1. Calling the Roll. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Euille, and the City Clerk called the Roll; all the Members of City Council were present. New Business Item No. 1: Deputy Chief Corle of the Police Department made a report on the fatal shooting by an off-duty uniformed Police Officer at the IHOP Restaurant in the 6200 block of Duke Street overnight and noted how the investigation will proceed. 2. Public Discussion Period. (a) Debra Chandler, 6101 Edsall Road, said that joining her today were seven other residents of the West End, and she spoke about damage to vehicles and vandalism in their neighborhood in the West End by children and the costs to the residents and the condominium association, and she said the problem is escalating. She said there is no curfew for the children, they need to be proactive, and someone needs to be accountable for the children. Mayor Euille said he was sure the Police Department and City Manager's office would look into this. Police Lt. Gibson noted the reports of destruction and vandalism that have occurred and the increased enforcement. (b) Amy Slack, 2307 E. Randolph Avenue, said Del Ray is home to community building organizations, such as the Del Ray Artisans, whose art show lines the walls on the 2nd floor of City Hall, the Potomac West Business Association, and Del Ray Citizens Association and is home to individuals who volunteer for individual events, such as Art on the Avenue, the Halloween Parade and the Turkey Trott, and serve on committees and have earned a splendid reputation. She said the Council paid the DRCA high praise when it didn't make a controversy over a day labor agency locating in their midst. She said that under the Zoning Ordinance, Ace Temporaries is an allowed use, through a special use permit. She said that finding ways to say yes to business is what the Del Ray Citizens Association does. Even when Del Ray has outright said no, they have laid out a set of yes conditions. Ms. Slack said the land use committee works openly with applicants to find solutions and recommendations. Today Council will consider several items that DRCA has weighed in on, and they found a way to say yes and asked if Council could. (c) David Fromm, 2307 E. Randolph Avenue, said that two weeks ago, a ground-breaking ceremony marked the culmination of years of planning and the true beginning of construction that will result in 2,000 new homes and hundreds of thousands of square feet of commercial office and retail space. There is still haggling to be done, as it tries to figure out what the Potomac Yard Design Guidelines really mean, but it is possible to sit back and let the project proceed. He said that to do so is to pass up a golden opportunity for the City to acquire a substantial piece of land that could be used as open space, playing fields or a site for a future school. He proposed that the City give serious consideration to negotiating with the developer to reallocate or redistribute some of the approved development within Potomac Yard in order to acquire at least the minimum lane necessary for a school. He said the consequences of that are that it will be necessary to increase the density at some locations within Potomac Yard, it will mean building higher at some locations within Potomac Yard, compensating the developer for lost profit, compensating the developer for the land, and to avoid actual expenditures from the City's coffers, it will mean some increase in the amount of approved development - a density bonus. He asked Council to direct staff to determine the possible options for reallocating the approved development. He said he personally preferred the option to consolidate the development in the land bay south of the bridge by building higher at the end closest to the Braddock Road Metro Station, keeps the total development the same in that land bay. The increase in density will be modest and could be spread over the remaining land bays or concentrated in the town center. Having more people located in several smaller but key footprints might also help clarify how to maximize the value of a bus rapid transit system in the Potomac Yard corridor, or perhaps justify a new Metro station when the Potomac Yard Shopping Center is redeveloped. He said they need a list of sites that are acceptable to the developer and then it can perform the cost benefit analysis and make an informed decision. (d) Michelle L'Heureux, 1120 S. Alfred Street, Apt. 203B, said her statement is a collaborative effort by several of the residents of Hunting Terrace and Hunting Towers. She said they are tenants of one of the last affordable apartment complexes in Old Town. In December, they were presented a plan by the developer to redevelop the complex, which would involve the preservation of all units as affordable housing, with the placement of Terrace residents, in exchange for demolition permits for the Terrace and certain zoning variances for its redevelopment. She said that recently, they have learned that the deal is in jeopardy, as VDOT has withdrawn the Towers from sale, preventing Mr. Kay from obtaining the property and implementing Mr. Cecchi's plan. She said the residents at the Terrace who are facing eviction at the end of this year are left wondering what is Plan B. She said they are making two requests. One is that the Council make the