Good evening.

Welcome to the March 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission Public Hearing at the Dell Pepper Resource Community Center.

I am Melissa McMahon, Chair of the Alexandria Planning Commission.

Without objection, Commissioner Lenahan's remote participation due to a personal matter is approved.

She is traveling for business in Southern California.

So she's joined us online.

Yes.

I nominate Melissa McMahon to be chair of the Alexandria Planning Commission.

I will second that.

Are there any other nominations?

Hearing none.

As many as favor.

Melissa Pinkman to serve as chair, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

All right.

Unanimously, the ayes have it.

And Melissa McMahon, congratulations.

You are unanimously elected to serve as chair of the planning commission for your one year term.

Thank you, everybody, for your confidence in me.

Or maybe you just don't want this job.

We'll see.

Are there any nominations for vice chair?

Madam Chair.

Yes, Commissioner Dubai.

Nominate Commissioner Kenning.

We have a nomination for Commissioner Koenig.

I will gladly second that.

Thank you.

Are there any further nominations?

Hearing none.

The nominations are closed.

As many favor, Stephen Kane for Vice Chair, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Those opposed?

No.

Hearing no no's and all ayes, you are unanimously approved for your appointment to another year as vice chair.

Thank you, Commissioner Kenning.

All right.

Is there okay?

So folks know from our docket, we're going to start with a closed session.

Is there a motion to convene a closed executive session?

Chair, I move that the planning commission convene in closed executive session pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711A19 to discuss plans to protect public safety as it relates to terrorist activity or specific cybersecurity threats or vulnerabilities to include briefings by staff members, legal counsel, or law enforcement, or emergency service officials concerning actions taken to respond to such matters or related threat to public safety.

A discussion of information subject to the exclusion in subdivision two or fourteen of section 2.2-3705.

Or discussion of reports or plans related to the security of any governmental facility, building or structure, or the safety of persons using such facility, building or structure.

All right.

Great.

We have a motion by Vice Chair Canning and a second by Commissioner Manor.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries unanimously.

At this time, anyone that is not authorized to participate in the closed session, please exit the chambers.

The planning commission will return no earlier than 7 p.m.

for the public hearing.

All right.

Yeah.

And now the public has to see us open.

Testing, testing.

We prove endlessly.

All right.

Is there a motion to reconvene in open session?

Madam Chair, I move that the planning commission reconvene in open session.

I'll second.

All right.

I have a motion to reconvene in open session by Vice Chair Kenig and a second by Commissioner Ramirez.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Opposed motion carries.

Do we have um Commissioner Lanahan?

Okay.

I see her raised her hand.

Hopefully, sweet.

And that's a vote.

Um, you voted in in favor of open of reconvening an open session.

For the record, excellent.

Okay, is there a motion to certify the closed session?

Madam Chair, I move that the planning commission does hereby certify that to the best of each member's knowledge.

Only public business matters that were identified in the motion by which the executive session was convened and that are lawfully exempted by the Freedom of Information Act from the X open meeting requirements were heard, discussed, or considered by counsel by the commission during the executive session.

Okay.

That was a motion by Vice Chair Kenig.

Is there a second?

Yes, I'll second.

All right, I got um Commissioner Manor on the second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries six zero.

All right.

We are now in open session again.

It is 701 p.m.

I have just a few announcements before we continue with tonight's docket.

And I can see Holly.

Okay.

So I never know.

Yeah, there you are.

If you wish to speak on a docket item and have not already signed up to do so, please fill out a speaker form online by following the sign up to speak hyperlink on the cover page of this evening's public hearing docket, or in person by filling out a hard copy speaker form, which can be found on the tables located immediately outside of chambers and providing it to Ms.

Williams, who has her hand raised.

Please note comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker, except for applicants and their representation.

To make your public comment through Zoom, please click on the raised hand button located on the Zoom taskbar when you hear your name called to let staff know you need to be unmuted.

If you are dialing into tonight's meeting via phone, please press star nine to execute the raise hand function when you hear your name called, followed by star six to toggle the unmute function.

For those here in person, please come up to the podium located at the front of chambers when you hear your name called and identify yourself by first and last name.

The city encourages and welcomes public comments from all residents on planning commission matters.

In keeping with that principle and with the principle of inclusiveness, this is a reminder of the shared expectation that the content and tenor of public comments always be civil and respectful.

Thank you for honoring those principles.

A reminder to all, including commissioners, staff, and speakers in the chambers, please speak clearly into the microphone to ensure all can hear you clearly.

Ms.

Williams, are there any changes to tonight's docket?

Madam Chair, yes.

Um the applicant for number five, um, Mr.

Farhang Mojani has asked to withdraw his application for subdivision 2025-00013, 3833, 3835, and 3837 Albert Avenue.

Okay.

Is this something we have to vote on?

Okay.

Sam.

Sorry.

Sam's going to have to say why the rejoin.

Yes.

I don't have mic.

Oh.

We don't have we will fish fix that right away.

Aha.

Back in order.

You have the you have the power mic?

The power move mic.

She is like mute, mute.

Um.

So my quick question was simply um I'm used to deferrals showing up like this, but this is a withdrawal.

Is that different than a deferral, practically speaking?

No, you have to take a vote.

Okay.

And we just say, and I think you are going to ask why they're withdrawing.

Were you going to ask why then?

Yeah, I mean, sure.

Say I'm a spirit.

That would be great.

Yes, good evening, Sam Shelby.

Uh this case was with or the applicant has requested to withdraw this because he doesn't need a subdivision.

He had submitted uh platts to us that were uh didn't really show the the where the existing lot lines were, and we determined that they're all uh all he needs to do is go to the courthouse and consolidate the lots, and he gets the configuration he needs, so no subdivision needed.

Terrific.

I love this kind of withdrawal.

All right.

Um would someone like to make a motion to approve the withdrawal of item five.

Um Madam Chairman, I recommend that um planning commission remove, I'm sorry, approve um withdrawal of subdivision 2025-00013 for 3833, 3855, and 3837 Elbert Avenue.

Uh, yeah, just a point of order 3835.

Yeah.

What you said was 55, but I think it was just I'm sorry.

That's because I'm not thinking while I'm reading what's here.

And there's a type of great thank you.

Okay.

And I got a second.

Um, so a motion by Vice Chair Candig and a second second by Commissioner Manor.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries 60.

All right.

That brings us to docket item four.

Unfinished business and items previously deferred.

Item number four.

A subdivision to resubdupt subdivide three existing lots with variations to the lot areas with frontages and B a development site plan to construct three townhouses, zone or B townhouse applicant 732 and 806 development LLC, represented by Kenneth Wire, attorney.

All right, go for it.

Thank you.

Good evening, Chair McMahon and members of the Planning Commission.

For the record, my name is Stephanie Sample, the Department of Planning and Zoning Development Division.

The applicant proposes to redevelop an existing surface parking lot at 806 North Columbus Street with three townhouses.

It did it's something.

Oh this is the agenda.

Next slide.

Next slide.

The project site is on a fully residential block with a mix of both historic and more modern townhouses, but is also across the street from a newly constructed condominium building and a mix of uses on Washington Street and in Old Town North to the east.

The site is within easy walking distance of the Braddock Road Metro station and is accessible to many bus lines and capital bike share stations.

The project is also like located in the Braddock Road Small Area Plan and the Parker Gray Historic District.

Next slide.

The current parking lot is actually three equal-sized townhouse lots originally recorded in 1891.

The request was subdivision with variation would allow for a minor shift of the north and south lot lines of the center lot by less than a foot on each side to make the end units wider than the center unit.

Next slide.

This slide shows the proposed townhouse footprint and architecture.

As you can see, the townhouses will be set back from the front property line to reflect the typical block setback.

Each townhouse will be a total of four stories with a smaller top floor accommodating a roof deck.

Each townhouse will have a small rear yard and two parking spaces.

With the removal of the curb cut on Columbus Street, there will be a continuous sidewalk and planning strip, as well as a street tree and a bike rack.

The BAR reviewed this project on two occasions and generally supported the idea of three townhouses, but requested certain largely material refinements when they returned to the board following planning commission approval.

Next slide.

There were four hearings where this project was discussed, one applicant hosted meeting, two BAR concept reviews, and the project was previewed at the January 8th P and Z virtual community meeting.

Next slide.

As with all projects, we'd like to highlight certain things with respect to schools.

The project has the potential to generate approximately one student.

Transportation improvements consist of the removal of the curb cut and a safer improved streetscape.

Finally, with respect to stormwater, the project exceeds the minimum treatment requirement by approximately 65%.

Benefits include the removal of the surface parking lot for infill construction and new housing in a transit rich location.

With that, staff recommends approval.

Thank you.

Are there any questions for staff?

Yes, Commissioner Dubay.

Just a quick question.

You mentioned the BAR saw this twice, but it's going to go back to them again.

Are those changes incorporated in what we're seeing?

No.

What you are seeing is the images that went to the drawings that went to the BAR for the second concept.

Okay.

So they had two concepts, and when after planning commission, they'll do the certificate of appropriateness review.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

All right.

Do we have any speakers?

Yes, we do.

We have um one online, and I think one in person, along with the representative.

So the one online is find her name here, Kate Sermons.

All right, Kate.

Can you you should be able to speak, so go ahead.

Yes, I think so.

Okay, I'll try one more time.

How's the sound?

Great.

Sounds good.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Um so what I would like to focus on in this hearing today.

First of all, uh, thank you for your consideration.

My name is Keith Zerns.

I live at 814 North Columbus Street.

That is directly adjacent to the 806 property.

Um, my property is on the north side.

Um what I'd like to focus on is section uh 11-1710E, requiring that lots be compatible with the surrounding lot characters in general compliance with the zoning regulation.

One of the biggest um and most noticeable issues with the design of this proposed development is the fact that it is a proposed four-story with the fourth recast between two two-story town homes.

Um, the shortest of which is 25 feet tall.

Um, the proposed town homes will be nearly 50 feet tall, so almost double this.

Um there will be a six-foot fence next to a nearly 50-foot wall, um, and will render the green space um some of the last green space on North Columbus Street a essentially shaded alley versus an open green space.

Um this is extremely out of character with the rest of the lot.

The lot has both historical homes and new built homes.

They were part of the old town commons complex um in 2001, I believe.

These managed to be harmonious.

We're not opposed to development, we're looking for harmonious development.

The old town commons precedent that was set required two things.

First of all, a four-story, even with four-story recess could not be next to a two-story town home.

It would have to be three stories with the third recess.

And regardless, it had to have a step up.

So there could be no four-story, regardless of history next to a two-story.

Old Town Commons honored that, and when you look at the street view, specifically on 800 North Columbus Street, which is often avoided in the photos of these development plans, there is no noticeable difference between the buildings that the old town commons buildings adjacent to the town homes to the north of uh 806 and 814.

I thank you for your consideration, and if you have any questions um specifically about my property or my statements, please feel free to ask.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Graham Douglas.

Hello, thank you for uh allowing me to speak.

I would echo the the same comments that Kate made.

Um primary concern, uh, and I'm a neighbor who has the house across uh Snowden Hill away from this proposed development, is the sheer scale of the development.

Um if you were to bring up um or if you recall slide four in the presentation that the samples gave.

I think uh the the proposal for a four-story town home as opposed to what you see in that in that picture will give you a sense of how dramatic the difference would be.

Um so the primary concern that most of the neighbors have is around the the sheer mass of the townhomes and the proposed.

Um a number of the discussions at the at the Board of Architecture Reviews have gone um pushed in the direction of making this a true three-story development and and ways in which that could be done.

And if and honestly, if this proposal was for two town homes on the existing lots of three stories, I think everyone would be supportive.

I think that would be completely in keeping with the the current um homes on on Columbus.

Moving on to a secondary issue is the what is referred to in a lot of the documents is the public alley that will be used as the primary means of access to the to these properties is actually a private street that was converted when uh the old town commons development was done.

What was the James Bland uh redevelopment that was approved in 2008?

Um that's the the maintenance of that street is funded by Old Town Commons.

We pay through our dues, um uh our homeowners' dues.

We pay uh towards both the immediate maintenance of the street and uh examples uh things like uh um snow removal, which has been obviously a major issue this this past three months.

Um but in the longer term, also things like uh accumulating the reserve to to resurface that street when it when it's required.

Um I haven't heard it at this point any proposal from the developer in terms of how they intend to compensate Old Town Commons for the work for the for their portion of the use of that street.

Um and then finally, I'd like to uh beg perhaps for some aesthetic improvements to the proposed parking.

Today, when I look uh across the street, I I look at a fairly attractive fence and don't have to look uh very much in terms of uh the cars that are parked in the lock there.

Um but uh some sort of mechanism for for providing a gate or a fence that that makes uh for a more attractive view would be greatly appreciated.

Um that is the the view of on on most of the rest of the street.

There's currently only one home on Snowden Hallow Way that has direct access to the uh to the to Snowden Halloway from the driveway.

Um I believe that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Final speaker is Ken Wire.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the planning commission.

I'm Ken Wire with the law firm Wire Gill.

With me this evening is no strangers to this neighborhood.

