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 call our Saturday June 15th public hearing to order. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll? We'll listen here. Vice Mayor Jackson. He is here. She'll be back here in a second. Councilman McGuirey. Councilmember Bagley. Councilman Chapman. Councilwoman Gaskins. Councilman Mcuire, Councilmember Bagley, Councilman Chapman, Councilwoman Gaskins, Councilman McPike. Here. Okay. I imagine Councilman Gaskins and Councilman Chapman should be along shortly. Good morning, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us. We are happy to have you here. We are going to begin with our public discussion period. We have a number of speakers assigned up. As always, use both podiums and you have three minutes. And we look forward to hearing what you have to sign. Our first speaker is Janice Grenadier, followed by Miriam Creeden, followed by Nikki Infield, Paul Hurtel, Boyd Walker, Dan Hazelwood. Miss Grenadier. You're not seeing her in the chamber. Miss Grenadier is not online. She's not online. All right. Then we will go to Mariam Creeden, followed by Nikki Infield. We have Mariam Creeden. I do not see her either. All right. We will go to Nikki Infield, followed by Paul Hurtel, followed by Boyd Walker, Dan Hazelwood. This is in feel. This is the last place I want to be today. I hate this. We all hate this. But I need you to know that I still see you for what you are. Nothing more than cowards, liars, and chills from murderers. Your citizens have begged you for nothing more than to declare that genocide is bad, a bar so low as to be underneath hell and yet you cannot stop tripping over it. When we ask you to work with us to find C's Fair Resolution language that works better for you, we get the run around. You say there's people opposed to a C's Fair resolution. Well, those people are literally trying to justify the mass slaughter of civilians, so not exactly Alexandria's finest if you ask me. But hey, they've got that sweet, sweet campaign cash. So it's a little genocide denial amongst friends. And I just got to take a detour here for a moment and mention the gala, add to the torpedo factory that you all attended. And an event so, for the party currently facilitating and funding a genocide, it would have been cut from a movie for being two on the nose. Just one, I'm sorry, I have to say, you trying to become one with the wall as you tried to sneak past our protest, lives rent free in my head and makes me chuckle at random intervals. So thanks for that. I cut my teeth as an activist protesting against our government's invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. I was called a terrorist and told by people, they hope I get raped and call the traitor. All the same charming things being spit at anti-genocide activist faces today. But I and all those who marched with me have been vindicated by history as will those of us standing for Palestine today. And just like it's nearly impossible to now find someone who agreed with the invasion of Iraq, because everyone has conveniently forgotten their own complicity and complacency, there will come a day when you will regret your choices. With your whole chest, you will declare you were totally against this slaughter from the beginning. But thanks to technology, we'll have the receipts. And you won't be able to lie your way out of your silence and complicity. You will forever be known as genocide enablers. Well done. Thank you, Miss Enfield. Next speaker is Paul Hertz-Hell, followed by Boyd Walker, followed by Ben Hazelwood, who is the final speaker of the public discussion period. Mr. Hertz-Hell. Mr. Mayor. Members of the City Council. Reiterating historical faxes necessary, especially since reading the mayor's newsletter. Fifteen years ago, Rich Bear approached me about changing the DCA's southerly take-off routes to fly over Mount Vernon. I informed Mr. Bear about the potential conflicts that could arise from flying over Mount Vernon. Subsequently, Congressman Don Byer submitted a letter to the FAA encouraging the FAA to proceed with the proposal. During a large-scale demonstration in support of the proposal, the FAA to proceed with the proposal. During a large scale demonstration in support of the proposal, the FAA was warned to new route with impact several historic sites that necessitated a specific process. The change was studied by the FAA through a noise screening study which identified, quote, significant, increases in noise levels in areas like Belvoir, Fort Hunt, Mad Vernon, and Piscataway Park. the state's planning to provide quote significant increases in noises levels in areas like Belvoir, Fort Hunt, Mount Vernon, and Piscataway Park. These areas house historical landmarks such as Mount Vernon is state managed by the state historic preservation office. The finding of significant effect would require 13 separate section 106 reviews due to potential impacts on properties listed in the national register of historic places. Specifically concerning their acoustic environment, which is integral to their historical integrity. Because of these findings, the FAA refrained from further action. It is important to note that throughout the entire phase, the proponents, including you, the city by association, deceived the public about the potential impacts, mocking and marginalizing anyone questioning the assumptions. Yet the same jurisdictions, Fairfax County, the City of Alexandria, and Prince George's County in order to implement these flight procedures regardless. Hard of consultant who has disclosed that you have already selected practically the same very routes with the same adverse impacts. Your persistence efforts to move the route over historic sites and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco and the city of San Francisco Thank you, Mr. Hurtow. Virtual community, open house on June 27th at 6 p.m. So we certainly welcome the public's input in that process. Next speaker is Boyd Walker, followed by Dan Hazelwood, who's the final speaker on the public discussion. Yeah, good morning, Mayor and members of City Council. I'm here once again to start talking about the business improvement district. Recently you changed the guidelines without any public hearing. And so this is the only chance to speak about it publicly at a City Council meeting. So you changed the guidelines so that if people don't respond, they would be eliminated from the total needed. So basically a year ago, the bid died. It was dormant. Nothing's happened with it. So to get it through, the city is now supporting changing the rules midstream. And bringing it back without any public hearings. I know there will be a final public hearing at passage. But all six of you have already said that you would support the old-time bid. So I guess the decision's already in the bag, which is very unfortunate since you've changed the rules and I think it's a very anti-democratic process to reduce the number that's needed to get to the 60% that the old-time business association wasn't able to get to. As a matter of fact, it was apparent that you hadn't read their first query that was only an option to get to. As a matter of fact, it was apparent that you had read their first query that was only an option to say yes. So there was no option to say yes or no. So thanks to Amy Jackson and everybody else who supported it, you're going to send out a ballot to everybody with a yes or no option. I realized the next morning that there should be an option to abstain too because if someone doesn't know yes or no That they might want abstain, but they want to respond so that they will also be counted because you're not going to count to anybody who doesn't respond I also think the balance should be anonymous. It's a vote There shouldn't be undue pressure on anybody to vote one way or the other just like the election coming up next week or people voting today. It should be anonymous so you can vote how you want you know for your own consideration and not because your friends have pressured you to vote one way or the other. So very significant consequence to this a 10 cent tax added to every property in the district. I also would ask that you please consider the long term consequences of this. Yesterday, I was at the custom shop and the gentleman there who runs that business was 76 years old. He said, well, after I leave, if no one wants to run this shop, you know, what's gonna be here? Another ice cream shop, a coffee shop, something that's not as unique, that business has been here 70 years in old town. Wayne Fisher on Royal Street has been here 40 years. Lamp lighter has been here 40, 50 years. Are these businesses gonna be able to continue with an added 10 cents tax that's gonna be passed down to their rent from their property owner? You know and and this whole process started with all-time business association getting the largest property owners to kind of Push up the numbers to force smaller property owners to concede so ask you to consider. Thank you Thank you, Mr. Walker. Next speaker is Dan Hazelwood. Mr. Hazelwood. Mayor, Councilor. Thank you very much for your time. Seven years. I'm speaking here about the old town bid. Seven years ago, some of you will remember Mayor Wilson, Councilman Chapman, where among the people I sit and had side meetings with during that whole debate. I was a leader of the opponent seven years ago. You'll find in your records about two years ago I emailed the council with a bunch of suggested policies that you consider putting in place if a new bid was to be potentially put on the table. I think you followed some of those suggestions as you chose, which is fine. You said a process it made sense. When the new bid came forward, they contacted me. I stood back. I said, OK, I said back seven years ago, I am against that bid. I'm against a bad bid, not any bid. So I have a very different view than some of the other opponents of the previous bid. When you chose to alter the rules, I decided I needed to pay attention again to what was coming. So I went and I looked at the advocates. I just want to focus very narrowly. I want good government. That's one of the reasons why Mayor and I spent an hour and a half at dinner talking about the bid seven years ago. I'm sure you have PTSD from that. The one of the things I want to draw your attention to is specific procedures, because this is really important. The bid, as it is articulated on the bid advocate's document, says that they have the board picked and that there will be no elections to board members. It will be ratified by council. And new board member appointments will be chosen by existing board members, it will be ratified by council, and new board member appointments will be chosen by existing board members. In other words, they specifically have a process that has no elective ability for the bid tax-paying members to alter the bid board membership once it's passed. That is a dangerous procedure in policy because what that means is every dispute will come to the council because there will be no remedy for property tax owners to deal with the bid. It will be a closed board that self-propeptuates. And no matter how lovely people are, human nature worldwide says that that is not a healthy long-term solution. It may be wonderful for a year or two. But I think before the bid goes to an action, you really need to have a process like we did seven years ago where advocates and opponents got together and said, let's make sure the procedures make sense from a good government process. So I encourage you that before that actually goes to an execution phase, you take the time and go through all the details, because there's some actually disturbing governmental processes in there, whether or not you supported our deposit, we ought to have a good process. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Hazelwood. All right. So I make sure, is that a speaker who was signed up and wasn't here? All right. All right. You got in just under the wire here. Are you are you marrying Credin? I like a deal. Miss Miss Credin go for it. Thank you. I could my run up. Thank you so much. Thank you all for your time this morning. Again. Nice to see several of you here. I want to take the opportunity to publicly thank Councilmember Aguera and Councilmember Chapman who's not here today for honoring their words that they spoke to me in private and being willing to stand up for a ceasefire and Palestine resolution that our group has been asking for. It has been about nine months since our group has been asking for. It has been about nine months, I think, since our group has been advocating for a ceasefire resolution. And at this point, I'm here to bear witness to, I guess, the lack of attention that Council has paid to this issue, and to also ask that the fact that my presence here is demanding accountability. I'm looking at each one of you, hoping that you'll look back at me. Thank you. I'm resident of the city. Several of you know exactly where I live. Several of you know the involvement that my community has had both on the Palestinian front and just in general as a resident of historical Don Alexandria. And one book that I read recently basically suggested that the most effective way to bring about change in a positive manner is to ask each person to put him or herself in another party shoes. That can be across the board, and I think it's a good exercise for pretty much everybody in this room to engage in once in a while and specifically here. So today I'm going to ask if any of you I'm assuming the answer is yes, have been in a position in which you felt as if a simple gesture from an authority, a simple gesture from anybody in the room would have actually made a world of difference. Whether it's because you were the only person of your race, of your religion, of your gender identity, of your sexual orientation, of any item of your being that you hold central. And if you thought that you felt alone or if you thought that you felt, again, some word could do something, that's what we're asking for here. I have been that person in many instances where I have felt isolated or alone, and I know that many of you have as well based on what you've told me. And so as a result, I would say, please listen to your residents that aren't at many of us here today, not because we're not being active, but because we're trying to be as effective as possible. And sometimes that means taking the most efficient route. I know that you all are interested in efficiencies because I know that the budget is very important. I know that all these local issues to making residents of Alexandria's lives a better place is why you're here. You're spending your time here to do that. And I appreciate that. One way to do that is to divest our funding of the government of Israel and Israel sponsored state businesses. That's a great way to find additional funding for the city of Alexandria. If you want to increase school teacher salaries, librarian salaries, if you want to have more programming available for social involvement and engagement to help protect the community, to increase people who can walk around in the streets, all things that I've heard from hearing and speaking over the past couple of months. And then the last thing I'm just gonna take it back to the putting yourself in your shoes. If you're a man and you were reading the news, your death hypothetically, if you were living in Palestine, would not matter based on the tallying of the death tolls. You're not a woman or a child. If you were a child, your death would not matter. If you're a woman the same. Thank you, please consider it. We're here. Happy today. It's great. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Ms. Creed is the final speaker of the public discussion. Is there a motion to close the public discussion? Motion by Council Member Bagley, seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson, any further discussion hearing none all those in favor of the favor of the saying aye. Aye. All opposing name. The aye's have at the public discussion period is closed. Thank you for all those who came to testify. All right. Madam Clerk. Sorry. Action items planning commission consent calendar 436. All right. We do have a speaker signed up on 6. So is there a motion to approve the consent counter items four and five? Motion by Council Member Baggling, seconded by Councilman Chapman. Any further discussion? Here are your none. All those in favor, please acknowledge saying aye. All opposed? Any? The aye has it. Madam Clerk, number six. Master plan amendment 2024-001, rezoning 2024-00002, development special use permit, 2024-100001, 61-01 is 61-25, Stevenson Avenue, playing commission action, MPA, rezoning, and the SUP recommended approval 7 is 0. Okay, we do have, as I said, one speaker from the public signed up unless anyone requires a presentation from staff. My thought is to get to the testimony from the public. All right, then do we have Amat Jendonere? Amat Jardonari here. Where's he? He's not here nor online. All right, we can give them a shot. All right. So there are what we also have Ms. Puscar. Are you just speaking to respond to public testimony? Correct. Okay. All right. Are there any questions for the applicant? Any questions for staff? If not, is there a motion? All right. There's a motion by Councilmember Bagley to approve the Planning Commission's recommendation on the Master of Planning, Resononing and DSU P's or second. Second by Councilmemic Pike, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please can I say an aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. The aye's have it. All right, Madam Clerk. Thank you, Ms. Pusker. Roll call consent calendar 7 through 11. All right, we do have a speaker signed up on 10, and I don't believe any other items. Are there any other items on the roll call consent calendar that anyone seeks to remove? All right, hearing none, is there a motion to approve the roll call consent calendar? 