redevelopment negotiations open to the residents of Hunting Terrace, Hunting Towers and to members of the public. She said they read about public meetings on the Monroe Street bridge and Jones Point Park and read about debates, exchange of ideas and in some the workings of a viable, inclusive democratic process. She asked why the residents of Hunting Terrace and Towers not afforded the same rights. Residents do not want to be informed of Plan B but want to play an active role in the creation of Plan B. The second request is that Hunting Terrace residents be able to live in their apartments until VDOT sells Hunting Towers to Mr. Kay. The City should not permit the displacement of residents at Hunting Terrace until affordable workforce housing is a guaranteed option for its occupants. In insuring this, she said, Council would be reaffirming its commitment for extraordinary affordable housing at the site of Hunting Towers and Terrace. Mayor Euille said the matter was discussed with the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Advisory Task Force this past week, they are having meetings with Mr. Cecchi and his representatives next week, and are making contact with the Governor's Office and the Secretary of Transportation to meet with them to encourage every effort to move forward to continue the discussions and sale of the Hunting Towers properties. He said the City is concerned and will move forward with an open dialogue when it comes in and will refer Ms. L'Heureux's request to the owners. He suggested Ms. L'Heureux put her request in writing to the owners. (e) Patrice Valle, 116 Ingle Place, said she lives in Duke Street Square and spoke about the vandalism issue and said there is egg throwing, tire slashing, rock throwing, graffiti, spray painting and door kicking, and the majority have occurred within the last month. She said it seems to the neighbors that it happens after school lets out or in the middle of the night between midnight and 3:00 a.m. She said there is a cut-through area, which is a hole in the chain link fence between Foxchase and Duke Street Square, and their guess is that the younger third through sixth graders have been abusing the privilege and have been sneaking around before parents get home and wreaking havoc for fun and games. Mayor Euille asked the City Manager to have a meeting with the Police, School officials and community to get to the bottom of it. Councilman Smedberg said this would be an appropriate discussion for the upcoming Quality of Life meeting. (f) James Hurysz, P.O. Box 5791, Arlington, and said that as a resident of Arlington, Arlington County government puts a tremendous amount of money into after school activities and sports and recreation centers, and almost half of the tax revenue goes to education, sports and recreation. He also spoke about HR4697 and the Medicare prescription drug benefit program and asked people to contact Congressman Moran about the legislation and ask him to co-sponsor the bill. (g) Julie Crenshaw, 816 Queen Street, said she is concerned about the make-up of the Jamestown Committee, as it is a duplication of the Special Events Committee, and there are a lot of people who have been left out. She said there were people who volunteered with the Department of Recreation and Parks to be part of the committee and they were ignored, and the Waterfront Alliance was not even included. She said one of the reasons it concerns her is that the City Manager was told there was a list and it bothers her because she was the first volunteer. Because this was something of very high quality, of historical nature, she told Janet Barnett she would like to work out some of the problems. She said that when she spoke to Ms. Barnett this week, not only did she not tell her when the meeting was, but she had a member of KSMET and someone on the Waterfront Committee ask her why she wasn't at a meeting. She said none of the volunteers on the list have ever been contacted. She said she told Ms. Barnett to remove her from the list and asked her why the City Manager didn't get it, and she was told that the City Manager knew she had one but never asked her for it. Ms. Crenshaw also spoke to mailings of notices of meetings and said the notices often arrive late and that is in violation of FOIA. She said she sent a letter to the City Manager and told him about the difficulty across the board, that different departments have the same difficulty, and it is something that needs to be looked at. She said she was contacted by Rose Boyd, who wants to put her on another mailing list. She said she sent another email and the City Manager didn't answer that one. Ms. Crenshaw said that at the budget hearing at the Lyceum, there was hardly anyone in the room, and no one sat down with her. She said she went to the Jamestown meeting, and they were greeting people at the door, and no one waited for her to come to be greeted. She said the mailing didn't get to people until the afternoon of the meeting and didn't get to some people until much later. She said there is a significant problem with getting mailings to people to be notified of meetings, to include agendas and minutes and said the problem is the mail goes to the mailroom and what happens at that point, no one can tell. She asked that something be done about the violation of FOIA. Mayor Euille asked