I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going 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 I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to go to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to go to the next station. Alright, we can call the meeting of the Foster City Planning Commission, the May 7th, 2025 meeting to order. Mr. Trainer, can you call the role please? Yes, Madam Chair. Mr. Duncan. Here. Mr. Crazner. I'm here. Madam Chair. I'm here. Mr. Steven sir. Mr. Polinski here. Thank you. We have a quorum All right. Thank you. So I think the first item on our agenda is the adoption of the agenda Any request for changes if not can we have a motion to approve? Madam chair I move to adopt the meeting agenda second all in favor. All right. Hi Okay okay no speaker series tonight so our next item is receipt of petitions Mr. Trainer do we have any written correspondence we do not receive any written petitions madam chair okay anybody here to speak in person tonight I do not receive any speaker slips and it does not appear anyone is here to speak either. Okay. Alright so we can move along to our action items. The first action item is 6A the West Falls SEE amendment the Grocery VCs. Mr. Zang. Or did you want to introduce this Mr. Fuller? Do you want to just? Thank you I just wanted to introduce Henry Zhang our acting deputy planning director. He'll be presenting the same tonight Great. Thank you. Welcome Mr. Zhang. Thank you. Good evening, and ensurechir, and members of the Planning Commission. My name is Henry Zhang, who is our Planning Department. Line four, help an associate in care of the WF developer LLC, request an amendment to the volunteer concessions approved by the City Council on August 9, 2021. Basically to reduce the minimum size of grocery space from 39,200 square feet to 32,900 square feet. This amendment is being proposed in response to the least seen reality of the grocery space. Update to this staff report from the April 23rd walk session on April 7th and then referred to the planning commission on April 14th meeting. The city council held its first walk session on April 7th and then referred to the planning commission on April 14th meeting. The city council held its first walk session on April 7th and then referred to the planning commission on April 14th meeting. The city council held its first walk session on April 7th and then referred to the planning commission on April 14 meeting. Planning commission held its work session on April 23rd and next step will be city council held will have a public hearing and final consideration may 12. Staff recommend that the Planning Commission make a positive recommendation to the City Council on TR25-09 for Council's final consideration at their scheduled May 12th public hearing. But-man associate have representative Ms. Merbass Avidisian also joined us tonight through teams and I saw her camera has been turned on. That's the, that's the end of my presentation. Thank you. I'll be available to answer any questions. Great. Thank you, Mr. Zang. Avadisi, and did you have any comments that you wanted to make before we open it up to the commissioners? No, I have no comments to add. I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Great. Thank you. All right. Well, we saw the item in work session last time. Had some discussion about it. Is there any further questions that have come up for tonight? Okay. Just one, Mr. Duncan. Just one that doesn't really specifically relate to the item, but I mean to the particulars. But did we ask you last time what the timetable is for? Sealing the deal and getting started on work and opening and so forth. I can't remember Oh No, I don't think we talk about that. I know it's a little a little Tangent but while we've got your hear Mary Beth. I just wondered if you had anything to say about that. The lease with the fresh market is assigned lease and it has been signed since last summer. They have recently submitted their plans for their build out of their store to the city for review, for their first review comments. Once they get approved, I would approve permit, which I don't know how long that will take be ten, I guess depends on how extensive the comments are that they have to respond to. Then they will proceed into construction of the tenant buildout. We are roughly making some assumptions about the timing for permit and the timing for build out. Think that the store will be open. Third and fourth quarter of next year. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And could I ask the parking we did discuss a little bit last time is the notion that most people who are driving are going to be coming from the east and passing the store and turning into the garage that's beyond the store or what's the what's the primary entrance and exit for the parking for the store? There is an entrance off of Haycock Road that there will be a traffic light at Haycock and the new street that we built called Magnolia and there will be signage directing people into that entrance of the parking garage. Thank you. That's very helpful. So I'm not able to use my cursor, but maybe someone can point to where they show the corner, the D3 phase two building, and then the A1 building. There's this little street called Magnolia Street. That is, thank you. That's an entrance into the parking garage. Once they you'll be you'll be below this grade that we're looking at currently and you'll be entering taking a left into the garage under the A1 building and there'll be 120 dedicated parking spaces just for the grocer and it they'll have signage and whatnot to make sure it's clear where patrons can park. So that's the primary entrance into their parking space. Okay, thank you. And this is an operational question. So forgive me if I'm jumping ahead, but what's the parking regime going to amount to? Are you going to hand out vouchers or. Oh yeah, 90 minutes of validated parking. Validations. Brandy pretty cool. Okay, so 90 minutes free with validation and store. We'll see. Correct. All right, thank you. You're welcome. Right, thank you, Mr. Duncan. Any other questions? If not, does somebody want to make a motion? Oh, sorry. Is this the public hearing? It is. It is. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Trainer. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this item. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this item tonight? Seeing none, I think we can close the public hearing. Okay. There's no further discussion. Would somebody like to make the motion? I can do it. Okay, Mr. Cresner, thanks. Please do the honor. Yeah, I'm happy to do it. I don't have any questions tonight. I had a few questions in the work session that the applicant was able to answer. And I appreciated the Frank discussion we had about the state of the grocery business in the city and in the region and also the reality of the lease. And while initially I had, again, I wouldn't call them concerns if it just those questions, those were sufficiently answered. And I think ultimately, the grocery store will still be what was intended with the initial approval. It's substantially so. And now there's an additional 6,000 odd square feet that can be leased for a different business. So as far as the fiscal benefit, which was the point of having these types of conditions in the voluntary concessions, I think the the intent of that, the spirit of what was approved originally is still going to be met with Israel till we minor change. So with that as a preamble, I'll go ahead and make the motion. Again, this is a TR-25-09 resolution to amend the voluntary concessions, community benefits, terms, and conditions associated with the West Falls Church economic development project, also known as West Falls Special Exception entitlement approved by resolution 2021-23 dated August 9th 2021 to reduce the minimum size of the grocery store component from 39,200 square feet to 32,900 square feet. Whereas in application four, special exception in titlement amendment and related revision to the approved voluntary concessions, community benefits, terms, and conditions approved by the City Council on August 9th 2021 for the West Falls Economic Development Project has been submitted by Hoffman and Associates, Care of WF developer LLC,uant to the procedure said fourth in sections 48-90 and 48-48-B, special exception entitlement of the city zoning code. And whereas Hoffman and Associates COWF, developer LLC filed an application to amend the West Falls SEE voluntary concessions, specifically provision number two on Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and Development and concessions is reasonable, reflects leasing realities and is consistent with the previous West Falls project SEE approvals and objectives and that there are no other changes to the mixed use projects land uses development program, conceptual development plan, or special exception site plan. Now I therefore move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of this item, TR25-09 to the City Council for their public hearing and action on May 12,, 2025. So that's my motion. Second, second, Pat. Thank you, Bo. Thank you, Mr. Crasner. Mr. Trainer, would you do a roll call, please? Yep. All right. Mr. Duncan? Yes. Mr. Crasner? Yes. Mr. Stevens? Yes, Mr. Polinsky. Yes, and Madam Chair. Yes. Thank you the motion passes 5-0 Thank you. Thank you Miss Avadishan and Mr. Zhang for being with us tonight Good luck. Thank you. You're in the Thank you Okay I think our next action item is our planning commission minutes from our April 23rd meeting and changes I Notice one typo mr. Stevens name did you catch that there's an extra three It's line 15 there's a yeah, it's a number three in there And that was a that was the only thing I noted yeah, he's sci-fi name any other changes did you catch anything? No, okay motion to approve So moved as amended amended. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. All right. I think we are on to our work session item. Running a little ahead of schedule. And tonight we are hearing about the affordable living policy. Mr. Fuller, would you like to introduce this item? Yes, thank you. We have a work session scheduled tonight. The Affordable Living Policy. We have Dana Jones, the housing director here, and she'll be presenting. Thank you. Welcome, Ms. Jones. Nice to see you, Dana. Good evening. Dana Jones, I'm the Director of Housing and Human Services for the City of Paul's Church. And I'm here to talk about the Affordable Living Policy. We've been working very closely with Planning Staff. Emily has guided us. Well, first was Paul. And then now it's Emily. She's kind of guided us through the whole process and has been invaluable. So I'm just gonna kind of give you an update, we have a draft and my purpose tonight is just to get your feedback. We're not asking you to take an action right now, we'll be going to council and then we'll come back to you and ask you to take an action. Is that correct? Okay. All right. So you can go ahead and Go to the presentation Okay, so we are hoping to have the policy adopted in August of this year So you can go to the next slide. All right. So the affordable living policy is a policy that we update every five years. And it's important because the city uses it as a tool to kind of determine how much affordable housing we should provide. And so what is affordable housing? So just to give you an idea of what affordable housing is, it's any household should not be paying any more than 30% of their total household income towards housing. And that comes, that's a HUD standard that all the localities follow. And that could be anybody. So someone could be very low income, someone could be very high income, and still if they're paying more than 30% of their total salary, then that would not be affordable to them. A lot of people are one paycheck away from that. So just to give you an idea of what that is. So the HUD standards that we use for all of our housing programs and pretty much every locality, we use the HUD AMIs and that's the area median income. So you're looking at Northern Virginia, Maryland and DC. We're all part of the same group. So low income is gonna be 30 to 50% AMIs. So we're talking $46,000 a year to $77,000 a year. And that's four. So they're saying a household of four, an average income for a household of four is $154,700. So all of these are based off of that. So like I said, low income is 30 to 50. Moderate income would be 51 to 80. So that would be 78,000 to 123,000 and then workforce income would be 81,000 to 110,000. So that would be that household would have 124,000 to 185,000. So that's the standard that we use for all of our programs. And we base all of our rents off of that. And we annually update the rents because those HUD AMIs change every year. So you can go to oh, so. And then this year is different because we are now be going, this affordable living policy has never been a part of the comprehensive plan. But staff and the city attorney determined that it should become an amendment to the comprehensive plan. And we're pretty excited about that, because that's going to give this more teeth. And so Emily, I won't get into what the comprehensive plan is because I'm sure you guys know that since this is the planning department. But so the affordable living policy includes categories, goals, priorities, strategies to achieve those goals. It has an action plan at the back of the document. And we also have a monitoring plan that we're going to use. We actually have a housing dashboard and a affordable housing dashboard that we're going to put up as soon as this is adopted, it's all set to go. So we're just waiting and so you'll be able to see in real time how we're doing every year to meet these goals. So you can go to the next slide. So the, like I said, the purpose of the policy is to identify key demographic and housing supply data. We kind of looked at all the housing policies and programs. We looked at all of the neighboring jurisdictions and took all that information and then determined what our housing goals should be and how we're gonna meet them. You can go to the next slide. So this was the work group members that we had. It was a really diverse group. We were really proud of that. We had, you can see we had a mortgage lender. We had two developers. we had someone from