City Council Work Session - Reports   11/15/2021

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Councilor Payne and Vice Mayor McGill, are you too?

Thomas, would you do roll call, please?

Councilor Payne?

Here.

Councilor Snoop?

Here.

So I'll turn it over to representatives from the Charlottesville Scholarship Project.

Do I have any questions or comments?

Counselors, are there any comments or questions?

friends have made that have been supporting the scholarships actually awarded.

Thank you, Lloyd.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

All right, next up we have a discussion conversation with staff regarding the comprehensive plan and future land use map and this will give counselors an opportunity to ask any questions they have before our 630 meeting.

I also note that Jenny Koch and Ron Sessoms from the planning team are here as well.

Counselors?

Is there another presentation?

Is that a question?

I'm just asking if there's any other presentation happening before we jump into our questions.

2020 census numbers, I believe.

Chancellor Smith?

so that's why I had asked that he be permitted to join us today.

Thank you.

So Mr. Lombard, would you like to tell us what Weldon Cooper knows about all of this?

Our population projections for 2030 and 2040 are expecting that trend to continue.

Councillor Snook, are there, do you have any other or any other councillors?

What is driving population in Charlottesville?

It's just a matter of where the growth is going to go.

or at least a factor, an important factor to what's affecting the growth rate is simply how many housing units, how many dwelling units there are for people to move into.

You would have to have any comments or somebody else talk about what the side effect cost would be of that, but you will have the growth somewhere, yes.

And has the growth rate in the county been essentially comparable to Charlottesville's growth rate, or has it been growing faster?

So it's definitely, we've seen them kind of move in different directions depending on where the growth is.

Does that sound about right to you?

But the city has not had development that had a lot of development, so it's very more.

Is that a reasonable growth rate to expect to continue?

So yeah, 1%, I would say it's probably on the low side of what I would expect over the next decade.

Thank you.

Any other counselor have any questions?

Thank you.

Thank you for joining us.

Any other question for Mr. Fries or any?

And I'm just curious how much involvement NDS staff has been having in all of these discussions.

Miss Creasy, do you want to speak to the remainder of the

So there has been quite a bit of correspondence throughout the process with a variety of staff.

Yeah.

And boards, commissions,

Any other questions?

And should that be reflected in the comp plan?

address that issue of commercial development.

Can you comment on that?

Does that answer your question, Mr. Counselor?

And his answer was in the hundreds, not in the thousands.

You generally do a build-out analysis based on zoning, not based on a land-use map.

Yeah.

That's just not the way to look at this document.

Yep.

Those are my general questions for now.

So it's a really general question, but I really would like a little more context because this is important.

Koch, do you want to also take a stab at responding to that question?

plus a bonus for affordability to be determined in the zoning update.

So that bonus is like, I'm sorry, another unit beyond the three or four.

the you know within that up to three or four base maybe some some parcels might have up to two plus the bonus you know I think give that's the sort of flexibility we've looked to build in here with all these zones is to say up to a certain number of units as the sort of the base but not all parcels will have those that allow for the maximum.

Am I making sense?

James, would you agree with that?

That's one approach one can take on addressing that issue.

at additional units, which I think is just going to really be challenging for some of these smaller sites.

But that ultimately will be a council decision.

So I just think it can be confusing to residents that are asking those questions.

Koch respond to this directly as well, but we didn't try to be as close to the PUDs, I don't believe, but the small area plans, which really represent a great deal of investment by the city and those communities, we were given a great deal of strong consideration.

And so I think that's part of the issue is the community just sees it and everyone just sees the upper range of that, even though when we get back into the details and we can get to more of a parcel by parcel, it's going to be more clear that there is alignment that's stronger than maybe what we see right now.

Koch, do you have anything to add?

And again, in the zoning, we will look to reflect that as much as we can.

I see you.

What is, you know, is it anticipated that the market would not respond to that in the sense that we would likely only see single family homes get built and they wouldn't be building two, three or four units with an affordable one unless they're having some kind of subsidy?

And so to impose an affordability requirement, which not only has an upfront cost, but also has an ongoing cost in kind of reporting and paperwork and all the details that go into maintaining an affordable unit over time, in and of itself can also prevent people from making those kinds of decisions.

We have not shown that.

I think there is an economic study of some sort that I've seen just in the last couple of months that basically says unless you're getting up six units or more, it's just not going to be feasible to think you're going to have one of those, say, four or five or three be an affordable unit unless there is some specific subsidy.

the rent of the market unions has to cover the subsidy on the affordable unit.

And quite frankly, I just, you know, my guess is looking at other localities that the market wouldn't, but I haven't seen any concrete specific data or analysis for here in Charlottesville if like what, if any AMI level could possibly be producing more affordable units throughout all general residential.

are very rare, then you've made the window very narrow for the opportunity to create new units.

Don't move to six because I have some concern about where the numbers are there now, you know where they are at now too, but if there's a way to word this to where it's always considered first and then maybe proven that it's not possible, I think that that's helpful for the goal that we're having here.

PB, Harmon Zuckerman, I think we should be able to arrive at a policy that works for the city.

Yeah, I think we're all interested in what sounds like we're most of us are interested in doing it more thought more purposefully.