that information on the make-up of the Committee be given to Council and for staff to look into the concern about the mailing situation. (h) Kathleen Henry, 213 Laverne Avenue, said she wished to speak about 301 Laverne Avenue. She said shame on the five members of Council who voted to vacate the regular process vote. She said apparently, there was some idea that someone on the adjacent property might acquire the lot and build a huge structure. It is not horrible and it actually looks like the best of everything seen so far and maintains the corner better than any of the housing plans. She said that even though this was done to protect property rights, she didn't think it was the right case and this property was acquired knowing that the staff had said nothing should ever be built there. She said this is not what they want the City to look like and didn't want the precedent. She said this should be stopped now - it is too big for the property and something else can be done. (i) Charlotte Landis, 433 N. Patrick Street, said she received their tax assessment and they have been reminded that they are part of an historic district - Parker-Gray. She said there are five historic districts in the City and Parker-Gray is the only historic district that does not receive tax credits. She asked why the State and Federal tax credits are available to residents in Old Town, Rosemont, Del Ray and Park Fairfax, but the City has not sought the same for Parker-Gray, and what does Council plan to do on providing Parker-Gray with tax credits to make all neighborhoods equal. City Attorney Pessoa said he would provide a more formal response, but it relates to whether it is a National Register District and the process to get that status through the Office of Historic Alexandria. He said that coordinating with the City Manager's staff, he will get a response back to Council. (j) Marlin Lord, 2724 Hickory Street, spoke about the art in City Hall on the 2nd floor. He thanked the Mayor, City Manager, Deputy City Manager Evans, Parks and Recreation Departments, and General Services for making the project possible. He called attention to the reception to be held February 28 prior to the Council meeting. (k) Boyd Walker, 922 Cameron Street, speaking for the Upper King Street Preservation Group, said they are continuing with their lawsuit against the demolition of the rear of 1520, 1522 and 1524 King Street, even though the developer demolished the two buildings at 1514 and 1516 King Street and virtually demolished 1600 King Street. He said the consequence of the lawsuit is the project could not get started, and he asked Council to work with the planning staff to see if the issue can be resolved. He said the developer has not sat down with them yet to offer to negotiate anything and they would like for that to happen. He said they would also like to see the rear preserved as well. REPORTS OF BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES ACTION CONSENT CALENDAR (3-5) Planning Commission 3. SPECIAL USE PERMIT #2005-0119 4600 KING STREET, SUITE 5A ULTIMATE HEALTH SCHOOLS Public Hearing and Consideration of a request for a special use permit to operate a training school for nurses (commercial school); zoned OCM (100)/Office Commercial Medium. Applicant: Arangu L.N. Tomdio PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommend Approval 7-0 (A copy of the Planning Commission report dated February 7, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 3, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) 4. SPECIAL USE PERMIT #2005-0127 408, 410 EAST GLEBE ROAD & 3006 JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY CULTIVATED GARDENS, INC. Public Hearing and Consideration of a request for a special use permit to operate an outdoor garden center; zoned CSL/Commercial Service Low. Applicant: Janet Sauser PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommend Approval 7-0 (A copy of the Planning Commission report dated February 7, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 4, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) 5. SPECIAL USE PERMIT #2005-0132 2520 NORTH CHAMBLISS STREET HOME CHILD DAY CARE Public Hearing and Consideration of a request for a special use permit to operate a child day care home; zoned R-12/Residential. Applicant: Vijaya Shah PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommend Approval 7-0 (A copy of the Planning Commission report dated February 7, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 5, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) END OF ACTION CONSENT CALENDAR WHEREUPON, upon motion by Vice Mayor Pepper, seconded by Councilman Macdonald and carried unanimously, City Council approved the action consent calendar, with the deferral of item #3 at the request of staff and the withdrawal of item #4 at the request of the applicant, as follows: 3. This item was deferred at the request of staff. 4. This item was withdrawn at the request of the applicant. 