7, 8, 9, and 11? Motion by Councilwoman Gaskins, I think. Seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson. Any further discussion? Hearing in none all those in favor Please invite saying aye Oh, it is a roll call Madam Clerk. Please call the roll. Sorry Gaskins aye vice-minister Jackson Merrill listen aye councilman Geary aye councilmember Bagley councilman Chapman councilman McPike Okay, the roll call consent calendar is approved unanimously. Madam Clerk, number 10. Public hearing, second reading and final passage of an ordinance to amend and reordained section 5-7-57. Chapter 7 of Title 5 of the Code of the City of Alexandria, Virginia. Okay. We do have one speaker signed up to speak on this item and so we'll get to that unless anyone has any questions for staff. All right we have Samantha and at least you're up. Hello. Good morning. Morning. I'm a former resident and a current property owner in Alexandria and one of several people who requested a change to this ordinance. So thank you for considering it. In 2021, my husband and I became involved in senior dog rescue when we adopted two senior dogs with severe health and mobility issues. Lenny, a 12-year-old blind toy poodle and a few months later, Papa, a 16-year-old blind toy poodle, and a few months later, Papa, a 16-year-old blind and deaf shit zoo, both of whom have since passed. We still lived here when we adopted Papa, and when we later learned from a friend that we had exceeded the dog limit, we already had two standard poodles. I didn't believe her until I researched myself. I couldn't understand how 320-pound dogs would be allowed, but not 4 who's combined weight was less than 120 pounds, particularly when two were blind and immobile. Doglimists are designed to prevent hoarding and its consequences, animal cruelty, neglect, and nuisance, but a dog limit is not the answer. Hording is a mental illness resulting in someone having a large number of animals they cannot care for, but someone can have 4, 6, eight, or even more dogs and have the time capacity space and resources to responsibly care for them. And I know people who do that. This is born out in the rescue world. At Mary's Haven Senior Dog Rescue in Maryland, most of the neglected or abused dogs come from one or two dog households. It's not the number of dogs that's the problem. It's the unwillingness or inability to care for them. At Tuesday's session, we also heard that noise complaints come primarily from single dog households, and that 75% are repeat complaints. The odds are slim that adding one or two dogs to a household that hasn't received a complaint will transform that previously responsible owner into an irresponsible one. Increasing the dog limit would also not prevent Alexandria from continuing to enforce existing laws and ordinances that already directly address animal cruelty neglect in nuisance. We should encourage responsible dog ownership and continue to rely on neighbors, friends, family, and veterinary staff to stay vigilant and report cases of animal cruelty and neglect, including harmful and excessive breeding. They're also benefits to increasing the dog limit when it comes to shelter and rescue communities. The limit doesn't just apply to dogs people own. It also applies to temporary foster dogs. Animal rescues desperately need foster homes to get dogs out of shelters while the rescue looks for a permanent home. As of Tuesday, this week, Mary's Haven had taken an already 13 dogs this month but had been unable to place on foster homes. Because the director of Mary's refuses to leave dogs that are blind, deaf, sick, or disabled in a shelter, she sometimes has up to 16 dogs in her home, but for her that's even a lot and so a time she has to make the heartbreaking decision to close intake. If every dog owner and Alexandria with three dogs were to foster one or two more, the impact on rescues like Mary's would be profound. So to some, allowing people to adopt or foster more dogs while retaining the city's ability to address animal cruelty, neglect, and use sense would be consistent with the dog loving character of the city's ability to address animal cruelty, neglect and nuisance, would be consistent with a dog loving character of the city and support animal welfare objectives about the city and the animal welfare league of Alexandria. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for the test. I also love the pride of the tie. I have to say it. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to close it up. All right. This is an emotion to close the public hearing by Councilmember Cyeck, seconded by vice-merge Jackson. Any further discussion and closing the public hearing? Hearing none. All those in favor, please remain. I. I. All opposed. Say nay. All right. Any additional questions on this ordinance or motion? No. This is a motion by Councilmember McPike to approve on second reading final passage the ordinance and it's been seconded by councilmember Bagley further discussion councilmember Bagley you have further discussion no I just wanted to thank the speaker for her work and foster and rescue It's a valuable piece of the pet ownership you know experience. Thank you Thank you councilmember Bagley all right There's no further discussion. We have a motion in a second. It is a roll call. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilmember Pike. Aye. Councilmember Bagley. Aye. Mayor Wilson. Aye. Vice Mayor Jackson. Aye. Councilmember Geary. Aye. Councilmember Chapman. Aye. Councilwoman Gaskins. Aye. Okay. The ordinance is adopted unanimously. Madam Clerk number 12. Public hearing and consideration of a five year license agreement would say group LLC. All right, there's no speakers signed up. Does anyone have any questions for staff? Hearing none is there a motion to close the public hearing and authorize the City Manager to execute the license agreement and take any actions that are necessary. Motion by Councilman Chapman, seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please be my saying aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed, aye. The ayes have it. Madam Clerk, number 13. Public hearing and consideration of an extension of the existing lease agreement between the city and Jeffrey L. Yates Right Same thing on this one no speakers signed up I'm pretty sure sorry, I'm not able to get into my thing here. So yeah, no Actually hold on which numbers this is 12. Okay. Yeah, okay. No speakers signed up And is there a motion to motion by Councilman Chapman seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson to receive the report on the extension and approve the three month extension of the existing lease agreement and authorize the manager to execute a three month extension of the lease agreement with Mr. Yates. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please ignore saying aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay. The aye is havent. All right, Madam Clerk, number 14. Special use permit 2023-00480 South Early Street. Plan Commission action recommended approval, 6 to 1. All right, let's do a brief presentation on this one and then I believe we have a speaker signed up. All right, Good morning members of Council. My name is Patrick Silva. Urban Planner with the Department of Planning and Zoning here this morning to present this item to you. The subject cited 80 South early street is located within the eye industrial zone between Duke Street and Wheeler Avenue on a commercial property. Occupied by three separate commercial tenants, including the applicant who occupies the northern most tenant space outlined in red on this slide here. The site is surrounded by a mix of commercial and industrial properties, commercial industrial properties to the south and west and residential properties to the north and to the east. To address the SUP request itself, the applicant Daniel Donnelly modern design requests after the fact approval for three shipping container-style trailers which are used by the business showroom and display areas for their existing furniture design business. the recommendation. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the 260 square foot trailers present at the site but did not recommend approval of the larger 320 square foot trailer. The Planning Commission also recommended allowing the 260 square foot trailers to remain on site for a period of two years with an additional three years available via approval of the subsequent administrative special use permit down the line. That does conclude the staff overview of this item, but staff is available to answer any questions. The members of council may have. Okay, are there any questions, councilman Gaskins? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. During the Planning Commission discussion, code enforcement came up several times, and I think there was a recommendation to look further into the role of code enforcement at these types of sites. I was just wondering if you could give a little more context as to what are the specific recommendations and kind of what are the next steps with code enforcement? Yeah, thank you. So we did get here a number of concerns related to this state of property maintenance and site cleanliness for this site. So plenty of zoning staff did coordinate with our colleagues in the property maintenance division of code administration Who did go out to the site to conduct a number of inspections and issued the property owner a notice of violation for debris General sort of just like I said site cleanliness issues that were present there Staff plenty and zoning staff did go back out to the site this week and the state of the site in terms of site cleanliness issues was substantially better. And property maintenance staff will be conducting a follow-up inspection to confirm compliance and pursue into our sort of standard approach to our remedying these issues. And over the two-year period for which this could be approved, is the way that we would continue to ensure compliance just based on kind of resident complaints. And we'd next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, and the next two years, up litter within a certain proximity of their site. But if we were to receive any sort of complaints from residents, we would resume this sort of property maintenance enforcement route. So it can be addressed in a number of ways. OK. And then that would, I mean, we could review that as they come back for a potential three-year approval. Absolutely. Thank you so much. OK. Any additional questions before we get to testimony? Okay All right, we do have one speaker signed up Joshua Yoon Do we have he's online just needs to have you you're online you just need to unmute Mr. Yoon can we hear you I'm going to go to the next slide. Mr. You can hear you. There you just need to have the notice microphone. Joshua, can you hear us? Yes, hi. There you are. We can hear you now. Perfect. Hi. My name is Joshua Youan and I'm speaking today again in regards to concerns that I continue to have with 80 South Early Street. I'd also like to again acknowledge that while the applicant may not be directly responsible for the construction that we'll speak on that he does occupy the same lot as where these issues occur and that there is a shared property owner between them. I'd like to say that I spoke at the Planning Commission public hearing last week about these issues the most important of which being the construction noise occurring at hours they should not be. During the public hearing last week at least two commissioners urged the parties responsible to reach out to members to the community or of the community regarding these noise complaints and other similar complaints made over the past month or so and unsur, no such attempt has been made. Not only did the party in question not make any attempt to reach out regarding any of these issues, but did not even bother to stop construction outside noise ordinance hours at all. In the less than two weeks that have passed since then, I've made four separate calls to 411 about noise continuing to occur as early as five something in the morning. After three of these calls, I personally went to the site for at least half an hour each time and taken video evidence of these occurrences. Not once that I noticed police actually bothered to come check out the noise complaints, despite the fact that Alexandria's police headquarters is no more than a 30 seconds drive from this property. This is extremely concerning to me and disheartening to say the least as myself and all my neighbors are forced to continue to endure these noises as early as five in the morning. All while being assured that someone will be sent out to take a look. Yeah, no one bothers to show up until at least over half an hour later, at which point the noise is a very good chance of no longer being present. How can these types of noise complaints be taken seriously and expected to be resolved if the city doesn't even bother to investigate until after the noise has woken up half the near-put has already stopped. The parting question even leaped at the first opportunity to continue construction on the Sunday, while also engaging in numerous other illegal activities along the way, ranging from operating heavy machinery, criminal using a mobile device, to driving up and down a note through street with a backhoe with no permits to do so according to TNES. If you have ever taken a look at anything to do with this property in the past month or two alone, you will see a list of an extremely concerning length of violations that this property has been cited for, and these few I just mentioned are just a couple more out on top of the many already documented. I'd also just like to mention that the notice of public hearing for today that was previously posted on an electrical poll in the slide walk of this property has been taken down as of at least last night if not sometime before. We have as a neighborhood have become tired of making these types of complaints through regular channels and having no tangible resolution from them. We want to finally be able to get a good night's sleep. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Ian, for your comments. We appreciate them. If staff can comment on some of the history here, I think the concerns it sounds like are related to the property, but not the applicant is at accurate. And how has staff been addressing these concerns? Yes, that's correct. So as I mentioned, the applicant is not the only commercial tentative this site. There is a construction materials business that also operates here, which staff has found to be the use that is generating the noise issues. So when we did hear these resident concerns, we immediately reach out to our colleagues in the Department of Office of Environmental Quality and Tess, who handles enforcement related to noise control issues, to confirm exactly what regulations the other use that is generating these noise issues would need to abide by. And both that specific business owner as well as the property owner have been brought into the fold to be advised as to what needs to be complied with, what quiet hours are, as far as when noise can be generated by these uses and when they have to be sensitive to the neighbors. So while no actual violations have been issued in relation to the noise issues at this point, the enforcement team from the Department of Transportation Environmental Services has been brought into the fold and is working to bring these noise issues into compliance. What is the name of the property owner? I will need to double check really quickly. Is this James Schanberger? Yes, that's correct. Okay, and so the applicant is Daniel Donnelly, but the property owner of this property, who's the construction entity is James Schahnberger. So I do not believe the property owner is also the owner of the construction materials business. I believe there are two separate entities but both have been brought into the fold. That's correct. Are there permits pulled on the work that's happening? So the work that is occurring here is it's not construction processes that would require approval of something like a building permit. The operation of the use itself is in compliant with the use limitations and the permitted uses of the eye zone. But it is the obviously the impact stemming from the use that are the issue as it relates to noise compliance, things like that. And to add, the name of the business is E and G, and it is a construction materials business, which can operate by right, a permitted use in the industrial zone. Nonetheless, it's subject to code requirements. And it transfers materials and trucks to construction sites. So this is not construction activity. This is the operations of the business. Right. Mm-hm. Oh. OK. Yeah, that's a different issue. But they're still subject to the noise ordinance, obviously, which it sounds like they're not complying with, is that? Go ahead. Good morning. Mocha Atwood, Office of Environmental Quality. We have spoken to the resident as well as to the business, ENG, and we're working through the resolution of it. We also conferred with the city attorney's office to figure out where in the noise code. They are not doing exact, they're not doing construction, they're doing work to bring construction materials and to bring materials to another site where they're doing the work. So in an industrial zone figuring that out. So we went through the noise code and looking at construction devices, which is what they're using by definition, it would fall under that, which leads them to table one of the noise code. And so they are going to be bound by those hours according to discussions with the city attorney's office. So what are those hours? Yeah, the hours for table one would be 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, Saturdays, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sundays, there is no work. Okay. So, I mean, this sounds akin to the issues we dealt with with Home Depot several years ago. It sounds like the exact same issues, because this is part of their activity. This is what they're doing. So, all right. So, obviously not necessarily germane to the question we have before us, and we can talk a little bit about the details of the question we have before us, but it sounds like we need to work with these neighbors to sort through these issues. So, certainly a lot of, as I look in the packet here, a lot of concerned neighbors in that area from this issue. So, let's sort through that and try to figure it out. Okay, questions on the actual application councilman Chapman And then councilman Gearing. First question is applicant the applicant here or? I believe he's attending a birch virtually. Okay, because I'd love to hear and I don't think he signed up but I'd love to hear kind of. I see I do see something in what we received but I do want to kind of understand from him the thought process of doing that sort of out kind of any communication with the city and once the city was, once somebody communicated with you from the city, it took you almost a year, if not over a year to kind of come and start the actual process. So I kind of want to understand from him if he's available available kind of what was a reasoning behind that. Do we have Mr. Donley on if he's not available staff what what more can you see what's your Donley on there? No okay so we don't have anyone here in the room. So I did read that in the staff report about kind of a lack of timely compliance if we'll say that I have you know I have voices before I have concerns about people doing stuff without kind of engaging the city And then once the city's been engaged kind of Being kind of Lex Vays will call about catching up to what they need to do so I'm starting to see a pattern where I don't think folks are kind of taking the city seriously. And I'm kind of interested in staff's kind of opinion about how flexible we are right now and what a notch down or a couple of notches down and flexibility looks like. I'm a car on where it's playing director and I think that's a good one for me to take. You know, we do have a practice of when we find that somebody is operating an activity that requires a special use permit or some activity in allowing that to continue while we are considering the special use permit. And as you indicate, it is possible that folks are taking advantage of that in order to do things first and ask permission later that it becomes part of a strategy rather than happenstance. I can't say that that's the case in this instance. People also do things out of ignorance or initiative sometimes. I feel that on balance our policy has been a good one that as I mentally review many of the situations where this has occurred it has been an activity that for whatever reason we have come to support and so an interruption in that activity while the the wheels of bureaucracy occur sometimes is is better but but nevertheless I'm I'm with council's direction and permission. You know, we'd be happy to take sort of a review of how that has occurred over the past couple of years and come back to you. And sort of see if there are tweaks where we could more encourage people to ask permission first, then second. I do appreciate that. I understand and appreciate staff's flexibility. I'm just noticing kind of a consistent trend where frankly, without any kind of compensation staff is having to kind of jump up and rush out to enforce and kind of get people into coming up with clients and that again is taking away from staff time. I, and folks can correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think we have any kind of fines associated with finding people having done things before kind of asking for permission. And so they're able to kind of get away with it, coming to compliance because we are pretty flexible and understanding that they're able to kind of get away with it. Come into compliance because we are pretty flexible and understanding that they're trying to run a business and trying to hopefully do the best for their business. And that does equate to revenues for us. But I guess I don't like having staff having to kind of consistently pull people along as it relates to some of coming into compliance. And so I would, with respect to my colleagues, I would love for staff kind of all over this. So more and kind of think about how we can change that dynamic. Yeah, and possibly a little bit of a discussion with some business owners that business categories, where we see this happen, where frequently, just sort of get a sense of how to, I mean, we're all interested in success and compliance and that kind of thing. And I know we can get there. That's right. Thank you. OK. Councilman Eger. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I share the concerns of my colleague. It's always a little bit frustrating when it's like, may a culpa, and there's nothing to kind of follow up with it but that aside I guess Can you talk to me a little bit about Why the applicant is utilizing these Storage containers instead of utilizing their actual building inside? Yeah, absolutely. So I think the approach to sort of having a showroom or display for their products was something that came out of the COVID era when they had to be sensitive to COVID error precautions and this allowed them away to have potential customers see pieces in their various contexts that the trailers have been fitted with sort of faux bathrooms faux living rooms. So without having to come in and interact with the staff directly in an era where sort of proximity was a sensitive issue, this was the temporary solution that they came up with and continued to operate after the fact. In conversations with the applicant, they have indicated though that a temporary approval would provide them enough time to find a more permanent solution to this showroom issue, whether it be reconfiguring their existing building on the inside of the permanent portion of this site or finding another site for their showroom. They have indicated that this temporary approval would provide them enough time to change things up to a more permanent solution. OK, so that's where I was going to go with my next question, which was going to be if the two years would be enough time to allow them to shift their displays into their building or to do some type of redevelopment or adjusting. So thank you for that. So I don't know how my colleagues feel, but I'm okay with the two years. I would not wanna do the three year extension via administrative special use approval. I'd rather it come back to us if they are looking for an extension at all. So I'm just gonna throw that out there. So Councilman McGarry, you're suggesting an amendment to condition three with basically, I think you would put a period after 2027, is that right? Yes. So right now it says the two temporary trailers immediately, but in the front building wall, she'll be permitted at the site with for a two year term, which expires on June 14th, 2027. Planning commission's recommendation continued with an opportunity to increase so you're going to remove that language. Are you making a motion, Mr. Ergier? There's a question from Mr. Chatman. So I understood that he a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a good question. I think it's a new SUV. All right, Vice Mayor Jackson, did you have a question? Okay. Okay. Council Mayor Gary, were you making a motion? Or? I was a little hurt. You council member Bagley. I was not second. Oh, you got second motion, it does not happen. Mr. Mayor, I'm moving the application with the amendment that we just made. All right, so Councilman McGarry is moving to close the public hearing and approve the Planning Commission recommendations subject to an amendment to condition three to put a period after 2027 and have the sentence be the two temporary trailers immediately, butting the blah blah blah blah. Shall be which expires on June 14, 2027 period and there's a second by Councilmember Bagley. Further discussion, Councilmember Bagley. Thank you. I appreciate the conversation, sort of the extended explanation of the usage and the fact that they're looking into solutions. I wanted to make like a shout out here, I guess, to maybe ADP or our small business office within them about maybe helping with that process because we want to keep the business in Alexandria. This just might no longer be the best location for it. business, you know, office within them about maybe helping with that process because we want to keep the business in Alexandria. This just might no longer be the best location for them due to size and maybe due to their adjacent, you know, the business neighbor. So I don't know if anybody, you know, if you all as you close the loop on this can perhaps make that connection because we definitely want to, you know, keep business in Alexandria and help find them, you know, relocated space. If that's where this evaluation is headed, we don't want to send them out of the city, but we want to find them a space that can actually accommodate their business and potentially grow it and improve it. Okay, further discussion on this one? We have a motion in this second. If there's no further discussion, all those in favor please can only say aye. Aye. All opposed? Aye. The ayes have it. 6 to 1. All right. Madam Clerk, number 15. Special use permit 2024-0026. Opps and shine, 3410 Mount Vernon Avenue. Planning Commission Action recommended approval 7 to 0. All right, just a disclosure and then a recusal. So as my colleagues are aware, I own a property that is adjacent to this property and have for quite a while. So as a result on the advice of I'm going to be stepping off the vice mayor and I'm going to chill in the back until you guys are done. So see y'all. Okay. We'll have a presentation and that's going to be a little bit more of a presentation. So I'm going to be stepping off the vice mayor and we'll handle this item and I'm going to chill in the back until you guys are done. So see y'all. Okay. We'll have I'm going to go to the next floor. Okay. We'll have a presentation and then we'll go to test money. Good morning. Vice Mayor Jackson and members of the City Council. My name is Mavis Stampield and I work for the Department of Planning and Zoning. This is a special use permit for an existing restaurant without or dining for a one-year review and for special use permit condition amendments The restaurant is located in a small shopping center at the corner of Mount Vernon Avenue and Wesley Brode And it's immediately adjacent to Sanborn Place a street developed with townhouses built in 1999 that faced the restaurant's rear patio dining area. Because there have been no verified violations of the special use permit conditions or the noise ordinance, the applicant is requesting live entertainment, which would include trivia night, live musical performances, children's events and similar events until 11 p.m. on weekdays, and until 1 a.m., 1 p.m., Thursday through Saturday. After cooking, we consist of cooking classes and sports. The applicant would also like to open the garage door of their building during indoor live entertainment events. This garage door faces Mount Van Bernan Avenue, and it's not near any residential property. The general location of the proposed activities with games located closer to the business building and further away from residents. Two civic associations submitted letters, Delray Civic Association and Mount Vernon Court, which is the name of the development on Sanborn Place and located behind the dining area. Both of these groups supported some of the request and did not support other parts of the request. The Planning Commission recommended approval with no changes to condition 10 for the outdoor dining hours, hours of operation. But did recommend changes to four other conditions as noted in this slide and not be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions for staff before testimony? Councilman McPike? Could you walk through the exact changes that planning commission made to the proposal that staff submitted? Sure. They approved outdoor cooking consistent with the state code with no limitations. And outdoor games, ancillary to the restaurant use. And they approved the outdoor opening of the front facing garage, which was consistent. And they approved the live entertainment with a six hour maximum, but without the limitations that staff had imposed. Describe the like going like let's get a details like what did staff recommend on these I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and I'm not sure if that's the question. That was planning commission's position and not staff's position. No, the planning commission approved recommended approval of the live entertainment. I believe the only change that they made was that there was a description that staff had included in the condition that describe what live entertainment would consist of. And they removed that description. The description is live entertainment, shall include, but is not limited to live music of any type, DJs, hosted, gain, trivia nights, movie nights, workshops, including similar events such as that. OK. They didn't change the hours that salvage recommending everything that's correct Councilwoman gascas Thank you best mayor both Civic associations as it relates to live entertainment Had concerns. I think one requested a mitigation plan others specifically had concerns related to amplification requested a mitigation plan, others specifically had concerns related to amplification. Can you just talk about sort of what tools we have? I know in here in the conditions it doesn't specifically lift a mitigation plan, but what tools do we have related to enforcement beyond just that I know we have the noise ordinance, but we also saw in some of the letters people were saying they've made complaints and by the time we come out, you know, it, you know, the noise has changed or the noise has stopped. Yes, the tools are the noise ordinance, first and foremost, but also the special use permit conditions. And, you know, there is a condition that says if there are repeated conditions that are violated, then we can redock at the special use permit before the city council. Okay. And then my other question was... I'm sorry, it was also related to noise. Oh, in condition 14, there was language added specifically related to email notice of the residents at Sanborn Place and talks about how that has to happen, no less than a week in advance. Do we have similar types of conditions like that where there are email or required notifications to specific residents and do they fall? I guess for consistency sake, do they fall within that same noticing requirement that we're putting here? We have most recently and that's within a past couple of years have included a similar condition for classical movements that has outdoor concerts, right adjacent to neighbors. And it is very similar in scope. Thank you. Councilman Aguieri. Thank you. A couple of clarifications from staff. So we say approved live entertainment is that inside, outside both? I'm sorry. I should have been more clear. This is the application is to allow the outdoor live entertainment and to continue the indoor live entertainment that was previously approved. Okay. So we're continuing indoor with the time slots that are at the bottom. I believe those time slots are for the life and outdoor entertainment. Yes. The indoor entertainment is permitted from 4 p.m. to 12 a.m. Okay. So we're maintaining indoor entertainment basically until close, outdoor entertainment is until 11. So I don't know, probably not sure about it. Right, I think during the weekdays it's still 9 p.m. Okay, and then outdoor live entertainment versus house speakers. Is there a condition for background music? Yes, there is. That's until what time? Outdoor amplified music in the form of background music is permitted from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Friday and Saturday and from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. I feel like I need a chart for this. I can't believe it. OK, because I'm OK with the background music going later, but not sure about the live entertainment outside going until 11. But I think that's all I have for right now. Yes, sir. Kelsa, make my. So the live music, if there was live music, But I think that's all I have for right now. Yes, sir. Council's minute. So the live music, if there was live music, would be limited to the same decibel level as the background music? Yes, that is what it's proposed to. And that's just, and that's the same decibel level coming out of the speakers. It doesn't account for the sound produced by the musicians actually playing the music themselves. I can tell you that when I was out at the property with a live performer, I could hear, I could barely hear the live performer in the middle of the patio, but when I sat closer to the speaker, I could hear it. Okay. And the Planning Commission modified the condition that staff had regarding outdoor cooking, which the staff version said outdoor cooking facilities in host stands are permitted to include smores and cooking classes are permitted without amplified sound. Planning Commission removed the specific reference to smores, I think it's fine. I mean, you know, that we don't need to be that particular. But we're also moving without amplified sound. So under these conditions, would the cooking, if you're having an outdoor cooking class, would it be allowed to be amplified now when it previously would not have been? Right. So I think that we would view that as part of the live entertainment. And is there a way to make sure to specify that if that is amplified, it's held at the same decimal level as the live entertainment. Is there anything in these conditions that would require that? I believe that the conditions say that the decimal levels would be the same for any live entertainment. Okay, and we've moved cooking specifically into the live entertainment definition here, or do we just sort of take no real definition? We have not included that, but any noise is ultimately subject to the noise ordinance, which would be the 65 decibel limit. The reference to the same decibel level as the background music refers to that still would refer to that 65 decibel level at the property line. So it would also add some specificity there that it should be controlled through the house system. Any amplification outdoors regardless of cooking class, entertainment, comedy, whatever goes to that system at that level. And there was also, I believe, there was in the schematics that y'all had put together for the staff report that planning commission avoided. There was a designation of a very narrow area where games couldn't necessarily be played, which I understand from talking to the applicant would have really constrained operation in a way that, you know. But there was also, was there, is there anything in the conditions as they stand after planning commission regarding noise, dampening related to games like Jenga or Kinect 4 that involve things clattering and falling on the ground? I think the planning commission removed what we had put in for that. Okay. The mat. I think that planning commission removed what we had put in for that. Okay, the mats. Yeah. I think that maybe that's something, obviously we don't want, if you have mats, you can move around if you move the game. Because I think, yeah, putting all the games at one little corner might be a real obstacle to the functioning of the business, but I do think having something that comes along with the games to muffle some of that crashing sound would be useful in this place. But we can get into that. I do also want to hear from the business and residents about their concerns. Thank you. Any other questions before testimony? OK. We have three signed up for the public hearing. Let me get to that list. Leslie Klein, C.J CJ Cross, and Stephen Harris. So, Ms. Klein. All right. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you. Members of the Alexandria City Council, thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Leslie Klein, and I'm a homeowner on Sanborn Place behind hops and shines patio. I had the pleasure of meeting with many of you just last year feeling with the same issue. You got it right in 2023. While outdoor dining is a by-right privilege, amplified music, outdoor cooking, and games are privileges afforded by a saw. I have no issues at all with anything this business wants to do inside their physical structure. I just don't want to hear or smell it inside my house. The current proposal would allow this business 18 hours per week of live music and entertainment as well as outdoor cooking and games. There is a lengthy documented history of this business's often elicit outdoor activities, including outdoor cooking excessively loud games like Cornhole and live music and trivia, being clearly heard inside of our homes, including 17 documented violations and dozens more Alex 311 complaints over the past six years. If this SUP is approved, we would have no recourse other than calling the bar and asking them to turn it down. The same business that docs was Sun Social Media last year. The same business that requested TNES permits specifically for unamplified music and then proceeded to use microphones and speakers. This lack of self-awareness, history of adversarial interactions with our community, and their willingness to stoop to the level of riling up people with lies on social media, gives me no reason to think they would ever respect their neighbors simply because City Council asked them to. I've been very vocal in giving staff regular updates over the past year that everything the city did was working. I'm extremely grateful we haven't had to repeat the weekly process of enforcing city regulations when this business refused. New neighbors don't understand why this is an issue, and it's because under the current SUP, it's not an issue. But allowing any of the privileges they're applying for would be unproductive. The city worked extremely hard to find a compromise between the wants of a business and the needs of neighboring residents. Many of my neighbors also wrote in with similar recommendations as did the Delray Citizens Association. I urge you to reject this SUP application and instead renew the 2023 SUP, which allows the business to have the privileges they're seeking, but with the appropriate checks and balances to respect their neighbors. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Ms. Klein. CJ Cross. And then Stephen Harris. Good morning, council members. Thank you for taking the time to bring this up. My name is CJ Cross. I have been managing Hobson Shine since it opened. I feel like that we have, for the five and a half years we've been open, been a very good member of this community, hosting lots of charity events, community events and stuff like that. Hobson Shine is more than just a restaurant. It is a community space that many different non-profits and community groups have used over the course of the past five years. And I do agree with the vast majority of what the city with the Planning Commission came up with for this force that will hopefully allow us to go back to being able to offer those events. Over the last year, year and a half, since we pulled back a lot on what we've been doing in the restaurant, we've definitely been less of a member of the community than we had in the past because we've been afraid of getting violated on any of our permits on our SUV. Most, almost everything that we do does not actually cause significant noise. The vast majority of the times that we got the violations was when a large single speaker was used by entertainers when we either had permits or were misunderstanding how the permits worked for things. We have since added in a sound system where our alt any sort of entertainment would be wired directly through that. The president of the HOA for Mount Vernon community came over and we had a musician and all the games set up and turned it up to what it's permitted to be at, walked over into the neighborhood and you could not hear any like barely barely if you walked over to the up to what it's permitted to be at, walked over into the neighborhood, and you could not hear any, like, barely, barely, if you walked over to the fence to hear it, you could hear the entertainment. The way we've set up our speakers now will not allow that sound to get over there. In addition, I now have a text conversation going on with the president of H.O.A. He can text me directly and let us know if he's hearing any issues, and we can immediately comply. If there's any issues speaking to our staff or taking care of whatever needs to be done, I really do hope that we're able to use that as a way to stop things. We've made a mistake on that one permit where it was said unamplified instead of amplified when we applied for that one permit. The second that we got a message from a member of the community, we looked at the permit, realized that it was, there was the typo, we moved that musician inside within three minutes, I believe. Like it was a stop, go inside. There is only two things that I kind of had a little bit of issue with the staff recommendations. I believe the Planning Commission also kind of agreed. It was the distances and stuff like that in terms of where the games could be. Where we set those games up when we did their demonstration and the musicians where we plan on doing it. But the 65 feet doesn't quite match with those. The other thing is the 9 p.m. closing time on the patio on the weekdays. I have an alarm set up on my phone because we all have 8.30 every single day. I call staff or message them about see people out there. But it's still sunlight out. At this time of day on during the summer, people still want to be out there. We can definitely cut off the music and stuff like that at 9 o'clock, but if the weekdays, if customers are still able to be out there, you know, for another half hour, 45 minutes, having it go till 10 o'clock to be even with the rest of the other restaurants in the area, we'd ask that we be able to keep folks out there till 10 o'clock in the weekdays, just to, you know, people can do normal dining time. But thank you all very much and hopefully with all the mitigation that we've put together and with the staff recommendations, we can, you know, go back to being a better, better member of our community. Thank you, Mr. Cross. I have a couple of questions for you actually. So last year, we were talking about a sound wall or something. Did that ever happen? So, well, we never got the permission for the live music, so we never actually did any of the things that we talked about because we didn't get the permission for it. That said, the trees that we planted are probably twice the height of what they were before, and the change with having the music go through our house speakers was a significantly bigger change than any of the other options we could have. We had a set of sound engineers that I believe the city even spoke to sound engineers. And it was how the music was being amplified, was the best way to reduce it. And if you come out to the restaurant and where we're in the neighborhood, you can tell it works. Like when we had the musicians there, you couldn't hear it. And that was, we took the recommendations of the engineers. Okay, so just to remind myself, do you have amplified music inside, but not amplified music outside right now? So right now, we have the background amplified music outside, and we can have live musicians inside. The only time we've been able to have amplified live music outside was with the permits, and then the one time when the city came over for the demonstration and the neighbors came over for the demonstration. We'd like to be able to have the musician outside amplified and when we did the demonstration it was amplified and it definitely did not, the sound did not carry to the neighborhood. Great, thank you. Any other questions? Councilman Chapman? Thank you. For staff. Well, let me start with the applicant, and I'll go to staff. So we have a period of what, five, five and a half years, complaints and challenges through that. We've had a year where we've had nothing. And as you say, it's because we've scaled back a bit, kind of outside of what I've heard about the sound system, what other kind of managerial steps or steps have been taken to kind of make sure that if given these allowances, things don't pop up again. I know you've talked about kind of your communication, but talk to me and my colleagues more about which. So I will say at the moment we have some of the best staff that we've had, like our first three years we were open, we had great staff during that period of time, we had some staffing issues that we have now taken care of, we have a fantastic new manager who's in there. But we are definitely observing our cameras more often, making sure that staff know that even if customers in the evening are having loud conversations, our staff is instructing, say, hey guys, we do have neighbors bringing it down. We've definitely taken a different approach in terms of making sure that our staff know that part of their job is making sure that our customers behave, which has helped that a lot. You know, our staff understand it's funny, like, you know, I told you I have that alarm set for 830. I now get a text at 829 from the staff saying, hey, we've already talked to the customers, because if I literally like pop the camera open, if I'm not there, I pop the camera open and I text at 830 on the dot every single time. Hey guys, I see there's four people outside. Hey guys, I see there's six people outside, you know, and so like that. And then I'll keep on looking until I know what people are inside. So we've definitely we're observing and making sure that folks are doing things the right way and our staff understand how strong we are making sure that happens. Thank you. For staff, I just want to make sure I'm clear on this stuff. So staff was present when they did the kind of demo about missing and sound. And as you mentioned, it wasn't strong noise from, yes, the sandborne place property line. No, sir. Okay. I couldn't hear it at all. Okay, that's helpful. As we do have, and I don't know if I miss this in the staff report, but kind of the comparison of other businesses on long Mount Vernon Avenue, because I know we've had initial other conversations about outdoor music games and things of that nature. If we were to allow what planning commission recommended, where would they fall as it relates to some in comparison to other businesses along the avenue? leads to some in comparison to other businesses along the avenue. So hi, Phi barbecue on Mount Vernon Avenue. The life entertainment was approved there for very similar hours. And we don't have any others along Mount Vernon Avenue. Okay. The garden had applied for accessory games in the back and they have that type of approval but they have not set them up yet. So that's what we have at this point. Thank you. That's it. Councilwoman Gaske, Councilmember Bagley. Thank you, Vice Mayor. My question is for the applicant and it does relate to the games. I'm curious what proactive mitigation might be possible for sound generated from the games? What have you explored? So we do plan on adding the mats in around the games and everything like that so that you know it does Take this does observe the sound from the games that said when we did the test We had the games just on the concrete and it the sound didn't really carry But we do still kind of put in the mats primarily so that these mats are here because this is where we want these games That doesn't mean you know occasionally somebody might move a game around and stuff. But we were making sure that staff know to tell people, hey guys, we'll at least keep us over here. But we plan on putting the mats down before the games are brought onto the property. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Yeah, thank you. I'm sorry. Yeah, thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. I'm sorry. I wanted to follow up on what my colleague was asking about Comparators. You mentioned high-fi has an approval for live entertainment. What are high-fives outdoor dining hours? I will look them up right now. I think the larger point I'm getting at here with my colleagues is We're evaluating if we took the baseline, what planning approved, one thing that the applicant is pushing for that is different from what planning approved is the hours. And one area of the hours that I did wanna have a conversation about is the nine, nine o'clock, weekday, outdoor dining hour limitation, and potentially whether that hampers this business's ability to compete relative to other businesses with a similar model in a similar neighborhood. I have seen this in my own neighborhood where sometimes I will cross the street, you know, because the place I've just walked into is about to close, but the one across the street is still open. So if we're able, before we get perhaps, you know, to the motion stage of the proceedings, you know, I think it's important just to know who their comparators are and what their outdoor dining options are. Hours are. Thank you. and we have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to do that. We have to be able to Good morning. We're open. The city council. My name. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this matter. My name is Steve Harris, president of the Mount Vernon Court. Community Association. We are a private community located directly behind. Hots and shine. For one solid year, we have generally enjoyed peace and quiet. Thanks for your efforts last year in clamping down on this business. Is this desire to shoehorn loud? Mr. Harris 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 I generally enjoyed peace and quiet thanks to your efforts last year in clamping down on this businesses desire to shoehorn loud activities and unreasonable volumes into their rear back patio. On May 20th, there was a meeting held with the city's planning and zoning Hearing on this matter, I was in fact 30 minutes late. I'm sorry for that transgression, but I also have a full-time job in addition to being a very reluctant HOA president. After realizing that they had failed entirely to enact any of your recommendations from last year, they made a last minute effort to change their sound system for a demonstration held on that quiet Monday afternoon. I will now set the scene for you. There were approximately four patrons in the rear patio during the demonstration. There was also some construction work going on, but I do not have a problem with that as it was within normal hours and that type of, or normal hours that type of activity is permitted. It is not material to the point I am going to make. The sounds from the construction were that of jackhammers. I only mentioned this as it has previously been used as a defense to dismiss my reasonable argument. For the record applicant did run over to the construction team and asked them to cease operations for the purpose of this test and the team complied. So now there were no additional outside noises. While I was on site in the applicant's rear patio, they instructed their single live performer to play live music over their new sound system and it was not overtly loud. This was done in the area where applicant proposes to house the games, not under or inside of the tent. I'm glad you have the, so where it says performer location, they were actually, the performer was located approximately where the games were. And so the sound was reasonable and I did not think it to be too loud that it could carry into our neighborhood. So from this alone, you could say applicant has demonstrated they have done something to mitigate, mitigate noise emanating from their establishment. We then moved to Sanborn for another test where I stood on the curb in front of the N2 houses closest to the fence that we share with Pops and Shine about 25 feet. Jeff, then radioed somebody to tell the performer to start again and I thought the sound level was reasonable. Games such as Jenga and Connect floor were also tested from my vantage point and I didn't find them to be loud. I'm not even sure I heard them at all. I then told the approximately five owners of Pops that were on site that I would not dispute the new sound system and game sounds if they would ensure that the sound level was the same as it was for this test. So now I am in the position to speak for my entire community about a test that was performed on a Monday afternoon with four patrons less than one month prior to this council meeting. I also pointed out that I could not attest to what this sounded like inside any of the homes because I was the only one present for the test. I do not have children who may have sleep affected by what this business wants to do. It is a leap for me to be the sole person to make this decision. I wish that Hobson took this mitigation step prior to their St. Patrick's Day live performance on March 16th. So I would know what it might sound like with 49 people in attendance with all the associated cheering and singing along that might come with it. I will add that I do have all the phone numbers for Hobson Shine Management as CJ mentioned. And prior to May 20th, I personally have never had any contact whatsoever with Hopstap. Hopst asserted at the planning commission that they were in contact with us, but I don't entirely think that's accurate. We were not told of their request for expansion or consulted ahead of time. We only found out the same way that you did. On occasion, the applicant met their obligation to tell us about live events, but it wasn't consistent. The March 16 live event was sent to us post-part Thursday in the evening and did not arrive until the mail came after the event was over. And our... Mr. Harris. Okay. He dropped. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Harris. Let me know if he gets back. Okay. So do we have any more questions for staff? He's back on. He's back on. He's back on. Okay. Yes, Mr. Harris, are you back on? You just need to unmute this microphone. You need to unmute. No. Okay. Okay. Mr Harris, can you unmute your microphone? We cannot hear you. Okay. We'll come back to Mr Harris and give him a few more seconds. Questions for staff. I don't want to close the public hearing yet. Yes. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing first. Okay, there's been a motion to close the public hearing by Councilmember Chapman. Seconded by Councilmember Gaskins. Any discussion? No. Okay, excuse me if I's very angry. Okay. I'm sorry. Any discussion? No. Okay. Excuse me, vice-versa. Okay. I know it's just on. So I actually can, is it possible? I'd like to ask the applicant a few questions in light of Mr. Harris' testimony. Yes. So if we could just delay closing the vote. Absolutely. Absolutely. Sorry. Mr. Crawley. He's back home. You want to wait for Mr. Harris? Let's go ahead and make sure he can unmute. So I'd like to address just a couple of points that were raised there. I really want to avoid a he said she said like in chambers and generally speaking, but it is concerning sort of what appears to be like the ongoing disconnect between the representations about, you know, relationships between the parties. And so, you know, understanding everybody, I think, wants a good outcome here. Can one of you sort of address, who obviously heard the same testimony for Mr. Harris as we did about sort of what communication is and who you're communicating with and when that happened. And can you just help us? Yeah, so we spoke with Mr. Harris at that meeting at the May 20 meeting. And we both agreed that email communication is the best way. What we're planning on doing is we're planning getting our events put together well in advance and sending him an email for the full month of events a week or two week plus before that each month. So that they get a full thing and he's got it set up. He actually was saying he can set it up so that it was Mr. Harris who said this. That we can send it in a way that it actually goes out to their entire email list. Whether it's us sending it to him and him forwarding it, or him creating some sort of rule with their lift serves so that it can go direct with all of them. But we did agree that the email was the best form of communication for everybody involved. And discussing the circumstances, and I'm not sure if I just misunderstood Mr. Harris's statement, can you put the map up again of their property, the layout of where things will be? When you all did the, oh, it was there. There it is. When you all did the sound test with the community, was the performer in the performer location? So this was, so the performer was not in, the performer was actually right above where the games are, which is where we have the sound wired in. That said, and as Mavis can test to where the performer is now located is slightly no longer really relevant, because the sound is almost entirely coming from the speakers, not where the form is located. And that was the other thing we were asking about is, you know, the designation of everything needed to be cooking here and games here and stuff like that. We're gonna keep the games as far away from the property line as possible, but like just, you know, actual designations on a map kind of gives too much opportunity for us to have a mistake made. Sure. I appreciate you touched on what I was hoping to draw out, which is because the performer, any performer, has to be tied in exclusively to your amplification system, it's marginally irrelevant, potentially, where they actually are because it's where the speakers are that ultimately dictate how the noise is sent into the world. Is that a fair statement from staff? Yes. I mean, when I was in front of the performer while he was singing, I could barely hear him. And I could hear him more clearly when I was sitting somewhere near the speaker. OK. And so I wanted to draw that out because, eh, I wanted Mr. Harrison to understand we heard him, you know, and that ultimately, if residents see their performer not in that designated circle, it's really still about the amplification level, the decibels that are getting over the fence ultimately. So I appreciated sort of bringing the games as close to your building as possible, but I also appreciate and understand why I don't want us to be hyper-technically bound by these particular circles, because especially with the performer and amplification, it's really more about where the speakers are, and they're permanently placed. Yes, yes. OK, so I feel like I'm clear on that point now and hopefully I haven't muddled things for my colleagues. But is staff comfortable that I have the correct understanding of the layout and the implementation? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Harris has no concern. Okay, thank you. So yes, sir. Okay. So, sir. Okay. So, um, yeah, we're couple, we have a couple of topics we're discussing here. The games, the cooking, I think are all, it seemed reasonable to me. Regarding the sort of live performances, what is your expectation on the number of live performances that you'll be having? maybe one, maybe two a week, if that. I mean, musicians are expensive. Yeah. The whole idea of us having live music for, I think, A.L.X. now said, like, 10 hours a day, it's not affordable. So I would love to have more music, but we can't afford it, and it's also doesn't make sense during non-peak hours and everything. But basically, once, maybe twice a week, primarily, like Friday evening and Saturday during the day. So under the current SUP conditions, you were able to have live music outside if you did a permit through the Permanence. Yes. And how often did you all undertake that? We did, I think, about three in the first four months of operations this year. So January, March, and April. And in what way was that cumbersome to the point that you would like to, like, move beyond it? Like, what is the challenge there with the permit process, the post to have? As a restaurant, tourister, I'm not a permitter. So, like, for example, when we were going to the T process, the post to have? As a restaurant tourist, sir, I'm not a permiter. So like for example, when we were going through the TES, the major issue that came up on March 16th was I accidentally had a typo and they're saying it's unamplified, but we're applying for an amplification permit. So just kind of the tediousness of like the actual verbiage, the actual terms that are needed for it was super difficult for us as restaurant tours to understand these kind of different permits. For the other permit, Mr. Bill Grayback actually super, super nice gentleman. He kind of walked us through exactly what we would need to do in the future if we wanted to get a permit, which was specifying who's gonna be coming, the time that they start, the time their break is, the time that they restart, and a lot of time they're gonna have from set up to finish. Those are things that we don't typically handle or work with. So getting those permits was, it's doable, but for a small business like us, it's, again, it's paying for a permit like that, then going through the processes and then notifying your neighbors, it gets to the point where it's, might you be not worth it at that point, financially and time constraints. Okay. Okay. So my words may it be not worth it at that point financially and time constraints Okay Any other questions if not all entertain emotion to close public here. Oh, we already did so who now remind me what it was Okay Councilman Chapman and only a secretary councilmember gas and second. Okay any further discussion All right all those in favor say aye. Aye. Nays? Eyes have it? All right, so now I entertain a motion or any other questions to the staff. If I could. Yes, ma'am. Yes, staff been able to identify. Yes. And comparators, Thank you. Sure so at High five which is also an outdoor venue behind evening star their outdoor dining hours are 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily and the outdoor live entertainment hours are 6 to 10 p.m. Wendy Wednesday through Saturday Any chance on northside, social, which also feels like a geographic comparator? Do you know when they're outdoor? We, dining day have, they, we do not have approval for outdoor live entertainment if it's... But happening, they have not come forward. What about just the outdoor dining? Because my understanding of the current SUP proposal from planning is to limit even outdoor dining at hops and shine to stop at nine. At Northside, they fall into a category called commercial complex, and they do not have to come forward with an SUP for outdoor dining or an indoor restaurant. So in other words, they don't have an SUP with these restrictions or limitations or conditions. So I just have to Google it. And we can do that if you'd like. It's not part of an approved. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Just to clarify, you're saying the live entertainment at High Fy grill stops at 10 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday, which would be an hour, hour later on Wednesday and Thursday, but an hour earlier on Friday and Saturday than was being proposed here. Sorry, I just have a a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. We're very consistent. Sorry, I just have a clarifying question. Because if I was following correctly, I think Councillor McBagley would ask you about dining. You were just naming entertainment. Can we just say it one more time? What are the hours for the dining versus what are the hours for entertainment at the comparators. I think it's at number seven, page seven, might have these conditions. Oh, I see here. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. We're good. Compare. Yeah. No, I'm sorry. Comparators. So the comparators. So the high five again, uh, we're dining hours, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily. And then I think we have the hours on, oh, on another slide, perhaps before this. And that compares the proposal here for. proposal here for... We, I'm sorry. So the outdoor dining hours at a high fire again, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily. And then at a planning commission recommendation for outdoor dining hours are 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Friday and Saturday and 11 to 9 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. Okay, Councilmember Aguirre and then Councilmember Bagley. Thank you. So I'm going to make a attempt at a motion and then we can work through it. So I would move the planning commission recommendation with the following amendments. So to condition 11. Spit B and D so specifically for cooking and for outdoor games, it would be outdoor cooking without amplified sound and that we would cap it at 9 p.m. Just to be responsive to the community members that are concerned with the additional noise that comes with cooking and games and would be similar language for condition 11d and say allowed for use until 9 p.m. daily for outdoor games for condition 14c outdoor live entertainment shall Shall not be amplified, but for clarity, does that mean they can still use their house speakers? I believe that the house speakers would be the live entertainment, so that would be glued them from using the house speakers if they were not amplified. So we don't want to have live entertainment, but well, live entertainment without amplification, but we do want to allow them to have their background speakers. They have had the background speakers for the past year. Yes, sir. For condition 10 This is specifically for their outdoor downing dining area, so not not entertainment. So for their outdoor dining area, so not entertainment. So for their outdoor dining area to be open until 12 a.m. Friday and Saturday and then 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. Okay, so. So Sunday through Thursday till 11 p.m. Okay, so. So Sunday through Thursday till 11 PM. But then they're capped at mind to have activities. Does that make sense? So they can't do outdoor cooking or the games past 9. But they can basically have people sitting outside until 11. Okay, so I have a question about that. Concerning what we were just doing with the comparators. High five was that till 11 Sunday through Thursday or till 10 Sunday through Thursday? 11 PM. It was Sunday through Thursday to 11 p.m. Okay. High five. Okay. So council member Geary has made a motion. The Planning Commission recommends. Approval with these amendments that. Let's see. Go back. Condition. Condition 10. Would be 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and 11 a.m. To 12 a.m. Friday Saturday and 12 a.m. Sunday. And then 11 b and 11 d were approving outdoor cooking and approving outdoor games, but both capping them at 9 p.m. And with no amplification. And with no amplification. And the last thing I would mention for discussion as well. So condition 30, the director of planning and zoning show review, the special use permit one year after it has been operational. I'm going to be able to get a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a But I would look to my colleagues if you want to do it quarterly or just every six months. No, why? So I think I appreciate you bringing up that last point. I think do you think a probably a six-month review might be helpful? I think and the reason I'd say that my colleagues is this is again a business that has kind of a history with us as I said last Meeting when they came before us We rarely have businesses get to that step and so as we get them back to a stable foundation. I want to make sure that we are being as supportive as we can but also being very mindful of making sure there's no backtracking. So I think that'll allow us to do some of that. I do have a comment on one of the pieces of the hours, I think, in terms of, and I'm trying to make sure if we're stopping the outdoor games at what time for the weekday? Nine, nine. I'd be interested in a kind of closing up shop out there at 10. You know, I appreciate kind of having them manage the space, but I think it might be a little bit too easy for somebody to, if games are still out. And that two hour time period for somebody to, if games are still out. And that two hour time period for somebody to go ahead and do that, I think this allows them to kind of start to shut that space down, game stop, people stop being there. It probably is a little bit smoother that way, just for at least just for the weekdays. You know, if we do that for the weekdays, I I'm amenable to the weekend being a little bit longer. I would never take that as a fairly amendment. Yeah, so. Okay. Thank you. Thank you to both my colleagues for the proposal. I guess just a couple of things I've been thinking about. I'm comfortable with the six month review. I like that. I'm comfortable with the six month review. I like that. I'm comfortable with the change to condition 14C with the no amplification. For the outdoor games, while I recognize they mentioned they're still planning on the math, I would like the math language to be added back into the condition that was taken out from planning commission. I think that just gives us a way to enforce it by having it back in there. I would agree with the change related to the outdoor dining and the outdoor cooking and the outdoor game, stop at get nine. I do have some concerns about, and I'm not with you on the longer hours for the outdoor dining. Yeah, so I'm okay with the rest. I'm not there with you yet on the longer hours for the dining. I wanted to tell you a little bit of where my thinking is. I could maybe get closer to the second proposal that Councillor member Chapman had around 10. One concern I have is I'm trying to make sure from a Force ability. If we've got this thing stopping at this time and this thing stopping at the next time how complicated does that become not only for the business owner but then also for our staff to be making sure all of these things are happening within the correct hours. Council member Ageary then councilmember Chapman. I have no issue Sunday through Thursday as councilman Chapman made a friendly amendment and I accepted to close dining at 10. Friday and Saturday, I would still like to see dining open later. And that's without amplified music, without games, without cooking, they would just be able to sit out on the patio until designated time. Okay. Yeah, and I think. Okay. I think... Is that the motion? Councillor Member, Gary? I guess we're still discussing Friday and Saturday, what time they can be open. Okay. But otherwise, I've made a motion with the amendments to 10 and 11 and 30. And council member Chapman has seconded that. So discussion. So I think my quick piece is, I think in regards to my colleagues' concern about enforcement, share a similar concern, but I understand that that's not gonna be kind of impinging on staff. I think but I understand that that's not going to be kind of impingent on staff. I think if I understand and staff correct me if I'm wrong on this, our process on kind of enforcing these are really hearing from public or hearing from residents or hearing from nearby neighbors that might see games being played after a certain time or might hear noise after a certain time. It's not necessarily staff kind of going out and checking. So I do, that's why I wanted to get those things a little bit closer in time versus having a two hour difference between when we stop games and when an outside area closes because I think that increases that confusion. I think by hopefully by getting them closer aligned, you might have a little bit less confusion by neighborhood and by community members as well as by the business. How's the member, McPike? Because it's really useful to loop back to things if fifth time or six time. What were High Fives dining, outdoor dining hours on Friday and Saturday? It is daily until 11 p.m. So yeah, I have concerns about a restaurant that has had issues going beyond giving them even more. We've had issues here. We cracked down pretty hard last year and I am certainly comfortable loosening restrictions this year to try to help the business so long as we have. I think the review period proposals, a good idea to make sure that the neighborhood can come together. But I think that, you know, the staff had a recommendation in some ways planning and zoning loosened it more. And now if we're loosening it even more, I worry that we might be going too far there. I also, an issue that was raised is the length of hours of the music, starting at five, knowing to whatever is like six hours was the proposal. Now we're sort of expanding that again. And I recognize y'all are trying to find, you're trying to find something workable here. And I appreciate that. I don't know if I'm going to be able to get there with y'all, but I do think that extending all the way to midnight on Friday and Saturday for a restaurant that we were having real issues with a year ago compared to comparators that don't go that far. I mean, I would probably be more restricted than planning was. Is the thing, so I don't know if we're gonna get to where I would. I would be. Yeah. What time is it? I don't know, I'd have to. No, I don't have one right at the second. I just don't think that I think I'd be more comfortable with 10 or 11 than midnight to be sure. Okay. Council member Bagley. Thank you. I have first a question for staff and then potentially an amendment or a proposal for an amendment to my colleague to try to get us to. If the stars align and in six months there have been no verified complaints and no additional changes requested by the applicant, what would happen at that six-month review? Like, would that be a consent item potentially? Could it be an administrative? So these reviews that are referenced here are, they are enforcement action, where a zoning inspector goes to the site to ensure compatibility with the conditions. So that's what that reference is. Six months visiting the site, checking to make sure conditions are met, then again at a year, and then every three years after that is the schedule. Okay. So we would talk at it docket it if there were problems reported, we would not if there weren't. That's what I wanted to get to is there's a possibility here that we wouldn't, council wouldn't act on this in six months if everything's gone well. If it hasn't, it will be docketed for council and raise the enforcement issues that have potentially been raised to revoke or again modify the SUP. I just wanted to be clear on what happens in six months. And then sort of absorbing everything my colleagues have raised about cooking and amplification and hours. I wanted to say one thing actually that hasn't come up yet and I really don't want to scratch at this, but I want to be clear for the public and the neighbors about it to the extent outdoor cooking is allowed. It will also be bound by all the fumes and smells and other related, anything that they do otherwise. So I just want to be clear about that. Like to the extent the smell is an issue, which to the extent there are toxic fumes or something else produced, there are existing rules and that will already apply that don't need specific regulation here today. If you are producing smells and noxious fumes or other side effects, we have regulations and the ability to respond to that. Is that all a fair statement? Yes. Okay. But let's not produce any of that. And then on the hours, I hear what everybody's getting at. My concerns were for a little bit more consistency and also to sort of understand the business's desire to maximize their opportunities, their hours. It sounds like what I'd like to propose to my colleague as a potential closing amendment might be, because their most direct comparator is 7 to 11 daily. So I agree with Councilman McPike that I don't think we need to go beyond 11 daily on any day for this business. We have an existing comparator that is 11 daily. So to the extent that would change your weekend proposal down to 11, would you accept that amendment? Okay. And then with regard to weekdays, given the history, given that we're trying to listen to the neighbors and listen to the business, I would propose we just go to 10 o'clock if that might allow some of my, we already did. I thought it was nine. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So we're already, so then you've agreed to the friendly amendment. Does John agree to the friendly amendment to 11? Then I'm my job here's not Okay, all right, so now we need to oh Councilman Chapman yeah one more thing I think I would add I think we have the ability to add a 18 month review as well Yes, sir, I would add that For what we're doing I mean, I you know, I just like, I don't wanna see that here. You know my feelings on that. So in order to get six, 12, and 18 months, and then three years, hopefully we don't have any issues. Okay, so would that be acceptable? Okay. Thank you. And you were the the second council member Gaskins. Thank you Madam Vice Mayor. I just want to make sure I've captured everything because I had so many notes. Okay, condition 10, they would have 11 a.m. till 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. I mean, 2 10 to 10 Sunday through Thursday, then 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. Friday and Saturday. Conditions 11 B and they would have the approval for outdoor cooking, but it stops at 9. Without amplified sound. Condition 11 D, they'd have the approval of outdoor games until 9 p.m. and the mats are added back in. There's no changes to 14a, then 14c, they'd have the approval of light of entertainment without amplification, and then they'd get both a six month review and an 18 month. Am I missing anything? Six, 12. Okay. Six, 12 and 18. Any other discussion? Yes. No, no, no, no. Sorry. I am a little uncomfortable with going from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays for the outdoor dining. Can you go and go on with planning commissions? I understand that's where the consensus is. I just that is a, you know, I feel like planning commission already pressed a bit more than comfortable with. I don't know if I can go beyond that, but you know, that's the consensus. That's the consensus. Okay, any further discussion? any further discussion? Yes, councilmember. Staff, do you have clarity? Do you want to read anything back to us? There is one thing that I wanted to mention or ask about in the condition or regarding outdoor live entertainment and the use of the speakers. There is a statement there that says it must be kept at the background music level and they can use the house speakers but kept at the background music level and they can use they can use the house speakers But it's at background music level and I'm and I Understood that we were leaving that in and I just wanted to say it out out Which is technically amplified, but it is at that very low level. Yes, okay Thank you, okay, so I could ask one clarifying and then I think I could ask one clarifying and then you're intending to keep the hours the same under 14 C. Is that correct? Oh, probably not because if they have to well, so again for, sorry, Matt, vice mayor. No. I'm sorry. Because the way it says is that music can be to 11 p.m. but not outdoors. It can be indoors. So this 14 C relates to outdoor live entertainment. OK. Those hours. So outdoor live and may occur. Can we just change the outdoor live attainment may occur in accordance with the hours of outdoor dining? the other one. Okay. Can we just change the outdoor live-at-tunement? May occur in accordance with the hours of outdoor dining. Yes. Okay. We have a motion by Councilmember Aguirre, second in by Councilmember Chapman. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favour say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. The ayes have it. Thank you very much. It wasn't three hours like last year. I just want to point that out. Thank you. All right. Thank you vice mayor. All right. Madam clerk numbers. 16. Resonting 2024 to zero, zero, zero, one-709-711-Pellowton Street. My commission action recommended approval. 7-0. Okay, we have a number of speakers signed up for this. Why don't we go ahead and do a staff presentation, and then we will get to the public testimony. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Good morning, everyone. Sam shall be planning and zoning. This is a, uh, sorry. Did you announce it already? Did you announce the item? Yeah. Okay. Sorry. Seven. This is a seven or9 and 711 Pendleton Street. As the clerk mentioned, this is a rezoning request. Just for a little bit, site context, this is on Pendleton Street between North Columbus and Washington Street. It's right behind a bank of America right along Washington Street and it's a existing one-story commercial building that's been there since about the 40s. It was used for a long time as a grocery store and has had a series of office tenants since then. And I need to get a little bit more context than I ordinarily would just to kind of put in place what has happened here. It was built as a commercial building and it was zone residential. And it remained residential, zone until the 70s. And that creates a, when you're in conflict with what the zoning ordinance says you're allowed to do on the property, you're really limited to what uses you can do there. You're basically limited to whatever uses was that existed prior to the change in the ordinance. And the property owner really wanted to expand the business beyond just retail when the grocery store closed. And so in the 70s, they struck a balance with city council and the council granted them the commercial zone. But the applicant at the time proper that the uses would only be limited to office. And the reason for that was that the property before the rezoning was still zone residentally and the master plan at the time designated the site for residential. So the reason the proper was there, the reason the city council accepted the rezoning is even though at the time it was inconsistent with the master plan, the applicant had proper that the subject property we limited to the uses of just office is only. So the applicants today of just, so there's five units in the building, the applicants of 709 and 7-11 have come forward to ask for the proper to be removed and to be subject just to the commercial zone beneath it. So if approved, the rezoning would allow the properties to be used in compliance with the commercial low, the CL zone. There have been a number of neighborhood complaints about or concerns about this property. Primarily related to trash and litter, a lack of Austrian parking. The concerns about traffic and pedestrian safety along Pendleton Street there. They're also concerned about the Austrian loading and unloading and the narrowness of the adjacent public alley. Staff met with the neighbors on site and heard these issues from them and we directed the applicant to conduct outreach with the neighbors as well. Planning commission recommended approval and staff recommends approval now because the the master plan now for this since 1992 has designated the site for commercial uses and it designates the the property specifically for commercial low which is a zone that was designed for properties like this that are immediately adjacent to residential. So again, planning commission recommended approval, 70 and I'm here for any questions anyone has. Thank you, thank you very much for the presentation. Are there any questions for staff? All right, let's get to the public testimony. So we have Kurt Byron, Marcus Allen, sorry, Offett Suleimanavo in a youngling Wang, who's the representing the applicant. So do we have Kurt Byron? Hey, good morning, cut it here. Yep, we can hear you. All right, perfect. Okay, all right. So, yeah, good morning, folks. Council members. My name is Kurt Byron. My family lives at 609 North Columbus. And amongst the other speakers and folks who have put, we're going to written testimony speaking on behalf of our homeowners. So even though the planning commission voted in favor of the applicants, today you as a city council can do the same But we recommend that you should not Regarding parking, you know if all in average each household of the block on 1.5 cars Among the 31 families. We're already short 18 parking spots. So that's the current number and adding more businesses. It's just gonna further Further that problem Regarding the loading zone, the other week, Commissioner Maynard suggested the city work with the applicants to establish one of Pelleton in front of the property. But if that happens, we lose more parking spots. Like the loading zone in front of the dog park or Michael's own king, of course, of course, can park there. For neighborhood engagement, Commissioner Lyle, and then just a second ago, you heard it from Mr. Shelby. Encourage the applicant to meet with the neighbors, and I quote, as the project moved forward. But this has not happened, and neighborhood engagement is something that should happen well before today's city council vote. And Sam, you're there, but to contrast, your presentation that you've got provided, you provided examples of other businesses that I assume were to show the similarities of these applicants to businesses that have been around a 2, 2, 3, 1, for a zip for years. But none of the examples are like ours. So the presentation is strongly misleading, because we've got a much denser residential footprint, numerous bus stops within 75 feet. On the primary route of a fire station, we've currently got parking issues obviously. And then we're just off Washington Street, which means North Columbus is swamped with speeding vehicles and then traffic jam bypassers. And then looking at the notes, regarding real estate market strength, vice chair, Mick Mahan noted that all this market is weak, and then further applied to the city to be flexible to advocate demands. So to counter, I argue that it's not the city's responsibility to bend, to be suitable to businesses well after they purchase a property. It's poor practice, and I'll listen to or support homeowners in a street that's inherently residential. And then regarding trash, Commissioner Maynard crewed the applicants about how trash be handled. So if you walk around the blocks today, I offer Columbus debris, bugs, residue, unsightlyness of bound. Yeah, there's a couple of dumpsters in the alleyway, but they belong to another businesses. And they halfway sent them back up a property, Bank of America's property, all bet without permission. And then halfway into the 10-foot alleyway which already is tight for certain. And the other week on the fourth, Ms. Wang said, she visited the property pickup trash weekly. It's pretty surprising, because the first time any of us homeowners have ever seen her. And where were they when, you know, for eight months, we had a dumpster that was overturned and nobody would come and, you know, clean it up. So I hear the buzzer, but in conclusion, we as the homeowners of 500, 600 block. Thank you. Mr. Byron, your time's expired. Thank you very much. All right, next speaker is Marcus Allen, followed by Afet Sulemaio, Lenovo. Do we have Marcus Allen? Just need to give this microphone. That can hear me. You can hear him, Mr. Allen. Good morning, Councilor, good morning John, but like what you do with Manu Mission by the way. I want to start off with saying I am generally supportive of people's endeavor to try to start their business with themselves, especially a small business. But a paramount to me is the well-being of my neighborhood and my neighbors. And we already have a business located on Pimland History between North Columbia Street and I'm sorry, between North Columbia Street and Halford, which attracts a lot of foot traffic and you can often see people double parking in the middle of the street, which creates a safety hazard along with the bus stop things that Kurt just mentioned and everything like that. We also have several houses of worship nearby that don't have off street parking. So that overflow of their activities comes into our block and that we have more difficulty parking. We also have four new residences that have been added to the block over the last several years. So that means even more consistency of people parking in our block. And we're feeling the effects of having parking anxiety at this point. So going out from groceries and things like that can honestly make you a little nervous because you don't know when you can come back when you're able to unload your haul or not, or get your two-do-do list done without having been a wind up parking to block or two away from where you live. And we pay all this money for these parking stickers and everything, but they're becoming increasingly less effective for us or of any benefit for us. We also have an increase in road and presence due to the dumpsters over in the alleys from one of these business I had previously mentioned in which there's a lack of capacity and maintenance of that. I would just hate to see more of that. And I'm just hoping that you guys won't be apprehended to the needs of the residents and they were having another opportunity of a revenue stream coming in from a business. I think it's fair amount that we started listening to a residence person. I have been a resident here for 42 years of my life, which is I am 42 years old. I'm a class of 99 graduate from the Alexandria High School. I've seen a lot of change. I just don't think that this is one that will benefit my neighborhood. And I'll just leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Allen. Next speaker is Affett, Sulumanova. Good morning, the members of the City Council. My name is Afet Sulaymanova and I am here to represent Sevda Tahrili. She is the applicant and the owner of the property located at 711 Pendleton Street. We have been good friends for over six years now. Mrs. Tahrili is the owner of a small beautiful cafe called Baku Delicious, located in the heart of Fairfax, Virginia. They are baking the most delicious Eastern European pastries and delicacies in the professional kitchen, currently employing the kitchen staff, consisting of a pastry chef and a cook. Bako Delicious has made its good reputation for high-quality pastries, as well as traditions for serving coffee and tea to its loyal customers who frequent this charming place. Among these customers, there were also many Alexandria residents who would ask her to open a similar place here in Alexandria. It would be closer to their home and where they could meet and enjoy tea coffee with their favorite pastries and then pick up a few for carry out. Vasya Mistahirli was visiting a friend in Alexandria when she saw a charming small office space for sale on Pendleton Street and the idea of buying this space and turning it into an art cafe came to her. This new coffee shop, art cafe will be a small family and kids friendly gem that will bring joy, warmth and positive vibes to the neighborhood and the city. Our customers love our hospitality and always feel themselves welcome to in our little coffee shop. There will be no fully equipped kitchen on site as the headquarters in Fairfax will provide and deliver ready-to-sell pastries, packaged in small boxes to go. There will be no delivery trucks to load or unload at the front as the cafe will have a retail concept selling cooked prepared items only. It's worth to be mentioned that this is a small business which is a woman owned and woman operated as opposed to some soulless large chain businesses. We are proud to notice that the CDO Alexandria would like to support this idea and give us a opportunity to be a part of the constellation of the small businesses currently operating in Alexandria. At least two, three full-time employees will be hired for this coffee shop adding to the list of open positions in Alexandria. We have heard that there was some concerns about parking issues among neighbors, how we were taken into consideration a small size of this venue, around only 700 square feet or so of retail space, and limited amount of seating in the café. These issues shouldn't create problems, and we are confident that the city of Alexandria will have a plan to address them should they arise. The concern of the trash removal isn't an issue either. Since the cafe will maintain their own trash box and with no kitchen and cooking happening in the premises to produce excessive reviews, there will be no additional burden on the neighborhoods infrastructure. May I finish my? I can let you finish. I usually let one person represent in the applicant. So if you go the next speaker, she's going to be on a timer. So you can finish. OK, so just one sentence. When working in the neighborhood door to door and talking to our new neighbors, we have received a warm welcome from them. We're expressing our commitment to meet any concerns that they have. Also bearing in mind the fact that this coffee shop will be operated by the property owner, Sevda herself, who is 100% vested in maintaining the neighborhood and the city's safe and beautiful place to live and work, following all local rules and ordinances related to workplace or the cleanliness and taxation. I sincerely thank the Alexandria City Council for this opportunity to make this statement and hoping for a positive resolution of our zoning request. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. The next speaker is a youngling Wang. Is that right, Ms. Wing. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Joan Ling-Wing, and I'm a partial owner of 709 Pendleton. My mother bought the building over a decade ago for her life savings. And ever since then, we've been operating 709 Pendleton as in the office rental. Since the pandemic, I believe the pandemic has impacted a number of commercial buildings, especially offices. We saw difficulties filling our office. So we currently have vacancies. And this is when our neighbors approached us about lifting the zoning proper, which restrict the use to only offices we decided to join her Hoping that this could enable us to attract a wider variety attendance Regarding the neighbors the discussion about parking I As I said before in my last testimony As I said before in my last testimony, parking is a problem that's not unique to this intersection. It is a problem that's more widely applies across the city. So to uniquely enforce this proper on this intersection does not make sense if we look at how it applies across all properties uncomfortable businesses. Secondly, I believe this coffee shop will actually bring more likelihood for us to fill our vacancies because there will be a lot more folks who are aware of our vacancies. And thirdly, as commercial owners with retail businesses, they're well aware of the surrounding area. So while the neighbors complain about the trash, So, I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So I had been the person who was taking care of the alley, even though I just heard a testimony of someone who questions what I do every weekend. I'm there to take care of the alley, which is next door to 709 Pendleton. And the only issue that's there, now Bank America completely resurfaced the parking lot. So it looks really nice. The only issue there is there is a trash disposal and we don't know who's trash disposal that is. It's not bank Americas, it's not ours, it's there. And at some point I'd love to figure out who is it belongs to and what we can do about that trash disposal because yeah we did like none of the neighbors know what to do there. Our cells included. I think the point I want to make is there should be opportunities for folks to have a, have the ability to have businesses as well as have a great way of life. When I reflected about the testimonies from the folks who spoke last time doing a testimony, I just realized the economic disparity and the background of the folks. I think these are small business owners who are here for the for who are building their business and I would like to see that the city approved this because the fundamentally complies of the master plan and we will have an opportunity to do for our vacancy. Thank you miss. Thank you. Okay miss. I think it's the final speaker on this item. Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Motion by Vice Mayor Jackson, seconded by Councilman Chapman to close the public hearing. Any further discussion and closing the public hearing? Hearing none, all those in favor, please ignore. I say aye. All opposed. Any? The ayes have it. Questions for staff, Councilman Chatman. Councilman Chatman. First question about the trash disposal. That was something that came up from a number of residents, rats, rodents, and such. Is there any way for staff to kind of follow up on that? So the dumpster that the applicant just mentioned is on the Bank of America property. And sometimes it's built into the alley, but it belongs the Bank of America property. And sometimes it spills into the alley, but it belongs to Bank of America. If there are, so these two spaces are vacant now, so there aren't tenants in them. And so if vacant spaces don't have people in there to police this trash and everything. And then also the restaurant use, the coffee shop would require an administrator, use permit and those often have conditions about trash pickup and everything like that. Councilman McGee. Okay. Say yeah, just for whatever trash disposal garbage can, can we just identify what's in thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not sure if it's a thing that I'm not be any delivery trucks because the way they're going to set up their operation is that everything will be made at a different site. I'm just curious, is that your understanding and what is your understanding about what type of vehicle or the ways in which things will be delivered from the other site to this site should not move forward? It's too early to tell, unfortunately, because right now what we have in front of us is just the rezoning request. We don't have the full details of their operation, but that's when they submit their application for the restaurant, that's when they'll detail about all the specifics of the business use. So unfortunately, we don't know because that's not the application before us, but it'll be worked out when they fall up with their special use permit application. Okay, thank you. Councilman Chapman. If I could ask Ms. Wang, that question, if you might know the answer to it, I think the question I think we're trying to understand is if you're not necessarily using big delivery trucks, what kind of vehicle will be used and want to understand how that'll work. So she, Sevda and her coffee shop employees, they're going to be bringing those cooked items on the side using her personal card. And there is also a fourth, like, I think that's why we're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We're doing this. We recommendation. This has been a motion by Councilman Gary seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson to approve the planning commissions recommendation is there any further discussion? Councilmember Bagley. I just I wanted to I appreciate the motion in the second to be clear We are simply removing the office proper. We're not at this time approving any SEP's related this particular business And so it is encouraged staff to continue to engage with these proposals and business and so it has encouraged staff to continue to engage with these proposals and to anyone from our ADP business community who might be watching to also engage with what appears to be, you know, small, exciting new business opportunities that we want to support in the city. So just wanted to put that out there. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor McLeod. Councillor Chaplin. Just another quick comment since it's brought up by a number of residents and what we've We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for the staff. We have a question for All right, we got a motion to second any further discussion on this item hearing none all those in favor please ignore saying aye I all post a name the eyes have it. Thank you very much congratulations. All right 9 o'clock number 17 So I'm in text amendment 2024-0007 Coordinated development is your reception will design plans. 22-0001, 315 Stovall Street, 312 Taylor Drive, 2380 and 2425 Mill Road, 206 Hoffman Street, 2310, 2356 and 2400 Eisenhower Avenue, 222, 250 and 2300 Dog Lane Planning Commission I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. and sometimes requires some extra scrutiny. So onto our staff. Hello, for the record, my name is Nathan Randall, Principal Planner with the Department of Planning and Zoning. The project area for the requests that we're speaking about today are it covers 11 development blocks and close proximity to the Eisenhower Avenue metro station, as shown on the screen here. They're all zone CDD number two. The future development is anticipated on nine of these blocks that are either partially vacant or vacant, and those are blocks two A and B and green, three A and B and yellow, nine A and B in pink, 11 and 12 in purple, and block 20 or the eastern portion of block 20 in red. Two additional blocks, seven and 14, on which the movie theater and above-grade parking garage are located have been included for administrative reasons, but development is not anticipated over the term of this CDD. Altogether, the sites comprise 21 and a half acres, not including land to be dedicated for public streets. The applicants are proposing a total of 10.7 million square feet and a half acres, not including land to be dedicated for public streets. The applicants are proposing a total of 10.7 million square feet of new development on the nine blocks, which would be constructed over a period of up to 20 years. The new development would be subject to minimum and maximum building heights ranging from a minimum as low as 125 on block three, and as maximum as high as 400 feet on 9B and 11. The new development would be a mix of residential and commercial uses, which would exceed one million square feet on every block, except for block 20, which is already partially developed. It's important to note that in these square footages and numbers that I'm presenting, this is all in the framework plan of the CDD conceptual design plan and new construction for individual buildings in this area would require additional development approval such as a DSUP or development special use permit in the future and no such DSUP has been requested as part of the request before you today. Other important elements of the project include the future construction of up to six new streets flexibility regarding the construction of new street F. up to six new streets, flexibility regarding the construction of new street F. The transportation related improvements around the Eisenhower Avenue metro station, including turning the existing bus loop into new streets C&D, ten new open spaces in connection with future development that would all together total 2.8 million, I'm sorry, 2.8 acres. And that includes a trail, a bike head trail along New Street A, a future onsite affordable units, amounting to 10% of the difference between the base density and the previous size and our Avenue Metro, our new Smiley Area plan and the current proposal. The applicant would also be asked to provide a voluntary contribution in the future and then the dedication of to the city of approximately 30,000 square feet of land, likely on block two, for the construction of a new public school or other civic use, such as a community center in the future. Let's see. So the two land use requests before you are a text amendment to eliminate minimum parking requirements for the CDD number two zone, and that includes all properties in that zone, not only the 11 that are the subject of the CDD Conceptual Design Plan request. And then of course the second is the CDD Conceptual Design Plan request, which is the framework plan again for future development consistent with the details that I shared earlier. The project is consistent with the Eisenon our east small area plan. I will shorten my presentation a bit and not go through all of these items, but I we can certainly discuss them a little bit more if you'd like. We'd like to point out three specific considerations to our water management would be considered with individual future development. Transportation improvements are being proposed as currently as already described. We estimate that approximately 200 new students would be expected with future development. That's a full build out over 20 years and just an estimate. And then the fiscal, and we've done an estimate on the fiscal analysis and it shows significant increase in the net tax revenue that would be expected at full build out over 20 years. The project would offer several community benefits, including the long anticipated redevelopment of surface parking lots in close proximity to Metro. The construction of six new streets, as I mentioned, the bicycle trail and other open spaces, a monetary contribution toward neighborhood projects, primarily a park under the Metro tracks, as well as additional bike pet improvements, an estimated over 200 onsite affordable units and $18 million or more in a voluntary, monetary contribution. Again, that's over full build out and that's an estimate. As well as land for the new public school or other civic use such as a community center. In addition to standard written noticing requirements and discussions of the project with the Federation of Civic Associations and recent months, the applicant and staff have shared information on the project with the public on several occasions as shown on the slide here. In conclusion, we believe that the proposal is consistent with the eyes and her east, small area plan and other policies and we recommend approval and we're available to answer any questions you may have. Okay, are there any questions for staff, Councilman Gaskins? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a quick language question. My understanding for the community space was that it's not an OR, but it's an AN to be explored either there or somewhere else. There are a couple of times where OR was used here and I just want to make sure it's not a school OR space, but it is exploring both. I think the what we have been discussing internally and discussing with council and the applicant is that there would be a co-located public school with a community center. But yeah and to answer your question specifically it is and rather than or. Thank you. They mean two very different things legally so I just want to make sure. Thank you no more questions questions All right. Thank you Councilman Gaskins Councilmember Bagley. Thank you and to follow up a little bit on that point Can the relevant staff members just speak to the coordination that's taken place to date with ECPS on their facility side about this plan and its development? Sure, Carl where it's again Our coordination on school related items sort of goes back both generally in our close partnership on long range planning for school facilities, including the Long-range Education Facilities Plan, and then following with joint facilities master plan, where urban school models were a very much a topic of joint discussion and planning. So that's sort of a foundation. And then discussion and exploration of similar size sites in the North Potomac yard and in the Green Hill project. Then specifically for this, our coordination occurred throughout the Eisenhower East and our area plan update. And then in the year since then, both with specific proposals that ended up not going anywhere for block two, but allowed us to engage with the school system about potentially how the site could be used and programmed. So, and then we have touch base with them again, a couple of times for this CDD as well. So they are well informed of the progress. They note that any urban school model has a lot of decisions and logistics that would need to be made. But they will work with us on those. I appreciate that and just would continue to encourage sort of the relevant staff members on each side to keep each other informed, perhaps provide an update to school board directly. And then with regard to the student generation, I appreciate sort of the figure. I assume that number is somewhat phased and also breaks down by age and exactly where they're filtering. And so I just want to encourage, I don't know if there's more to say on that, but I definitely want to encourage that as phasing happens, as models adapt, we are actively updating that data into the CPS, you know, modeling and modeling so that nobody's caught by surprise with 30 students because a building opens in this nature we're gonna have a building opening rather than a couple of single family homes. That will definitely occur. And the mechanisms by which that does occur is that we update our student generation rates and the forecasts on an annual or nearly annual basis and it is very much a partnership project, a process, and then each DSUP itself has an estimate of the students that are gonna come along with that particular project. So that is how we make sure we stay up to date. I appreciate that I think it's something the community as we're talking about development, talking about housing creation wants to be, you know, wants to hear that we are conscious of student generation and where those students are being generated and how we're communicating their appearance to the school board and the school division. I forget, Mayor, is there a motion pending already? No. Okay. Okay, so I would. I still have to give them. I'm so sorry,. Okay. Okay. I would still have to give them. I'm so sorry. We have public speak. Yeah. Well, they don't have to speak, but it's, apparently, we have to at least acknowledge them. So, Vice Mayor Jackson. Thank you. Could staff talk to us about how was determined to eliminate the parking? Sure. how was determined to eliminate the parking? Sure, so this CDD, the CD number two zone, the parcels in question here are all very close to the eyes and are having new, eyes and are having new metro stations, excuse me, and there are also bus lines that are nearby. In the prior 2003 plan, there was a recommendation only for parking maximums as opposed to minimums. And so for many years, there's been the idea the market could be better to determine what the parking needs would be for each site. Although that specific recommendation did not carry forward into the 2020 plan, there was a recommendation only for parking maximums as opposed to minimums. For many years, there has been the idea that this area was one that would only need the parking maximums as opposed to parking minimums. That perhaps the market could would be for each site. Although that specific recommendation did not carry forward into the 2020 plan, there's still that idea when combined with the proximity to the metro station. We thought that that would be a good idea to recommend approval of that text amendment. And how does the parking structure that's already there play into this? parking structure that's already there play into this? Well, you know, that parking structure already there, we understand by the way that there is some additional capacity in that garage, and that it would, that it does serve the buildings that are already there. I think that it helps in a, in a sort of practical way in terms of parking needs, but the parking assessment of individual sites would occur as part of DSUPs. Okay. Rob Curran to my name's Ernie, that garage also was meant to serve sort of the whole town center. It was part of more of an office vision. And so it's always been sort of a shared use kind of garage. And I think it's shifting now today. It's shifting to different uses. The redevelopment of only half the parking in the new residential building on Mandible is in the building and the other half is in the towns and are garage. So I think we'll continue to see that urban utilization and shifting of parking with this new model. Thank you. I know the movie theater, you know, a lot of movie theater, movie goers use that parking lot structure. But also what is transpiring with this is when I'm thinking about disabilities, people with disabilities. I know I've already heard a lot of people that are moviegoers, they can't find handicap parking around the movie theater. And so it creates an issue. So again, as we are thinking about parking minimums and the elimination of what should be there, I also say I understand people that are using Metro to get around and scooters and bikes and pedestrians. But the other part of this is those that we don't want to put limitations upon because they have limitations of their own. So thank you. I wanted to know more about that. Thank you. Great. I thank you, Vice-Morning Jackson, Councilman Chapman. First, excuse me. So first let me apologize