the Planning Commission, Derek. He was great. He kept us on track and spoke his mind. We really needed that because he had a lot of background and knowledge that was really helpful to the group. I mean, he was really helpful. We had some renters, some homeowners. We had the director of the homeless shelter, their board. So we had a really diverse schools and employees, really good diverse groups. So you can go to the next. And so these were the focus areas that we had. Rental housing, home ownership, diversity of housing stock, preservation of affordable housing, unhoused and wraparound services, funding and governance. So those were the categories. You can go to the next slide. So looking at this, I told you that it's now going to be part of chapter 10, the housing in the comprehensive plan, housing a complete community and the stars are next to the goals that the workgroup met on November 20 and then determined that some of these goals needed to be priorities and so if you see a yellow star that means it's a priority and a lot of them were already working on already so you can go to the next slide. This is If you see a yellow star, that means it's a priority. And a lot of them were already working on already. So you can go to the next slide. This just shows you what the table of contents, all the pieces that are in there. So I don't know if you had a chance to read it. It is a draft. It's pretty big because we, you know, change the fonts and all of that so that it was ADA accessible. And that added some pages to it, but you can go to the next page. So the first category is rental housing. And so, let's see. So these are the three goals that are under there. So the first one is a priority goal. And what we want to do is, and this is a stretch goal, currently we are getting about 6% of affordable housing from any new development. The work group would like to increase that to 12%. And may or may not happen, but it's a goal. So we put that there and then goal two is so the housing commission had targets, housing targets, and that was kind of a basis for when we started with the policy. And so we would like to, the group would like to increase the percentage of affordable units in the city from 3% to 6% so that so all housing units would be 6% of them would be affordable. And then the third one would be the deeply affordable. So those I told you that are at that 30 to 50% units. We would like to increase that to 25% of the total affordable units. And so just to kind of let give you an idea of what the housing affordable housing programs that the city has right now, we have the Affordable Dwelling Unit Program. That program, we negotiate with developers to get a reduced rent for a certain number of units. And like Rice said, we're averaging about 6%. We got 10% at one property so that's how the affordable dwelling unit program works. And then the CCAU program is the city committed affordable unit program. We didn't really have a program in the city that was addressing the need for people at really low income. And so that's That's why we developed this program that serves people at 50% AMI and lower. And so we have 12 units currently, which is not a lot. But our waiting list is 700 people currently on the waiting list trying to get units. And over 50% of those people are at the very low income. So that kind of shows you that we need to increase that stock. We have, you know, like half that list is people that are below 50% AMI. And so let's see. And so just to give you an idea. So a low income rent in the city would be $1,. A moderate rent would be $1,895. And then a workforce rent would be $2,707. So that just kind of gives you an idea of what the rents are that people that are in our program are paying. I mean, you can go to the next slide. So homeownership. So the city currently has an affordable homeownership program where we are using Amazon funds to, and we're working with the nonprofit in the city and we purchase units for, we purchased them at a market rate and then we sell, we put in $20,000 worth of improvements and then we sell them at a reduced rate. And so it was a really a priority goal to increase first time home ownership opportunities in the city because before we had this program, we haven't had any home ownership opportunities for anybody like between 80 and 120% AMI since 2008. In the last two years, we've sold 10 homes with this program. So we're pretty proud and excited about that. They were town homes and condos, but these are opportunities that, you know, were not available. And so we want to increase that. And I think one of them was a single family home. And then goal five is we want to incentivize developments of affordable home ownership units in our ADU program and try to help new home buyers. And's like city employees schools employees that want to purchase after they've been running. So you can go to the next slide. And then our next category is preservation. And so we want to retain the affordability of the The Existed Committed Affordable Units in the City right now. And we're slated to lose some, but we want to have, we don't wanna have a zero net loss of the committed affordable units that we have in the city. So those would be our ADUs, we have some units five buildings at Virginia Village, so those would be committed. And then their teacher workforce units at the read building, their nine units over there which are also committed. And so we also want to preserve units, come up with a way to preserve units that are expiring. For example, Pearson Square, we have 15 units of Pearson Square that are expiring in 2025. So we're trying to, you know, be creative about, you know, what could possibly be done to possibly retain those units? Also, the field is a big concern. That's 96 units of housing. They're all at 60% AMI and those are due set to expire in the future. We want to try to make sure that we don't lose those units as well. And then goal seven is we want to make sure that people that as they age that they can stay where they live and you know that they don't have to move. You can go to the next slide. And then the next category is housing stock. We want to make sure that there's enough housing stock along the spectrum because like I told you, that home ownership program, if it wasn't for town homes and condos and that diversity of housing stock, it would be really difficult for a lot of people to purchase. So we want to have a diversity of housing stock, duplexes, multi-family units. And so we're really excited about the accessory dwelling unit. You know, that's coming along and also the T zone and all of these things are gonna help us to achieve that. And then goal nine is we want to encourage larger household units and multifamily properties. And so people when they come to us and get on our wait list, the majority of them want either a one bedroom or a two bedroom. And so we want to try to make sure that we have enough of those. And then we want to promote policies that increase housing stock diversity and density. So let's see. Yeah, I think that's pretty much, so you can move to the next one. So unhoused and wraparound services, with this goal, we're trying to reach people at 0% AMI, like even less than 30%. So homeless, we want to have a range from homeless to 110 so that everybody gets covered. And so we want to expand housing and service options for persons with incomes at 0 to 30% AMI and persons with disability. Currently in the city Winter Hill apartments they serve people, seniors and persons with disabilities that's 80 units of in the city. And maybe about 70 of those folks that live at Winter Hill are using housing choice vouchers to afford to live there. And we want to retain and expand on-house services at the property yard. We know that that's a long time coming. It's a long-term plan. But our group is advocating that we don't lose the 12 beds that we currently have at the winter shelter. It's 10 beds for males and 2 beds for women, and we'd like to expand that so that more women can stay there, and possibly have a year-round shelter in the future, because it is a winter shelter. And then we are anticipating the loss of Medicaid or something along that line with the current administration and you know news that we're hearing down the pipeline meeting and men have been going to a lot of meetings with human services directors and we are anticipating cuts to Medicaid. So we want to prepare for that and advocate for an expansion of Medicaid and be prepared for when those cuts do come. I'm seeing go to the next stage. Oh, and I will mention here. So human services in the city. We have seen, you know, just some from what we have experienced in our human services specialist and increase in homelessness in the city. And we think that's because of mental health needs and also substance abuse. And so when people in the city see folks, they call our office, and then our office works with the police department. They have an officer who specifically works with that and we'll go out, visit those folks and see what it is that we can do to meet their needs. Now, when we meet with someone, sometimes housing can be offered and services can be offered, but that doesn't mean that the person is gonna accept that offer. I mean, we cannot force people to go into housing. Some people have income, but, you know, we, you know, we do the best that we can. So you can go to the next slide. The next one is funding, and we're doing a lot in this area. We want to make sure that people understand what the housing needs are. We want to secure a dedicated annual indexed source of funding. We've done taking a big step with that. Our affordable housing fund, which is a pot of money, which developers put contributions in, and then City Council makes an annual contribution. We are now making that a long-range plan that runs concurrent with the CIP. And that's as a result of Council last year revising their financial policies and saying that they want the Affordable Housing Fund to run with the CIP. That's what we feel like that's a really good thing because we have long-range needs. Like for example, the fields and some of those other things I talked about we need to start planning to meet those needs and it's going to be a long-range plan and so we have some of the categories that we have in that long-range plan are CCAU program, the Affordable Homownership Program, the Acquisition Strike Fund which is Virginia Village. We've purchased five quads in Virginia Village and our long-term plan is to do something in that area to provide more affordable housing, maybe some consolidation. You know, that hasn't been outlined, but that's one thing we want to do. The city does receive housing grants from CDBG and HUD and we provide those to three nonprofits in the city that are housing nonprofits. And then the other one is we're doing a housing needs assessment, and we have a housing preservation fund where we're setting money aside to meet those needs. And then like I said, we wanna commit annual funding for at least five years and target annual amount of affordable housing funding by 2040 to a million 680. You know, here, and that is a stretch goal. That is what the work group is recommending. So you can go to the next page. So as far as governance, we want to strengthen the existing policy structure by updating the legal authority. We feel like that now that we're part of the comp plan, we'll be able to do a lot more of that and have a lot more teeth here, so we're excited about that. We want to, and goal 19 is a big one. We want to enhance transparency and make sure that people that use our programs are at the table. This is kind of my soap box. I see a lot of commissions in the city that are making a lot of decisions about a lot of people, and those people are not at the table. And that's not right. So that's why we wanted to make sure that our work group included folks in the community that are renters, homeowners, users of our programs, all different incomes, all different races, so that they are having a say-so in policies that affect them, workers, at all different incomes. We want to make sure, because we have, I think, 11% of our ADU program are city staff and school staff, you know, people that come in and are looking for housing. So we want to make sure that those people get a say so. So that's really important. And we want to make sure that we maintain dialogue with our partners, H-SAC, the Human Services Advisory Council, and the Housing Commission have decided to have more combined meetings because housing and human services go together. And so we need to work together to accomplish goals. We have a combined meeting next week, as a matter of fact. So those are some of the things that we're trying to do with governance. So you can go to the next. So this is our timeline for adoption. We're at 5.7. I mean, yeah, 5.7, the planning commission. So you can see what's here. We're going to come back to you guys June 9th. And it'll be referred to you June 9th. And then'm sorry this is like a eye test I'm trying to see and then we'll have a work session June 18th and then we'll be asking for official action from you all July 16th. Hopefully we'll be getting adopted August 11th. You can go to the next page. So like I said, the purpose of tonight is just to kind of get feedback from you all on all of our different topic areas. You can either give that to me now or you can send that feedback to Jack and you can send it to me, you can send it to me directly. However, you'd like to do it, but our purposes, well will you went to the economic development authority last night We wanted their feedback with regards to how does this affect workers and You know that kind of thing as far as the economic aspect what were their thoughts? With you all we just want to know as far as planning and You know what your priorities how does this fit in there? Do you think've covered everything what are your thoughts so and I forgot to mention Andrea came was also represented you all at one I think you filled in for Derek a couple of time I tagged in on the release appreciate that yeah so it's up to you what how you would like to give that feedback but we're in a stage. And so we are open hearing feedback from you all. That concludes my presentation. Just wanted to give you an idea of what we're trying to do here. Any