Um PT Blooms, two principles are Patrick Bloomfield and Jerry Ricardi.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you tonight.

Um we actually have um three separate things to discuss tonight.

Uh the first is a subdivision.

Um staff, would you mind going back to that comparison chart?

Um I was all prepared to give a lecture on subdivisions, but I think if we just read the city's memo from your city attorney and your plan director, I can just say I agree.

Happy to debate that, but the the key principles of that um discussion are that um staff concludes on page 13 the proposed lots, not the buildings, but the lots would maintain compatibility with similarly situated lots.

They have a great chart in the staff report on page 12 and 13.

So we hope that you approve on the subdivision ordinance, uh subdivision variation in accordance with the ordinance, which lays out the criteria for approving approving the subdivision with variation.

The uh the second item in front of you, if you could go to the um aerial, I think that speaks uh volumes.

If you look at the um aerial, there's no disagreement about what the facts are here.

We are in the RB zone that allows 45-foot tall buildings.

To remind everybody, the BAR has granted approval for height, scale, and general architectural character.

Um Stephanie, if you wouldn't mind going back to the um um facade, one of the views of the roof um in between shows of roof setback.

What we've done based upon community feedback is the four-story there is set back at a one-to-one ratio from the front of the building.

One to one roughly means for every foot in height, we're set back a foot from the front of the building.

We are also aware that we're next to two-story buildings.

There's no debate here.

To be clear, these buildings are 42 and a half feet tall.

That is measured by your zoning ordinance.

Your staff confirmed that.

They're not close to 50, 42 was closer to 40 than than 50.

But we also set back from the sides of the buildings, understanding we're next to those two-story um townhouses on both sides.

If you go back to the area, I'm sorry, one more time that shows the neighborhood.

If you look at the Snowden um hollow well way in the back, those four stories are brought to the edge of the building.

We set ours in in response to the neighbors.

We've also reoriented the bay to the south.

One of the bays was blocking the neighbor's view, so working with BAR, we flipped the bay in the front of the house to give view to that um townhouse to the south.

We will still work with BAR.

We were discussing our comments in the back.

I know Mr.

Dubay brought up you know what's left in front of us.

It will be meeting with the BAR.

They were very clear the northern wall needs to be entirely brick.

We initially wanted to break it, we got the message, it faces um Katie's house, and we need to do a better job at that wall, and we go back to BAR, we will work on that to be entirely brick.

Another point of reference, um, I know Snowden Hallow way pretty well because I wrote the easement that sits on that property.

I worked on that entitlement.

It is a privately owned property, comma, with a public access easement.

That was done as part of the trade-off, if you will, to approve Old Town Commons.

Those properties were brought to the edge.

The City Council at that time determined that access way was sufficient, but it had to have a public access easement on it.

Staff can confirm that.

But we're here to say we will comply with the public access easement.

A portion of our property, you can see on the red line goes into that alleyway.

We will, of course, maintain any disturbance that we cause in the construction.

That will be our responsibility.

But in closing, we agree with the staff report, all conditions.

We look forward to working with the BAR.

We've done what we can within constraints of the zoning ordinance to reduce the height from 45 feet down to 42.

We are aware this is a change to the neighborhood.

We think it's a good change to the neighborhood, and we agree with staff's conclusion that the variation and development special development site plan meet all the criteria for approval.

And we're happy to answer any questions you may have tonight.

Thank you very much.

Are there any questions for the applicant?

Thank you.

All right.

And if there are none, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

Second.

I have a motion by Commissioner Dubai and a second by Vice Chair Koenig.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries.

6-0.

Holly's muted again, though.

Is she muted of her own accord?

Okay.

Yes, I said aye.

Okay.

Excellent.

I just didn't want to disturb anything.

Terrific.

Thank you.

All right.

That brings us to Commissioner discussion.

Who would like to kick off?

Right, Commissioner Ramirez.

I will just say I do not take exception to this proposal before us today.

Again, this is for the subdivision, not necessarily for the architectural features of the buildings.

So for the subdivision of these lots.

I don't take exception to it.

I think it is is it is very much in line with the lots uh sizing and um orientation of the of the street, the neighborhood, um, the neighbors, there are all of the lots seem like they're they're falling in line.

And I think all honestly, I'm I'm excited about uh seeing some some occupancy of this um lot beyond just a parking lot that it is currently.

So excited to see it move forward.

And and just a point of clarification, the the subdivision is an item on the docket, as is the DSP development site plan.

Um so if you have any feedback on that piece of the analysis, you're welcome to share that too.

Um no, I do not take exception to the DSV either.

Okay for the similar reason that it is it is um the cadence of the the developments are in line.

And I think that having those side side setbacks, um, you know, looking at the um the lots um and the buildings on the back side of that alley, um, you do see like they they are the the very top level is pushed all the way out to the very perimeter.

These are set back a little bit.

Um I you know, at a certain kind of human scale when you're at the sidewalk, you're not going to necessarily perceive that that top level as much.

Um, but I think that it does add a bit of uh uh uh perforation um to the development that it will be a welcome element to the design.

And now I'm done.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Commissioner Dubay.

Just a quick question for staff.

The the one caller talked about green space.

Is that uh I guess she was talking about the the space between her unit and the lot line there.

Maybe Mr.

Wire can answer it.

Um I'm not sure.

I think I walked down through there, I didn't really see a green space in particular, but I think she's talking about her side yard.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um other than that, I mean I I don't I don't see reason.

I mean, that the I know there was some consternation by former member Brown on some of the details, but thanks to Mr.

Stoddard and staff for the memo, it really clarified everything in my mind.

I don't I don't see any reason not to support this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Dubay.

Other commissioner comments or discussion, Vice Chair Keenick.

Um Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think um just a couple of quick confirmations.

Um I'm comfortable with the subdivision.

I'm also um I I uh I'm persuaded by the staff's analysis on the DSP.

I just wanted to clarify that it sounded to me like the staff's representation on a couple of items and Mr.

Wire's representation were congruent, but I just like to confirm that.

So the uh the actual status at BAR, as we mentioned, they have to go back for the final certificate.

But is it correct to characterize their previous examinations as being in uh in uh uh in support of the massing and scale of the project, and the only issue, only only items at issue for the final certificate are refinements of design that don't address mass and scale.

Correct.

Okay.

Um the fact that uh the representation by uh some of the uh uh testimony that identified that um this is a private street and Mr.

Wires representation that it is a private street with a public access easement, and uh staff is comfortable that that public access easement does indeed facilitate everything that's required for this project.

Correct.

There's also a 10-foot public alley in the mix as well.

But we'll be improved by the um developer for this project, the the remaining portion of the public.

Sorry, I I'm not catching what you're saying.

There's a there is a narrow public alley um behind the red box.

Uh north, south, east, west, uh, west.

Can you go to that other slide?

Not that one.

That one.

You say the gray area?

Yes.

That's actually public.

Huh.

So it's a 10-foot public alley and then Snowden Howell Way.

Snowden How improved half of the public alley, the other half will be improved for this.

Huh.

Okay.

So that's a wrinkle I wasn't aware of.

But the the bottom line then is effectively that everything that's being required in terms of access to this new development is completely in order relative to the way those uh access points are the same.

Yes, public access is meant with the ingress egress easement as well.

Great.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Madam Chair.

Um with those clarifications, I'm comfortable uh supporting both the subdivision and the DSP, and I'd be happy to move something to that effect whenever you think it's a good idea.

Terrific.

Um I'm gonna make a quick follow-up on that um because I didn't quite catch this in the review.

Um to the community member comment, I believe it was Mr.

Douglas regarding Snowden Hallowell Way and its maintenance.

Um the development at Snowden Hallowell is required to maintain Snowden How Snowden Hallowell Way, which would go up to that property line.

But this piece that is the public alley that's gray, is this going to become the responsibility of each of these property owners to maintain?

If you look on page 19 there's of the staff report, there's an image which shows the public access easement and then the public alley.

It's seamless.

It it appears as if it's all Snowden Howe away.

Right.

But but is Snowden Hallowell are the folks who who own and are responsible through uh uh association type of structure to maintain Snowden Hallow away already maintaining the public alley.

Half of the public alley is improved.

And is I the half that would that that is that was part of that original development?

And then this part isn't improved, but it's gonna be improved as part of this development.

I'm just asking, not it's not like so much at issue in the approval tonight, but it's a I want to raise that it might be at issue in the long-term maintenance of the of this because you could get 20 years down the road the next time something's got to be paved, and they're pointing at each other saying, No, it's you, no it's you, no it's you, no it's you.

And I just think that we need to make sure the applicant and everyone's working really carefully to identify who's going to be responsible for that because if it's still just public, the applicant improves it, but does that mean it's the city that's gonna fix it when it breaks?

And if that's the case, are they gonna have the standing to go to the city and say it's been 20 years since this was paved and now it's all crumbling.

Can you please come in and fix it?

Because it's just these little feet.

I mean it's a public gallery, so it is the city's responsibility.

Okay.

Okay.

Well that's great.

It's on the record.

Everyone remember that?

Okay.

It's the city's responsibility.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Um wasn't expecting that tangent.

Um I'll go ahead and offer some um some commentary.

Uh I think this is a terrific in-fill project for this location.

Um this the stocket item is in two pieces.

So I guess I'll speak to the subdivision first.

In my review of the subdivision, and staff and the applicant are aware, I spent a long time asking questions to make sure that I understood how to apply our subdivision requirements to this request.

And I really appreciate staff's and county attorneys' memorandum that is a part of the stocket item to continue to provide that context to the language that sits in our code.

The key, so basically all the requirements that I see that are necessary for meeting the subdivision code requirements are met under in the um in the analysis of the variation that's being requested.

The part that I stumble upon, and it's just my nature to get to get caught up with words, is the use of the terminology substantial injustice.

But it has been properly explained to me and clarified to me that the important words aren't substantial injustice, but that but the definition of what that means for us.

Thanks.

All that's being requested here in the variation is the ability for that inner lot of three.

We're still dividing it into three lots.

They're all substantially the same configuration as the original three lots, but we're making the center lot a foot and a half narrower, and we're making the outer lots ever so slightly wider.

Um if I'm asking myself, do I gain any substantial benefit to forcing the applicant to build three 17 and a half foot lots, build on three 17 and a half foot lots versus the proposal that they're bringing before us.

And I can't think of the purpose that that demand would serve because I think the project can be built out and the lots in the configuration the applicant is proposing serve the same substantially the same uh land use and development purpose as the original lot configuration.

Um all that is to say it wouldn't be just of me to require them to stay at 17.5, 17.5, 17.5 for the non-benefit I would get out of that compared to what they're offering.

Um so it took me a while to get to this place, but I sort of figured it out, and I feel very comfortable with that with holding that position on the question of this subdivision application.

Then that brings me to the DSP, um, which is our funny way of saying if you build more than a couple things together, but not a lot of things together, you there's this middle of development approval that we have.

And um, and we're charged with looking at things like consistency with small area plans, consistency with city policies, massing location design, health safety, and welfare, um, other policies that we have around open space, crown coverage, and this proposal of three um town townhouses, is consistent with the small area plan in which it falls.

These townhouses, while taller in their design than the houses that are immediately adjacent, are not out of context with the Snowden Hallowell way, the development across Snowden Hallowell way from them, and they are facing development that's quite a bit higher and um larger, more massive, um, just across Columbus and leading toward Washington.

And we are looking at this in a neighborhood context of this kind of development transition.

Um there are no risks to this project, as far as I can tell, to health safety and welfare, and this project is meeting the open space and crown coverage requirements that are associated that would be associated with a development of this type.

Um I want to acknowledge that Mr.

Douglas um was concerned about whether a gate or fence could be applied to the rear of the lots to allow more of a I guess um uh visual obstruction to what might be the clutter of someone's backyard.

I don't because all of the lots require vehicular access to the back, I don't I don't think that we can sort of um we can expect that to happen here.

I don't I don't think that we can sort of we can expect that to happen here.

I guess it doesn't mean that it couldn't, because I've seen other lots in the city that have ultimately ended up with a fence that can be closed behind um vehicles.

But I don't I don't think that that to the extent that this project is already meeting the land use objectives for the site.

And in fact, it's providing for parking spaces on each of these sites, which a lot of times is a bone of contention for neighbors because they don't want to be competing with parking on the street that sometimes new development will bring into an equation.

I think it's it's packing everything in that needs to be on these locations and providing for completely compatible development design.

Um I'll be supporting both elements of this proposal.

Anything else from Commissioners or motion.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh just a couple of quick um observations before I put the motion out was just to um appreciate your uh very detailed kind of evaluation of all the um pieces of the puzzle here, and I concur with all of that.

And I also concur with the fact that the variation wrinkle on subdivisions.

I mean, we see a lot of subdivisions, but the subdivision with variation and that particular language about substantial injustice.

Um I I always find it incredibly complicated to try to kind of make my way through that.

I think you did a very nice job of summing up what the essential um evaluation that's being made is, and I'm comfortable that we're well to the positive side of that um trade-off that's being explored there.

