able to provide a sense through your research of what that price point might be like. And then I've got to follow up that as well. Yeah, I mean, there are several different extended stay hotels and it depends, you know, which one might take advantage of this, but we've been speaking with the Mariette Corporation talking about the Renaissance hotels, which is their, you know, high tier and you're talking, you know, pushing $200 a night on those. I guess the other question is, is would this ordinance have the effect of putting the breezeway in other hotels that are not conforming into some sort of conformance? In other words, it puts together a framework for which other hotels would eradicate compliance with this 30-day rule, puts them into some sort of compliance. No, because in order to be approval as an extended stay hotel, they would have to both have a special use permit from this council and meet these criteria, neither of which they would have. If I may, that's what I'm asking, is that if you have now an ordinance that says skulls out specifically, we go now and say, there is an ordinance that falls out specifically. You don't have to think of any of the papers at permanent, which the mayor may not bring. Correct. Okay. I have a question. If I couldn't, and just, I mean, the problem we have now, is there's ways around that. In the dilemma we were put into, last time we brought brought this up is they stay there for 29 days. They uproot these families, move them across the street for one night, move them back in. It disrupts the family and it circumventes our ordinance. And that's the dilemma that I have with this thing is to make sure we're not opening a bigger issue than we currently even have today, Mr. Reim. Well, I think you were getting to my question, which is, can this ordinance actually address that scenario? And when in your operational standards for extended stay hotels, this is section 1, 10, 3, 73. Number 10 says it in more than 50 percent of the yesterday, the company continues to occupy by the same tenant or tenants for 30 days or more. So what is the definition of occupancy is that they simply go down to the front desk, switch rooms, and start again, or do they actually, is the occupancy considered in the entire structure, and they have to move completely out of the place and come back the next day? As Mayor Lederer said earlier, there are families right now that are in one hotel in the city for 29 days and go up the street to another hotel and come back. While there is a cap, of course, on how many of the county places here, as I noted, there are nonprofit organizations that also may be placing folks in that we don't have a good handle on those numbers. And that can occur whether or not we pass this. And so I think that now- That was my question. All right. Tharn any more- The only other comment I have is you normally include the minutes of the planning commission when they refer things and I didn't see those in here were there any Issues I see they continued the public hearing so I'm assuming there must have been issues that came up that they That are worth pointing out to us that either got didn't get resolved unanimously that how to be brought to our attention Sure, there was the one issue that they had I think the largest issue that they had had to do with parking. And what the appropriate parking standard was for this type of facility, whether it required more parking, less parking than a standard hotel and motel. The Marriott Extended State folks did a study over a four-day period of peak days when the hotels were full at Mara Field and Faroaks to get us a good local idea of what their parking requirement was. And in both cases, even at full occupancy, they were parked at slightly less than one space per guest room. So the Planning Commission felt that that was therefore an adequate standard to leave in the ordinance. And that was basically to give a little more time to go back and do that. And I think that that was their primary concern. The minutes of their meeting had not yet been approved. I will make sure that for your hearing you'll have either a draft set of unapproved minutes or a set of approved minutes. Any other comments or questions from staff? Okay, we look forward to you coming back with some of the thoughts that we've outlined. We will now reconvene our regular meeting. We're going to actually go into a closed meeting for a few minutes for two purposes. I move the City Council convene a closed meeting under Section 2.237-11A3, the cut of Virginia to discuss the deposition of publicly held property and excuse me. It also be under section 2.237-11A1 to discuss appointments to boards and commissions. All council members and favor the motion. Please signify by voting aye. Aye. Opposed? And a passionate, unanimously. I'm going to do it. I'm going to go to the next room. Yeah I'm going to do it. Thank you. I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not go home. 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, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home, I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. I'm gonna go home. music I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not a man, I'm not to play a little bit more. . I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to do it. I'm going to be a little bit more careful. I'm going to be a little bit more careful. I'm going to be a little bit more careful. I'm going to be a little bit more careful. I'm going to do it. I'm gonna to go to the next room. I'm going to do it. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to play a little bit more. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to do beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. to In favor of the motion, signify by voting aye. Opposed and it passed unanimous. We are now down to appointments to boards and commissions. Mrs. Cross. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wish to appoint Cheryl Hancock to a vacancy on the commission for women for three-year term extending through June 30, 2011. Zero second. Second. Move by Mrs. Cross, seconded by Mr. Rasmussen. All in favor of the motion, signify by voting aye. Aye. Opposed and a pass unanimously. Economic Development Authority, Mr. Drummond. Like to make a motion for Michael Jay-Domarko, to the ability of the economic development authority, when remained heard before your term, I think October 14, 2008. Second. Moved by Mr. Drummond, seconded by Mr. Meyer. Any discussion? I'll in favor of the motion, sing the five of voting aye. Aye. Opposed? And it passed unanimously. That now brings us to comments by the City Council, Mr. Drummond. First, I just want to thank the City staff for a great or vigil I prayed. I know that my family, especially my children, had a wonderful time, especially seeing Elmo getting this slide from the tree as it went down Armstrong, because that just would have been a great site for us to see with almost stuck on the trees going down the study hall now and then. I also want to bring up a couple of things before they counsel the attention and I have had some discussions with some individuals about the possibility of having some public sessions about the hot lanes that are coming to North of Virginia as well as the Delas Rail Construction provides for the public. Just holding an informational session for the public, there's going to be a lot of construction that's going to be going on that obviously affects our citizens, especially on the Brotic Road area, on the Beltway. And I just would like to see the interest in terms of getting some FAF help in terms of putting together some public sessions. If there are no objections, I think what you're suggesting is we just have a standalone outreach meeting that would be work with staff and bring the speakers in and let this- Correct, it's an public meeting and just give an update to everything that's going on to the construction ones. If there are no objections, Mr. Sisson, you'll work with Mr. Drummond to pull that off. Any other comments, Mr. Drummond? Thank you. Smire. I also want to give kudos to the entire community for a successful independent state. The independent state celebration is without hyperbole the most significant event sponsored by the city each year. There are hundreds of participants in the parade itself, scores of citizen volunteers and our dedicated staff and nearly every department and all of them contributed to make this a safe and inspiring event. And I want to express my appreciation to all the persons who made this a success. It's always problematic to single out anyone individual to thank because the unit and stay requires such so many people to make it a success. But I do want to recognize our parade announcer Warren Carmichael, who has served as our announcer in every parade in the city, since the city began hosting the parade 44 years ago. Mr. Carmichael has announced the parade first announced that when he was 26 years old and it was held in front of what is now Paul at six high school. He's been doing it every year since so you can do the math on that. Mr. Carmichael is my neighbor, my friend, he lives in Oli Hills, and has contributed to our community in many, many ways, and I want to thank him again for his commitment to our parade and making it a success. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. President, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Two things. One, the complaint tonight that Thank you. Thank you. Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Two things. One, the complaint tonight that we had about the trash pickup. I wondered if we could, first of all, I don't know the answer to this, is whether we have a good, simple way of getting complaints registered into the city. I know we have a hotline or a phone or some kinds of complaints, but I didn't know if there's one on the website or not. I can't remember. And we could just take a look at that and see if there is, if there isn't, that might be a good addition to that. And then secondly, the issue of Westmore property. I would like to suggest that since we have leased it to someone, but we don't know the total future of that property, of suggesting that we go back in the market and see whether we can, not see whether we advertise it, to see whether there are any potential parties interested in it in the future and that we just not stop right now and let it sit with the current tenant. I mean, that's a big discussion and whether we can, I mean, the other option as many of us have been talking about is a year from now tear the building down and turn it into a community park. And I get to assume what you're suggesting as we go out and float kind of a trial RFP and see if there's any interest. Just try to identify but no commitments in terms of just to see if there's any interest. I for one, I've said it other than the financial issue that I don't think we should be in the real estate owning business, but that's my own personal viewpoint. Is there any comments, thoughts in terms of what's being proposed? Mr. Drummond? Well, I was in a comment on this and I've been, since it's come up, as I've expressed some of my colleagues. And I know that Mr. Perryman and I have talked, you know, I think the community would like to see that area remain as a public facility as a community park. And I would actually be sort of low to when I put it back on the market when I think the community, if I'm my understanding in talking to him is correct, is they want to have that serve the community there. And moreover, from a financial standpoint, I would really prefer to see the money that we do get the next time around. I should be listed again, stays dedicated. I actually tend to agree with those in the community because while we approve this tonight, I do ask some concerns that this amount of money was used to plug the budget over sort of stuck in a situation where we had to do it. So I guess where I am on that, I would rather hold on if you see how things go too with the school. I mean, we're sort of assuming that they're going to pay back what they owe us at this point as well. Mr. Murray, the Westmore School has, it's nearing at the end of its lifespan. There are some systems in the building that are problematic, including the boiler. I do believe that we're in a, between a rock and a hard place with respect to the need for revenue. And that's why I voted in favor of the Academy for one more year. I think long term, I would concur with Mr. Drummond that it would be advantageous for us at some point to raise the building and have an additional park facility in that quadrant of the city. However, I think we need to move cautiously on that in terms of the timing given our, the dire economics situation that we're in right now. And who knows in six months or 18 months what that profile economic profile will be, we may find ourselves in a situation where we might go ahead and take the building down and then not have enough resources to do anything else with the site. And so I think we need to continue this conversation about the Westmore School, but I overall strategically I don't believe that it's in the best business, it's not good business for the city to be in the real estate market and least with that particular property. The chap Peterson once made a comment that I thought was astute was that Fairfax City has a history of collecting school buildings. And our track record with respect to the management of those buildings has been a mixed report card carrying the metaphor on now. So I would hope that we could continue this conversation with the long term objective of raising the building and having a nice recreational facility in that portion of the city. But right now, I think the course is to continue to rent it and look for opportunities to get revenue out of it as long as we're not going to be putting additional money into that building simply to keep it open. This is a handful. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. At this point, I'd like to see us keep all of our options open. If the building remains, the community has a facility that they're able to use for any of their civic association meetings or other purposes that are there. The playing fields remain available to the city in what space it the next year at least isn't going to be better for the city and while the revenues aren't great I think there are other tenants who are in city buildings who are probably paying even less. So we clearly have a record and we've debated that very issue about putting somebody in a building and knowing that once they're in there it's going to be hard to get rid of them. It's going to be hard to get more money out of them. But they've been a good tenant. I'm not making a case one way or another for the current tenant that's there, although I would like to get my money back that they owe us. So I think it's going to be very interesting to see what they do over the next year. But floating it, the question is, do we do it right now? Do we wait until January if the forecast look a little different? And then we put something out there with no commitments and see where we're at, I think that makes sense because clearly the next year, we're trying to take $250,000 to tear down a building and then another couple hundred thousand dollars to fix everything up over there, maybe put in some other play equipment. We just don't have it. It's not that we're not committed to addressing that concern. It's a matter of timing, at least from my perspective. So I would not want to see as close to the door at this point on any option. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Any other comments? Mr. Mayor. Ms. Cross. I would agree with Mr. Greenfield and Mr. Meyer and Mr. Resmanson. I think we really need to have a plan here for not only this building, but this building, the outcome for this building is tied into what we have at Green Inc. So we have more dimensions to this issue than just Westmore. So our thinking on the least tonight, extending the least fine, I'm fine with it. I am hoping that we'll find the avenues in which we can recover the money that's Otis. I want to go into that, but so I would agree that we need to keep our options open and if that means that we need to advertise and see what the market will bear in terms of commitments for that property beyond this next year, then I think that is a good idea because I don't think that we're going to have a kind of funds when all is said and done to do very much with this property in terms of tearing down the building and renovate the fields and all of that for some time. Do? Any other comments? Some, Regent. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to, at the appropriate time, I hope that we would consider putting in the budget the funding that may be required to demolish the school next year so that is an option available for the council. That's the will of the council of time. And the other concern that I have, I think nobody feels this is an optimal situation, particularly when the maintenance for the NVCA is, you know, they're required to care for the maintenance and we have a boiler issue that at some point may result in a significant expense for the city if the tenant can't afford to pay for boiler. So I think we should very much in favor of considering the demolishment of the school next year and having that option and built into the budget for our discussion enough a few more time. Well, if I could just forget it is beyond tonight. I mean, we just signed at least for a year. So I'm assuming even if we do decide to go out and see what might be out there, the timing wouldn't be today. It would probably be six months from now or certainly will have some period of time to see how we're doing this fiscal year to get to the budget process. I'm guessing it would probably be January 1st or somewhere in there. This goes a year from now as that. It goes until the end of the school year next year. So maybe if the staff assume me when you want to keep the option and I'll remind everybody again, it's going to take five out of six votes. So any two people can pretty much decide the building can do anything at once. And I just hope everybody caught Mr. Stombery's point, which is the reason this proposal made even good sense to me is because we got out of the liability, the boiler and the roof that may blow up and all the things related to it. And I would assume if we extended the lease to a new tenant for an extended period of time, that liability more than likely would go back with it. But Mr. Sisson, if you could, you know, maybe give us a staff report at the appropriate time and talk to us about timing and when you would recommend if the council wants to go out and solicit lease or users see what might be out there when that would take place. Okay? Any other comments? Mr. Scrasmer from Mr. Greenfield? No. Comments per se, Mr. Mayor, other than to thank Mr. Sirworth Orn for watching the meeting at home and hope he enjoys his swim. Miss is cross. Some of us aren't permitted that information, but thank you for sharing. Miss is cross. Oh my. I want to go back to Mr. Leeds comments at the beginning of our meeting regarding the Mrs. Cross. Oh my. I want to go back to Mr. Leeds comments at the beginning of our meeting regarding the legal limits for trash pickup in the city and moving those back to tonight o'clock. And I would ask her for a staff summary of that. ordinance so that we can put