you you you you All right. Good evening. Welcome to the Monday, September 16th agenda for the City Council work session. Can you start with roll call please? Sure Mayor, Ms. Connolly? Here, Ms. Flynn. Ms. Hiscott. Here. Mr. Schneider. Here. Ms. Underhill. Here, Mayor Hardy. Here. Thank you, Council. Okay, I know we've got some media items tonight. But before we get started, I wanted to officially thank staff for really busy weekend in the city. It was very successful in all accounts between the Fall Festival, the 75th anniversary culmination, plus it tastes the false church, and then the Ed Foundation for a 20th year run for the schools, and then welcoming week kicking off in Fall Festival. So thank you for all the hard work. I know that events like that are not pulled off easily. And so it was a busy weekend all around. So please pass on our thanks everybody. Well, we certainly will. Thank you Mayor Harding. Yeah. I'll second that. It's great to have all the city council members there, but city staff and the community take a lot of pride in these events. It takes a lot of coordination, a lot of hard work. I think it was a great weekend in the city. Great, okay, let's get into the work sessions. All right, so our first item up is a briefing from staff on the greening of Lincoln project. And Tony Dudley is our stall work project manager for this and he will detail the many meetings that he's had with residents of the street, working through listening and processing input from residents on the street, and then working through to arrive at decisions that we think represent a good synthesis of the input that we've received. And in some instances, some compromises between competing views and always staying aligned with the original purposes of this project which Tony will describe. We do have a few budget implications of the changes that have come about through the public input as well. The project budget is over $11 million at this point so we do want to talk about those numbers with council. We do have a strategy on how to address that. And we have Caitlin Sobsi here who can help talk about some of those numbers and some of those strategies. And this could then flow in to the council's year-end financial report and budget amendment discussion that will be happening at your next meeting in a week. So with that introduction, I do want to thank our staff, Tony, in particular for all the work you've put into the project and to all of our community members who've been so engaged on this as well. Andy, I don't know if you will have any other introductory comments or whether it's just turn it straight over to the town. Turn it over to the town? Okay, Mr. Dudley. Good evening everyone. My name's Tony Dudley. I'm the Stonewater Project Manager for the Senior Falls Church, DPW. And thank you again to Council and City of Managers Office for allowing me to come and speak to you this evening about our project, The Greening of Lincoln. and City of Managers Office for allowing me to come and speak to you this evening about our project, the Green and your Lincoln. The Green and your Lincoln project, I don't want to sound too formal. This is kind of an informal work session. So I don't, I sound like I'm in front of Congress or something. The Green and Lincoln project spans from Northwest Street to the west all the way to the Arlington County line to the east it crosses several roads along the way Northwest Street great for spring street North Oak Greenwich Great Falls Meridian Walden and finally Yucatan Where it then exits the county. Or the city, excuse me. The project goals, we had many project goals to cover for this particular project. The first and foremost was flood mitigation and water quality enhancements. We've had a history of flooding along Lincoln Avenue. The drainage, the infrastructure out there is probably as old as the railroad bed out there, a lot of the pipes date back to when there was actually a railroad running along that corridor. Another one was enhanced green space. We wanted to, in some instances, try to reduce some of the unused parking and underuse parking in order to one, create more green space out along the corridor. But also to help us with reducing the overall impervious area along the corridor. That in turn helps us with permitting the project because in a lot of instances, believe it or not not the state requires us to pay to a mitigation fund in order to do this kind of work even though we're trying to Work on the storm drainage and improved the storm drainage. They treat us just like they would treat a developer in that process and so we're trying to do our best in reducing the cost of the permitting. ADA compliance was a big one too. Right now the sidewalks are at best 4 foot wide, and all of them have poles that go right down the middle as you'll see later. Next was traffic calming. Based on the public's review of the project early in the process, before I even came along, there was a need to do traffic calming along that corridor. And then certainly last but not least was increased pedestrian safety. With the sidewalks being as narrow as they were, people had to walk in the road. Site distances were an issue. Crosswalks were an issue, crosswalks were an issue, so we wanted to see that play out as well. So some considerations that we had to take under consideration included the existing condition studies that we've done out there, local ordinances. I won't read all of these. You have them in front of you. Grant compliance is another one that we needed to adhere to because the money we're spending has to be spent for a particular reason, for a very specific reason. So there are some things that the money could not be used for. Green infrastructure benefits, that was something that when I came aboard with the city some three years ago, council was pretty heavy on trying to incorporate green infrastructure into the city stormwater infrastructure. From a roadway sidewalk standpoint, we had to deal with perceived property boundaries. Even though you might have right away lines that are further back in people's yards, people have adopted that front yard and front area of the right away as their own and don't wanna see it changed. Parking was an issue, has been an issue and will continue to be an issue that seems like as long as we do this project. Site distances is another one that we talked about. We had to, we were looking at all of the intersections out there for site distance components. More planting and vegetation lighting is another one that we'll cover later on not as part of this project, but certainly something that we'll have to deal with eventually. And then school buses and bus stops. Yes, we did talk to the schools and got their take on where bus stops were making sure that all radiuses, all turning radiuses could be could be handled by school buses and the like. So there's a lot of a lot of stuff on that screen but it's just to kind of show you starting as far back as into 2021, or when the neighborhood got involved and when we got involved in 2022, kind of bring the project along, and then you see the design kickoff is where in this year, where most of the work has been done. But I want to focus in on some of the things that we've done this year as part of public involvement. You guys were updated on the project back in January of this year. There wasn't a lot of information. We had just come out of the planning phase and we're just starting to design phase at that time. The CACT was updated for the second time. Actually, we've been to them twice and my friend author once a third time to for them to come for us to come and talk to them. Our first public meeting was held in February where a lot of you were there kind of saw the interaction with the community. It was standing room only in council chambers so we had a great amount of participation. The planning commission was briefed in April of this year, so was the Public Utility Committee commission. After our public meeting, we had, I had several informal meetings with property owners. That included one or one where I was sitting in people's dining rooms or living rooms looking out on the one their front yard to show them what we were doing. It included group meetings where there might have been anywhere from three to ten people involved. I remember one where we took the took place up into Yucatan where most of the meeting where the property owners talking to each other and not me talking to them. So that was pretty exciting, but it gave us the lay of land as far as what we needed to do. We followed that up with four formal evening block meetings. I say evening because we had them at a time where people could work, could come after work and walk the project with us and we could show them exactly what was going on and point to the specific things that we thought were important. I have to say that these meetings were also well-intended. And I felt like we reached consensus at each one of those meetings as to the work to be done. Let's talk about the study area watershed. Up here you see it actually there's four watersheds in the project area. Watersheds meeting, just a quick definition. Watersheds is simply an area that where water, water rain that falls on it will drain to a single point essentially. We have four of them in this water, in this area. We have the Ellison branch, which is in blue, co-branch, which is in green. I should say Ellison and co-drain to eventually drain the trip's run. And then we have Tramble branch as well as a Shadowwalk branch. Shadowwalk is a subcomponent of the Tramble Branch. You might remember we did a project on Tramble Branch down on the WNOD just earlier this last year. Just to show you what our current conditions look like for Co and for Tramble, you can see where essentially Just to show you what our current conditions look like for co-infotrammal, you can see where essentially we have a lot of localized flooding. Some of that surface flooding, this is 10-year event, which is another way of saying it has a 10% chance of occurring in any given year. But you can see where Lincoln Avenue is, there should be no flooding for the 10 year on Lincoln Avenue. We have undersized pipes that cause back up. We have poor curb and gutter drainage which floods, resident yards and basements, and we have repeated flooding of Lincoln Park. This is a diagram that shows the flooding for the 10-year storm event on Lincoln Avenue in the Ellison Branch area. That's in the 900 block of Lincoln where you may be familiar with the house that has a flood wall essentially sitting in its driveway to stop water from coming over the curb and down into their house. So here are some of the flooding in the park. This is pretty constant thing. It stays there for a couple of days. Our project will look to improve that. The picture to the right is actually a manhole. You can see, there's a point on this word. Yeah, you can see, oh, let me get up. You know, I've realized that it's standing up. That's why my voice is standing. But you can see here, this is a manhole that the tree has kind of grown around. And so that's indicative of the type of structure problems, and infrastructure problems that we're dealing with out here, or one link and area. And here's some of the issues that we're dealing with as far as the sidewalks on concern. We have very narrow sidewalks where utility poles are in the middle of them. We have very wide streets. We do have utility conflicts and failing pavement. Also, any neighbors, any of the neighbors would tell you we have speed control issues because of the wide streets and also pedestrian safety issues. I think someone was hit on their bike just about a month ago if that. So these are all issues that we have to tend with. And the question is all, wait a minute, it's out there. Why don't you bury the utility poles? Well, we joke that if you go to Dominion Powell and say, hey, can we bury these utility poles? They'll say it'll cost you a billion dollars to do that. Well, it won't cost you a billion, but it will cost you several hundred million, excuse me, tens of millions of dollars to do that. Because you gotta remember that not only is the minion on the pole, but also every other utility is on the pole as well. And all of those guys want their own corridor to put their infrastructure in, and it just becomes very expensive, very fast when you're dealing with that. So this is a little bit small, and maybe you guys can see it on your computers, but I just wanted to show you this because we did develop a decision matrix on dealing with these particular types of, or dealing with these, some of the issues out here. I can't see that, so I know you can't see it. So what I'm going to do is, again, I'm going to get a little close again and just talk about a few. For the stormwater improvements, say for example for water quality. You know, we wanted to, you know, our considerations were low impact development, green infrastructure, green space and vegetation. What can we decide to do? What can we do? What can we decide to do? We're going to do fire retention facilities. We're going to do street trees, oh thank you. We're going to do street trees as well as reduce pavement in the area. For flood mitigation, we had to deal with, do we deal with present day flood risk or future flood risk? Do we up size existing infrastructure? Do we use detention facilities? Do we increase the capacity to meet tenure to the 10 years storm event? Well, we do up size the system and we do meet the 10 years storm event. But we deal with present day risk fact risk because of the fact that the area is not going to develop into like commercial or anything like that over the time. So we feel like using existing conditions would be enough to satisfy us and to have some lifespan on the project. So for roadway elements, travel lanes, minimum for vehicles is 9 feet, minimum for emergency access is 11 feet. Well, we went for 11 feet. We stuck with 11 feet because the emergency vehicles are important. You want the idea to get around. And so that's what we decided to go with. For traffic calming, we went with both raised crosswalks. Also, speed tables were going to put in in areas where before, in our earlier designs, we had crosswalks that crossed over the street, kind of going to put in in areas where before, in our earlier designs we had crosswalks that crossed over the street, kind of going to nowhere. We eliminated those crosswalks, but we still need to feel like we need to have raised tables in order to control the speed in there. As well as reducing the width of the road, because most if not all traffic engineers will tell you the way to slow traffic down is to reduce the width of the road, either visually or literally reduced the width of the road. For project area limits, there's another important one. Do we use all the right away or do we go for easement acquisition as well, what we decided to do to use the right away because most of the issues and complaints that we got where people saying do not encroach into my front yard. I can't tell you how many times we heard that particular saying don't encroach, I just got a call today as a matter of fact from a lady that lives at 917 saying, hey, make sure you don't encroach them I yard. So, and you guys may have even seen that because I know she copied all of you guys on another email. And then for pedestrian facilities, we did a lot of curb extensions. Of course, we're doing crosswalks. And again, we're keeping the sidewalk out of people's existing front yards and using that as a place to establish a line in the sand and moving those out. We're doing six foot sidewalks and most parts of the project and seven foot sidewalks on other parts of the project. So here's an example of some of the stormwater features that we may include on the project. We know we have at least a couple of areas that we will be including these types of project things on. One includes the American Legion property, another place is in front of 508, where we have a long stretch of underused parking, where we use these types of structures. These structures actually, these pictures actually come from DC. And DC's been a fairly good leader in promoting what they call pocket BMPs, trying to fit these types of structures into an urban environment, which of course we are. Your standard BMPs tend to be, well, I joke, say out in the middle of the field, where it's pretty much you can build anything, but these things really fit in an urbanized area. And they look good, too. Some other stonewater features that we're going to use are pervious pavement. There's an example of it to the left there. We use that quite a bit in some areas, as well as underground attention. We don't