5. City Council approved the Planning Commission recommendation. The voting was as follows: Pepper "aye" Gaines "aye" Macdonald "aye" Krupicka "aye" Euille "aye" Smedberg "aye" Woodson "aye" REPORTS OF BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES (continued) Planning Commission (continued) 6. TEXT AMENDMENT #2005-0008 FOR THE PROPERTIES BOUNDED BY FOUR MILE RUN, JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY, BRADDOCK ROAD, SLATERS LANE AND THE GEORGE WASHINGTON MEMORIAL PARKWAY Public Hearing and Consideration of a request for an amendment to the City of Alexandria Zoning Ordinance to revise the CDD Zone regulations, Section 5-600, to allow for a revised Monroe Avenue connection for the Monroe Avenue Bridge. Staff: Departments of Planning and Zoning and Transportation and Environmental Services. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommend Denial 6-0-1 (A copy of the Planning Commission report dated February 7, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 6, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference. A copy of the City Manager's memorandum dated February 21, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 2 of Item No. 6, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) Mr. Baier, along with Ms. Baker and Mr. Culpepper, made a presentation of the report and answered questions of Council. Ms. Baker said they are recommending that Monroe Avenue be constructed today as it was approved, option 1, but that it reserve right-of-way in what is considered to be the park area, to allow the two-way slip ramp to be constructed at a later date, option 2, if the traffic thresholds are met. Mr. Jay Johnson, Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Administration for the City Schools, commented on the effect the Monroe Avenue realignment options will have on a future school site in Potomac Yard in Landbay K and requested Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the proposed text amendment. Mr. John Hill, architect with Grimm and Parker, spoke about the feasibility of putting an elementary school on the site. Mr. Arthur Schmalz, City School Board member, spoke to urge Council to continue to maintain the approved option 1 as the desired and preferred alignment for the Monroe Avenue interchange. The following persons participated in the public hearing on this item: (a) Maria Wildes, 3452 Martha Custis Drive, said it is not an environmentally friendly proposal to tear up a perfectly good bridge. She also spoke about Route 1 being a tractor trailer route and the safety problems with it, and Council needs to listen to the residents. (b) Allan Highman, 312 E. Custis Avenue, encouraged Council to find the right solution for the citizens before finalizing the Monroe Avenue bridge project and the recommendation from the Planning Commission is not the right solution. He said it needs to acquire and set aside ample land for the future site of a school, it needs to acquire and set aside ample land for a current and future recreational open space needs, in addition to the school site, and it needs to reconfigure Monroe Avenue for convenient and safe access to Route 1 to keep increased traffic off Del Ray streets. (c) Marlin Lord, 2724 Hickory Street, supported denial by the Planning Commission and to stay with option 1, as did Larry Grossman, who was unable to stay. (d) Michael Neilson, 4110 Ft. Worth Place, speaking as a youth sports volunteer, urged Council to adopt option 1. (e) Amy Slack, 2307 E. Randolph Avenue, said there is a chance to do the bridge better the second time around, and she said she agreed with the Planning Commission and supported option 1. (f) David Fromm, 2307 E. Randolph Avenue, said the DRCA supports option 1, and expects the City to follow through pro-actively on monitoring and mitigating the traffic. He asked Council to express support for four way stop signs in the neighborhoods and encouraging staff and the traffic and parking board to expedite their approval and installation. (g) Bill Hendrickson, 304 E. Spring Street, said it should stick with the already approved plan, unless they find there are problems. (h) Brian Reid, 18 E. Howell Avenue, along with his wife Beth and daughter Cleo, urged Council to adopt option 2. (i) Paul Lininghan, 401 E. Monroe Avenue, said it should not waste any more money on the Monroe Bridge options, and said it should move forward with promise and not retreat into an action. (j) Leslie Barnes Hagan, 419 E. Howell Avenue, spoke of the need for a school site when Potomac Yard was being sold, and said her concern was of the loss of Monroe Avenue as a major traffic conductor for all areas west of Route 1. She said it is important to reach out to the constituency that is affected by the decisions of Council. WHEREUPON, upon motion by Councilman Krupicka, seconded by Councilman Gaines and carried unanimously, City Council closed the public hearing. The voting was as follows: Krupicka "aye" Pepper "aye" Gaines "aye" Macdonald "aye" Euille "aye" Smedberg "aye" Woodson "aye" A MOTION WAS MADE by Councilman Krupicka, seconded by Vice Mayor Pepper, to defer the action to so the City Attorney can bring it back on February 28 to incorporate language that would provide flexibility to consider option 2 to ensure they are able to make accommodations for ensuring both available space to site a school and parks. Councilman Macdonald said he would like to insert language to the effect that they will try to preserve the same amount of active recreational fields that it currently has, so it doesn't lose the current amount of ballfields it has. Mayor Euille said the actions next Tuesday relative to the item is to move forward to construct the