And I appreciate uh Commissioner um Brown's um uh uh last opportunity to um to bring um a complex matter to the staff's attention to the point that they spend a lot of time on it and write a very complex and comprehensive memo that helps us figure it all out.

So I'm comfortable with where we are on the subdivision still.

And the only other item I'd add to the DSP observation um is uh that indeed I I find that it's um it's positive in every way, and we are indeed dealing with the RB zone that acknowledges 45 foot buildings by right.

So there's no uh no relief being given here to allow these buildings to be somehow taller than they otherwise um would be.

So with that said, I would uh move to approve subdivision 2025 0006 uh for 806 North Columbus Street.

I'll second.

All right.

I have a motion by Vice Chair Koenig and a second by Commissioner Dubay to approve the subdivision.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries six zero.

And uh Madam Chair, I move to approve development site plan 2025-0030 for 806 North Columbus Street.

I'll second that as well.

Okay, I have a motion by Vice Chair Koenig and a second by Commissioner Dubay to recommend approval.

Wait, to approve, pardon me, the development site plan.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Motion carries six zero.

Thank you.

That brings us to Docket Item 6, our discussion of the Housing 2040 master plan.

We'll see if it works.

Thank you.

Good evening, Chair McMahon and members of the planning commission.

My name is Tamara Yovovich, and I'm with the Office of Housing.

I'm here tonight with our dep with our director, Ellen McElbane, uh, our landlord tenant relations division chief Mary Horner and my colleague Chris Doe.

Um there are four of us tonight here, but um I just wanted to share that there are many uh minds and hands involved in the housing 2040 process, and we wanted to recognize that both within our office and within the Department of Planning and Zoning, DCHS, the Health Department, and the Office of Climate Action in particular.

Nancy, is there a trick to the clicker?

Persistence.

Okay.

Thank you.

The purpose of our briefing tonight is to bring you up to speed on our housing 2040 process, which is the process to update the city's master plan as part of that, though we'd like to also take a half step back and just explain what steps we took to get to this point in the process, how we approached engagement in particular, how we've developed our principles and goals and the projects that have helped to inform the recommendations and strategies in our plan.

Also, we wanted to take a couple of opportunities today to promote our draft recommendations and strategies, which were released for public comment on February 20th.

We have a couple of different ways for the public to engage with those, both through an online platform.

They can also submit an email or submit a voicemail through through our platform.

Next slide, please.

So for any members of the public that are online, we just wanted to provide a friendly reminder of the purpose of a housing master plan.

The purpose really is to help address housing needs in the community.

On a personal level, it might be to help identify ways in which we can help expand affordable rental opportunities or first-time homebuyer opportunities.

It might provide an opportunity to expand tenant protections, look support look at ways in which we can support our older condominium communities or expand housing choice at a city, kind of more official level, though, that city housing master plan also helped to inform decision making both at the planning commission and city council level.

It helps to inform our land use recommendations and our small area plans.

It helps city council make decisions on our budget, what housing programs or policies should be supporting.

And it also helps to develop to inform the development of new tools, whether they're financial tools or regulatory tools.

Next slide, please.

We have a current housing master plan.

It was adopted by city council in January of 2014 and it's codified in the zoning ordinance.

Next slide, please.

So this shows our timeline.

We started back in 2024 with a lot of internal research and kind of introspection.

We kicked off publicly with our kickoff meeting in September and our quantitative housing needs analysis, which established that kind of numerical foundation for the lot of the work that we uh that we did.

We'll talk a little bit about our engagement process in the next slides, but it's taken us now to what I'm what we're listly calling kind of spring of 2026.

So I was a maybe a little bit ambitious of me considering the snow this week.

Um but we had our February 28th community open house just this past Saturday, uh, which was really kind of the peak of our public engagement process.

Um and it was following on the footsteps again of the release of our draft recommendations just about a week uh prior.

The comment period for those recommendations closes on March 22nd.

So we encourage members of the public to provide us feedback because that'll help to inform the development of the final housing 2040 plan, which is anticipated to go to public hearing in June of this year.

I will note though that that our work will not be done at that point in time.

We're really considering that to be kind of just the end of phase one.

Phase two really is the implementation of the plan, which will consist kind of of a series of project as well as the development of a dashboard to kind of help us help us track progress.

Uh next slide, please.

Um sorry, next next one after that.

So, in terms of our engagement approach, really it was an all-hands on deck.

So every person before you tonight and all the folks in our office that have participated in our public awareness and participation process.

Uh, really, there were three different components to it.

The first was an intentional focus on education.

Um so our colleague Mary organized in October of 2024 kind of our education months, and we dedicated each week of that month to a particular topic.

There were webinars, there was information released online, and the intent there is to really kind of bring kind of everyone up to speed on kind of sometimes complex affordable housing terminology and definitions that we use, but also to familiarize Alexandrians with some of the programs and policies that either our office provides or some of our sister departments.

And then our engagement approach really had two strategies.

One was kind of a high-level approach to making sure that Alexandrians knew what we were doing and why we were doing it.

And uh the intent was to kind of capitalize and leverage uh engagement that was being done through different departments.

So we've been really fortunate to work hand in hand with our colleagues in neighborhood planning and a particular uh with the health department as well.

Um we would go to listening sessions, there were pop-ups, um, but then there was also more targeted engagement with stakeholders who might prefer kind of more uh more uh smaller, more intimate conversations.

Um we complemented this with our housing survey, and we'll talk a little bit about some of the findings and the approach that we uh that we pursued in analyzing that data.

And then our projects uh intentionally pursued uh engagement that kind of worked best for their scope and scale.

Um so my colleague Chris will talk a little bit about kind of the work group format that he pursued.

Um other projects um pursue different types of engagement.

There were more one-on-one conversations or conversations with um some of our advocates as well.

So the intent here was to have um as many different types of engagement was as possible to make sure that we were meeting the community where was most comfortable for them, and also to per and also to allow for it to be an iterative process because there is a lot of information to process.

Um I think the more engagement you have the bit the more that it builds on itself.

Next slide, please.

So, in terms of how we've been um how we've been learning and what we've been learning, um, we've been fortunate first and foremost to be able to build off of the experience implementing the current housing master plan.

So we have over a dozen years of experience implementing that that uh master plan, whether it's through the development of policies, whether it's through the execution of programs or the development of new partnerships.

Uh we've also been learning uh through our small area plans.

We've had three small area plans that have had very robust um housing components.

So our South South Patrick Street's housing affordability strategy, our Landria Chirilago small area plan, and and most recently our Alexandria West small area plan.

I will note that when we developed these slides, the Duke Street small area planning process hadn't been kicked off yet, but we've also been very engaged on that process.

In addition to that, there are a series of different um uh planning efforts uh that our colleagues have been involved with that we've been able to build off of those and those range from kind of our age-friendly plan update to the climate action plan, green building policy.

Uh, Mary Heads Up is our liaison for our legislative work with the Office of Housing, so our work is constantly being informed by updates kind of at the state at the state level.

Um, and then last but not least, we've been kind of working lockstep with the health department with respect to their community health assessment work and their healthy homes uh action plan.

Uh next slide, please.

So, with respect to our quantitative housing needs analysis, um, and and we've intentionally kind of added that quantitative part because I think it's really important that we also ground our recommendations in data and looking at trends.

It is certainly not the entire picture, but it is a very strong foundation to kind of build our work from.

Um, and what we've highlighted here kind of some of the points that we've been speaking to the community about.

None of these will come really as a surprise.

We've talked a lot a lot about these through our small area plans to varying degrees.

Um, some of the ones that are uh new perhaps are is our emphasis on looking at ways in which we can support our condominium communities.

About 50% of our homeownership stock are condominium communities, and many of those are aging and many of those are facing deferred capital maintenance.

So one of the new things that we looked at as part of this housing master plan was what kind of partnerships, um, what kind of tools can be used to support a very large portion of the city's housing stock that might not be at the forefront of everyone's minds.

Uh we also took a strong look at our demographic trends and uh Alexandria's population is is aging.

Uh the age cohort that's experiencing kind of the greatest level of growth are our seniors, um 65 plus.

Um so one of the questions that we ask ourselves are you know, what what kind of housing typologies in particular or kind of housing plus care models you know might might be able to meet or help address you know their their growing needs.

Kind of on the uh on the flip side of that, uh the age cohort that's experiencing the greatest level of decline are our 20 to 34 year olds.

So again, there are lots of questions that can be raised there.

Uh, what kind of housing typologies or uh what type of price points in particular might the city want to cons might the city want to consider if that is a population group that we want to continue to retain in the city.

And then certainly last but not least, looking at you know high levels of housing cost burden and particular how that impacts our lower lower income households and workers that really serve kind of as the foundation of our economy in particular our our service sector.

Next slide, please.

And then this is sort of our our context slide and uh items range here from the fact that we are obviously a Dillon Rule state.

We only have those authorities that have been granted to us by the state, and those have implications for uh the housing tools that we currently have kind of in our in our toolkit.

I think we talked a little we we talked a lot actually about our aging condominiums, but our rental housing stock also faces a lot of challenges, and that's one of the data points that's informed the work that my colleague Christo has done.

Um then all of our obviously city departments and city plans face a similar challenge when it comes to kind of scarce, scarce resources.

Um in the briefings that we had with planning commission, I think it was also really helpful to make note that there's also a larger context here, and what and that is that regional incomes have simply not kept up pace with the growth in housing costs.

And I kind of refreshed my memory a couple of days ago and was looking kind of at the change between our incomes from 2000 to 2025.

And incomes have grown by about 100%, which sounds like a high number.

But then you compare that to the increase in housing costs in Alexandria.

And you know, rental costs have increased by an additional 80 to 90% on top of that, and our assessment values have increased by over 180%.

So it really helps to kind of uh put a well highlight with a highlighter the challenges that that differential in income growth and housing costs, what kind of challenges it can create in a community.

Next slide, please.

So this slide is a uh is a broad summary of the topics that we have heard.

Um I will note that uh we were there was a very broad range of issues that came to our attention.

In particular, here you'll note that the availability of housing, the cost of housing, concerns over rent increases, um, or generally uh increases in housing costs because renters are impacted by far more than just rent, and they're impacted by the increases in utilities and the application of additional fees, uh the lack of renter protections in particular as they apply because we're in the state of Virginia, concerns over building conditions, and uh general fear of displacement, whether it's displacement of your own family or concerns that your children may not be able to remain in the community or your aging, your aging parents.

Um there was also uh also a component of the feedback that we got that expressed concern over the adequacy of infrastructure in the city to support additional density with respect to providing adequate parking, adequate open space, um public infrastructure and school as well.

On the flip side, we also had a very strong voice that spoke to the importance of expanding housing supply as well to help moderate increases in housing costs.

Next slide.

So this slide helps to summarize the housing 2040 survey that uh that our office uh issued back in roughly November of uh, I'm sorry, that should have been November of 2020, November 2024 through January of 2025.

We had just a little bit under 1,200 responses.

And again, there was a very broad range of issues that were raised through the survey.

But what we can unequivocally say is that you know that the top, the top really six six concerns here were focused on the cost of housing, both on the renter side and the homeownership side and the availability of housing.

Um we also with intentionality uh asked individuals how concerned they were about these topics.

Um so these issues may not have impacted them personally, but if they felt concern for their neighbors, friends, community, this was an opportunity for them to voice to voice that concern.

Uh the concerns were most acutely felt by uh sort of the bookends, our younger Alexandrians and our older Alexandrians as well as our renters.

Next slide, please.

And that takes us then to our projects and our and our principles and goals.

Um the principles and the principles in particular kind of establish our values, kind of the lens through which we uh look at our housing 2040 recommendations and strategies.

Uh, next slide, please.

So, as part of the first step in this process, um there was some introspection.

We took a look at our 2013 principles and wanted to make sure if they were relevant, did they still apply?

Were there things that were missing or things that had had changed that might that might warrant amendments?

So you'll see here with principle number one uh speaks to kind of three major components that will help advance and support diversity in the city.

And we define diversity here broadly to encompass everything from socioeconomic diversity, cultural, racial, and generational diversity.

And those three components really are supporting housing stability, anti-displacement initiatives, and really housing access to housing options in the city.

Our second principle speaks to the importance of health.

We all know that the quality of your home impacts the health of your community and your personal health.

Um the third principle speaks to all the variety kind of of tools and approaches that are critical to helping to preserve and create affordable housing in the city, and in particular here the emphasis is on leveraging city dollars, kind of stretching those city dollars to the greatest extent possible.

Number four, we thought was really important because it's recognizing that interconnectivity between housing and pretty much all components of our the functionings of our city.

So line how we use land, the resilience of our economy, how we use transportation and maximize transportation, public transportation in particular, how sustainable we are and how prepared we are to deal with climate issues, and then certainly again the well the health and wellness of our community.

And the fifth one again is recognizing the importance of the housing master plan being prepared to address current needs, but in addition to that, our future needs as well.

And and as part of the plan, we'll be highlighting how critical it is that we are also able to pivot.

15 years is a long period of time.

Housing priorities could change during that period.

So the intent is to really have a strategy that is uh that is nimble and can kind of change course as needed during that period.

Next slide, please.

Following are the principles, which again are those values statements.