have any room for above ground attention, but we are negotiating with the American Legion to put this type of detention facility in their parking lot. Here's an example. We do plan for some underground attention in the park underneath the existing basketball court. So that'll minimize the amount of disruption we have the vegetation there, but it will help in throttling down the flow as we get it to the W&O D, which is still a little the pipe size down there is still a little bit undersized. So we want to be able to throttle a lot of this water back before it goes down. Co branch is another place where we'll throttle that water back so we don't have any downstream implications. So at this point that I want to have Caitlin talk about the funding and the budget that we have for the project. Thanks. Hi, good evening everyone. I'm Caitlin Sobs, DCIP coordinator, also in public works and I'm here with Tony tonight to speak to this slide on the funding and budget. I'm also going to refer a lot to the staff report, the fiscal impact section specifically of the staff report. Did the point not work? I might need it. The immediate fiscal impact in the staff report tonight is $330,000 in additional local funding. An appropriation will be requested as part of an upcoming budget amendment later this fall. The first table there on the left is a summary of project cost broken down into the, and we can't make that any bigger, right? Sorry. I'm sorry. The first table is a summary of the project cost broken down into sort of the program areas of stormwater and transportation. Because in this project we have both, right? And then also the funding eligibility of grants. Under stormwater we have a project sub total of $7.2 million. That entire amount is eligible for grant funds. Through ARPA, we have federal and state ARPA sources. And then also another state stormwater grant, which is called SLAF. Under transportation, we have the roadbed reconstruction and the sidewalk project scope. That total is 3.9 million right now. That is all eligible for a V.Dot state grant through the Revenue Sharing Program. That's actually we've increased that project scope. It was initially just a roadbed reconstruction that we have a grant for through V.Dot. We've increased that project scope to include more of the sidewalk improvements. The sidewalk missing links and curb ramps and widening in areas where we can. The reason that we've been able to do that is because of something called pro-wag, which stands for public right-of-way accessibility guidelines, which is a federal guideline. It was just approved or published in 2023. It's a federal guideline that requires us to update pedestrian facilities in the public right of way above and beyond the previous ADA guidelines. So that's how we made that sidewalk, extra sidewalk scope eligible for this V. Grant as we use ProWag to say, you know, where, where the work scope was not eligible before it now is. So we've increased that to 3.9 million for most, for the roadbed reconstruction and most of the sidewalk. The last little section I have right there is a little sliver of sidewalk work that is not eligible for grant funding from VDOT because it's not required by ProWag. So that is what I'm calling the ineligible sidewalk improvements. And that amount is $330,000 and $330, $306 to be exact. So that's our grand project total of $11.5 million. On the right, on the second table, I've summarized all the same stuff, but I've broken it down into the funding source and status. So for the 7.2 million of stormwater funding, we already have 5.1 million of ARPA, already allocated for that project. Then we have an additional almost 2.1 million of the slough grant that I mentioned. That's technically pending. It is appropriated to the city in the state budget. It's just pending an executed agreement with DEQ for the funds. But that makes up the 7.2 million of stormwater. For under transportation for the roadbed and the sidewalk funding, we have a V. Grant already appropriated in our budget and in the state's budget of 2.7 million. We are requesting an additional almost 1.3 million for the pro-Wag sidewalk. And so that is also pending. We don't have an agreement for that. And technically, the funding is not appropriate to us in the state's budget yet. But we've been actively working that. Staff has been actively working that with Vita. They so far agree with our stance that that sidewalk is required by Pro-Wag. I would agree that it's eligible for the grant funds and have been very cooperative So I'm very optimistic about getting those additional funds and getting an agreement before the end of Before we reach a hundred percent design But that's why that is that those things are pending technically So that's the 3.9 million for road bed and sidewalk. And then of course we have the little sliver that I mentioned, the $330,000 for the ineligible sidewalk work, which would be requested for additional local funding in the budget amendment. And then, so this funding scenario that I have laid out here, this makes a couple of assumptions. And this is what is laid out in the staff report starting online, 142. Here are the assumptions. Number one, we assume that the current scope of this, the scope of the project, as it's defined in the concept, is finalized and that significant design changes are not needed. Significant design changes would obviously change our estimate as well as a lot of other moving parts. So if we if we if this design, you know, that's being presented tonight is finalized and nothing significant is changing. That's what we're you know, that's one assumption that we're making. The second one and the third one are both the grant, the pending grant funds. So we assume that we're going to get the executed agreement for the SLAF grant and the stormwater funding is going to be complete. And then we assume that we're going to get the additional funds from VDA and we're going to execute that agreement and that budget will be whole as well. And then the fourth assumption is that the pending $330,000 would be appropriated through some type of budget action by Council. Again, the immediate fiscal impact of this is the $330,000. That's really the deficit that we're working with right now. But there are longer term impacts to the holistic six year CIP. And this is sort of what's described on starting, I think line 158 in the staff report. The V. Grant that we have requested additional funds for is a 50-50, it's through the revenue sharing program. I will usually refer to it as rev share. And it's a 50-50 grant. So it's, requires a 50% match from the city. 2.7 is what is already allocated and appropriated to this project in RCIP. And basically what we would have to do in order for us to provide the local match to the new project total of 3.9 million is we would have to do in order for us to provide the local match to the new project total of 3.9 million, so we would also have to increase our 50% local match, right? So we would need to delay the start of two other fiscal year 25 projects that are in the CIP right now that are also funded by Repshare because all of that local money to make 50% of that 3.9. It's already in the CIP, it's already appropriated, it's just another project right now. So what we're proposing is that we would delay the start by one year of these two other projects. Those projects are the intersection, the traffic signal and intersection improvement projects at Broad and Spring and Hillwood and Anadil. We would delay that start. They are in fiscal year 25, so we have, they're starting this year, but we would delay that to fiscal year 26, which realistically they would probably be starting towards the very end of fiscal year 25 as it stands right now. But we would push out the funding and the project schedules of those two to start in fiscal year 26. We would borrow the 1.3 we're solving for a 1.3 million dollar local need, right? So we would borrow that 1.3 million dollars in local money from those projects. And so the only impact would be the $330,000 additional that we need. But we would borrow it from those two projects, push those two projects one year out. That has impacts in the out years, fiscal year's 27 through 29, we would have to pay back that 1.3 million. So that creates a need in the out years, starting in fiscal year 27. So, and that's when we would pay back the what, that would be an increase of $1.3 million of local money in the CIP in fiscal years, 27, 28, and 29. Most of it is in 27. So, that also assumes, I think that's another assumption that nothing will change between now and fiscal year 27, which some things could change between now. And then in our CIP funding scenario and in our plans and in our budget. But that's the current scenario and the impacts that in the current outlook that I wanted to outline for you all tonight. Thanks, Caitlin. Thank you, Caitlin. I should say that the ineligible sidewalk funding, it's ineligible because of the fact that it doesn't front the project. So there are two places, at least two places that just happens. One is a connection from Great Falls, excuse me, from Lincoln Avenue to the WNDO detrail, along Great Falls is one of the areas and another area is Eucatan where there's a there's a sidewalk that's just I don't know 50 feet away from the way we're working that we want to make that connection so those are instances of ineligible Sidewalk funds and No of the sidewalk funds. And no, I think you're advanced to that. What is it? Set it in. There you go. Okay. So our next steps on this include the design phase, receipt of 60% plans in October. Right now we're sitting at about 50% plus or minus receipt of 90% plans in December. So you can see we're really fast tracking this. Thank you to Joe Orizzi who's sitting in the cheap seats back here. He's the project manager for our consultant, Kim Lee Horn. And then receipt of 100% plans and specifications in February of 2025. Our bid and award phase includes bid phase starting in November of 2024. That's when Joe and my good friend, Jan, start working together in order to develop the construction documents. Project bid would be in March of 2025, and then project award would be in June of 2025. And that's when you would see this again to approve the construction contract. And then ours construction would start in July of 2025 and end in August of 2026. That is only September, October, November, December four months shy of when we have to have this money spent. We have to have it spent by December 31, 2026, or we lose it. It's cut and dry, simple as that. So with that, what I'll do is we do say questions, but what I want to want to I want to run real quickly through what our existing plan entails and specifically the roadway the sidewalk and the storm drainage. You guys have copies of this you can follow along if you would like but you know this is another place I have to get up and I'm sorry you know my voice was much better when I started this project but I've talked so much about it I think if you guys that remember the first public meeting I was talking a whole lot clear and had a lot more a lot more breath and for some reason I don't I don't have it anymore but we'll see how it works. And less gray hair, right? Yeah, I had to shave my beard off so I didn't look 65 when I went. Nothing is anything wrong with 65. As you can see here, here's the West Street here. Spring Street is here. You can see we've enlarged these sidewalks here to about six feet in width. For those of you that are looking at this sheet, that faint red line indicates the existing curb and gutter. So you know where the existing limit of the sidewalk and roadway are right now. You can see we do have to come into the driveway some, and those are just to be temporary construction easements in order to fix the grades between the sidewalk, the new sidewalk, and the existing driveways. Some of the driveways, actually, from what I understand, people bottom out of one now. So a lot of those will be able to fix as a part of this project and get brand new driveways. So we do allow parking on the north side of the street up until about this point here, this parking here as well. 915 is where we have the worst case of flooding in this particular area here. And I'm proud to say that our first choice was to go this way with the water, but now we're going to be able to come back this way with it. And also fix what we call spread problems in the road. Spread is the distance that the water comes out of the gutter during a storm event and it inhibits the flow of traffic and we're able to resolve those back to our current today's standards. None of the road is is basically on today's standards right now. Here you see we're continuing you see notice where we've come outside of the poles here the existing poles we're not able to move those poles because and I said this at one of the block meetings I'm like raise your hands or who wants to give me an easement to put poles in there further in their yard. I got no takers from that, but we were able to move this out essentially and we do have parking along this area here, but we, and we have more green spaces, what you see in this area. We're gonna be looking at the what you see in this area. We're going to be looking at the crosswalks in this area. These are not quite settled yet. We still have to look at site distances and things like that. Our engineers are looking at that now. Our internal engineers are looking at that now. If you can see where we do have crosswalks here and here scheduled. And those will be raised crosswalks. So they'll act as kind of like a hump as you're going through. Next one. Down here we get into, I'm sorry, let's see. Okay. We'll talk about the American Legion here in a minute a little later on, but you can see what's going on here is we actually have, we will eliminate the parking in this area. Some of these houses front on the street, some don't. But these areas here will be left as low areas as kind of like a last resort for flooding before it floods people's cross spaces and yards in this particular instance. We'll have crosswalks here at Greenwich, not shown, but another and also a crosswalk here. In areas where we go for long distances without crosswalks, we will install speed tables that take the place of crosswalks that we've eliminated. Here in the park, we'll do some underground attention in this area here. Also, we will install some underground storage areas in this vicinity, as well as bioretention, in order to eliminate some of the ponding that we see currently in the park. Here you see that we've, again, we've moved the sidewalks out into the street because again, we wanted to narrow the roadway because why? Because that calms traffic. That reduces speeds in the area. If we go to the next slide, the big thing here is the, let's go down, is the intersection. So we have made scroll down is the intersection. So we have made some changes to the intersection. We did some analysis of the traffic there, as far as traffic count, as far as signal studies. And we found that what we would do is maintain a straight and left turn only lane come on on these four three quadrants but we would just leave the straight left as a single lane on the going north. We also would maintain or create islands here for two reasons. One, it allows for a right turn lane, and also it shortens the crosswalk so that you don't have as far to walk across. There's a refuge you could say for pedestrians as they come across. As we get further down you see where we do some bioretention here in front of 508 and we we do some bio retention here in front of 508. And we also do some permeable pavement in these areas here. And again, you can see where the existing curb is. So we have narrowed the road quite a bit in these areas. I'm going to go to the next one, because I want to have time for questions. I'll go have time for questions. So same treatment here. We've moved the poles to behind the sidewalk. We narrow the road physically here and we also, it is narrowed in these locations as well. Right now there's a median that goes down, or a painted median that goes down the middle of the street there. So we reduce that, reduce the lanes to 11 feet, reduce the parking down to 7 feet, and then also given a visual narrowing through here with both concrete liners and permeable pavement. Again, you can see here that we've done the same thing. concrete, liners and permeable pavement. Again, you can see here that we've done the same thing. We've narrowed physically narrowed the road here at Walden Court, but this was an area where we also had a lot of flooding in this area. So you can see some of the stormwater improvements that we make in these areas in