City Council Meeting   5/2/2016

I'm

Music playing

Music Playing

and John F. Kennedy.

Music Playing

Music playing

Good evening, everyone.

I call this meeting to order.

Pledge of Allegiance, please.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Mr. Rice, will you call the roll?

Ms. Szakos.

Here.

OK, awards and recognitions.

Mr. Fenwick, would you mind beginning?

These are the announcements, right?

Yeah, we mixed them up the last time.

I have an award in recognition.

As the council representative to the scholarship program board, I'd like to announce that the city scholarship program has awarded 10 more scholarships this year to, I think they're all Charlottesville high school seniors, and I'm gonna take a couple of minutes and just give you a couple of sentences about each of them.

They are an impressive group of young people all coming out of CHS.

Tariq Carrington has had an exceptional academic career, earning a 4.43 GPA while enrolling in rigorous honors, AP, and dual enrollment classes.

He looks ahead to a career in the medical field and has been accepted at his first choice, Virginia Commonwealth University.

He's also a leader and award winner on the CHS track team.

Conga Dayong.

Her goal for the future is to become a nurse.

Her parents lived in Tibet and relocated to India where she was born because they wanted a brighter future for their daughter.

They came to America, and she is certainly living out that brighter future.

When she graduates, she will have earned a GPA of over 4.0 and taken multiple honors, AP, and dual enrollment classes, including Chinese.

During her time in high school, she has participated in girls' soccer, international and Chinese clubs, and has worked part-time at a local restaurant for two years.

Grace Gilbert has been accepted at the College of William and Mary and intends to pursue studies in the sciences.

She has a passion for photography and will graduate with a GPA, I didn't know this was possible, of 4.7.

She is also active in various clubs at CHS and participates in concert choir and is a volunteer at the Virginia Discovery Museum.

Valeria Gutierrez Cruz plans to study physical therapy and ultrasound in college.

Her mother immigrated from Mexico to give her children a better life.

She participates in AVID and Computers for Kids, as well as other extracurricular activities.

She's worked at a local daycare center during the summer break.

Zarni Hein.

His parents and his brother came to the United States where they faced many hardships and challenges relating to a new language, starting school and leaving members of their extended family behind.

And he's planning to study engineering and get a bachelor's degree from a four-year university.

Robin Heitman has a passion to be involved in the fine and performing arts and is interested in arts in many areas.

And she's applied, she?

Yes, she has applied to many fine four-year colleges and universities.

Justice Howard is taking all of her classes as a dual enrollment student.

That means she's getting college credit while being in high school for 2015-2016.

At CHS, she took many honors and AP classes and will graduate with a 4.6 grade point average.

She has an interest in psychology and has applied to several universities.

Tanner Largent, in addition to softball, Tanner also plays volleyball and maintains strong grades in academics.

She will graduate this next month, this month, this month.

She works part time at a local restaurant, and her avid teacher says that most students seem to either work or play sports, but the fact that Tanner could do both while maintaining strong grades is a testament to her skills and her drive.

She's interested in studying physical therapy.

Lakera Mills plans to pursue studies in biology and chemistry.

After graduation, she would like to enter the medical field.

She will graduate with a 3.5 and she works as a cashier on the sales floor during breaks and holidays.

And Wendell Santiago,

plans to study nursing and physical therapy at a Virginia college and has already been accepted at ODU, Radford, Longwood, and UVA Wise, and he'll graduate with a 4.0.

And these students are all students with academic excellence, but particularly with economic need, and these are folks who might not be able to go to college if it weren't for the help that they get from scholarships like ours.

I have tracked some of the students who've gone before.

We've been doing this since the early 2000s.

And some of the students who have gotten these scholarships have done amazing things and made us proud.

Some of them have come home and been leaders in our community.

Others have gone across the country and have carried with them the kind of ambassador role about what a wonderful place Charlottesville is and what a great education you can get here.

Thank you Mrs. Szakos.

One other unusual thing about the scholarships that the city awards is that they're four year scholarships.

So they get an award this year and then next year if they stay in school they get more and then third year they get more than that and the fourth year they get more.

Thank you very much.

A lot of hard work has gone into this.

Sure.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

So I don't know how many of you all knew, but this is something really good that's going on.

It is National Police Memorial Week.

