I'm going to say it. I can't do that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Bye. I just want you to think because when I come to the bottom, I just want to think that I I just need that. You can take a picture. Yeah. Okay. Good morning, everyone. It's 930. I want to welcome you to our May 17th public hearing. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Mayor Gaskins. Here. I smell back. Councilman Gere. Councilman Chapman. Councilman Elnubi.y, Councilman McGrane, Councilman McPike. Here. Okay. Welcome. We're going to dive right in. At this time, I will entertain a motion to consider docket item 20 out of order. So moved. Second. Okay. There has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilwoman Green to consider item 20 out of order All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say nay the eyes have it madam clerk please call item 20 Presentation of a proclamation recognizing older Americans month Okay, at this time I have asked my colleague councilman a giri to lead us in a proclamation recognizing older Americans month. If you're here for the proclamation, we ask that you please come to the front. We'll do the reading of the proclamation and then we'll do a picture with the council. All right. good morning everyone and welcome to Older Americans Month. I'm going to go ahead and read the proclamation. We'll let everybody introduce themselves and then we'll kind of take it from there. So whereas the month of of May is older Americans month, and whereas older Americans month was established in 1963 with President John F. Kennedy designating May as senior citizens month, which later became older Americans month. And whereas the purpose of older Americans month is to serve as a time to acknowledge the contributions of older Americans, especially those who have defended the country, and to highlight the importance of healthy aging and community support. And whereas the 2025 Older Americans Month theme flipped the script on aging, focuses on transforming how society perceives talks, perceives talks about and approaches aging, and encourages individuals and communities to challenge stereotypes and to spell misconceptions. And whereas the local, national, and international contributions of older persons in history deserve recognition and celebration. And whereas local leaders, such as former vice mayor and council member, Dell Pepper, exemplify the contributions of older Alexandrians to the vibrancy of Alexandria and to the health of all Alexandrians. And whereas older adults who are family caregivers, approximately 70% who are women, provide the backbone of the U.S. care system, allowing parents, spouses, and other loved ones to live an age independently in their homes, providing about 600 billion annually in unpaid labor. And whereas all people benefit from the profound and undeniable impact of the Older Americans Act, and older persons continue to make profound contributions to the growth and strength of both our city and Commonwealth. Now therefore, I can't a good dinner on behalf of the Lear Gaskins Mayor of the City of Alexandria, Virginia, and on behalf of the Alexandria City Council, do hereby proclaim the month of May as older Americans' month. In the city of Alexandria, and reaffirmed the commitment of the city to expand the leadership of older adults and their involvement in public service positions, and do commend all citizens to commemorate this month in gratitude for those older persons who have contributed to the life of the city, and the nation where all have by right a position of equality, fairness, justice, and freedom. And witness whereof, I have herein to set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Alexandria to be affixed this 17th day of May 2025. I'm Vicki Rutsen. Jane King. Jim Bruin and a veteran and a son of immigrants who also came here and served this country. So thank you for the opportunity and thank you for the recognition. Thank you for flipping this script. My name is Michael Schuster, I'm the chair of the commission and agent in Cannington mentioned that he's also part of our commission. So I think we have a quorum for this meeting. I'm Bob Eifert. I'm with At Home in Alexandria. And I would like to mention that Michael Schuster also received the Annie B. Rose Lifetime Achievement Award from the Commission on Aging this last week. So congratulations to you for your outstanding service. I'm glad you're here. And I knew nothing about it, but the mayor date, apparently. It It was a wonderful surprise. And with that, Madam Mayor, I would move the proclamation. There has been a motion. Is there a second? Oh, yeah. There has been a motion by Councilman Ingeary and a second by Councilman McPike to prove the proclamation recognizing older Americans month. Is there any discussion? Okay, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say nay. The aye's have it and the proclamation passes. I'm going to pivot to our public discussion period. I want to take a moment at the outset to remind everyone who is present that our public meeting, this is a public meeting of the City Council and it is convened for the purpose of conducting business of our city. We welcome and encourage public participation but we also must ensure that the meeting proceeds in an orderly and respectful manner. Disruptive behavior, so shouting repeated interruptions or other conduct that interferes with the orderly conduct of the meeting is not prohibited. Individuals engaging in such conduct will be warned and if the behavior continues, they may be removed. So we ask that everyone conduct themselves in a manner that allows for the meeting to proceed effectively and respectively for everyone in attendance. And we're going to continue to read this at every meeting just so that we can normalize the sort of rules of the chamber. And so we are then going to get started. The way this will proceed, if you are new to us, is the clerk will call the names of each speaker and you will have three minutes to speak. As a reminder, we will hear the first 15 and then the remaining speakers will be heard at the conclusion of docketed items. So with that, I guess one other thing, if you are in the room, please recognize you can use both podiums on the left and the right. Madam Clerk, please call the first three speakers. Excuse me, John D. Lawrence, Alicin O'Connell, and Eric Lips. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm Vice Mayor, members of the council. John Lawrence, I'm the chair of the Northern Virginia Jubalde Detention Commission. Most of you have come by and you've seen the facility, So thank you and I'm going Mayor and members of the council. I'm John Lawrence, I'm the chair of the Northern Virginia Jubilee, the Tension Commission. Most of you have come by and you've seen the facility, so thank you and I'm gonna keep sending out invitations, we'll get all of you there, staff included. Like I said, if you want to, I just wanna come up here every once in a while and give you an update on what's going on. I wanna be positive, They're only a couple bad things, not bad. But anyway, first on the budget, we obviously didn't get what we asked for, but given what's going on across the river with... bad things, not bad, but anyway, first on the budget. We obviously didn't get what we asked for, but given what's going on across the river with Trump and Musk and they're flying monkeys, you were very generous. So we're going to make a work and we appreciate what you did. I've spoken to you before about USDA, how DJJ was announced a few months ago they were getting out of the business of being the facilitator. We are still trying, along with a few others in the state, to figure out how to become our own authority to administer USDA funds. It's not looking good, frankly. There's more movement than progress on behalf of the state, and I don't think it's going to happen. So that'll be about $100,000 whole in our budget combined between the center and shelter care. And obviously food is not optional so that whole will be filled. On the concrete slabs you've all been out there and you know how horrible they are and how much I hate them. We started to take one apart to actually find out how it's built so that we know how we can take it apart, you know, is there rebar? What is it? But we've started on getting rid of them. We have a sample of a bed. We're going to use an ideally what we're going to have is we're going to have a bed low with a cubby, a desk, a chair, all indestructible bolted to the floor and cubbies on the wall so it has more appearance of a room rather than a cell so that is a desk, a chair, all indestructible bolted to the floor and cubbies on the wall so it has more appearance of a room rather than a cell. So that is started. We had a job fair a couple weeks ago for the first time ever, two days. We had a bunch of people come, so fingers crossed, this will help start to put the dent in our recruiting and retention. The only negative thing is the storm last night we had a microburst and a large tree right next to the our parking lot and the apartment building next door came down, took out a fence, landed on a car, nobody got hurt so that's the only thing that really matters. One thing I want to talk about is and the commission hasn't gotten a copy of this, they're gonna get this weekend, we just got it. In the fall, Mike Mackie, who's been an incredible resource to me, put me in touch with Chelsea I-Cart in DCHS. Because I wanted to learn more about trauma informed care. She offered to send out a team to assess the center. And coincidentally, they came out when Mr. McPike was out there for a tour. So he got to see the first hour of what they heard and saw and what they asked and they were great questions. We just got a 23 page single space report with practical ideas as to what we can do. Some are already underway, but I can't thank them enough. And I wish I hadn't run out of time because I would have told you all three of their names. Thank you for your time, John. I guess what I would ask, can you circulate that report to the council? Absolutely. Once the commission gets it, I will send it to you because it is absolutely amazing. And I'll just take this chance. Erica Kleiner, Noreng-Botar and Chelsea I-Cart. I mean, the amount of time they spent to do this report and to get very practical in terms of what we can do, what we have done, and what we should do. It was amazing. And speaking about half of myself and Janith, our executive director, there's nothing here we don't want to do. Yeah, I think it'd be helpful for us to be aware of kind of what those things are, what's being thought about and kind of the cost so we can move forward on some of those things. I also wanted to reiterate, I know that we are following closely the challenges you mentioned with USDA, and we mentioned in our budget work session, we agree this is non-negotiable, this is not optional, so I know the manager, and I believe deputy city manager, John Lambert, are supposed to be working with all of us to continue to keep us updated, so thank you. Right, yeah, it's just we're still hopeful, but honestly not very hopeful. I think I heard councilman McPike. Thank you for your testimony. I'll listen to a con all Eric with the screen of the year. Good morning. I want to start by saying thank you to and Councilman Anubi. El Nubi, sorry, for coming out to Dr. Concerties hearing on Wednesday. We are very grateful that you both listen to the community about why this case was so important and came out to support our neighbor. Dr. Concerties was very clear that since he was a political prisoner, he needed political support and I'm glad that he got it from both of of you. Dr. Surrey was granted bond on Wednesday, released in Texas, and flown home to be with his family, which is wonderful news and a huge relief. The effort to get him released and returned home was truly a collective one. His wife and family and friends did the heaviest lifting as did his legal team, but there was also a concerted effort by faculty and students at Georgetown, Democratic political leadership, advocates and ordinary community members across Virginia to bring awareness to his case and fight for his freedom. It might be more comfortable to frame his unlawful detainment simply about free speech, but it wasn't just about that, and Dr. Constory has said so himself. He spoke out against the genocide of the Palestinian people and this administration labeled him a terrorist for that. That is why he was stolen from his home and his family and he paid a very high price eight weeks and eyes detention and says he will not back down all the same and will continue to speak out about this genocide because he must and we all must. In the past 24 hours, over 115 Palestinians have been murdered. All of Palestine is on the brink of famine and elderly children and disabled community members are already starving to death. So when we talk about why Alexandria should divest from genocide and apartheid, we are referring to the same type of collective initiative as came together around Dr. Surrey. One where no one party is the hero, but we all work together to do what's right. Alexandria should divest because over $12 million of our tax money goes to fund Israeli occupation in Palestine and Israeli weapons that are murdering Palestinian children. We should divest because our retirement funds and city contracts flow through companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Amazon, which profit off the destruction of lives and homes. We should divest for the sake of our collective souls, and we should divest because it will make a material difference. But we should also divest as part of a larger project. When one city moves towards justice, we empower other cities, municipalities, and counties to follow our lead and be brave. Something horrific is happening in Palestine and is not removed from us. It would be easier if it was, but this genocide is funded by the US. It is endorsed by US politicians. And it would stop if our leadership stopped it. It's easy to feel helpless in the face of brutality beyond imagining, but we are not helpless. If we come together as a community and say we will not support or endorse genocide in any way and therefore we will not invest our collective funds in it, we can be leaders in Virginia. Listen to your constituents and divest now. Madam Clerk, next speaker. Eric Clips, Janice Grenadier-Glampine. I'm going to try to help you feel a tiny bit. Welcome. Welcome to the right side of history. Today is the 586 of the most recent iteration of the genocide that most of you approve of. But I'm going to try to help you feel a tiny bit. Welcome to the right side of history. Today is the 586 of the most recent iteration of the genocide that most of you approve of. But we welcome Aliyah and Abdel-Rakman. Thank you so much for finding your humanity and showing up to support Dr. Badar Khan Suri. Welcome to the majority, US public opinion, and welcome to the majority, US public opinion, and to the right side of history. Now, we expect you to show up for local students, local families, Alexandrians of Conscious, and any of us who end up wrongly accused, detained, or disappeared. The rest of you, Sarah, Kichana, Kenik, John, Jacinta, McPike, shame, fail. Just like the rest of you have failed to divest. A quote from this body's statement in 1985, as Americans and as Virginians, thus devoted to the principles of the Declaration of Independence, we cannot ignore gross and unconscionable violations of human rights in other parts of the world, particularly when the policies and programs of our city may, through its investment, provide support for the continued violation of those rights. So, please, please divest from the apocalyptic apartheid investments in the Alexandria Supplemental Retirement Plan, The overly generous genocidal investments in the local government investment pool, LGIP, the appalling apartheid-based investment in the Virginia Retirement System, which I had to get all of my money out of after working in public schools here, and the crackpot killer city contracts. Last part, the NUCPA, the NUCPA. What do you know about it? Probably not that much. The Israeli, UK, American colonizer lie is that it ended. But it never ended. The current version is just so brutal and genocidal that no human being of conscious can ignore it. But just like the Kashmir, the Congo, Cuba, Myanmar, Haiti, Palestine, all of these are one issue and we would like to help support you in ending elite white supremacy, apartheid and genocide wherever it exists. Thank you. Councilman Onyubi. So typically we don't comment on comments or public speakers. Just want to say one thing. While I appreciate people realizing or thinking the two of us would be in there that morning, I refuse the framing of, you know, we're the only two who care about human rights here. I know my colleagues because typically we don't comment or not going to defend themselves, but I'm going to speak up for them. I think my colleagues care about human rights, and the fact that they weren't there this morning does not mean they don't care. I almost didn't make it because I had work commitments, and it was just stroke of luck that I was able to make it, and I glad I did, but the fact that my colleagues did not make it that morning out there, I refused about, I refuse that framing that they don't care. So I just wanted to say that. Thank you, Councilman on Newby. Madam Clerk, next speaker. Janice Grinivier, Glen Pine, Nikki Enville. I want to start out this morning congratulating Officer Goodroom who just got compensated 7.25 million for the discrimination that he had to endure in the police in the city of Alexandria Police. It's another example of the black on black discrimination, which is also white on white discrimination. social hierarchy here hierarchy here in the city of Alexandria discrimination. And once again, we care about other people more than we do our own citizens. Everybody's out on the thing. Let's fight for these immigrants. Well, what about the citizens? The citizens of the United States of America deserve due process just as much as these other people do. But in state of Virginia, from the hierarchy, social hierarchy of discrimination is one of the worst, which I have had to live, which each and every one of you. And the monthly videos of me coming here shows the amount of criminal activity of when one person decides who has the power what's going to happen to you. In my situation, not only does it include everyone up on that diocese, it includes all of them prior from 2010 who have been given notice of this. This discrimination includes the judges, the fixer judges that are chosen by our Supreme Court, the clerk of court who allows documentation of my home to be filed. When he knows he has firsthand information that it's been robust signed, that the bar number on it belongs to a judge in Florida. That the Wells Fargo bank has stated that they have nothing to do with it but yet my house is in their name. We have a problem and all of you are staying silent about it and our city manager has all of the documentation and the proof in his hands. Our sheriffs are involved, our police are involved, our commonwealth attorney is involved, and it goes all the way up to our state legislature. We have no separation of power who chooses our judges, so our judges have now become tools for the elite to get what they want in the courts, especially in the equity courts. Our children, our parents, our grandparents, when it comes to guardianships, are not safe here in the city of Alexandria. Because of the judge sees they have any money, they're gonna put in a nursing home, they're gonna get a guardian, their funds are all gonna be taken, and their children and their grandchildren are gonna be loved with nothing. And they're basically gonna to be murdered in that nursing home not said properly not given the proper on dietary needs that they have this discrimination is gone on for too long and we now have a case that sets presidents in this in the federal court thank you for your time next speaker I speaker. Go ahead, Pine, Nikki, infelminous, the Albert. Good morning. I'm a Jewish Alexandria resident. For over 500 days, we've been told that the US enabled genocide of the Palestinian people is not a local issue. Local issues are things like schools. Not millions of people and babies that we're starving and blowing up on the other side of the planet. What perhaps I'm hoping that some of you are starting to realize is that it's all connected. That this is a local issue in so many profound ways. Dr. Consuri and Arlington-based Georgetown professor was abducted by his home from masked iced agents in March. The Trump administration has been kidnapping even legal residents of the street in broad daylight for being sympathetic to the Palestinian play for opposing the horrific slaughter and starvation of millions. Dr. Constellery's play and our email campaign spurred Councilman Elnubi and Mayor Gascans to show up at court for him this week, which was meaningful and important. Councilman Elnubi even spoke there correctly citing the threat to free speech, although being careful never to mention Palestine. But Dr. Constory wasn't abducted over a free speech issue in the abstract. It was Palestine speech. He spoke out for Palestine specifically, and that is why he was abducted. We need to exercise our free speech rights on the subject of Palestine. Including you on City Council. You need to normalize free speech on Palestine by speaking out about this genocide. Folks, did you think that if we were all cool with the U.S. enabling a genocide in the Middle East, if everybody turned away and said that that's not a local issue, did you think that none of that genocidal hatred, none of that political violence, none of that fascism, would be turned here on people in the US? Turned even on peace studies professors at the local school, Georgetown. This is a local issue. One of the more profound rallying cries at pro-alestinian rallies is one that says in our thousands, in our millions, we are all Palestinian. I take it to mean that we must be brave and we have to embody their relentless struggle for self-determination in the best way we know how. But it also reminds me that we can't pretend like this genocide is removed from us. Our society and our locality are both causing and impacted by this genocide. Our local weapons manufacturers are selling the tools that maim children. The underlying fascist ideology is turning on us as well. And the local families and friends of those murdered are struggling right here in Alexandria. This is a local issue. It's clearer than ever. Where is your red line, divest? Thank you. Madam Clerk, next speaker. Nikki and Phil Melissa Albert, all her tell. I'm going to do variation on the theme that will feel familiar to anyone who is sentient in the 90s. You're definitely a Holocaust denier if you are currently wrinkled over the fact that I just used the word Holocaust to describe what we're doing in Palestine. Because it turns out that Europeans don't have a monopoly on that word and what we are witnessing, what your silence is encouraging, is in fact a Holocaust. You're definitely a Holocaust an I or if you're still calling it a war. Calling what's going on in Palestine a war is like having the winning Super Bowl team go full chest against a bunch of kindergartners with a ball and pretending it's an even match. Do you start sentences with words like, whenever someone tries to explain the actual history of the situation, how this didn't start on October 7th or with Trump or how this isn't a religion of thousands of years old religious fight and how the only thing this has to do with religion is that the racist apartheid state known as Israel manipulates Judaism in the most disgusting way to justify its colonial occupation and slaughter. Remember kids, the bad guys used Christianity just to fight slavery. You're definitely a Holocaust janitor if, after 19 months of everyone from us, your employers, to the International Criminal Court, drawing a cray on map, explaining how Zionism is nothing more than a racist, white supremacist, land-hungry political ideology that distorts, manipulates, and weaponizes Judaism and its history to justify its atrocities, and you still refuse to acknowledge this fact. If you still think those of us fighting for Palestine, even though it's not to practice Judaism, or anti-Semitic. If upon learning how much God's down money we have and continue to send to Israel to conduct its illegal and immoral colonization, and now Holocaust, and you don't want to throw things at other things out of rage. If you still care a single solitary, what other Holocaust deniers think about you? Just like being a homophob or a racist, is one's defining characteristic and nothing one could possibly have to say about anything much matters because their bigotry has rendered them irrelevant. One should wear being hated by our modern day Nazis as a badge of honor. But if you're still worried about what the worst people on the planet think of you, it's probably because you're one of them. And finally, you are definitely a Holocaust denier, but if you are still staying silent, it does not matter one single Iota, if you don't like what's happening, but if you refuse to speak out against it, you are encouraging it. If there are nine people at a table in one Zion Nazi and the other nine don't say anything, What you've got is a table filled with 10 Zion Nazis. For the love of everything sacred and holy, stop denying this Holocaust, stop funding this Holocaust, stop encouraging this Holocaust, and join us to help stop this fucking Holocaust. Thank you, Madame Clark McSpeaker. Melissa Albert, Paul Hurtell last speaker Huntsbury that we held on Wednesday outside of the first day of the rally. I'm calling you from my home because I'm making up time for work. I was one of the organizers of the rally for Dr. Huntsbury that we held on Wednesday outside of the rally. I'm calling you from my home because I'm making up time for work. stay one of the organizers of the rally for Dr. Huntswary that we held on Wednesday outside of the federal court. And I just wanted to thank the mayor and thank Uptel for showing up. And so showing support for this resident. A lot of you have heard me talk about the fact that my own family left a country that was abducting and disappearing people in a really brutal regime, and it has been incredibly chilling to watch this starting to unfold here in the U.S. So I just wanted to take some. I thank you to you all who showed up and express my disappointment in those who didn't. I think that now is the time for everyone to show up and get loud. You know, we've been coming to you for over a year expressing our horror at an unfolding genocide, but the fascism that we've been supporting as a country and in the west abroad is coming home now to find us here. And so I would really urge everybody on City Council to start showing up and getting loud because we are next. I'm here making up time for work that I missed on Wednesday. It's a Saturday. It's beautiful outside and instead I'm here making up time for work that I missed on Wednesday. It's a Saturday. It's beautiful outside and instead I'm here. And I'm just, I'm stressing that point because I understand what you're talking about when you say that some people don't have the luxury of taking time off to, you know, show up for their fellow citizens. but I did it. I did what I could. And I expect all of you as elected officials to speak out. This is your moment. And if you miss this moment, you will regret it. Fascism leaves no one behind. And we're all next. So, you know, thank you to all of my friends who are there in person today. I was with you all and thank you for your beautiful speeches. And I just want to support everyone's call for divestment. Thanks. Thank you. Madam Clerk, next speaker, and I think this is our last speaker. Paul Rattell. Madam Mayor Gaskins and members of the City Council. I reside in Mount Vernon, but I'm here because I'm being directly affected by your actions in company with Fairfax County in moving airplanes to fly over my house. As a community member directly affected by aircraft noise, I want to raise a serious concern. The current draft study on Southflow departure at DCA overlooks something critical. The duration of noise, not just as volume, matters. While areas like Old Town and Doors Short-Sharp burst of airplane noise communities near Mount Vernon experience long sustained overflight that were on people hour after hour. Our neighborhood is already significantly impacted by low altitude arrivals that bring prolonged noise throughout the day. Yet the study relies solely on Elmax, the metric that captures only the loudest instant of noise event. It completely ignores how long that noise lasts and how deeply it disrupts daily life. For us, it's not just how loud it gets, it's how long it stays. Learing outbound the parkers on to an already burdened arrival path creates a compounded impact that the study fails to recognize. We need a smarter, fairer approach. One that reflects lived experience and uses metrics like DNL and SEL to capture cumulative effects. Not just brief peaks, thank you. And I would like to say that the year ago I brought this up to your attention. And I submitted a comprehensive noise study. And all that was ignored for political expediency. once you use DGNL and other metrics, or let me put it this way, the LMAX is such a poor metric. It covered up at all. And I find that that's a shame. Because you had an opportunity to really do a comprehensive noise study by hiring the consultant not this but the consultant who could have mapped out entirely but instead you chose to use an almax and I'll provide you also a more detailed study on this. Thank you Paula and if you want to leave the additional study or the comments with the clerk happy to take a look and we'll also have staff follow up with you and make sure that the council has an update on this process. Paul is our last speaker. I will entertain a motion to close the public here. Okay. There has been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Councilman Elnubi to close the public discussion period. Any discussion? Okay. All those in favour say aye. any opposed say nay All right the eyes have it madam clerk next item action consent calendar planning commission 4 through 8 Okay, I I want to pull item 5 and then I need to pull item 8 because we have a speaker signed up so So 7 8 Do it through, that's seven, eight. So, it's their emotion that I approve item four and six. No. Seven, that's in poll. Okay. So, there's a motion by Councilwoman Green to approve the action consent items four and six. Is there a second? And there has been a second by Vice Mayor Bagley. All those in favour? Any opposed? Okay. Action consent items 4 through 6 are passed. Madam Clerk, next item. Special use permit 2024-0034. Parcel address 4800. 4800. Kim Moore Avenue, the Launte apartments, plain commission action recommended approval. Seven is the. I don't need a presentation on this. I wanted to pull this for two reasons. The first is I just wanted to highlight. This is a really good project. This is a project that is taking advantage of our zoning for housing tools. It is also taking advantage of delivering on some of the things that we just set forth in the small area plan. So I think it's important to take a minute to highlight that when the policies we pass are having a direct impact on our goals for more homes, especially homes near transit, and leveraging tools that allow more homes to be built, honestly without a lot of city investment. The second reason why I wanted to pull this is because I think it's also important to highlight and I said, this would staff in my briefing, my frustration towards the lack of progress on getting our dashboard up. I think when we pass zoning for housing, we were really clear that we want a space where we can lift up things like this are happening, where the public can see, here's the policies that are being used, here's the activity that is happening, here's the number of units we're getting, here's where it's happening. I think we spent a lot of time back and forth giving recommendations on what we wanted to see and now we have a moment where this could be up on our website and people could be watching it and I know a lot of work has happened and I appreciate that but it doesn't seem like we're or any closer to getting that up in a transparent and clear way. So I really just want to say that this is a moment where we should be holding ourselves accountable. But it doesn't seem like we're any closer to getting that up in a transparent and clear way. So I really just want to say that this is a moment where we should be holding ourselves accountable. Because it's helpful for the public, but it's also helpful for all of us as we look at future projects that leverage zoning for housing tools, as we go into the Housing Master Plan, as we do some of the other things in our long range plan. So I know there's work. I appreciate the explanation that I was given, but I just really hope that we can accelerate on moving that work to the website. So folks can see when good projects like this move. Carlemore, it's planning director and I just want to say thank you very much for that encouragement to act on this very important concept. And even to underline sort of the importance of what you're saying, in doing the summary update that we prepared for a council, it's highlighted that there is a lot more going on that people would be interested in knowing about. So you have our commitment to act quickly. Thank you. I appreciate that. Other questions or comments on this one? Vice, sir, hand it. Vice Mayor Bagley. I appreciate that we're going to keep moving without the presentation, but I just wanted to highlight what the success that the mayor is referring to and that took place here is one of the modifications in zoning for housing was to modify the number of units per acre allowed on a project. This was a building that went through a renovation that created more interior space opportunities to have more apartments and the thing that had kept them, that would have kept them from converting that to housing was that prior limitation on units per acre. So having changed that and zoning for housing and then to the credit of the, you know, the ownership at the at the site and our staff, marrying that concept together resulted in more units inside and existing building with nominal impacts to the surrounding community, but creating more housing, which was the intent of zoning for housing. So I just wanted to express my enthusiasm for the project and encourage other multifamily owners in our city to look into these possibilities. Are there opportunities in your buildings that zoning for housing creates or on your land that the changes we made creates? Because I'd love to see more projects like this that create more housing without needing more money, without needing substantial impacts from a construction perspective. And more housing of any kind is a necessary tool in combating our housing crisis. So thank you to staff. Councilman Chapman. Unless there's other questions, I'll just go ahead and put a motion on the order initiate. That's right. Initiated and recommend approval for this tax amendment. Okay, there has been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Councilman Aguirre to move approval for this tax amendment. Any discussion? Councilman Onnui. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I wanted to add one more thing and echo what my colleague said here. The other thing, because we don't have a presentation that I want to highlight, the public is the type of housing that's being created here. Because a lot of times when we're approving new developments, some of the things that we hear is these are on the high end housing, these high end units. But those ones that are being created are not high ends. People who don't know where these apartments are, they're right off seminary behind them. And these are middle, you know, regular market rate apartments that in that middle of the market. So they're not expensive. There are a lot of time starter apartments for folks who came in from outside of the city or small families that are starting off so we're creating in this case those housing that we really need in the city to be inclusive and for those who can't afford, you know, in most cases the apartments and the housing that are created when we approve new developments. Thank you, Councilman O'Neubi. And I'm gonna go back to Councilman Chapman because I forgot about closing the public hearing. So I need to- Madam, just adjust my motion to also close the public hearing as well. Okay, and I assume your second, accept that? Okay. Yeah. And so we have a motion by councilman Chapman and a second by councilman in giri to close the public hearing and to approve special use permit Number 2024-003-4 all those in favor say aye Any opposed say nay the eyes have Madam Clerk, next item. Special use for May of 2024-006-3. Carlyles, John Carlyles Street in Eisenhower Avenue. Carlyles Block P, Planning Commission Action. Recommend approval 7-0. Okay. Councilman Chapman. Thank you, and I know in my briefing I talked to staff, but also wanted to raise this publicly I think one of the. I don't say challenges but maybe the hesitations on moving forward with this while I probably will support it is looking at where we have particularly for this property set. All plan was probably back in the early 2000s, if not earlier than that. I can't remember. And at that time, for folks who don't already know, the affordability of kind of affordable housing funds were already set. And the runway for development was quite some time. and so I think for me a lot has changed between then, way back then and now and so looking at properties that still have not developed around our affordable housing policy, some other other policies, what has changed and is there any way to make sure with what has changed we are still keeping up with that. I know that affordable housing for the entire car law area has been paid but my question to staff was if we are going to continue down a road where we are approving these items that have not developed why not kind of unravel these parcels that are still not developed? Because much of Carlaw, as we already know, is developed and some properties are looking at their second redevelopment. Look at unraveling some of these properties that still have not developed and looking at some new planning opportunities for them where we can capture probably better community benefits because our formulations have changed over time. I think I will, if this comes back and I'm on council, this comes back again, I will not support it and ask my colleagues not to support it so we can take that step. I do think with things that are still out lying in car law, we need to have a new vision that That is accurate for where we are now as a city and the landscape is as well. Thank you, Councilman Chapman. Are there other comments or questions on this item? Councilman Eguiri. I just wanted to speak and support of my colleagues' comments. I think it's very poignant that if we approve something 10, 15, 20 years ago, and clearly over that amount of time, things change. I believe if we're giving continuations, if we're looking at different things, then we need to also adjust for that time period. Thank you, Councilman Hickory. Is there a motion? Vice Mayor back. Thank you and I want to join to a degree my colleagues comments. This is as I discussed in my briefing as well and I think this is the second or third time now and my what is my second term that these extensions have come up and I know I've asked similar questions about what is our practice and why is this happening and what does it mean in terms of not benefiting from potentially ways in which we've updated policies since the initial project was granted. But given that this is the first extension, given that this project does involve senior living, which is an absolute need in the community as well. And at this time, I'm comfortable moving to approve the extension of the special use permit for the three-year extension, but I'm inclined to just express that it may be a different conversation to my colleagues' point in three more years if this were to come back again. So that's a motion on the table. Would you be open to putting in your motion a closure of the public hearing? We're gonna get this right eventually folks. Yes, so Madam Mayor, I moved to close the public hearing and to approve the consideration of a special use, a move to approve the special use permit for a three-year extension of the previously approved SUP 2020-0065 for block P. Second. Okay, there has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilman McPike. All those in, well, any other discussion? Great, hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Right, the ayes have it. Madam Clerk, next item. Special use permit 2025-009-1101. Fintly laying planning commission action recommend approval 7-0. Okay, do we need a presentation? If not, I will go, we have one speaker signed up. Okay, so with that, I'm gonna go right to our first speaker. And that is Mr. Duncan Blair. Mr. Duncan Blair, speaker form should have said, in the event the item is taken off the consent calendar. Evidently, it did not, the I will refrain from elegant discourse. Okay, I won't do any, I just anyone have questions for Mr. Blair with the system. Okay. Is there a motion to close the public hearing and move approval of the SUP? There has been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Councilwoman Green to close the public hearing and to move approval of special use permit number 2025-009. All those in favour? Aye. Opposed? All right. The eyes have it. Madam Clerk, next item. Roll call consent calendar 910. Is there a vote? Okay. Councilman Chapman. Move approval of the roll call consent calendar. I can. Okay. There has been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Vice Mayor Bagley to close the public hearing and to approve the roll call consent calendar. This is a roll call. So Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilman Chapman. All right. Vice Mayor Bagley. Mayor Gaskins. Hi. Councilman McGuirey. Hi. Councilman Elnubi. Hi. Councilman McGuirey. Hi. Councilman McPike. Hi. Madam Clerk, next item. Public hearing and consideration of a five year license agreement with the Alexandria Seaport Foundation for docking the Maritime Heritage Center one and two within the city I'll give you my rena. Councilman Chapman. If you go ahead and put a motion on the floor to close public hearing and approve and authorize the seat. One and two within the city of Marina. Councilman Chapman. If you go ahead and put a motion on the floor to close public hearing and approve and authorize the city manager, execute a five-year license agreement substantially similar to attachment one with the Alexandria seaport foundation. Okay. There has been a motion by Councilman Chapman and a second by Councilwoman Green. Any discussion? Okay, hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The aye's have it. Madam Clerk, next item. Resonting 2025-00001, development special use permit, 2024-10010126 long view drive in 29, 21abi O'Court Westridge Towns Plenty Commission action recommend approval 6 to 0 6 to 1. Okay and I think we are going to start with a staff presentation on this one. I think they have a brief presentation and then we'll go to our speaker. Good morning Mayor Gaskin and members of the City Council my name is Lee Amdyeans urban planner with planning and zoning. I'm here today to present the The Westridge Trowns Project, 126 Longview Drive, and 2921 Nopil Court. Here are the items we'll be talking about today. Today's request is for consideration of a rezoning and development special use permit for 19 townhouse style units in three multi-unit buildings and one single unit dwelling. The project details have not changed since the council deferred this project last month. The action requested of the council is approval of the rezoning and DSUP. Key points include the project includes rezoning of a portion of the site from R8 to R8. and includes the provision of one on-site for sale three bedroom affordable unit at 70 to 100% of AMI. And modifications to and SUPs are also being requested. The project site, the location, includes spans the distance between between Navier Court and Longview Drive, which is north of Duke Street, between Bishop Arerton High School and East Taylor Run Parkway. The site is within the Taylor Run Duke Street small area plan. As stated previously, the project includes 19 townhouse style units with rear-facing garages in three multi-unit buildings and one single unit dwelling. Vehicular access for the townhouse units is from Nabiou Court and the single unit dwelling fronts on and is accessed from long view drive. There's no vehicular connection between the two. Townhouses are four stories and 35 feet in height and a single unit dwelling is two stories and 24 feet. They comprise a total of 36,000 net square feet of development. 