order to alleviate that problem. And go to the next one. And this is the end of the project where, again, we move the side, we move the curve and got it out. This is one of the areas where we'll be connecting the existing sidewalk, which is right about here, to this sidewalk here, creating more green space, narrowing the road as soon as you come into the city. Can you go to the next one, please, Sophie? This is what some of the work that we have planned for the American Legion, we're still negotiating, but one of the things that we're gonna do is, we're gonna build a bi-retention basin in this area here. Remember, this is the area where I said we were creating low spaces behind the curb in order to help with the flooding in this area. And we also want to plan a detention basin basin in the American legions parking lot. At first we thought about doing it in this area here, but this seemed to be the more sensible place to put it. We will be tearing down this house here in order to allow for this pipe. For those of you that don't know, that house is currently condemned. The back half of it is actually missing right now. So in, I'm probably not, well, helping the legion with this particular issue while they help us with another issue, essentially, especially to put it. I think that's owned by, yes. This property here, and all of this this and this is owned by the Legion. And if you never been in the Legion, you need to get an invite because it's pretty fancy in there. I have to say. So that's about it as far as the project is concerned. Again, detention. So you think you have one more with the Lincoln Park? again detention. Okay, yeah. So we kind of saw this before, but we have an existing basketball court here. We're going to be using that as underground detention. We're also going to be doing some better, a little bit better drainage components here. This side wall, we're moving this cross wall because this driveway kind of backs into this cross wall here. So we want to move it. And the reason we like this is because there's a big energy facility right here. It is an underground power station essentially. That is underground, but you can see it. It's a green box. It stands about this high. I don't know why. No way do we want to move that. So we move the fence down to the gate to the park down to this area here and install a sidewalk here where currently there is no sidewalk. So we feel like that will be a big improvement to the area to have sidewalk and we maintain parking in this area along along the park itself. So that is a fun, that does it as far as, that was a quick run through. You guys have the plan in front of you. So with that, I'd like to open it up to any questions. Great. Well, first of all, Tony, thank you. I mean, when I think about the objectives between stormwater, green space, accessibility, traffic, pedestrian safety. These are like all the top priorities we regularly hear from everybody. It's really hard to get in one of those perfect, but to try to balance all of them is really an art. So thank you for all the hard work. Thank you. Thank you for all the detailed block meetings, the briefings, and then the comment response matrix. I read through every single one of them in most of the emails. I think it's just really impressive how specific and detailed and responsive you've been to everybody and try and incorporate all that. So I wanted to give you Kudos for that. I actually had a neighborhood party. Someone on the list had given you feedback about how much they appreciated the outreach you had done to the neighbors. And so that came on the list that I wanted to make sure you heard that. And then the second actually before I open up for questions, is actually Kudos' Justine. I know she's put in a ton of work in meeting neighbors where they are and hearing feedback. And I think that detailed outreach really does make it different. So Kudos to both of you. So with that, questions or comments? Sorry, we're justine. Who knows most about the more walking the street with people. I've seen you out there many, many times. I do remember when you first started this project, you mentioned that you had another project in DC that was incredibly difficult. And so you're entering this with, I guess, some confidence. But I also wonder if now that we're 50% of the way through this, like maybe this project is actually even more difficult than the one you did when we have such a deeply engaged and involved population probably more so than anywhere else in the country I might say You know, I think about this project, you know It's almost like a piece of dough where you can like stretch it towards stormwater and maybe that like you know Takes away some parking or we can stretch it towards tree and maybe that takes away some sidewalker You know, there's so many different and then money is actually the biggest thing maybe that takes away some parking or we can stretch it towards tree and maybe that takes away some sidewalker. There's so many different, and then money is actually the biggest thing and it's like which direction can you stretch it in? And so before I get too much further, I do wanna disclose that I live in this neighborhood. I am not directly on Lincoln so I'm not directly impacted, but a lot of the people that I've been interacting with are my neighbors. So considering, thank you about all these considerations. I have a list of 12 questions that are medium-hard, and then four questions that are hard-hard that I'd like to go through. And then there are probably more, but I can also follow up afterwards. But I'll try to go through as quickly as possible. So with these plans, there's stretches of green, and it says that that's landscaping. Can you talk a little bit about like what the green represents? Because sometimes, especially, like if you go to the 900 block, it looks like the green goes on to people's properties. And so is that suddenly the city taking over landscaping for resident, like what does that green mean, especially when it goes on to property? It just means new open space. The idea there being that if we add on to someone's front yard, then it would just undergo normal maintenance, like they do now. Right, so it wouldn't mean that the city is taking over landscaping. We may be able to plant some things there for residents as a part of the planting plan. We have to be careful though, because on the south side of the street is where all of the power poles are. So we can't plant any like big trees or anything like that, but there may be room for planting in some of those areas. Okay, so I guess like on, I'll give the example of 917, when it does, and actually maybe we can pull this up, it's I think the first page on that document. Yeah, so all the way very close to number one. Yeah, number one. So right there you have like you have a little bit of green that goes on to the property. That's not actually just means there's no purveousness there. I mean, there's no impervious there, excuse me. Right. But they can do what they would like. And actually in that area, we're staying outside the her erected fence. So yeah, it'll be, she has a natural area there now that she's been pretty adamant about keeping. So we've been able to to to maintain that. For is there maintenance built into Some of the expected costs of this project so things like those what you were showing in DC where there are plants and other things like that is a city prepared to maintain these Basins Unfortunately, we have not put any maintenance cost into the cost that you see there. And in order to, if Council is going to prioritize things like pervious pavement and in green infrastructure, there is maintenance costs that go along with that. And so, DPW staff leadership will bring forward those types of things because we won't be able to keep a zero-sum gain on our maintenance as we have it today. We'll have to see some increase. And it's not like we don't do any of that today. We have we have BMPs and and like for example over on Westmoreland just off of trips around where we maintain that that that the detention basin So there will be some increase in costs But that is kind of what comes along with Water quality components and and in the green infrastructure. Okay, well I guess just I would care about making sure that we get that on DPW's docket. So that it's not like we do this project and then suddenly five years down the road. Oh, we have to maintain it or do whatever else. So just as long as that's on Council's radar for budgets and DPW's radar. So then actually going down on this page at 921, it does look like the sidewalk goes on to their property. Is that the case? Is any of that down there going to go on to people's property? Honestly, Councilmember, that area is kind of in flux right now because of the fact that we don't currently have sidewalk right away down that area we have a sidewalk it's not in it but it's not ADA compliant but there's no there's no right away there at the moment so. is that's all their property. That is their property, okay. So that would be something where you'd have to work with them. Yes, if we yes, we'll tie into the existing sidewalk, but yeah, we'll have to do some work there from a right away standpoint in order to make that happen. Okay, and so I guess for- Otherwise, we'll just, we can find a place to kind of cut the project off before then So that we don't we don't impact that area. Okay, okay, so that's that is one area that's kind of in flux depending on the right of way and Depending on working with the homeowner's there We do though. I should say from a traffic standpoint. We are planning to do a no right turn on read at that intersection. Perfect. Okay that answers the next question so thank you. Okay. Let me just make sure I'm not missing anything. Is that crosswalk there would that be a raised crosswalk? Yes. And it was not the crosswalk that you see to the left. On the one to the right. yeah, the one crossing Lincoln. Yes, yeah, straight, the straight one. Great one. Okay, perfect. That would be a raise crosswalk, yes. Okay. Let me see. If residents so desired, what would be the pathway for permitted parking on Lincoln? I'm going to throw that to Wyatt. Could you talk a little bit about that? Permitted. Permitted. Permitted. Permitted. Permitted. So some residents were asking, just asking to plant the seed so they were wondering what would be the process. We would assign that to staff member who would work with the neighborhood. There is a petition process where we need to have an indication of a majority of the residents would want that and so that also then would prompt a parking utilization study and so the combination of the data of the parking utilization study and the petition from the residents ultimately then fees into a decision. We do have a couple of zone parking areas in the city. Generally, they've been around new mixed use development. That's where we've implemented those in recent years. OK. So that would be the pathway here as well. That's right. OK. Great. Thank you. Let me see. Are all crosswalks on Lincoln right now? They're raised crosswalks? Not now, no. Oh, excuse me not now. But now in the plans. Yes. Okay. And then are the intersections crossed that, like, let's say the Great Falls intersection. And what else do we have? Spring Street or Oak Street? So the crossing streets also have raised crosswalks. Yes. Okay. And are any crosswalks that are in the plan right now because you'd mentioned that there had been maybe a crosswalk that went to nowhere. There aren't any crosswalks in the plan now that you see going away. Yeah. So an example with that would be Spring Street. Just slide down a minute. So let's see, spring. Is that spring? No, I'll go back one page. There you go. All right. It was on there. OK, so here you can see where, at first, we had crosswalks that went across the street from the spring side to the other side of the street, but of course there's no sidewalk over there to go too. Right, so in these instances, what we were suggesting is that we put in raised speed tables in these areas to make up for the lack of a crosswalk a crosswalk in this. So again we're slowing the traffic down but there would be no crosswalk there. And so that would be the main I guess we don't have we that would be the main area where we would have speed tables. Yeah. Okay but you nothing on the east side just mostly right here. Well on the east side most of the crosswalks go somewhere over there. Yeah so that's where that's where we would have the great crosswalks. Right but no speed tables on that side. We don't have any plan but I probably will talk to the traffic engineers to see because they have to review this project as well we're kind of in that review project. But we'll see if there may be one or two needed over there where we have long stretches that need to be. Gotcha, okay. So that's, I guess, we're only at 50% so that's something in flux as we go along. Okay. Right now this speed limit's planned through 20 miles an hour. We're planning for 20 miles an hour, yes. And then currently 25. Okay. Are another question I got about rapid flashing beacons? Do any of these intersections have rapid flashing beacons? We currently there are no rapid flashing beacons planned. But honestly, I would like to see one at Oak Street, like a flashing red stop sign. If you're not familiar with these, they're just a stop sign to have lights around the stop sign itself that kind of promote the stop sign a little bit better. So it wouldn't be something where you push a button and it flashes light. It would be something where you push a button and it flashes light, it would be something that's. Continuously flashing. That would, I mean, I don't know, I have no idea what the costs are, but that would probably add some expense. It would add some expense, yes. Okay, so that would be that. I just wanna add about the rapid flashing begin. If we did add that here, that if we used grant funds for that, it would require a traffic study, like a traffic warrant study to justify the rapid flashing begin. That's something that we've actually had a hard time justifying in the past. We had a hard time justifying it across South Washington. So I would imagine that we would also have a hard time getting a warrant to justify that across Lincoln. I just want to say that for the public record. That's helpful to know all the different considerations that go into that. In terms of trees, do you know, like where are trees being removed and where are trees being planted? Do we have that information yet? We don't know where trees are going to be planted yet. We do have some idea where they will be removed. There's only one tree that we're planning to remove by the park and we're putting a sidewalk in its place. The tree, the tree actually is in the way of people walking down the street. I mean, or through that area and there's no sidewalk there now, but we'd like to see one day, of course. That's one tree that would be removed. We got some pushback. We had planned a sidewalk for the, you can go, flash through pages, go to the intersection, the great fall intersection with the park on it. Let's see, hold on it. One more. There we go. Here we go. That's good. So you see where it says prop seven foot sidewalk, proposed seven foot sidewalk. There's a tree right there that is outside of the park limit. That's one for sure that we know will be removing. Another tree that we'll be removing is the one that you saw, the manhole going around. There's a few more off the corridor that where trees love to grow over the corrugated metal pipes for some reason. They get their nourishment from the water and everything else and they usually straddle the pipe. But the problem is those pipes are 60, 70 years old and when they go the tree goes with them. I mean, you know, it'd be at wind storm or what have you. And so it behooves us to remove some of these old trees because they're not healthy where they're sitting. But in other instances, if you scroll to the right, go one more page over if you don't mind. And then scroll down. All right, so in one instance, well, let's see, we go to, oh, sorry, that might have been too far. There are some trees. We had proposed a sidewalk for the right, for the east side of Great Falls south of Lincoln. Okay. And there was some feedback saying, hey, you've got some trees down there that you would be, yeah, that's it. You scroll down. Yeah, so you see, I'm not going to get up. So just in the middle of that page, you zoom back out again, go down. Yeah, there you go. That's good, that's good. So you see the sidewalk that we had planned for the east side of Great Falls south of Lincoln headed towards the Wando D. There are several older