We established 10 goals.

Uh these goals again kind of build off of the 2013 goals, but in particular the ones that I wanted to highlight that are new are uh an emphasis on our tenant protections and supporting our uh tenants and landlords.

So Mary will have a chance to talk about kind of the breadth of work that has fallen um within that uh within that umbrella.

Uh we talked about the importance of our condominium communities and then also the importance of um health and wellness and kind of tying housing stability to economic mobility.

Um we will have uh we know that these goals are uh somewhat long.

We are going to have some shortened versions of them so that the goals are more relatable to the public.

So thank you for that.

Thank you for that suggestion.

Um and I think this takes us to our project slide.

And the intent, yeah, if you if you wouldn't mind navigating to the next slide.

Um so the intent of this is uh to show to showcase kind of the the breadth of projects that fell within um the housing 2040 umbrella.

We are just going to have um we're gonna highlight two of these in particular, uh, our landlord tenant work and our affordable housing preservation work, but we're happy to answer questions about any of the other um uh uh projects uh after that.

So I wanted to pass it on to my colleague, Mary.

So I I'm not sure if you all have had a hi, Mary Organized.

Or the record, thank you.

Um I don't know if you all have had a chance to read through them yet, but I'll just quickly highlight some of the recommendations or just from a very very broad perspective.

Um I don't know, you probably have read the last version of the housing master plan, but there were tenant protections, tenant the tenant landlord relationship was not included in that at all.

And so this was kind of a fresh start for us.

So um what we identified through our engagement was um the need for educational resources.

We have dozens, if not hundreds of tenants calling us every single month.

Um, sometimes it's with a dispute that they have, but oftentimes it's just seeking information, seeking resources, um, not understanding the the landlord-tenant relationship or the lease that they've signed, um, and so trying to help empower residents to understand better the agreements that they are signing, what they're um agreeing to when they rent, um, legislative advocacy as well.

A lot of residents who contact us expect that we can take actions that we simply don't have the authority to take right now.

Um, and so trying to align that better so that we can assist residents and what's through um legislative change.

Some of those are um advocating for housing stability, eviction prevention, transparency when it comes to fees.

We have a lot of residents who don't even understand the ledger that they sign, they can't even get a ledger, um, and a lot of the fees are they don't understand trying to address housing disparities, whether that's through anti-retaliation, um, fair housing advocacy.

Um, we also have recommendations that discuss uh or address eviction prevention.

Although our department does not oversee the court system, we do um have a vested interest in making sure that uh we fight displacement or try to support those the um the advocacy that's already occurring around eviction prevention, there's courthouse outreach and participating in that.

We also have uh recommendation on strengthening landlord and tenant communication and relationships.

Oftentimes that is a part of the problem and why residents are reaching out to us.

It's been a um whether it's a breakdown of communication or a misunderstanding, but trying to help residents just facilitate that conversation with their landlord is a big role of that we play.

Um, and then expanding housing affordability protections and anti-displacement strategies.

I have a feeling this is going to be one that continues to develop as we have more legislative authority or as we pretend potentially have more funding or less funding, but trying to figure out how do we um fight displacement within our city as we also have um additional development.

And then um trying to advance housing stability for vulnerable populations that uh could that that's a right broad variety of people, but how do we support those who are uh most vulnerable, and then strengthening our community outreach.

And I think really trying to ensure that as we continue our policy development and our programmatic uh development, that we are in uh including the community's voice and their um input as we evaluate and continue to adjust.

Okay.

Thanks, Mary.

Um to talk a little bit about preservation.

Um I guess the starting point for this uh goal and recommendation and the recommendations, um we looked at the data.

So we know in terms of affordability, we're losing market affordable housing, which is to say housing that doesn't have affordability commitments.

Um so looking at the data, we've gone down from 18,000 uh units in 2000 down to 9,800 units in 2013 down to 6,900 units that are considered market affordable to 60% of area median income.

Um to Tamara's point, we're seeing that housing costs are outpacing income in the city, which is making our housing less affordable.

So on that side, we um have on the affordability side of preservation, um, we see that there's a need to preserve market affordability on the committed affordable side, so housing that has affordability commitments.

Um we have done our well, we have done an inventory of our committed affordable properties with LITEC funding, um, with pro with half contracts, project-based vouchers, um, and other forms of affordability commitments, and we have 2100 units at risk of expiration over the next 15 years.

Um, and then another key component.

So when it comes to preservation, we're looking at affordability, livability.

Um so we looked at, and what we've heard a lot from residents as well during our housing survey with Mary's engagement and landlord tenant that a lot of our affordable housing is older.

Um you're dealing with habitability issues like mold, pests, um infrastructure breaking down, heating, cooling.

So we recognize our capital needs that are being deferred a lot of these properties.

Um the third issue that we've heard from property owners was um issues with financial viability.

So a lot of our affordable housing, obviously, because it's affordable, they earn less in revenue, so there's less money to handle a lot of maintenance, deferred maintenance projects, capital maintenance.

So those are the three kind of key data points that we've been hearing both quantitatively, qualitatively.

Um then we in terms of our process, we did a lot of talking at first, we did research with some of our key stakeholders, we talked to other jurisdictions, um, and at some point we recognize the importance of having everyone hear each other in the room.

So we brought together some tenant advocates, um, property owners, funders, um, nonprofit developers.

Um we wanted everyone to hear each other's perspectives and come up with solutions and vet solutions that would work for everyone.

Um so we had uh started with a preservation panel in April of 2025.

Um we had a property owner meeting, uh, which was very informative just because there's such a wide breadth of issues depending on the condition of the properties and also the size of the properties.

So we have a recommendation that um came from that related to supporting our small property owners, um, which who have very different issues and um capabilities versus our large landlords.

Um and then uh we had a work group where we brought a lot of these same stakeholders back together and talked through recommendations that we've seen based off what's we're hearing from each other, from other jurisdictions, um, and that's led us to I'll give you a highlight of kind of our recommendations.

Um that led us to our recommendations in terms like the biggest one I would say is exploring tax relief as a financial tool.

That is something that a lot of property owners um are find desirable um and impactful.

Um that could be used for rehabilitation.

Um we're gonna have it focus on um preservation of properties, both condition-wise and affordability-wise.

Um so let's say you know someone wants to rehabilitate a property, we can provide it um within our authority under city ordinance.

Um we could provide a time-limited tax abatement or tax relief in exchange for rehabilitation and affordability commitments.

Um another key finding um is really to uh redevelopment.

So we as a city would um an office hope to support uh maximizing replacement of affordable units that are being redeveloped.

So if it's market affordable or committed affordable under 16%, we would work with applicants and property owners to figure out what options they have and what tools they can tap into to try to replace these on a one-for-one basis with a goal of replacing on a one-for-one basis to minimize displacement of residents.

Another key one is related to re what we want to also create a rehabilitation pipeline, solicit more projects, reach out to property owners to assess what capital needs they have and figure out if there's ways that we as a city can help improve the livability of our building of our affordable housing.

And missing one key one here.

Oh, acquisition, yes.

Um so we have strategic preservation priorities that we're kind of laying out uh what we're looking for as a city.

We're looking to help our partners, namely like our nonprofit um affordable housing partners preserve, acquire and preserve properties that have deeply affordable housing, have conditions that impact residents and their health and well-being or our strategic assets to the city.

So a loss of if these properties were to lose their affordability or be redeveloped or lost in any other way would have a significant impact on the city.

So those are some of their key highlights and happy to answer any questions you have about preservation.

Thank you, Chris.

Um so this leads us actually to uh to the uh end of our presentation.

I think we just have one more slide after this.

Um but I think it's really helpful to hear from Mary and Chris to just to get a flavor of the breadth and the depth of the work that's kind of happened under the under the housing 2040 umbrella.

Um and I think the next slide uh just includes the the QR code that takes you directly to our plan website.

Um again, the comment platform is housed on our website.

We encourage folks to uh provide comments through March 22nd.

Again, you can also email comments to us and submit voicemails as well.

So we're happy to answer any questions at this point.

Thank you all so much.

Um questions, comments, observations.

And I want to kick off.

I can st I can start.

I'll start.

Um my first question is do you have a staff lead to assign to every goal?

Like an individual person?

Excellent.

Excellent.

Yes, our huge staff of our huge staff.

Our huge staff of 16 have all been fully activated.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Um it's it's tongue-in-cheek, but um, but the observation that I make is just that um I'm really impressed with how much is trying to be accomplished in the housing master plan here.

Um there's a lot of different ways that housing touches us, and we're obviously the planning commission and we deal with land use approval processes and land use compatibility questions, but you have to deal with people's health, safety, and welfare in a much more direct way.

Um the provision of housing and the way that we put laws together at the state level and the local level, and the way we put resources together really do touch lives directly every single day.

Um and and your your deep understanding of that is reflective in the work that you've provided here.

Um I have some questions and and some observations.

So these are probably in the weeds a little bit, but one of the areas of um goalslash recommendation.

There's there's two that popped out in your descriptions and in the notes here that I wanted to connect.

One is this um striving for housing stability for vulnerable populations, which we think about in many ways as there's a household in a house.

Is the house in okay condition, or do they have to do they have to leave it because it's not even safe to live in anymore?

Can they afford that house or that apartment?

That's another reason why some people have to have to leave um where they live.

Um and things that make people vulnerable populations, it's a touchy word, right?

But we can I I feel like from even from my my sort of background in transportation planning, there's not really a good substitute for vulnerable populations in a lot of instances.

So a lot of things can make someone vulnerable.

Another piece that you have in here in a separate section is the housing for seniors and persons with disabilities, and those are two vulnerable populations in a very large umbrella sense.

Um I like that we're coming at it from two different angles.

I think it'll be important and it will continue to be important because so much of what you're doing here is acknowledging vulnerability because the the differential speed at which prices of housing are going up and people's incomes are not going up, that's creating more vulnerability.

It's just one more piece of that increasing of vulnerability.

But I'd also like to think that when we're designing our housing solutions with the development community in partnership with us, sometimes they're literally our sort of affordable housing partners, sometimes it's just the private sector development community at large, but that we're doing our best to get them to produce a product that's decreasing vulnerability.

And Tamara heard me, I I got to I got to stop in at the open house and engagement this pack past weekend, and and she allowed me to bend her ear a little bit on the concept of universal design and talk to me a little bit about the challenge that we have faced in the past in getting the development community to really take that seriously because it if we were to implement principles of universal design which would specifically combat the mismatch of vulnerability with people's ability to be housed in a much broader way.

It could let people age in place much more literally.

They could stay in the in the unit that they've been in for a long time.

Um but there are costs associated with making units accessible and maybe applying universal design features.

So I wanted to just flag that as when we think about how development comes to us and how we weigh in on that development, um, there's only so much we can ask for, there's only so much we can require, but there's also the ongoing conversation about what you know we we'll we'll have the the presentation about how the unit mix is the right unit mix and that kind of thing.

But that's strictly able-bodied households, and the the ratio of accessible units that they have to provide is two percent.

And is to does two percent reflect the market for people who need units that are more accessible?

I'm not I'm not sure.

I'm not sure if that actually matches our marketplace, and if we're trying to tackle some of the things you described, like a growing senior population who may want a unit that is more like a fully accessible unit, I won't say is a type was type A unit, um, maybe something not quite that would still suffice, but that sense of the population that's growing, which you said was 18% or 13 13 percent.

13%.

Um that's not 2%, right?

So it's like a bit of a making sure that as we're continuing to talk to the development community, there will obviously be a limit to what we can require, but also a benchmark to say this is the this is this is the population you're building for.

Um, and and the things that benefit seniors who are trying to age in place are also things that benefit children and families with with different ages and abilities in in amongst them, where you might have some people who fit that nice neat mold of able to do anything, but you'll have younger and older who are of differing abilities.

Um that's I think it's a really interesting piece because it crosses over multiple goal areas that you're working under and and recommendations that fall under those.

Um I also one last thing before I'll pass it pass it on.

I wanted to ask, because in the context of thinking about developing or facilitating development for the populations that we're growing today.

So, say we don't have enough senior senior housing, so how are we gonna get more of it?

Um one of the things that comes to mind to me is the experience we have with the elate, and that that was an independent senior living building that was designed and built in the Bragg Metro neighborhood, but then apparently just didn't hit the market right.

So it couldn't, I don't know, it couldn't pencil, it didn't it didn't, people didn't move in, and then it ended up in this other circumstance where now it's owned by a different entity and being used for a slightly different population.

Um so I'm curious if there are any takeaways, not on the sort of ladder transaction piece and how it's being used today, but more on the project that was in theory is aimed for a market that we have but couldn't meet it.

If there was anything that we saw sort of on the outside of that of that all happening, and I I don't know if anyone has any um any thoughts about that, but I was just really surprised by by how all that transpired.

So, Helen McElvain, um I will say I think that's a fascinating question when city council and planning commission approved the project, it was and we were able to negotiate nine affordable units on site.

I think what appealed to us and made the project different was that it proposed it was going to be independent living, but it was going to have elements that would allow people to remain in that home for a longer period of time, was going to provide meals.

It was going to have concierge service to help people schedule doctor appointments and get them there.