12,000 square feet of private open space is provided for the townhouse style units, which is just over the required 35% of the site area. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. Oh.. Setback modifications are requested for the multi-unit portion of the development and SUPs are requested for the townhouse style units for compact parking space sizes and garages and also for bonus density as provided in section 7700 of the zoning ordinance. Now we're ready for key findings. Some highlights of the project include for the plan achieves improvements to storm water quality and provides quantity reductions through on-site bioretension and other BMPs and will exceed the required phosphorus load reductions by 14%. When constructed, the development is anticipated to generate up to three students, which will attend Douglas MacArthur Elementary, George Washington Middle, and Alexandria City High Schools. Regarding traffic, the proposal did not trigger a traffic study with an estimated peak AM trips at average of 11 and PM trips that average of 12 added benefits include one on site for sale three bedroom affordable unit at 70 100% AMI Monetary contributions to the city housing trust fund of 143 thousand dollars and public art fund $12,000. Also the buildings were designed with consistent with the 2019 green building policy. My colleague Nathan Randall will now provide further information. Good morning. The project was discussed with the community on four occasions. The applicant presented it to the Longview Hill Citizens Association in two meetings in June and October of 2024. The Alexandria Housing Affordability Advisory Committee endorsed the Affordable Housing Plan element of the project at its September meeting. The Federation of Civic Associations heard information about the project, and zoning ordinance notification requirements were adhered to. in addition, five letters of opposition and four letters of support have been received from the community. This case was originally heard at the April 1st Public Hearing of the Planning Commission between that hearing and the April 26th City Council hearing. Staff learned of a noticing matter from a neighbor in which the site address was listed on the required sign postings as being long you terrace instead of long view drive. The applicant subsequently corrected the sign posting council voted to defer the request from its April 26th city council hearing given this noticing matter. The case was reheard at the May 6th hearing of the planning commission which voted six to one to recommend approval of the rezoning and DSEP requests. No changes to the case have been made to the substance of the proposal since the Planning Commission first heard it on April 1st. We recommend that Council approve the rezoning and DSEP requests. Subjected conditions contained in the staff report. We welcome any questions you may have. Okay. At this time are there questions for staff? Okay, so with that, we will come from Chapman. So the only question I'll start out with is, under, if we were not to read on this property, and the folks wanted to still go forward with redevelopment, what does that look like? I think there were particularly things that we talked about in my briefing regarding kind of the density on the project, but also parking concerns and parking. Sure. So there could be several different, you know, sort of layouts or development proposals and one of them that was discussed briefly at the planning commission meeting was perhaps four plexes or a series of four plexes could be proposed. Four plexes, consistent with zoning for housing wouldn't necessarily require parking. A question also came up about lots without frontage. There need to be some sight layout issues sort of worked out. So it could be a, although there could be many proposals, the one that was talked about I'll say the most, would have been different from what you see before you today. Thank you. Councilman Aguiri. Not so much a question, just wanted to raise something to the public's attention. Because as Councilman Chapman noted, there was some concerns around parking. I just wanted to highlight condition 124A, where the principal use of garage parking spaces shall be for passenger vehicles garaged at the address. And I think this will definitely help with concerns around overflow of parking and folks parking on the streets and taking up some of those spaces. So when folks are encouraged and, and I'm way mandated to utilize the garage for those parking spaces, then I think that'll help with some of the concerns there. I have, you wanna go? Just a follow-up to that. Yes, come from Chaplin. And I forgot to ask this in our briefing. I appreciate my colleague mentioning that. How do we enforce that? We're not going to kind of peep in everybody's garage every night to make sure they park the car, but how is that enforced? If we're going to kind of mandate that. So the typical or standard wording of the condition has enforcement lying with the HOA. So and it would be required to be a part of the HOA documents. So Carl, where is playing director? If there is a 311 or complaint received by staff from a neighbor, in case the neighbor doesn't contact the HOA, we also have the ability and responsibility responding. I have three quick questions before we go. One, I was reviewing the letters that we had received from residents who expressed concerns with the project. I think one of the main concerns was as it relates to the new density on the property. Can you kind of just walk through how staff has determined, and I guess the majority of the planning commission determine that this project while adding additional density would still be consistent with our requirements for residential low? Certainly. So one thing that was sort of in maybe an overarching idea here was that there's higher density residential near along Duke Street, Zoned RC. And there is, of course, mostly single family sort of to the north. We saw this as a bit of a transition zone where something that was, you know, townhouse, but still meeting the residential low designation for the property in the small area plan, it would be appropriate. And so what we looked at, there were other areas, there's a townhouse community on Nopil Court, immediately to the west, that was also designated for residential low. We generally looked at the FAR and compared it and we think that the FAR that's proposed here would be consistent with residential low. So on balance, you know, we see this as a bit of a transition location that this FAR and this proposal would be consistent with residential low. The other thing that came up consistently in the resident letters that we received was regarding the setbacks. Can you just kind of talk through for the council and for the public? How do we, like what criteria do we look at? How do we look at what's a reasonable modification? How is that determined? Sure. I think that, so one of the things that we look at when we look at Modifications is whether the whether there are still a reasonable amount of you know land area or setback in between The property that's being the building that's being built and its neighbors, you know whether You know such that the original purpose of having a setback would still be retained, you know light and air and and in this case we found that you know the there is one one point there there has been discussion about the setbacks to the north and at one point because of the way that the building is oriented its 10 feet but it actually widens up to 15 feet for the majority of the length of that and we also looked at whether the what the setback is on the other side for the other house and we estimated is around seven or eight feet feet. So we put the two together, we were comfortable with the, the, the, the, um, setback modification being requested. Okay. Um, and then this is a follow up on some of the parking questions. I know in other developments we've talked about sort of what conversations we might need to have with neighboring, um, properties. And I know the apartment building also sometimes has parking that spills over into the neighborhood. What conversations have or are planned with them to kind of talk about making sure residents are parking on the spots designated for them? So I know that the applicant has discussed a variety of topics that came up in the or a few topics, excuse me, that came up in the community meeting. And they, I don't recall for sure, but they may have also talked about parking. You know, I'll also add that the Nobbel Court on street parking does not have a residential, it's a spot where residential parking permits would be allowed, but the neighbors have not requested it. So they haven't had the, you know, gone through the motions, right, to request it yet. And so, you know, there are things that can be done. Maybe the applicant may be able to speak to any conversations they've had with the residential apartments to the south. That's helpful. No, I want to just make sure I feel like that was a consistent theme. And I think hearing the different layers at which this is being approached from the garages to the HOA enforcement, to potentially a residential parking zone should the neighbors wish to pursue that, to also working with the neighboring properties. So I just want to make sure there's multiple levels of enforcement there. And then the last question I had and then we'll go to the public hearing. Chair Mc Chair McPant, she mentioned in hers a request for staff and the applicant to review planning and lighting plans. I know this would happen as part of the final site review, but I'm just curious as any conversation happened to date about what might be possible there as a way to provide additional screening for the adjacent residents. So although detailed discussions have not been held yet with the applicant, it's something that we feel comfortable is easily remedied as part of the final site plan. Thank you. Councillor Cousin-Chamden. And can staff talk to me a couple things that we came up in my briefing. Talking about other properties or other townhouse communities where we've had the policy around or made the exception around kind of garages for combat cars. I think we talked about that in my briefing and the staffs that they were going to kind of let me know some of those other areas in the city where we've done that. Sure. You know, one thing I'll start off by saying is that there are projects that have requested a parking reduction in the number of spaces, right? And but the question more specifically, I think that you and others have had is about whether the, are there any examples of projects where compact size spaces were recommended were requested and recommended for approval. We'll be able to see what we've released to. One is Westridge, sorry, Edward Towns. On Stevenson Avenue and the other is the Sal Patrick Street townhouses and I think it's 206 through 212 Sal Patrick Street. Okay. And you know, with those approvals, I'm assuming maybe we're seeing, let me start here. So I wanna make sure as we're giving this exception to these garages for smaller cars, we are actually seeing smaller cars. There's some connection with what we're seeing and what we're doing. Because if cars are getting bigger and we are now giving exceptions for more smaller car garages, the two are not going to mix. And then we're going to exacerbate, at least, in my opinion, we're going to exacerbate the parking issues because somebody with a Hummer is not going to be able to fit in their garage. And I think the goal here is to fit cars, as we've said, in their garage. And these are sizable garages for two cars. And so hopefully, both individuals who have cars are able to fit them in there And so I want to understand kind of the data points that we are seeing that says this is something that's actually going to work out Not only for the approval time that we're doing it now, but as we go into the future Because as I drive around I'm seeing bigger cars not necessarily smaller cars Well one thing that that I can say is that I don't believe and others with planning and zoning can jump in if they've heard differently. I don't believe we've heard any complaints, for instance, for those other locations, or at least I'm not aware of any complaints. Rob Kern's planning and zoning. I think one of the things I heard in the zoning for housing, conversation was challenging staff to try and be creative about providing various housing types and options for people. And while the compact space option may not be fit everyone, it does, as I think Chairman McMahon stated in the Planning Commission, we're providing two spaces instead of one. If we just sort of tried to standardize the car size, we'd sort of lose that opportunity for two smaller cars. So here, we're also providing a home that's probably at a lower price point than others in the marketplace. So all these sort of fine grain decisions lead up to try and providing options in the marketplace. While we inform the owners, these are compact spaces, we, you know, so the people are aware of the size of unit, just like they're aware of the size of bedrooms and bathrooms and other things, and they're, you know, like by the thing that's going to work for you the best, and at the price point that you can have. And so I think what you're seeing us in real time trying to provide those different options for people to choose. I appreciate that answer. I think the challenge with that for me is one. is one the market in Alexandria is just very interesting, as it really needs to price points. And so I don't know, even with some of the decisions we make up here in exclusions and exceptions that always kind of relates to what's happening in the market. I would also say that, you know, while I hope folks are looking at everything that they need to do or way they need to adjust their life to fit into these spaces such as having compact cars, I don't think we have the carrot and the stick they're in place to make sure that happens, right? Because again, if I have a hummer and I don't wanna fit it in next to my wife's Prius, I can park it on the street, right? I think that's, and I think that's the challenge that the neighbors are looking at. What is going to make sure, ensure that someone who has a little bit bigger car or a regular size car actually uses the space they have? And so I think that's where kind of my question is, kind of what we're seeing and how we're seeing it, as it relates to what we think is going to happen in the future, or is there, you know, we're providing the creativity and the carrot to allow for this, but where's the stick to make sure this is actually happening? Yeah. I mean, I would just add, because I think you were a really good point, because this is playing out in the life of Cameron Station, where you have smaller garages and a lot of people have bigger cars. I think you were a really good point, because this is playing out in the life of Cameron station, where you have smaller garages and a lot of people have bigger cars. I think this is where the HOA comes in and is really important. I mean, I can tell you in Cameron station, people who have now been using their garages for storage are now getting fines and violations, because it was agreed that that is where your car is supposed to be. to be. So I don't know how that will play out here, but I heard the HO enforcement, but I do think it is something that if someone where your car supposed to be. So I don't know how that will play out here, but I heard the HO enforcement, but I do think it is something that if someone's not paying attention to, it does become an issue, because people aren't using the space as intended. Let me one brief thing, and hopefully people don't beat me up about this. I'm not a big fan of leaving it to the HOA. I think I've heard enough horror stories of some of how some of those different opportunities are related. a big fan of leaving it to the HOA. I think I've heard enough horror stories of some of those different opportunities and relationships and things work. And so I'm always nervous about just saying, hey, we're gonna kind of give it over to them to make sure everything goes right. And I 100% get that I want to just raise it as an example of it is playing out in real time. And this is the way I think all of those pieces interact because the other thing that becomes is I think we talked about The enforcement I can tell you in Kermann station if you then park in the city spots You can only be there for so long and then they come around and they give you a ticket and then they move you and so there's Many levers of how it interacts I'm vice mayor Bagley and then councilman Olnubey and then I do want to go to the public area. I mean, to this end, I just to pick up on what Mr. Kerns was getting at to, you know, we sort of got ourselves into this housing crisis as a country in part by establishing a lot of minimums that made, a lot sizes really big, that made minimum, you know, you know, house sizes really big that required certain things. And this is part of an effort to acknowledge that, that if we, if we establish baselines, that set, you know, the house lot has to be this big. That means it's going to cost this much because the land is expensive or if we establish certain requirements. So I'm not to minimize, you, but I do want to acknowledge the council themselves has certain levers in the marketplace and one of them is allowing different things to be built and some of them will be smaller in recognition that the buyer will have that option to buy something smaller. I own a car and I'm a buyer in the marketplace and if it's the overall product is smaller and then more affordable and my car will fit in it, I'd rather buy that than another house that's larger with a larger garage and justifiably a larger cost. So the enforcement and the practicalities around parking are real, but I wanted to just indicate my support for what staff express, which is their responding to what we are saying about creating choice in the marketplace, thinking about what is necessary versus what is. is, you know, storm water run, you know, necessary is safety and, you know, the building standards, you know, these are necessary. And then there are things that are more market optionality, you know, creating different products. So we don't wanna create things that are unsafe, that don't align overall, you know, with a good, deliverable product, But I share or I want to create things that are unsafe that don't align overall, you know with a good deliverable product But but I share or I I want to agree with staff sentiment that they are responding to what what we expressed over a year long process and Zoning for housing which was to create Optionality where possible and you know smaller garages for better or worse or part of that optionality, you've talked about. Councilman Neube. Thank you Madam Mayor. So I guess I have two bucks of questions, parking and then student generation. Let me follow up on the parking one. If people start parking in the street and we see spillage, they're not, in the HWA, let's say it's not enforcing, is that a situation where we can do a parking permit program to mitigate that spillage? Yes, since this area is zoned for that, the residents would have to sort of get together and put in a petition for it. But that is, that is an option. Okay, I appreciate that. Because I think, I'm trying to think what tools, does the city have in case the HOA to Councilman Chapman's point does not do what they're supposed to do. So I appreciate that answer. My second question is on the student generation piece. You said three students, that's at any given point, right? We're assuming that at the law. And I know we talked about this in my briefing. It's the life of the development, correct? At any point. That's right. At any particular point, on average, we would expect three students from this project. And my question would be, are there any, it struck me as low? So my question would be are there any it struck me as low so my question is are there any comparable communities somewhere that we can look at to validate that number? Yes there are the last time that we did sort of a test case particularly for townhouses was a while ago but we are engaged with the school system on updating the student generation rates. So this is a good time for us to also see if we can tease out some specific townhouse communities and make sure that there's not a lot of differential. But the update will look specifically at all the townhouses in Alexandria and how many students are living in them. So you will be getting with the update every time number. I think you appreciate that. If I could just add to that, it might be helpful, Carl. Because we do have new member, we're a new council to kind of update at some point in a memo on how we do this process, sort of beginning in the beginning of the year with ACPS going through. I always, it's such a weird, the cohort survival rates, that's chronographics, all of these different pieces, and then also talking through what's the data that goes into the student generation rates because we are in the process of updating that ratio for all of our properties so it may just be helpful so everyone's on the same page. Okay sure. I appreciate that Madam Mayor. Thank you appreciate that from staff. Thank you so much. Okay, so with that we're going to turn to the public hearing and since we've been here we've had another person sign up so I'd like to start with the resident. So we could call her first. That would be great. Julie, find some bush. Hi there. Thank you very much for letting me speak today. I wanted to touch on a couple of things, I think largely on the kind of understanding and assessment that the proposed development and higher density is in keeping with the neighborhood and comparable to the existing townhouses on Nobhill Court. And I think for those who visited the site, the Nobhill townhouses are about the third, the density of the proposed. And I think one of the other key differences is that it does actually extend the existing fabric of the neighborhood where those townhouses are facing the street and enforcing the kind of existing fabric and grain of the neighborhood. Whereas the proposed development has two of the townhouse buildings are really kind of counter to the existing the existing fabric where the front of some of the houses are facing either the side yard or rear yard of existing houses. And I think I'd also just like to highlight that my biggest concern is is with the setbacks and the relationship between giving setback allowance when something is much higher. one of the other key differences with the Nobhill townhouses are two to three stories. Max and something is much higher. One of the other key differences with the Nobhill townhouses are two to three stories, Max, and most of the residential neighborhood is one to two stories, so it is lower than allowed, but it makes the difference between what is proposed a lot more stark. So when you combine a reduced setback with something that is higher, it's more noticeable. And I think the other concern I have with the way that the setbacks are proposed and the development is laid back, what is left for setback in several locations is more hard-scaping and doesn't allow for vegetative buffer, which again, if you are doing reduced setback, allowing for some sort of buffer is important. I think those are some of my main concerns. I did also want to touch on some of the kind of process of this. I know the developer did have two community meetings. We were explained that the review of Planning Commission and the Council meeting that's ongoing were our opportunities to give feedback. And I think that's very disingenuous that because the plan is already baked and up at this point, it's not really an opportunity to give feedback at this point. And then I also do want to point out that for those meetings, both were virtual despite the fact that we as an association requested in person given that a large number of the community members are elderly and not terribly tech savvy. And I know for the second meeting I was unable to join because I sat for 20 years. Thank you miss thank you we appreciate your comments do you have kind of a closing sentence? Okay thank you I found I'm gonna go to the next speaker. Good morning Duncan Blair wire Gill representing old Creek homes. Matt Gray is the developer of old Creek homes and the first thing I'm going to say is parking Matt did the Stevens and Avenue houses which are again kind of entry level housing when Stevens and Avenue they've, the garages have compact spaces, it was not an impediment and those spaces are being used. With regard to the term compact spaces, we may want to just change that nomenclature because in many ways we think when in the 80s when compact spaces were over a lot. We were thinking of Lincoln Continental town cars and a Volkswagen. That's not the case today. The Hummer is probably the outlier, but what Matt had found in selling these homes, the standard car that most of us drive it, is a compact car and fits within a space that's 9 by 16 and a half as opposed to 10 by 20. So the size garage is not the Montgomery County issue of people not being able to get out. They are size to to fit most cars. The other thing that's staffed and say is that if this were not a multi-family building because it's a condominium, in townhouses, single-family houses and two-family houses, we would not be asking for this special use permit. They are permitted to have compact cars without a separate special use permit. With that said, the last thing I want to say, this project is a transition. We worked very hard to transition from the Housing Alexandria Garden Apartments. I did talk to John right after our first community meeting in said, you need to look at your residents parking. I think what's happening is for some other residents, it's a place on the street or a parking garage, space. They're going to park on the street just because human nature. But housing Alexandria is aware of it. We see this as a transition between the different types of housing on Nop Hill Court, but we also see it as an opportunity for the city to look at a piece of property that can be redeveloped with entry-level housing, with one on-side, affordable housing, for sale unit, in a substantial contribution, in a character that fits within the neighborhood. Be glad to answer any questions. Are there questions for the applicant? I have one quick question. It was brought up by the speaker, and you heard me raise it earlier, around vegetation, plantings, and a lighting plan. I just want to get right back. Yeah, at the city, at the Planning Commission meeting, chairing man suggested that we look at lighting. Lighting is a big topic as we all know, to make sure that the lighting does not spill and there's not glare already working with those fixtures with regards to planning the areas ever suggested will be augmented and this may sound disingenuous but it's not. It's in that interest also to provide good transition landscaping and to have a community that's well landscaped. Thank you for sharing that. I just want to go on record. I do agree with the residents on this one. I'm glad to hear that conversations are happening. I think this is really important. So where we can mitigate, minimize the hard escape and put whatever plantings and native plantings that we can, I think it'd be important for also consistent with the fabric of the neighborhood, but also just to alleviate some of these concerns. If there are no further questions for the applicant, then I'll take a motion to close the public hearing. There has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by Councilman Chapman to close the public hearing. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Right? The public hearing is closed. Is there any additional questions or discussion or comments from my colleague? I'm trying to pull up my staff report and I'll say a little bit long. The applicant asked or mentioned housing Alexandria and staff kind of talked to me about kind of the any conversation and communication with them. I know they've got a number of one side parking spaces and as was kind of stated are people using those are they spilling out to the street already I tried to drive by at a reasonable hour to kind of see what parking looked like but I don't want that just to be the only kind of data point if there are others as well. So we've also heard the potential for car spelling over and the applicant just spoke to that. I don't have specific numbers for you on that. We'd be happy to follow up with Housing Alexandria a little bit more on that point. Yeah. I just want to have a quick time. Sorry, we are already close to public hearing. Oh, I have a few. Thank you. I have a few. I have a few. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I would move to approve. I'll see what this is. I don't Added move to approve, resounding to 2025-001 and DSUP 2024-0010 as reported by the Planning Commission with the staff's conditions. Okay, there has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by Vice Mayor Bagley to approve the rezoning number 2025-00001 and DSUP number 2024-0010 as based on the staff report and the discussion at the hearing any additional discussion All those in favor say aye aye any opposed We have one day so the motion carries six to one it is councilman Chapman Okay, madam clerk next item. Thank you zoning text amendment 2025 that's zero zero zero zero zero three Playing commission actions initiate and recommend approval seven to zero the commission. I'm going to start with the commission. I'm going to start with the commission. I'm going to start with the commission. I'm going to start with the commission. I'm going to start with the commission. I'm going to start with the personal participation in this one. I have been advised that due to the broad changes proposed in zoning text amendment 2025-00003, including amendments related to the lighting under zoning ordinance section 6-403F, I can vote on this matter. However, I want to be clear that I have decided to recuse myself from the vote on item number 14, SUP 2025-0021, the Episcopal High School Athletic Field Lights SUP, because my husband is an athletic coach at Episcopal High School. Also for the council and for the public, I need to make a statement about the docket order since we received some questions about this. On council's docket today, specifically items 13 and 14, item 13 is a zoning tax amendment that includes a proposal to amend the SP criteria for lighting of congregate, recreational facilities and dog parks and the proposal would delete the 80 feet height limit on light poles. Item 14 is an SUP that is specifically a proposal by the Episcopal High School to install field lights at heights both below and above 80 feet. of 80 feet. The city has docketed matters in the same way in the past and so consistent with the law and as stated in the staff report, if the tax amendment and the SUP are approved, the lights exceeding 80 feet cannot be installed until the council adopts the zoning tax amendment implementation ordinance, and the consideration of which will be scheduled for Council June 14th meeting. So my understanding is that staff are going to be proposing condition language that will make this clear and clearly show the intersection between 13 and 14. So with that, I'm going to go, we have several speakers signed up for item 13. So we're going to open our public hearing and I'm going to ask the clerk to call the first three. Roy Shannon, Jr. Chris Hansen and Carter Fleaming. Okay. Do we have Roy in here? Yes. Good morning Madam Mayor and Council members. My name is Roy Shannon with the law from Shannon Wright and I'm representing property owners on Frost regarding this stock at item 13, the talking point. So I think everyone remembers 2018 and the amendment with this came into place and the height limits was critical. I think the way this is being pushed through, the staff report says it recommends minor updates to the zoning ordinance to correct typos, incorrect cross references and emissions as well as the proposing updates to clarify language, codify current staff interpretations and address unintended consequences. I assure you that with this went through in 2018, this was not an unintended consequence of 80 feet. 80 feet was very specific. In fact, when you look at six stash 403 F2D, that's the setback requirements of 35 feet. So right now, they're not putting a limit on how high the polls are. They're just erasing that limitation. So before you had 80 feet and you had to have 35 from the setback from right ways and property lines. Here you 35 feet and no limit. So you could have 150 foot pole within 35 feet are at 36 feet of a property line. That's crazy. That is not been was happening in 2018. That's not what should be happening here. This is a major change. This isn't an insignificant little minor change. So right now it seems, I mean to say that 13 is not part of 14, I think, I think you have to say they are this point of it. And the whole point of the 100 feet is for the feet for requirements for their training facilities. Well, what about the city's requirements? Why is the city bowing to feet far? Are they going to bow to the other organizations that come up? It just, it doesn't make any sense. Right now, the setback again, 35 feet is what it calls for in part D. That was tied to the height, as with a lot of setback provisions, deal with the height of the building, the height of the structure. So for all of a sudden, for staff to say, well, we're just putting this minor addition of eliminating the height restriction. Again, there's no cap. We're just going to eliminate it. This is a minor. This is absolutely significant. And it should be carefully considered. Not by Council here who are not lighting experts or staff, and I say for that matter, you bring in people and you do a very big tax amendment and you do a big change that has big consequences. And this is going to impact at least the 51 fields that are already in place anywhere else. So again, I would encourage you not to approve this one minor section of a number of issues, but this doesn't fit on its face with an omission across reference to typo or anything like this. This is a significant change, even with the cap. And there should be the due diligence and the studies that go into it, not just throwing it up there, because we're trying to get FIFA lights in for their standards, their they're training standards. The fee for would probably have to meet us not fee button. That's another story. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Madame Clark and Madame City Attorney, question for you. I realize that I jumped right into the public comment without the staff presentation. Do we have the ability to pause? I just want to make sure everyone's on the same page. Can we pause this? Yes, you could pause the public hearing and ask for the staff presentation and then go back. Okay. Do I need a formal vote to pause it or I can just pause it? No, you can pause it. I'm going to pause the public hearing just so that staff can set the ground level on what are all of the different things that are being proposed. I'm sorry Mr. Shannon, but I can tell from your comments that you have read the presentation. And then we will resume this. Morning. Sam Shelby with Planning and Zoning. And so this is one of our regular, you know, we do this a couple times a year. We go through the zoning ordinance and look for opportunities where there could be more clarity or we find a we come across a regulation that is not quite serving us the way we thought it would. And so this has this proposal has a variety of elements that are on the screen here. I'll just go through each one one by one. Let's see. Can we have the next slide please? Okay, so the first piece is the accessory dwelling unit requirements. When we passed the policy in 2021 staff had recommended a permit requirement and this is an administrative permit that is only, it's the first stop kind of for an ADU applicant. And it's an administrative permit that's approved by planning and zoning only. We issue the approval, it is reviewed by other departments, but we originally proposed this because we found that it was a common practice for other cities and jurisdictions that had ADU policies. And we also thought it was going to be a great opportunity to have another venue to explain a new policy, to residents who are interested in building ADUs. And we thought it would also help to have this standalone permit for tracking purposes. But you know, four years into the policy, four and a half years into the policy, we found that it's basically making city staff look at the same material a couple different times, which is not necessary. We have a robust, you know, system for tracking. And so we're finding that, you know, this, we're recommending that we remove the standalone an ADU, that it would only be, you know, that the ADUs would still require all sorts of building permits and mechanical permits, and these sort of other code requirements would still be, you know, thoroughly reviewed and met. This would just save some time for residents, and it would also save a little bit of money. And also just, you know, it wouldn't, it would reduce some of the redundant reviews that are happening with accessory dwelling units now. The other piece is when the ADU policy was passed the council added a condition that required an owner to be to use the subject property as their primary residence when they apply for the ADU permit. And the genesis of that requirement was concerns about the use of ADUs as short term rentals. And also a little bit of nervousness about developer speculation that having an ADU would encourage developers to purchase homes and the city and construct an ADU and new and new and new and new and new and new and then ran out both the main house and the ADU. We are at this point suggesting that we remove this requirement. We have a brand new short-term rental policy, so any short-term rentals would need to be registered through that and reviewed and monitored through that program. And we've been keeping track of this again since the policies inception. We haven't seen evidence of this fear coming to fruition with the developer speculation. And it also just, it's a complicated rule to enforce. So we are also asking for this to be removed. We can go to the next slide. Before we go, there are two questions on that point. Vice mayor Bagley and then Councilman Chapman. I think to my, to the mayor's point earlier about sort of dashboards and tracking with relatively new policies, I just thought this gives us a little check in opportunity opportunity to ask how have our, and since you're sort of touching on what you're seeing in the market and your expectations, can staff just speak briefly to what their expectations were of ADUs being built and where we're at? So we forecast that we would get about 15, 80 years a year. And I would say miraculously, it's almost exactly what we've gotten. I think we're at 78 since 2021. So we're a little bit off the mark there, but so we're getting a little bit more than we expected. But basically, that's where we're at, that we've got that many units. No, I appreciate that. I mean, I think it's a nice moment to highlight a quality forecast. And so I'm gonna ask a follow-up question, which is what's your forecast in light of these changes? How does a change of forecast? Right, so this is a little, it's not that scientific, it's kind of just basing our next experience and the number of inquiries we've had from different types of applicants and those that have sort of informally told us whether or not they would apply for an ADU. So I'd kind of forecast that this would be another three to five ADUs a year as we're moving this policy. Councilman Chapman. Can you give some specifics about the complications that you just mentioned at the kind of tail end of what you were talking about? Yes, so you know, for example Some of the applications we've had for ADUs are from homeowners who are renovating their whole house and so when they apply for the ADU permit there is sometimes there's no house to live in because there's no There's no house on the site or there no, because the house is being demolished and rebuilt. That's one of the examples. Another example is if the property is owned by an LLC, it's really hard for staff to determine the entities of that LLC and where those people reside. Basically, our only ability to determine if somebody is using a property as their primary residence is who's listed on the owner of the property. And if that matches on the application, then we'd have to ask for mortgage statements and all sorts of stuff to actually verify somebody's primary residency. Comes with a Gary. Thank you Madam Mayor. So I'm not opposed to this in any way, but just given that we're considering taking this restriction off. I know we talked about this dashboard, but I just like a problem check in probably. In a year's time, let's see if the numbers are kind of according to what we thought they would be. Sure. I think that's a great idea. Next slide then. I don't have the controls. Can we do the next slide, please? So this is another sort of minor update here. Right now churches are permitted in sort of a random smattering of zones. And it just needs to be more consistent that they're allowed in all zones where other similar uses are allowed. So if a church is not like not currently listed in a in a zone, for example, but a public school is or something with somewhat similar impacts, then churches should also be listed in that zone as a permitted use. The second piece is that right now in an old building that was built before 1963, if you hit the renovations that you're doing, if they exceed a certain amount, then that whole site has to be brought into parking compliance, no matter how long it's been there. And so there's churches that are, you know, most of our churches predate 1963, and we had a, you all actually saw a case pretty recently where a church was adding structures and ramps and stuff for people with disabilities to access the church. And those things are expensive. And it hit that target where it needed to be then the full parking requirement needed to be triggered and applied for. So they had to seek especially use permit for a parking reduction because they were adding improvements to the building that would trigger the parking requirement for this provision. So what we're recommending is that only changes to a church that would actually increase the parking requirements so that they were making their sanctuary bigger or their auditorium bigger or adding more classroom seats for their daycare programs or whatever. Those are the only things that would trigger actually the parking requirement, rather than, you know, rehabbing a building or that kind of thing. And this is, we're starting with churches because it's a use that we've seen recently with this exact thing. It might be something that we return to you later as a broader recommendation about changing this for other uses too, because it just, it seems like if you're not changing the building in the way that makes the parking requirement higher, then maybe we don't need to actually have that building comply with parking. And that's not part of the proposal today, I'm just giving a little preview there. Okay, I'm ready for the next slide please. Okay, this this is, right now, you need a full hearing special use permit for light poles at an athletic field or a dog park if the light poles exceed the height limit in the zone that the property is located in. And that is going to remain. We're not changing the requirement for a special use permit. You still need a special use permit for light poles on an athletic field if the height of the poles exceeds the height that's allowed in the zone. Right now there is a limitation that prevents the height pole application to have height poles that even that exceed 80 feet. And this is regardless of whether or not an applicant has demonstrated to satisfactorily to counsel that light impacts can be addressed with the application. When we recommended this 80 foot limit, the technology was newer and is evolving. And what we've learned over the years is that taller light poles Better focus light and reduce lights billage impacts than shorter poles and this still So we're recommending is getting rid of the the 80 foot height limit is is removing that Restriction council could still say no to a light pole. That's too. If it's too close to a property line, either staff or planning commission or city council could say this is looming too close to a property that light pole needs to be shorter. There's still very broad discretion for council to adjust location height and make sure that any sort of potential impacts are thoroughly addressed without the height limit. The setbacks would stay the same, the 35 foot setback would stay the same. There is an upper limit on how tall a pole could be without additional requests needed. For example, if a light pole were 100 feet, there's basically just a two-part setback limit. There's the, it can never be closer than 35 feet, but a lot of the other zones establish even larger yard requirements. So if those setback requirements are based on height, so if you had a taller pole, then you would need to have a larger setback than 35 feet. And the applicant could have, you know, could ask for a modification from that, but then again, Council would have to find that there's no, it's not going to, you know, cause undue impact or loom over adjacent properties. And you know, just to highlight some recent, recent poll, light poll approvals, there's, we now have lights at Francis Hammond Middle and Simpson Stadium in Jefferson Houston. And these are all, you know, especially used permits that have been approved by Council over the last two to three years. One second, Mr. Shelby, question from Councilman Chapman. Yeah, for that last point, do we have either the heights of all of those or the highest one? Yes, so these are all, let's see, the tallest one is at the Parker Ray Stadium and that some of those are 80 feet tall, the rest are 60-ish feet tall. Councilman O'Neubee. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Where did the number 80 come from? Why is 80 not 60 not 100? I'm going to start a car on where it's planning director. The very often our zoning ordinance changes are driven by examples that we have before us. And this is not a bad idea in most cases, right? Because it will bring forward, like we did with Alexandria City High School lights, it was Contraversial. The neighbors were very interested in the impacts, the potential impacts. And the proposal at the time indicated to us that 80-foot high poles were adequate to light Alexandria City High School and mitigate the lights village to the maximum extent possible. So we structured our text amendment in order to not go beyond what we felt was the minimum necessary to accomplish what we thought was the goal there. And over time, clearly 80 foot poles are useful. But we have learned since that our exploration of just how tall our poles could go and still have their impacts mitigated was not extensive. And it is only now with this additional analysis related to the application where we have come to understand that the industry standard allows us to go higher in order to achieve better light mitigation. I appreciate that and you touched on it. We're probably talking about the application but since we're talking about this here because we have to make a decision on the 80 feet. I know to tell a change and all of that, and that's why this is a good case of us adapting to the times and also trying to streamline how we do things. So the height is not the only thing we look at. We look at other factors we require to study. So can you talk to me about that? What else do we require that we use to make a judgment, whether this light or these poles are going to have any adverse impacts? Hi, Bill Cook, staff planning and zoning. Some of the things that are also evaluated, when first of all, if the lights are approved through an SUP process, there still is a building permit process that has to come in. So when building permits are submitted, there's a requirement not just by planning and zoning, but from other city agencies such as Tess. There's a requirement that the plans demonstrate that they comply with city ordinances. So we do have an ordinance in the code of ordinances, which refers to foot candles and how much light shines onto an adjacent property. So the way that we measure that is the application includes photometric diagrams, which are also a requirement for DSUPs when they come in. So, you know, this will show the level of light on the area being lighted as well as what the light level would be outside of a property line. So we'll see the property lines. So in addition to the photo metrics, typically, usually particularly this vendor must go, they have some, they usually provide these very colorful, you know, heat maps, so to speak, where they show the light intensity of various degrees and where it is on the site. So we take a look at all of that, as well as the other city departments. And depending on the light bulbs that they're using, how it's being directed, all the technology that's used, that's being used, all that impacts all these measures, right? So it's not just the height, there are so many other factors that impacts all the measures. And we explore that and we go through all these measures to measure the impact. So the height is just one factor, but there are so many other factors that potentially make the height irrelevant. Correct. The biggest impact that we have seen through studies that we've evaluated is hard to describe. The additional height cuts the appearance of what we would call glare. So you still may see the source of light, but the higher height just allows for a more precise focus, if you will, so that the light lights what's intended to be lighted and not other things. And there's less of a, you know, I'm trying to, I'm, it's easier to focus and, it's easier to focus. And you're not as aware of where the light is coming from. Mm- it. Thank you. Thank you. And I guess if I could just put a finer point on this, I think you're getting at bullet number three, which is that whatever we decide, there's still a set of criteria that has to be reviewed and evaluated to make sure that we are minimizing impacts. And in some cases, this will not be a good fit for everywhere. Councilman Green and then we'll go back to the presentation. Thank you Madam Mayor. I was just wondering can you tell me are we going off of the study that we did for Alexandria City High School lights back in 2017-2018 or did we is there another consultant that came in to to do a study? I can comment. The study is individual to the site. So the Episcopal High School site is, it's all completely new and different. I'll just note that the contractor is the same, the contractor who did the design and will do the installation is, to the of my knowledge, they're like the premier sports lighting consultant and contractor and they do public schools, they do professional sports stadiums, all athletic to my knowledge, that's their specialty. And what is the height requirement for lights for FIFA? There's a, I believe their requirement is 100 feet. Got it. Thank you. You know, actually, when we get to the Episcopal application, I was going to say, if we could hold that one, I'm going to put my app on. I can't participate in that one. My appellation. You can hold that question. And hold the next conversation. Next slide. Sorry. OK. This next piece is right now that electric vehicle charging equipment is not allowed in a required setback. And that's a little bit unfortunate because a lot of People's driveways are in setbacks. Setbacks are, I mean, driveways are permitted thing in a setback Because people's driveways tend to be in front yards or Side yards or that sort of thing. So what we're proposing now is to allow EV chargers in those Required yards so they can be near the driveway. Next slide. This last piece is just the, there's essentially three subsections within the historic district provisions, or the historic preservation provisions of the zoning ordinance. There's the old and historic district, there's Parker Gray, and then there's a hundred year old buildings. And they should be sort of formatted and structured similarly. So they read logically, it makes sense. So that's part of the proposal here. The other is to clarify the administrative appeal process and just to make sure that that's consistently applied across the three different types of historic properties that the article 10 regulates and also to specify the appeal process for administrative decisions in the Parker Gray District Next slide please um comes from japan Maybe I think I just missed this when you when you first started speaking on this So if you go back to that last slide. So with what we're doing with Parker Gray in relation to Old and Historic District, we are bringing them, we're bringing, so I want to make sure. So we are changing what we do in historic Parker Gray to match what we're doing in Old and Historic. We're not really changing what we're doing. We're doing what we're supposed to be doing now. We're just making sure the regulations match how the provisions were meant to be applied. Okay. Because I thought when we had the conversations, the staff correct me if I'm super off on this. When we had conversations about actually bringing the two, I want to say the two BARs together. I think that was the last time I remember having conversation about what appeals processes look like and things of that nature. So I just want to understand kind of what happens there now, now that we have this joint B.A.R. that deals with both and we are now adjusting the appeal process for Parker Gray. So right now the part, it's the Parker Gray provisions don't specify an appeal process of administrative decision. So we had to sort of lie the other districts provisions to that to make sense. And so it's basically just writing that down and making it listed. So we're not making an interpretation that it's actually the law. Thank you. Yep. Any other questions for staff? Okay, so then up, oh, Councilman and Gary. Thank you. So specifically around the EV chargers and front yards, well not opposed to it. I did raise concerns when we were talking about EV Chargers in general in the city around standardization and what they look like because my concern is that if we allow it, all of a sudden we're gonna have all kinds of different posts and people's yards, which again, I want people to charge and utilize a yard, but are we looking at what they're gonna be looking like, how they're standardized, that they actually work within the grid system and pulling energy and everything? So this is another thing to sort of monitor. We do have some guard rails in place. So if, especially in some of the zone where you might not expect to see a big flashy charger at, you know, likely that wouldn't be allowed because any sort of screens or advertising would count as signs and the depending on the the zone you're in, the sign limitations are or and how the property is used, the sign limits are pretty low. So if they if they needed or if they if a resident wanted to install an EV charger that was Perhaps like a little too, you know something extra to not compatible with the neighbor 15 feet Neon lights. Yeah, you know that kind of thing we could still there's still some guard rails to To require additional approvals from that applicant or to say no Okay, so I just want to make sure that that was still kind of in place because again not against having it just want to make sure that It doesn't kind of get out of control when startle they can kind of crazy in people's yards. Yeah, all right. Thank you Okay, so with that I'm gonna go back to the public hearing and we're gonna start with our next two speakers Chris Hansen and Carter Fleming Good morning, my name is Chris Hansen. Thank you for having me. First off, I want to thank Alvie for being here. It's a very nice day out there. It's a farmer's market. There's a lady selling baked goods. That's where I sort of wish I was. But I realize sitting here that you guys are giving up a lot of Saturdays over and over and over again for us. and I appreciate that. I appreciate one you in particular Councilman El Nuby. In the last couple days my wife called all you guys, I know you're very busy, haven't had a chance to call her back, but you did and happy wife happy life and so I very much appreciate it. I had some stuff prepared here but in sitting through this process I realized that number 13 is sort of a a classic way of getting something through government, which is put something controversial amongst many things that are non-controversial. And I'm like, cool, I'm for the church thing, I'm for the adieu thing, I'm for the electric car. But we're going to change the height limit for the whole city on lights and bundled into this sort of what we usually call when I used to work on a hill like this Christmas tree bill, which is like, yeah, which is like, yeah, we're gonna make a hard for people to vote against it because there's so many things that we like that are for it. And I think that is just bad process, least a bad outcome in the long term. This isn't a minor change, this is a significant change, and I think should be well and duly considered. My wife and I are the property that will be the most affected by what Episoples asked before. And I think we actually have a reasonable position. We're not anti-light by any stretch. We just were alarmed by how quickly this process came about because they're asking for 47 light poles, which are just feet away from our property. To give you an example, we're talking about the setbacks here and currently is 35 feet for the 80 foot. I mean, I think if there was an 80 or 100 foot pole, the distance between that wall and that wall is where my children's bedroom is. And the way the business used to be done from my understanding, because we've lived there about a little less than a year now, is that the head of school would come and talk to the neighbors, talk about what they wanted, that's how they got the track built, there was no opposition, we got a certified letter just a couple weeks ago saying, this is what we're doing. So it was, to me, it feels like a rush process, and this is gonna go citywide, and I don't think people are well aware this citywide change is going to take effect. And I think't think people are well aware that this city wide change is going to take effect. And I think hype is important because if you come to our property, there's these beautiful trees that have been there a long time. The lights that are applied for here are going to be taller than all of them. you may think that we are protected by the trees. We're not. If they're 100 feet of the 150 feet, I mean, they could be as you could end up saying, at some point. here are going to be taller than all of them. So you may think that we are protected by the trees. We're not. If they're 100 feet of the 150 feet, I mean, they could be as you could end up saying at some point, cool, we're going to put 100 feet of pole here, put a antenna on top of it. And now this is what we're doing, we have stadium lights. And so I'm just very alarmed by the process. I think me and my neighbors have a very reasonable position. We're not anti-lights by any stretch. We are, we love living next to a physical, because it's a vibrant place. We have kids very reasonable position. We're not anti-lights by any stretch. We are, we love living next to a peaceful, because it's a vibrant place. We have kids that are playing baseball. It's fun, but we just want it to end before bedtime. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate your time today. Next speaker, please. Art of swimming, Frank let's go. Stephanie Sparks Smith. Okay, is Carter online? Is online just needs to be on mute and smart and phone. Okay, her. Her. Miss Fleming? Yes, can you hear me? Yes. Okay, great. Good morning, I'm Carter Fleming, and I'm speaking on behalf of the Board of the Alexandria Federation of Civic Associations, also known as AFCA, so I would like to request the five-minute limit. The AFCA Board would like to express our concern for an opposition to the text amendment to remove the current 80-foot height limit for light poles in congregate recreational facilities. While AFCA appreciates land-use division chief Tony LaColla's recent presentation about this bundle of text amendments at our April 30th AFCA meeting, we do not agree with the city's designation of this change as a minor text amendment, as Mr. Shannon pointed out earlier. Staff states that such lighting projects will still require an SUP, and therefore staff will still have the ability to decide what an appropriate height for future lighting projects is. But we know that the lighting companies will no longer have any incentive to find a plan that will work within a height limit in the city code as there will be none. The elimination of the height limit will have impacts across the city, and as such, AFCA believes this should have been and still should be the subject of robust community education, outreach, and public discussion. At our AFCA meeting, none of the civic association members had heard about this text amendment prior to Mr. LeCola's presentation. To bury this amendment in a bundle of other text amendments does not demonstrate transparency to residents across the city who will one day wonder how a 100-foot tall light poles are looming over their homes. Staff's proposal, as is often the case, is focused on making it easier for applicants to propose light poles of unlimited height, rather than setting a standard that is reasonable for residents who live next to a school or recreational facility. The 80-foot height limit for light poles in the R20 zone is already double the height allowed for any other non-residential structures. This amendment will allow a musco who is the lighting company used by all recent lighting projects in the city to present drawings and data that require poles of 100 feet or more in every location. Staff and applicants do not have the expertise to challenge such technical conclusions. And thus, Moscow's recommendations will become the new city standards for lighting, with little ability for residents to challenge whatever height is proposed, as there will be no limit. My own neighborhood is quite familiar with Moscow due to their lighting plans at Parker Grey Stadium. We have 80 and 90-foot tall poles behind our homes. Moscow's plans show that all glare miraculously stopped at our property lines. This is not the case for at least one home-owned bishop lane that has been subject to extreme glare since the day the lights were put up. ACPS who owns and operates the lights states that this glare is perfectly acceptable and requires no adjustment. Based upon this experience, Council and staff should question whether muskows, diagrams, and specifications can actually be relied upon by the City Orvets residents. Moreover, on page 158 of the application for the lights at Episcopal High School, which you will hear in the next docket item, Musco states that, quote, in some cases, city ordinance or other factors require the use of shorter polls. A challenge that experienced manufacturers can typically resolve with customizations like additional polls or creative aiming strategies to achieve your lighting goals on and off the field end quote. But somehow we never hear about those creative aiming strategies and the solution is always to go higher and higher. That is the easy way out. The adoption of this text amendment will simply remove any incentive for applicants or the city to challenge musco to find those creative solutions to reduce the impact of towering banks of lights dominating the field of vision in residential areas across the city. AFCA therefore has counsel to reject the unlimited height in this text amendment and retain the current 80-foot limit. Applicants would still be able to request a variance to this limit when necessary, as TC Williams did and a Piscobal High School could have done. But applicants should not be able to take the path of least resistance and construct 100 foot poles by right in every location if you approve this text amendment. Thank you very much for your attention. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Fleming. I know Councilman Chapman has a question for you and then I have a free of all of the questions for staff. Thank you, Ms. Fleming, for your comments. I was trying to picturing the site, picturing the stadium. You mentioned in your comments one particular house that is still having kind of huge glare issues. I don't necessarily want to know the house number, but I'm trying to understand where on the neighboring property it would be, because I just want to understand that for kind of the central case we do not have any look at next. Yes. Thank you, Councilman Chapman. Yes. One house that is directly opposite the playing field on Bishop Lane has glare throughout their yard and they truly can actually read magazines in their breakfast room without lighting because of the light shed from the Parker Gray Stadium. We have asked over and over for the school system to come and adjust this and modify it. And they have said no, this is within the normal bounds. But I'm just pointing out that for future neighbors, if this is the attitude that, oh, that's normal, you can have that glare even though Musk goes drawing said the glare stopped exactly at the property line. This is a concern that should be concerned for everybody in the city. So trying to clarify, maybe we're not asking the question right. So to clarify what I'm looking for, is it knowing Bishop Lane like I do, is it, are we talking directly behind the center of the the stadium, are we talking the western edge closer to your home, not to put you out there, but are we talking the eastern edge of the property? More the eastern edge of the property. Thank you. I have a quick clarifying questions by staff. And the testimony it was stated that this would be setting out by right approvals for for lights. Can you speak to that? Yes, so There were every single light pole that exceeds the height limit in the zone So if it's taller than 40 feet would need full hearing especially use permit approval So planning commission and city council. So they still have to go through our process. Yes, can you speak to? I know you outlined that council has a role to weigh in and part of that process, we will do the review in the criteria. It also seemed like there was an assertion that means residents won't have a piece in that process. Talk through how residents would be engaged or their opportunity to weigh in since we still have to review every one of these. Right. So the applicant often conducts community meetings that are, you know, attended by city staff and encouraged by city staff. You know, there's, depending on the applicant and I, you know, I might turn to my colleagues. Behind me to go over kind of, I don't want to go too close to Episcopal, but, you know, that's like, that would be a good example of the community outreach that is done for these types of things. But the citizens or residents have the ability to write to city staff at any time, to include any kind of written statement with a staff report. You know, we're available for meetings. And then obviously there's venues at both the hearings for speakers to speak as just happening today. I think I just want to be clear that even if we approve this, you don't get like light poles popping up all over the city. You still have to go through the same lengthy process that my colleagues are going to go through for the next item. Right, that's not being changed. OK. The other question I have, can you speak to it? I'm trying to remember if it was Toyota, if it was Lindsey Lexus. But I know in that case, there was a lot of discussion about creative light modification. And in fact, I think there are actually still like modifications and changes going back. I just think it may. but I know in that case there was a lot of discussion about creative light modification. And in fact, I think there are actually still like modifications and changes going back. I just think it might be helpful to give another example of a process of where we've had to go out to the property. We've had to go over the lights. We've had to modify the lights. We've had to continue to do adjustments. Because I think it's important that all that still remains and all that would still be wired and necessary. Right, Carl Mournett's a Plane Director. So yes, with the lengthy Lexus case and some others There is a ongoing process by which the Impact of lighting on an adjacent property and is Managed so the city staff is involved in helping mitigate those issues. So if a neighbor reports that despite best efforts, they are being negatively impact by lights from an adjacent property. It goes in their bedroom window, for example. The staff does get involved and works with both the property owner and can work with both the property owner that has the light as well as the property owner that is experiencing the impact to resolve those issues, adjust the where the lights are pointed, adjust the brightness of those lights, etc. And I guess just to follow up on this filming's point, I heard she has spoken with ACPS. If there's a role that we need to play and follow upup, can we make sure that we do that follow-up? Yes, as I was listening to that, I was trying to determine if we'd had been received that complaint. I didn't see that, but we are now happy, now alerted, to be part of it. I'm going to go, sorry, we have questions. Vice mayor Bagley. No, I, and to put just two finer points on what the mayor has just said. One is, you know, this is an example where I know the mayor and I, and perhaps others visited the site as part of that follow-up and have seen mitigation, you know, take place to some resident satisfaction to a degree. It's ongoing. And then I just want to, I want to say another way what the mayor just said about what's happening here to sort of, if we pass 13 full package, including light poles. Including light. We will still hear 14, which is proof of the concept we're describing. If every pole above the base 40 feet allowed did not require it's a separate SUP, otherwise if we 13, including this change, 14 would just come off the docket because it would become a by-right use. So we have a real time example here that if we pass this package, including this change, in the allowable request, it still requires, and we're gonna have an immediate example that each poll over the base height in the zone to have its own hearing. So I want people to see that to connect that. Is that my colleagues making a face? But is that a fair statement? Yes, yes. Thank you. You're making more like a piece of paper. Now I will now go to our next speaker, Mr. Frank Petsuit. Good morning. I'm speaking on behalf of Seminary Hill request five minutes, though I don't think I'm going to need it. I'm Frank Petsuit, I live on Juliana Plays. I'm speaking for Seminary Hill and support of the current section 6-TAC 403F in urge caution if not outright rejection of the proposed text amendment. We note that the current section was adopted in 2018 granted relief from height requirements for public congregate facilities. At the October 23, 2018 council hearing, there was a full and robust discussion on this specific issue, including detailed explanations of why the specific 80 foot height and 35 foot setback were selected. It's interesting the discussion you all just had. Same discussion in 2018 except 80 feet. During the discussion council stated that its athletic lighting was closed to public rights of way in residences recognized potential negative impacts and determined it was critical to provide assurances that polls will be no higher than 80 feet and that only upon a specific showing of light and glare. In other words, the 80 feet height requirement itself was considered extraordinary relief from normal height restrictions under very narrow circumstances. I did look at the council discussion then, and council cautioned against viewing adoption of height relief for athletic lighting for these facilities as approval of lighting every potential field in the city up to 80 feet. In reality, that's precisely what happened. Every poll now starts at 80 feet and comes down from there and is just simply an assumption. Councillor Chaplin, you in particular were very critical about the staff putting the text amendment under the radar within sufficient public engagement and disclosure. The lights at the high school was the subject of public debate, but the text amendments did not conduct any meaningful outreach, especially something that was going to impact every part field in the city as mis-flemming testified. Rest of the city found out from us in the last few days that this text amendment was even on the docket. Here we are again. I would like to quote from the staff report in 2018, multiple speakers addressed the issue. There are hundreds of pages of documentation, lots of technical analysis. And the staff report said the amended section permits a maximum height of 80 feet for congregate recreational facilities and dog parts with SUP. Quote, this height has been found to be the industry standard for the type of facilities and areas that are exist and anticipated in the city. And so the staff report went into detail. Yet this Scalz will staff report you have today. They never mentioned anything about 2018, the hundreds of pages, everything that went on the record. It simply refers to it as a minor update. I want hammer that. You've heard this is not a minor update. There was no public outreach or public disclosure on this exactly what was warned about. In the next item, right, these two items are inextricably intertwined. They are. They just are. In fact, if item 14 didn't exist, we wouldn't be talking right now. There's no other reason to move forward with the with the text amendment. The you also heard some testimony this morning and you asked a great question Councillor Lorraine, what are the five fee for requirements? We looked them up, fee for requirements for polls for training fields are 22 to 25 meters, which translates to 72 to 82 feet. We don't know where they're getting this 100 feet from. A little bit concerned that the universe of technical analysis is coming from the company that are selling the polls. And that's it. That's not an analysis. That's not a basis to do something. I did want a couple of other points to make with this. We did do some homework. This would be groundbreaking. We're not aware of any other city or county in the United States that has unlimited height for lighting poles. ADP is actually already on the way high end of what other jurisdictions permit. And there's a reason for that as disclosed in the 2018 letter. I did want to emphasize with Mr. Shannon said that 80 feet is correlated to the 35 foot setback. Those numbers were not picked out of the air for no reason. And so I'd again urge you to disappointing that you were not informed of what happened in 2018 and what the full nature of the record is that would have been very informational for today. I think moving forward about why that all came about. And we've had lighting issues now. I would point out in the staff presentation they pointed to other lighted facilities on the field. They're all 60 or 80 feet. That 80 and 35 feet were picked for a reason. It was to stop these lighting discussions once and for all. You either meet height and set back or you do not. Thank you Mr. Putsy. All right, thank you so much. Okay, we have another speaker, Ms. Smith. Yes, Thank you for your time and I'll speak more on docket number 14 but Stephanie Sparksmith, General Counsel for Physical High School. I'm going to try to separate this and talk broadly. And I come to you as the General Counsel and also some who served on an NCAA rules committee for over 10 years and has looked at lots of different field designs and placements of various items. And I wish Musco who might be listening was here themselves to be able to defend some of the ethical attacks against their engineering degrees and sort of the good faith in which they work with proper owners. I do want to, there's been a lot of stones thrown at a Piscol and I'll take the time and docket 14 to address those in a respectful manner. For now what I want to address is the ones that are specific about larger fields, right? Like where does 80 feet come from? I imagine that experts were consulted in 2018 and 80 feet as is in the expert letters that we submitted to City Council comes from a typical height with sort of standard setbacks for a standard size football field with a narrow track. Other fields such such as one that's at issue in Docket 14, are large and we want to use correct soccer terminology pitches with a very wide track. In order to actually put lights in the best interest of neighboring areas and reduce glare and minimize any type of impact that could possibly have with spillover or other issues. It is trigonometry in terms of moving things back and they have to go higher. I would imagine that Alexandria City High School, who I think those lights have brought tremendous spirit to their students. I imagine that if they were higher, the individual who's having some glare issues may not be having those issues. To give you an example in our project, because a lot of people are speaking about our project, there are other FIFA standards besides the ones that were cited and different ones used in evaluating our project, but it's not about FIFA. And I'll talk more about FIFA and it actually being a positive light instead of throwing in a cast of a negative light in these discussions. But it's actually about the engineering eluminating engineering society standards. And it's also about general sport governing body standards. Like the NCAA, the MLB, people who want the best lighting, safest lighting for student athletes and professional athletes to be able to compete under. And then how do you match that with the engineering standards that exist within the illuminating engineering society? And I think one really sort of clear point that's gotten lost in this, that people I tried to describe it in the board commission meeting is when we had our field, this specific field looked at, the ideal height was about 120 feet and we pushed that. We're not interested, nor do I think property owners are interested in having large poles. of our other poles are higher. And in fact, if we didn't do anything with any support governing body standards, and. property owners in general are interested in having large poles. None of our other poles are higher. And in fact, if we didn't do anything with any