trees down that would have been impacted by that sidewalk. But also in the way down there are some utilities that we want to miss. And so instead of going of putting the sidewalk there We're going to cross the street and we're going to put the sidewalk on the other side of the street Where there's an existing sidewalk and then we'll improve that sidewalk so that it meets pro-wag and that will serve as the As a way to get to the WNOD from there. So we will eliminate, we will be eliminating what you see as sidewalk on the east side there. Yeah, okay. So for that specific area, I mean, I guess we'll talk about some dough that we're pulling on. Right now, I mean, so these plants show a sidewalk on the east side, but that sidewalk would be removed. That's correct. Well, it's not there. There's no sidewalk there now. So it'd be removed from the plants that have, okay. So then, and the main reasons for that would be for the trees, for tree canopy and for utilities. And then does that save money on the project too? Just not really because we have to redo the sidewalk on the other side. The other side walk on the west side there suffers from the same problems as the side. So they would have to be a brand new sidewalk there. But I mean it would save some money and the fact that I wouldn't have to remove any trees, which those trees are expensive. And I'll tell everybody that it's not my first choice to remove trees because it costs a lot of money. I mean, we're talking eight to $10,000 a tree to remove those types of trees. So we wouldn't have to remove any trees. We wouldn't have to deal with any utilities. So yes, the answer is yes, it would be cheaper. Yeah it would be cheaper to build the sidewalk on the other side. Okay so that is so one one part of the poll is is money too. I did hear from a few neighbors that they did want that sidewalk in there but I think going back to the what I what I will do is go back to the community and mention all these different trade-offs. And also this is something that we should discuss. Do we want the sidewalk or not? Is that actually even something that's up for consideration right now? Is whether or not to keep that sidewalk or is that pretty much a... It's a done deal. Done deal. Yeah. Okay, so there's no, that's not like... in your comment matrix you said like what was up for consideration and what wasn't and so that that sidewalk is out of the question. That one you see there? Yes, it's out of question. Out of question now. Okay. So then I'm also wondering going to the 700 block so I think if we go up back age. Yeah. Right, I think it's. Scroll down. Yeah, this is good enough. So, I guess what I'm wondering is, again, this gets to the green landscaping. Where the sidewalk is, is that as close to the property line as you can get, or is there a green buffer between the sidewalk and people's property such that you could put the green buffer on the other side of the sidewalk? OK, so we've talked about that internally. And the problem that we get into is sometimes that there is only a foot wide. Okay. Another area is it's more, but in a lot of areas it's not a lot. And I honestly don't see being able to maintain or even grow anything in an area that small. So just like the reason we didn't put any mediums in the middle of the street, right? We pushed all that to the side so that people could maintain it themselves and not necessarily have this dead patch of dirt that's growing between the sidewalk and the street. OK, so there is a little bit of space. Some cases there's a little bit of space. In some cases, there's a little bit of space. There's a bit more. Generally, we put the poles in that area though. Okay. Would the space where the legion is, I guess, let me just see. Can the sidewalk run behind the utility pole away from the road since the city's turning that property into a storm-water management? I agree to that one house on the corner there does not have any off-street parking so we agree to have parking in that one area. Oh, so towards... We're 7-11. Towards 7-11. 7-11, 7-12-7-13 maybe. I guess, let me just, sorry, let me pull this up on my end. 7-13, yeah. So I guess, yeah, so right where 7-11 is and that utility pole is, it wouldn't be possible to move the sidewalk to the other side of the utility pole there. Very much. Yeah. I think anything is possible, but there's also a need to have. So you can see the parking that we kept in front of 713. What we did, we also have a need for maintenance vehicles in that area as well. So we were trying to put in as much parking as we possibly could. To move the poll, we put that poll outbound of the, we also have to impact 709 as well. Mm-hmm. OK. So again, it's the, so yeah, we do have access impact 709 as well. Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you. So again, it's the, so yeah, we do have access to the 7-11 property, but 709, I can say I'm trying to stay out of people's front yards. Yeah, yeah. What about, so I guess the, and then the final utility poll at, at three or five Lincoln, so this is all the way on the edge of the city. That's I guess the one place where we didn't add ADA compliance. Is that something where we could? So that would be the last page. Almost last page. Excuse me. Third to last page. So it's very. Yeah, just yeah, keep going down that way. There we go. Right. One more. Yeah here. So you have the project and I guess ends before that final utility poll. That one down to oh to the right? Yeah, it ends, yeah. So is, I guess this would be an expense. I guess being able to put some sort of sidewalk or ADA accessible route around that. I mean, it would add to the project, I mean. That's because. Is that, and so this is on your matrix, what was in purple was things that are up for consideration. If there is money for that, is that up for consideration or is that completely out of bounds? Well, I don't think it's completely out of bounds. We do want to maintain parking in that area. I got a big, I don't think we necessarily would have to take it. But the other thing was encroaching into that natural area was also a big no-no as far as a residence in the 300 block was concerned. So I guess. So you have to stay behind so you'd have to come down to the south there quite a bit and so then you'd have to increase the sidewalk width and you would be encroaching into that natural area there. Okay. Okay. Okay. So then now going to the, my last four questions, so I'll wrap up soon. Going into the 600 block near Lincoln Park. Are there, so that would be... Are these hard questions? What? Are these hard questions? Yeah. Okay. We'd like to graduate into the hard questions. Yeah, these are the hard questions. Yeah, this is the last four, and they're the hard ones. Yeah, so this 600 block, in era. I guess is there any way, let's say if that crosswalk removed, I know you gave very good reasons for why the cross sex wear it is. If it were put back, would there be a way to change the sidewalk to go around the utility area, such that maybe it does go into the park a little bit, but that would be a way to both ad parking and keep the crosswalk. So you have the issue of the property there beside the park backing into that crosswalk, essentially. That was one of the main drivers behind moving that was that we didn't have that particular, we didn't have that conflict, essentially didn't have that conflict essentially. Okay. And you talk about the balances. So, I mean, that was brought to us by that property owner. I have to watch people as I'm backing into the road. So, moving that, and then moving it that far is to get it behind the utility essentially. And get it to the other side of the utility. Okay. So, you don't see any sort of, I don't know if the word is compromised here, but you pretty much see it like that that's where that crosswalk would need to go. That's how I see it yeah. Are there in terms of parking for the park? I do know that there are parking spaces on great falls, but oftentimes they're not utilized because it's not obvious. I mean, this is where I don't know how wide this project can extend, but if there is some way to make the parking spots on great falls more obvious, that would be a way to make the parking spots on Great Falls more obvious, that would be a way to sort of increase parking in a sort of, in a way that hopefully adds, you know, makes it easier for people to access parking, especially in an area where there's so much parking that is getting removed right now. I mean, it is. I think it's beyond the scope of this particular project. Okay. But, you know, you can see that it's parking in front of the removed right now. I mean, it is. I think it's beyond the scope of this particular project. OK. But you know, you can see that it's parking in front of the park right now. I mean, or right adjacent to the park right now. And so in that specific area, do you see any simple, what are the, as long as we're talking about the dough? What are the trade-offs? And do you see any simple way of adding parking back in there? Honestly, I don't. The right-of-way lines that are shown there are not correct. They are, the right-of-way lines that you see there are pretty much right at the edge of people's existing property right now. Right? That was one of the very first meetings I went to from a group standpoint to talk about what was going on there. And at first, what we did was we eliminated the deterrent lane in order to keep the parking. But that meant that the sidewalk also encroached into the 601-603-605- 607 yards. Matthew Razz was one of the first people to come in and he did some drawings to show, hey, this is how much it impacts my property. You're going to take my walls. And you're going to take that guy's walls and that guy's walls and that guy's walls. And at the time, we didn't know exactly where the right away was. But then we found out that the right away is right at the walls. I mean, so the right away narrows in that area, right? So there's no city property there. And the quote that I remember was, use your property, not mine. Okay. And that meant use the street to do your work, not my property, not up into my yard. And so I took that face value because we were. This sidewalk was going to come into his front yard quite a bit. And again, a couple of the neighbors there were said, if I have to choose between my property, my wall, and the parking, I choose my wall. And so of the four or five people that were there, if four of them were saying that, then in my mind, that's consensus. You know, because I'm not going to be able to please everybody all the time. So that's what I did. I stayed out of their property away from their wall. And I gave their walls a wide birth to make sure that even my construction would not encroach on their walls. And again, that was one of the very first property owner meetings I had out there. And it got a little contentious, I must say. But I did what they asked. And not only that, but they told me that if I eliminated that turn lane, then I was going to have cars backed up down the street. So what did I do? I didn't eliminate the turn lane. I left the turn lane there. I found the justification to leave it there. And so that's kind of, I mean, that area is very tight down there. And in order to meet all of the goals here, that was the decision that I made. I'll book stops here from a project management standpoint because a lot of times I'm the guy having to make those decisions and then justify them later on and so that's the decision I made. In terms of I guess actually saying a lot of these crosswalks are narrowed or they come to what I would consider pinch points. Has there been talk about putting a more of a pinch point there? You have the crosswalk, but it doesn't narrow. We have the island there, the refuge. The mid- block crosswalk on that. Oh, eliminating the mid. Not eliminating. I was saying, narrowing that space as you have parking there, but obviously not parking at the crosswalk. At the crosswalk is not. Um, extension. Does that make sense? I'm not sure. Follow. Yeah, it would be a bump out at the crosswalk. So this was another piece of feedback that I've. Oh, I mean, yeah, it would be a bump out at the crosswalk. So this was another piece of Oh, I mean Yeah, it could be done. I mean, I don't know if it's a hundred percent necessary, but But yeah, I mean because we were pretty narrowed down through there already, so but I guess in terms of in some ways Because you do have the parking lane on towards near the park. So there could be something. Yeah, it could be. Yeah, and we can look at that. In terms of, I am curious, in terms of costs, because I have no idea, you know, the scope of this stuff, it are bump-outs more expensive than regular pavement. Yeah. They are. Okay. More forming, concrete, fill. I mean, they end up being a little bit more expensive. Because one of the other comments was asking about Oak and Greenwich Street. So it would be on the northeast side of Oak and Greenwich Street. Yeah. I've seen that comment. We're going to take a look at that. Okay, we're going to take, I've seen that comment. We're going to take a look at that. Okay. We're going to take, definitely take a look at that to see if that can, if that's, if, that's possible. The only issue that we have is storm water and drainage there. Okay. I don't want to necessarily create a bump out that trap storm water, that's because that storm water comes down that street, right? So we have to put some type of catch basin in there in order to handle it. And I just need to make sure that the catch basin that we put in there doesn't have to be so big because a water coming around that thing and then coming out into the street and messing up our spread. Gotcha. Okay. And then I think we're almost done. Oh, in terms of how narrow are the pinch points? Do they come down to 22 feet? 22 feet. So what I was asked was, is it possible to get them, some of them to be more narrow specifically because I guess Zach but before Zach left had said that even for buses and snowplows it's okay to have pinch points that are more narrow as long as they're only in like one place or two places. It's the emergency vehicles that we talk about at that point time you know emergency vehicles needing or being more comfortable with 11 foot lanes, but that's about as narrow as the fire trucks and the fire engineers like to see. So that's why we were sticking with 22 feet as a minimum there. Okay, I hope I know I've taken up a ton of time. So any other remaining questions I will follow up offline, but hopefully I took away some of your guys's questions too Thank you for that and I will follow up soon. I do feel like I'm in front of Congress We look a little different than congress I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. I'm going to have to get back to the next meeting. We've seen so much of the public comment and so really do appreciate the time and effort that you've put into it and the telephone calls and then the thinking and the internal discussion. And so I know it's been a lot. And I think from my perspective, it's for people who have provided comments, I appreciate seeing all of them. But I just want to ensure at this point that really you have processed them, that you have given lots of consideration to them. As you said to the extent that you are deciding not to implement something that someone has suggested that there's justifiable basis for doing so. And that we're at the point that if people continue to feel strongly about issues that you are open to hearing that in order to help understand why it is at such a sticking point and whether they are particular issue is born out by their lived experience in the street for however long the period of time is, but I'm not gonna kind of get into the individual comments to the degree as much as kind of just overall appreciation because I know a lot has gone into this but at the same time like it's a very large investment it's now at $11.12 million dollars. So we want to make sure that we also do it right. On the budget piece of things so just to kind of clarify we're talking about the 330,000 that you would need as an additional infusion of local dollars But basically what you're talking about is floating 1.3 million from elsewhere in the CIP into this project So we're talking at, like, basically finding $1.6 million and slowing sort of, it looked to be the maybe hawk or West Broad and Spring, and then also the Hillwood and Anondale. And I put that out there because, you know, they're also important points, right, in the city for pedestrian safety and places that we hear about a lot. And so I guess I'm just, I wanna avoid like surprises where we see a CIP and then the next thing, there's