We're just making an assumption that the existing unit is the affordable unit.

In addition through to this, the bonus that we've discussed for general residential.

But for medium intensity right now it's being proposed that it's up to 12 you're saying that up within that whatever I guess James is saying between six and 12 that there would be obviously still got to be studied that there would be a requirement for some level because right now as everyone reads it it's like you're asking for all these units and none of them are affordable so do I really want to have that happening in my neighborhood and it's not even going to yield any affordable units.

Yeah, yep.

Go ahead, Nikai, did you have something?

No, go ahead.

but I said I gathered that for today's purposes we're not going to be making either decision today both of the both of those choices are zoning choices not comp plan choices am I reading that correctly yes you are correct and and to to further respond on the general residential what that that the intention there is to create more housing choice throughout the city and also

So I'll have to address that in a moment.

I would like to note one thing too, James, not to interrupt you.

No, go ahead.

And so that's, you know, we are going to be looking to do that when we get to the zoning phase of this process, you know, sort of learning from work that's been been done.

This is a slow evolution, not an abrupt change.

The question I have is, has there been any changes to the draft of the comprehensive plan since the Planning Commission passed it?

No, we purposely did not make any changes to the other than the changes that the Planning Commission recommended.

those four amendments?

Yes, we did not make any changes to that document from between the Planning Commission meeting and this meeting.

Other than that, there were no changes, just to clarify.

And so can you speak to that a little bit, James?

The very first test of our ability to live up to our plan is gonna be with the zoning project and we better do it right.

I know that when we have a site plan review process, neighborhoods have been involved in the past, or adjacent neighbors have been involved in the past.

It could be that they're only done through

I just think that it is a courtesy for people just to be aware of what's coming their way before the ground is breaking.

Yes.

I think that developing something like this is actually going to be one of the higher priorities in terms of timeline of making sure that we're doing that in parallel with this zoning rewrite.

Koch if she can respond on that particular strategy, what was intended there.

I would also note that within the sensitive community areas themselves, per planning commissions, amendments, we will be looking at, you know, adjustments to those areas, making sure we're considering other data points that should be included outside of just the census demographic data that we had used.

I just don't have a clear kind of vision of what that could look like.

We can look for some of the actual document tools to share with you.

So just be mindful of that.

because I think they can be really inviting for the kind of redevelopment that some of those communities don't want.

And I guess I would invite, I don't know if Ron has anything you would want to add to that.

So we've been working to craft the plan, keeping in mind those initial planning principles that we'll review tonight as part of the presentation.

If I say much more, I'm going into comments and that question, so I'll hold that off for later.

Are there, counselors, any other questions?

Well, I guess the first question, just a clarification, the expectation is not that the maximum height and density will be allowed by right everywhere where medium intensity and high intensity residential are located, correct, once we start to go through the zoning rewrite process?

Yeah.

not in avoiding unintended consequences, particularly in these, again, neighborhoods that have a lot of low and moderate income homeowners and renters, we're creating a huge flood of outside capital investment because the land value has gone up is just gonna result in more homes being flipped and more gentrification and displacement.

So Councillor Payne.

And, you know, so if you could just add in how that could possibly play a role in that, if you were not going.

Jenny, do you want to add to that, and particularly on the equity toolkit?

Perhaps there are some other areas that might be appropriate for some of that sensitive community area designation.

I know you've said that at the end of the zoning rewrite process, we will be looking at the land use map again, but just sort of what assurances built into that process will there be?

So that's the best assurance I can give you.

And, you know, I know that the zoning rewrite process is when we're really going to have those discussions and this land use map is really initiating that and isn't even on its own actually changing the land use until we go through that process.

and my expectation, Councilor Payne, is that if I'm before you roughly a year from now presenting a zoning ordinance that reflects that land use plan exactly and has those clear negative consequences for the city, I expect each one of you to vote against that and send me packing.

I like that, taking responsibility.

Okay, counselors, are there any other questions at this time?

And I can understand why that next step has been really challenging for people who find themselves in this medium intensity category.

I know James or Ron, would you have anything you'd want to add to that?

Okay, Mr. Sesson, do you have anything?

So we built upon that concept as part of our design for the current future land use map as well.

You know, those are all cities that look at some neighborhood scale multifamily, some of the smaller multifamily, you know, areas throughout the city.

So I just continue to have those concerns.

But I do anticipate there will be changes as we go.

So even some of the changes that have currently been made, maybe that's a better use for the higher intensity or mix.

We do have a closed session that we have to read into.

You've got three minutes.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

If there's anyone else who'd like to address Council at this opportunity, please click the raise hand icon.

I don't see any hands.

No other hands.

Thank you.

answering questions and being here this evening and we'll see you shortly at the next meeting for the presentation and public hearing and more questions and comments.

Right.

Councillor Hill, do you have the closed session motion?

I have it up.

Go ahead.

I got it too.

Is there a second?

Second.

Mayor Walker?

Yes.

Councilor Hill?

Yes.

Councilor Payne?

Yes.

Councilor Snook?

Yes.

Thomas.

And just a reminder, the 630 meeting is on a different Zoom webinar.