So we have to make sure we thank all of our law enforcement officers for the great work that they've been doing.

And we have a proclamation for them.

And it reads as such,

Whereas in 1962, President Kennedy proclaimed May 15th as National Peace Officers Memorial Day in the calendar week in which May 15th falls as National Police Week.

And whereas by a joint resolution of Congress in 1962, National Police Week pays special recognition to those law enforcement officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty for the safety and protection of others.

and whereas since the first recorded death in 1791 almost 21,000 law enforcement officers in the United States have made the ultimate sacrifice and have been killed in the line of duty including 128 officers killed in 2015 and whereas countless men and women of our great community have proudly worn the uniform

of our area local enforcement agencies and have unselfishly dedicated their lives to the service of others and whereas we are fortunate to have a police department that strives for professionalism and continually serves our community with honor, duty and integrity.

Now therefore be it resolved that I, and I'm not him, but Mr. Michael Sigler, Mayor of the City of Charlottesville, do hereby recognize the week of May 15th through 21st, 2016, as National Law Enforcement Memorial Week in the City of Charlottesville and urge all citizens of this community to honor our citizens serving in the Charlottesville Police Department and law enforcement agencies across America this week and always, signed and sealed on the second day of May 2016,

And we have someone very special here.

Thank you, Mr. Bellamy, mayor, members of council.

This, as you said, this award has been going on.

This recognition has been going on for more than 50 years now in the United States.

It means a great deal to the men and women of all law enforcement agencies, particularly coming from the people we serve, the citizens of Charlottesville and this council, the city manager.

It means that much more to men and women of our police department.

So on behalf of them, I thank you for this.

And I must say that I am looking forward to, after last council meeting, we officially appointed our new police chief.

I know our current police department as well as our new police chief are diligently looking forward to making sure that we build bridges within our community and have community relationships.

So thank you again for all the work that you do and the best is yet to come.

Thank you.

Okay, another one.

This is close to my heart.

So this is a proclamation.

Paul, would you mind coming down?

Honoring Paul Beyer and the TomTom Founders Festival.

Whereas Paul Beyer, a Charlottesville native, has evidence to sincere and abiding desire to celebrate the residents, founders, and businesses who have made Charlottesville a world-class city, and to that end, launched the TomTom Founders Festival in 2012 to celebrate music, art, and innovation.

And whereas

Paul recognized Charlottesville was a community with world-class researchers, supportive government officials, a beautiful landscape, and a caring community making a perfect home for the TomTom Founders Festival.

And whereas the TomTom Founders Festival has become an annual week-long celebration of music, art, food, and innovation, boasting over 78,000 attendees to date and partnering with over 400 community groups and organizations.

And whereas in 2016, its fifth year,

The TomTom Festival brought a record 38,000 people to the city of Charlottesville to enjoy music, art, innovation, and food, hosted competitions where $1.5 million was awarded in grants and funding, and brought together 49 bands and performers, 81 speakers, and 136 artists and creative vendors.

And whereas the TomTom mission is to celebrate founders, connect resources, and leave legacies,

And through Paul's vision, the TomTom Founders Festival has accomplished precisely those goals, fostering remarkable connections among varied communities within the Charlottesville areas, while producing extraordinary renown for Charlottesville and Virginia and the nation as a whole.

Now, therefore, I, Mike Signer, mayor of the city of Charlottesville, do hereby honor Paul Beyer for his deep commitment and loyalty to his hometown city,

for bringing his vision for celebrating creative founding to life through the TomTom Founders Festival, for bringing new appreciation of fun as a virtue, and for giving the world yet another reason to know Charlottesville is a great place to live, work, and play.

Well first I'm honored that you all would do this for me and I'm honored that I can accept this on behalf of an awful lot of community members that make this happen.

As you mentioned there's hundreds of organizations that

Chip in each year and help celebrate our city and countless staff and volunteers.

I think we had 300 volunteers over the week.

So my hat's off to them and I'm honored that I can accept on their behalf.

We have a couple of our board members in the back, Greg Graham and David Toovey to sit here.

And again, thank you all.

Thank you.

I wanted to also just take a moment because Tom Tom happens in the city and it wouldn't be able to happen.

at all if it weren't from support of folks like you all, Councillors Galvin and Szakos who for years have been supportive of this.

Thank you, Mr. Fenwick.