questions for me? Great. Thank you so much, Ms. Jones. I was a really comprehensive overview. I was, yeah, like I said, I was lucky to get to be part of this group in the early stages. And it was like a really diverse group. I think he did a great job of bringing people in from the industry and from the community and from a lot of different backgrounds. So yeah, I am a strong proponent of your goal to kind of make sure that everybody who's affected by these decisions has a seat at the table. I think that's really important so I'm really glad that you took the extra step to to make sure that was happening. So yeah that said I know I have some questions for Miss Jones and I'm sure some other folks do here so if you wouldn't mind sticking around with those for a little bit we just have maybe a little conversation. Anybody want to go first, Mr. Siemens? Yeah, I just had one question. It's regarding goal eight, diversity of housing stock. You had in their accessory dwellings, I think you had townhouses and just wondering if you considered including cottage housing in that list. That would be a good addition. We would love for cottage housing. Our focus here was kind of affordable housing. The cottage housing that's currently in the cities, we think it's great because there needs to be a diversity of housing stock. It's not necessarily affordable. But if there could be some affordable cottage housing, that would be fabulous. Maybe accessory dwelling might get us to that, but we would be in full support of that if there would be some way to make it affordable. Right. I mean, our focus was affordability. Yeah, I think flagging it is another housing type that is available in the city and then thinking how we can layer it on to make it affordable. That's right. That's what I would. We're coming up with an incentive program. Say, if you make one unit or two units, whatever the size of the, make it affordable, then you can have reduced setbacks or some kind of a benefit to encourage that. Okay. Thank you. That's it. That's it. Yeah. Um anybody else? Okay. Thank you. Go first. Okay. Mr. Duncan, you're up. Thank you. Go back to your slide if you would about the percentage of affordable units in the newer buildings, the goal to increase. Yeah, thank you. So my recollection of how this framework of numbers evolved over the last 12 or so years has that, as you say, 6% was sort of the standard, maybe 15 years ago, 12 years ago, startling. And the characteristics of the councils over the years led to a nudging up of that number. We went to 8, 10, 12, I think founders too is at least 12. One suggestion would just be to have a, and maybe this is in the fuller report, but it would be to have a chart that shows that, the percentage, so you can pull it right out and see it. And also, I recall that we ended up in a sort of quiet discussion with our legal authorities over the city's right to, well, let me put it this way, there were concerns that we appeared to be requiring a certain percentage of affordable housing and were instructed that that actually can't be done according to Preston and other cases in Arlington and it was a real, it was a behind the scenes battle but there was a lot of push and pull between certain members of council and certain members of staff over this question. I'm all on board of course for the number going up, but I remember when Derek was on the planning commission. You know, like, why don't we just raise the number? Well, you know, there's a reason that we didn't just raise the number because we didn't want to get ourselves in this sort of lawsuits situation. Fortunately, we had a good working relationship, pretty well all the developers that came through and put up the newer buildings, but it was handled more subtly than a big chart that says, we're gonna go from six to 12, just to avoid any problems. Well, and this is a goal. And I mean, we're recommending this, but you know, it's not law. I mean, all of some of these are stretch goals. So whatever we can receive would be good. And like you said, like I think at Broad and Washington, we received 10%, but it's not really usable because at Broad and Washington. We have, I believe we have studios that are at 80% AMI. They're on the higher end. And so those rents are 1856. And so we can't really rent them because that is a lot of money for a studio when you can get a lower income studio somewhere else. So we've been able to rent two of those, but we would prefer for, if we go up to 10% that we don't do that with that, have them too high of an income where we rent, we can't rent them because it's not really useful for us. Yeah, I remember a lot of push and pull over. We want larger units so that we can get families in and what we want and what the developers penciled out in their, you know, performers was not always meeting. You know, we would try to come to a accommodation that was agreeable to them and didn't end up with legal battles or whatever stalls in the process that would prevent the building from being built at all. Yeah, just a sensitivity to that, that this is a goal and that it is a process in Virginia, according to the way things are done in Virginia, that involves negotiation through the SC process with all parties involved so that it's not a requirement, but it's a component of the package of special exception. And we anticipate some changes in the future, some legislation passed this year with regards to provision of ADUs and affordable housing. I'll send it to you. I don't know if it will be right now. Yeah. That's not a good area that, yeah, I'll be interesting to follow. The second thing was on my mind was the... I'm glancing my nose here and make sure I don't skip something else that I wanted to ask about. Actually, I'll leave that for... Maybe somebody else will bring it up. I'll leave that for later. Okay. Always give me a call. Yeah. Ryan, I order to find you. Thanks. I appreciate it. Mr. Plainsgate, did you want to jump in? Just a couple questions. Thanks for your presentation. I was really, I'm a relatively new member of the planning commission. So it was really useful for me. Thank you. Thank you. You had said earlier that 30% of household income, the HUD standards are 30% of household income. Is that standard for rent, slash mortgage only, or is that inclusive of like utilities and things like that? For our programs, we don't include utilities. It would be your total gross household income. So you shouldn't be paying more than 30%. That's how we do our calculations for eligibility. But we don't include. Now our ADU tenants do not have to pay for blanking out. They don't have to pay for amenities. Ammon are not included and that's negotiated up front. They also have the same type of, I don't know why I'm blank. It's late, I guess. But yeah, so they don't have to pay amenities. So that's off the top. They do have to pay for parking and things like that. But we don't include utilities in there. We do that. All right. Thank you. You had said, I forget which goal it was. I think it is, well, it's pretty much any of these goals. Like in terms of the standard or the goal for by 2040 in terms of total count of affordable units. Do we know now how many affordable units are in the city? Yes. We need that. And this is on page 39 of the report. So we currently have 216 affordable units. Let's see. And so if we were going to raise it from 3% to 6%, then we would need to add an additional 228 units by 2040 and so that's where we are. So you said 228. Yeah so we would need to do 110 between 30 to 40% AMI 110 between 50 and 60% AMI. We don't need any more units at 70 to 80% and then 90 to 110%. What page are you on? Dana. What page are you on? This is on the actual report page 39 and 40. And these are the housing commission. Oh, in the appendices. It's not in the presentation. Yeah, yeah, no, I know. Okay. Yeah, I was I was wondering about these counts. I don't think I made it down to these. I think it's in their report, not the staff report. The actual report. Yep. Yeah, the draft chapter or the draft. Yes. Yes. Whatever policy. There you go. So looking at, if we're looking at a net ad of 228 and the fields goes away theoretically, like I depends on what happens. Like it is slated to go away. And that's 96 units. Yeah, but our goal is to not let the goal of to not let. We can't, you know, I mean, our goal is to preserve those units and so that that doesn't happen. Is there, basically, I guess my question would be, is there any way to make that goal if the field, if for some reason the field goes away? It would be more difficult. We do have the five quads at the Virginia Village units, so you know our plan there is when we purchased those units was to do some type of consolidation long range plan so that we could build more, preserve those units so I think it's 20 units over there and then build more units so that might be one way to achieve it. Is there any sort of way anything we're thinking about in terms of backup plans for goals around finding housing for people in the event, the field? I'm not trying to hire. I am also hopefully figure out a solution. But if we don't, like, is there any sort of goal for how we find space for folks around the field? The city has a relocation plan. Most localities have to have it. So it has, it outlines to the developer what they would have to do if something like that were to happen. So they would have to have a plan for relocation for residents if something like that were to happen. But like I said, our goal is for that not to happen. And that's really all I can say. We've been in contacts with the developer and I can't really get into it. But our goal is for that not to happen. Like we're doing everything in our power for that not to happen. Another sort of question. In terms of the, I should have done a better job of writing down which pages these came off of. There was a goal of in terms of the multi-bedroom, it's a two plus bedroom solutions. Is there been any pushback to that to, I know there's a big push around not increasing capacity at the schools? Has there been any pushback in terms of finding affordable units that are likely going to be more attractive with the families? Well, none of our ADUs are more than two bedrooms. I mean, there might be a two plus den, but we don't have any three bedroom 80 use. And I guess I take the thought that, you know, a two bedroom or one bedroom din doesn't necessarily that it's gonna be a larger household. I mean, we have single people that come into, you know, our offices that need space. Or, you know, at the read building, we have people that move in, and, you know, maybe their household expands or they get a raise, you know what I mean? And they may have to leave. And so, I don't necessarily think that a larger household equates. And we're not really, for fair housing purposes, we don't really get into talking about children and families and all of that sort of thing. Which makes sense. I told you I'd get it. I was curious if you had received any pushback about from any or a chatter from anyone about. It was discussed last night at the Economic Development Authority meeting. But I will say people that come into our office and are looking for affordable housing, they generally want either a one bedroom or a two bedroom. So those are the two things that we, so we have a need for singles, you know, one bedroom, larger households, and I'm saying two bedrooms. And then we also have a need for units for persons at lower incomes. Like those are the needs that we have. But we don't have any A to U's that are like three bedrooms. I think at Pearson Square, there are two bedroom dens. They generally have the largest units at Pearson Square. So the largest we would be talking about would be two bedrooms. Okay. That's one other question about I missed the number you've said so I apologize. That's okay. You said around the number of city employees teachers, the employees that were part of affordable housing. Yeah, I had a head of. that were taking advantage of affordable housing. So city schools occupies 15.7% of all our ADUs and city government occupies 11.1%. So as a matter of fact, so Madera Founders Row 2 is about is opening. So we've been putting out information and publicity to schools, city employees, we send it to the chamber and we have been getting a lot of calls about those units. We've already put four city employees into units and so I mean it's a lot of demand out there and the chamber know, they're excited about the units because they want to house their employees because they can be closer to where they work. How do we, and you said there were 700 approximately, 700 people on the wait list. Do you have any idea, or do we have any idea how many of them are schools slash city employees? Or what percentage of them? So we do it by priority. So priority one is either you live or work in the city and you're a senior or disabled. That's priority one. Priority two is live or work in the city. And priority three is no relationship to the city at all. Generally, we usually do most of the placement from priority two. Priority three, we rarely get to, but like I said, brought in Washington, we're doing priority three now because those rents are kind of high and we've had trouble placing those. We are doing priority three there. And so, what was your question again? I was sort of curious. Like in those, priorities one and two, how many of them are city employees or school employees? I could get that back to you. I don't have the exact- Mostly just curiosity. Like I don't have that number right now, but I could get that back to you. And then how does the distribution work? If somebody comes off the wait list. So the department's open to Madera, how do we go about assigning or picking the people who then get is it time-based? So people come in and they fill out a preliminary application and that's just to get on the wait list. So that preliminary application talks about how many people are in your household, are you employed, do you live or work in the city? And then we can determine what priority are. They get on the wait list. And then when the units become available, they're already on the wait list that's organized by, you know, priority one, two, and three, and how long you've been on there. So they go by your name. So a lot of times we go through the list