And possibly because of economics, possibly because the lease up was slower than maybe the original developer had anticipated.

They weren't able to stick with it and deliver on that.

And so they they added some elements, a couple of meals a week and things like that.

But I will say that it just, you know, I they also told us that several other, you know, we had this whole spate of senior um housing projects, and I guess they all got delivered around the same time.

And their price point was higher, so people made other choices or went to places that had other amenities or services built in.

So I I think I think there were, as there always are, a confluence of different things that all came together.

Um but I I think you know, what was originally anticipated by us all didn't materialize in that way.

I think it's actually being put to a very good use now, uh, both to meet ARHA's immediate need to relocate people, and they've been able to do that from Laudre.

Um, but also to for both the original residents who moved there as well as for uh residents of LaDre provide a very an increasingly robust, you know, group of programs and you know, I think communal activities to help develop that new community.

But but I think it's it's an interesting, you know, what are the elements that people need to um allow them to stay in a place and and be successful?

And you know, for us the the meal program, we said, well, people if you have a couple of square meals a day, you can sort of fill in.

You know, what are some of the activities of daily living that really help people and obviously having access to transportation on site, all very important.

Yep.

So thank you for that that description, and I agree.

I think the connected challenge is the more we try to pack in to service provision that comes through housing, the more potential pitfalls we run into because of whether it's like the compatibility with the market at the time, competition with other types of product, but it seems like that's part of this.

It's just a complex package that they're trying to deliver.

Well, one of the things that we have begun work on, but we're going to be obviously continuing as part of our phase two, is this whole issue of senior housing plus care.

And you know, when you look at the ever increasing cost to operate it, the challenges of providing care, staff shortages in providing that care.

I mean, there are some very big, hard and probably expensive challenges.

And our state is not one that allows housing and you know, Medicaid and other things that might be available in another state does not allow those to be combined to possibly you know uh create enough resources.

So it's it's it's a challenge both for our community, but I think society at large.

I think the city's done some creative things.

I think our you know uh our ADU policy is one way.

Um we didn't talk about this statistic, but is it it's eight or nine thousand homes in the city that have a person in the household or sixty-five or older?

And so we don't have a lot of good options or affordable enough options, it kind of locks in homes.

If people had a place that they could move to, uh they might be willing to sell their home, but instead they're kind of locked in place too because they can't afford and there's no there aren't enough places to go.

But ADUs potentially provide an avenue where someone can create their um accessory dwelling unit, stay in their community on their street, and someone else can live in the house.

So I think it's going to take a lot of different things to uh crack this nut more.

Excuse me.

No, please go ahead.

Statistics on how many ADUs have been built since I think the last we heard it was like 85.

We're up to 96 now.

96, yeah, yeah, yay, really, for the city.

Because although they're not committed affordable per se, they do offer also a more naturally affordable option.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

No, thank you for the question.

Yep.

Commissioner Dubai.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

At the risk of following you down into the weeds, I have a couple of similar questions, I guess.

Um but first I want to say thanks for the the work.

You guys did an incredible amount of work on this.

It's obvious that you took a lot of pride in it, and it's quite a product.

Um you should be proud of it.

Um I did it um like you I had a chance to go to the open house Saturday morning and spend a little bit of time there, and that was very well done, and I and I learned a lot there too.

Um questions uh in the timeline you the dashboard is mentioned.

Is that a public accessible dashboard that we could track how this is?

It will be when we create it, yes.

So that's a good thing.

That was my question.

Yeah.

Okay, cool.

Um then further on a couple of questions about condos.

What was the 50 percent that that you threw out there?

So just under 50 percent of our homeownership stock are condominium communities, so it's roughly 20,000 units.

Okay.

And we've added a lot of those in these office conversions over the last couple of years.

So we have added some.

I mean, I think the primary concern, honestly, are the are the older condominium communities that are 50-60 years old.

So you got in the one slide you talked about how do we support these aging communities in the condo communities and the infrastructure, and it's mostly capital.

I mean, is that something I don't even know what you could do?

You can't you can't just throw money at it.

Although they would like that, I'm sure.

Well, well, we won't be answering.

We won't be throwing a lot of city money at it.

But I think what we're trying to do first of all is through our regular um governance training programs to make sure that uh more people both on boards and who live in these understand some of the complexities of what it means to own and run a condo.

And also to help boards make the kinds of very complex financial and uh other decisions they they they have to.

But um, you know, the law now allows condominium associations to borrow money.

And so one of our thoughts is that you know, we would like to work with state agencies uh to maybe create uh more um advantageous uh financing projects of products so that you know condos could make use of that, but would have boards that were trained to you know manage the projects and and and also uh potentially a place where the city possibly could be is in um helping the community do that reserve study that would guide what are the priorities.

But but clearly the events a few years ago in Florida, I think has brought attention to all of this that you can't have uh have an association that just decides they're not going to address their deferred maintenance.

It's important to everybody, and it it definitely impacts affordability because this is now the typology that offers the greatest path to home ownership in the city.

I think at our presentation on the budget the other night, the average you know uh sales price is about 450 or $60,000.

So and and you know, obviously condominium fees in the older buildings are very high because they face a lot of deferred maintenance.

Well, it's not thank you for that.

Um that leads me right to my next point.

The condo not all of them are because they deferred the cost.

A lot of them is because the associations are being set up to fail when they first get into the buildings when the builder still has control and they sell half the condominiums and then more than half or whatever the number is, then they turn it over to the association.

But prior to that, they sell all these units and they artificially lower the HOA fees, and when the association takes over, they find a big gap.

Um I'm speaking from personal experience because that's exactly what happened to us three years ago.

Our association has a tremendous gap because of the developer, for whatever reason, that they were artificially low, this is my opinion.

So I don't know if that's something that can be studied, looked at, or prevented.

Um I mean, our our fees have gone up to the other.

That handoff between the developer and the association, that was one of the things that the State Commission identified as a problem and requiring more.

I I might think that the reason that happened is because during that point in time, the developer is paying the fees for all those condos that's still up.

So it would make sense that they would want the fees to be lower.

And then, you know, as the as the systems I mean, yeah, I I'm glad that she mentioned that part of it.

But yeah, that's that's what's happened.

Um we we weren't aware of that phenomenon in particular particular that the fees go up, but we do do know over time, obviously they they go up.

Well, I can assure you they go up.

Um and lastly, you talked um in the topics of concern about the adequacy of the infrastructure, and I assume you mean lectures the electric grid, the water and sewer, all of that type of infrastructure, or were you talking more about city services like schools and public safety?

The comments kind of range from city services to transportation, school capacity, open space.

Okay.

And and uh yeah, I would hope us study would include the electric grid in particular, because we have an ongoing problem with Dominion with keeping our lights on and we keep adding to it, and their grid doesn't get any better.

So not sure if that's something you guys could even look at, but just a comment, I guess.

But thank you guys again for your work.

Thank you.

Commissioner Keeny.

Uh thank you.

Ms.

Chair.

Um just uh uh a quick overview acknowledgement along with everyone else in business.

I continue to be amazed, I have been for the for the relatively long period of time now that I've been watching you all work from back to before the previous plan that you're now updating, that the the sort of breadth of the challenge, the complexity of it, but also this sort of amazing level of organization and intent and skill that you all bring to trying to address this whole range of challenges, many of which are just on the verge regularly of being overwhelming, and all of which are diabolically complicated, and most of which are resistant to making the kind of productive change that we all want to make.

So I think your effort really is both kind of astounding in how intense and efficient it is and pretty heroic in the fact that it continues to be something that on into the future is not going to be something we solve and then walk away from.

It's just sort of an eternal challenge.

Um as I look at this plan, um uh one of the things that I'm most excited about is that um some of your bubbles at the very beginning about the kinds of things that the Housing Master Plan plugs into now includes another tiny little bubble called the Green Building Plan.

Um I'm very excited that you all are engaging that.

And as I look at the the um the draft that you have of the goals to find um goal number 10, which is on page 20 of the copy that I have, uh, that seems to be uh immediately very well organized and very focused on a lot of very specific things that can be worked on from right out of the gate.

So a lot of the things that you all have already uh recognized, both the fact that you know this plan is there, you're working on it, that now OCA, that the Office of Climate Action is a partner with you, like planning and zoning and all the others that you work with in the city.

Um I just think that's uh uh uh really exciting as we move from the realm of our long-term effort to be a tiny part of actually getting the plan updated and in place, and now we can just sort of sit back with our hands behind our head and watch you all do all the work that it takes to actually bring bring it about that you're actually um uh doing that.

Um as I look at the way it's organized here, you know, you have the first piece is existing buildings, and the second piece is new development.

I'm thrilled with that because we spend all our time uh for the most part talking about new development, because that's for the most part our job.

But we know that the two percent of reality that is new development, and then the two percent of that that we actually touch with what we do is a vanishing, vanishingly small part of the whole equation.

And the other part is the other 75,000 buildings that are sitting in the city that are burning energy and that our environmental policies say things like we're gonna reduce energy use and emissions by 50 percent over some certain amount of time.

Well, 50 percent reduction in anything that's either half the buildings are gonna get 100 percent better, or 100 percent of the buildings are all going to get 50 percent better, and we don't have anything like a a process in place to actually get at that level of traction.

But where we are is that you all are now looking at ways that you can actually bring your skills to bear through the green building plan and through collaboration with Office of Climate Action.

So there are a couple of I wouldn't want to avoid going into the weeds with just a bunch of uh generalities.

Um Chris, your observation um on the um on the preservation part, and you mentioned the fact both that you have that there's an objective to sort of generate a rehabilitation pipeline.

Um that to me has great implications because it starts to talk about you're reaching as far out into the future as you can do is line up as many of these buildings as you can to get them organized and funded to do a series of projects.

So over time we're building what may start as a small number but ever increasing level of um uh traction and change on a larger and larger number of buildings.

Um and also this you you mentioned uh one scenario that involved tax relief as a way to kind of make a targeted tool that will get to a particular, in this case, perhaps possibly the smaller owners' particular need they have and offer um some incentive that is very specifically connected to the thing that you want, which is continued committed affordability and improvement of the operation of and rejuvenation of the building.

So along with that, it seems to me in your um in your goals here, there are a couple of things.

Um both a reference to the possibility of providing technical assistance and purchasing incentives for solar energy and battery backup on site, which again we're talking about existing buildings now, um, which I think is um is great.

So that's that's in that same level where technical assistance is something that's needed to kind of smooth the path and get a technology that's really affordable actually into the projects.

And if something like a purchase purchasing incentive can come from either volume, because you all can aggravate it, aggregate it, maybe aggravate it along the way as well, you can um aggro aggregate that, and that becomes a way that the price point comes down a little bit without a direct subsidy from the city and without the small bill business owner finding more money out of pocket to do it, right?

Um also I'd have a question for you about how much or I don't know how far you are with OCA on this, but um there's also the mention of using uh CPACE as a mechanism for financing.

And all I'm not really conversant with the details of CPACE at all, but I've just watched for the decade or so it's taken to actually get it authorized in the city in some fashion, and then I've listened for the last few years to the report to say, well, no, it hasn't actually been used literally much or at all.

So uh do you have thoughts yet?

And and if you're if you haven't addressed this yet, that's fine.

But are are you all either well on your way to figuring out how to actually use CPACE in in conjunction with OCA to get that mechanism into our projects?

Sure.

Okay.

Well, first, thanks for the in-depth uh feedback.

No, that's really great.

I think just to start off with, um I think there I also helped the sustainability portion of this.

Um we worked a lot in collaboration with Ryan Freed over at the Office of Climate Action.

Um we also work with the EPC, um, a little subcommittee that's focused on housing.

Um so we started with the recognition well and the charge from them to make sustainability, you know, a pl show how sustainability impacts Alexandrians.

Um I think in terms of housing, when we look at our housing and our affordable housing in particular is the one that's the least energy efficient, uh if it's the older it is specifically, um, and also has the greatest impact on residents because low-income residents are disproportionately impacted by utility fees.

So uh with that in mind, um that's kind of where sustainability played into our existing housing and also recognizing that most of our in most inefficient housing, um the ones with the highest utility cost, the highest burden um is our existing housing.

The new developments um have higher, uh have more sustainable housing, greener housing.

Um but to get to your question, so we've done a lot of this in conjunction with Ryan Freed, who is much more of an expert on a lot of these things.

But yes, we've had these conversations about CPACE.

Um I know that the feedback that we've received is that it's not as viable of a financial tool because of the the loan terms, the financial terms are comparable to market um and add additional constraints, restrictions and things like that.

So that's something that we I think we'll be looking at finding ways that whether it's to happen to that, to you know, have more conversations uh with about that at um the appropriate level, provide feedback, uh, but also recognizing that in terms of sustainability, there are other opportunities that could emerge um at the state and federal level.

Um I know that under the previous administration, the IRA, the inflation reduction act had some viable financial um uh packages and assistance for um a lot of sustainability improvements for um existing housing.

So uh that's just something that we are trying to proactively be aware of and help spread awareness for, and that's kind of where the technical assistance piece comes in is um you know looking at these tools, evaluating ones that are coming down the pipeline and um making sure that our partners can tap into those.