support governing body standards and its standard light, the ideal light starting point was 90 and 100 because of the actual size of the field in the track. So we can push them down and push them down, but it's going to sacrifice lighting standards and it's going to sacrifice being able to actually meet the type of glare and spillover standards that we want to meet. And I would- I have a question for you from Councilman Chapman. And I will say, I think you and the next person were given three minutes for this one because there isn't on- This is a staff proposal. I do know in the next one, because you are the applicant, you will have a different amount of time during the next document item. I just wanted to say that. Consumption. So I just wanted to ask, one of the concerns that was raised here was about communication with neighbors. Do you guys, as a school, have communication standards for the neighborhood, particularly the folks around the property in terms of anything that's going on or changes like this. What are those standards that you do? Yes, I'm not as familiar with sort of the head of school discussion with local neighbors, but we have tried to be very friendly navels. I'll talk about that more in Docket 14. We generally go through the Seminary Hill Association, and that is what we have done with the track project before and other projects So happy to sort of discuss that more related to fiscal. I don't want to confuse it And I would just ask if I can have the one closing statement that you offered There's been a lot to talk about good governance and what has seen this bad governance and perhaps I have more good faith in the city of Alexandria than others do I think good good governance is when new technology and new information comes that would otherwise have ordinances that stand in a barrier from property owners trying to do good things with their property and also things to protect the neighboring areas as much as possible. And then they relook at ordinances. I think that's actually good governance. It's significant not because of its breadth. It's not going to apply too many. It's significant so it doesn't serve as a barrier for people actually trying to do this process in a thoughtful manner. Thank you. So we have one more speaker in our public hearing and that is Mr. Blair. And as I mentioned Mr. Blair, you'll also be timed at three minutes. Sorry. I look forward to the challenge of being held three minutes, but I'm ready. I'm ready. I haven't had to use my gavel yet. I'm ready. All right. Duncan Blair, Lyre Gill, Durham, speaking on behalf of a physical high school and connection with this request. Mr. Petsu was right on October 13th, 2018, the first real lighting of athletic field was approved approving TCU AMS high school at the time. There was not a real light standard at that time on height, and it was established by a text amendment heard the same day. The robust discussion did occur mainly on the application like the one you'll hear next. The polls were said at 80 feet. But the special use from it still had the limitation. The applicant should demonstrate that the increased poll height will mitigate the impact of whiting in terms of spillage and glare. That's especially used for requirement. What the Planning Commission and the staff is saying is that like many prescriptive rules, they can be the booby prize because you limit what may be better technology. Eight years ago, AD seemed to be a number. Eight years ago, they didn't have the illuminating, illuminating, engineer society creating standards. And as they said, and I find this hard, we use simple trigonometry. I don't know any simple trigonog in my mind, but they use that to determine the most efficient way to safely light a field for the athletes to reduce glare with a zero's foot candle outside of the field for the athletes to reduce glare with a zero foot candle outside of the field. So if you use, and as I understand, Hammond High School, one of the issues I kept on reading about, they're proposed right next to the track and maybe encroaching on to the track. That was a safety issue, and could be because you have the foundations of an overrun for the field. Probably because of the 35-foot setback, they could not put the poles on the outside of the field. Trigonometry tells us that if you put them on the outside of the field to get the same focal point of only lighting the field, that additional setback and additional height provides a safer environment for the athletes does not like the track and does not do, and it does eliminate the glare. Piscoy school if you will hear has only a few color polls most are substantially less look forward to answering any questions. Thank you Mr. Banner. That is our last speaker of the public comment period. Second, there has been a motion by Councilman incarie and a second by Vice Mayor Bagley to close the public hearing, all those in favour say aye. Any opposed say nay. The ayes have it. We can now resume discussion. Vice Mayor Bagley. Thank you. Can we actually return to the EV charger slide for a moment? And I don't believe we had any speakers on this item. But I have a practical question. And if the answer is to be determined, that's OK. For the benefit of there's interest about this in the community, I think, for people who have invested. Can you all go to the EV charging slide? Oh, they're trying. I'm sorry. Thank you. Does this address in the ordinance, because I appreciate, like, we're looking at a bullet here that may not be the complete language? Does it address plugs, wires running across sidewalks to, you know, like when you say off street parking is located, are we getting into that yet and how we're addressing somebody who puts one on their front yard and then charges a car on the street? There's, I believe there are provisions in the city code about things that cross public sidewalks and that kind of thing that you can't have those. I don't, I said, but I believe there are provisions in the city code about things that cross public sidewalks and that kind of thing that you can't have those. I don't, I don't, I said, but I believe there are provisions in the city code that prevent things from going across the public right away without permission. Okay, so without permission, might be a key element to what you said there. What I'm trying to get at is I appreciate, I think this change is designed with the concerns like councilman McGarry expressed, you know, to allow more chargers to be placed in homes where people want them to be mindful of standardization. To the extent they don't have a driveway, though, because we have single family homes with front yards without driveways. Where will this leave a person in that scenario? What will their options be to install in their yard, but charge a car in the street? So in that circumstance, this wouldn't really help them. They would need an encroachment to use, to cross the sidewalk with the right the right away with the charger and Maybe what we will I'm sorry Karl Marx will do is provide a more thoroughly answer for Council on that subject Okay, I appreciate that and I don't mean to get too far in the weeds But this is moving in the right direction. I think of facilitating this and I would appreciate if you can like a follow-up memo with maybe a breakdown of, you know, if you're in this circumstance, this is the process, either as an encroachment or maybe this is a next iteration, you know, of our policy is starting to envision ways to address this scenario. Can I move on to another area you want to start this? Well, actually, I do think, are there any more EV charge or questions? Because I think for the sake of organizing this discussion, okay, it looks like Councilman O'Neil-Nuevi has a question on this, and then Councilman Giri, and then we can move to another topic. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Say my echo, my colleagues, comments. I think this is a move in the right direction. If we are really serious about trying to be a sustainable city, making it easier for residents to install EV chargers is the right move. So they can invest in EVs. Obviously, my question, so again, please keep moving in that direction of streamlining these kind of things. My question is, what does it take now for someone to install an EV charger? Is it a DSUP? Is it just simple application? What do they have to go through? What kind of costs that they have to incur with the city? I'm not talking about how much they set back they install it? If it's like a typical single unit dwelling like a regular house, and they wanted a needy charger in their setback, they would have to go to the border zoning appeals. There's, you know, kind of the answer kind of depends, but one of the simplest, like, straightforward house would go to the border zoning appeals to ask for a variance, and it would be very difficult to obtain. If, in normal cases or in which cases? In all cases. In all cases. I mean they could have it if they could have a Navy charger if it meets the setbacks. Like they're permitted outside of a setback. But if they do not meet the setback then they need a special permission from the board of zoning appeals. Even if they have a driveway right Councilman a giri Okay, I'm gonna go back to face Mayor Bagley for her next topic Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you I'm looking back at my notes. I will may about lights. Some of the speakers towards the end here. And I appreciate the speakers, Mr. Putsu and others who have brought us back. I think it's valuable. I think maybe only one of us sitting here now was actually on council. Maybe councilman Aguere was. No, no. Yeah, just the one. No, I say that not to put my colleague on the spot, but to reiterate, like, it's a valuable, you know, just really said in context for all of us to sort of the last time we didn't evaluation like this. But for me, I think to my colleague's point, I think it was in this dialogue. It's been a long meeting already, folks, about science and allowing that to help guide us, to some extent, in our policy making. One thing it brought to mind is actually this conversation about garages earlier and sort of what we accept as the proper size. And again, I live in an old town and there's some teeny garages that would have been perfectly acceptable that we would sort of scoff at now and we've gotten bigger and now we get smaller again. So I think what I would like to put back to staff, because there were sort of, from speakers and references to sort of our ability to process, consider, respond to science, respond to the state of technology. And so if just a member of staff can address the role that science or research or advances in technology are informing the change in position from 2018 to now. And just to put it another way, to the extent the 80 feet in 2018 was driven or not by science. Can somebody just kind of try to put a fine point on that? Certainly, sorry, Karl Moritz again. And I alluded to this a little bit in my response to Councilman El Nubby when I pointed out that at the time of 2018, certainly there was a value assigned. It was not a science-based value. It was a political value, I would say, to the importance of only allowing the minimum height necessary to accomplish the goals that we had before. The polls lighting of Externency, high school, athletic field, and perhaps other similar situations. And so in that case, we did not build in what we might do in other situations, which is flexibility to anticipate that technology improvements will occur. And there are any number of analogies in land use regulation that I can point you over the course of my time here where we have been super prescriptive in the moment because it was important to provide that assurance. But then we found ourselves having to revisit because for whatever reason, a market condition or technology had changed the circumstances to a point where we had to reconsider it. And so what we felt in this case was the SUP process is the right moment when a city council, the public, can evaluate a specific situation in a specific time and take into account the technology available at that moment. And so putting a restriction in the ordinance is not is important as having a robust discussion when we are considering an issue P. Thank you for that answer and I think with a phrasing, I think he said not a science-based value, but it was more of political value and I don't want to misquote you, but I mean... Yes, I mean there was reasons why we... There were science-based reasons why an 80-foot pole would work. But I feel we were also wanting, excuse me, to assure the public at the time that what we were doing then was limited. And so for me, and just, you know, so it starts, you know, socializing the dialogue, I guess my colleagues, I asked the briefing, and you know, I asked the question in my briefing, I sort of went, well, why do we still need an SUP? You're taking away a restriction, and you're telling me I'm still going to vote on all of these. This dialogue, I think, is helping both me understand, and what I hope is helping the community understand. So by eliminating a fixed number as proposed, it's to avoid, you know, the specifics of the technology in any given year time, things we learn. But by maintaining a requirement for an SUP for anything above the zone's base, you maintain the ability to always be specific to that situation, that neighborhood, the technology available at that time. And that's how I'm sort of reconciling the idea of we're eliminating, we're creating sort of an unlimited option, but retaining a very specific requirement of approval of each poll. Right. Thank you. Okay. I just have a few quick comments and then I'll open it up if there's still more questions. I want to pick up where Vice Mayor Bagley left off. I think as I've been following the comments we've received, the dialogue that's happened today, for me, if you told me on the lights that this was by right and we're just approving these telegraphs, the city, I would not support that. I think the ability to then come through and I might even ask staff, I think the criteria you walk through, that should be like a checklist on the website. So any resident who's impacted, they can go back. to then come through and I might even ask staff, I think the criteria you walk through, that should be like a checklist on the website. So any resident who's impacted, they can go back and say, did you cover this? Did we go through this? How was this evaluated from the time? I heard time, condition, location, technology, setback. Sure, if we go through the recording, there's a lot more. But I think knowing that we have the ability to continue to go through that, I think, is really, really important because everyone of these do have a different context. I also think making sure that we are doing our role to follow up with residents that if somebody is impacted, that we continue to do those creative modifications or mitigation, I think, is really important. The other thing I wanted to speak to is I heard a couple of comments about our process. It is not unique to this case that we have asked staff to go back and say our zoning code is a lot. There's so many layers and screens and so how do we begin to simplify and bring forth a package of things? So I understand that. I'm also empathetic and I've even watched it in this conversation that it is a lot to follow bouncing from issue to issue to issue to issue. And so what I would like to propose to the council, I know I can't make a motion but this would be my proposal. I actually think that we should take this one at a time. We should go to the first slide and we do a vote on the, I've lost what was the first one. to, the lights, the historical changes, and so it is very clear what we are voting on and how the council, how the council is looking at this. And then I guess for future times when we pull together a package like this, maybe there's a way to categorize them by topic or theme so that it's just kind of easier to see the intersections between this. But that would be my comments on this. Councilman Chapman. Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I appreciate the opportunity to do that. And I know one of my colleagues will make the motion. I just wanted to give some context and history about how we got here, I think, with respect to the speaker as well. I do, I think Council was intentional several years ago about bringing these Texan amendments together as a group and I think the speaker hit it on the head because some of these issues we view as very minor kind of easy changes that are updates and then in those in discussion of those with the community some of them pop up and attract more attention. And I don't think, I think staff to their credit, try to understand kind of what is going to be small big or whatnot, but it is really until we get that conversation with the community that we find out that something is a bigger issue. We're going to have more speakers on something than other things. And so it's not an idea that we are trying to hide anything. It is that we are going to bring it forth and bring it to the community. We may have a number of pastors that come in here concerned about changes to what we're doing with churches, right? We don't know until it kind of comes out to the public. And so it is not an intentional way to hide what it could be a controversial issue. I would say also with the timing of this, why we have 13 and 14, I think is intentional too and to council's benefit to do it that way because I have found in my time here, we have done sometimes done a text amendments on one public hearing and then the next month the reason for that public for that text amendment comes forward and they're not together, they're not aligned. And so the public has no kind of understanding that we've done a text amendment to make this massive change on something. And I think the property around the Marks Center Hilton was the last time we did something like, where we had a discussion in one meeting and then had some real action in another meeting. And I don't think that's frankly transparent for the public. And people aren't gonna, if they don't have to, come here two months in a row to follow something. And so doing it right after the other might seem rushed, might seem, if folks want to say calculated, it's not intended to be that way. It is hopefully more transparent that folks can kind of follow the conversations while we're doing the policy change as well. And so I just wanted to add that to the conversation. Thank you, Councilman Chapman. Other comments, questions? So all three hands. Councilman McBike, Councilman Elnubey, and then vice mayor Begg. Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you to everyone who spoke and staff and folks who worked on this. I do think we have good sets of zoning text amendments here. I'm very excited about the ADU provisions that you're bringing forth. I think we do encourage the construction of ADUs around the city and love the notion that it's going to bring three or four more per year in Tallah's Andrea. Really appreciate the EV charging element. And on the lights, I agree with the mayor, right? This is not a by-right tool that we're giving folks. We'll have to come to us. It will not be going before the Planning Commission be considered. And so if it's mechanically appropriate to do it this way, I would like to move approval of zoning tax amendment 2025-003 as presented at the staff report, but with the question divided so that we vote on each component separately. Madam City Attorney, would we then go through and call a separate one for each? What's the cleanest way? I'm going to ask Deputy City Attorney Christina Brown to walk through how we're going to break this down. She's been assigned to this tax amendment case. Okay. So I think what it would be the clearest to do is by subject matter. Okay. If you want to actually, you could actually follow the notice that might be the sort of clearest way that would differentiate between the specific ones for one you could have for instance a motion to correct the technical errors and make clarifications and articles for five, 7 and 10, and then you can work through that notice for each of the numbered provisions. I think, you know, it, it, staff walked through those in the presentation and specifically highlighted, you know, the church parking and the lights is number four, for example. And for each one, the action of council would be an approval, a disapproval, or a referral back to the Planning Commission for further study. Okay, so just to repeat it back, would I be seeking an emotion if that someone would do number one, number two, all the way down down to number eight I think that would be the clearest way to have a vote proceed Well the council Can I actually ask for clarification because I think there are only actually some of these were eliminated from the text. So I think I'd need staff's assistance to identify which ones were actually pulled from this zoning text amendment proposal. I'm sorry, can we say that again? What would, some of the, what was originally noticed, staff decided to, at this point, they weren't ready to proceed on some of these corrections. So I'm going to have them identify if any of those subsections need to be pulled so you don't have to vote. You shouldn't vote on those items. Two and eight. So numbers two and eight are ones that aren't going forward today. So those can be struck. We should be taken on those because we're not proposing, we're not making any proposals under this. I hate to make it more complicated for us. I just want to make sure, because it's really important to me to make sure that we are as clear to the public. If certain things were pulled, can you explain to me when they were pulled and why they still ended up on our official So the legal ad, the thing that goes in the newspaper and we, those items, that gets decided like a while back in order to meet the nosing requirements. And those are, so that's before the staff reports released. And we, for the legal ad, we want to make sure it has as much information as possible. And so if things are, it's much better to not consider something and have it listed versus not having it listed and considering it. So, you know, through the staff report, you know, as we're producing it, we realize we need more time for something or we need to make it, you know, just think about it some more than we, than we, they don't come off the legal ad. Okay, this may be something for the manager and the clerk and the city attorney I'd like to address us in the future. I mean, because I would hate, it's 1214, if somebody came here to sit to talk about murals and townhouses, they would have spent a lot of time on a Saturday going through something that we weren't gonna hear. Yeah. Councilman Chapman. Thank you Madam Mayor. And I would do to your comments and I appreciate that you're gonna meet with staff, but we definitely need to make sure this is very clear for the public. There's nothing in the presentation that says that these things are pulled. I did not see anything in staff and correct me in the staff report that said that these things were pulled up front for council to see you're the public to see so that definitely needs to need to figure out a way to highlight that because that definitely is a big misstep. Yeah, this should not happen again. Councilor McGarry? Yeah, I'm not too happy about that either. Additionally, well I understand my colleagues want to go down this one by one. I think that's an inefficient use of our time. I would prefer that we do it in block. And then if there's something that there's disagreement on, that we just pull that one item. So in this scenario, we would be pulling, I believe, two, six, and eight, two, and eight, because they were pulled six, because I believe Councilman Chaman would like to have a, so I would like to go down this one by one. I believe two, six, and eight, two, and eight because they were pulled six because I believe Councilman Chaman would like to have a separate vote on that. But if there's something else that my colleagues would like to pull out for an individual vote. But that's just my opinion. I was tracking that folks also wanted to pull the lights. So that would be four. What I'm saying is so I'm going to go back to Councilman McPite. Then sort of let's take care of the ones that are clear, right? Okay. I think one by one is that less messy. It's very clear. All right, let's do it. And it doesn't have to be inefficient folks, pay attention. Okay, then I will start with number one. I move that we approve section one, the correctional technical errors and clarifications, included in zoning text amendment 2025-0003. Second. There has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by Councilman Chapman to correct the technical errors and make clarifications. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. All right, motion. Councilmember Pike would you like to keep going? I move that we approve section three to amend Article three, four, five, and six to add churches as a permitted use in a variety of zones as included in zoning tax amendment number 2025-000003. Okay, there has been a motion by Councilmember Pike and a second by Councilman Chapman. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, the motion carries. Oh. Quick question for the city attorney. Do we have to make a motion on two just saying that it has been removed? We'll just note it for the record. Okay, I'd like to note for the for the record that we have removed item 2, the amendment of sections 3-606 and 3-706 to clarify open space requirements in the R.A. residential multi-unit and R.B. residential townhouse zones. killed them at Pike. All right. Then I would also move that we approve section 4. Do a min section 4, 0, 3. We have high limitations for lighting permitted. We have used permit3. There has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by Councilman Chapman. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. The ayes have it. All right. Continuing down, I move that we approve Section 5 to amend Section 7 zero two to the electric vehicle chart equivalent in any required yard In zoning text amendment 2025 dash 0 0 0 3 second There has been a motion by Council mimic Pike any second by vice mayor Bagley Any discussion may be our bag may I ask and thank you just just a brief I just want to put a finer point with staff that should this pass in a moment. I really think there's some equity issues involved in not resolving how people who don't have a driveway can charge their vehicles. This has been solved in other cities and counties around the country. And rather than sort of a passive dialogue, I'd like to indicate, hopefully, with my colleague support, a more proactive resolution is pursued on this item. I'm sorry, Caron was quickly, the Office of Climate Action was texting me that they are already working on something too, so we are mobilized. Okay, I'll love that. Sorry, no, Councilor Nuby. Yeah, thank you Madam Mayor. I echo that actually not everyone has a driveway. So there are cities that have these covers that go over the cables. So if we can look into that kind of stuff, and hopefully that would help us allowing people who don't have driveways to charge their cars on the street. Because, like I said, I mean, I appreciate that you bring in this forward. I mean, honestly, when I when I saw it I was like I couldn't even believe that we weren't allowing people to put Chargers in the front yards, especially if they have a driveway So the more we keep moving in that direction make it make it more equitable for those who have the ability to do it But the city's not permitting it using these kind of solutions that are already out there the other cities are using I think, is certainly proactive and equitable. So I would appreciate it if we could do that. Thank you, Madam. Thank you. Okay, so there has been a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it. All right. Next one. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Section 6 of zoning and text amendment 2020, 2025, dash amend section 7203 to relate to accessory dwelling in its delete permit requirements and use limitations Okay, there has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by vice mayor Bagley any discussion Councilman agree So to staff I know that I I said a 12-month review if for whatever reason within six months you just start to see something drastic. Please Come come back to us. And I see everyone's head nodding and sometimes We're from staff. They didn't know that we were all in agreement. I think everyone's in agreement We'd like to see something in either six or 12 months depending on. Thank you. All right, any other discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. The motion carries 6-1 with a no vote from Councilman Chapman. And next item. Finally, Madame Mayor, I move that we adopt section 7 of zoning text amendment 2025-0003 to amend section 800F to exempt churches from certain parking requirements. Okay, there has been a motion by Councilman McPike and a second by Councilwoman Green. Any discussion? Councilman on Newby. I tried to say this earlier, but we moved too quickly. I emailed Steph about this. I know we're using term churches, but this applies to all places of worship, right? And is this something we're going to look at just from an inclusive standpoint? Yes, that's right. We want to make sure that our zoning ordinance reflects is more equitable in its language. And so we are intending to replace the word churches with places of worship. Thank you. Does that need to come back for a separate checks amendment or can we? This is a future. Or this future. It is a future initiative of ours. Vice Mayor Bagley. But to that end, should a place of worship that does not identify itself as a church be able to make use of this provision until we make the further text amendment to make the language more inclusive. Yes, we're covered with the definition of churches as the art of churches. Yeah. I'm really glad this was raised, and I'm glad to see staffs for our project. Working on it, but to be clear, all places of worship can benefit if this passes in a moment. Can I make one other quick comment? So I also just wanted to, I really appreciated Councilman Neuropa Chapman's comments earlier about somehow the, sometimes the timing of things, how, you know, what looks like a series of non-controversial items with one, you know, controversial one slid in. To that end, if this package had come forward, you know, three or four months ago, when we were literally doing an SUP for a church in this scenario, it would have looked like it was aligned more to that pressing matter. And so I just wanted to raise that. We have voted on something that, you know, was impacted because this language didn't exist. I'm saying a few months ago, but time sometimes is weird, and maybe it was a year ago. But so I wanted to highlight that. I thought he made a very important point, and we had a good recent example of it. And then separately, on what is my theme of today, apparently, this is another really good example of listening to the community on all sides to expedite our permitting process, reduce the costs of building things and doing things. And so for what it's worth to the extent a church is not in our pipeline, our SUP staff pipeline to taking up time, that's clearing the queue for other things moving through that pipeline. So where we can eliminate the requirement for an SUP on an older church making renovations to not have to come into line with our parking requirements, where staff time is not being spent on that and fees to that place of worship is not being spent on that. So if you step back and take a holistic view of what this means, it doesn't just benefit the individual places of worship, making renovations, but it has impacts downstream on staff time and how long it takes to process an SUP and to go from idea to reality in the construction context. So just adding that into something that might seem very specific has related impacts. Councilman Chapman. Thank you, and I don't want to kind of go back and forth and don't mean to disagree with my colleague. I appreciate her comments, I think, overall for me. I want to have folks understand when we talk about fees. For me, every opportunity to reduce a fee is not necessarily to me a good one, because we do have staff doing that work. And as we continue to talk about compensation of staff and things of that nature, some of these fees, frankly, offset the amount of personal property taxes, residential property taxes, we are putting towards the kind of employee compensation. And so I do look at fees a little bit differently. I appreciate the appreciate the business interest of decreasing fees and making sure, but I also want to make sure as we have staff do work, some of those charges to their time are brought in by fees. I do think there's some context that we should look at as we talk about fees. So there So there has been a motion by Council Member Pike and a second by Councilwoman Green on item 7. All those in favour say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Right, the ayes have it. And then I want to note for the record that item 8 create provisions for a mural program has been struck. Okay. At this point, Madame Clerk, next item. Special use permit 2025-002021-1200 North Laker Lane in 4200 West Bratwick Road, Biscope High School Athletic Fills, Planning Commission Action, Recommended Provo 7 is here. Okay, as I stated I'm going to recuse myself since my husband is an athletic coach at a Piscobal High School. I'm going to hand the gavel over to Vice Mayor Bagley and then for my colleagues I'd like to recommend after this item we hear 15 and then go to lunch. So we can stress when I get that. All right. So I would kick off first by just asking for everybody's patience. I don't fill this role often and I'll do my best to run this process efficiently. I would, I assume my colleagues would agree that we'd like to begin with a staff presentation. All right, if staff could cue that up for item number 14. And Madam Clerk, for clarity's sake, I'm going to you actually called the item or did you call it before the mayor recuse? Okay, just checking it. I don't want that to be my first Mayor Gaskins and Council. My name is Bill Cook with Planning and Zoning Laney Services Division. Pescoble High School is requesting, especially use permit to install athletic lighting on their campus at 1200 North Quaker Lane. Next slide please. The proposal is for campus wide lighting plan for several athletic fields located primarily on the west side of their 130 acre campus. The staff report notes that the private high school is operated on this site for many, many years and as contiguous with Virginia Theological Seminary to the South and residential neighborhoods to the West and North and South of West with points of access from West Brattich Road and North Quaker Lane. Next slide please. The property is one more slide. Yeah, the property is one more slide. Yeah, the property is owned R20, which permits private schools with an SUP. The staff reports notes a series of SUPs and DSUPs, the most recent of which governs the entire campus currently. The R20 zone limits building heights to a maximum of 40 feet for church and school uses. Those height limits apply to all structures therefore an SUV is required to permit light poles to be constructed tall in the 40 feet for certain recreation uses such as athletic fields. Next slide. The campus proposes a total of 47 light poles to be constructed among the various athletic fill the facilities at various heights ranging from 40 feet to 100 feet. Staff notes that a few light poles as proposed would not comply with required 35 foot setback or such equipment. These are located along the west side of the property servicing the tennis courts and softball field. Therefore, condition has been included so that these locations can be adjusted before any construction permits are issued. The tallest poles are located at the Hummel Bowl track field and adjacent practice field. As noted in the staff report, these fields are anticipated to be used as practice fields by the international soccer team coinciding with tournament events, tournament events in region this in next summer. These fields are furthest away from adjacent residential areas and a budding West Bratwick Road. In evaluating the SUP criteria for lighting for this use, staff notes that the experience and familiar variety with such systems and the installation contract are shown that these systems to be focused so that overall glare and lights billage onto adjacent properties is mitigated. Additional height for the light poles minimizes glare and allows the most efficient and precise list light distribution while minimizing disturbance to neighboring properties. Next slide. All light installations require building permits and any future building permit must comply with the existing zoning ordinance provisions specifically pertaining to lighting and conditions of the SUP. According to the applicant lighting in these areas is planned in the longer term. So staff is comfortable that this condition allows the applicant to proceed with construction of the lighting for the fields to the north, the three large fields, so that the school can phase their improvements and coordinate funding. The applicant has met with a Seminary Hill Association and has discussed plans directly with neighbors. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend a SUPU approval subject to conditions mentioned, thank you. And if you could advance forward to the very last slide, and we'll just hold there. That concludes the presentation. I do have this graphic we'll probably refer to a later in the discussion as well as the conditions. Thank you. Thank you, staff for the presentation. I appreciate that you're going to leave this up for the conversation as my colleagues if they point to it. Do any of my colleagues have questions at this time for staff or shall we move to the public hearing. All right. So with that, if the clerk could please call the first speaker and the names of the next two so they can get queued up. OK. Ryan Katz, Megan Hansen, Sean McLaughlin. Ryan's online. It just needs to unmute. Mr. Katz, can you unmute and let us know you're there? You're in a state of doubt. And you hear me? We can hear you. Your time has started. Please go ahead. Okay. Great. My name is Ryan Katz. I'm a neighbor on the other side of the field, so to the subject of this SUP. And I respectfully ask City Council to actively listen to the concerns being raised with a curiosity that seeks to understand why so much resistance to this SUP exists. And the issue at hand here is whether or not the city will respect the principle of community impact in the approval of this SUP. A few facts. The SPUP seeks to approve 47 light poles ranging from 40 to 100 feet across 8 fields in impact in the approval of the SUP. A few facts. The SUP seeks to approve 47 light poles ranging from 40 to 100 feet across eight fields and 12 tennis courts. Episcopal has represented on multiple occasions. They're only currently planning on installing 10 lights across three fields. Both their general counsel here today, and the associate head have misrepresented the scope of the SUP to several groups presenting the scope of the project is ten lights across three fields. The city typically restricts a timeline for an SUP to three years, but in this case for some reason decides they need a ten-year window to be approved. And the city's own fields that have lights installed are subject to limitations on use to balance the community impact and there are literally no restrictions in any form on the Episcopal field and it will exacerbate the impact from noise, lighting, parking, and traffic. And so my question is why would the standard that the city applies to its own fields be completely disregarded for Episcopal? If the city limits the approval to the 10 lights across the three fields, which is the current plan in the works, and the one they represent that really the only one they're planning on doing anytime soon, it will preserve and uphold the principle of engaging the community in the SUP process. If there's truly no community impact, they represent later time. And clearly the burden is going to be on neighbors at that time because the city would effectively is effectively the school needs to engage with the neighbors impact to define common ground and to mitigate the concerns about the impact. The city, of course, will retain the right to evaluate it and if we disagree, they can make a decision at a later time. And clearly, the burden is going to be on neighbors at that time because the city is effectively now giving them carte blanche on the project. While they're probably the richest organization in the city and the largest landowner with more than 130 acres of land, I don't believe that those factors should afford them any special treatment. And I'm hopeful that you see this similarly. So my specific ask is the City Council restricts the approval today of the SUP to the currently planned 10 lights across three fields. It will respect the principle of evaluating community impact as a part of an SUP process. And absolutely doesn't limit their right to pursue additional lighting approvals in the future. I appreciate your consideration today. I hope you choose to implement a reasonable restriction on the SUP approval, which would be approving 10 lights across three fields and not a carte blanche 10 year approval of 47 lights, 37, which are not even planning right now. Thank you, Mr. Katz, for time that's expired. Thank you, Mr. Katz. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Katz. By their own words. Time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Katz. Thank you. Thank you. Megan Hansen. Good afternoon, and thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. You met my husband, Chris, in the previous docket. And so we are, and thank you again, Mr. Anubi for your staff's call back. We are the property that is most affected by these changes and that we border the track field as well as the softball and the baseball fields. So I am speaking to you today to strongly for you to strongly oppose the permit as written because it significantly departs from precedent is too expansive in scope and as but rushed through to meet the school's agreement to host FIFA events next month. Most special youth permits are for 36 months. This permit being considered today is for 120 months or 10 years. If the council approves the permit is written, my neighbors and I will lose the right to speak up about how this project is affecting our lives and properties. Additionally, the permit would allow the school to install and use 47 lights simultaneously, seven nights a week, with the only restriction being that the lights must be turned off by 10 p.m. The lack of usage restriction is outrageous. And additionally, the permit does not require a visible to offer its Frazier, Frost, and Lawrence neighbors any light and noise pollution protections. There is a precedent for light limitations as evidenced by the final agreement on the lights at Alexandria City High School. We ask for the same light limitations in our neighborhood. Additionally, why are we rushing this huge project through? I understand the need to install six lights around the track so the FIFA vents can proceed in June. But why does that mean we need to rush to give the school expansive power to install the additional 41 lights and breaks city precedent. And you know the neighbors have when we've asked the school about what the plans are, it takes a while to get information back and the information is not specific. So we feel a bit of a loss of we don't we're being asked to trust an entity that we don't feel like we can trust right now. And so we're asking the City Council to help us through this. And I'll add that while I guess I'm speaking on behalf of my family's personal situation, I would all citizens in Alexandria consider what would mean for a 10 year special use permit to be passed today. This special this specialist passes, there will now be precedents in the city to grant other 10-year-long permits that strip citizens right to public input and don't require the city to do really significant check on how a project is progressing. In closing, I urge the city council to amend the staff recommendations as written and adopt the conditions as outlined. I actually have in a handout that includes some of the points that Mr. Katz made earlier. and I think if I can go put it in the bucket, I'll do that. These are reasonable requests that ensure a measured, smooth transition of lights installation, while also making sure that a Piscable can have a vibrant, great community with lights, and accommodate the fee for use in June. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Hanson. If you could pass copies of the proposed language to the clerk, she'll pass them to us. You could call the next speaker. Okay. Sean McLaughlin, Liz Chiminto, Amy Katz. Good afternoon, dear Mayor and members of City Council. My name is Sean McLaughlin and I live at 1615 North Frost Street. I have lived in Alexandria for over 43 years and at this address for the past 20 years. I speak on behalf of my family in opposition to this SUP application. Other speakers will or have addressed the noise and light pollution concerns. I agree with those sentiments, but would like to address a critical community situation that has been trampled upon in this application. N-N-N-N-N-N-N-N-N the Alexandria way. Many of you will recall our late mayor, Patsy Ticer. I had the great honor of serving as Patsy Ticer's campaign manager when she first ran for mayor. I adored Mayor Ticer. She often spoke about the Alexandria Wei which simply meant working through difficult issues with your neighbors and respecting opposing opinions. The Alexandria Way was not perfect, but in a small community like ours, it is vital to prevent overreach and hostility. This application has violated the Alexandria Way at nearly every turn. No direct outreach to those of us as immediate neighbors until 7 a.m. this morning. Last minute switches in the number of light poles and heavy handed tactics that leave you as a long time and pleasant neighbor wondering what you did wrong to receive this type of treatment. For the record, when a peskable wish to receive permission to build their current track, I was invited to dinner as a direct neighbor, where the headmaster and the then CFO briefed me on their plans and asked for my feedback. I had no opposition, but I felt heard and respected, in other words, the Alexandria way. Why not do the same treatment this time for a project with a much larger impact? I respectfully ask you to hit the pause button and require a Piscopal High School to limit their application to 10 polls on three fields on Braddock Road and require them to sit down for an overdue conversation. This is not too much to ask and still allows a Pescoville High School to install lights in time for the FIFA practices. It also allows the Alexandria Way to return to the table and common courtesy and respect to be honored. I know Pescoville High School graduates are some of the most incredible students. Many of them are here today and they've gone on to become honorable and notable citizens. I suspect Episcopal High School will recognize my request for honesty and fair play. After all, it is enshrined in their honor code. Thank you. Thank you, sir. We can call the next speaker. Liz Chimento, Amy Katz, Roy Shannon. Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Chimento and I'm here to speak in favor of the applicants proposal. I'm a long time resident of the city. I had to actually use my calculator to get 33 years out of that. But for the past 22 years, I've lived on Fort Williams Parkway, which is directly across Seminary Road from both the theological seminary and part of the high school. And in my experience, I have found the high school to be an excellent community partner and neighbor. I've never had any issues or concerns with any kind of overflow from campus events. They are very vibrant and busy campus, 12 months a year, not just when the students are here in the fall, winter, and spring. And we have found them to be great neighbors in a couple of ways. One, in addition to the beautiful surroundings, the well-maintained campus, and the good management of such a large and fulfilling space, we have also found them to be great community partners with regard to some of the athletic needs of our community that quite frankly we can't always meet with our existing facilities and fields. And so while I understand their first priority is to their own students, they have been wonderful in making their fields available and accessible to other athletic uses throughout the year and also bringing some of the special uses that they already have without the lights with professional sports teams last year in the year before they had professional teams training there during the day from the Champions League and a number of the soccer players in our community were invited to come and help set up for the training, meet the players, and in one case, do some sample coach development by playing for those teams, coaches. So we have found the episcopal usage and access to be a really great part of our community experience here. The other thing I did wanna add in addition to providing a little bit of a safety valve, you will and some added access to opportunities in the community having just attended the economic development summit I'm very excited about the opportunity to start bringing these FIFA teams into our community housing them in north old town where my parents live and they're accessing all of our fine other tourists and residential and restaurant facilities will be a great thing for our community. And so I think we have to look at this in a broad context of all the possible ways that this will enhance our community. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. The next speaker, please. Amy Katz, Roy Chan, and Terry Andrews. Hi, my name's Amy Katz, and I am a lifelong member, a resident of Alexandria. I was born in Alexandria Hospital, and I attended George Mason Elementary, GW Junior High, and I graduated from TC Williams. After college, my husband and I returned to Alexandria to raise our four children, and we've greatly benefited from everything the city has to offer. We have lived just across the street from a Peskable High School's athletic fields for almost 20 years. My husband and I have always been good neighbors to the school and have appreciated the vitality that comes with having a school nearby. However, I am deeply concerned that the school, our neighbor, did not reach out to us, even though our front door is in clear view of the fields, and we are mere feet from the campus. It was only through the Seminary Hill Association, SHA, and a neighbor that we recently learned of the proposed lighting plan. Initially, an EHS representative of the SHA Board communicated a plan that involved 10 light poles. Imagine our surprise when just days later we discovered that the special use permit submitted by the school actually requests approval for 47 poles and some within the setbacks. This lack of transparency is troubling and raises serious concerns about how these plans are being communicated to those who will be most affected. Additionally, some of these light poles are proposed to be 100 feet tall, much higher than the 80 foot poles that were settled on for the Alexandria City High School's football field after a seven year legal battle. The language in city zoning regulations is being permanently altered and the height restrictions abolished. This discrepancy raises important questions about fairness and consistency in how we treat different institutions. Furthermore, a Piscable High School has requested a 10-year special use permit, which is highly unusual. Special use permits are almost always granted for 36 months. A 10-year request would essentially remove the opportunity for the surrounding neighborhoods to provide input for an entire decade, creating an unnecessary and undemocratic gap in community oversight. If approved, this would set a concerning precedent, allowing other institutions to request long-term permits without adequate community engagement or oversight. We must be careful not to open the door for more projects that bypass essential input from the very people who will be affected. As a neighbor and longtime resident, I'm concerned about the lasting impact of this proposal. The additional polls and lighting will extend activity late into the evening multiple days a week, increased traffic and contribute to light and noise pollution. It will change the dynamics of our area in ways that cannot be easily reversed. This isn't just about my neighborhood. It's about the importance of community outreach. You can finish your space. Okay. Outreach and input in the decisions that affect us all. Thank you. Thank you. Lori Shannon, Terry Andrews, Frank Putzen. Good afternoon, council. I'll try to be quick here. Let me first talk about what this Intensification of use because the staff report Didn't talk about this much in order to the application. The intensification of use when you put lights on Till 10 o'clock from six to ten o'clock at night. That's the quiet hours. That was a big issue with the large city. The city of New York is a large city of New York. The city of New York is a large city of New York. The city of New York is a large city of New York. The city of New York is 2011-0017 is controlling. The application says the SUP 2019-0026 is controlling. The one that Episcopal says is controlling is involving two dorms, two dormitory buildings. That has nothing to do with the outdoor athletic space in the stadium. In the stadium events they can have there. We went through this extensively without Sanjaro High School. What are the lights going to be on? What are they going to be off? Who's responsible for that? To have sight lighting, there's going to be a ton of sight lighting. You can't just have the lights go off and the kids running around in the dark. So the site line is not playing for in here. This is so woefully deficient. It says that there will be no change in increase of patients. No increase in personnel, no increase of trash. The staff report says, or not the staff report, the application says 19 times it refers to DSUP 2019-0026, that there will be no change in conditions. That's not true. I mean, that's a false look. There's going to be significant changes if you're going to have fields lit up at night. There's going to be more times use, because the fields aren't used right now at 9 o'clock, but they're going to be. So again, this is a falsehood that was put forward. So I don't know, again, I don't blame staff because the application was deficient. The application also points out 2017-21. That was mentioned twice. 2018-21 was mentioned 12 times. And 2017-22 was mentioned 15 times. These are all different. These don't matter. The SUVs that build up on each other matter. And right now there is no conditions that are put forward on this project. There's 250 pages, 20 of substance in the beginning. And then there's a bunch of musco light specs. Right now, the three fields for 10 lights, the neighbors wouldn't be opposed to that. That would be a green light. But the fact of the matter is, they asked for the other ones, and even if they pull them back now, they're like, well, we'll get to them in the future. The sad thing was, the staff reports like, well, we have other departments that will look into that. with them. No, this level of specificity is needed now. Not down the road, so the three fields, ten poles, We have other departments that will look into that. We'll keep on working with them. No, this level of specificity is needed now. Not down the road, so the three fields, 10 poles, that specificity could be there, and that could be approved. But the other ones, that's not there. What's interesting is staff just, or the city council just passed, talking item 13 that says, you guys are gonna do this in the SUP process. You're gonna look into the details, Well, here's your opportunity. The conditions need to be put in there. No conditions. Go look at TC lights. There was like 130. Thank you, sir. Next speaker. Terry Andrews, Frank Putzoo, Greg Gibbons. Hello. Terry Andrews. I'm also a lifelong Alexandria resident, born in Alexandria Hospital, graduating from TC. And I returned from college to teach in the ACPS until my daughter was born. Since my daughter was born, I have been volunteering in both the recreation and academic realms. And I'm saying this only to demonstrate that I've been committed to the betterment of this city. And I'm committed to doing my part to make living here a positive experience for everyone. And I mean everyone. It's a very big city. Growing up here, I never paid much attention to Episcopal or what was behind those gates. It wasn't until my son decided to go there for high school that I realized what a gem we have right here in the middle of the heart of our city. More importantly I learned how generous EHS is in opening their gates to the community, sharing their incredible resources and going out of their way to accommodate their neighbors when approached to help fill some need. They are good neighbors with incredible facilities. It seems ashamed that those facilities can't be used for many hours of the year because of lack of lighting. Even though they open their fields to the extended community looking for extra space, their ability to share is limited due to lack of lights. It is perfectly reasonable and good old common sense to allow them to light their facilities to maximize their use. It would not just benefit the school, but the community, the entire community, not just their neighbors. With all the latest technology and lighting, it just seems silly for any high school in this century to not have lighted fields. They're asking for extended time to design, plan, and implement light. Sounds the lights sounds right to me. They clearly want to do this thoughtfully because that's who they are. That's who I learned they are. And that's how they do things. Time permits that. As a citizen and a neighbor I fully support a physical people lighting their fields and know that they will do so responsibly and respectfully. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Next speaker please. Frank Patsu, great Gibbons, Aurora McGowan. Good afternoon. This time. I'm actually representing Seminary Hill. I do ask for five minutes, although I don't think I will be taking all five. I appreciate that, sir. Thank you. Thank you. I'm speaking on behalf of the Board of Seminary Hill Association and in support of the members of our association who live directly next to a Piscopal High School. Seminary Hill Association for decades has had a constructive collegial and close relationship with the Piscopal. The school holds a seat on our board and our bylaws include all of their permanent campus residents as members of Seminary Hill Association. The representative for the last seven years has been very effective, in fact, I would say exemplary, in keeping us surprised of developments. And she has supported our community on the major issues we have taken up that are of interest to our community. Similarly, we've been very supportive of the construction projects that Episcopal has taken. You've heard about a couple of them this morning, the dormitory, just as a good example. And we were inclined to support this one too. We told the applicant officials, when we met with them on April 21st, at their fields. The SHA me, that meeting included seven senior physical bullet officials, including the headmaster, almost half of our board members and several of our members who live across West Brattick Road from the school. Left clearly under the impression that the three fields along West Brattac were the principal focus of the field lighting, SUP application. The attendees at that meeting spent the entire time asking questions about the lighting of those fields, makes sense, including the placement of the ten light poles. The answers were generally satisfactory and and the board members who attended left inclined to support the project. Early this month, we started, the neighbors received a certified letter telling them the full scope of the application that's before you today. And we had not seen that application, those of us on the board. And we started hearing from pretty frantic residents along there about holy smokes. What's the scope of this? We thought it was about the three fields. This is the entire campus. When we access the application and the staff report, that's when we learned the SUP was, or fully appreciated, the SUP was gonna run for 10 years and allow the school to erect 37 other light poles on several more fields and tennis courts, but in consultation only with city staff. This SUP, if approved as is, would cut the neighbors out of the discussion on those future lighting projects up to 9 plus years from now on fields and courts much closer to those neighbors than the original three, with unsumpholes, potentially within the 35-foot setback. I know there's issues associated with that. I share some of the speakers. I have less concern about the current and post-couple management, not failing to consult with us. Of course, we have no idea who's going to be at the school in 10 years. They're just going to have this SUP in front of them that says, hey, you just need to talk to this person over at the city staff and just go ahead and not having any background. They're not going to know about this. That just doesn't seem fair or right. And frankly, we are a little bit disappointed that this process jammed the neighbors. And ultimately, you've been this position in the last couple of weeks before this meeting, right? Before we really appreciated the full nature and scope of this S.U.P. For that, those reasons are board voted to endorse the Episcopal application with a condition, the same one you've heard, that the S.U.P. be limited to the lighting of the three the West Bratwick Road, and only those fields for now, without provisions for future lighting projects. Importantly, there's nothing unusual about that. I would ask one of the challenges here, and you'll hear this again, is they need the three fields and the ten poles to support activity for FIFA and some of the other ones that we've been talking about. Well, when you ask the follow-up question, well, what about all the other fields? The answer is, well, we have no plans. We're never gonna build that many polls. You get things like that. So it's very confusing. I would ask you, when you get to the 10 year to just press, what is it that you need? What is your need? not what you think might happen in eight years. I mean, in eight years, I might get a Lamborghini, right? Anything could happen in eight years. So it's highly speculative. And frankly, in my experience and my career, I've never seen an SUV quite like this one, right? That here's what you need. in 10 years, just game out and we'll give you an open ended authorization over the course of the next 10 years that you can't tell us what it is. I do want to emphasize one final point, Mr. Shannon made. The SUP application itself is very strange, it's skeletal. I seriously doubt there's not going to be any change and noise, and usage, and capacity, and trash. I mean, obviously, there's going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. I'm not going to be in the room. Blue. Good morning or good afternoon. Hi. Great Gibbons or McGowan, Nathaniel Femaloo? Good morning or good afternoon. Hi, thank you first for your time today considering Episcopal's proposal and for the opportunity to talk to you. My name is Gray Gibbons. I'm a junior from New York at Episcopal. I play soccer and tennis and I run track. This past fall I was injured so I watched from the sidelines as my soccer team played under the lights during the one Friday night lights game per year. We alternate each year with the girls varsity field hockey. So as I watched I knew that I would never get to play a game under the lights. Being on the sidelines gave me perspective and allowed me to understand how impactful this now opportunity was for a community to grow together. I remember watching EHS students cheer on my team and seeing the radiant smiles that my teammates exuded as they heard encouragement from their friends, classmates, teachers, and coaches. Being away from home can be lonely and I think that playing sports and watching games are a way for people to bond in support of something greater. They're shared a Pisc will pride. Games like Friday night lights spark joy, laughter, feelings of overcoming challenges and share losses among students. Additionally, emerging scholars as a program were a Pisc will students like myself, tutor kids from the local Alexandria community who would not otherwise have access to tutoring resources. We focus on academic work and also spend time just playing games with them. They love to play lacrosse specifically and they have it summer day camp at a Piscable where they use the fields. One way that I think the lights could be an incredible opportunity for these kids would be to organize events for them to play lacrosse game or capture the flag under the lights. I know that as a kid, this would be an exciting and powerful moment, and how cool would it be if a bunch of Episcopal students were out there cheering for them? Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker please. Arora McGowan, Nathaniel Family Lou, Gracie Bucks in Boston. First, I would like to say thank you to the members of the city council for letting me speak today. I'm a warm a gallon. I'm a faculty kid from a school and I'm a sophomore right now. I live on campus and I am used to the neighborhoods of Alexandria. Also I play play for Alexandria Soccer Association, which is a nearby soccer club who a PISC will also has a community impact in bond with. This past spring we have been practicing at a PISC will on Wednesday nights. I will say we are not that loud, so that may be a positive. And it's been really inspiring and interesting to see how how Piscool isn't closed off and is involved with community organizations. As we enter full season the Sun will set earlier which is difficult for Piscool to open up their fields for access. With lights at night a Piscool will be able to give the community and other sports teams an opportunity to practice at a P which would be super helpful during a busy time of soccer season. I really hope you all consider these lights to be going on teammates and I would love to continue our club experience at beautiful fields at a physical. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next speaker. Thank you, Femaloo. Gracie Boxston. Burnham, DeBose. Good morning. I'm the Therneer Fomalooa, a junior student at Episcopal High School. I want to start by thanking you all again for taking the time to hear me speak and for considering our school's primary application. I think one of the strengths that EHS offers is its diversity. only where the student body comes from, but in the way we come together as a community. I personally am from El Paso, Texas, and my classmates represent 27 different states and 24 countries across the globe. So this wide reach truly enriches our experience, however, it means that families live far away from campus and face real challenges attending games and supporting their children, especially when these athletic events occur primarily in daylight hours from 4 to 6 p.m. Now installing lights on our athletic fuels allows the school to host more evening and weekend games. These are times when families, both local and far away, are far more likely to be present, as parents do not have to leave work early to support their kids. And their presence is meaningful. If Foster's connection, community building, and a deeper sense of belonging. Now these events at phase value just may be athletic competitions, but they are also shared moments that help shape the identity and strength of a place 460 students call home. And as mentioned before, the benefits of these lights go beyond just our school as well. Local youth soccer teams and groups, such as my colleague mentioned earlier, emerging scholars rely on our fields and lights community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the community and the sir. Next speaker please. Gracie Boxton, Burnham, Buck DeBose, Kira, Lamptie. Hi, I'm Gracie Buckston. I'd like to start off by thanking you for having me here. I'm from Oklahoma City and I'm a junior at a physical high school. Oklahoma City is a three hour flight away. There's only one direct flight a day, leaving at noon, central time, and landing here in DC around 4 p.m. East Coast time. With possible delays, troubles with baggage claim, and the commute from DC from DCATHS, it is rare that one arrives on campus before 430. You're probably wondering where I'm going with this, but it'll get there. I'm a part of the varsity Philochi and LaCross teams at Episcopal. And being on these teams comes with great privilege. You're probably wondering where I'm going with this, but it'll get there. I'm a part of the varsity Philocky and lacrosse teams out of Piscopal. And being on these teams comes with great privilege, responsibility, and most importantly, fills me with pride. My parents love to support what I'm passionate about, but it is very difficult when my games occur either at four or four 30. I stated before, there is only one direct flight that my parents can take to see me play. But in the event that they do fly here, they usually miss a significant amount of my games. If a fiscal were to install lights on athletic fields, it would be more accessible for parents from across the country to watch their children fly. Because if these new additions, athletic games, a few athletic games would be pushed back to times most if not all parents could attend. Being from Oklahoma, my parents rarely attend my Phil Ocky and LaCross games because of the early times conflicting with flights. I hope that for my senior year, my parents will be able to see a whole game at a fiscal high school. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Buckson. Next speaker please. Burnham DeBose, Curel Lampedi, Bowen DeRinger. Good afternoon. My name is Burnham DeBose. I am a junior currently at Episcopal High School, and I'm from Charlotte, North Carolina. First and foremost, I would like to personally thank all the members of the City Council for taking their time to consider our school's proposal to light up our athletic fields. I also appreciate the opportunity to speak to you for a couple of minutes as a student athlete at Episcopal High School. So currently I'm a junior and next year I will be going into my senior year at Episcopal. and the one night out of the year when two of our teams play underlights is undoubtedly a highlight of the year and the defining moment when our school spirit comes to life because it's out of the year, when two of our teams play underlights is undoubtedly a highlight of the year and the defining moment when our school spirit comes to life. Because it's late in the day, most students can actually go and support the games as well as parents. It's one of the purest and most authentic experiences as a student here because everyone is able to attend and support. As a soccer and tennis player, being able to play underlights would be a dream come true. It's every kid's dream to play at night with a big crowd cheering you on. Additionally, I'm so excited to see you. This is... As a soccer and tennis player, being able to play under the lights would be a dream come true. It's every kid's dream to play at night with a big crowd cheering you on. Additionally, I'm so excited to see this proposal is not just for light, for the football field or soccer field, but for other athletic areas of the Pisc pool as well. Being a part of the tennis team, getting lights on the tennis courts would be amazing, because it shows the schools commitment to each of its teams as well. The school is able to attain approval to light through athletic fields, rest assured that we aren't going to be out there every night. I know one of the gentlemen here was concerned about his kids bedtime and we have bedtime too. So rest assured we aren't gonna be out there late into the night. Overall having these lights out of Piscobal we bring our community closer together night games of school spirit that potential for some competitive dorm activities and extra practice time when the days become shorter. I mean what more could a kid ask for at a home away from home so thank you. Thank, Mr. DeBose. Next speaker please. Lampty, Bowen Daringer, Michael Hanson. Good afternoon and thank you for your time. My name is Kyra Lampty and I'm currently a junior at Episcopal as well. However, I am not a student that uses one of our fields. I am a dancer. I dance on campus as well as off campus at a local studio. Because of that, I often return from campus fairly late and miss a number of our games that happened during the day. On the other hand, when I dance on campus, my dance teacher often has to deal with students wanting to go to games during practice versus having practice. Episcopal is a community. It's a family. One of the biggest joys at Episcopal is going to games and supporting your friends. With the addition of lights, we would be able to have games later in the day. So everyone that's not a student athlete at Episcopal could also go and experience supporting a team on the field. In addition, I'm a local student. I live in Maryland and you would think that since I am so close to my family would be able to come and support my friends as well. However, with their jobs, they're both government workers and because of their strict time constraints, it is often that they're unable to make it to games since they're so early in the day and they get get off of work around four o'clock, which is most of our games are. I know personally my roommate is not local and often her family can't come see her play games. So my parents will be her second family and come watch games for her instead. However, often they're unable to support her as well because her games are so early in the day. So with the addition of lights, it would not only be supporting student athletes, it would be supporting the community, allowing people who don't play sports to come and support people who do, as well as it would open up a fiscal to the surrounding community and also surrounding families who want to come and learn about a fiscal and the community. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Lampty. Next speaker, please. Bowen Duringor, Michael Hansen, Chris Hansen. Hi, I just want to thank you. Thank you Miss Lampty. Next speaker please. Bowen Dorengar, Michael Hansen, Chris Hansen. Hi, I just want to thank you guys for being here today and letting me speak. I want to lead off with that I'm an Alexandria resident and I actually met her fact living the seminary Hill area and just want to mention that my parents are in full support of this and so am I. But as of sat here for over just over three and a half hours, there's one word that occurs to me more than any other that I've heard. Councilman Chapman say Mr. Hanson, Mrs. Hanson, Mrs. Katz, and many other people say in in that word is community. And a Pissful really embodies this word. They not only just do nine months out of the year, they do 12 months out of the year. They host summer camps. They support nine months as a student. And I remember when I was a young child, I attended Douglas MacArthur Elementary School and ACPS School. There was a faculty kid just like Aurora McGowan, my classmate invited me to watch the Friday night late-skam against St. Stephens. And I remember just seeing all of it and watching a pistol just cross St St. Stevens that matter of fact, I did 10 St. Stevens as well, fit through it. So during my time at a pisspool and during my time at Douglas MacArthur and St. Stevens, I noticed how strong this Alexandria community is and how much a Pistobo does for it. They not only just do nine months and 12 months, they do practices at night for other teams. They help with emerging scholars, they help with numerous organizations that I help out with, like, one love in all different things. And I think with this ability of getting lights, we could have so much more to offer, not just from when the sun rises and then when the sun goes down, but after the sun goes down. And I've been playing sports here my whole life. I grew up playing Alexandria,Crosse, ALC, Winter, Fort Ward, so many different places that all have lights. And I've always wondered why a pistol doesn't. And now that we're finally here and that we're finally in this discussion, I urge you to just think about how much more this does for not just the Pistols students, but for the community, Alexandria community, but the Virginia community, and the world community, considering FIFA is coming here. Thank you. Thank you, sir. And as we continue to move through this speakers, since we might be towards the end of the youth speakers. I just wanted to take a moment and just acknowledge, I think we can all agree, regardless of your position on this and the outcome today. I want to express my appreciation to the youth who have come in, spoken eloquently, and on behalf of their school and their role in the city. I know the mayor has recused, but I think she's made a real effort to engage youth and bring youth into this building and it's something we all support. And so I just wanted to take a bead and just acknowledge she all's patient waiting here three and a half hours and speaking on behalf, that's not to minimize any of the adults here and the content of the speech, but I think it's important as a city that we acknowledge the role that youth play. And so, appreciation to you. Next speaker, please, Claire. Michael Hansen, Chris Hansen. Good afternoon, councilmembers. My name is Mike Hansen. And I'm going to offer a little bit of a different perspective than you've heard today, because I'm not from Alexandria. I'm visiting my brother for the weekend. And honestly, this is how I'm spending my vacation. I'm from California, for the weekend and honestly this is how I'm spending my vacation. I'm I'm from California and I didn't think I would be doing this today So I'm just wanted to share you know little perspective of maybe someone from the outside looking in But before that I also have a little bit of a coincidence so I Amalandia's attorney in California. I am a land use consultant and I'm formerly the planning director of the city of San Diego and was a deputy chief of staff for the mayor of San Diego. So I've kind of been in the different roles of the different people sitting here and it's in some ways kind of fun for me to watch this, but also not like I mentioned, right? And the one thing that is jumping out of me that I just wanted to share with you on, other than the church calling religious facilities, church is the one thing that does strike me is from my perspective, almost unthinkable, is the generous expanse of treatment in the conditions that are being offered to a private school that is not offered to the Alexandria City Public Schools. the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, the service, Thank you, Mr. Hanson, and welcome to our city. Please take advantage of all we have to offer During your visits and I just want to put a pin in if staff could make a note. I want to keep moving to the hearing, but that's a point I'd like to address when we close the public hearing if we can. Thank you. Next week, or please. So I'm back. Now that we're getting to know each other, my I wanted to move back to San Diego. go my wife wanted live in Alexandria, so we compromised and we live in Alexandria. Um. I love seeing the students up here. I got into government myself. I ended my time in government as a chief staff to the United States Senator because I came to something like this, did this kind of stuff back in the day. And I think their input is almost the most valuable because they've actually given us a path forward. We are not against the Episcopal use of this. We want, my understanding is there is often restrictions on the students of the school using this. And we talk about bedtime. I don't know when the Episcopal bedtime is. I mean can point of order one is it? Study all is at 8 then why don't we turn them? So if study hall is at 8 then why don't we turn the lights off at 8 or 8 30. I mean I believe our neighbors and just to be clear our neighbors are the only people with homes up on the screen right now are coming to this from an extreme place of reasonableness. Having full use for 10 years with no restrictions all the way until 10 is unreasonable. I wish I could have brought my kids to speak here but there are 5, 3 and 10 months. It would have been wild but probably not as productive. With their comments, to me the North Star is what they're talking about at Episcopal should be able to use it. What we fear is it turns into a lacrosse tournament factory, night and night out throughout the summer, throughout the weekends, unending. And I think that is inevitable if not with this current administration at the school, with the next one, because it'll just be like, wow, we have this field, these lights, and let's go until 10 p.m. it is loud on our property it was so loud at the whatever softball game was held there recently we couldn't be outside so we just went to the softball game and it was fun because we love a pisc pool the vibrance that they bring where over in the property all the time walking around we just from a point of reasonfulness think that it should have restrictions we should do the lights that are that we all agree on here and then wait on the other ones to see how it impacts us and then have a conversation about it and have restrictions on how late it can go and who can use it. So thank you for everything. I think the former Marcus close but we'll see you. Thank you for your time sir. Madam clerkaked speaker. Stephanie Sparks and Duncan Blair. I think they're going to flip their order if that's not a problem. And as the applicant, can you just refresh all of us what the time limitation is? If... Or a attorney's, there's no limitations. Just wanted that to be also be clear to the public if there doesn't. If you don't hear a bell ringing in three minutes, it's because these are speakers on behalf of the applicant. I will be very brief. I'm still Duncan Blair wire-gill. It's kind of hard to follow the speakers that talk so eloquently about what this will do with their lives, impact the campus, and also their involvement in the community through mentor programs and others. So I'm gonna be very brief. I'm gonna address 10 years. What is 10 years and what does the special use permit? Most special use permits are permanent. If you have a special use permit for a restaurant, it never ends. It changes if you increase or enlarge or expand, but it's there forever. Why is the physical asking for 10 years? There's a precedent forward in that the lights that were approved at Howard, to Anteniavenu for Patrick Henry, GW High School, the Houston Elementary School, soon to be maybe a middle school, GW High School. When those were approved in 2022, they were given five years, not for the duration of how long the lights could be there. They were given five years to budget, plan for the future, knowing that they're able to do it. And in this case, there's a condition, condition number two that has us continuing to work with staff. And I'm under no dissolution that if you work with staff that means we'll work with the community on the additional lights near the tennis courts. It was late no doubt but we had a study must who came back out look to the setbacks the lights that area went from 16 to. But the 10 years gives us all the ability to plan to work with the minion power to figure out what's the light load, the maximum load that can come needed to all the lights in a plan in the future. If the lights aren't implemented fully within that period of time, you would come to come back to get an extension of the approval for the lights that are subject to appropriation and complete design. Other than that, you know, the school is requesting is a special use permit in itself. You need a special use permit to be a private school academic with more than 20 students. Pissible has over 400 and about 200 people on campus all the time. So we're adding accessory lights, which are permitted in the code, especially use permit is for the increased lights, poles, which we just talked about. And we are working with the best company in the United States to minimize what the ordinance looks at, glare and spill. And again, the other SEPs are proven 2022. Unlike TCEMs, some right across the street from neighborhood. Do not try to put restrictions on the number of times the light can be used, number of teams that can use it. It relies upon the judgment of ACPS, and I can promise you that a fiscal high school has greater concerns about over usage of its fields having people on the campus. You heard this study hall is from 8 to 10. They are going to monitor, control, and police use of the field to make sure that it's a safe and nurturing environment for all the students and the families that live there. I'll be glad to answer any question and Stephanie Sparks Smith who is the General Counsel of the Episcopal High School is to talk next and she can provide more information about the technical issues outreach and other issues. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Blair. Do my colleagues want to hear from Ms. Smith before we pose any questions? Okay, thank you, ma'am. Yes, please. Thank you very much for your time and patience today. Especially your patience and listening to the heart and soul of our campus, which is our students and appreciate that they have this opportunity to kind of see civic engagement and action, including people who oppose our position here. And I think that's important for them to see people. Reasonable people can disagree about matters and you can do it in a civil manner and seeing really sort of government and action. So thank you for that opportunity. Again, Stephanie Sparksmith, General Counsel for Piscool High School. I've had the fortune, good fortune this process to meet many long-term residents of Alexandria. I myself grew up in a small town in New Hampshire. But about in the winter of 2013, my husband, I moved from DC to Old Town and purchased a property here with our brand new newborn baby at the time. And we now eventually found way to a Piscola High School's campus where we live with four of our kids who my daughter actually demanded and wrote an entire speech to come and want to give today. And my husband shut her down that it was nepotism and she wouldn't be able to speak. But I think there'd be sort of lots of it be fun to kind of see the youth before you. I do want to, I do feel like it is an obligation in my position at the school to just sort of give more information. I'm not going to say counteract, I'm not going to attack sort of the accusations that have been laid against me throughout this process. And some of my colleagues in terms of misrepresentations, I'm just going to provide you more information and let you guys determine your own determination in terms of this. Before I start and sort of talk about it as well, I do want to say that both of our head of school Charlie Stilwell and our assistant head for advancement Christina Hald who serves as the board member on the Seminary Hill Association Board are both here present today in support of the school's position and have been engaged throughout this process. Some people have said this process has seemed very rushed for someone who's been living and breathing it. What's felt like 21st 7 for several weeks and months it is not felt rushed at all. It's actually felt long and thoughtful and purposeful and a lot of what we've done. Some of you might know more about it at the school than others on the City Council. So I just wanted to give you some general information about some of the work that we do and the character we are since that is coming to question at points during this document discussion. We believe we are extraordinary neighbors. We've heard feedback about communication and we take that to heart. And I'll give examples of how we actually have responded since to try to increase that communication. But in terms of being sort of welking of community, I want to give you a sense of some of the things that we do for the city of Alexandria. There's been a lot of talk about FIFA which I'll address, there's been a lot of talk about all these teams using our facilities, people and some of these processes have said like and you know you make money off of people running your fields. There's's nothing wrong with running out your fields as a private property, but more importantly, it totally overlooks sort of all the work we do with nonprofits and all that we do for the city of Alexandria. To give you some examples, we let routinely, Alexandria City's firefighters, police, people from K9 to active shooter to CSI units all do their training on our space. We understand that we are very fortunate to have amazing facilities and to have over 130 acres of land. We use that to actually help support our community, our neighbors, the youth. Beyond law enforcement and firefighters, we recently hosted a mock trial to help sort of with expert witness of fire marshals and firefighters. We in terms of Alexandria City High School, we allow them to use our field house for many of their indoor track meets. And all of these things I'm listing, we do not charge. We do it not because we're required or remanded to do it. We do it to be good neighbors and good citizens and community supporters of the city of Alexandria. This past year it was a perfect example of Alexandria city high school who built that beautiful new building across the street from us which is super exciting. Had construction issues in terms of parking. Where were some of their teachers going to park and have parking. We offered spaces out of high school for them to park so that the teachers could get there on time and also so that the neighborhood was not actually having parked cars in random places in order for our teachers in the city to be able to teach at the high school. Beyond that, we, you know, try to host a, you know, series of kind of community events whether it's like triathlon, not triathlons, we don't know, we don't use our outdoor pool for that type of, but more of, I'm blanking on sort of, we have a biking group that comes in, doesn't nonprofit. So that's what I was thinking of. But sort of the 3K races are different things like that for supporting local organizations. We recently hosted the Special Olympics, which has become sort of an annual tradition that we do over year. And all of these things are not to, again, make money in using your facilities. It's a way for us to actually have our students involved in community service and for them to see the model of why it's important to be a good neighbor. I think we recently did the Charlie Hill cleanup, day park and other service, to have our students exposed to sort of the dedication it takes to serve in public service and people who lose their lives and when they're serving as firefighters or police officers. I think in terms of like our youth organizations I think we do a pretty incredible job and one of the one of the things about our auxiliary uses is that I could give you pages and pages of all the groups that we have to campus. People seem surprised in this process that we've had professional teams. Now you're going to have professional teams all the time. We've had professional teams on our campus for years. Okay. All of our neighbors have my cell phone number. No one called me about the softball news the other day. I've said, call me if there's complaints. In our acceleruses, we have not received complaints at all. If we have, right, if we were to, we would address them. That's like actually how the responsible neighbor that we are. Smith if I could, and I don't want this to be read at all as, but if I appreciate your statement only because the day is getting long and I want you, I want you to have the benefit. If there's technical things, because Mr. Blarolder, the fact that you might address elements. And I don't, I don't want to dissuade you from your statement at all. But to the extent my colleagues are interested in sort of any of the technical discussions about the lights themselves or the planning that are in your statement, I would love to hear that part and then perhaps circle back to the larger dialogue. No problem. I don't interpret that as any diminishment of the story. Not really. I think we all appreciate the story that you're telling. Not at all. In terms of I think, I don't know if this would be relevant. I can talk about sort of why lights, why we want to do lights, why we're asking for 10 years for all the fields, would that be something helpful. In terms of why lights internally first and foremost it's for our students. So we've heard this sort of like FIFA and FIFA needs these three fields. Anyone who knows professional soccer players, no one wants to... in terms of why lights internally, first and foremost, it's for our students. So we've heard this sort of like, FIFA and FIFA needs these three fields. Anyone who knows professional soccer players no one wants to play an artificial turf. Two of those three fields are artificial turf. Those are entirely for our like internal use in the way to support youth organizations that we help support in the city of Alexandria. In terms of the 10 year permit, I mean, I think it's well established in 11506 CTA that we are permitted to ask for that. I think it's well established in 11506 C2A that we are permitted to ask for that. I think it's very that people do that because they don't necessarily have the type of land that we do in the city of Alexandria. A reason for that 10 years and why we're going for all these fields is you heard it from one of our students ourselves. We have lots of different teams. One of the things about running temporary lights is we've had to limit what teams each year could use it. We want all of our students to know that, well, we might not have official concrete funded plans to put lights on the baseball field. That is something of interest. And in part of the planning in 10 years is there's an economies of efficiencies. And I've been told by neighbors in sort of variety ways, like there's no economies of efficiencies. Well, when you're putting in electricity, and you're trying to predict, right, whether you're gonna have other leading lighting needs, it is a big expense to go back and revisit those site plans to redo that. If you know that you have permission, whether you end up absolutely doing it or not, and we're putting a limit, and if the council wants to consider lower than 10 years, which I don't think is necessary. We're certainly open to that. We're not trying to have lower than 10 years, which I don't think is necessary, we're certainly open to that. We're not trying to have this crazy long leash, what we're trying to do is be thoughtful. So there are a lot of efficiencies. We don't want to be redoing the site plans. When we look at landscaping, we put in that middle cocks field, that's called cocks field, the turf in the middle of those three fields. We put a big bar there and we've heard from neighbors on West Bradford that that's been tremendously helpful in terms of any noise, just noise during the day. If we wanted to do further landscaping or do berms along the baseball softball tennis court, that takes time, that's an investment from the school, that is thousands of dollars. It's hard to, as a school commit to do those types of resources, knowing that you're not able to put lights on those fields. So it's a lot of sort of that planning and infrastructure, and it's a streamlined of the process. Quite frankly, it's also a transparency to the city. We did talk to the city in terms of, I also looked at sort of what other higher education schools do, because quite frankly, point frankly the size of our school, the residential aspect, is much more like a small college than it is sort of a high school campus. You do have to plan ahead with development plans. You do have to do that type of extended planning. So that definitely factored into sort of the like, why all these? What our neighbors are absolutely clear about what we said to them is we don't intend to install 47 light poles. In fact, as soon as within 24 hours of receiving an updated plan from our lighting company, because we said, you know, take a look at these setbacks. We know that these were preliminary planned, but we want to make sure people know we're not trying to, you know, encroach on any setbacks. We asked them to take a look at the poles. We haven't done a full efficiency of all of those ones that we could do, but we did tell them, okay, we can actually eliminate 10 from the 10 score. We could just do six of the courts that are the most internal part that are furthest away from the property line. I actually email. But we did tell him, OK, we can actually eliminate 10 from the 10th court. We could just do six of the courts that are the most internal part that are furthest away from the property line. I actually emailed that to the neighbors this morning. When did we find that out yesterday? So part of the plan is we don't have some official funded plans. But the reason we put all the skins in is because we're serious about it, right? We want to consider it. We want to see how these ones go. And then through the building permit phase, we'll do sort of the official ones. But I think the proof is actually in. is because we're serious about it, right? We want to consider it. We want to see how these ones go. And then through the building permit phase, we'll do sort of the official ones. But I think the proof is actually in what we submitted for the three fields for the building permit. No one asked us to reduce the number of polls on those fields. But what do we do with the middle field? We're lighting the middle field by the polls on the outer two fields. No one asked us to make sure, and you can see it in the expert engineering letter. No one asked us to say, make sure you have the minimal number of polls again. What do we do? We tried, we could have done more polls on either the fields. We push must go. What is the lowest height we can go and still have the maximize mitigation for any effective neighbor areas? And we've done that with these three. So that should be sort of a good phase showing that yes, we don't have official plans but we've show these scans and show yes, we're still going for the zero spillover. You sort of get caught here where we provide too much detail. So like it's 47 polls and then we don't private enough detail. Like sort of you get caught kind of in this middle where we're We're just doing a good faith effort to say, City Council, instead of coming back to you over a year, we're saying this is our plan for our lighting. Instead of, we want these city fields and the next year come back and be like surprise we forgot to tell you about this one because we think as part of being informed is for you to know actually our full plan and no one is going to worry if we don't decide to light a softball field or some tennis courts or one of the field hockey fields but if we We don't ask for it now, we can't plan for it, and we're not actually being transparent to the council as a whole. So that's it. field or some tennis courts or one of the field hockey fields. But if we don't ask for it now, we can't plan for it and we're not actually being transparent to the council as a whole. So that's in terms of sort of the why the lights. Is there, in terms of the technical, I'm happy to speak to anything else. I'm happy to speak to our communication. I'm happy to speak about FIFA. I think the main point I want to make at the end, really, that I think is important before taking your questions is like, the idea of limits, you know, many of the city fields with lights do not have limits. They are on automatic timers, some go on and off, you know, consistently in terms of the same times. We have said we will have ours off by 10. We have our own internal limits. We have study hall for 8 to 10. We will have no noise, right? We don't allow our outside groups not to use music on our fields during the day. Yes, we have some of our teams do during game warmups. I've heard some recent things about some of our kids having playing music out on some of the areas that's disturbing to the neighbors, and it's something we're going to address. That's the first time we've kind of heard of that recently. But we are going to have our own internal limitations. We have 24-7 security. Anytime we have an auxiliary event, we have security present. We have EHS personnel present. That's how we manage things. All of our parking is all within campus. With any event that we have. With the exception of we host the citywide track meet and that sometimes spills over. But we've even been trying to line new areas of our campus to actually maximize the parking we have. We've said to the neighbors we'll give you a 24-7 number you can call with any complaints. We had temporary rates since 2009, we heard complaints about them because they weren't the best technology, we tried to fix those, we were responsive. So our internal limits and I think our own check counts in and I've heard a lot about yes the are close. And I've brought tons of pictures so you can kind of see. But right to that right at the bottom of the screen, okay? We have over 700 people that live on our campus. Over 460 students, including minors, we have 234 residents of Alexandria that are families. There are new born babies and plenty of little kids and the dorms and residences directly next to that field. If anyone has been to any of our faculty meetings, you can be rest assured that we will get a lot of complaints from our own internal community. If we are allowed, if our lights are on affecting bedtime, and well, yes, the neighbors are close. I think they've underestimated. I did some measurements myself. It's less than 150 feet from that field to those residences with dorms and little kids. So we are thoughtful and respectful. We're gonna do that that way. And we believe our internal limitations and our record of history as the citizen of Alexandria in the school since 1839 should serve as record of that. No, I appreciate that, Miss Smith. I think if we can pause here, I know at least two of my colleagues have questions. And if I could start with Ms. Widow, Council Member Chapman. Thank you, Madam Vice-Mayer. Going back to the last-docut item, I wanted to kind of understand your communication and I think it's appropriate for this-docut item. Kind of with the neighbors, I know I've heard various situations around communication. I did forget to ask the representative from somebody I heard about with a place in that communication. So can you kind of help me understand how the school communicates, how you receive, you've talked about receiving complaints, conversations, how does that all work? Which I want to be very clear. Yes, I can speak. I have no personal knowledge of the dinner. That was reference, so I'll say that, but I can tell you communication that we have done in this instance, and then communication that I personally have done throughout this process. And about a year ago, Episcopal, our representative of the Seminary Hill Association Board brought to their attention that we were going to explore lights. And in that time full transparency, we were thinking about Hummable, our football stadium. And the reason for that is that was the one that we've had the time. the station board brought to their attention that we were going to explore lights. And in that time, full transparency, we were thinking about Hummable, our football stadium. And the reason for that is that was the one that we've had the temporary lights on since 2009. As we have sort of dug into this process and realized how advanced technology is, I mean, one of the reasons we have not done it earlier is because we were used to the temporary lights. And in our campus, we, anyone who's been to it, we care about aesthetics. Certainly, and so for our own 700 people who live on our campus, the idea of having lots of lights, with worries of spillover or glare, was a high concern. As we sort of dug into this, we realized that actually, we should actually take a closer look and consider. And yes, it was thinking, okay, which fields do we do next? Is there an efficiency about this? Is there an interest in a lot of teams that actually come, including sort of being named a training site for the club cup, and then being named a training site next year in June 2026? You know, should we think more seriously about our grass field? Like, our soccer teams would love that too. So we'd expanded and we thought, you know, it's probably wise after talking with parks of recreation, the city doing our own exploration of sort of what higher ed schools do that are more of the size of our type of campus and planning, that it would probably wise after talking the parks of recreation, the city doing our own exploration of sort of what higher ed schools do that are more of the size of our type of campus and planning that it would be wise for us to actually do this at once. My understanding is there was an update in the fall that was before we made this decision. And then the summary Hill Board Association meeting, I believe it was April 10th. I remember and I had emailed a copy into the city and the city council in terms of the slides that were presented. The focus was absolutely on the three fields. The minute show that we said a 10 year permit we were going for, it has, I know it has the same pictures that we submitted the application because I did the Adobe red edition of labeling the fields. Those and I sent them to our board representative to put on the slides. So I can share the slides if you haven't received them. They show all those fields. But of course, our focus was on which are the ones that we know the exact number of polls at this point, which are the ones that we're going to do right away. If we get permission, it's these three. But the permit is for all of the athletic fields. That was the communication we did. We had, we invited everyone in person on April 21st. Again, we were over by the three fields. Our head of school did say the permit is for all the athletic fields. We don't have any official plans of a timeline for those exactly right now. The three that we're gonna do immediately are these. And yes, all the focus was on those. We didn't talk about 47 polls because we don't intend, we've already reduced the number of polls, that's not our intention. Those are the placements of ones that we wanted. And then we had continued communication. Any individual outreach, we did the legal outreach by notice through Mr. Blair's office. I believe we complied with all that as we're instructed to do. And then any individuals who called, either Mr. Blair, reached out to the school, we personally called back. And actually there's a neighbor here tonight who, today, who alumnus connected us with, and our head of school reached out to them, offered to talk before today. They said they were traveling, the assistance that they were traveling that they would get back to them on Monday. any individual I've met with these neighbors, I've done follow up an email, I'm happy to share any of those communications. Councilman Elnubey. Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor. I need to remember it most, Madam Mayor. What should the Apple can, to the extent that you are aware of the you know that you can walk us through what would be your timeline for a 10-year installation for this project like I know you said you're gonna start with the first three fields but how would it how would it advance from there for each of the other fields I can answer if you want it. Answer first. I would say that what we've talked about is actually likely to have sort of the baseball softball Brian field. But it's a little bit dependent right on how we see sort of our use, whether we feel like our teams would benefit more from the turf, that brine field in the middle is a natural grass. So that has sort of more dormant elements of it. So we're gonna sort of see the use, but I imagine we've thought about it in potentially three phases. Some of the timeline has to do with honestly funding people and sort of the neighborhood made a lot of comments in recent private meetings about our like funding and we had this campaign which are things really to our dorm and health center. Sometimes it depends, sometimes you have some new super interested in doing tennis. Okay, so our job right now is to do sort of the big planning in terms of electricity, landscaping, those types of things, and then evaluate kind of the needs of the school where we can best support the community. The natural grass field, for example, Brian, there is a lot of interest in terms of next June. We don't foresee that we would put lights on those by next June, but we are kind of evaluating it in that way. So it's hard to, I mean, people are saying we are not giving sort of specific enough answers, it's because we're just being honest that we don't have a set timeline or frame work. I hear what I'm trying to get at, because you asked for 10 years, so I'm trying to think about how long would it take to do all 47? Would it take 10 years? How would it take to do all 47? Like would it take 10 years and how would it look like? Like, you're one, two, three, you're doing this in that field, year two, four, you're four, five, six, you're doing the other fields. Like, you know, is there a potential that you can finish that up that before 10 years. That's kind of what I'm trying to understand. I mean, I wouldn't say there isn't the potential. And it seems like you don't have all these answers, right? It's going to be more of mean, I wouldn't say there isn't the potential. And it seems like you don't have all these answers, right? Like, it's gonna be more of like, you know, as things progress, right? But you're trying to give yourself the maximum possibility, so you are able to make decisions as more information of... Yes. I would say that, I would say that's accurate, and that we will do our best to try to sort of decipher as we go through with more clarity But it's absolutely to have some of that flexibility given the nature of sometimes the needs can change as a school or the funding related to certain projects can adjust But we'd want to start in terms of the infrastructure and the site plan that we could actually plan in terms of landscaping and electricity and things like that That that we would have that grounded kind of immediately in some of our immediate plans Okay, I appreciate that and and I have more questions for stuff But just one related to a point that was brought up by the applicant Typically it's a three-year SUV in this case. They're asking for ten if I'm not mistaken I read in the staff report I think that there is a provision that allows properties over a certain size to ask for that exception. That is specifically allowed in the zoning ordinance. Yes. The properties over. Like not everyone can ask them. There is a specific section that provides that for the larger properties. Yes. would you tell me what is the reasoning behind that exception for those larger properties? So I think in the reason for that is because the potential for offsite impacts is so minimal. And also because the property of that size is going to need, if the SUP is covering a complicated site plan that more time is gonna be needed for that to be implemented. Which is kinda what we have here, right? Thank you, appreciate it. Thank you very much. Are there any other questions? Councillor Mourning. Green? On that. So Mr. Moritz, would that also equate to Alexandra City High School? Well, it could. But I will note, since we're on it, that Alexandra, I would say that Alexandra City High School was a very specific set of conditions underlying that review. that review. And so the 2022 reviews of Hammond, Patrick Henry, Jefferson Houston, et cetera, I think it's a better analogy. And we approved a five-year issue P for those. They are not in that they don't have as many fields, of course, as what is being proposed at Episcopal. But I also point out, and I think Mr. Blayer made this point, we only had one condition on those approvals. It was a single condition, and it was that the approval was for five years, and it had to be consistent with the lighting plan. So my colleagues might have other questions for staff, but are there any other questions by the applicant or other members of the public at this time and if not, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing. We've got a motion by Council Member McPike and I've saw a second by Councilman Aguirre. And I just go ahead, Mr. Cudd. Real quick discussion, I don't know if I've seen Mr. Putsu still here or did he head out? So I did have a question for a representative of seminary hills. I did want to understand, okay, I'll just say this publicly, I wanted to understand their position and their relationship and the communication with the high school as well because I think there was some inferences that folks from the high school chat with seminary hills and then seminary hills hopefully disseminates that to the community. I know they've expressed to us on many occasions they represent the various neighbors in that neighborhood. And so I wanted to understand how they're communicating you. Yeah, thank you for the opportunity to speak on that. So again, we just moved here last year. I didn't know the Seminary Hill Association existed until we found out that this, we got the notice for the special meeting. And I was out in front of my house with my kids, and another Seminary Hill board association member had Bill Rosello, who's the head of it on the phone. And she came over and she was like, the fence, I said, are you aware of this? you wear it's 47 bowls and Bill Rosello was not, which I think is the substance of what is, is that seminary Hill like, the fence, I said, are you aware of this? Are you aware it's 47 bowls? And Bill Razzello was not, which I think is the substance of what is, is that seminary Hill leadership. And I heard this also when I joined the Zoom, the following week, when I heard the board members of Seminary Hill Association recall their meeting with Episcopal where it was discussed to get the approval, there was definitely a very big misunderstanding of the scope of the project, and that frustrated Seminary Health Association, because they felt misled, they felt that a piscable didn't convey the full scope of the project. And it was only when the neighbors who found the special use permit found the visual showed it to them and they were like, oh my gosh, we had no idea. So I can speak from that experience of being out in front of our house and then joining the Zoom, hearing and seeing their reactions to when they realized the scope of the project. Thank you very much. I do have kind of one last question for you. In regards to that, because I did have that written down, is there any clarification you can give me or insight, you can give me on kind of that miscommunication between what was said at the meeting and what was taken away from the meeting. Obviously, people might take different things away from the meeting, but I just want to make sure I'm understanding kind of what the communication was to Sumnery Hills. Yes, and I'm happy to provide the City Council with our board members talking points. She read them at that Zoom. Okay. I repeated them. I think the misunderstanding existed that there was a lot of talk about the three fields. The minutes of the meeting show that we said someone asked so all athletic fields and our person says yes. We have the slides to show it, but I think because so much of the talk was about the three, because we have so many of those final details, because we've submitted a building permit for it. That was more of a focus. But at no point were we ever trying to hide the idea that we were doing all of the athletic fields. Everything is public record and when I was asked when I met the neighbors, Megan Hansen was kind of to reach out to me. I followed up with her. We communicated back and forth in a timely manner. I invited her over to campus. She brought neighbors over to campus. At no point when they asked me is it all the fields that I said no it's not all the fields I said it is all the fields These are the three that we would start with. So I'm not sure I promise you that like I've tried to and I have documented evidence to show it. I've tried to now be as communicative as possible to show that like that's how we operate. And I'm remiss that that wasn as it was before, that was never on tension, we felt like we were communicating. But I've done that, I'm forming them of the tennis change this morning, like I said. I've also, we also offered earlier this week, and a response to a request from them, we offered to sit up some formal type of communication beyond the Seminar Hill Association. So that as we move forward with this, if approved, and I put, if approved, as we move forward with this, we can... up some formal type of communication beyond the Seminar Hill Association. So that as we move forward with this, if approved, and I put, if approved, as we move forward with this, we can figure out a more formal mechanism so that this type of thing doesn't happen again. I haven't heard back about that. We mean that and good faith and good intent. We want to have good neighbors, we want to be good neighbors. We also understand that lights are a big deal, and that reasonable people can disagree on that and have strong feelings about that. And we hope that our implementation will go on. I don't mean to cut you up. And we also understand that lights are a big deal, and that reasonable people can disagree on that and have sort of strong feelings about that. And we hope that our implementation will show. I don't mean to cut you up. I want to just, is my colleagues feels his questions been addressed? Okay, so with that, there's a motion on the floor, just because I think the answer had been addressed. I have Mr. Puzzo has read what phone call. he's following but he had to leave. I mean, he had to state me that I could read or... I'm sorry about that. I... I mean, he has to state me that I could read or. Sorry about that. I think the neighbor was able to help me on kind of where. I said it was. I appreciate it. Thank you. So there's a motion to close the public hearing on the floor and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor of closing the public hearing. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. the public hearing and then I'm just gonna make a quick update for the public hearing. I'm going to make a quick update for the public hearing. Hearing none. All those in favor of closing the public hearing. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. We're closing the public hearing. And then I'm just going to make a quick PSA for anybody in the room who might be here for a later item when we do in the room and didn't hear the mayor make that announcement about two hours ago. Madam vice mayor. Madam vice mayor. I don't know if potentially instead of taking up 15 that we break for lunch after this item. Let's see. Yeah, and I I appreciate that let's see where the dialogue now takes us and the time it takes us and We'll invite maybe perhaps our mayor back at that point to help address that Art Felida okay, so with that any questions for staff mr. McPike. Thank you all very much. Appreciate the presentation several hours ago about this proposal. When we're discussing this, a lot has been made about sort of the amorphous nature of the lights beyond the first 10. There's sort of, there's a vision to have lighting at all the sports fields, but not specific locations There's not a building you know plan that's been submitted How unusual is that for a project like this of this scale? Bill Koch staff I would say that For this type of this application is a little bit unusual because it's an SUVP and not a DSUP. A DSUP would typically have a lot more conditions related to the construction. So I think, and as was mentioned, the lights which were done on the other fields, Pam and Simpson, George Washington, Houston, all those, that only had one condition. With this one, we did put in the condition for the longer period of time, as well as the condition about making adjustments to some of the setbacks. I think that condition came out of experience with DSUP applications. And I'm thinking of situations where we wanted staff, wanted the applicant to work on architectural adjustments and things like that so that we can get the approval and still allow for some flexibility to make changes. With regards to this plan, I would just say that the numbers, the locations of the poles and the heights of the poles, if either the, if the poles and the heights of the poles. If either the, if the poles were to decrease, decrease in height, that would be fine. And if they became farther away from the adjoining properties, that would not be a serious significant issue either. If the, you know, if the poles as presented were to increase in height or were to get closer to the properties, then that would likely trigger an amendment to an approved plan. So, and if I may, because I agree with everything that the Mr. Cook said, but to summarize also is that there are standards within our ordinance for the impact, the potential impacts that lights could have. And so, while some adjustment is possible. the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . met whether it's year two or year eight or year nine of this issue P. You say that some of the polls that are sort of not part of the building plan for the three fields at the north end of the property. Some of the lower poll, lower down polls are not meeting the current setback requirements. What is going to happen with those as this process move forward? So, and those are identified on this map. It's hard to see here. We tried to make this compact and efficient. But ones where the numbers are underlined. Those are the ones that are for adjustment. So you're looking at the ones, the tennis courts. And there's one poll I think associated with. weather softball field. So either, you know you're looking at the ones the tennis courts. Yep and there's one poll I think associated with the softball field. So either you know that's going to have to be relocated so that it meets the setback or what we're hearing is the applicant is proposing to eliminate some of them altogether. Right. It sounds as though they've eliminated the tennis court light in their sort of planning. It's now six lights. But regard. all together. Right. It sounds as though they've eliminated the tennis court lights in their sort of planning. It's now six lights. But regardless of what we do today, can those light poles be built if they violate the 35 foot setback? No, because they would not be in compliance with the zoning order. So we cannot get the permission to build closer to 35 feet in what we're voting on today. No. All right. Councilman on Newby, thank you. Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor. And thank you to my colleague. I had that question as well. So I appreciate staff addressing this. So I'll ask another question about what we heard about the time of day. And I just, I want to preface it with this, I think, personally, as I was thinking about it and hearing the conversations about the time of day and hours of operations, I was thinking about days like, you know, where we are now, where it's like, sunset's eight o'clock, right? So, but there are days where Sunset's 7, 6, 5, and that's where really becomes important to have lights. Two Macs. where it's like sunset at eight o'clock, right? So, but there are days where sunset's 7, 6, 5, and that's where really becomes important to have lights to maximize the effectiveness of having such fields. With that in mind, what will be, if you can clarify, because we heard so many things, what will be the permitted hours of operations for this or for these fields? And how does that compare with, forget about ACHS, it's an outlier with all the other lighted fields that we have in the city? If staff could put a pin in that for one second. My running around was related to, I know as we rolled into this, I indicated we'd be take 15 and then we would take our lunch break, but there's been some polling of the group and some checking in with staff and we're going to push 15 to after the lunch break and there was a public speaker on that item and if they're in the room, I wanted to say that now before they sat through whatever remains of this dialogue. room, this item we're currently doing is our last item before the lunch break. And then we will take up 15 after a brief lunch break. So thank you to staff. I hope you've got the questions still in your mind. I think so. So in response to the question, the different facilities would all be managed by different entities. So I'm not sure that there's a universal rule that applies to all of them. I believe that in the case of fields that are managed by RPCA, I believe their time limit is like 10 PM. Maybe a little bit. Let me just, let me clarify my question. So in this SUP, this SUP does not impose any time limit. I do not address the time limit. This SUP leaves it open. It's managed by other things. Correct. Got it. OK, appreciate that. All right. I think those were my questions and look forward to the conversation. I'm sure my colleagues have more questions. Council member Chapman, thank you. Thank you. I first want to start off by, and hopefully with the support of staff, correcting me in several places, with kind of the context and kind of differentiation between what I see as this request from a Piscobal and kind of what we did with ACH. Because I do think there are some meaningful context, particularly particularly I appreciate the former planning director from San Diego kind of looking at this, but I think there are some historical context that we took with our city's only high school versus what we're doing with a potentially private entity. For that context, I think for me being on council, there was a lot of conversation prior to this wide community discussion about a supposed contract of sorts with the African American community that was right by the high school and the city. There's an unfortunate history of taking of land and doing some other things in particular around our high school. And so I think that drove much of the conversation with the community around impacts that not only the folks on Bishop Lane feel, but also the folks, and I forgot the small name of community there. Thank you. Woods Place, I'm a good in trouble. Had there, and I think that drove a lot of our individual conversations with community members there, but also had a different tone to it as we specified some of the details around what we were going to allow on that particular field. Again, it is our only high school and so we don't have other high school sites particularly to mirror it in the city and provide a different kind of context or different level of policy as it relates to that type of land use. and so I do want folks to understand that. That is not the underlying context when we talk about Episcopal High School. Even the relates to that type of land use. And so I do want folks to understand that that is not the underlying context when we talk about Episcopal High School. Even though it's been here since 1800s, that's not kind of what we're talking about with this specific use and this specific site. And so I do think, at least for me, I look at it in a different way, having been there through the conversation of 2018. I do wanna to kind of start my comments out about the communication because that is something that does need to be strong as we heard from students, as we heard from neighbors, as we even heard from the school. We are a community, particularly I live in the middle of the city as well, not too far from Episcopal and the expectation is that we talk to each other, right? I think there are some things that hopefully we can mandate from our purge to say, this is the expectation of the city as you work together, regardless of what we approve or don't approve today. We did do some of that as a related to when we approved the lights. We made a single phone number, something that folks had the opportunity to. We also, with no disrespect to my colleagues who have served on the school board, we did take a look at the history of the high school and their relationship with neighbors. It wasn't perfect. It wasn't, in some points, great. I haven't heard that in the conversations today that there is a history of miscommunication and whatnot there. And so I am also looking at that as well as part of this conversation because as we move forward, that communication has to be strong. Neighbors have to be able to rely on the school to be reactive and proactive as it relates to any impacts, whether they be light or noise. Some of the other impacts that folks talked about, I do want to separate out with this being a private facility. I'm not expecting to weigh in on trash. I would hope that a Piscobal would take it upon itself to handle trash within its site. That's something that we had to look at when we talked about the public high school. Capacity of your buildings and things of that nature. Having lived in the city all my life. I know, you know, what happens when you have folks come to the track meet and kind of have a lot of folks on the property and how that's managed. And so I don't necessarily see that as being an issue as well. I do and I appreciate the extended conversation around the 10-year SUP. However, I appreciate applicants that come with a very clear understanding for council of what they are going to do on their property. I do realize that that is not perfect. Obviously market conditions and other things will help to find that. But for me, having a 10 year runway to kind of figure things out on the back end, I think is a little much for me. For me personally, I would prefer a three to five year as you've already heard today. We do extensions. Those extensions, staff's policy and the city's policy is pretty routine. Obviously there are situations where if that extension is kind of out-of-line with current thinking, we don't know what happens with technology in the next five years. And so there could be opportunities to adjust or even the city with its priorities ask for certain things, whether it's certain LED lighting or environmental standards of the school that we're trying to do on a public sphere as well. And so, you know, it's a much shorter time frame. I don't think inhibits you from the kind of full planning that you're talking about, but it does, as relates to us, kind of lock you into what, frankly, we are held accountable for by our residents that you are doing on your property. And so I want to be very specific. I love when applicants are very specific for that fact, because I'm going to have to chat with neighbors, whether they have concerns or whether I just see them in the grocery store about what is happening on that property and I want to be able to understand exactly what's happening there and be able to talk about it. As was mentioned I think earlier opportunities to build in landscaping I hope continued work with the city allows for that to continue to be something that can naturally provide some barriers and hopefully some sound. I appreciate the conversation about a berm and doing that. I know we've done that in other projects and other places here in the city. But those are some of the things as I look at what we're looking at here. I'm not necessarily comfortable with the 10-year SEP. I appreciate that you do have the option to ask for it. But what I'm hearing as well is that there is a lack of concreteness as you get into the out years. And so if that is still the case, I do want to see somebody come back to council, whether or not I'm here, but council to have a conversation with them about exactly what is going to be moving forward on the property. That's it for me for now. Right, I appreciate that. Any other questions for staff? Councilman, I'll new be. Thank you, Madam Vice-Mayer. I tend to agree with my colleague, Mr. Chap Chapman. I would be able to shorten the timeline to five years for the reasons that he stated. So if I think what I'll do at this point, I'll put a motion on the floor to approve the SUP with five years. Before we get a second, I want to check with Madam City Attorney if that's a sufficient amount of language. There was also a condition as well that was put forward so I think that needs to be addressed. Yeah, if staff. With all staff's recommendation except for the one condition about the period we changed that from 10 to 5. With the addition of the condition that we profored and that was added. I just want to make sure that's clear and that that's in there. Is there a second to that motion? I'll second that. All right. So there's a pending motion on the floor and I want to just give my colleagues an opportunity to be clear that they understand the motion and what it includes and this would be the opportunity I guess to raise any questions or ask for any clarifications on the motion on the floor. Okay, so there's a motion and a second pending and hearing and seeing, go ahead, councilmember Jeff. Me ask staff this because I have a close public hearing already. We didn't. Sorry. Let me ask staff this question while our folks are still continuing to talk. I want to make sure for staff's knowledge what is the number of polls that are being asked for today? I've heard a couple of varied numbers, but I want to understand specifically even after I guess today's communication, what is that specific number? If you have to chat with applicant about that, feel free. Well, it's 47, per their application. So we're with that. Okay. Okay. If there's no other comments or questions, there's a motion and a second on the floor. All those in favor of? No second. The Councillor McPig. Any other comments or questions, Councillor McGuirey? Yeah, just real fast. If this passes, I brought up the staff during the briefing. you're coming up early street, it's been reported to me in apologies. I don't have days or times for when this is. It might have been because they were utilizing temporary lights. I don't know. Let's ensure that if this passes and someone's driving up early street, they're not blinded by the lights. Yes. Thank you, my council Councillor Minniguerre. Oh, Councillor Minnal and Newby. Thank you. I'll just add one more thing. I also, I mean, I appreciate everyone who came and spoke today and the concerns that were raised. But I also appreciate the Piscopal putting in the effort and the work on this. And the fact that part of this is the whole FIFA conversation, I think that that's also, I know it's not the driver here necessarily, but that's a big deal. Like having some of these world class teams come to Alexandria to practice in Alexandria, it's gonna happen this year. And my understanding we haven't been matched for a team next year, but the World Cup is one of the biggest events in the world. To have a team come some of these top of the top players and fans and everything come staying in Alexandria, that is a good thing for our city. I also wanted to put that out and thank Piscool for helping us with that because that's the field that people thought is a world class field that can no one looked at our high school field, the other field, so I appreciate the effort in that regard. Councilwoman Green. Thank you Madam Vice Mayor. I'd like to put out and thank you everyone for being here on this marathon of a meeting today. And especially the students, you guys are so very impressive. We're very proud of you. I would like to make a condition for approval for the time that the lighting would go out 945 during the week and 1030 on weekends. So are you requesting a friendly amendment to councilman El Nubis? If that would be a friendly amendment, yes, I think it would be appropriate. Councilman El Nubia, are you accepting that request to amend your motion So the seconder will have to agree as well, but if if my colleague can just explain a little bit more and yes Yes, tell us if we have the power to then the SUVEP because it sounded like and we can find that out But currently that's that's what happens at games at Alexander city high school not that you know that compares but In just in respect for the neighbors and all that we've heard today and I am so providing it has brought so much to our high school through school spirit and and for our athletic department and the neighborhood as a whole. But I just, I do think that that stipulation should be put in. So before I respond to that, I'd like to hear more from my colleagues. If my colleagues would be also enabled to that, because if we accept a amendment, then it doesn't pass then. Councilman Chapman? Sorry. So I want to be clear, we are setting kind of a time limits for lights, specifically lights on the field that they need to be in. And what was the time? Did you say again? 945 to end the weekend 1030 on the weekends. He said 1030 on the weekends? I did. Friday's weekend. What do we have? And we have nothing on the books now, right? Or nothing within the application, it would be they could have more than 1 a.m., right? Would you not have a time limit? But we don't have time. I'm sorry. Bill, would you answer that question? Yes, we do not have a time limit associated with this issue P. In terms of, you know, the time of use, we've sort of, we have accepted the applicant's explanation of the nature of a residential campus and some of the limiting factors of that. Right, and I think that's where I wanted to get clarity on. I understood that to be around 10 on a weekend as well. So I don't get it managed public hearings close, check with the Vice Mayor. That of me, I respond. For the time being, I'd like to sort of resolve the questions that we're having the conversation with I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I was related to the hours of use by the high school. Right, and this being the last one. I'm trying to align what I've heard in terms of the hours of actual use and willing use by the high school with what we could potentially do in terms of setting an end time for lights. I believe they stated that their curfew is 10. Is that correct? Is that mismanagement? Did you? I believe the previous test was 10 o'clock. That's right. So I don't know if I'd be comfortable with what we're defining on the weekend. I would try to keep it aligned with kind of that school timing. Because even if there is, let's say looking at the extreme use, if there is an outside use, I would not want that to go past what is already expected of the campus. And so if they're renting out people, it's not until 11 even 15 to 45. It needs to be less than that. I'm good with 10 across the board. But the matter is currently requested as an amendment to the pending motion. So our first step is councilmanal newbie accepting the amendment to his motion which would limit the weekday hours to 10 p.m. and the week end hours to 10 30 p.m. Just 10 across the board. Okay, so are you amenable to adding that element to your existing motion? Yes. And is the seconder? Since it conforms with the school's curfew, yes. Madam City Attorney, I just want to confirm that as currently amended we can move forward with a vote. Yes. Any discussion on the motion as amended? Council and Chapman. So another thing that I would add to the hopefully add to the motion by an amendment is when I asked staff particularly about kind of how we mandate types of communication. And what does that look like? I do wanna make sure, and I appreciate the school's interest in communicating with the neighbors, but again, I want something that we can hold folks accountable for. And so at what level, and I'm trying to remember back in what we did in 18, I can't remember that. I know the schools already said that they have a number that people can call, but mandated meetings or things of that nature. I know we've mandated stuff like that in the past as well. Two kinds of things like that, we have it. In many cases had a condition where there is a single point of contact has been established and their contact information is widely circulated so that the members of the community can contact them at any time. That's a one condition. We have periodically but far less frequently required regular meetings because oftentimes a regular meeting is only required when there's a problem. But we have in-mere occasions required a quarterly meeting or something like that. So I appreciate the answer. I don't think I would want to require quarterly meetings, but I do want at least, I would recommend to my colleagues, at least in annual meeting. I would hope that being done now, but at least in annual meeting with a budding neighbors, particularly on the side that's affected by this, SUP at least once a year to kind of discuss what may go on doing the year or what changes need to be made or what have you. That does not seem to be a stretch, but I'll leave that up for the body as well as adding in something about ensuring that there is a single point of contact who that person is, what their number is, and that expectation. Just for clarity, you're not seeking to further amend the motion, you're expressing what you'd like to see as a best practice as an implementation. I am. I was agreeing with that question. Yeah, so I'm actually looking to amend the motion. I'm sorry. Sorry to make it tough for you on the first run, but I'm doing it. Okay, so I can get to work. Did councilmembers El Nubian make pike track the request to staff as made by councilman Chapman? And are they willing to further amend their motion to include the request is outlined? Yes. Yes, find with the established from a single point of contact in a one-year contact requirement with the neighbors. That's correct. OK. So there's a motion on the floor that has been twice amended. Is everyone clear on what we were voting on? Any further comments or questions? The answer's no. OK. So I've been asked to restate the motion and I think everybody understands why so I'm just going to ask for everybody's patience as I bring up the docket. It's item 14. Okay. So this might take a minute and I'm going to ask the city attorney and everybody to listen carefully. has been a motion by Council Member Enubi. Enubi is seconded by Council Member McPike to approve the item, docket item 14, the special use permit to add accessory lighting above 35 feet tall and athletic fields at a private school. It has been moved with the requested conditional language as circulated to council that the approval of the lights that are 80 feet or less is effective upon approval of the S.U.P. Approval of any lights that exceed 80 feet is effective upon adoption of the implementation ordinance ZTA 2025-003. That motion also includes a restriction on the lights to be turned off at 10 p.m. daily. And it further includes a requirement to meet annually with the residents and to provide a single point of contact information. Madam City Attorney, is that the motion as you understand it? So five years you can't get that. So close. It modified the application in one key way, which is to make it a five year SUP. An emotion and a second, and a statement of the motion, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay, there are none. There's no abstentions. And the motion passes unanimously 6-0. And I'm inviting our mayor to retake the dius. Thank you. Thank you. All right, with that, as you're exiting, if you could please, please lower your voices and keep your conversations to minimum, Council is going to go into recess and we will return at 305. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. we are going to come back from recess and get started. With that, Madam Clerk, please call the next item. I shall use permit 2025-00825 Mount Vernon Avenue. Playing a mission action recommend approval 7-0. Okay. Does the council need a presentation on this one? No. Okay, so then we're going to go right into the public hearing and there are now two speakers signed up. So we will start, I'm sorry, misplaced her name. Do we have a med of fee fee? I don't see them online. Oh, this time it's my fault. Do we have Mr. Amed of fee fee? I don't see them online. Oh, this time it's my fault. Do we have Mr. Ahmed Feefe? I don't see them online. Okay, then we're going to go to our next speaker, which I believe is the attorney for the applicant, Ms. Pascar. Good afternoon, Madam Mayor and members of the City Council. For the record, my name is Kathy Pascar with Walsh Klujee and I am in here before you today regarding this project to convert the existing building at 25, 25 Mount Vernon Avenue from commercial to residential. We do have the support of the Delray Citizens Association and the Delray Business Association. We did have two meetings with the Delray Land Use Committee. We had a meeting with the overall Delray Association. We met with the Delray Business Association and most importantly coordinated very carefully with the most immediate neighbors. If you've been out to that site, you can see that the building kind of wraps the side yard and backyard of one home and the backyard of another. So we worked with them, made revisions to the plan in response to concerns that had been raised. I know I've received some questions about parking and how parking works. I will say that a few years ago we had an effort to try and actually demolish this building and rebuild a new building. And just given the site constraints and the requirements of the zoning ordinance and the sentiment of the community, we backed off of that. I now have a new client who's looking to reuse the building for ground floor retail restaurants and daycare with residential units above. Now the use is a multi-unit residential building, right? That's what you come in with as your request because that's, it's just a residential building. I will say that the current plan and I told the neighbors this was that we are proposing to do short-term residential rentals. There are 30 units, and those short-term residential rentals, they already exist in the building above the 2,400 block, where cheese tea can be sour. There are 17 short-term residential rental units there. These units are about 475 square feet for the 26 one-bedroom units 700 square feet for the two bedroom units. And I say that because they're very small units. They're almost built to be the short-term residential rental. In the 2,400 block, there are some spaces that are reserved for the short-term residential rental units in that building. and if you were to go over to that parking lot, you would see that many of them are empty most of the time because most of the people who come for these short term residential rentals are coming by Uber or they're coming to the Metro and walking. I've actually asked people who I've seen coming out of the building, I've had people tell me that they're here because they have families that live in the neighborhood and they just stay at the short-term residential rental because it's more convenient. So we have people who are coming here through other means and don't have cars. We are providing parking in the lot for the daycare. So long as the daycare is on the site, there will be dedicated parking because daycares need kind of concerted pickup drop-off and so we're doing that. Now, if this building in the future were to convert, let's say to just regular apartments, right? And there are 30 units, and the question is, well, there's no parking. What we don't want to do is hamstring the parking lot in the 2400 block by having to reserve parking spaces for this building. However, there is a lot of parking in that lot. There is actually parking below grade and parking at grade. And our hope is that if someone, most of all, we think because of the size of the units and the proximity to transit, right, we're near Metro, we're near BRT. We've got a walkable neighborhood that has everything we could need in it. We have scooters, we have bikes, and we have Uber that we think that if this did go long term residential because of the small size of the units, it'll clearly be more affordable. And that some people may be carless by choice. But for those who are not carless by choice, there would be an opportunity for them to have access to parking in the property to the south if they could work out a rental agreement at that time. But the current anticipation is that it will be the same operation that is running its casa who is running the short-term residential rentals in the block to the south. They also have short-term residential rentals in the old, oh gosh, where streets market was, that Delray Tower, they have some units there too. And so parking just isn't in high demand. And so if it were to go long-term residential, we still think that there's adequate parking to serve that future apartment use if and when needed. Councilman Aguieri. Ms. Poscar, I guess what intent, if any, does your client have of really looking at this and making this potentially long-term residential? They don't have an intent to make it long-term residential right now. It is going to be CASA, but just by the very nature of the use, right? You have to have a multi-unit residential use in order to get to the short-term residential rental. And just from a use standpoint, it could be long-term. It could be long-term rental. It could be long term condos or it could be short term residential rental if we follow all the requirements of the city. But their intention is short term residential rental through CASA. Thank you. So I guess to my colleagues I would say my concern here, I really don't have any issues with the short term rental. I think the conversation conversation changes, however, if this becomes long-term residential. At that point, I wouldn't necessarily want to move forward with granting this. I would want them to come back to us if they're going to shift their model from short-term to long-term. But I just want to make sure that my colleagues colleagues you were I stood on that. Did I mention that we had the support of Delray Citizens Association and Delray Business Association? Okay. Yes. Yes. Okay. Other questions or comments for the applicant? Okay. If not, then I will entertain and just so we're clear, this means afterwards there are no more questions from Sipuskar. Any more questions or comments? That's what I mean. Okay. So then is there a motion of close to public hearing? So. There's been a. Afterwards, there are no more questions from Spuscar. Any more questions or comments? That's what I mean. Okay. So then is there a motion to close the public hearing? So there's been a motion by Councilman Chapman. Is there a second? And a second by Councilwoman Green to close the public hearing. Any discussion? Okay, hearing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, the ayes have it. public hearing portion is closed. Councilman Chapman. Question for staff to my colleagues' point. Do we have any kind of history or examples where, there's been that type of change from a short term used to kind of a more longer term use where we've had somebody come in or is there any issues with us doing that? Because I share the same concern with him. It's not about the kind of overall use. I think that's fine. I think what I want to understand is normally up here, when it's a short-term use, we're not as worried about kind of people parking and things like that because people come from Uber and they come from airport or what have you. But with a longer term use, how many of those folks are going to have a car and what are the expectations around parking and parking infrastructure that we're going to have for that? So this is Sam Shelby with Planning and Zoning. This would be one of the first cases that's come forward under the, well, the short term rental policy is actually still not active, but that's the short term rental policy created another parking requirement, a different parking requirement for short-term rentals versus multi-family rentals. So we don't have any history of a use. I mean, it has probably been, there have probably been cases where units have been switched between long-term and short-term rental, and there's no, there wouldn't have been a city review of that because the parking requirement would have been the same. And when does the new short-term rental policy go into effect? Don't know the exact date but it's September of this year. Okay, thank you. Councilman Alnubia. Thank you. I also agree with my colleagues. I think if this will change too long term, then I would like it to come back to Council. I don't have a problem with it for the short term. Also, I saw there was one condition that said if a park impairment residential program would be implemented, that building would not be eligible. Can staff clarify for me is that only under short term, or even if it's converted to long term, these residents would not be eligible for the park impairment program? Any residents? Any residents? Yeah, I mean short term renters would not be eligible. Not a program to be able to do that. That makes sense. That's what I thought I wanted to clarify. That also gives me a little pause. I worry that that would cause people would come in, you know, rent and then start parking the streets and then at a point if a program occurs then they will be out of luck and they will be stuck and they probably won't understand. We'll realize they're not going to read the staff report and realize that this is not that building is not eligible for a park permit. So that also gives me pause. So I'm in agreement with my colleagues about the long term that I would want the applicant to come back if it's converted to law. So I think we need a little clarity on what is being proposed here and whether or not that is possible. So Madam Mayor Christina Brown from the City Attorney's Office, what's being proposed right now is a parking reduction for a multi-unit residential use. And so that's basically a parking, that has a higher parking requirement. And so where she's asking, a parking reduction is being sought. This is an SUP, so it's applicant-driven and applicant can request it. Now the fact that they've asked for that basically sets it up so that it's possible that they don't have, if they, if, so basically what you're approving would allow them to have a multi, well, let me back up. So the multi-unit residential is a by-right use. So the use is already, and what you're looking at is just the SUP for parking. So just to set the baseline. So that parking standard is higher and what's being sought is a relief from that standard. The short-term rental parking standard is lower. So they're asking basically for essentially they could they could switch back and forth with the use if they've gotten this parking reduction and they're asking for the multi-unit residential. So you would need to deny that portion of it and then the app then the applicant could agree to seeking something less or the applicant could come back and make another application for a only short term rental reduction from those standards if that makes sense. It does. That's why I wanted you to kind of walk through because I think to sewer on the same page here. I know Councilman Chapman had a question on this poll. You're good. That was a question. OK. Vice mayor Bagley. Yeah, and I appreciate Ms. Brown. We have an NCEE eating essentially that the parking reduction here is not tied to the short-term rental policy. It's being sought relative to the requirements of the multifamily requirements for parking. So the representation about the actual usage is not what's driving the request. They're saying multifamily requires us to do X. We're asking for a reduction from that. But by the way, we're planning on using it, you know, for another permitted use. So, to the extent like my colleagues were discussing wanting to have it back, should it be used the other way? For me, I'm not supportive of that because essentially that's what we're doing here today. We are saying, okay, if it's a multi-family building, this is what would be required, and this is the reduction they're asking for it, and these are the reasons they're asking for it. So if and when it ever became a multi-family building, they'd come in and say the same things, essentially they are saying today, which is, you know, if market forces or our residents or our leases require us to reserve what we know we have somewhat available nearby and we can do that but we're asking for this reduction because we believe market forces and demand is going to allow us to fill this building without setting aside these spaces which I often see available for other public uses and not sort of taken off the parking inventory. So you know that's what I thought the important clarification is we'd be doing the same analysis if they came back later to say we're going to be multifamily but that's the analysis we're doing today essentially essentially. Is that Ms. Brown? Is that a fair statement? That is what has been requested as part of this SUP is to an analysis under the multi-unit standard. Councilman Gary. I hear my colleague is saying where I would disagree is that we're putting ourselves in a position where we're allowing an applicant to basically switch without then coming back towards for something. And that's what I am not liking. So I see this as a way to try and forgive my language here, but to try and sneak something in. Kind of mayor. Okay. So while I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the usage and with the parking reduction necessarily, what I take issue with is, well, if I want to switch, I could just switch. And not have to come back and say anything. I could just do whatever I want essentially. And since, as Mr. Shelby said, this is essentially the first time that we're kind of doing this, I don't want to set us up with a precedent that, OK, now anybody else can kind of come back and do something similar. Which we would hope if something were to go wrong with here, I'm not saying that there is. But then, you know, I would hope that we would learn our lesson and do something differently. But if we're setting that president, people are going to come to us and say, well, this is what you did before. OK, here's what I'm going to do. I think you're. I would hope that we would learn our lesson and do something differently, but if we're setting that precedent, people are gonna come to us and say, well, this is what you did before. Okay, here's what I'm gonna do. I think you're looking to respond to I'll go to Vice Mayor Bagley, and then I typically like to just keep it closed so that we continue to have this dialogue, but I think since there are questions about the intent of your proposal, I am going to come back to you. Thank you. Thank you. So thanks very regularly. So to my colleagues' point, we address today's request in the terms that it's being requested, which is a variance from the multi-family requirement, and we don't have to approve it. I mean, so I hear you. I almost don't care that she's saying to us, but I think this is almost like the Episcopal Lights a minute ago. We have a rubric to do it under, and the applicant is also giving us full disclosure, an element of usage that they actually intend to do. But the metric before us is I'm required to do X under multi-family, which is a higher standard. I'm asking for a variance from that and we don't have to give it today. I mean, to be clear, we could say we're uncomfortable that if you in the future use it in a multi-family way, this won't be sufficient parking. So that's the rubric that I'm sort of going to make a vote today, whether I'm comfortable giving a reduction to a building with a multi-family use. You appreciate sort of the full disclosure element from the applicant, but by the way, that's not quite what we're doing. But that's how I'm trying to examine it. Do I believe that this parking reduction is appropriate if it's with 30 long-term lease units? I'm going to go to Ms. Pescar if you could just address that he's about to be intent. So Councilman McGuirey, I think it's the opposite of what you're saying is we came in and requested as Ms. Bagley said a conversion of this building to multi-family, multi-unit residential with ground floor retail. I was actually being, I wasn't sneaking anything in. I was actually being honest with the community that this is gonna be a multi-unit building. However, my client's current intent is to do it as short-term residential rentals because I did not want to come to you and get approval of a multi-unit building with a parking reduction, and then all the sudden be doing short-term residential rentals and have the community go, well wait a minute. You told us you were doing multi-family and so I actually did the opposite. I said, you know, our current intent is to do short-term residential rentals but for the use of this building because the only way I get to short-term residential rental is through the multi-unit building. And so we are coming to you and saying we're looking to do a multi-unit building that is, has a parking reduction associated with it. So the parking reduction we're requesting is associated with a multi-unit building. And I could have just come and we could have been talking like we did when we do one on King Street. And we have the same conversation about people you know, people here are called by choice transit issues, but I did, I was very forthcoming with the community about the intent to do short-term residential rentals. And I think that's what's causing a little bit of the confusion. Councilman Elnubey. Thank you for this back and forth. I think it helped clarify for me. And I think I agree more with the framing of my colleague, the vice mayor. However, I think even if we're approving it under the higher standard for long-term residential, I still would be hesitant to provide that exception. Also, question for staff. Can you walk me through the rationale for adding that condition that that building will not be eligible for the residential parking program if it gets implemented in the future in that neighborhood? It's a standard condition for multifamily residential. It's almost every project that that asked a parking reduction is, Council's ask us before to add it in, and now it's become something that we routinely include with multi-family parking. The residents are exempt from the, not allowed to be part of the, it's a whole policy to, TNES has. Sam, what might be, Mr. Shelby, sorry, what might be helpful is can you explain why, like the intent behind? Yeah, it's meant so the new use, the residential parking permits are there. So residents don't have to compete with heavier, more parking intensive uses, restaurants and commercial uses generally. But inserting a multi-family building into a neighborhood that has a residential parking permit can cause unnecessary impact on the neighborhood they have to then compete with the building's occupants for the street parking. And the, I think that might be it. Thank you. That's helpful for me to frame my thinking. And with what you said, for me, I worry if we grant that relief here, that we are creating a situation where residents of that building will be competing for parking. So the way I look at it, I probably would support personally granting the exception if we grant father in that building into any future parking residential program. That's how I would look at it. But that's just me. I guess, let me try explaining it in a different way. So if you're asking for a parking reduction, I think the thinking is we're not going to grant you that reduction and then allow you to add additional spaces and spaces, uh, spaces, but on the streets. Because now you're saying you need less parking, but then in the same sentence you're saying, but I also need more parking. So I think that's, that's where it's coming from. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. But the way I'm looking at is, may not happen, but I worry about a situation where people rent in that building and park on the street in the residential neighborhood around this. And I think it probably will happen. And if we exempt it, it will happen. But then if it comes to a point where we apply residential program, then those people are out of luck. They. Yes. And I worry about that situation and that's where I'm coming from. And like, well, I think to be. No, I think you're exactly what's going to happen. I think the thinking behind it is when you are making a decision about living in a place like this. And you know that parking is not coming from it, coming with it, or you're in a high transit area, that we are in some ways incentivizing you or trying to put forth a policy that would encourage a different type of behavior. Instead of saying, we want you to bring the cars, we're going to give you an extra spot, we're going to give you a street spot, and it's going to happen to happen to be other. So let me get a councilman to carry it, then vice-mayor badly. Yeah, I mean, I was just going to use a more solid example of the election, right? We just recently got a three-woman issue around it, right? The Alexa was built out specifically so that there was enough parking for those residents so they wouldn't spill out. But of course, we know what happens, right? Because you have to pay for those spaces, not everyone can afford spaces. So then what are they end up doing in the parking on the street? and that's what creates the, you know, point of conflict with residents that are already parking on the street. So definitely. is not everyone can afford spaces. So then what they end up doing in the parking on the street. And that's what creates the, you know, point of conflict with residents that are already parking on the street. So definitely something that we wanna try and avoid. Thanks, Mayor Bagley. And to take it a step further, I appreciate you over the mayor saying about incentivizing non-car uses, but the other thing this makes clear to the development community is, You need to do your math right, because if you build a building and especially ask us for a parking reduction and sell it to your clients and price your building and then those people end up on the street, we're going to ticket them, we're not going to give them residential parking permits and now you're dealing with unhappy residents who are saying to your point, well I didn't know when I came into your building and I liked that it was cheaper because it didn't build parking that I wasn't going to be able to park. So, I love the mayor's comments about incentivizing other uses, but the policy also exists so that the builders build the building in accordance with the proper expectations of how much parking they need. So, I feel pretty strongly that if a situation like this where somebody in Lexin Florence a great example where somebody's asked for a reduction, I would not want those specific tenants to get access to a parking permit. I appreciate an individual might be surprised by that, but he's going to have to take that up with his landlord, you know, with their marketing department, with the choices he made when he came into the building. Sorry, done. Councilman McGarry. So, going back to kind of the framing of the conversation, and then I appreciate where the vice mayor was trying to put this, I think the issue that I then take there is sometimes our policies or regulations that we have in place aren't prepared to deal with the things that we're dealing with. So while I get, you know, we're approaching this from this lane, I feel that this is a lane that doesn't totally exist for us and that's why I'm uncomfortable with it, but to your point, we don't have to approve it right now. Right? And so if there is an way where we can put in a condition to say that if a decision is made at a future point to convert completely to long-term residential, then I would be in favor of denying this. Okay. I want to restate it, and then I think Ms. Brown, we might have a question for you. I think what my colleague has just said is that if there's not a way to put in a condition that would bring this back before us, that then you would be in favor of tonight. Okay, so I think the question we would all need so that the rest of us can move the conversation forward is is there a way to put in the condition, and if so, what is that language? Because I think I heard earlier, there's not a way to do that, but I just wanna... Correct, I don't believe there's a way to... Because it is being at... This is what is being asked at the moment is for that reduction at that standard. So yes, there's no way to condition it to come back. Everyone clear Given that now that we've clarified that issue are there other questions that need to be addressed by staff or comments that folks would like to make By sorry backly I mean in an effort like to Just continue the dialogue to perhaps get everybody to yes if there is a possibility is the specifics of the reduction in terms of like sheer numbers. I'm just curious if we open a dialogue at all about the extent of the reduction, if that would at all change my colleague's position, because I'll indicate I'm keen to see the building put to use. We've been through this before. I know my colleague is keen to see a put to use. And so is that is there a conversation to be had there about the extent of the reduction? I see the applicants head but I just wanted to put it to staff first who would have engaged with the applicant on this point. Is there any flexibility in the extent of the reduction such that we could not fully grant a full reduction but require a certain amount so that we know we have it and I guess can staff address the extent of the reduction? I'm going to start and then I might ask Christina to weigh in the city attorney to weigh in one more time but basically the required parking for the multi-family uses 20 spaces and the space required for the short-term rental or nine. That's the different, does that help a little bit? Are there essentially no spaces on the site itself? There are zero spaces on the site itself. to be used in any way, residentially, there has to be a reduction. Right. Okay. There are zero spaces on the site itself. So for this to be used in any way, residentially, there has to be a reduction. Right. OK. And I wasn't trying to play bait and switch in that, but I wanted to try to take it at face value. And so this is, again, the respecting my college concern, this is for me how I'm framing it as we want the use activated, we want residential areas. There is no way to do that on site without tearing the building down and putting parking on it or underground. Those are the facts as I understand them. So for the purposes of sort of moving the conversation forward, oh, I'm sorry. Can I put a motion on the table or? Yes, you can. Okay. No, I mean, I don't want to hurt me. We can call for discussion after the move. Okay. So, I'm sorry, let me. I was in the staff report. Okay. So, I'd like to move approval of the Doctodiedem 15, especially use permit for reduction of required parking for retail restaurant, multi-lead dwelling uses and modifications to the front and side. You're at setback requirements, open space requirements, and to permit a six foot fence with the secondary front yard to facilitate conversion of existing non-residential building to a mixed use multi-unit residential building. Second. Okay. There has been a motion by Vice Mayor Bagley and a second by Councilwoman Green. Any discussion? Councilmember Chapin. Thank you. My question is centered around the loading zones. zone so as I understand it they would be taking the current kind of back parking lives all right and turning that into a loading zone It's on Stewart Avenue and that would become a loading zone Okay, and then the Sheree McMan had a question about kind of the Drop off pickup for the daycare as it remained. So, so the day. Where's that at? The day. had a question about kind of the drop off pickup for the day care if as it remained. So, so the day care there will be spaces dedicated to the day care in the parking lot at one in the 2400 block. Thank you. Okay. So. I'm Councilman on Newby. Thank you Madam Mayor. I think I appreciate again appreciate the framing of the vice mayor of this, and it's really helpful. So I would love to get to you. I mean, I am trying to think about this practically and the way my colleague framed it where without tearing down the building, there's no way to add parking. So I wonder question to staff, can we add a condition there that the landlord, the management company, whatever, let's people know before they rent there, if the city implements a parking permit program, they are not eligible. So we're clear, we're transparent on the front end, so people don't get into that position. That's situation. I'm just looking so the condition number four says the applicant shall provide information regarding alternative transportation options and nearby off-street parking facilities with lease or purchase agreements. We could amend that language to say, you know, to be clearer that it says that you're not eligible for the, that the landlord is responsible for telling that. I guess, and then we can come back to Councilional Newby. I guess before we go down the path of mending the condition, we have many buildings that fall into this category. So what is the standard practice that we currently deploy today? What's in front of you? And, okay. And do we have feedback on how that's working or not working? Or- I can't answer that right now, but we can definitely find out. Okay. I guess I hear where you're to my colleague, I hear where you're getting it, and I can't make the motion so I'll let you get at the proposal. I guess what my hesitancy would be on something like that is this comes up so frequently before the council. I don't know how I feel about having this building as like a one off with a separate condition when we face this frequently throughout the city. And I wonder if this is the path we want to go down. Is there a different type of communication or practice that needs to happen versus kind of a one off condition on this property? So back to you, Councilman, on your behalf. I take your point. I wonder if it's an end. if we can do this and figure out a way moving forward, like a policy change or something, where we figure out how to solve this problem at large. So I wonder if we can do both. So I would be supportive if my colleagues would be unable to, a friendly amendment to add that condition. I would be supportive of the motion. And then if we can have staff come back to us with something, how to address these situations holistically in the future. Hold on, Madam City Attorney wants to weigh in and then I will go to those who made the book. What I'm hearing is I'm not sure that I'm hearing a amendment to a condition. I'm hearing that you would like staff to do something additional so I don't think we need to amend the condition. I'm asking for both to amend the condition and separately, you know, council, given direction staff to come back with something in the future to address this problem in a systematic way in a overarching way. But in this certain case, I'm asking if my college would be able to affront amendment to add a condition, SM explained to make sure the landlord, the property owner, explicitly tells those who are going to rent there if a program gets implemented, they are not eligible for it. So. OK. So just OK. So I want to make sure we're all tracking the same thing. So Sam, can you the language and then councilional Newbie I'm gonna ask you just so it's as clear as possible I'd like you to state the amendment that you are trying to put forth and the recommendation to staff Then I will go to vice mayor Bagley and councilman Green and see if they are amenable to that and we can have discussion on that so Condition number four as proposed says the applicant shall provide information regarding alternative transportation options and nearby Austrian parking facilities with lease or purchase agreements. So my amendment would be to add to condition 4 and explicit and inform potential residents if the city implements a parking program in the future, a residential parking program in the future, they would not be eligible for such a program. Madam Mayor, I may have some language if you're interested. Okay. Yes, I would be just a week and way all our of our options here It's really breaking my rules here about you getting to speak again I thought the point was to move things forward. I don't know why there's rules Yes, the applicant he asked The applicant shall provide information regarding alternative transportation options comma nearby by off street parking facilities, comma, and the fact that residents are not eligible for RPP permits with lease and purchase agreements. Okay. Vice Mayor Bagley, are you amenable to that? And then that I'd like to indicate my my amenability if could hear Councilman Eguiri's position on whether that does anything to his amenability. Councilman Eguiri. I'm still a little bit reluctant only because I have faith in staff coming back with something. So it makes me a little bit better that we're going to try and work on something. I still am a little bit cautious and have reservations. I'm not sure. No, I think I mean part of why I say that again to everybody's point, I'd like, you know, if we can get everybody to yes, but I think what I'd like to do for today is leave the motion as written and the condition as written and with an understanding that we're going to continue as requested to get ourselves to where our conditions moving forward, our policies moving forward are very clear on this point. So that would allow, you know, obviously I understand my colleague may still need to vote against the matter, but I feel like it's cleaner for the time being and forces us to not do this application at a time to have a better policy moving forward to address this matter. But so that's where I am. I'd be curious to hear Councilwoman Green who I think was my second. I'm fine with that. That way, the way you stated it. Okay. So then that I think is friendly and then dies. Councilman Nuby, do you have an option you could still offer it and see if you get a second. Or you could choose to vote how you wish with on the current motion. I mean, doesn't it hurt to offer it so I offer it so I'm just motion. If there's a second. Okay, there has been a motion as proposed with the language presented by the applicant is there a second. Okay, that motion dies. And so we have a motion on the table that was put forth by Council in the, sorry, by Smere Bagley and seconded by Councilwoman Green which would be to approve the SUP number 2025-00008 based on the staff report and the discussion at the hearing. Any additional discussion? Vice Mayor Bagley. And just to clarify for the community and since we've had a little discussion here is as currently moved, residents of this building in the future are not eligible for a residential parking permit. The fact that it won't stated clearly in condition Doesn't change the fact that they will not be eligible We're all clear on that and that's a accurate restavement. Yes, okay any other discussion Okay seeing none all those in favor say aye aye Any opposed Okay, so the motion carries a five two All right,, Madam Clerk, next item. Special use from it 2025-0010, 31111 Circle Hill Road. Plane Commission Action Recommend approval 7-0. Madam Mayor, are there any public speakers? Only the applicant, so if he does not wish to speak, then there are no public speakers. Okay, with that. Then I would move to close the public speaking portion and move approval. Okay. There has been a motion to close the public speaking portion and to move approval of item 16, SUP, number 2025, just 0, 0, 0, 1, 0. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Any opposed? The I's have it. Motion carries. All right. With that, Madam Clerk, next item. The development special use permit 2025-1001. 2601 camera mills road. George Mason Elementary School Reconstruction, Plain Commission Action, Recommend Approval 6-1. Okay, and for this we will have a short presentation, and then we do have several speakers signed up. Good afternoon Mayor Gaskins and members of the City Council. My name is Abigail Harbol, urban planner with planning and zoning. I'm here today to present the George Mason Elementary Modernization Project located at 2601 Cameram Mills Road. Next slide please. Today staff will summarize the project location and details noting key issues and benefits of the project as well as the community input. Next slide please. The request is for consideration of a development special use permit for the demolition of the existing one story school and construction of a new two story school with additional parking areas, indoor and outdoor recreational amenities and, thank you. An overall site improvements. The action requested of the commission is a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Keep points on the project include that the project is providing increased elementary school capacity within a modernized building which has been designed to meet ACPS and state educational specifications as an incorporated parking and traffic modifications to address circulation and site access needs. The George Mason Elementary School site outlined in red here is located in the central part of the city in the North Ridge neighborhood. The school takes its main access from main Cameron Mills Road. The site is also uniquely accessed along the southern property line via two residential streets with Westminster Presbyterian shares to the north and then surrounded by single family residential properties, a mix of R8 and R12 residential zoning districts. The school was first built at the site in 1939. The project is to demolish a majority of the existing school maintaining the original 1939 building facade and construct a new two-story building to accommodate 670 students and 80 teachers and staff. The two-story building will have north and south wings connected by a two-story glass library and multimedia space. The site will provide three onsite parking areas for a total of 60 parking spaces, as well as for a benefit to the teachers and staff. HPS is also working on an agreement with the adjacent Westminster Presbyterian Church for an additional use of 20 spaces for use during school hours. Utilizing a mix of brick, glass, and natural colors, the two-story building behind the original facade will continue a design that is in scale with the surrounding residential neighborhood, but allows for modern sustainability and functionality needs. This includes an interior courtyard at the center of the building that allows for light into the interior classrooms. A second courtyard between the cafeteria and gymnasium wings that merges into one larger open space at the rear of the school. A concert offer was made to preserve as much of the park open public open space as possible with attention to blend the building with the surrounding neighborhood. Some highlights of the project include the plan of choose improvements to the storm water quality and provides quality Reductions through onsite by retention and other BMPs and will exceed required phosphorus load reductions by 34%. A traffic study found that separating bus and car pick up and drop off would improve the congestion found at the start and the end of the school day. This will be achieved by increasing the Camden Mills Roadway for bus lay-by, as well as an 8-car loop that will allow for increased vehicle circulation. I hope so, apologies. Benefits also include increased capacity, a legal design and net zero-ready building, net zero-building that will comply with the city's green building policy, improved recreational and stormwater facility to include new BMPs to address large rain events, replaced pedestrian pathways as needed for better walking and biking to the school, and site from the surrounding neighborhood added bicycle parking stations on site and publicly accessible restrooms. Starting in 2023, ACPS began community outreach conducting 15 meetings over the two year period. This included supervisor advisory group discussions, community meetings and PTA meetings to connect with families. ACPS also held a community meeting regarding the swing space to be located at 1703 Northmore regard which is next to the existing Ferdinand T. Day Elementary School. All virtual meetings were recorded and posted on the ACPS website along with questions asked and answered answered during the meetings. During outreach, concerns were raised about the loss of open space, traffic congestion, circulation around the site, recreational access and usability, and the coordination of after-school traffic and activity. As discussed in the staff report, staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the Northridge and Rosemont Small Area Plan. The findings can be made for the two requested special use permits and therefore recommends approval of the project subject to conditions of approval. The planning commission voted 6-1 in recommendation of this approval. This concludes staff's presentation and we're available to answer any questions. Okay. Any questions for staff if not, we'll go right to the public here. Councilman Aguirre and then Councilwoman Green Thank you Madam Mayor Staff can you tell me a little bit to two co-questions first what's Kind of the standard for Maximum number of students at an elementary school I am not aware of a standard ACPS we coordinate with AC ACPS on their capacity needs. Okay, well, let me frame this differently and why I'm asking. So I think 1,000 is probably too big for elementary school, but 7 or 800 maybe. And then especially with the concerns around open space, why didn't we go to three stories? Yeah, that was discussed a lot. And I believe ACBS could speak to it more. But our understanding was, or since it is elementary and the children are younger, they would like to prefer to keep it to in cases of emergencies that exiting was easier as well as navigation of the building. I mean, you would have a smaller footprint and I get coming down the stairs would be take more time in terms of emergency, egress, but you know, the whole point is you would put the older kids on the top floor, right? You would put fifth graders on the third floor. Yeah. And then tear that down, right? At least in my opinion, I'm not an expert in this, of course. But again, I mean, I feel a lot of concerns could have been asswaged if we had a gun up on more story. And it even potentially opens up capacity for even more students. And so I mean, I'm not against this project, but I just feel that we had some missed opportunities there. It's hard and this was discussed a lot at the community meetings and the supervisors advisory team meetings that was, especially the supervisor advisory group that was discussed a lot, our planning commission or assigned was also. Sorry, supervisors. Advisory. There was a group of appointed people to advise the school on the project. Supervisor. I think our superintendent should I be saying it's a superintendent. Okay, sorry. Oh, yeah. Say no more, gotcha. I apologize, thank you, Mayor Gaskin. I do have a question, since this is my first one during this, where it's between our two bodies, I'm wondering, because some of my colleagues' questions, I think are really appropriate maybe for somebody from ACPS to speak to. I guess do we have an ACPS representative? Okay, for the purposes of today, are they able to come up with staff and we can throw some of these questions. Sophie, humor is here. So, did you want to come up? Yes. Okay, for the purposes of today, are they able to come up with staff and we get through some of these questions? I don't know. Sophie, here we are. So, if did you want to come up? Okay, well then, yes. Then I would like to invite you to come up. It looks like there's a microphone on one of these sides. I think it would be just be helpful because I imagine there's probably some things you can speak to more directly. And so before I go to councilwoman green, I do wanna follow up on where councilman and Curie started us and if you can speak to maybe how you came to the option, how ACPS came to the option they did and what was explored or not explored so that we have that full context. Sure. So I'll speak to the two and three story floor building and we also have our architect here, Brian Gritzmacher with VMDO architects. You can probably talk a little bit more about the height of the ceilings and what the maximum height allowed in the district would actually be. I believe there's a special exception for schools to go up to Abigail 60 feet. Yes. But the main reason was one contextuality with the neighborhood. Not even the, I think, the church spire is about at 60 feet, but not something that would overwhelm Cameron Mills. I feel like we would have a lot of neighbors here speaking about the height of the building as well. So that was one of the reasons. The other reason is what Abbey all spoke to with navigability of the school but also the ability to put solar panels on the roof. This way we're going to be able to get all those panels onto the roof for the building. Councilor McGarry. So since you're saying a larger surface area for solar panels. Yes. OK. I still feel that that could have been workable with a third floor, but I'm not a marketer. Councilman Green. Thank you, Mayor Gaskins. So you probably know I know a lot about this. And even on the board side this there's always Worried me so 80s Staff in the school 60 parking spaces. Can you can you clarify that I think you said something about a 20 additional parking spaces? I just really worry You know, and I know it's it's different high school to elementary school But you know at many how we're you know They're having parking issues. So it's just really good to to make sure that you know Particularly if we're going to have more students in the school that would be more staff and how do we? How do we make sure that we have enough parking spaces as the school continues to grow? Yes, ma'am. I'll start and so if you can jump in, the goal was for ACVS to provide 80 parking spaces for the 80 max teachers, they were aiming at 100% capacity. The idea was to reduce the amount of surface and asphalt and built environment to maximize the amount of green space on there. They wanted to take advantage of the fact there's a surface parking lot for Westminster Presbyterian Church just to the north. So they're working on our agreement for 20 spaces. That combined with the 60 they are providing at the three different parking areas would provide that 80 total. Great, thank you. Oh yes, Councillor McGarry and then Councillor Neill Newby. Thank you Madam Mayor. And I think again to that point, with the surface area, you have a smaller footprint with three floors, you have more open space. Okay, Councilman Alnuby. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'll get to that Councilman Aguirre. I have a question for staff. On the parking point, I know the Planning Commission made an amendment to staff's recommendation on parking. Can you explain to us what it would look like if we approve with the planning commission's recommendation and without the recommendation because it has to do with the agreement with the church. Correct. Yes. They had made an amendment to limit the amount of parking on site to 60 spaces. We had added additional language saying that if the agreement could not be made, that administratively we could work with the schools to add the additional spaces on site. And the Planning Commission was not in favor of that and struck that language. I think it's, I think ACPS is fairly confident and so if we can attest to this that they're going to achieve that agreement with Westminster, we'd hope to do it for a while and you know how those negotiations can take a while. So I think everyone is anticipating that it's going to work and they have full faith that the 80 spaces will still be provided. Thank you for that. Just for the record for my colleagues, I personally, when we come time to vote, I would be in favor of not taking the planning commission's amendment. I don't see where it hurts if they can't get the agreement to come back and try to work with staff on finding more parking to my colleagues' points. The other thing on the three versus two, again, when I was in the school board, this didn't come to the school board to vote on two versus three. that decision for the community is just probably, you know, for those who haven't been following this, this I'm personally very disappointed in that. I wish there were more options that came to the school board that had three floors or that staff had gone to the school board and asked if the school board wanted three floors before. It was too late to do that because when that went to the school board with three designs, all two floors and some school board members, including myself at the time and my colleague, Councilwoman Green, asked for more designs. We were told it's too late and we have to move on otherwise this will impact the project overall. So I think this remains to be a problem. And it's clearly it's going to create more problems. And I was really disappointed in how that worked out. I think the school board is a representative of the community. I would have loved for ACPS to go to the school board and ask if the school board wanted to see three story buildings, because how many stories is MacArthur? Two or three? Yeah, MacArthur is three stories, but it's also only four acres. Right, but if we wanted to save open space here, we could have gone to three. So it's not like we don't do three. We do three. And in this case, staff just made an executive decision to go to two stories. And I still have a problem about that. Not that I won't approve this project today because of this. I just wanted to raise it for the record and for the awareness of those who may be just tuning in right now. Another question for staff for the record and for the awareness of those who may be just tuning in right now. Another question for staff. For the public engagement, can someone go back to that slide? How many of those community meetings were in person and don't count the PTA meetings? Because PTA meetings are not necessarily a community-wide meeting. All these community engagement meetings, how many were in person? My understanding is not, but Sophie, can you confirm that? That's correct, the rural virtual. Yeah, and I have a problem with that too. Like, these were one... all these community engagement meetings, how many were in person? My understanding is not in, but Sophie, can you confirm that? That's correct, the rural virtual. Yeah, and I have a problem with that too. Like, these were one hour Zoom meetings where 45 minutes or 40 minutes of presentation, then a couple of questions that were picked from the chat. I don't even know if all the questions were answered from the chat, no opportunity for back and forth with the community. I know the Planning Commission wrote a letter about this. And again, I'm raising this. This project had so many missteps from ACPS. And I'm raising this, this project had so many missteps from ACPS and I'm really disappointed in how this project unfolded. So I'm putting that for the record. I'll have more questions after this but I don't want to hug my phone. So I'm going to go to Councilman McPike before I do. I do think there are just a couple of things for the conversation moving forward. We have the project we have in front of us to address today. So I hear you and I think maybe I know community engagement to piece, the design pieces, there's a lot. I think we also need to spend some time on today and what we have to vote on. But I think the piece about where we go moving forward is going to be really important because I know council we have put forth a lot of things around our expectations for community engagement, what we're looking for, how we want to see these meetings play out. And I think for projects that are for the whole city and across our two bodies, we do need to make sure those pieces are being followed. Before we go to councilman Peck, I think councilman Chapman has a question right on this point. Yeah, just to follow up with you and I appreciate your comments. I view my view my colleagues comments and if I made some I was thinking about making some towards what we've seen as just another indicator of kind of the disconnect in terms of the conversations and the cooperativness of working together with our school system. You know, it is pretty rare and staff correct me if I'm wrong, that planning commission is weighing in on kind of our partners, right? The school system, they usually don't weigh in on those processes. We're at commission, weighted on kind of the open space. And I don't feel in talking to the school board members like I did, that those concerns were necessarily taken seriously. Unfortunately, none of them are here to kind of hear me say that, I think, but I do have to kind of have the responsibility of putting on a record. Because I don't think their staff should have been in the folks, the architecture to been in that position. Those policymakers heard very clearly from the community, as well as many of us, about the opportunity they had, because in the end, we are funding this school building to build three-stories, to save open space, to do some of the things that, frankly, are the expectation of the neighborhood around them, and they chose not to do that. And I think we would be, kind of, frankly, irresponsible if we did not not voice that because as we will have future conversations with school board We don't want them to forget that While we while the community has expectations we have expectations to and there does have to be some Form of listening to that and and we should be able to see that in the projects that come in front of us as well So you know, I'll talk later about some other issues, but, you know, having a certain standard around kind of the expectations, I think, is a continuing issue that we are working with this, with this particular applicant. Yes, and I should be, I have no means saying that we should avoid that. I think it's critical and I think that's going to come up on many issues throughout this conversation. I think what I'm trying to get at is we're also going to have to make a decision one way or another on this. And so let's also, let's be holding both on, we're not doing this again without alignment on our standards. And here's how we'll hold each other accountable to that. and also what do we need for it today. Councilor McPick. So I don't want to blame anything. I am gonna move. we'll hold each other accountable to that, but then also what do we need for it today? Councilman McPick? So I don't want to blame or anything, and I am gonna move forward beyond this topic, but I was actually on the advisory committee, and there was a great deal of frustration that the public, you know, the schools obviously had a building and we have a need to serve the students are going into that building. The public had a variety of concerns, whether regarding the historic facade of the current building. Some folks are concerned about height. Some folks are concerned about open space. And there was disappointment amongst myself and other members on the advisory committee and the public at large that all options that were presented to the advisory committee took the same trade off. They took the the trade-off of cutting into the open space as opposed to going up. And I think that is actually colored the entire discussion that we've had since. And I do hope that future projects that go through the school system, when they're getting to the stage, when they're getting public feedback, we'll take, we'll offer different trade-offs and not just pick the trade-off that's going to be acceptable and present that going forward. That being said, I want to talk about the project that's a porous now, not the decision that was made in the fall. The layout that was made in the fall, or presented in the fall, for this sort of basic design with the two long, every what they call this one, it's not open heart as a no. It's a combination of a few. Okay, one of the, one of the, you know, it has changed over time. So how has it changed this, what we're looking at now, how has it changed based on compared to what was presented initially in the fall? Whoever wishes. Yeah. Sure. Sure. I can, yeah, sorry. We're to speak as the applicant, but also from here. So a number of things have changed. One, we rotated that the southern leg, I'm gonna call it, it's a kind of open up that open space, as well as the open field, we definitely heard the community on that. It's no longer a multipurpose turf field which would have meant our educational specifications. It's an open grass field with a re-oriented baseball diamond and the correct north-south orientation. We've considerably shrunk that turf field as well to have more of a contemporary is play area. I would say those are some of the major changes. And then of course we work through conditions with planning and zoning staff to really refine a few things. I hope that there's. Yes. No, and I wanna say I think there's a lot of appreciation for the effort that you all put in there that the shrinking of the her field, the fixing of the baseball diamond direction, that's a lot of appreciation for that. And I'm glad to see that progress being made. And the maintenance of the field, the field also now has fencing around it. Could you describe what the fencing or staff describe, what the fencing is going to be like? The field is currently not fit, so they're proposing new f're proposing new proposals. Yes, okay Based on what they're proposing it is a six-foot tall rot iron fence that would go around the open space But be within the pathways that go around the open space so the community There's a lot of walkways that go around the open space on both north and south sides as well as the rear. Those would be outside the fence area but the diamond area and the open space, everything within the red square on the interior would be fence-ten. What does rock iron fencing mean? What does that look like visually? It's black with gaps in between it. It's not chain link. It's very similar to what was done at MacArthur Elementary School. And you said, Presently, there is not a fencing around the field. Correct. So there is just some perimeter fencing. And how is the field currently used by the school system in its day-to-day activities? Jack, would you like to speak to that? Or so? Sure, I'll start out in Abigail. I don't know if you want to check but I believe it's like some sort of aluminum composite But it's a tubular okay, and it's like none it's so there's so many crashes into it It's not gonna break and hurt somebody right So the fencing as it's proposed is a six foot tubular friends around The baseball diamond around the turf field and around kind of just like encompassing that back area. I do have an exhibit. I don't know if anybody. Yeah, I think that'd be helpful if you want to. Abigail. Abigail, could you put them in the box, please? So currently, so as you know, there is a playground that is fenced in at George Mason. There's also some hard-scape area. When I was speaking with Kristen Donnelly, who's our head of physical education, I asked about the fields. And what do they do for part of their PE curriculum? She told me that they make do, that they still have a lot of folks kind of approach kids on site. There's a lot of people just kind of meandering throughout the school yard through the day. There's dogs that come onto the field. And so from a monitoring and just a safety standpoint, it's very defined times. It's not used for just recreation time. Like you would have dug some cart there where the kids can just run onto the field, place awkward during the day, um, as, you know, during their recess time. So it's a, it's very, it's highly programmed. Um, because before my colleague continues, I just have a question about, because I hear in your response that there are concerns maybe about safety and how this operates. I guess my question would be, is there many other schools across our city that also have kind of this shared open space. I live down the street from Samuel Tucker, where there's a fence on the outside, but it's kind of completely open for people to come in and out. Yet, I haven't heard a proposal that that school would be fully, you know, fenced in. I think about Jefferson Houston, where there's openings on the other side. I just, I have a little pause with the safety argument, if there isn't a standard ACPS safety protocol for all the school, so that every child is getting the same thing. If not, it feels like we're kind of picking and choosing where that might be, especially in a place where it's been without offense for over 80 years. And we have not been made aware of this multitude of instances. Sorry, we're going through most of my. Okay. Thank you Madam Mayor for making the points that I was going to fall off with. Sorry. That is my questions for now. I might have more. Okay. Well, I guess I would be, and then I know Councilman Chapman is ready to get in. I guess I would be curious. Like, is there a standard safety standard? And is this something we're going to expect to see at all schools, whether a proposed modernization or not, and what happens to the ones where we currently have fencing, but we don't have it all around? Yeah, so I think we're also touching on a couple future things for ACPS in terms of developing either new ed specs or a long range educational facilities plan that comes out of that. But right now, so the video you guidelines for school facilities and safety say outdoor spaces intended for student use during school hours must be part of a defined instructional or recreational area that is both secure and easily supervised with access controls in place to prevent allotment on authorized entry or community traffic through student zones. And then there's also a very similar ACPS policy. I can find it very quickly on my phone. But that essentially models that language from VDOE. So I guess I would have to follow up questions. One would be, do the schools that don't currently have that? Does that mean they're all out of compliance? eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes, eyes