because, may be next on the list, but your lease is not up till four months from now and you can't easily get out of it. So that's why we usually need about three people for every unit that we place because it doesn't always line up and we wanna have a backup. So that's why it's good to have a full wait list. And so. So if a place comes open, it's next person on the wait list in order until you find someone who is ready to go. Yeah. Go in through the priorities first. So. I'm sorry. Thank you. Last question I had was you talked about the 10 new homes that were first time ownership opportunities. They get that number right? It's the affordable home ownership program. You said, what was the timeline? You said it was two houses as of 2008, I think. And then 10. No, so we got a grant through Amazon to do a home ownership program. And we're working with, in HP, with just a nonprofit provider as our partner. And so in the past two years, we have actually sold 10 homes. And I'm saying before that, we did not have any home ownership opportunities since the spectrum. And that was in 2008. And we had eight condos at the spectrum. And since time there hasn't been anything for homeownership people come to us all the time and they want to buy and there wasn't anything available to them until this program came on board and so that's why and we didn't even know if it was going to work because we didn't know if there was going to be you know the market we didn't know if there was going to be any product for us to purchase. Because of this program and we're working with the nonprofit, they can make the offer faster than say we would be able to do on our own and it's worked. That $20,000 of improvements, mostly we've been spending on HVAC, things like that to kind of improve it so that the person can move in and then we sell it at that reduced rate. These old ten in the last year? Ten. We're like ecstatic. Because there hasn't been anything in any home ownership. People get, I mean everybody doesn't want to rent. Or you've been renting for a while and your household is growing and now you want to buy so we just didn't have anything You know for that spectrum Thank you very much for all the information. I really appreciate it Great Mr. Krasner. Do you have any questions? Commons not too many. I mean I could tell the group you know I can see that having Mr. Hyer on the group, you know I trust that you know the state of the art and affordable housing was Disgusting brought to bail. He's a great resource for the city So when we miss him on the planning commission, you know, we used to be able to just kind of sit back on autopilot Let him let him handle a lot of it. You know the affordable housing discussions so to speak And so I was great that he participated. I mean, I think overall I mean, I think I generally agree with like 18 or 19 of the goals I mean, I had a question about your goal 11, you know, when you talked about, you know, expanding. I mean, I think overall, I think I generally agree with like 18 or 19 of the goals. I mean, I had a question about your goal 11, you know, when you talked about, you know, expanding like the homeless population in the city. I don't even say it in that way. But I mean, I guess the only concern I have with, you know, that type of, well, if we don't have the, as you said, I mean, that's a multi-dimensional social problem with mental health and other services and if the city, you know, doesn't have those resources to provide and we, you know, sort of encourage, you know, more folks like that to come here I mean, you know, then what? I mean if we don't have, you know, the resources, you know, they were attracted initially because there's a bed and then, you know, and then they're in the day, you know, they're kind of turned out on the street. And I just, I question that. I don't know. I question that as a policy standpoint. I mean, I mean, I'd be a popular, you know, opinion, but I don't think I'm alone and sharing some concern about like trying to like targeting an increase in the homeless population, which would inevitably mean, you know, folks who were currently. opinion, but I don't think I'm alone and sharing some concern about like trying to like targeting and increase in the homeless population, which would inevitably mean, you know, folks who are currently elsewhere in the region kind of coming here because for that reason alone, I just have a concern about that. I mean, that's a different, to me, it's sort of different than enough, I mean, yes, it has a component, I guess, of affordable housing, but it's, I was look at different issue. And I think it should be the focus of a different kind of effort. And so that was my concern. And I know there are other people, you know, talk with people with disabilities. There are people who have zero income who are either disabled or have other issues, and that's different. But when you specifically talked about the homeless shelter, I just have concerns about it. I mean, given its location, it's near our schools. And I just think that you see examples of that. And I think of the homeless shelter in Reston. And what happens at the library in Reston, if people know, like one of the county's county's largest homeless shelters Reston and it's right next to the library. And then it's difficult because it's a difficult situation you're trying to be humane and compassionate, but you have large populations of folks that they're in the day are turned out on the street, kind of take over the library to the detriment of folks that want to use the library and it kind of becomes a difficult situation. So so the point is, if we don't have the services, we're a small city with limited resources for that. I just, I wonder about that. I mean, it's one thing, in a larger jurisdiction where the folks are already there. And they're out on the street. And you're trying to take them off the street. But if they're not already camping out in Falls Church, do we want to kind of invite that population into here? And that may sound like a cold thing to say, but it's just the reality. If we don't have the resources, we're just kind of, maybe, it sounds like we're doing we have a good intention, but I don't know where that gets us. So that was my question. How was the discussion about that particular goal as part of the bigger affordable housing debate? I would say so homelessness is not just a false church thing. I mean folks are transitional. They're moving around So I wouldn't say they're just coming to false church and the shelter is a winter shelter So it's only opened during the cold months Right And then you know during the day they may may go to a day shelter in Bayley's or Reston. And the city contracts with Fairfax County for a lot of our human services. So we contract with them. They have counselors that would come and meet with our homeless population. And then we have a human service as specialist,, Leslan Barrow, who's also able to meet with homeless people on the street. And so when we say zero to 30, even things like single room occupancy units are something that we need. I mean, if someone needs a super really low rent, even less than an apartment, where can they go? Right now we provide a list of single-room occupancies that people can make use of, but that's a need too, and that would be that 0 to 30%. And so homelessness is, it's a complex issue. So I don't believe that we're encouraging, you know, homeless to come to the city because that's not something we can do. People are free to go wherever they want. We do try to work with them when they come to the city. Like I said, sometimes we offer services or we may offer housing. Like in the past year, we offered about three housing opportunities where housing was identified, those folks could have moved into the housing, had the resources and income to do it, but chose not to. I mean, we can't force people to take advantage of the resources and that could be mental health or whatever. You know, like I talked about, you know, your affordability, the 30%. I mean, someone could lose their job and they could be homeless tomorrow. That could be anybody. You know what I mean? So I don't know there were like, you know, encouraging homelessness, but we're, and's pretty, remain pretty steady. We've seen somewhat of an increase and we work with people, but that's a regional thing. All the localities are dealing with the same issue. And if people were to leave false church, then they would just go to Fairfax or Arlington and then come back here. I mean, our homeless population, many that we work with kind of make the rounds, rounds, you know, they may go to rest in and they'll go to Fairfax and they'll come to us. And, you know, most of the people in the city are known to us. But maybe if we had some single room occupancies with those super low rents, maybe that might be an opportunity for them to move into that unit. So, you know, that's kind of what we're advocating for there. The kind of what we're advocating for there. I know Phil has always advocated for a single room occupancy. So lower around the straight. Super low units. Yeah, and I agree. And that's again, these are all, you know, humane goals, you know, but I do think it comes with, you know, it brings it with it, problems and other things that, you know, we just have to be aware of that, that we have the right services of Blitzdredd, I know we work with Fairfax and the community service board and to provide those types of services, but it's just again, the idea of increasing the homeless shelter and adding more beds, you know, which would, you know, I just think it's something to think about carefully. It sounds, one of the things that sounds good, you know, yeah, we're being, want to be charitable and humane and good, but it brings with it, you know, some, unfortunately, some of the other consequences that, you know, that not everyone in the city might like. And so we have to be aware of that if we're going to, you know, have that as a goal and just know that it has to be holistic programs. You said it's, so to me, I just view that as a goal and just know that it has to be holistic programs. You said it's, so to me, I just view it as a little bit different than purely an affordable housing solution. It is related, obviously, the cost of housing often can lead to homelessness. But then the folks that typically are out on the street, I think a lot of studies have shown, it's not usually an income issue alone. mental illness, its drug abuse, its other things, not just the high cost of housing, you know, because as you said there are resources typically for more. It's not usually income issue alone. It's mental illness, it's drug abuse, it's other things, not just the high cost of housing. Because as you said, there are resources, typically for most people, if they wanted to bed every night, there's a place they can have it. But because of mental illness and drug abuse, they don't. And people try to work with that. So to me, it's a different kind of problem that we just need to make sure we're attacking it the right way. I will say, I've worked in the city for 19 years, and I've never known of there to be any issue at the shelter since I've worked. No, I agree. I mean, I think it fits a need. And I think it's, it has been a success. I think from my understanding, I'm know, that it's led to a host of negative consequences for Nearby residents and visitors, you know as a result, but you know the idea of trying to, you know, dramatically expand it You didn't say that and I don't think the policy says that it just brings with it other issues And I just you know, I've witnessed it in other You know situations in the region and it's just something we need to be, you know very careful about how we would go about doing something like that. my opinion because of the potential for negative consequences that come along when you have that population concentrated in one spot. Did you have a comment Mr. Duncan? Well it just reminds me of something that I don't think that we've touched on. It's an important topic, obviously, to discuss and hear from the whole community on and such, or the faith-based institutions in the city represented on your study group. I can't recall looking at the grid if... I don't know that they don't remember. I mean we've been in this movie before and Dylan Methodist tried to establish a more permanent homeless shelter in their facility. Gosh, I guess it's been 25 or 30 years ago now. It's been a long time and ran into considerable objections from the residential neighborhood immediately adjacent and eventually nothing came of it. I don't actually know what's going on at Dulan and I think Fulswars resbyterian had a temporary homeless shelter at some point over the winter. I saw something in the church bullet and the bad thing which I never heard ever didn't know. No, but they had a homeless shelter. They provided meals or something. Some sort of wraparound services is not housing. And anyway, that's all to just say, let's reach out to that community. We had a meeting again, I was pretty new on council. So it's been 12 years ago at least, where we got all the faith-based groups. And if you plan that meeting. Exactly. And somebody ended up yelling at me on the and stomping out of the room. It was not a very successful meeting. But hey, you can always try again. That's good feedback. And anyway, they've been great partners. Yeah. Well, and other jurisdictions are, you know, they're churches that have surplus land that, you know, we know these deals. We read about them in the paper all of time. So that's just an area. And the other flash that went through my head was, it does fall search, housing corporation still exist and perform any function as any way related to average. Yeah. So actually the nonprofit that we work with for our home affordable home ownership program is NHP. Yeah. And the fall search housing corporation is a part of NHP. Some sit area. Some city area of NHP. And they still operate winter hill. And I mean, those units are not committed, but their mission is for those units to remain affordable. So like I said, that's a really big benefit to the city's for the market rate affordable. So huge benefit and shouldn't be overlooked is a very successful long-term effort to integrate affordable housing into a, you know, established community