like $1.3 million that's unaccounted for even though there was, you know, X amount reflected in the CIP for Lincoln Avenue, like, roadbed reconstruction and whatever else. So I guess in terms of like the additional cost, are we seeing X months after approving the CIP and budget just because the scope of the project has changed or can you just kind of shed a little bit more light on that? Yes. I'll do my best. Yes, so the project scope changed. We added scope to the road bed. It was just a full-depth road bed reconstruction and paving. We added a lot of sidewalk work. And I remember, I don't remember when it was, you do, I'm sure. But one of the times that Tony presented at council, he was asked, what would it cost to include all the sidewalk that we want to include and that the community wants? And it was the difference between $8 million and $11.5 million. So that's what we've tried to include in this project and it really helped us out that we had the pro-ag that, you know, that now is a federal guideline that we have to do a lot of that ADA and pedestrian accessibility work. So yeah, the increase is the difference between, and I can't remember now if it's 1.3 or 1.6, but it's the difference between the two points, it's 1.2 and a half basically. That's the increase to the project cost, the sort of project sub total cost for the roadbed reconstruction and sidewalk work. So we are increasing that above and beyond what it was originally. We are, that money is already all appropriated in our fiscal year 25 CIP. So we have that money, the local match. So, but we're moving it all. We're shifting it all to greeting of Lincoln and to the road bed reconstruction project as long as we get approval from Vida and they put up the other half, right? By doing that, we obviously have to delay the schedules a little bit of the other two projects. I wanna be, I wanna clarify that those two projects are not at 50% design right now. They're nowhere near that. We're not even, we haven't even issued POs for the design of those two projects. We just received funding for the first time in July of this year. So that is very, very early conceptual phase of those two projects. What we will get done between now and July of next year, we can still do a lot of it without any funding. We can do our homework and we can sort of queue it up so that we're ready to go July of next year if we go with this proposed scenario. But what we will actually get done realistically between now and July with the funding that we have is not a ton right I feel like you know Greening of Lincoln is is a priority right now because we are halfway through the design and we have the time constraints that we have right remind me what the rest of your question that's fine I mean that's a satisfactory answer okay I didn't want to lose like we're putting 330,000 into it yes really injecting like 1.6 or so into it between the 1.25, the 3.30 and we're going to need to come up with 1.3 from elsewhere. Right. A certain point in time to backfill where we're moving this from, even though those were CIP appropriated. So I guess for purposes of surplus and budget amendment and budget discussions, I just, I want those things to be reflected somewhere since they're now costs that we need to make up for. If we go forward with the proposed scenario here, it would definitely be reflected in the fiscal year 26th CIP. I mean, it would change the whole six year plan for transportation really for these different programs of traffic signals and paving. One thing that Andy and I talked through when we were looking at this is that yes, if you wanted to keep the funding as is for the other two projects, the way it is right now, if you wanted to keep it that, yes, the request in fiscal year 25 in your budgetment will be 1.6 million instead of 330,000. We felt that 330,000 was better at this time because really that 1.3 will not be needed because of the funding that we have appropriated in fiscal year 25 and 26 and because of the project schedules. That funding will not be needed until starting in FY 27, we will need about 1.1 additional local money than what we have programmed right now. And then in 28 and 29, it's like 2,000 and 28. And then it's like 200,000 and 29. So that's the 1.3 over those three years. Again, that assumes that we don't change anything in the whole six year program that we have planned right now. Okay. And the 900,000 for the right-of-way acquisition, are you pretty confident based on where you are now with what the plans look like that you can do the right-of-way acquisition you need for? I'm hoping it will be cheaper. Okay. Honestly, I think that we're still looking at the whole issue concerning federal Procurement and things like that, but you know locally when we're Working on a project for example with the legion We would ask for donated easement in that instance right and You know, I think it's like a ten dollar thing because somebody some we're you know the property owner's getting something out of it You know owner is getting something out of it. We're getting something out of it. So I'm hoping that we don't have to spend that kind of money. A lot of the $400,000 is really in developing the cost to do it. So a lot of that is professional services, essentially, going out getting appraisals and doing that kind of work. We've been able to lower that cost because it could potentially be, it could have potentially been more if we were doing like full appraisals and things like that, but we don't think we have to do full appraisals. We can just base it off of the appraised value of the property. And it's their temporary construction easement. So very little permanent easement. So those things only come in at around $200 or $300 a property. And then for all these numbers, we normally see, for example, the 40% contingency that's built in to this. So when we're talking about, you know, the funding amounts that we have and the totals that we're looking at, that's all built in. Yes, 20% for the stormwater. Yeah, okay. 20% for the stormwater, 10% for the roadbed. Okay. On stormwater, I guess I've raised in other contexts. When you do the stormwater analysis for this project and you're talking about, you know, undersized pipes and the vaults and whatever else that we're gonna be doing in different places at the Legion and Lincoln Park, is that based on current conditions as to pervious versus impervious coverage? Or are you modeling it so that let's say this area is at 35% impervious coverage and given the investment we're making, you're confident that like 35% impervious through this area with the vaults, even given current pipes you know, pipes where you're not expanding them, that you are overall alleviating flooding issues that people are currently experiencing. Yes. First question, the first answer is we're basing it on existing conditions and existing land use. Okay. So the one thing that we do have in our back pocket that we don't have, that we didn't have previously is that if anybody comes along and tries to put in like a McManchin or something like that the past because no one had to do or manage their water on site. So now they have to manage their water on site so we're safe and we know that this area is not going to turn into any really heavy commercial or anything like that. I guess I would just ask for your own purposes and planning and thinking about these decisions on the vaults and everything else. I do think it might make sense to see what is the current impervious coverage and then given the rate at which the tear downs are happening and given the possibility of the accessory dwelling ordinance that you might just wanna kind of model out, like what you think the current is versus what it could potentially max out is and what you're talking about the difference in the overall coverage. In terms of that, so I agree on the no right on red for that Northwest, so this is now the minor comment on this one just as I go through my list. The no right on red going off west onto Lincoln, but still I guess given how inset that crosswalk is, the cars are going to have the green on West and turn on to Lincoln when people have the right of way to cross as the pedestrian Lincoln at that point. So I think the no right on Red Bull saw some of the problems, but the right on green is still going to potentially be a problem given the location of that like ADA accessible crosswalk now. So can you just look at it more closely? Yeah. Okay. And then on the great falls in Lincoln intersection, again, you know, I just... I mean, I trust, you know, the traffic engineers, but at the same time, can you just give it a good hard look again on assuming drivers do not behave as you want them to behave, right? And that they're going to potentially cut out in lanes that they shouldn't be in based on where they're, they should be going versus where they're trying to go, that you don't end up with the lane shifts of the traffic coming off 66 on Lincoln toward Founder's Row, so to speak, with the oncoming traffic from Founder's Row going toward the highway, that the left turning cars are facing the right turning lane, but they're really facing cars that are trying to go straight, that are dodging around the people who are waiting for the people to make left turns, but not actually waiting their turn to go straight. Right, so like that when the lane shifts are happening that we are actually pulling. We will be looking at changing the signaling at that intersection as well. So one thing that I'm proposing is that there only be one signal green at a time. So that, and I still have to check with the transportation guys. But I would propose that we only let one part of the intersection go at a time and that would eliminate people kind of coming into one another that are coming at each other. Okay. On the neighborhood concerns on things like, you know, people currently cross, people currently park in parking lanes that are not abutting sidewalks. But there have been concerns about certain places where people will now be parking. And again, they're not next to a sidewalk, but they're also far away from a crosswalk. So do you, do you share the concern? Do you have an answer to the concern, do you have kind of, like, where should those people go? The road is getting narrower and you have people, it happens on great falls, right? When you park in the parking lane on great falls, there's no sidewalk and you have to open your door immediately into the oncoming traffic and not everyone's getting out of the car on the house side of the lane. And so is it just like be extra careful? Or is there a way that you're going to try to direct those people to the car? I think with a combination of narrowing the road and slowing people down that way, as well as the raised crosswalks and speed tables that we will try to reduce the end the reduction in speed down through there, as well as more, you know, and this is something that because this project's gone through such a thorough review, the police have an opportunity to discuss this as well. And so talking about more enforcement through that, through the corridors, well, to slow people down, would also be part of that. So we can't plan for everything, but certainly we can bring these other pieces that aren't necessarily engineering based, but just civic based, I guess you could say. On the park to the extent you're not taking, don't need to take more of the matur trees down to do so. I would support trying to do a buffer to move the sidewalk in from the road, given that we know we have so many little kids there, and a lot of toddler aged kids there, and if you don't have cars parked at certain times, those kids are closer to the road than you might otherwise want them to be. So especially there, if you can wrap the sidewalk and have the buffer, something to consider. Again, just to say. We do have three big trees sitting just inside the fence there. And so, and we've had issues people saying hey don't take these trees. And so I'm trying to draw it, you know, no I would have little kids to have the shade too. I don't want them out direct sunlight, you know, having issues. So, and then last thing I guess, do you feel like overall where you started and where you ended that you're happy with like how the aspects of all of this came through and that you sort of feel like the overall greeting of Lincoln, like name still fits the project. Do you feel like it's kind of a misnomer and that it's maybe a little craier than it was green to start with or kind of do you feel like it's been true to the... I personally feel it's been true. When we first started this and first watched this to the public, we eliminated all the parking on the north side of the road, everything. Because we had to have a place to start. So now we're kind of met that balance. Also, when we started this, we had a lot of pressure to include things like bike lanes, like full blown bike lanes and things like bike lanes, like full blown bike lanes and things like that. And we've been able to avoid that as well, because that would have looked like a different project, honestly. I mean, we drew up concepts that would show bike lanes on both sides and things like that. And I want to say if you fastest way to say no to greening a Lincoln signs in the front yards is to go and have to encroach into people's yards about 20 feet or 30 feet in order to turn that out. And so we've been able to avoid those kinds of pressures as well while also implementing slower speeds, and sticking to our guns or narrowing the pavement. So I feel like we've done quite a, I think the compromise has worked out well in the projects favor. Okay, well thank you again at the end of the day. Hopefully people feel, you know, their investments are better protected because we're dealing with stormwater issues that they feel safer on their streets overall and so again, I appreciate all the work that's gone into it. And wish you luck and our shared interest of moving this forward and keeping it on schedule so that we can get all this money spent by the time that we need to for the grant funding to help us with almost 50% of the cost. Right? Our funds. Thanks. Okay. There's a lot of questions so far. So who's gotten more? More comments? It's not covered, Dave. So what happens next? I'm looking at the schedule on the back. So does that mean you go forward after tonight or what's the next step? Well, we'll say in our original schedule that we laid out for Council, we had the May timeframe for really wrapping up the design at the 60% level. And we've been working with the neighborhood longer than we originally planned. So let me turn it back over to our project manager to welcome the next step. Originally when we first came to you guys with this project, the money had to be obligated by the end of this year. Right after, not days after we talked to you guys about this, the $4 million that we're getting from the state, right, is all for money. And when they, in the act of assigning our agreement, that made up for that obligation timeframe. So we don't have to have the none of the money that you see up there right now has to be obligated by the end of this year. Okay, so that gave us time to work a lot closer with the community on the project. So our next steps coming from tonight is that my friend Joe will go heads down on project, on the project and complete the plans and we will go through our normal CIP run of starting the right away scenario. We'll get that started. That can kind of run hand in hand with what he's doing. And then hopefully by December, we're sitting at 90% plans that we can look to bid in March. So really, those are the next steps. Just the heavy handed engineering that has to go in to getting all of our profiles and all of our stormwater discharges and everything else straight. So I want to thank you for very complicated but very interesting project that does achieve a lot of critical objectives. I think the question is, is it clear to the community what remaining input is possible and when? I mean, do you feel after tonight this is a go? And that I do, I mean, I'm just trying to figure out procedurally so that people, the public has a clear understanding of where this project goes now. So if people might have comments, and again, I think you've done a fantastic job working through these comments. Thank you, Council Member. So I'm trying to figure out because I know that 60% 90% plant thing created some issues with regard to park avenue. So I'm just trying to figure out so everybody is clear understanding what's the process from here on out? So Tony, if I may, I think we're shifting after tonight, pending the feedback from you all on Tony's walkthrough this evening. We're