bridge, and the other discussions will not stop that process. The voting was as follows: Krupicka "aye" Gaines "aye" Pepper "aye" Macdonald "aye" Euille "aye" Smedberg "aye" Woodson "aye" The following item was heard out of turn: 21. Pursuant to a motion made by City Council on January 10, 2006, City Council will reconsider a motion made on December 17, 2005, for the following item: SPECIAL USE PERMIT #2005-0114 301 LAVERNE AVENUE SUBSTANDARD LOT DEVELOPMENT Public Hearing and Consideration of a request for a special use permit to construct a single family dwelling on a substandard lot; zoned R-2-5/Residential. Applicant: Brett Rice by Duncan Blair, attorney (Deferred from 11/12/05) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommend Denial 7-0 (A copy of the City Manager's memorandum dated February 21, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 21, 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) A motion was made by Councilman Krupicka that City Council reversed the Planning Commission decision and approve option #3, with a provision that they take the money for Turner Avenue sidewalk and put it into a CIP fund for the neighbors to use, and with a condition that the fence be no more than 42 inches in height. The motion died for lack of a second. A motion was made Councilman Macdonald, seconded by Vice Mayor Pepper, that City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the application. WHEREUPON, a substitute motion was made by Councilman Smedberg, seconded by Councilwoman Woodson, to reverse the Planning Commission decision and approve option #3, with a condition that the fence be no more than 42 inches in height. Councilman Krupicka asked that the money that the applicant was originally going to spend on sidewalks be spent on tree plantings on the property and the public right-of-way. Mayor Euille said that doesn't need to be part of the motion - the applicant is present to hear the request. The voting to have the substitute motion was as follows: Smedberg "aye" Pepper "no" Woodson "aye" Gaines "aye" Euille "aye" Krupicka "aye" Macdonald "no" The voting on the main motion was as follows: Smedberg "aye" Pepper "no" Woodson "aye" Gaines "aye" Euille "aye" Krupicka "aye" Macdonald "no" * * * * * * Council took a 20 minute break. * * * * * * REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER 7. Public Hearing on the Recommendation on Revised Planning and Zoning Fees. (#20, 2/14/06) (A copy of the City Manager's memorandum dated February 9, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 7; 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference.) WHEREUPON, a motion was made by Vice Mayor Pepper and seconded by Councilman Krupicka, that City Council approve the Planning Commission recommendation, with the following amendments: the appeals fees be kept at the current rate; all non-development special use permit fees be kept at the current fee; and the final site plan fee go from $6.00 to $8.00 per 100 square feet of development. Councilman Krupicka said they should come back in a year or 18 months and take another look at it, as the goal for development fees should be the same as Arlington. Mayor Euille said his recommended change was to ask the City Manager to come back in the context of next year's budget with a revision and reconsideration of fees, but that same language can apply here. The voting was as follows: Pepper "aye" Gaines "aye" Krupicka "aye" Macdonald "aye" Euille "aye" Smedberg "aye" Woodson "aye" ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 8. Public Hearing on a Resolution to Adopt Increases and Changes in Fees for Code Enforcement Permits, Reviews and Inspections. (#15, 1/24/06) [ROLL-CALL VOTE] (A copy of the City Manager's memorandum dated January 18, 2006, is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and Clerk of Council, marked Exhibit No. 1 of Item No. 8; 2/25/06, and is incorporated as part of this record by reference. WHEREUPON, a motion was made by Vice Mayor Pepper, seconded by Councilman Gaines, to adopt the resolution to adopt increases and changes in fees for Code Enforcement permits, reviews and inspections, which carried unanimously by roll call vote, as follows: Pepper "aye" Krupicka "aye" Gaines "aye" Macdonald "aye" Euille "aye" Smedberg "aye" Woodson "aye" The resolution reads as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2179 WHEREAS, section 8-1-29(a) of The Code of the City of Alexandria, Virginia, 1981, as amended, provides that all fees for permits, inspections and certificates required by the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code shall be as established by resolution of the city council; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2067, adopted by city council on April 12, 2003, which incorporated an attached fee schedule, is the most recent establishment of such fees by the council; and WHEREAS, city council has determined that the fee schedule set forth in Resolution No. 2067 is in need of amendment and adjustment to change the fees charged for permits that authorize construction, to include alterations, additions, trade work (electrical, plumbing, mechanical and fire protection systems); fire prevention code permits; property maintenance inspections; and associated staff services for these functions and the fire protection retesting program.