and the fact that we don't know a lot about it is a good thing probably. It means that it's generally working out kind of. Some of those units are a challenge for the mobility impaired and you know the idea really is to should be probably to get some of those folks in elevator buildings or one level buildings where they can you know not have some newver steps to get in and get around their apartments but if false or child incorporation is still in the game and at least is involved in the home ownership part of it, then it would be good. Okay, so once you're out of city also gives them a grant. Yeah. We give them an annual CDBG grant that they use for maintenance and that type of thing that helps keep things affordable. So any type of like windows, new windows and things like that so they don't have to pay for that so it helps to keep the affordable. So any type of like windows, new windows, and things like that, so they don't have to pay for that. So it helps to keep the property affordable. Okay, good. Okay. Turn to another page real quickly. And Adaric, I was used to encourage us to think about dedicated funding for affordable housing. And you alluded to that. Yeah, you alluded to that on your chart, which is, you know, a good discussion to have. Me right now we're basically building certainly for the multi-family units, affordable units, on the backs of the market rate tenants who were paying extra premium because, you know, the developer didn't give us anything for free they get their money back somewhere somehow and One of the reasons the rental rates or what they are is because we've asked for more affordable units And so they make up the difference by charging the market rates a little higher But did your your group, besides Derek, discuss a broader sharing of the responsibility for building up the affordable fund by here marking money from the general tax rate or what was the thought about how to get the money? I knew that that was discussed, but I don't think they did decide to make that a goal as far as increasing tax rate or that type. I don't think so, but I mean anything is on the table. That would be a discussion. Yeah, I think it would be particularly if I have to, the buildings all stabilize, the new buildings stabilized, if our rents are persistently, significantly higher for rents than neighboring jurisdictions, then that ought to be a clue to us, probably, that we should share right now, single family homeowners, detached houses, don't have a lot of skin in the game of providing affordable housing and a way to get them involved might be something worth discussing. Our rents are comparable to neighboring jurisdictions. I don't and I've not heard that they're higher. Okay, well that's a good fact now too then. I wasn't aware of that. And just to close out, the question is, and Danny asked about the schools are also of interest. And just listening to the schools present their budget this time around, they're not being overwhelmed with students. You know, we're getting about the number of students that we expected out of the new buildings, maybe a little fewer, you know, overall enrollment and the school system has not changed all that much. And the last seven or eight years, I think in 2019, enrollment was about 2700. And now it's maybe 125 above that. So that's good. That means the plan that we sketched out works. But in listening to them appeal for more resources for their budget, what you hear something of is the nature of the student body is evolving. And so there are more students who need different services than maybe we provided traditionally here either language services or other special services. Is there any discussion about the kind of character of the folks who are coming in to the affordable housing units and the needs that they bring with them and are any concern expressed about that or did that happen? No, because it's diverse, it's everybody. I wouldn't say that there's one particular type of person that needs affordable housing. The people that are on our waiting list are a range of everything ages, race, incomes. Good. Okay. Lots of that. That's, that's good to know. And information. I think it'll be good to share with the community because, you know, that, that's my experience, you know, just having people think that having a son and soon to be daughter inin-law who you know have Standard sort of jobs, you know, and we've got steady incomes and so forth and yet are challenged to find housing Certainly to buy housing, but even to rent housing that's Affordable in this area and yeah, and like what I talked about like the city employees and schools and that that are making use of the program and like I said the chamber is very, I mean they they feel like this is a way to get workers to come to the city. Yeah. You know what I mean? So it benefits everyone. Okay. All right. Thank you. Appreciate the indulgence. Great. Thank you. Well, I have a few, a few comments and questions. myself. So first of all, thank you for for bearing with us and for all this great information and the presentation. I think big picture like these really seem like the right focus areas. I think the group really picked up on the right topics to focus in on. So you have rental housing, home ownership, preserving what we have, looking at the housing stock we have, the unhoused and wraparound services, funding and governance. So it's really comprehensive, which I really appreciate it. And then also a lot of really specific actionable, you know, kind of smart goals for each of these, like the things that we can really measure as a community in track. So I'm super thrilled that you all have the dashboard in progress. It sounds like we already have a lot of really great information that I, you know, as a community member, I'd be super interested to know everything that you just shared about, you know, like a quarter of all of our units are going to either city or school staff roughly. I think that's the figure that you gave. It was 15% city schools and 11% city government. Roughly, right? So, I mean, I think that is good for the community to know because as I think Mr. Duncan was just saying, I think people have an idea in their minds of who uses affordable housing and it's maybe not the people that you might think it is. So I think doing everything that we can to put more of not a face but like you know these are the kinds of people that you're interacting with all the time in your community and we really do want them here. I think there's a really good economic case for affordable housing in our community. So yeah, big picture. I think you all have all of the right pieces in this policy. And I think maybe our challenge as the planning commission is thinking about once this passes, like how can we continue to sort of refer to this policy and make sure that as we're making updates to our comprehensive plan that we're baking in these strategies and goals into those comprehensive plan updates. Because this has implications for things like the, like our land use chapter or facilities, community facilities and the kinds of investments and of course the CIP every year. So those are some big picture of thoughts from me. I do have a few specific questions. I was curious about how you got to the 1.68 million in annual funding by 2040, that recommendation. I know there was a gap analysis in there. This is what Arlington and Alexandria are spending. It's actually in the report if you want to because there's like a nice chart it's step report sorry I'm sorry it's in the drop chapter in the funding which is page 23-ish yeah page 23 so we looked at the current yeah it. Yeah, so I was just curious if this is where that figure came from, or maybe with inflation. So you're recommending increasing, so we have about 500,000 today, increasing that annually by 674, which would get us to about 1.2 ish million. And so this sort of 1.68 is that just assuming, inflation by that year, is that kind of where it came from? OK. I thought this was really helpful. This comparison of like here's what the city is putting towards. It's affordable housing program. And here's what these other jurisdictions are. I was wondering if you looked at jurisdictions that were a similar size to the City of Falls Church. You know, it might be helpful because like we are a small city. We do do a lot for an independent, a small independent city. But we don't have the, I'm not, and I'm all for increasing our affordable housing. I don't want you to think that I'm saying we shouldn't be. I just want to, I'm just curious about how we compare to other maybe similar size jurisdictions. So maybe add the... Yeah. Well, or, yeah, I mean, I guess what is that? What would that analysis tell us? And it may be that those communities are hard pressed to make these kinds of investments that some of our larger neighbors are able to make. But yeah, just for my own curiosity. And then, and speaking of that, that sort of like comparison with the neighbors, I was wondering if that might be helpful in the, as we're thinking about how to grow the, you know, our, the, the services that we're providing to the unhoused in the wraparound services. Like, can we look at other jurisdictions and similar size jurisdictions? How many beds do they have? What kind of funding for support services are they providing on a per capita basis? Because that might give us some guidelines on how other communities are funding these needs in Virginia. I do know City of Fairfax has a day shelter. They do, yeah. Yeah, I think that's a definite need and I'm a big fan of the SRO. I think it is really important to help people kind of have a path out of being unhoused. And if it's a really big leap to get to that studio, then I think it just makes it a lot harder. So as a community, I think we need to think about how we can make that a little easier. I was also curious about the big picture goal that you had for the ratio of affordable units of our total housing stock. It was so we're at about 3% now and the recommendation was to go to 6% by 2040. So that's a doubling. In terms of units, we have about roughly 500 units. Or is it more than that now? Housing, I think it's about, I'm going to go back to this. Maybe it was only 250 actually, and the recommendation is to get to 500. So we wanted to double that. OK. OK. I was just curious. Is that also something that you, the recommendation recommendation came from kind of looking at what other jurisdictions are doing or is there kind of a best practice for the share of our total units that should be affordable or what was that? I think we kind of looked at what the loss is going to be and you know trying to increase from, I mean just if we keep things the way they are and doubling and look at population growth and all of that kind of thing. But I do know that they kind of looked at other jurisdictions as well. Okay. I mean, obviously there's a need if we have 700 people on a waiting list. That's another figure that I'd love to see in that dashboard. How much demand is there and at what levels? You just told us that there are 700 people on our waiting list and half of those are below 50% AMI. And that is something that I think we just, the more the community can be aware of that, I think the better. There are a couple of mentions of the accessory dwelling program that I think this was written at a time when it was still under consideration and now that it's passed, you might want to kind of just go back and look at the references to that program and just update them, you know, to acknowledge that it's now passed. I mean, I would be a big fan of figuring out a way that we can maybe incentivize homeowners to make some of their accessory dwellings affordable. So I think there could be a policy solution that we should consider as a community. As part of this policy plan, we could make a recommendation that we investigate that. And then yeah, just on everything that Mr. Duncan just said about school capacity, I think I just read that it's, we're good through 2045. And I think the other point I would make is, you know, I've done like a little bit of analysis. If you think about the, you know, relative cost of a student, it's 20,000ish a year, which the median homeowner is not paying that much in taxes. Maybe they are if they have a really large house, but they probably also have multiple kids in the school. So if you think about it, the kids that are in the RMULTI family buildings are actually kind of underwritten by the commercial development in those buildings. So they're actually kind of cheaper for the community to educate than students that are coming from single-family homes. So to me, I think actually we should we should be having creating more larger units for students to live in. I think that also would be good for our school community, welcoming new different kinds of students. I know these units are expensive, but they're not as expensive as the 1.5 million, or two million dollar home. Also, like I said, we kind of talk about household. It's not really children. Yeah. Because I mean, we might have, we have lots of people to come in. There are two people that want to rent a unit and their roommates. And it doesn't necessarily mean that- They're family. It's going to be, you know, kids going to the school. Yeah, absolutely. That's an affordable way to live is to have a roommate. I mean, I had two when I was first. I had four. I had two when I was first four. I had four. I had four. I wouldn't assume. For sure. Yeah. Yeah, I think I just think the student issue is something that is salient for the community. But that's my perspective. Actually, I think we should be moving more of our student body to multifamily buildings, because they're underwritten by the commercial. That's not possible in single-family neighborhoods. Let's see. I think that is...oh, actually, I did have a question about the... There was a mention of the developing or establishing an affordable condo or town home policy. Can you talk a little bit about that? I wasn't sure what that was. It's a let's see. Strategy A. It's on page 14. incentivize the development. It's goal five under home ownership. And it says incentivize the development of affordable ownership units and reduce barriers to entry for new homeowners. This goal helped develop a more cohesive strategy for ownership units in