I saw you a couple of times throughout the week and you've been supporting entrepreneurship for years here in our city.

And of course, Mayor Signer, Vice Mayor Bellamy,

You all spoke at the festival this year, and it was, you're a riot.

I love having you.

You gave, you were the emcee of our crowdfunded pitch night.

We were 10 entrepreneurs.

We were celebrated.

And then you also gave an incredible talk at our youth summit, inspiring our students.

And then, of course, you gave a vision for the future of the city as an entrepreneurial hub at our future forum.

So I just wanted to give you both, Steve.

but these were banners that flew on the downtown mall throughout the month of TomTom and I would like to present these to the council as a whole but then there's two different banners one says found yourself which is the unofficial model of TomTom and I would like this to go to Mr. Bellamy and the reason is because the festival is about founding

you know the self empowerment and that is I think the key to all of us achieving something and I felt like Mr. Bellamy really gave some powerful comments at the festival that celebrated our youth and did that and then the second banner is America's founding city and the idea that we're not just a city for the past we're a city for the future and we're a city that's about founding and the best is yet to come and I felt like due to the mayor's comments I just wanted to give this to you as well.

And last but not least, I wanted to thank Maurice and our city staff who made this all happen.

So thank you for your leadership.

Thank you for allowing Jason to be on our board, Jason Ness.

And special thanks to Michelle Christian and Craig Fabio with the Parks Department.

Thank you.

All right.

Announcements.

Yes, I have one about the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and it's to celebrate our drinking water supply.

Come to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir on Thursday, May 5th at 1030 a.m. to noon to learn about the people and process behind our water from nature to the tap to the Rivanna River.

RWSA Rivanna Conservation Alliance, Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District, Charlottesville Public Works, and Albemarle County Service Authority will be there with information and demonstrations on watershed protection, dam construction and water treatment,

Wastewater Treatment, River Stewardship, Conservation, and more.

Free shuttles will run continuously starting at 10.25 a.m. from Trinity Church at 1301 Fontaine Ave. No cars parked at the reservoir, please.

Chris Jensen's City Parks Trail Planner will lead a moderately difficult 45-minute hike at 11 a.m. And a time capsule will be sunk in the reservoir at 11.55 a.m. to mark this historic milestone for our drinking water supply.

which has provided water since the 1880s, raffle food and fun for all ages.

This rain or shine event is free.

For more information on the event and your drinking water supply, go to www.rivanna.org slash Celebrate Ragged, all one word.

Questions, call Terry Kent at 434-977-8255.

2970, Extension 101.

And I would like to add one more follow-up announcement that relates to the Rivanna Water and Soar Authority, and that is the past week the Board of the Authority authorized the Executive Director to award a contract to a contractor to do odor mitigation for the Moores Creek Water Treatment Facility.

That is a huge, huge milestone

for this community to finally address the odors emanating from that treatment facility that was affecting the quality of life for Belmont, Woollen Mills, and our county neighbors across the river in the Pantops area.

So I just wanted the public to know that is going to be a reality.

We move forward on it.

And thanks everyone for their patience and their commitment.

Yes, they did, and that's also very important.

The McIntyre Recycling Center will continue through the end of this calendar year taking in food scraps.

And we will be making an assessment of that in September to see just how much volume we generate.

It is a question of, we do want to get economies of scale at some point.

It's not only a question of

that it's the right thing to do.

We have to understand whether or not a drop-off center is the appropriate way to go.

Do we need more?

Even curbside pickup.

So bring your garbage to McIntyre.

So bring your garbage to McIntyre Recycling.

It really helps the planet when the food's not in the landfill.

It's not generating additional greenhouse gas.

I would like to announce the Sears Festival of Cultures.

which will be on May 14th at Lee Park from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Come and celebrate the cultural and linguistic diversity of our local community.

The 13th annual Festival of Cultures will be a day of free, family-friendly fun with all-day entertainment, music, dance, song and storytelling.

Enjoy hands-on cultural craft activities, visit cultural exhibits, foods and artisan vendors.

You can also take a passport and travel the world in Lee Park.

There are dance and lots of, it's just an amazing thing you should come to Lee Park that day.

It's in Lee Park, Market Street, next to main branch of the library, downtown Charlottesville, free and open to the public, May 14th.