shifting more from the consult phase of the project for input from the public to more of an informed stage of the project for us to keep everybody updated on where we're moving forward. But our ability to continue everybody updated on where we're moving forward. But our ability to continue iterating on the design gets limited after tonight. Unless you all tell us we need to go back to the drawing board. But I think that's, that's, um, and will you be communicating with the community that one year it's 60% and one year at 90%. I'm just trying to figure out there's been a lot of involvement. I think at our last public meeting someone came forward with a different plan around the park or maybe that was eventually embodied here. But again, there's been so much work done. I just want to make sure that we're not going to get blindsided by significant public opposition. So I think there's some touch points where we can kind of communicate updates to folks. I don't, yeah, that would be helpful. So I think we can commit to that. I think that's something we can do, you know, as those plans come together, we can have those posted on the website, you know, in those kind of communication stonies that makes sense to you. Yeah, as a matter of fact, and I've said this when after the block meetings that we had was that essentially every property on is going to be approached separately because we have to get construction easement signs. So that really gives them an opportunity to say what's going on with my property, with my frontage. But they can see we have continuously updated the plans on the website from when we were at 30% all the way up until now and we'll still continue to make those changes and as a matter of fact we will transition from concept the pretty plan to the actual engineering drawing so that people can see that and what's going on and where the limits of disturbance and all that kind of stuff lies. So it'll be a continual project process, but we've got to stop somewhere with the concept. We've got to really move into the design phase because we could go on forever if that was the case. Now I'm not challenging that. I'm just trying to make clear what happens next when it happens. You know, citizens have continuing concerns. How can they be addressed? So I think you've addressed that. The second point I had is, has there been any study about traffic diversion that is if you narrow the street, you would at least reduce the speed limit. I used to live in Lincoln Avenue, and the traffic then was significant, and it's much more significant now. Do we have a sense about where the traffic is gonna go or successful with some of the traffic comment? Well, we have not done any of those studies. It might be helpful to do an origin destination idea, just to figure out, okay, we're dealing with a problem here, but does it move somewhere else? And so how can we look at that? Again, that's that shouldn't slow down this project, but it is something. Is this situation where we're moving traffic from one street to another? So that's it. And one more, well, two more questions. Arlington, it's in Arlington, right where it ends there in Yucatan, and that's Arlington. Is there a new discussion who our author is going to do at this point? Do they have any plans to? No, I have not had any discussions with Arlington. I think he hopeful to know, at least let Arlington know that we're doing this and be wonderful if they'd sort of think about doing some greening on that part because that's a singularly attractive. Well, we got a great resource over at Arlington right now. God name Zach Bradley. So, he's an expert on this project. May not return our calls, but just kidding. Yeah, that would be great. And then finally, there is a little bit of transportation history there. I think you mentioned it. I think there was an electric railroad, which I streetcar situation. Yeah. Is there any, just a, can we mind for that? I don't want to load anything more on this project particularly, but there's some sort of recognition or preservation of the elements there that relate to that. Okay, so I imagine that that trolley park has like a kind of crescent shape piece of land and gravel, and there used to be a signage in there that gave like a little history of the trial. Now it's just called Charlie Parking's kind of overgrown. But I think that's what you refer to, right? You can sign a recognition of how it fit into the history of folks. Yeah, maybe work with a historical commission to see if there might be a sign there or something at least preserving it. because yeah, that, that, and I guess the house there or one of the events there was a ridge of all the job staff. Okay. We talked about sign a join this and I can tell you that we will be preserving and maybe trying to update the solar system model that's out currently out there as well. So. It's painted on this sidewalks for those who you don't have kids. Like, marks like here's where the sun is and here's where mercury and Jupiter like on the, on the National Mall and on Lincoln Avenue to place it for that exact. That's right. Other questions? Oh, one more historic feature in that area is the one of the original corner stones is running off that street by mall and mall. Already running? Yeah, so, um, and additionally everything else, interesting history along that road. Thanks. Okay, other questions? I'm gonna get back to you after I get to. I'll just keep in and asking the questions. I just wanted to follow up on council member Snyder's question. If there were to be significant, you know, neighborhood outreach thing, this is absolutely terrible. What, given the short time frame timeframe what happens? It might be necessary to delay a part or portions of the project. If, for example, the east side, excuse me, the west side, volts says, hey, we don't want this. Then my suggestion would be that we delay that side of the project until later out years to maybe coincide with more intersection work there at Great Falls. Because this project was never an intersection project. It was, we've done a lot of stuff to the intersection, but it was never an intersection. But there have been concepts thrown out there of maintaining more parking on the east side, excuse me, the west side, intersection work there, then we would just go forward with the east side work. There's none of those types of things happening over there. And we would do maybe some of the core storm water stuff, but it would only be the core stuff. So it would be like maybe the work in the Legion, some of the major pike facilities but we wouldn't be able to solve flooding issues in that area. We wouldn't be able to solve flooding issues in the 900 block. And I would have to also say project goals wouldn't be met in that instance too. There would be no traffic calming. There would be no reduction in impervious area from a water quality standpoint. So from a project management standpoint, I would say if that was to happen, that we would postpone that. And so such time that we could come to some agreement and then, but we go forward with the other side of the project. I just wanna add to that as far as the funding implication of that were to happen, I think it's important to note that if we were to delay or cancel parts of this project, we've already spent a good chunk of money on this project. And if that were to happen farther down the road, when we've spent more of the transportation funding, that would mean deallocating grant funds and potentially paying back grant funds that we've already expended on this project. So for my perspective, for budget and funding, I feel like we're getting close to the end of being able to make those really big significant decisions and changes. We, if we go forward, you know, with the plan and the project as its plan now, then we're committing to that, those funding. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Debbie, you're a Mary Beth, if you want. I just wanted to make a comment to thank both Caitlin and you for helping to define that balance because when you open up, when you go door to door and you talk to everybody about all the potential things that could be changed, you write it turns into an intersection project a traffic management a bike false church project and you know Everybody has their own lens that they're looking at this This project and then want to have be a participant in it So I think recognizing the limits the benefits of having that art for funds and being able to do this in the first place Who realizing the limits on time frame and scope and I think you all explain that both the project meeting the goals as well as the limitations on funding and timing is super helpful. And we just need to continue to spread that word out through the community so it pretty has as best understanding she can. It's complicated, but netting out like those are our five goals here's how we're meeting them. Here are the restrictions on our funding based upon what we have and when we have to spend it by this super helpful. So I appreciate you continuing to share that message and also listening to as much as we can from the neighborhood within the time frame we have to do that. So thank you. Okay. I just had some broader things. There's a lot of detailed questions around. So as I think about spending 1111 million on any big project, I kind of want to start from the place of principles. And so in general, anytime we undertake a big capital investment, I want to make sure we are doing it right the first time. Let's not half-ass it and try to go back and fix things. I think second are we being future looking? So are we thinking about where we want to be as a community and this is accomplished those things. And then third, I think we all talked about, which is consensus doesn't mean 100% agreement on everything, but are we doing our best to accomplish all the goals and not let perfect be the enemy of the good. So keeping those three things in mind, I guess my broader question is Tony, do you think this accomplishes the original goals as best we can and if we and anywhere where you feel like we could do more what would you do? I do feel like it accomplishes the goals. Again, we warded off as much as possible. The those other elements, the heavy intersection project, the big bike America project, the bike falls church project. Those were those were kind of big items. I tell the joke, I don't know if you've seen a color purple or an open room for you. I had to fight my mom, I had to fight my daddy, I had to fight my brothers. And sometimes that's how I felt. And trying to push this forward. But I think it does meet those goals. I mean, it meets the water quality goals. It meets, we are reducing imperviousness while at the same time making sidewalks, putting more sidewalks out there. We are going to get some water quality benefits out of this, including not only tree planting, but BMPs and things like that. And I'll be the first to admit, I was going to hold on keeping one side at street non-parking. And I think that even I've grown through that process to include more parking than but to look at trying to solve the traffic calming issues and things like that in some different ways. So yeah, I feel like we met our goals there and I think that it will be a, everybody will be happy for it. The CIPs from a project manages standpoint are thankless projects, right? You know, nobody's going to be happy at the end of the, everybody's going to be, not everybody will be happy at the end of the day. I guess for the neighbors in the room and who might be watching, I think know that I guess all the neighbors in the room and who might be watching, I think know that I guess all the comments between the comment response matrix and the emails that we received, I think staff has done a really diligent job of trying to do our best to balance all those considerations. So we are hearing you, we may not be able to address everything, but those comments were definitely heard. My second question is, so also I guess I have to disclose it. I also used to live in Lincoln, Avidate 921, in fact, so I actually know Lincoln quite well, and I ran on it recently just to get to know the street better. So, in particular, I totally would support the no right on red at that intersection. I've actually experienced three car accidents living there myself, and so I understand that intersection quite well, as well as worry about parking being too close to that corner. So I think that's something that in the new design it accounts for some of the safety hazards. But on that note, while we are dramatically changing the street, are we fixing the known issues on Lincoln? So the one in particular I think is Oak and Lincoln, as well as Grena, I think we've had some issues about crossings. Do you think the design as proposed now addresses the sight line issues adequately, or is that something that we can have further follow-ups on? It will address the sightline issue. Is staff as recently made it very important? Sorry, staff is. Internal staff has made a priority to look at every single intersection there to make sure that we have adequate sightline distances for turning vehicles in the light. to look at every single intersection there to make sure that we have adequate sight line distances for turning vehicles in the light. So I think it does fix those problems. It does calm the traffic. I think Andrew Olson at one point gave me an A-plus on the project as far as the project what we had and there are others that support authors in the background here that has said that this, you know, it's meeting its goals while balancing everybody else's and so there'll be people that may not like everything but I think overall we've balanced everybody's needs. For Lincoln and Oaken particular, given that we had a recent accident there, I know that's one of the things we asked the rapid response team if there's any short-term things that can be addressed, knowing that we're not going to start construction on this for another year or so, it'd be great to again consider if there's any additional safety things that we can do as a near-term item that doesn't impact the greening Lincoln project. Okay, that's helpful. a near-term item that doesn't impact the greening Lincoln project. Okay, that's helpful. And then my last one is the comment I think earlier, which is, let's make sure we're clear on the expectations going forward. So I'm hearing that at 60 percent things are really locked in. And we are, I think as Andy said, transitioning from the consulting phase to the informed phase. And so while I know that maybe disappointing to some, I think we have to move at some point. So I think that needs to be clear to the community and then just keep us informed along the way. Any final thoughts? Otherwise I think after two hours, definitely how we really dug into this one. Okay. All right, thank you, Kao-chan. Great. Thanks, Guntoni and Caitlin. Thank you guys. Debbie proposes we skip the rest of the items. Mm. We're going to make up time. We're going to make up time because the next few are quick, right? Okay. While people are getting snacks, why do you want to just quickly queue up item B? Sure. So what's before council is a resolution to reestablish the community criminal justice board. This is something that for communities across Virginia that have programs to work with defendants for pre-trial diversion programs or post trial probationary programs. That if you have those programs in place, which we do in partnership with Arlington County, that we should have this board that is a mix of public safety, human services staff and community members to monitor this program and to continue to make sure it's in measure its effectiveness and things like that. So that is the request. This does have appointments that would then follow at a later meeting of the City Council. Once this board is reestablished, those appointments have been worked out at the political level between the County Board and representatives of the City Council. Thank you Mayor Hardy for your work on this. And in a nutshell, we would have two government appointees. We're envisioning this would be the City Manager's recommendation, but the appointments would be made by the City Council. A City Council representative and a community member representative. So all four appointed by the City Council. I'll stop there and be happy to answer any questions. I want to thank Sally who Put this together and she probably actually should have spoken to this item and Maria and her office put the staff report together and did a great job on So it did great. And Veronica too. Great. Yeah, so an update from the staff report that happened today was that we're getting two seats for government reps and then one for a resident and one for council. So we have not updated that in writing. So for the council's awareness, we're recommending that my recommendation is going to be chief Fard and Sheriff K would be the two government representatives. That could change over time, but that would, I'm anticipating that's going to be my recommendation to the City Council. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. I'm so rude. Any questions on this one? Dave. I'm sorry. Great. Excuse me. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. the answer to that. It's just being reconstituted and there's the first year of being reconstituted, there will be a strategic planning process. So I don't believe that there are metrics that are currently set within this body of review. The meaning that I attended last week was just discussing there were judges, permanent health and human services, community members, elected officials, please share up, discussing the challenges. So they were just, that was not a metrics, it was not based on data, it was based on an experience for the judges and the courts and those who were running the homeless shelters. So my understanding that the next year of work will be setting a strategic plan for this group. That's a good answer, thank you. Yeah, Arlington said the board used to exist. So Dave, you might remember when the Arlington Falls Search version used to exist, and this is really resurrecting it again. And I think as part of that process, that strategic planning will happen. I'm happy to share that there's a calendar for the work for the next year or so. That I can share that anybody who's interested. is interesting. Okay. We'll thanks for the work. Darren? Yeah. So I guess looking at the legal provision, it reads as though when it's multi-jurisdictional board that both jurisdictions would have equal representation on the board, though I understand given kind of the size of proportionality for Arlington and false church that so long as we are agreeing to something other than kind of equal representation that that's fine and that's fine by me, especially given our structure. And who sits where, even though they deliver services here for us too. I think that the second city government position makes sense, you know, to have possibly four people. And I guess reflecting on it now when I was kind of looking at the composition of the required board members versus sort of the optional seats, then in my mind, and kind of experience in terms of looking at pretrial, you know, services, pretrial diversion services, post incarceration, alternative to incarceration on the back end of sentences, you know, the things that often arise, or kind of mental health and disability-related issues, housing-related issues, kind of reentry programs, workforce programs, kind of the differences in thinking about recidivist versus non-recidivist sort of populations. And so I guess in thinking about who it is that we put on this board, you know, ultimately I think we're likely deferring, you know, to kind of your recommendation if it would be the police chief and the sheriff, I guess, you know, what I'm asking is to maybe reflect on the composition of the board and who's already there, and whether it, you know, makes sense to have both the police chief and the sheriff given that they work closely together or if it makes sense to kind of have someone who's in sort of the service delivery kind of world for the population that we're talking about in terms of what helps people succeed outside of like direct contact with a probation officer To kind of stay out of criminal just a criminal justice system by putting the Community supports in place that people need to succeed. So I guess that Meeting last week with regard to each of those subsets. And the representation from Arlington, you can see reflects that some of their community organizations were like, OAR, you know, the folks who work with job placement, post- Yeah, the community services boards and those things. So that's what I mean, just in terms of when it comes to us and when it comes to us for sort of appointment, I'm just putting it out there now in terms of, you know, and the end brews. Yeah. Like the one community representative there was a member of an NAACP early to for instance and wanted to make sure that voice was heard from the community. So I think you can address the both staff and the resident appointment. Yeah, but it was an interesting broad brush and you're exactly right. It was pretty interesting to have the judges who are making the decisions there with the people who are actually finding housing, finding jobs. I agree with you completely, and it's within the net. That was all bread and chocolate. I also noticed kind of a lack of at least city of false church social services representation and one oddity is that our social services are provided through Fairfax County and not through Arlington County so our representation in terms of social services won't be on this particular board so I noticed that I don't know if that's an issue. I think over the first year of strategic planning maybe some thoughts about that can come out of that group. Okay. Yeah, great. Another great point. Thank you, Debbie, for going last week. Okay. Well, I think we're scheduled to adopt this by resolution next week, so. Okay, moving on to the third item, Virginia Village. All right, well thank you. We're joined tonight. We have Brendan Woodley, who is joining virtually, as well as Dana Jones. And the team that's been working on Virginia Village has been a vicinity, Brendan and Dana really over the past two years working with the City Council, working with the EDA, working with the Housing Commission principally. As I reported during the City Manager's report last week, we've been informed by Virginia I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean, I to reimburse the EDA for the $925,000. It has put into the Virginia Village acquisitions and the city of Falls Church for the 2 million out of capital reserves. And then at that time, title would be transferred to Wesley Housing. And so with that announcement from Virginia Housing that that interim financing will not be forthcoming. We want to have a discussion with council about next steps. We are recommending that a part of that discussion occur in closed session tonight to talk specifically about properties that the city might want to encourage Wesley to acquire using public funds as a pathway to a potential redevelopment at the Virginia Village site and also put some guard rails around in terms of the negotiating position of public dollars that could be used for that purpose. So we do recommend a closed session for that discussion. The other thing I just want to note is that the city does have, has been very successful in getting grant funds to help with this effort including Amazon Reach funds and funds that we've gotten from housing and urban development through the community enhancements programs and with the support of congressman Don Byer and so there is funding available right now to reimburse the EDA in the city council if that were your top priority or in your top choice those funds are available and we could do that tomorrow however, one of the consequences of doing that is that the future acquisitions would be stalled for a period of time as we go out to get some additional grant funds and be able to continue the acquisition program. So that's sort of a public part of the discussion about sort of that trade-off. And in addition, Mr. Woodley has put in for grant funds to help us with a facilitator to stand up the redevelopment work group, which is envisioned in the original memorandum of understanding with Wesley Housing. We have a grant for $36,000 to help facilitate that work. And so one of the things we wanted to put on the table tonight was to get direction from the council to begin to put that work group together. And that work group will look at things like what the buildings would look like, what the configuration on the site would be, what the mix of incomes that would be seeking to serve on the site, mixes of uses and putting together essentially a conceptual plan as well as a conceptual financing plan for such redevelopments in the future. So that's one element of the memo that's before the council tonight. So that is a few notes just at a high level. Let me just invite Mr. Woodley if there are other key details that I've overlooked or additional context that he'd like to provide for the City Council on this sort of the larger topic of what we're trying to accomplish here with the Virginia Village project. Sure. Absolutely. Yeah, I think you probably covered most of it, why but thank you for kind of giving that introduction. Just pointing out a couple things on the memo that provided us out of giving that introduction. Just pointing out a couple of things on the memo that we provided as part of the packet tonight. We talked a little bit about after we found out about the news with junior housing, kind of our first instinct as a project team was to go and look at other alternate financing options. We looked at LISC, National Housing Trust, and a couple others. These options weren't ideal in that their rates were much closer to market than any in-term financing from Virginia housing. So it kind of made it restricted the size of any loan and repayment of any loan because of the debt service that would be implied because of those market rates. We're also pointing out online 52 of the amount that we prepared a table of sources for the project that explores feasibility of using the acquisition fund. And generally speaking, and to kind of reiterate, if the council's decision, the group its ability to pursue an acquisition slash redevelopment strategy. And then we also talk a little bit later in the memo about the recommended disbursement or rental income that if you call a couple of months ago, the council approved to the EDA. So we have a disbursement strategy for that. And of course, if you guys see the last page on the memo, there's a map of some ownership of the parcels, which I think might be valuable both for your help and understanding what's going on in that property right now and subsequent closed session as well. Okay. Do we have any other comments on this before we're going to close? I do. Okay. So I guess I mean, I guess stepping back more broadly. I don't know if you want to speak to it or Sally were to speak to it. The current status of the MOU with respect to the project. Like I went back and looked at both December 22, 2022 MOU and the amended MOU that we did in the spring. And I mean looking at it, right? It seems premised on the conveyances happening in phase one, the additional parcels that may be assembled, and then having enough parcels assembled to do any redevelopment. And I understand the concept of phase, redevelopment that we may be able to do, but I'm just as a general matter, when kind of the foundation of the MOU has been what I would consider like disrupted in kind of a fundamental way. Do we need to draft like a new MOU to capture where we currently are and the expectations that we have of like partners that aren't currently reflected in the documents that like would otherwise be seen as somewhat controlling documents. I said, do you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, you have, the MOU was sort of set up sequentially phase one, two, and three without the bridge line, which was really just to keep the revolving funding going to continue the acquisition. We are currently looking at it more. At the same time, it says sequential because we've lost time and we've also had changed situation. We now own more properties than when that was, you know, first established. So I think we have to look at that. The phase one transfer of the ownership was tied and facilitated to the loan and the acquisition because that's the end game per Wesley. But we're in the process of looking at could you just do the transfer now if we have the face re-end plan and look at different financing. So I think while we probably will need to refine the MOU once we sort of have an updated plan, I'm not sure we're there yet. I know we haven't formally put it into Sally's queue to look at that specific question. And of course we do have a first reading out there for tax abatement ordinance and we are not bringing the second reading to you now because we haven't transferred the properties but also if you don't have the debt on the properties from that loan, the core underpinning of the reason for the tax abatement until you get to redevelop that sort of pending. So there's a lot of pieces. I think we're still sorting out a lot of it. We'll probably have some direction after a good process. So discussion. I guess I raised part of it just to, yeah, I think we do need like a review of the MOU just to see like what the status of it is. Looking at it, I would expect that we're going to need to draft a new MOU, but part of that gets to, maybe you can kind of speak to. The commitment of our different partners, because we're talking about stakeholders and potentially assembling people to think about what redevelopment might look like, but that presumes that we have the correct stakeholders at the table. And so I guess in terms of, you know, feedback that you have and conversations you've had in terms of ongoing commitment of those we've worked with thus far in your expectation going forward is to kind of like who comprises that stakeholder group. Now let me start with that and certainly Brendan and Dana can add in. I do think the two primary partners in this and three because the EVA currently still owns property there. Are the right people at the table? Wesley has been working with us since we've got the news. And of course they were working with us through the loan to look at alternatives, keep the ball rolling whether it was financing or phasing. So I think at this point, we still have the right players at the table of the core members of that MOU partnership. Obviously, as you assemble properties and you need your long-term financing, you'll need more and the MOU did contemplate that for bringing the other party to the table whether it was a financing or a private developer. So that's built in there in In the Virginia housing response when they notified us that the interim bridge loan was not within their underwriting normal programming, it was too much out of the box right now for them. They did say that if there was a phase development plan or some more confirmed acquisition strategy that then getting back into their conversation on their that they have left that door open, whether it's their equity funds or their 4-9% tax credits. But Wesley and Brendan have been working with Lisk and some of the other options out there. Wesley has already been looking at putting an application in for the Amazon money. That's out there in Brendan had also alerted them to some Fairfax housing development money that's out there. So I was there, Wesley, still the right partner at this stage. Plus. Do you have, I mean, this gets back to an earlier conversation. And I ask for more transparency reasons. Do you have a sense of that proof of concept plan that was developed by Wesley, I guess, for its board of directors. And do you, you know, was their city input into that and did it, did it in any way? Like was there a disconnect between what that redevelopment plan looked like and what the city, you know, may or may not envision in terms of the scope or the intensity of that proof of concept. So staff was not involved in the development of that proof of concept. What I think staff was viewing is that this workgroup that I mentioned would be the venue for that discussion. So I think staff felt fairly constrained about their ability to kind of get ahead of that process. It is not uncommon for developers to put plans in front of staff and say, what do you think? And we typically will say a few things, but we'll mostly say, we're not here to design this for you. There's gonna be a process eventually by which you have to follow all of our zoning rules. And we'll start that when you're actually ready to start it. So those concepts are very much Wesley's concepts. I don't think the city has any identification with that. And you, but you're confident in terms of Wesley, Wesley appreciating that the city would need to have input and that that proof of concept may ultimately differ and could differ significantly based on like what the city inputter stakeholder input is. Yes, I'm very confident in that. That's built into the MOU. That's been our discussions and stay one up to the point of even having terms in there for the