new developments. And then strategy A was establishing affordable condo, townhome policy. So I just didn't really know what that meant. Is the idea that like as the mirror, like the spectrum, you mentioned the spectrum earlier, that was built and we were able to get some affordable condos out of that. There. You know, I'm gonna have to do some research on that one. I know one thing that's kind of prohibitive is the condo fees. Yes. For a lot of condos to make them affordable. Because I mean, our folks still have to pay the condo fees. And some of the newer condos, it's cost prohibitive for them to live there because the condo fees are so... Are really high. Yeah. Yeah, there's a lot of amenities that are baked into these buildings now that people have come to expect. Yeah, it makes it hard for sure. I'll get back to you on that. OK, sure. No, I was just curious. I mean, I think it's a good idea of affordable condos and townhomes. I just didn't know what a policy would look like exactly that would be part of sort of like a multi-family development that was a condo development or exactly that would be part of sort of like a multi-family development that was a condo development or one that included townhomes like what's the one on north washington that had some townhomes associated with it and I think some of those are affordable or cafe kindred is yeah north gate yeah Yeah, the condos are not okay. Okay. So with the policy possibly be that we the city covered the fees for residents of condos or town. Yeah that's what I was just saying. Maybe the city could. Take some of the housing fund money and apply it to amenities. Essentially a subsidy to help reduce the cost to the condo owner to just the unit itself as opposed to the extras. That might be an idea. I know that like I said, our folks do not have to pay amenity fees. Yeah, right. And all the localities have tried to negotiate to get condo fees at a lower rate. And it's not really a way to do that. No, I don't want to do that because those buildings too. They have to maintain those buildings too. We probably don't want them to. We will have those buildings to be well maintained, the buildings increases, so that's better paid for if you're gonna subsidize it by the public sector, rather than requiring it as the private sector, because it encourages them to cut corners. Right. Okay, I do, I just realized I have two more small questions. One, that was interesting when you told us about the Broad and Washington studio units, not renting, because they're too expensive. Is that because the rents in that building are higher than other buildings? Or is it because they're studios? They're too small? Or the units are at 80% AMI. So normally we would do lower than that, but in order for us to get 10% higher than our normal standard, which is usually was about 6% that type of thing We I'm saying we counsel negotiated so that those additional units would be at 80% a.m. I So therefore the rents are higher and we can't rent them. Okay. Yeah, I guess I was just wondering if, because I know we're making good guesses. We have, we know who's, the word of the demand is coming from. But, you know, if it's not working out, is there, is there an opportunity to turn those units back into cash and low, you know, so that we would, and I think I want the units, obviously, but if they're not renting and we don't anticipate them renting. So currently we are, we have it with the attorney to find out what we can do. Is there any type of, I mean, we have a period of time where they have to remain affordable before they would, you know, convert to market rate or that type of thing. Aren in perpetuity those units I thought everything we were negotiating. They are into perpetuity but I'm saying for them to get tenants in there. I mean, they're not going to allow the units to sit there for like five years. I wouldn't think that's not good for anybody. But this has happened before. So at, not broad and what, South Washington, where Harris Teter is. Oh, West Broad? West Broad, excuse me. We had units that were going up to 110% when that building first opened. And I think it was kind of like a downturn when they first opened. And they were having trouble renting those units. So they reached out to us and asked us if they could rent the 110% units at 90% AMI. And of course we were like, oh yeah, please. They did that to rent the units. They were also having trouble renting their market rate units. And my understanding is that the market rate units over at Broad and Washington are high and they're not filled either. So we're hoping that maybe we can do some type of negotiation like that. That's the hope because that really worked when we did it the last time. With West Brown. Even though it came from the developer. Yeah, well they're in center. I mean they don't want to lose the money on those units, even if it's less than they would make as an affordable, the affordable requirement. It's still money. OK, well, good luck. And then I guess my only last question is I know we held a community forum a week ago. I wasn't able to attend. What kind of feedback or questions were you hearing from the community? It was great because everyone there was a renter. And so they kind of gave us, we broke up into sections and we, you know, I'll have a whole list of feedback and I can get that to you, haven't typed it up yet. That would be great. I'd love to see that. Woodley feeling so rendered woodly who is the housing development specialist. Yeah. Who has been out and he just got back and so I'm going to pass this project to as soon as possible. Yeah, I'm sure. Because I have housing and human services that I'm kind of trying to manage. But as soon as you know he's up and running then he's going to type up that feedback And that'll be a part of our plan. And when we come back to you all, well, because we're keeping a track of all the comments that we've received. And so we'll provide that. Great. That would be great. I'd love to see those questions and comments from the community. Was that the meeting that I went to? Yes. Was that just a week ago? It seems like I was I think it was last one star two weeks ago. Yeah, it was too long ago. Oh, that's right, because it was before our last meeting. Yeah, it was too long. Oh, that's right, because it was before our last meeting. Yeah, I wasn't intend to see that long, yeah. Yeah, I thought it was a good, I mean, the dialogue was robust. There were not a lot of people there, but they had things on their mind. And there was a lot of things being written down on the poster board on the wall, so hopefully there's stuff that will come out of it that would be of interest. They were pretty in line with a lot of things that we had in our policy. It felt like we covered the major areas, but they had a lot of specific items that we want to take a look at. And our plan is to go to, we'd like to go to Winter Hill, it gets some senior perspectives. And we did have, we've already heard some feedback from the fields, but maybe get some more of those residents and things like that. Yeah, it's important constituencies, definitely. All right, Mr. Stevenson. Yeah, I just thought of one additional question. It's relative to the aging in place, goal. And I've seen this not in Virginia, but in other states of program, it's usually referred to something like homestead programs. I'm just wondering if you're familiar with that and did that come up in your deliberations? I'm not sure what that is. Well, basically what it is is like proposition 13 out in California. You kind of freeze the tax property tax rate. And it's aimed at lower income older people who are on fixed incomes. So a lot of them have a problem, obviously, in false shirts, because we keep raising our property taxes every year. And so homestead programs are generally designed to kind of level out their taxes, keep it at one level of which presumably matches their fixed income. And therefore they can stay in their homes longer. Yeah, I'll have to look into that. I know we have rent relief. We have several people in the city that get, you know, that get a subsidy at the end of the year to help with their rent mostly seniors. And then we have tax relief through the tax office that also sounds similar to what you're saying. Yeah, in this case, they'd obviously continue to be paying taxes. They would get relief from successive increases over time. I'm going to look at that. Home-stead tax relief. It's a relief. I don't think so. Home-stead tax relief. It takes a form of relief sometimes. It may. The one I'm familiar with, they just kind of freeze your rate. If you're qualifying, it's obviously not available to everybody. It's very limited, but it keeps your tax rate constant. OK. Yeah, we do have a relief program in the city. We have a relief program. Yeah, and deferral. Same thing for Autos, I think. Just on our website. Okay. Any other questions for Miss Jones or comments tonight? I hope this has been helpful. If you've got something of anything else, just send it to us. We're sending to Jack and then he can send it for Emily and then send it to us to Brendan. Or to Brendan, yeah. I hope he's back on his feet soon for your sake. All right, well thank you so much for coming out and sharing all this with us. Appreciate your time. Thank you and thank you for filling in. Yeah yeah I'm a poor imitation of Mr. Hyra but I was happy to help. Whenever people were getting off track and going off on tangents, Derek would bring us all. He doesn't have a lot of patience for just. Yes. He was needed. Yeah. Let's get busy here, people. All right. All right. Thanks so much, Dana. Nice to see you. OK. With that, I think we can go on to our information items. Any planning commissioner reports? actually. One of them was a speaker series. Oh yeah, let me ask you that. We could bring the speaker series back. I actually reached out to the incremental development alliance to see the results of the program. I think I took some notes and then I threw them away. So I recycled them, actually. One of them was a speaker series. Oh yeah, let's see that. We could bring the speaker series back. I actually reached out to the incremental development alliance to see if they will come out and speak to us because I think they're doing really interesting work. And I think they could really speak to a lot of the barriers that are in place that are maybe preventing some of the incremental development that a lot of us would probably like to see in False Church City, but nobody wrote them back. So... I mean, now that we have an accessory dwelling, code to get some developer to come in and evaluate it. The code or the code? Yeah, right. Interesting. Yeah, somebody told me, somebody on the staff told me that there's some interest that's been expressed in accessory dwellings already and I'm curious about that. That was gonna be my follow-up question. Was there anything has anything happened? It's isn't I thought it wasn't on the books for 30 days. Is it official? Yeah, but people know that we did it. Well, yeah, I spoke with our zoning administrator a couple days ago and There's been no applications as it be But you might be right that it's little too early for is it is it official mr. Trainor is it a or mr. Follower is it in the cone? I Know we set up all the paperwork everything's in the system I don't know whether it's it's in effect. I assume it is by now So So it was 30 days and what was that vote April 6th? Yeah, 14th. April 14th. So maybe not. So it could be another week, but I know we have everything set up and all that. And so we're ready for any application on it, you know, form system wise. Okay. Was anybody able to, I was out of town attend the ULI function? I was recognized. Yeah, were you able to attend Jim's recognition? You invited that? No. The one with Ledy is next week. Yes, there's. And that's you did. Mr. Fuller was there. I was there. Yeah, I did. Letty was there. Why it was there. Some Henry Laura from staff and Kerry. So we were well represented. And then the neat thing was both his daughter and son are in the real estate development business and their ULI members and they surprised him and did the intros for him at the podium. So he did his three minute speed. So anyway, it was a nice event. Yes, thank you. Great. Anything else from anybody? Is it cool for Swarter Growth? Advant that's next week. 12th? I think two are. It's Monday. No, that's probably the separate item. Yes, let's talk about that for a second too. But the coal is for smarter growth. The event is next Wednesday. It's next week. Next week. Probably was the 14th. You have to buy your way into that too. It's $100. $100. And till they up our salary. Oh, there you go. Rich for our blood. Maybe that's an update. That letter was sent on the behalf of the Planning Commission requesting the council look at the Planning Commission's compensation when they look at their own compensation later this year. So we'll see. Thank you for signing the chair for the chair and bread and everybody for that. And Danny suggested. Yeah, thank you for advocacy. Danny, you're asking. So the Paragon Theatre Tour is on. I got the Melon Tour. Monday at four o'clock. Or anybody wants to go. I believe it's Founders or two and the theater. Oh, wow. It's right. I'm gonna miss all of these events. I'm out of town all next week, sadly. I'm supposed to drive. Take pictures. I'll clear sure. Popcorn, Ollie, popcorn for you. You're safe, me, some stale popcorn. I'm only going if I get one of those giant yellow masks. Yeah, there was a lot of times where we never thought the theater would ever happen. Yeah, I mean there were a lot of folks thought that. Oh my god, that was a lot of times where we never thought the theater would ever happen. I mean, there were a lot of folks, a lot of them thought that. Oh my God. That was generally the consensus that I never had. There were probably three people. I don't want to jinx it because it's open yet. The first movie that I was shown. I know. 14 days or whatever. Yeah, but I saw them hiring and training people in there and that lobby bar area they have going on so it appears to be on the cusp of being a reality which is very exciting. Very exciting. Let's hear it for that. Yeah. Okay. You had something Mr. Sieben. Yeah. I attended the EDA meeting last night and they covered a whole