We also have an announcement that May is National Foster Care Month, and as a four-time foster parent, I am very appreciative of the work that's being done to support foster children and foster parents and foster families in our community.

There are three different events.

The first is May 6th, part of First Fridays this Friday, at Art in the City.

will be foster art.

Kaki Dimmick, a local artist, will unveil an interactive, movable art installation representing the number of children in care in our community from 5.30 p.m. at the McGuffey Art Center and also at 7 p.m. at the Ix Park and Second Street Gallery.

Then on May 14th on Saturday, Foster Care Awareness Walk, Piedmont Foster Walk 2016 sponsored by the Foster Care Alumni Association of America.

You can register and find details at www.crowdrise.com slash Piedmont VA Foster Walk.

The walk begins at 830 at CATEC and they'll be walking down the

Warner Parkway trail.

Please arrive at 8 to find parking and your team can walk or run.

Dogs are welcome.

And then all of May at the Jefferson Madison Regional Northside Library, the Hart Gallery display, the gallery of posters sharing children ready and waiting for their adoptive home in the state of Virginia.

So stop by the Northside Library.

And then just a quick thing at the transit bus center out on Avon Street at 830 a.m. will be in

A demonstration of our electric buses on May 14th from 9 till 3 will be the grand opening of the Lewis and Clark Center in Darden Tow Park.

And I don't know, Mr. Bellamy, are you going to mention something about the Young Black Men's Conference?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sure.

So I have a couple of quick announcements.

May 2nd.

Excuse me, Clean Commute Day is coming up, so in collaboration with Rideshare, UTS, Jaunt, and Green County Transit, Charlottesville Area Transit is asking

Local residents to pledge to use alternative transportation on Friday, May 6th.

Qualified forms of alternative transportation include walking, riding the bus, bicycling, and carpooling.

Those who pledge will automatically be entered to win great prizes, including Amtrak train tickets, Washington National Baseball tickets, and 30-day CAT transit passes.

Individuals may pledge online at www.alt.org.

www.catchthecat.org.

Again, individuals who may pledge online at www.catchthecat.org or in person by visiting the downtown transit center at 615 East Water Street.

To celebrate, CAT will offer free fare rides, excuse me, fare free rides all day on Friday on all routes.

So catch the bus if you can.

A couple of other announcements.

I want to send some special kudos to Mr. Corey, Holly Lee, as well as Matt Murphy from the Downtown Job Center for putting on a phenomenal resource fair for felons.

Reentry resource fair for felons this past Saturday.

Great turnout.

They worked very hard.

Also, thank you City Manager Jones and our Assistant City Manager, Mr. Mike Murphy.

The follow up to that will be on Wednesday, May 11th.

is having our big job fair and that's going to be a JPJ again Wednesday May 11th from 10 to 3.

It's free and welcome to any and everyone from the community.

So come on out and hopefully we can help you get a job.

This Saturday, coming up, the Charlottesville Alliance for Black Male Achievement is going to have our first annual The Black Man Can breakfast and symposium.

So this is for young males from no matter where you are, city, whatever.

We want you to come there.

The registration starts at 9 a.m.

The event lasts all day.

It's from 9 to 3.

and what we'll be doing is we'll be teaching you self empowerment tools, how to tie a tie, entrepreneurship, the importance of goal setting and a slew of other things.

It's gonna be a really, really great event.

And again, that's hosted by the Charlottesville Alliance for Black Male Achievement.

And we haven't forgot the ladies.

We've been doing some great work with them and they finally have got their things off the ground.

All right, so that is their meeting the first Sunday of every month at 3 p.m. at City Space.

So anybody who wants to help with that, please be aware and please mark it on your calendars.

Come on out.

So we got stuff going for the girls, the young ladies, the men, the women, the boys, everybody.

We're trying to get you to where you need to be.

And I'm going to repeat something that Wes just said.

This is the Charlottesville Community Spring Job Fair 2016.

The 2016 Charlottesville Community Spring Job Fair is fast approaching.

Due to the success of last year's job fairs and the community's employment needs, we will be holding another job fair Wednesday, May 11, 2016, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the John Paul Jones Arena.

We are once again anticipating a large turnout from employers and job seekers.

Employment resources for job seekers such as help with interviewing skills and resume writing will be available on site.