this has been a long process for these people that live on this is straight the runs test there. What off of work, excuse me, you know, and I've heard from more than just Mr. Leeds on this matter, so I think we need to take a hard look at it. I apparently the noise is intense and really trouble some for this neighborhood, so I'd like to do that. I also want to, when we were doing the cell tower piece, I wanted to ask the question, when we allow cell towers on buildings, do we also provide that when those towers become obsolete, that the company must be responsible for getting them down Because we're going to end up with little units all over the city and nobody's going to claim responsibility for them I may the there's generally a bonding requirement for removal So yes, the answer is yes, we do require them to take down and and I would If I could be so bold as to suggest we call these cellular antennas as opposed to cell towers, which is something else. Sorry. I'm technology challenged. And the other matter that I just wanted to bring to my colleagues' attention is the annual destination care effects meeting, which is Thursday evening at 6 o'clock at Court York by Marriott. I think all of you will be interested in the work of this group and the presentation they've prepared for the evening. So I hope you'll be able to attend. Thank you. Mr. Dahleys. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just briefly want to associate myself with the comments of the other members of the council and congratulating the members of the Independence Day Celebration Committee, the officers, Beverly Myers, Betty Bauer, Ron Cross, Nathan Rasmussen, and Leslie Herman, the other members of the city staff, Mr. McCarty. And the volunteers who put so much time and effort in planning into what is truly a signature event for the city that did a fabulous job. And I think we're all very grateful for what was a fabulous celebration. So thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Stonebees. I have two quick issues. And one, the comments by Mr. Restmas and Mr. Cross were a great segue into this during our swearing in ceremony. I tried to outline the four or five major issues that I saw during the coming year based on the election and Interaction the community and we certainly took care of one of them in the budget discussions we had last week and the second one is What I called residential community reinforcement and enhancement and It's an issue that I think we have huge challenges in front of us and Mr. Siss and I'm really just bringing this up To frame the issue. I know we've had some discussions offline. I'd like to schedule a work session in terms of a dialogue on those challenges, not the least of which is enforcement. I think any of us can go through any community in the city of Fairfax and find violations of zoning ordinance, our current, our current process, if I'm not mistaken, is based on complaint driven as opposed to more proactive result as a result. I think some of our communities are getting even more and more challenged and it's brought up to our attention constantly in some communities. And it goes all the way to, quite frankly, the reason I'm bringing it up tonight is so I don't forget about it is even this weekend on Thursday morning, political signs went up all over the medium, up and down the city of Fairfax, which we have guarded against and been very zealous and controlling, and they weren't taken down until Monday. I assume it's because, and rightly so, our zoning enforcer was probably not working that weekend. And so they stayed up for four days and there has to be a way for us to have a system that's not dependent on a individual or a Monday through Friday approach to enforcement. And there's many examples. There's a daycare center right now that we had an issue with and putting up a huge commercial sign promoting it. And it took months to get addressed and taken down and it's been up there for the last two months. But it sits there on a very visible row which means we don't have a provision again to proactively do it. I don't have the answer, I know part of it's staffing, I know part of it's kind of a creative approach to this but I for one was more shocked during this campaign and getting out into the communities on the condition of some of our residential communities, which goes all the way up the ladder, rental housing, group housing issues with the university overflowing to the community, and we need to get back on top of it. So I wanna just frame the issue of Mr. Siss and I'll work with you, and if anybody, and I know they're Mr. Greenfield, you've always had a high interest in this area, anybody has any ideas or thoughts that start getting them framed so we can have a work session and discussion and get the staff focused on it so they can bring a series of ideas and recommendations so that we can collectively address it. The second issue is one, quite frankly, that just troubles me and it came up today, but as part of this, I brought to the attention, I don't know, yesterday or so, a situation with a business along Fairfax Boulevard, who had been brought to my attention by a number of different people over an extended period of time, where they, in essence, were taking their employees out along Fairfax Boulevard and creating attraction and actually conducting hula hoop events and waving to drivers. And clearly it's a form of advertisement and a slow period of time. And the long and short of it is, if I read all the emails correctly, the last one this afternoon said, well, there's nothing we can do to enforce that. If that's the case, Mr. Sisson, then we need to roll up our sleeves and find a way to, in fact, clearly is the concept that somehow it's a bunch of employees in slow time going out and, you know, kind of letting the steam off and using it as a recreation opportunity just flies in the face of any logic, but If that in fact is something that's not enforceable, we need to find a way to enforce it So I'd like to just frame that issue and ask the staff if they could get back to us and make sure a it's not enforceable Which I believe it is but be if it's not enforceable at the end of the dialogue that we find a way To address the issue and I can certainly provide more background if anybody has an interest on the issue, with that, I'll entertain motion for a German. Moved by Mr. Greenfield, seconded by Mrs. Cross, any discussion? All in favor of the motion to signify by voting aye. Opposed and a passionate soul.