divorce as we called it if we needed to. We are not there. I think also it's important to put into context what they developed as their concept. It was after meeting with planning staff and zoning just to learn what is our code sort of the maximum you could And to look at sort of the financial feasibility to make sure that there was a long game option But I think the reason that it was for their board and not a big engagement was it wasn't intended to be the end game with the community Working group which is spelled out the work plan as well as we've got the South Washington area plan and other guiding principles to feed into a plan. So we all helpful to know and to just confirm. On the five, one, two, three, four, five, the five city owned properties that we had anticipated would have conveyed a closing, but we still retained ownership of. What is the status of sort of the management of those companies and obligations? Are we directly servicing those properties at this point in time or does Wesley have involvement beyond the Wesley housing owned? So we're currently managing those. I don't know, Dana Jones wants to speak to it. We have a contractor that serves as their project manager or property manager. Yes. Good evening, all. We are contracting with ProMax and Kayleen Marks are housing specialists as the staff person that works with them and they take care of collecting rents, the maintenance, if there's any kind of a building issue like the roof or whatever they handle all of those things that they work directly with the city on that. And they have for some time. Thank you. And then I guess, yeah, my last comment on it is just, you know, we support the preservation of affordable housing. I, you know, would support trying to obtain work these parcels. In terms of preserving affordable housing, I think it's an important thing we need to do. And, you know, something that we definitely need in the city and that despite our, you know, ongoing development is still an area in which we need to be more focused and committed. And so I say that at the same time also, have an expectation that it is going to be a maybe more public and transparent and visible as, what it is that we are talking about in terms of redevelopment and getting public input into, you know, what that looks like and, you know, keeping or replacing or maintaining, let's say, 80 units, right? At what intensity do you build in order to keep 80 units versus like preserving 80 units and getting as many more as you can while still being able to kind of use the land effectively and you know hit different incomes and kind of price points then what we're kind of effectively doing in some other development in the city right now. Okay. Other questions or comments in open session? Dave? What's the financial impact if we don't agree to be paid back? What impact will that have on city or EDA projects? So we're going to discuss the EDA impacts with the EDA tomorrow night. They plan to have a discussion about this as well. And so I think that's the discussion for them is what is the opportunity cost or what are other projects that they will not be able to proceed with. So we'll let that kind of that evaluation happen. Where they paid for this was out of their land acquisition funding that was intended to help them incentivize economic development through strategic land acquisitions. That's the funding that they used to acquire one of the units. And so that's sort of the short answer is that that program is impacted by the fact that the money is tied up in this purpose. How about another city programs? So on the city we have 2 million from CAPPA reserves and so this does have an impact on the CIP. We were assuming that we would get that 2 million back and that it would be a program in the CIP. And we can provide the council with sort of the listing, how those funds could impact the CIP. And some respects there's some discretion in terms of how that $2 million would be, $2 million would be impacted over the six-year CIP, because that's where the money was taken from is from capital reserves which is used to fund projects throughout the whole six year term of the CIP. And Cindy, I know the staff's been doing some work on that. I don't know if you have anything that we can speak to specifically about that. We were anticipating we'd have a discussion in the context of the year in financial report next week. Correct. Nothing specific for tonight? The bottom line is we would try to make it so the impacts are on the out years of the CIP rather than in the immediate first and second year of the CIP. As a relative EDA they have asked for the rental income proceeds from the property that they own. I think about 200,000 I think the staff report recommends only 150 of that so we keep 50 for capital expenses related to the unit Yeah, that would just be contingency until transfers to the squeslay and then they take over And so that would in the near term give EVA some cash flow but that is as Mr. Shields indicated the conversation with the EVA tomorrow evening. There are questions or comments. So going back to the MOU I think one thing that I remember from our 2021 discussions and creation of the MOU was keeping flexibility for additional partners. And so I think one thing that's been pretty consistent, I think, among past council's current councils and the EDA is the idea of thinking about income and not creating areas of concentrated poverty. So given the opportunity to essentially revisit the relationship here, I do think this is a good time to remind ourselves about the idea of having a market rate Third partner potentially and think about how that could fit in So I know that was not should not be used to Wesley given that we discussed it extensively during the Courage in the them on you, but that's one point I want to bring up again Yes, and we've recently Have had that conversation with Wesley and even when you look at, let's say, a LITE Tech project when you do four or nine percent tax credit, you usually have a for-profit private developer as part of the partnership. So that could help, Wesley traditionally has experience only in LITECH funded projects using six percent or nine percent. So it's majority affordable, which is great. But if you want to think about having some market rate that would cross-subsidize the cost of your affordable housing, you can then have 80% units, 120% units that would help offset the cost of some of the affordable units. So it just seems to make sense and it would accomplish multiple community objectives that way. And even under the tax credits you can do an average income so that it averages out to 80% AMI, but you can go 30 to 120, or you can have separate building. I mean, there's a lot of options, and that's where the working group and the community engagement piece with the grant that HHS has got, which will allow us to unpack that a lot more. Yep. And then on that point, good segue. So I think I remember the Housing Commission, and I think now the Affordable Living Work Group is undertaking kind of our housing goals, right? How many units we need to produce by what day? And they're pretty ambitious. We want to hit those, both affordable and middle income housing goals. And given the math involved, just doing inclusionary zoning, like we're not gonna solve affordable housing with just 10% units in new mixed use projects. That's just not gonna create enough units. I do think this is, need more serious commitment towards affordable housing and I think this is our bet and so I think keeping our you know money in it while we explore options is probably is my preference on kind of a way for given those really ambitious goals we have in the community. Okay so we go into close now do we stay here or do we want to? We're going to close here and then move to Oak. If I could just to take the cue off of the last thing you said, if I could just highlight one sentence in the staff report for council. Line 139. I'm sorry. At line 115, we are going to go into close session to talk about some strategic acquisitions that might be able to get us towards the Phase 1 redevelopment sooner rather than later. And one of the notes in the staff report is that with a redevelopment, there are its own financing challenges that come with any redevelopment. And so when we get into that mode it may not be still a question of pulling money out of the project is going to be a discussion about what's the public substance needed to help making a redevelopment happen. I just want to kind of highlight that point as well. I guess in that case, I mean, part of the reason that we weren't able to get the mortgage, I guess, or the funding was because there wasn't a clear development. So I'm guessing that once we do get to the place where we do have a development plan in place, then it would be possible to get that funding. Well, that's the point I'm making. Yeah. We may not. Oh, okay. What I want to sort of just be clear about as we go into this, that this is all very difficult to do. And so, in a phase one redevelopment, you know, what we see in other jurisdictions is that there needs to be a whole staff of financing, including LICC, including money from local jurisdiction. And so that redevelopment may not be an option to pull money out, it might actually be a call for more money to go in. I think thank you. I appreciate that. Okay. I'm going to start with the session. Should you say no? All I'm motion made by a council member. Is that kind of a council member. Is that back in the background? No, I'm not. My mic was off. And passed by a vote of the City Council. Council went into closed session pursuant to Virginia code 2.2-371-183 for discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. A closed session will be for the purpose of discussing funding the acquisition of specific parcels of real property located in Virginia Village in order to increase the city's affordable housing stock. In such discussion, in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. Councilmember Connolly. Yes. Flynn? Yes. Sean Ciscott? Yes. Snyder? Yes. Underhill? Yes. We're going in time as 10-04. I'm Dane and Brandon. We'll see you in the other meeting link. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you We're on our way to another kind of meeting. I'm going to have to go back to the next room. I'm going to have to go back to the next room. I'm going to have to go back to the next room. I'm going to have to go back to the next room. Okay. Okay. Are we cameras on or not yet? Okay, this is our coming out motion. Aponemotion made by Council Member. Connolly. Seconded by Council Member. Underhill. And passed by voted city council council we can be in an open session. Connolly. Yes. Flynn? Yes. Sean Sistak? Yes. Sider? Yeah. Underhill? Yes. Sider? Yeah. Underhill? Yes. Already yes. Coming out time is 1040. Okay. This is a certification. Upon a motion made by Council Member. Yes, sir. Seconded by Council Member. Plan. And passed by affirmative roll call vote in open session. It was certified that one only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements and two only such public business matters were as identified in the motion by which the closed meeting was convened, heard, discussed or considered in the closed or meeting by the body. Connolly. Yes. Flynn. Yes. Chancisco. Yes. Sider. Yeah. Underhill. Yes. Hardy,iska. Yes. Sider. Yeah. Underhill. Yes. Yes. Yes. Hardy. Yes. Okay. I think we have one additional motion to make. Yes. I'd like to make a motion. I move that City Council direct staff to negotiate purchase of the lots discussed in closed session within Virginia Village in partnership with Wesley Housing. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. All. Call roll please. Ms. Connelly. Yes. Ms. Flynn. Yes. Ms. Hiscott. Yes. Mr. Schneider. Ms. Underhill. Yes. Mayor Hardy. Yes. That passes. Thank you. Any other business or items to discuss? I have one thing. We got an email about sign off there, right, I can understand some of the frustration with kind of the state of like the unevenness and the manhole like cover bumps and the slanted nature of like the street directly adjacent to the project. And so I was just wondering if you could provide insight both into the condition sort of it sign off and then cost implications if we were if we needed to undertake actually taving the street. So I know that the city's transportation engineer just to assess it in terms of inclusion in the paving plan for this year or next year and I'll get an answer back and I'll provide that at least from a technical perspective of what the transportation engineer thinks on it. It is who is not part of the voluntary concessions in Lawton Street be repaid largely because there wasn't supposed to be you know the same level of construction activity on Lawton I think once they got involved in the sewer line in particular there were more impacts there But I'll get an answer on that and share that with the city council and share that with the neighbors. Thank you. I just had one other comment going back to last week's request on signage at the WNODE trails where we've had cars turning on to them. I know thank you for the response which was referring out to Nova Parks but I also am wondering what ability we have to add our own Fulcester City signage. I know it's I don't know what's considered parking land in the WNOT Park trail land that we can't put anything on or can we look at putting a no right turn right here sign next to our new stop signs or near that. So we're in question a different way I guess. Yeah. I do want to consult with the park authority on this. This is now we do have a wider trail than most parts of the trail so we are unique in that sense. But in the larger sense they deal with these problems for the entire 44 mile section of their trail and they're always very concerned about consistency. And so we'll coordinate with them. We're aware of the problem and we do want it addressed but we'd like to do that in good coordination and communication with the parks authority. Okay. I would like to reinforce that plus note that we're working with our traffic engineers for the city. They had some concerns about no right turn on red because it's obviously cars. We don't want right turn on red but we would encourage the bike or Scooter in the bike I guess No, so we need to make sure that we're have clear messaging as well as consistent with no departs Thank you You know with upcoming elections There are a couple programs regarding misinformation and Cog Board was briefed by the FBI on foreign interference. Also I think it's important for Council to remember that we're an independent body and that we've got to separate our own personal partisan views from our official roles. So just a reminder to all of us to do that as well. But I haven't heard if there's any other additional election or related issues we ought to be thinking about right now. Why did you hurt any? Nothing specific probably that the council is not already aware of. There is a lot of coordination going on. We had a briefing with the CAO's at COG as well. Where all of the election officers were invited are our chief administrative officers, that's the CAO committee with, sorry. And our registrar is very plugged in to kind of all of that regional surveillance so that he's aware of, if there are regional concerns or national concerns, he's aware of those as well and he's in regular communication with city police for any assistance he might need. Then one last thing we do we get audited by the state for our cyber security specific related to election equipment. And so we go through kind of those protocols as well. Can I ask for related to elections? And I think maybe Joe Carter had mentioned something in passing about coordination, but to make sure that given that we're talking about high turnout presidential election year and Oak Street will be open on election day, that that coordination is taking place in terms of school security. Yes. Okay. I had something. So at the Founders 2 Neighborhood Meeting, they had mentioned that Dominions 2 months behind in taking the polls down and then they're grounded. Getting power to the building is causing delays. I'm not sure whether we've escalated our government relations person at Dominion, or they have their own attack, but it's calling impacts of the project and slowing you just today I I was alerted to that this weekend at the fall that's false or false fall and today I just got the community meeting summary notes I have some details so I will be but I have not yet okay thank you okay nothing else Let's join. All right. Thank you. Just your money and we'll not be here on many days. Nice meeting you. I will not. Thank you. you