So hopefully is anybody else wanted to add Helen or Okay, hopefully that answered.

Oh, it's a good interest.

Thank you.

And I think that the bottom line is just you're fully engaged with all these pieces of the puzzle now.

Um and I think one of the things in my modest efforts to be involved in these kind of projects over the years, um, it seems that the part of the process that you all are the most familiar with is also critical, which is the actual um financial and operational and age reality of any given property, and the fact that when you want to do something like solar or any of these other fundamentally important operational changes to the envelope, it has to be done in a cycle with the overall financing and and refinancing capacity in the projects, and it has to be done in an integrated way.

And that deal that if you run through and you do a kind of conditional renovation and you complete it and you finance it and you move the people back in, then you go, well, wait a minute, why don't we put a little solar on this project while we do it?

It just won't work.

You just miss the opportunity.

All these things have to sort of be brought together and integrated.

So thank you very much for that response, and I'll um uh ask for a little more indulgence so I can ask one more question, which is um Mary, your your whole presentation is the whole realm that you're dealing with there, and I appreciate the fact that you all have brought the landlord and tenant rights associate and resources kind of issue to the fore tonight for some focus.

And it's another realm where I just watch all the pieces and I'm ignorant about most of them, but the import of all these things is so critical.

Uh just kind of an overall question of the and this goes to kind of our lack of authority or our limited authority in the realm of things that you you as a department are looking at that are potentially improvable in terms of gaining more authority.

What's on that horizon that is either both the most plausible, the most useful that you might be the most excited about that might happen sometime within the next matter of years rather than decades.

Um just kind of what's what looks good and what looks exciting at this point, if anything.

Yeah, no, I appreciate the question, and there's actually quite a bit that's exciting.

And in fact, right now, I think we are in a very um interesting legislative session.

I don't know if anyone is watching, but um housing bills are are really taking the this to the center stage right now.

There were about 178 housing related bills that were filed.

Not all of those were tenant related, but a lot of those that are passing and are uh making really good progress are tenant protection bills.

Um one of the ones that we're really excited about, because I think it actually will have a market difference in our eviction filings is the um 14-day payer quit bill.

So right now, if you fall behind in your rent, um basically you have until the fifth you are given a notice that says you have five more days, and if you don't pay within that time frame, we will file a lawsuit against you for eviction.

Um there are additional fees that are then tacked on.

Obviously, there's a late fee, there's your attorneys' fees, there's court costs, and the law has already passed and is likely to be signed by the governor um shortly, which will now move that time frame back nine days.

We know that gets attendants to a second pay period, and we do track data from the court.

We have a courthouse courthouse outreach program that tracks every single person that comes to court and the outcomes for those cases.

And what we have found is that those who come to court versus those who do not come to court, actually, those who do not come to court actually have better outcomes because most of them are able to pay before court.

And so our hope is that um with that one legal change that we might have fewer eviction filings, which then thinking about the downstream effect, fewer calls hopefully for um services, whether it's to our office or to DCHS for financial service um financial assistance, kind of relieving that pressure, because right now oftentimes those who work in tenant advocacy or tenant assistance, we run around with our head chopped off a little bit.

We wait until the end, right?

Oftentimes it's I am being evicted in the coming days.

And so if we can try and work our way upstream, I think that's really exciting, not just for our office, but for everyone who works in this space within the city, not just even city employees, but our nonprofit partners, those who are really invested in this work, but um again, it's you we're dealing with those who are in distress who are um often going through a really hard time.

And so if we can kind of alleviate some of that stress on them, it it's has downstream effects on us too.

Um another bill that I think will could really change how things operate within the city that is also likely to pass, it's already passed within the House and the Senate, it just needs to be signed by the governor, would actually provide more authority to the city and to any locality within the city to enforce um habitability conditions under the VRL, the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act.

I don't know how excited the city attorney's office might be, but it would provide us again if we find that there are properties where there are uh systemic issues.

It's not just one unit, it's it's broader, and that code administration is not able to bring it up to uh to the condition we'd like.

This will then give us as a city the ability to take action.

Right now, the only action that is really available to a tenant in that circumstance is to file their own lawsuit in court.

And they have to pay their rent into escrow.

They need to put on a trial, they need to put on evidence.

And most um our to be perfectly frank, our legal aid is so overstretched that they can't take on these type of affirmative cases.

They're really focused on eviction prevention.

And so this is um kind of evening the playing field a little bit.

It's not necessarily putting um the burden on the city to take on any case, but to reserve our energy for those where we really think that habitability that there's conditions issue that warrant uh broader enforcement mechanism, and that would come in the form of an injunction.

So uh it's just again, there's more authority that that is kind of expected of us at this point.

When residents call us, they're often thinking that we have some ability to take this action.

Um, and so this would provide some some new authority that I think is exciting as well.

Um there's more than there's there's a lot of bills that have passed, but those are some that from the tenant advocate advocacy perspective we're excited about.

Right.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Other comments, questions?

Um we've got Commissioner Ramirez first, and then we'll do Commissioner Mayor.

Sure.

Um first um I also want to echo my fellow commissioners' comments that this was a very extensive um effort that the depth with which you all have been going into each of these principles and goals and thinking about ways to tackle all of these elements and and putting together the master plan is absolutely commendable.

Um I'm excited for it.

Um I'm excited for this update.

Um I think the last one was 2013, 2013.

So, yeah, so it's it's it's been a while.

Um, and I think a lot of our market really has changed.

Um I just wanted to highlight within um in in reading and reading through the materials and reading through the backup that you have for for each of your your goals.

Um one of the the key pieces I I felt I kept seeing over and over was um understanding the the and I think you know Chair McMahon had also noted the same word vulnerability, um, the very vulnerability, and we we illustrated as well, right, with uh the case of the Dre, um the vulnerability of a development plan and the being able to recognize that that that is a key element that on one hand in in our industry makes us so interesting.

Um, you know, every single development is a risk.

Every single project is not a guarantee.

It's not a, you know, you get the investors, you line up the money, you get all the funding, you put the shovel in the ground, you build the building, you build it, they may not come.

Um, and that's a really interesting element.

I wonder whether or not um the city has also considered like taking some of these cases that didn't necessarily go out.

And I know part of this is understanding some of the financial structuring of it, which may not be so readily available, but being able to do a debrief to understand what did work or what didn't work, what were the original components of the proposal that then didn't build success.

Um every time that I look at a development that doesn't quite come through the way that it originally was proposed, I feel as if like oh, there's a certain bit of this letdown that there was this vision, there was this idea.

And at the core of it, there has to be some element of good in there.

You know, it's not just about making the money.

Um, and especially too when we're talking about housing, right?

It's a very core element, the need for shelter, um, the the need for uh for human safety.

Um I I'm just curious to see if perhaps the city would consider even looking into a couple of these cases to see what didn't quite work.

What were those market conditions that ended up making it not being as successful as originally proposed?

Um and then the idea of sustainability, I actually feel that the sustainability question is much more with a capital S and much less on just the green sustainability, but even also understanding and thinking back to the 2013 housing plan when we were talking about um the goal of being able to build in the ability for um folks to be able to remain in their housing in place.

Um of those key elements, and you were highlighting it in here with um, you know, under under goal two, um the affordability, livability, and long-term financial viability of existing committed and naturally occurring affordable housing.

Um one of the most key elements, right, to have affordable housing is to not have to change.

Of course, we talk about built property maintenance and you know going on a maintenance plan, making sure you're taking a care of the structure on large scales, apartment building, landlords, you know, et cetera, but even for the the common, you know, single family or one or two-person homeowners for them to maybe tap into the city for any resources to understand how best can you take care of your own home.

The best way for us to maintain the stability of a city or stability of a community stability of our region is if there is a little bit less change.

Whenever there's change, there's always like that highlighted element of risk.

You can get better, it can get worse, you never know.

If somebody can remain in place, we reduce that kind of vulnerability and we increase that sustainability.

Um I I hope that, yeah, and and I I just really hope that we don't lose that goal as well to maintain that kind of element of sustainability for existing homeowners.

Um and then um uh through reading some of this as well.

I I feel like there's there's a lot of um the the perhaps, and maybe I'm I'm reading too much into it, but the mindset is going into kind of much larger quick scale acquisition, and I agree.

They have more increased supply, very simple.

Supply and demand.

It's a very simple economic relationship.

It's been the same for ages, and you increase supply.

You will, you know, if you have the same amount of demand, that price should go down.

It should increase the full affordability for everyone.

Um but I think we also have to recognize and acknowledge that very long life cycle as well for developments, right?

Just because we say, like, hey, we want to do this, we want to acquire or we want to build in maybe public-private partnerships to develop more housing.

That stock isn't come going to come online tomorrow.

It's not for another five, six, seven, maybe even ten years down the road.

We have to recognize that.

So it's this kind of synergy and your diagrams show it, right?

The synergy of all these different elements.

Um I think it's just really important to acknowledge and recognize that it's it shows the vulnerability of a given system.

We will propose, right, and and develop a master plan with the best mindset of what is now.

But as we can see, even from the plan that we have from 2013, some of the steps is already a little bit outdated to this update.

Um so, you know, it's it's I I think the effort is very, very commendable, um, perhaps giving you all the kind of grace and space to be able to allow a dynamic update, maybe more on a half decade, nearer term in some way, maybe better, who knows?

Some just market conditions are changing so much.

We see, you know, the the population demographics are changing perhaps on a more rapid pace, who knows.

Um and you know, I I'd love to be able to see like, hey, we're going to bring on more housing, more housing supply.

It will increase the um you know with affordability um for more folks in the city, but let's look at those population trends as well and make sure we're not outpacing ourselves and getting out over the fronts of our skis.

Thank you.

To you to your comment, Commissioner, we we've um intentionally built in uh sort of uh future regular reviews.

You know, we looked at what are the things that you know maybe we we didn't do either enough of or frequently enough, and I think that's one of the goals.

Um we we had a housing summit um several years ago to do sort of a mid-course check-in.

Uh and we did take some proactive steps, but I think I think that's a great idea to make sure, just as you say, we're really um uh uh addressing housing needs as they evolve over time.

And it is to recognize, I mean, this is a huge undertaking to have to do it on a very regular, it's a huge lift.

You know, so some some ways of like, hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, but maybe we're zhuzing up some other sections to really update it a little bit more can make the lift a little bit lighter for you all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Manor.

Um just kind of ripping off Commissioner Lymares' point.

The timeline, thank you.

So glad I have you next to me.

Uh the timeline involved is very long.

And I always take the opportunity, Helen, to thank you and your team for what you're doing in Chirilagua.

And I will refrain from getting on my horse about immigration and the importance of that neighborhood to our $1 billion a year visitor economy.

Um but that is exactly where affordable housing needs to be.

And what has happened, I thought you told me at one point there were supposed to be condos and rentals, right?

And the condo financing fell out.

Did I understand that correctly?

That that's right, Commissioner Manor.

The um the the project Sansei and Naja.

Um the the second building, obviously the first building is going to be completed in phases over this coming year.

So you'll see uh leasing activities starting.

It's really it is, it's wonderfully massive.

Yes, it's just exactly the way massive shipping and it's all affordable.

Um but so that's 416 units, and um that will be coming online in phases beginning leasing activities starting in April, and then for that building going through the first quarter of next year.

And um it is going to be all rental units from 40 percent AMI to 80 percent AMI.

And I think one of the really exciting parts of that building besides the affordable housing is there's going to be community space on the bottom floor, which will include city flex space, lots of offices that will be bringing services to people, um, a center that will provide youth activity um uh opportunities uh after business hours, which is one of the things we heard back in 2020 that there just wasn't enough of.

Um, and then uh uh a live food hub uh in that area.

The second building, you're right.

When we brought it to you, we anticipated it would be a mixed use building.

It's still going to have the um uh neighborhood health clinic um and they're looking at other community users, but what was to be 58 condominium units because of the market we're in and sort of the drying up of lots of both philanthropic and other money is going to instead be 79 rental units.

So um it's it's not a perfect trade-off.

I think there were many of us that were excited about having homeownership in the neighborhood.

I hope we'll have that chance in a different place, but it is it is just sort of reflects the times we're in, unfortunately, and I think some of our neighbors' concerns about you know making a big investment when the current situation is so so uncertain.

So but it's I think having 79 more units and again the same the same income mix.

And uh again, I'll just say to what the market is producing and your comments about universal design.

I'm only aware of one building in the city that has all units universally designed.

That's the way point.

And um that's an affordable building.

And the other thing that the market is not producing are family-sized units, and that is a requirement for affordable housing that we have large components of two and three bedroom units.

So when we talk about how you know who's being served and where our population is shifting, it's you know what what is what what's what's being produced and and who's being served.

So it's really disappointing to me because you know this would solve the affordable housing issue for generations, really, because real estate wealth can be handed down.

And uh it's really a pity that that piece didn't come together.

But again, you're right, you have 79%.

Well, we we have, you know, we've had our first um uh city-sponsored home ownership project on Seminary Road.

And I think that um, you know, I think it's been successful.

There's a small condominium building that's yet to be built there.