host of issues but one item I thought is something that we would probably want to track and that that is they're looking at the commercial property tax abatement program. This has to do with older, smaller buildings that offers an opportunity for a tax abatement. Apparently it hasn't been used very much. And so the EDA members are interested in taking a look at the program to see what might need to be changed to make it more useful, particularly of interest given the change over at Brown's hardware and some of those other stores that are in that area where there is interest in maintaining those buildings. And so the thought was that this type of a property tax abatement program could be useful in maintaining those. So they just brought it up and discussed it so they've got to work on it yet. But I thought I'd mention it, something of interest to us. That's it. Yeah, a lot of change in that area. Antigana X and Browns. Yeah. Thank you. All right. I think that's it for us. Mr. Fuller, I see we've received a late-breaking memo on SB74. So I hope you'll go through that. But please proceed with the director's report. I will. First of all, I'll give you an update on the planning director recruitment. Mr. Stevens and I served on a panel where we looked at the technical side and there was a second panel that looked at the leadership management and so those recommendations were provided to the city manager who my understanding will be interviewing the three finalists and then making a selection and so we should finalize that in the next 30 days or so. Anyway, just what it is. I'm sure that will be a relief for it's exciting. Yes Especially you And I appreciate you know have any planning commissioner also, you know on the panel. I think that was that was great Yeah, thank you, Mr. Stevens for stepping in To that. When you don't have a daytime job. I know. I'm really sorry. I can't do it. You got launched. Yeah, that's right. We did. Yeah. So I'm looking at our upcoming agenda. The next meeting on May 21st, we do not have any agenda items, so there will be no meeting. And so we'll have met once this month. next meeting will be June 4th. We have a work session on the rezoning at 106108 South Flea Street and it's a complimentary work session and then we'll- What is that? What does a residential property? What is the- T-zone. What's the rezoning? It's a residential it's a request for a rezoning to T. Yes. I haven't heard. Yeah. T. It went over his own to T. Yes. It's um it yeah it's currently residential but it's T on the future land use map. Yeah. Okay. Is that a recent change? It has there always been T and Lennie's T-Glennie's? No, we went and looked back. And do we do that? Back in 2005, those were the designations on the future Lennie's map for T, transitional use. That was a 2005 change. Yeah. So, well, there was about 50 parcels of looked at. And I don't think it was necessarily a change. But anyway, there was a number of changes back then. And so basically there's a uniform depth Coming off a broad street for commercial use right and so I think that was part of it's kind of filling in those gaps and so Interesting anyway, was that the origin of the interesting of the because it's a little uneven, the number of parcels that are zone T on the future land use map? Yeah, in that particular block there was like four, I believe, where it was kind of like missing teeth where there was kind of a string. It's across the street, it's a single family. It's across the street. I think it might be on the... Self as residential. Yeah, it's a single family detached. I'm a detached. I wonder like across the street. I think it might show to be T as well. I think it might be on the on the. Self as residential. Yeah. What's the single family detached? I mean, I wonder like across the street like it's only those two lots. Yeah. I'm going back from the I don't know what we call that building, but yeah. So anyway, so we've we've looked at it preliminarily. It'll be going to the council the week before, I think the principles were on vacation. This would have come probably a couple weeks later to you, but we didn't want to delay six weeks on it. So we've scheduled it for July 4th, and we'll be using the work we did for the council the week before to tee that up quickly. So anyway, we'll have a work session on that. And then in Thelos Park, they're working on a kind of a site plan for that recreational facility. And as part of it, they need to do subdivision consolidation. And so that will be coming before you as a subdivision. And so we'll have a work session on that on June 4th. And then that would tee up two weeks later for final action on that subdivision. Then later they're kind of site development plan. There's not really any structures other than maybe some type of outdoor shelter or something we haven't seen in detail. So anticipate there will be a basic site plan that would come out of later date. That may be our, well I guess it's only a work session but if SB, depending what happens with SB 974 maybe that's our last subdivision. No, I'm going to go over that now. Oh we're going to keep subdivisions. Yeah. Alright, yeah. I have a red memo that I'm going to talk about that now. And so then on June 18th, as I mentioned, it would be final action on that subdivision and then the Affordable Living Policy would come back on a work session. And then on July 2nd, we have the broad and Washington easement. It's a vacation that the developer needed to do and so it's a process to do that. So that's basically the schedule coming up. Moving to the legislation at the state level, as you're aware, the legislation on SB 974, you know, it's to be enacted in July 1 and that directly impacts the city in terms of they've provided for a designated agent to review and act on subdivisions and also includes site plans and plans of development and plans of development we're still trying to figure out what the context is at the state level and whether that is the same as some of the things we have like grading plans or something like that. So, site plans and subdivisions are clear to us. And then this legislation, as you're aware, does not include the planning commission or the governing body as being able to serve as a designated agent for the locality. And the only exception was if the locality is 5,000000 population or less. So this designated agent would have the ministerial authority and that's typically reserved for the planning director or similar agent. In addition there was a second piece of legislation that was a minor change but is also something that will be rolling into these zoning texts and amendments. And that was a minor change but is also something that will be rolling into these zoning tax amendments and that was HB 2660 and that relates to the time period on all final action on subdivision plots and it also tends to list everything and so it through insight plans and plans of development and that's been 60 days and we've always targeted that and they've reduced that now to 45 days. And so it becomes the kind of thing where, you know, if they're not in final form, then we'll just have to start denying and then specifying what's missing. And then they would come back in and we would do everything all over again until we get it in final form and approval. And typically it used to be where if we didn't act within the 60 days then they could petition a 10-day period in which the Planning Commission could take action in a special meeting and act on something that was pending. We've had a practice where we've felt like sometimes that the developers don't resubmit right away and instead of forcing a denial, we try to work with them and sometimes the period goes 60 days, but that's always been our target for site plans and subdivisions. So, anyway. And that was Marcus Simon's bill? This was yes. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And so, we met this week, staff did with the city attorney and the city management and we collectively discussed the new legislation in its context and the impact on the city's subdivision site plan processes and approval authorities. Looking at the city charter related code applicability, we discussed that and talked about issues in the next steps. And we also talked about HB 2660, which identifies the limiting of the timing and change from 60 to 45 days. So in terms of the resulting preliminary discussion, which we're still doing some research and we'll be starting to draft some code language, but the subdivision party authority, the initial review, the city charter indicates that the planning commission is the planning subdivision authority of the city and would retain that authority, even under the new legislation SB 974. And specifically our charter says the planning commission shall be the Planting Commission of the city. And so that's our preliminary understanding. That's good news, but also how does that drive with the very specific line? Does an agent does not include the local planning commission? Is basically the city charter over rules state law. Yes, that's basically city charter is kind of the highest state laws the second. And then city code would be the third. There's exceptions to that. It could be some historical pieces to it, but generally that's how it is. So we're a Dylan rules state. And so if we're explicitly given authority to do something, then that tends to be the lead on it. Now, if our code is silent on some piece of that and administrative or so, maybe how we do advertise and are notice on it, then we would default to the state code in many cases because they've specified something that would relate to that authority that we have. And we're silent on how we do notice or something to the public. And so the state code does come into play sometimes in a secondary fashion. But when we looked at the site plan, that is not in our charter and it's not specifically specified as an authority of the planning commission. And so SB 974 provides for a designated agent. So the council would then need to authorize who would be the designated agent and typically as I stated before, that would be a planning director or similar agent and it would be administrative staff review. So then the other thing we noted was the special exception site plan, the SCSP that we approved West Falls with. That has basically a combined SC and site plan procedure all in one. And so that was to expedite and not have two processes. And so we may have to decouple that and break that out. I mean, that was very specific to West Falls. That legislation really can't be used anywhere else for the most part. And so we would have to look at that code and possibly break that up into some form of an SC and site plan. So in looking further at staff is what we're doing is preparing a list of the code sections that are related to the site plan and so do as in rules. And then we're gonna continue interim staff meetings with the city attorney this month and key staff management and then you know continue to refine the scope of the legislative impact and the required code changes and then we're going to draft code amendments and on the impacted sections that are consistent with the new state code. And then we would also develop administrative procedures for the designated agent on how we'd implement this. will continue to review and research and then we will be working on that in May and then in June. This will come before the City Council. They will have a preliminary briefing on the results of the General Assembly on the 27th by Cindy Mester. This will be part part of that conversation, obviously. And then in June, there will be some work sessions and then anticipate a first reading. And then, you know, action with the Planning Commission. This schedule that I listed in here is tentative. I haven't run it by anybody else, but working through it, it works. And it does go to the first week in July, but I think that's the best we can do. And at this point, hopefully we don't have a site plan that we have to deal with in the middle of it, but I think we can have it in place by the middle of July. So I think we've got to do a little more research and kind of pull things together. But anyway, so that's the preliminary findings. And I think there's a little good news there that some do agents stay. And then the site plan will continue to look at that. We're trying to define what plans of a development are. A lot of times the state code and the this you know other localities. What they call something by name it can be very different. And so we'll work with the city turning to kind of define that the state tends to throw everything in the in the paragraph so it can cover everything and so anyway mean but obviously this was specific more to plots and site plans. Anyway, I have an electronic version of this with links to all the code so I will have that sent out tomorrow and so you'll have the benefit of having this document with the links that you can click on and then I plan to do an update, you know, probably by the end of the month of kind of where we are, and then we'll have draft language in June. And then I'm suggesting that we have a joint work session with the council because of the need for viewing things along. And when they have their work session that you guys be invited as well. So I'll continue to push for that and communicate that as well. So anyway, so that's the initial findings. And so we're continuing to work on this staff this month and then you'll see this formally in June and then probably have final action early July. Any questions now for me? No, it's a really comprehensive memo. Any questions? Comprehensive, therefore I can't understand the word of it. So ask me any questions. I know, any questions. And we don't have here all night. So we charter authority to do subdivisions but not site plan review yeah So tell me how that affects like a day in the life of I mean what's an what's an example of I mean I know the Eacon eyes would have gone to the designated agent but I've been a little bit... Yeah, so in other words, the... And yeah, you can see would have gone to the designated agent. Would have been a sample. Yeah, stop. Yeah, so, in other words, the... Yeah, I can see our site plan. So, what were we doing in a subdivision instance? What we've always done. Yeah, the subdivision would not change. What's