to the attorneys. I know you reached out. I wasn't able to meet with folks. So I don't. I apologize if I'm surprising you with anything I say. But one of the concerns I do have is going to be what happens with some of the new streets. How, how Edgerton Stone is this from staff's perspective? And I'll kind of talk about why I'm asking that question afterwards. So the CDD Conceptual Design Plan echoes the configuration with location of the streets from the Ison area, eSmall area plan. And they serve as a framework for those individual DSUPs that come forward. There is some, I would say some flexibility that if a different proposal comes forward and it's evaluated among staff and ultimately comes to planning commission and city council it And there is also some flexibility built in for specifically for one of the streets, new street F. Okay. The reason I ask that question is, as I look at blocks 2A and 2B, and we talk about the concept of having a school. And I know there's challenges with what I'm about to say, but the idea that we are already moving to an urban school model that's not going to have field space, I think is the wrong planning message for what we want to do in the future. We know we have limited field space, unless we're talking to a developer that can put a project together that has on maybe rooftop field space or something like that. I think we do ourselves a disservice in saying, OK, we're going to have an urban school model that's going to be really, that's going to be them in the size, but the issue is not necessarily building the issue is open space. And how we will probably need to work with the development community to develop something that has sizable space for fields or playgrounds or what have you. I don't think we want to necessarily plan out another for a mandate. I think we took that concept as something that was trying to fit into the peg, the hole that we had there. But if we're talking about empty space that we're planning out, I'm not necessarily comfortable with saying, hey, we wanna put a street here, that's gonna then limit our opportunity to have on block two what could be a whole unified opportunity for a school. That's just a concern I have, whether it's block two, block three, wherever that falls within what we're planning. I think we do ourselves, we sort of change ourselves as a community to say, okay, we're already going to plan for a smaller school building with lack of open space and the lack of active open space. So that's one concern, and I'll be honest about this next one. I think I've talked to you guys probably individually in the past about kind of ideas around what could happen in Block 9. That is a huge pad for development. I would, obviously this is not getting hopefully redeveloped right away. Hopefully there's an opportunity for us to attract some larger economic development opportunity there. It's one of the larger spaces in the city to do that. Obviously, we're not gonna try to attract an arena that hasn't necessarily worked in our favor. But something, you know, there are limited paths that are that size. And so, you know, I would hope that we, as a city maybe give some opportunity for seeing what larger opportunities could come from something this size. And that's kind of why I asked how in set and stone this is. If it's something that opens up to the industry and somebody's open to putting something in their large space, it's not well. We've already set aside a new street here and we're not going to be willing to entertain that. But if that's not the case, I'm definitely fine with that. I do have concerns about kind of the parking and I did ask staff and I didn't get a chance to read the compendium so I apologize about kind of comparisons to other areas that have already moved in this direction or is this a first in the region type of idea? I know the answer for that. Sure. So we have looked at where parking minimums have been eliminated. And there are dozens of communities across the country from Hartford to Birmingham to Sacramento. And more locally in Virginia, Richmond, Charlottesville and Ron Oak have all eliminated parking minimums citywide in recent years. We also found that Charleston, South Carolina has a district along the Air King Street that were minimum parking requirements have been eliminated. So this is, you know, this approach is like this have been tried in other places in the country and other portions of Virginia. Thank you. I think that's my questions for now. Okay. Other questions before we get to the testimony? All right. Are you guys just available to answer questions or do you actually want to say something? Miss Gibbs? Americanatham Gibbs wire girl. I think we as the applicant wanted to have as many attorneys as the city brought today, so that's what we're gonna have. But truly, this is an exciting DSP, CDD, and paradigm looks forward to seeing you later this year with actually their next building on block 20. So we look forward to talking with you guys about that. All right, great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and Mr. Counsel. Just to note, for some members of the public, nothing's being approved today for a square footage. This is just a zoning text. We're taking the vision you all approved in March of 2020, and it's CD expired, and now we're turning it into zoning compliance. So I think it's a huge step for us when we explain that to the community meeting 15 years ago when I met Nice and Howries we were lucky to get one beat one person show up we had 20 people out of community meeting most of what we heard is what you'd expect school generation and they like actually their neighborhood they like the urban core they like the Wegmans it's very well received and certainly the tendency there is going great just one note on block 14 there are 2,000 parking spaces on block 14 and 1400 them are always. So that just sort of gives you the structure. This parking minimum has actually been the approach in Eisenhower East since 1999. So we haven't had minimums. If I had to guess, hopefully I'm back in front of you in 25, we will probably have an argument with staff about parking maximums. If we have good strong retailers, they want a little more parking than our code. So if I think you want to put your finger on the pressure point, it's not going to be the minimum. It's going to be the maximum. And we'll certainly work with Carl and his team as we go forward. But we're very excited today because with this zoning step, we're now able to go buy and sell land and attract those tenants. And Mr. Chapman on block 9a and 9b, there's a 60% commercial forward. So that gives you some not just indication it's a zoning text requirement for that use of that site. So again thank you for your time it's not off and you get to approve zoning for 10.7 million feet and have no one testify but that's because we've been talking about this for a long time we've had good master plan outreach and good community engagement. So thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Wire. All right, is there a motion to close the public hearings? Motion by Vice Mayor Jackson, seconded by Council Member Bagley to close the public hearing and any further discussion. Hearing none, all those in favor, please remain. I say aye. I, all opposed, say nay. The ayes have additional counsel. This is, you have a question. Councilman Chatton with a question. Maybe a nice mayor. So I apologize because we just closed that part. But for staff, as going back to my school comments, can you kind of, as much as you can, kind of lay out for me how if we wanted to do a historically sized school building with what we have in Block 2 or Block 3, to historically sized school building with what we have in Block 2 or Block 3. How does that, you know, for the public's understanding, how does that come together? Where it's not necessarily an urban small school, it's a larger school building with a larger footprint, with a field footprint. Certainly, Karl Moritz, what is before you is a contribution from the private sector toward the land necessary for school. And so that is an amount of land. That doesn't mean that the city council or the city couldn't, if it wanted to, square footage or even decide that a different site with a larger footprint was a preferable choice. So we're not precluding Council Earth School Board from making other choices in the future. We're just providing a basis from which we can start that planning. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good idea. So, I think that's a good, you know, I hear my colleagues concerned about field space and wondering, given the other spaces, maybe they may not necessarily need to be at the school, but we can think about across the whole site, how are some of these play sites, how are some of these dog parks, how are some of, like, what's the vision for the open space overall? Sure. The, excuse me, the Eisenhower East Plan set up a vision to try to have proximity to a certain amount of open space were just scattered throughout the neighborhood, which is a valid proposal or a valid concept. But even in the plan and in the CDD doesn't override that. Other options are better served the community can be considered. So if by example, we decide we want to consolidate some of the open spaces that are currently on multiple sites, and the property owner agrees or it's part of the development plan like that can be on the table, this sets, again, the part of the development plan, like that can be on the table. This sets, again, the sort of the framework that we're requiring, but it doesn't preclude better ideas from coming forward. But again, they'd have to be negotiated along with the development applications that we are entertaining. Thank you. No, I just wanted to lift that up, because I think one of the great opportunities of it being the CDD is we have the opportunity to think about the whole site. And so as ideas like this come up and recognizing the concern, but also the hope that we want to see for open space in the future, I think beginning these conversations as early as possible, and really thinking about where there might be opportunities across the district is important. And then lastly, I just want a comment. I just want to say I appreciate the applicant talking more about parking minimums. I think sometimes folks assume that means that there won't ever be any parking. What it really is is the market is dictating what might be the best parking there. So it doesn't mean there's, I just wanted to make it very clear for the public. It doesn't mean that another parking space will never be built. It's really thinking about kind of the whole structure and what's the best parking on the site. Thank you. Okay, Vice Mayor. I was going to move approval of the zoning, or the recommendation of the zoning text amendment and the coordinated development district conceptual design plan for Eisenhower. It's a motion by Vice Mayor Jackson who approved the Planning Commission's recommendation and the text amendment, the CDD. There's a second from Councilman Gaskins. Further discussion, Councilman Bradley. Just one quick comment and hopefully on the parking, I wanted to lift up the Environmental Policy Commission actually issued a letter of endorsement specifically on this point, and they referenced that like the Mojability Plan that Council adopted in 2021, identified this strategic approach to mobility and that parking and new developments should right size parking for residential commercial development and sort of our modern approach. And so I appreciate the clarification and the acknowledgement sort of by my colleague that minimums do not prevent parking from being built. Actually, maximums set the maximum that can be built, but eliminating a minimum does not preclude parking from being built. But what it does allow is for development to focus on a non-car user or to decouple the cost of building something from the cost of parking. So just wanted to highlight that our Environmental Policy Commission is supportive of that text amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Mourbagli. Vice-President Jackson. Thank you. I did just want to lift up the considerations that were brought to us. They're in the presentation. But things that are, and we've already talked about the schools and how it be wonderful to have more of a open schools is a school building instead of an urban one. I think that's needed just for field use in our community that it wouldn't just be for the schools but it would be fields that would be needed and be used throughout our community for various organizations and functions. The storm water, obviously we are very concerned throughout the city and we've had some great solutions even for just our school buildings. The last couple of school buildings built, we have been able to modernize how we are collecting storm water and then using it. So I would like to see more of that, of course, in the Eisenhower East plan, as it's moving forward. And then, of course, parking, you know, it will always be a back and forth. I understand the elimination of the minimum. But again, you know, with smart growth comes, you know, smart opportunities of how we use parking and where it's needed and for whom that parking is for. So, I know, you know, for even to take the school example again, we would need it, obviously, for teachers and depending on how that building was built, hoping that it would be an opportunity to build something for any grade level as we've been doing it now the last couple of times that we would also put parking in there for any students if it was a high school level building so things to think about moving forward, but that's what this is. It's a concept. So we appreciate you bringing it forward. Thank you. Thank you Vice President Jackson and Councilman Chapman. you bringing it forward. Thank you. Thank you Vice President Jackson and Councilman Chapman. Yeah I think it was mentioned about block nine kind of being the the 6% commercial. I think one of the things that I'm mindful of or want to ask is and staffs kind of per understanding is this something that we can kind of lock in I think with what I've seen with different CDDs over the time we've seen change you know landmark was supposed to be a certain level of commercial. That's changed. We've seen that in other parts of Potomac yard. We've seen that in other parts of Eisenhower where, when projects come in, you know, we get requests for a little bit of a change. How locked into this 60% on me? I can address that. So the 60% is listed on the cover sheet of the actual CDD conceptual design plan. And it's also a recommendation of the small area plan. So, we see it as being a really important component of both of those parts, both of those documents. And they would be incorporated into the future DSUPs as well. All right, thank you. Thank you, thank you, Councilor Chaplin. I think on two things, I think this is kind of an interesting perspective for us when we think about when the Eisenhower East Plan was originally approved, right? That was well over two decades ago now. And so, you know, this is, in some ways, we kind of see what, you know, how these things cycle over time. I would also know it on the school issue. And I think this is an interesting question that I think we're going to have to grapple with over the next several years. I think if we look at the state standard, right, the state standard for an elementary which is the smallest is five acres minimum and then an acre for each hundred kids you have. So let's assume that we have a 500 kids school which is actually relatively small elementary school for us. That's 10 acres. The entirety of this plan area that's available land in this plan area is 21 acres. So that would be essentially half the developerable land. So that would plan area, the developer will land in this plan area is 21 acres. So that would be essentially half the developer will land if we were in the state standard. I think we acknowledge that on the school sites that we're building certainly in the dense urban areas of our city, they're going to be something urban or more urban. I also think it's, we, you know know I think we're kind of in our minds putting kind of a traditional elementary school on acres of land and all of these sites and it is going to be I think a conversation that we're going to want to have with the ACPS over time around how their real estate is configured you I will note, over the next several years, God willing, we will be getting them out of some very expensive lease space for their headquarters and hopefully into a, hopefully some space that we own in control for headquarters perspective. So all of these properties that we're assembling over time could potentially be part of that as well as part of the high school network. Right now, the satellite function operates in an office building in Lee's space. So potentially we would be looking for places for that. So I think there's a lot of different school uses that I think we're going to want to think about. But then I think we also, as Councilman Chapman noted, we do have a precedent for some of these urban style schools in the city. I'm not sure I agree completely with Councilman Chapman that that's something we avoided all costs in the future. I think some aspects of that have worked really, really well. But I think we just have to be flexible as we go. All right. We have a motion in a second. Any further discussion on this? Hearing none. All those in favor, please go to my saying aye. Aye. All opposed to the name. The aye's. Have it. Thank you very much. Madam clerk number 18. Public hearing, second reading and final passage of an ordinance to amend and reordained section 2-1-4. Compensation of members of Article A, General Provision of Chapter 1, the City Council of Title II, General Government of the Code of the City of Alexandria, Virginia, 1981, as amended to increase the compensation for the mayor and City Council members effective January 25th. Okay, we have no speakers signed up. Is there a motion to close the public hearing and second reading of final passage ordinance? Motion by councilman a Geary seconded by councilman McPike Get that without talking you saw that so any any further discussion Geary not all those in favor. Sorry. Is there a roll call man? Please call the roll councilman a Geary All those in favour, sorry, is a roll call. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilman Inigiri. Aye. Councilman McPike. Aye. Mayor Wilson. Aye. Vice Mayor Jackson. Aye. Council Member Bagley. Aye. Councilman Chapman. Aye. Councilwoman Gaskins. Aye. Okay. That the ordinance is adopted unanimously. That concludes our docket. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion by Councillor Member Bagley, seconded by Vice Mayor Jackson. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please remain. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Aye. The aye's have it. Have a good afternoon, everyone.