It's just been waiting for the the townhomes to settle.

And I think it's certainly something uh as Tamra showed, um, you know, there was desire expressed at every meeting we had about you know creating affordable housing and what can we do to help people you know achieve wealth.

So I I think we we definitely want to continue to look for homeownership opportunities.

Well, this is a massive amount of work, and again I congratulate you and your team.

We all work for Tamar.

Okay.

Well, all of you.

I congratulate all of you on what you're doing in Chiri Lagua.

Thank you.

But also this is a very important thing.

Well, more and more to come in Chirilagua.

Oh, really?

Well, um get together and talk about it.

There's a CLI project that will begin sometime this year.

And uh as well as some others.

So we'll get together and talk about that because I look forward to it.

It's super important to the city's economy.

Speaking as someone who employed a lot of people from there.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you very much.

Sure, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Manner.

Um other commissioners.

Commissioner Lenahan, did you want to say anything?

I know sometimes it's hard to get your a word in edgewise when you're remote.

You are still muted.

Try again.

There you go.

I'm talking anyway, even though we needed.

Um, I I like everyone, I'm just so impressed by how much work uh has put into the plan.

And the anecdote that I taught uh um told uh the staff last uh week was that I went by one of these signs and there was I don't know, six languages on the sign in terms of getting involved with the plan, and and to me it's like that's just the perfect little snapshot of the kind of um community we want to be that you're not only serving those who might obviously think to be participant, but that uh might not and and now can be because you've done such great outreach.

So um I like that notion of serving everyone.

So I look forward to I did I do have a couple of ideas.

I think that um like Steven, I immediately thought of of CPACE as a mechanism to um fund upgrades in terms of energy efficiency to existing buildings and uh the fact that it's then tied to um the the building is a as a tax uh assessment, it makes it a quite different um mechanism to to take on some of those things.

And so I would love to just think about whether we could connect with some CPAC financing um companies because I I think it can be done.

And I think the typical reaction is that the capital stack doesn't work, but I I think I think um there are ways to make it work.

So I'll I'll try to be in touch with you at some point about that.

That'd be great.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Lanahan.

Um I was reminded that I have I have one very specific recommendation.

And my colleagues on the Dais here will know this is not coming out of left field because I always have opinions on this topic, and that is parking.

Um recommendation four of bull one.

There's a strategy that reads continue to monitor car ownership across all housing types to ensure parking requirements are right-sized and do not constrain housing production or inflate construction costs.

And my suggestion is that this strategy be rephrased.

Um just take it for consideration.

You don't have to do this.

But I would I would say the the friendly amendment that I would make is that um we write it as something to the effect of acknowledge that parking requirements produce direct construction costs which can impact affordability or constrain housing production, period.

Because I don't personally think staff should feel obligated to monitor car ownership rates across housing, all housing types into the infinite future.

That's a lot of work actually.

Um it's a lot of work.

It's not just like how many parking spaces, but you're actually trying to figure out what cars people own, and I can tell you that's not as easy to do as as referring to the property tax registry.

Um I perennially take issue with the concept of right-sizing parking because I don't think there's a right size.

I think it's all a trade-off.

And parking costs money to build and maintain, and it creates one more piece of the equation that you're all dealing with to make affordable housing.

So I'm not saying that that there won't be parking at affordable housing.

I'm just saying don't set yourself up to somehow be expected to find the right amount of parking requirement for every type of housing that you're producing in every context.

And if you can if if we can flip that equation to just acknowledge the realities of how parking impacts housing affordability, then it fits under your recommendation four, which is explore opportunities to lower housing production costs.

It's much simpler.

Whereas the strategy starts to set you up for failure, especially in community conversation.

So I just think that might be an opportunity to flip it a little bit.

And that's the last weed that I will get into in the plan.

We've enjoyed all the weeds.

If there are no further comments, we can relieve the housing staff of their duties this evening.

Thank you again so much for the update and all the work thus far and all the work that will come.

And we look forward to continuing it with you.

Thank you.

And that brings us to other business.

Before we dive into commissioner reports, comments and questions and the planning and zoning director's report.

And that is Nancy Williams.

And she has graced us with being our what is this clerking, clerking our meeting.

And she used to do that all the time and has since moved on to other responsibilities.

Let me see here.

Am I first or are you am I first?

Either one.

Okay, okay.

So I just have some I have some bullet points, and then I'll also have some personal comments, and then Paul will have some comments, and I want to encourage any other commissioners to share comments.

So tonight is planning and zoning assistant director Nancy Williams' last planning commission hearing.

And she is retiring on March 27th.

Nancy started in planning and zoning as a principal planner in the long-range planning division, where she successfully led pivotal planning projects such as comprehensive updates to the waterfront and old town north small area plans.

Later, she was promoted to assistant director, tasked with providing oversight to the boards and commissions unit and the administrative services unit, advancing planning policies and organizational management initiatives.

Nancy was instrumental in the successful adoption of city policies such as zoning for housing, housing for all.

Fun fact, Nancy is the department's first assistant director.

She has certainly set a high bar for the next assistant director.

Nancy is the embodiment of professionalism, integrity, and dedication.

She has gone above and beyond to ensure that the Planning Commission and other planning and zoning bodies are informed, supported, and most of all in compliance with the law.

And you have done so much for so many.

So gosh, back in 2018, I had a baby.

And so what is that?

He's seven and a half now.

But he was scheduled to be born in the first week of November.

But he came in the last week of August.

So he was very early.

And as most of you know, we don't meet in August.

Sometimes we don't meet in July.

So what occurred was that I attended a planning commission meeting, not looking pregnant because I was I was in my second trimester, and then I came back with a baby.

And everyone was confused because this was not a body that I would normally just say, hey, I'm pregnant, hey, I'm pregnant.

Like it didn't happen that way.

So it was very confusing for most.

And I was, I had a baby and he was in the NICU.

And I was he was in the NICU for eight weeks before he came home.

And at that time, so we meant, you know, August 25th, he was born.

Um, probably September 3rd or something would have been our for our hearing.

Um so my husband and I were visiting the NICU, and I was pumping to generate, sorry, TMI guys, but just gonna do it, um, to make sure I had milk supply.

And when your baby's that small, you're doing this like every hour, every two hours.

It's very frequent.

So Nancy was the person who helped me figure out how to do this during our hearings because our hearings, especially then, were actually a lot longer than they are now.

Um we had a lot of items on our dockets that made us go into the wee hours of the morning.

So while my my son was either at the NICU and then later at home with my husband being fed by bottle, I was here and I'd have to take these breaks and go into either Nancy's office or some other office in staff's quarters with my iPad showing me the rest of the commission's proceedings live so I could follow the discussion and I'd pump for the 15 minutes or I forget how long it would take.

I'd do that, and then I'd come running back to the hearing and I'd come in and continue with proceedings.

And it just went that way for every hearing for months and months.

Um but Nancy was there to help me make it work, and it was a really important period in my um life serving my child who who needed me.

Um it meant a lot to me to be able to make that happen and to be able to continue to serve the community and feel like it was totally smooth and acceptable.

Um so thank you for that.

Yes, yes, please, Commissioner Manor.

Here we go.

Uh I'll share a personal story about Nancy.

Uh Nancy was, if I recall correctly, you were the principal planner for the waterfront, right?

Yes.

So she uh was on the waterfront commission at the time of the battle royal, as I like to call it, uh, that went on over the Olin plan.

And Nancy's buzzword was vibrancy.

And I don't know how many times I heard you say that or but it was like this mantra that just got and it was I always call it was the post-industrial wasteland of my childhood because there was nothing going on down there.

It was a place for tourists and dog walkers, and that was it.

You got to the bottom of a historic main street, and there was a Starbucks, and that's it.

You know, there was a trash vine covered chain link fenced in parking lot for the club, and their old horrid stucco building that had been sitting in soggy soil for decades and smoked in for a century.

Uh and that was it.

That was our waterfront.

That's our historic waterfront.

And Nancy was bound and determined that she was going to make it better, that we were going to pass the Ulm plan.

And I know for a fact that a lot of city staff took some really awful abuse from residents who were just vehemently opposed in a nasty way, really, to passage of the plan.

Which now you'll sit down there.

If I'm walking along between Barca here and Ada's here along that promenade, and thinking, and you were against this?

You sued the city to prevent this from happening.

And it's just unbelievable to me.

And it's it's such a huge hit for the city, and it is a large part of why we have this one billion dollar year visitor spend, and because it's so nice.

And I will tell the story I already told you is that we used to the commission used to go down to observe the wharf when it was under construction, because this was a time when the Olin plan had not been passed, and we wanted to go down and see, hey, wow, look at what's gonna run down there.

And we were walking back from, we would go on one of Charlotte Hall's boats, and we were walking back to King Street, and we walked past the place that is now Vola's.

And at that time, there it had been a uh furniture store, I believe, and then we had a hurricane, and they were wiped out, and they never came back, and the space sat empty for a long years and years.

And I'm not sure how, but Gary Baker, I think, gave the space to OHAF to run a like a volunteer given um driven gift shop.

So it was open sometimes and sometimes not.

And we were walking past, and I looked at Nancy, I said, you know, Nancy, that would make a really good restaurant space.

And Nancy was like, oh, the city would love for you to do that.

It was like so fast.

And I immediately turned around and I said, Well, I wouldn't do it unless it had outdoor seating, because the only place to sit outside in the city of the three-mile border of waterfront is a place that nobody lives here goes to.

The chart house, that was the only place to go.

And you know, bing bang boom.

Well, it wasn't exactly like that, but uh I opened the first iteration of restaurant at uh where Vola's is now, and thank God I got to sell it uh after the boat club and the city came to peace.

Um but I really you were really such a lightning rod for some real nastiness, and but the results are fantastic.

I mean, really, it's yeah, honestly.

The city owes you a debt of gratitude, really.

And I'm sad that you're leaving.

I mean, I've really enjoyed working with you so much, you know, because our results have been really good, right?

So sorry, uh Director Studder, we just bypassed you, but but you may go next.

If I may, thank you.

So uh I I want to take uh a little bit of time here uh to recognize uh uh what uh uh Nancy has meant to the to the community, uh to the staff, uh, and of course to me personally uh that I showed up in Alexandria a little over a year ago, and clearly I had a lot to learn.

Uh and so I knew uh uh I think maybe Carl did this on purpose.

He put my office right next to yours.

Uh and so I found myself often going just sort of right around uh sort of from one doorway to the next to say, uh Nancy, I need help with uh that was uh right a common way for me to start a conversation with her.

Um I need help finding someone who can do data analysis.

I need uh help uh finding someone who can uh sort of address uh an old plan issue.

I need to know more about this development.

Can you tell me who this person is?

Uh who is this uh sort of person, personality civic booster within the community, and can you tell me their history?

And Nancy is a um just a wealth of information uh but also uh uh uh uh wealth of generosity uh with the time she gives to people, with the mentorship she gives to people, uh, and the uh just the the patience she takes uh with people to uh to sort of get them used to things, to understand what they need to know uh and and help them on their way.

And so Nancy, thank you for for all you did to help me get set up in the in the city.

Uh folks may not know this, but uh write sort of uh Nancy's career didn't start with the city, so we were already the benefit of someone who is very skilled in what they do, uh, right, as evidenced by uh starting as a principal planner within the city.

That's not a title we give out lightly, and for someone to start at that title really recognizes that she came in already with a very high level of skill and performance.

Uh and then she contributed 17 years uh to the community, uh rising to the position of assistant director, uh a position uh right that had to be created for her just to just to give her uh a way to continue growing and and contribute her skills.

And uh, you know, one of the reasons for that is uh Nancy really sort of uh symbolizes a commitment to public service uh that takes a lot of dedication, it takes a lot of commitment, uh, and it really takes this belief that that local government has has a purpose, it's a calling, that it's something that people contribute their time because they believe that local government can make people's lives better.

Uh and uh Nancy's very sincere in that commitment.

You can see it in the hours of the day at which she's sending out messages.

Uh and it's not just because emails are important, but it's important because she puts the right people in the right places so that they can so that they can be successful, right?

Nancy's always looking for ways to connect people to opportunities uh and to bring people together.

Uh we mentioned some of the plans that she worked on, uh zoning for housing, waterfront plan, old town north.

These were not the easy ones.

Uh that uh I learned this lesson from an old mentor, and and I can uh write if I if I hadn't if someone hadn't told me this before, I I could have paid better attention and learned it from Nancy.

This this idea of you go toward the danger.

Uh that doesn't mean you're reckless and you dive into challenging conversations, but the danger is where the important stuff is happening.

And the only way to approach that is with a level of courage uh as well as a level of skill.

And that means you need to be able to listen to people, you need to be able to say the difficult things, you need to be able to convene the right conversations, the right people.

Uh and Nancy, time and again, that's what you were able to do, and that's why everyone always gave you the hard stuff.

Uh and uh as was mentioned, Commissioner Manor, you mentioned that uh there was a real benefit that came to the community, uh, that the experience people have.

There's more housing.

We mentioned over 90 ADUs have been constructed uh since zoning for housing passed.

Uh the waterfront plan, we spotlighted it in the small area plan implementation report.