an example? Except for the timing on it, we would be looking at targeting 45 days worth of 60, but that would be the only thing. an example of the subdivision action that we've taken. We have one coming up with the Fettles property where we're doing a consolidation plot for that property. So that would be actually something that would happen for July 1. Then it could be a pipe stem or some other lot being divided within the city. We've got a couple. We had one saying, in my time, my other side of Oak Street school, we had a subdivision a couple years ago. It was in a lot line boundary change. It was technically, it was still a subdivision though. Like some of them were moving a lot line. They actually already had two lots, but they were adjusting a lot line and that was a subdivision. That's when we're changing lot lines basically. So we're not, if somebody has a large and a piece of land and they can create another lot out of it to build the tip of it. That's when we're changing lot lines basically. So we're not, if somebody has a large and a piece of land and they can create another lot out of it to build and tip it residential. I was afraid that's what you were gonna say. Sounds exciting to me. We don't see it, we already have that a theory. We don't see very much, very many. We do see some time. So is there been any discussion? I mean, I thought initially there was some discussion of, oops, can we get a doover on this and have a... I mean, I thought initially there was some discussion of whoops. Can we get a doover on this and have an increase to jurisdictions with 20,000 people, let's say. How many people are in the basket that we're in? And is there any discussion being given to trying to change the basket? I mean, I just the notion of the planning commission not being involved in site plan review seems like one of the biggest changes in the history of the city. It is for us for sure. I mean, larger jurisdictions, a lot of times do have their site plans and subdivisions done by staff. Yeah, I'm sure. I think the intent was to bring smaller jurisdictions in line with what larger jurisdictions do. You know, again, the problem in enrichment of initiatives in editorial, but they have a short session. This year was a really short session. You had a bunch of part-time legislators that show up. They don't know a lot about planning and zoning for the most part. And they just throw a lot of stuff out there, and it's like a race to see what'll stick, what'll get through committee, and a lot of times something like, you know, people don't have a lot of time to think about it. Research it, some cities and counties lobby and try to make things less bad if they can. I asked Marcus about this after it was done, and you know, I didn't talk to Cindy with me It was being done, but yeah, everything that you say is my impression of how it got done. It was aimed at trying to encourage housing, new housing by Van Valkenberg. We are part of the collateral damage of that noble effort. The theory is like streamlining,lining. And so therefore, like it would, you know, it would, it would, it would streamline the process for somebody to build because they could just go through staff and not have people be hearing and take longer. And so there, you know, that was the theory. And that's, that's been a popular trend in certain circles in Richmond, you know, the idea of trying to like, you know, take away some regulation related to land use review and land use and zoning controls to facilitate housing, first and foremost, after a doing battle for 20 years. I've been interesting to try to get things moving. It's an interesting thing. We got things moving and now we're being ganked back from Yeah. So I mean, the only hope would be like other jurisdictions like us who've moved or now, you know, have been affected by larger jurisdictions who are already doing it that way, don't care. I won't care. So it's smaller jurisdictions, you know, if they could be able to lobby to undo it or change it next year and raise the cap to a higher number, you know, and say, and argue that in a small jurisdiction it's not a burden and we actually had a lot of benefit which I think is true in false church yeah right well said but you know that that would be the way to do it you know to the lobby Simon and others of our our state legislators to say wait a second false church you know we're only we are now 15 17000 and you know really it really wasn't a burden here and and it burden here and it was helping and now we can't do that. It's tough. It's going to be over. Gary's that you're impression that I probably can't speak to this but is that a track that anybody's even talking about going down like in parallel to all these changes that you're trying to make? Yeah, what is your logic? What is your... No, we're not going to do that. We're going to try to keep things the way they are. What Commissioner Crasner just indicated is the only path that we're aware of now would be to lobby now for the next General Assembly session in a year and you know, ask to raise the population threshold to 20, 25,000 or whatever, and that way, you know, we could get the authority back for site plans. So, but there is no quick fix with the enacted legislation taken effect in July. Okay. All right, well, thanks for, I'm just curious whether you've thought through like, would this designated agent handle waivers? And if so, what would the process be for deciding? Yeah. The code right now, basically at the end of the site plan code, it talks about any authority granted to the planning commission is then the authority of the planning director when they're doing an administrative site plan approval. And in this case, it flips it to where the designated agent would potentially be the planning director or other similar agent. And so the authority is in there now. I know there was some discussion. There was some action down in Southern Virginia about waivers that was kind of adverse. And so I don't know if that'll come up in this discussion or so forth. But anyway, so but right now the code provides for the planning director to do that specifically. So it kind of removes the, removes the public from being involved and that kind of decision making. One option of being our code, again, right now the code delegates all, you could say in the ordinance that certain waivers make them like special use permits or special exceptions you could say, if you know, if you're a fully by right, you know, this I plan can, you know, run administratively. But if there was a particular waiver that, you know, the city felt should have that public review, you could change the ordinance to say to specifically prohibit the director of planning or whoever's the agent from doing that and make that, make modification just to call it whatever you want special exception or a special permeritor whatever you want and so there might be a way to write the ordinance such that you can designate agent necessarily an individual or can we decide that our designated agent is you know somebody from staff and a panel of experts who just happened to be members of the community. I'm serious. I mean, this seems like desperate times here. I mean, what about, yeah, we have, I mean, the planet has got plenty of other work to do without having to decide plans at all, but to keep the community's voice in the process somewhere. That's the case, I mean, for God's sake, we've got community groups for every little thing in the world and we're not going to have it for site plan review. That's just indefensible, it seems to me. Yeah, I agree with you and Commissioner Stevens. That's one of my questions is, what is is what is the public process going to be with a designated agent? And so obviously, you know, we relied on the planning commission and you guys have, you know, the commissioners as, you know, residents of the city to then hear, you know, developers and residents of the city and their concerns and their objectives and then kind of, you know, use the code, you know, ministerial action for the most part, but occasionally we had waivers and you had three types of waivers. One was if you had a small site plan that didn't need to provide the 32 items that are required to submit a site plan, then a of time staff would kind of work through that with them and they're adding a portico to a front of a building or something. They don't need to do all 32 items in that case. There was a waiver provision for that based on second one was some landscape related buffer waivers, density or the depth. The the third we've been using in the last couple years is the parking one, where it's a modification technically, but it's the same thing as a waiver. So those are your three items that, I mean, think of, the last site plan we had with economicsconize, you know, based on parking and landscaping, you know, on that small site, you couldn't meet code. Right. And so, anyway, those waivers are necessary to approve small sites like that. Yeah, right. For example, in Fairfax, the director can waive landscaping, but not parking. Parking has to go to public hearing. Yeah. So the so the ordinance could be crafted to do that I think and still stay within the new law. If we felt that there were certain things that we didn't want staff to be able to wave unilaterally so to speak and needed a public review, there are ways to do that to the take back the waivers and mods. You know, if not, you can't take back the authority to approve it, but if someone wants to deviate from the code, you could, there's probably a way to add an element to the ordinance to require that they get a public approval or a board and commission approval, some kind of whether it's us or whether it's City Council or both, it's probably a way. So, I'm something to think about as we figure it out in the coming months that yeah, it'll be an adjustment. I'm sure there'll be things we haven't even thought of yet that will come up. A staff starts to look at their first few, at first few side plans administratively and they're like, and what do we do? So yeah, we'll have to keep us in the loop, I guess. Um, and, uh, yeah, we'll see where we go. I plan to and I hope there's a way through one of these means and we were thinking about other things on how to have the planning commission involved and you know if he can't be direct authority some advisory basis. So anyway we'll talk about that and then I'm looking for you know also you to you know talk to your council members and you know discuss the objectives that you have and some ideas and staff will be proposing how administratively we would implement this. And then we could always revisit it in another couple of months. And so I think we're just going to work through this based on the parameters we've been given. same time the same time as Mr. Cravener's is, Cravener saying, you know, there's opportunities to look at these things in different ways, and there's some secondary things like waivers and stuff. So anyway, you know, this is the only way I know. And so I've been here so long. This is the only way I've ever, you know, done, you know, developing review and site plans and subdivisions so it's a, you know, big difference for me too. So, but, you know, the administrative work that's done by staff before it comes to you, you know, that's not going to really change other than the timing might be a little more rushed now with the other change with the other bill, but other than that. And we might deny things on a few occasions just because the clock's up. And so that was never an objective of ours before. We always kind of tried to just work and get it in final form. Our goal was always to get the applicant in final form. And then we had the planning commission know, provide a community forum to discuss it and make the final decision. So, yep. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Fuller, for this really detailed memo to be continued. Any correspondence? No, Madam Chair. All right, I think that's it then. Wait, stop. I know it's driving home tonight that the Yassini building has now got graffiti adorning its windows and walls. What's going on going on there? Anything? Rich Booy? The Asini the... The Bank. The Asini jewelers. Former Bank. Former Bank of Overwatch. I was unaware of the graffiti, but in terms of the site plan, let's see, I'm trying to recall, did they get a pool? No, I think they're still pending. We haven't heard Yeah, no worries they They got an attorney who then straightened them out and so They were able to kind of get all the stuff finally done. Okay, it was it was a very it was been over a year so they've resummitted they've resummitted and no, they haven't resummitted. We're still waiting for the final resubmission. Okay, because it wasn't a look at it. So, since it wasn't on the look at, I was concerned that it had dropped off. Yeah, I took a picture, it's traffic was at a standstill, so I can take a picture out in my window, but there's a very extremely elaborate piece of graffiti right next to the old drive through the bank. It's on the bank, or on the... So I can take a picture out in my window, but there's a very extremely elaborate piece of graffiti right next to the old drive-through of the bank. It's on the bank or on the current. You see each other's. On the bank. No, sorry. It's on their new side. Yeah, it's on the bank. It's on the take. Oh, look at that. It's a mural. It's a mural. Public art. Exactly. It's depending on your taste. Anyway, well, I would... I don't know. An author,. Public art. Exactly. It's depending on your taste. Anyway, well, I would I don't know. I don't know. I know. Authorized public art. City Council is too busy with the budget and other things. Where are ones of property? They own it. Do we know you see any owns of the building? We should they've insult to them to clean it up. We shall should probably I'll send you a copy I should give them a heads up if they yeah don't already know yeah good. Thank you Possibly they're driving by it. I would think they would figure out soon. They, they, they, they, they, they, they're right there. Looks out on them. Their business is still open. Right. Next to it, they should be on the phone. They are, they are next to each other. So. terms of their existence on the white little. Any other final items? No? All right, then we are adjourned.