The the millions of dollars of investment that came to the waterfront, and yes, it's money for economic development, but it's also pleased places people can go and they can enjoy.

Uh and a lot of that rests on uh sort of the the benefit of the work that you you put in for the benefit of the community, Nancy.

Um the the other thing is that we've talked a lot about Nancy's commitment to the community.

We've talked about her commitment to planning, uh the skill that she brought to it.

Uh but she didn't just do it for herself, she didn't just do it for the community.

That's something she also paid forward and got the next generation of staff ready.

That everyone who goes through planning and zoning gets mentored by Nancy.

Uh she maintains, and we're gonna have to find someone else to do it, the professional development guide.

So she goes through and catalogs whether you are a planner or an administrative professional or an engineer or a all the other things we have within planning and zoning.

She documents all of the professional development options that are available to you, whether that's conferences or seminars or tuition support, uh, hours of leave we put in, how we support people with professional credentialing.

Uh she works with people's career development plan.

She makes sure that uh performance reviews uh have career development goals included in them as they go through the process.

That it's not just the outward facing work she does, it's the inward facing work as well to make sure that everyone's the best person they can be and the best professional they can be.

It it really is pretty amazing to see Nancy at work.

Um and I think all of that is is all sort of you know, where I started this idea of public service, uh, and I think I'll probably conclude with this point as well.

That um uh it's resting in this idea that there's something more important to uh to the situation than me.

Uh and so if I can put in my time to make somebody's life better, I'm gonna do that.

And and that's something that Nancy brings to the job every day, and I I greatly appreciate it.

I sense that.

She's sick.

She deserves to go.

No, you just say right where you are, ma'am.

Thank you so much for all of the service.

There's all stand up and get a picture of the stand up.

But uh from the yes.

Yes, from the right to the thing.

Well, we need Holly.

Oh, that's fair.

Oh, yeah.

I'm sorry, I'm just gonna.

We have the seal in the background.

So we're gonna go just careful safe around all the line.

Yes.

You guys did a great job.

That was fun.

Sure.

I'm going off camera, so I got this head in the background.

Oh, we won't say that's pretty good.

We don't need all the voice.

That would have been kind of funny because one, two, three.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have so much enjoyed working with you all.

It's been a real honor.

I've learned I've learned a lot from you, and I just enjoyed you as people.

So thank you.

Holly, thank you.

Thank you.

I am too emotional to speak anymore.

I did not expect this at all.

You're probably the one who's your own.

I do want to say thank you from the bottom of my own.

Well, thank you.

All right, and I wish we were done, but that's not done.

We've got a couple other things to do.

Um, commissioners' reports, comments, and questions.

Are there any reports tonight?

I have one.

Okay, Commissioner Manor, and then Commissioner Dubat.

Uh the Waterfront Commission met last week, I believe.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh it's a good thing you're here.

Uh Waterfront Commission met last Tuesday morning, bright and early.

And we had an excellent presentation from uh Rob.

Oh man, I'm so struggling with names this week.

Um, Dave Robins, Dave Robbins, who is the pleasure boat um seat on the commission.

And he did a fantastic presentation about this really the poor condition of the marina, how uncompetitive it is with the newer ones at National Harbor at the wharf, and that we have no place to launch a human-powered watercraft.

There's no kayak launch, there's no place to put a paddle board in.

And there's also almost no tie-out for visiting voters.

Which is just absurd in my book.

And he reviewed the um the city commissioned a a um marina visibility study in 2017 that went nowhere.

And you know, I chaired the board of Is Alexandria, and I like to say that crown got nailed to my head because I am always thinking about the visitor economy.

And for us to we're we advertise ourselves as the port city.

And we we're clearly are not that.

You know, we don't we don't welcome people from other marinas, and there's a lot of activity on the river.

Now you can go and park at uh or anchor or dock at um bolas, but there are like four spaces there, and it just seems to me it's a really missed opportunity for the city to really increase that visitor spend.

And every time I have a chance with someone on council, I always say, you give visit Alexander whatever they ask for, because you know that's the antidote.

I say this all the time.

It is the visitor spend is the antidote to the endless for lease or the more desperate for lease or for sale signs you see everywhere.

And that is not going to change.

And we were very lucky to be one of the leaders in the country in conversions, but residential units need to have expensive services like schools provided.

So this is a big shift, and the city is very lucky to have Old Town to leverage and market and bring people here who spend money and leave, you know.

And uh so I really would like to see the commission.

Uh first of all, I'd like to anybody who's interested, I like to send Dave's presentation out because it's really excellent.

And it's just startling, you know, how we are the port city, and we have very we we we don't we aren't, you know.

So I would like to send that out to people because I think this is something I would anticipate the KIS commit if Dave is successful in getting counsel to do something about it, and I have determined I will help him in whatever way possible.

But I think you know the commission could play a role in this as well.

So I'm I'm very passionate about this, you might tell.

If you send it to Ted, he'll circulate it.

Oh, perfect.

Okay, great.

Thank you, Jody.

Very good.

All right, commission.

Commissioner Dubay.

Um just briefly, I I put a another report from our monthly R Hall meeting.

And if there's any questions about that, I also attach the PowerPoint they sent us or they presented to us.

Um they're also working on a five to ten year capital plan.

Um, and once that's it's only in draft now, they didn't want me to circulate it.

So once that's done, I'll get that out so you guys can get an idea of the development that's that they've got in the pipeline.

And um, I did hear that I believe at the last council meeting, they finally appointed the entire board.

So there should be some more movement there soon.

But that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you for that update.

Um Vice Chair Kennedy.

Madam Chairman.

Can I address a question or two to Commissioner Du Bay?

Uh thanks a lot for the report.

The fact that it actually comes out beforehand is startling.

I wish I'd ever gotten around to doing that myself.

So it's good to teal this.

I had just a couple of things that occurred to me.

Um with all the the sort of turmoil in the in the recent past, uh the tenor of the ARHA redevelopment meetings now are is it getting back to normal?

Is the new board and the temporary executive director is that all working out?

It is as good as it's been in the year that I've been on it.

Yes.

Um, what it was before when you were on it.

But when I first got on it, it's it wasn't like it is now trying not to say too much, I guess.

Sounds like an improvement.

But it is an improvement.

There's a lot more communication.

Um there seems to be a lot more um willingness of the both bodies to talk to each other.

Um but yeah.

That sounds good.

I mean, we'll see.

The the new board now will do more proactive on hiring the permanent CEO and uh in the nut in the report that they are interviewing for a financial officer, and so that they're moving.

That's good.

That sounds good.

Um thanks for putting a PowerPoint in.

There was uh some sort of event in construction on the North Building.

Um this is something that nobody got hurt or no, they were they were um they were pouring one of the floors and it the the sh the um shoring collapsed under it.

They don't know why, but it happened during the pour, which is odd.

Yeah.

Um my question was that uh I thought at first that they had pulled the the shoring out too early, which has happened in other places, but she said no, it happened while they were doing the pour.

And this is a construction company that's done it for years, it's never been an issue before.

They they didn't have the reason when they gave us this, but they were still looking into it.

So a dangerous event, but not one that's not a casual.

Nothing that nothing that slowed it down whatsoever and didn't hurt anybody.

So that's um and you got a uh a sort of design overview of Ladre here.

Um and this may be too far in the weeds, but what the original LaDre redevelopment project that that crashed and burned after five years of effort.

That first RFI process went through a whole examination of inviting development teams to propose solutions that are either rejuvenations of the building or new buildings.

Right.

And if I remember correctly of those four entries, only one of them was a rejuvenation, the other three were new builds.

And it was a new build selection.

Went all the way through the entitlements process as we all know, and then didn't didn't come to fruition.

Um of the things I recall about why the rejuvenation approach wasn't taken were kind of anatomical limitations in the building itself in terms of limited floor-to-floor height and limited corridor width.

Do you recall or have they presented in that level of detail?

Did they find solutions to those or were just living with the spruced up but not improved conditions?

The only thing they direct they talked about specifically was the corridor width and the door widths for the units to make sure they're properly um, they're gonna be able to achieve that.

But they said it, yeah, they can.

Um they talked specifically about that.

Um the other point you made about the ceiling height, they didn't they haven't said not that I recall, but they they did mention for sure that the the widths were accurate adequate in the halls and the doorways.

Well that's great.

I mean, I think it's just exciting that this project is back.

I mean, when you reported that that the sort of truck, and now the design is complete and it's moving forward, that's grand.

And the logic.

Yes, and I don't know if I print it out.

Um the logic of reusing the building is still I mean the fundamental soundness there of all that invested energy and all that invested carbon isn't getting broken down in landfill and creating it.

So the logic of and the inherent sustainability of reasoning existing buildings is important.

And the very last one was just they've got a slide here that includes Cameron Valley.

This uh uh this view is the existing correct.

Have they was there any update on when and how this project is?

That will be in uh 10-year capital plan.

Um I can't recall exactly what year they had it, but the big discussion now is the Duke Street corridor, and they're working with the Duke Street um transit plan group, and they're just making sure that anything they do is gonna reflect that.

So that's the same.

But this has reached the reach the top of the list of next development projects.

I can't say that for sure.

Okay.

But it's it, it's it's moving into the phase where they're gonna start thinking about what's the same.

It's being talked about.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Any other commissioner updates?

If not, we can go to our director's report.

All right, thank you, Madam Chair.

I apologize.

We don't have a written report uh for your docket tonight, but I can uh certainly highlight uh a few items verbally.

Uh so for folks who don't know, the proposed budget uh for the next fiscal year is out.

Uh I always encourage folks to track that process.

That's one of the most important things the council does in any given year.

Uh information can be found at Alexandria VA.gov slash budget, um, including a schedule of upcoming events uh as well as summary and complete information about the budget.

Um the next bimonthly community uh meeting in our bimonthly community meeting series will be held in two weeks uh on Tuesday, March 17th.

Of course, we'll be putting out the usual noticing for that.

Uh and for anyone tuning in tonight, it's a great way to get a look at what's coming up uh in the planning commission and council dockets in the month ahead.

Uh also uh I think at the next one we're gonna do a spotlight on uh uh transportation planning uh and the city's approach to transportation planning.

Um so that'll be an interesting one.

I think last month we did a spotlight on stormwater reviews.

Uh this is part of adding a 10 to 15 minute segment into these into these they're pretty snappy meetings, they're only an hour long, um, in which we cover all the the docketed items as well as do these primers on different things of interest, uh landscaping, transportation, stormwater, things of the like.

Uh in terms of dockets, uh document materials that are coming up.

Uh I know we had a lighter docket uh tonight uh in April.

It'll be a uh a little bit busier.

Uh I won't touch on all the items, but uh just four to be aware of two townhouse developments, one along Eisenhower Avenue called Eisenhower Point two, uh, as well as uh uh in Old Town at 300 North Lee.

Uh you all may remember you voted on in council approved uh uh approximately 70 pages of improvements to to commercial zoning in the city in December.

It was one of our commercial zoning text amendments.

Uh council is part of that action.

Also asked for staff to follow up uh on a few additional items, uh specifically uh uh more opportunities for uh indoor live entertainment, uh more opportunities for outdoor exercise, uh, and clarifying how we handle school trailers and making sure there's parity between public and private school trailers.

Uh so those items will be coming back for your review and recommendation uh in April.

Uh and then also uh just touching back on budget every year.

Uh as the planning commission, you all have a responsibility to review the proposed CIP for alignment with the city's adopted master plan.

Uh you'll be asked to review and make your recommendations to council on that in April as well.

Uh and then in May, uh the Potomac River Generating Station, the PRGS sites are tentatively scheduled to come back to you.

Um of course the CDD concept was a plan a number of years ago.

Uh and so as is common with these larger developments, the the CDD um uh concept plan, especially around phasing has been refined as they as they uh get closer to development.

So you'll be asked for uh modest amendments to those uh in coordination with uh reviewing the DSUP applications for blocks B and C, the first two uh uh buildings to go up, uh, as well as the open spaces of uh the waterfront park, which uh by its name goes along the waterfront and the rail corridor park, which extends uh sort of diagonally uh north and to the west.

Uh and then also before you will be a public project, uh renovation of the old town pool uh along Cameron Street near the King Street Metro is in for renovation, uh, and they'll have an application uh in front of you as well.

Uh those are all the items I had in my report.

Uh happy to take any questions.

Any update on um demo for PRGS uh demo for PRGS.

Uh so that would uh start after the development applications are approved and they've had a chance to secure their financing for construction.

So there's still that's still hanging out there for money.

Uh correct.

And that's not uncommon for a project of this size that people would work methodically through getting their entitlements before they have something real to show investors.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

If not, our last item is our minutes from the February 3rd public meeting.

Are there any comments, questions, or changes to the minutes?

And if not, I could entertain a motion.

Motion to approve the minutes.

All right, I have a motion by Commissioner Dubay to approve the minutes for February 3 and a second by Commissioner Manner.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Motion carries 6-0.

And do I have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

All right.

A motion by Vice Chair Kennedy to adjourn.

And a second by Commissioner Manor.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye aye.

And we adjourn at 9 33 p.m.