The 2016 Charlottesville Community Spring Job Fair is being presented by the City of Charlottesville.

in partnership with the County of Albemarle, the Department of Aging and Rehabilitative Services, American National University, the Adult Learning Center, Piedmont Workforce Network, and the Virginia Workforce Network.

For more information, visit www.Charlottesville.org forward slash job fair.

And I don't know if Captain Pleasance is still here, but this is Cops for Kids Day.

The Charlottesville Police Foundation is once again gearing up for its annual Cops for Kids Day, which will be held on Friday, May 13, 4 to 6 p.m. at the Cherry Avenue Boys and Girls Club.

On that afternoon, hundreds of kids and dozens of police officers will gather for a fun afternoon of playing together and getting to know each other.

The cops run through a bouncy house with the kids, do the limbo,

shoot nerf guns, dance, ride bikes, play corn hole and eat with them.

And all the while they are breaking down barriers that often exist between young people and the police.

Why do we continue to host this event each year?

Our simple concept, relational policing.

You've heard Chief Longo talk about this and we hope our new chief will share the same goal.

When the police know the people in the community that they serve and the people in the community know the police,

There's a level of trust and relationship that surrounds us.

This is good for everyone.

I wanted you to know about this awesome day and invite you and your families to come join in the fun.

All are welcome.

You're going to do the limbo.

Last session.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

But there was one issue that Councilor Galvin had brought up.

We just wanted to bring you up to speed on that.

And that's the

some of the maintenance issues at CRHA and the city is providing some assistance with that, some guidance on that and we'll be working closely with the CRHA administration to help with some turnaround issues that they've been having with maintenance, providing some leadership there, working with contractors and helping to manage some of those projects.

Thank you very much and I did

Listen in on the CRHA meeting last week, and it was really gratifying to hear that the connections had been made and that they were making the arrangements.

So look forward to hearing the results.

All right.

Thank you.

Now we're on to matters by the public.

Guidelines for public comment, these are at every meeting.

We welcome public comment.

Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular city council meeting for matters by the public.

Please follow these guidelines for public comment.

If you're here to speak for a public hearing, please wait to speak on the matter until the report for that item has been presented and the public hearing has been opened.

And we have several public hearings tonight, the sign-up sheets for which are down here.

There's three of them.

and those have been advertised since the agenda was public.

Each speaker has three minutes to speak.

Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks and a chime will ring as you get close to the end of your remarks.

Green is when you have lots of time, yellow is when you're in close, and red is when you're getting to the end.

Please do not interrupt speakers.

Whether or not you agree with them, please refrain from using obscenities.

My name is Lewis Schultz.

I live at 1809 East Market Street.

Both houses of Virginia's legislature passed Senate Bill 43 in this year's session, and on March 11th it was approved by Governor McAuliffe.

The purpose of Senate Bill 43 was to amend and reenact Section 24.2-222.1 of the Code of Virginia to include the words, notwithstanding any contrary provisions of a city or town charter,

and the portion of the statute that allows the locality to pass an ordinance to hold its council elections in November.

The new addition to the text of that statute means that even though Section 5D of Charlottesville's charter explicitly states that council elections are to take place in May of even-numbered years, it will become legal for the city council to pass an ordinance moving council elections to November.

That bill will take effect July 1 of this year, a date that is still two months away.

In an official opinion known as an OAG, Virginia's Attorney General wrote that Virginia follows the Dillon Rule of strict construction and that Virginia's Supreme Court has ruled that municipal corporations have only those powers that are expressly granted, those necessarily or fairly implied from expressly granted powers,

and those that are essential and indispensable and that when a local ordinance exceeds the scope of this authority, the ordinance is invalid.

That makes a very difficult problem for this city because in 2004, city council passed an ordinance to add section 22.35 of Charlottesville city code and since 2007, council elections have taken place in November of odd years.

That ordinance cited Virginia code section 24.2-222.1 as authorization for the change in the elections

Long before that statute's recent amendment, that is prior to the addition of the words, notwithstanding any contrary provisions of a city or town charter.

That ordinance was therefore invalid at the time of its passage, and we should by law have council elections upcoming this May 3rd, which is tomorrow.

In City of South Norfolk v. Dale, Virginia Supreme Court ruled that unless there is a plain indication of an intent

that the General Act shall repeal the Special Act.

The Special Act will continue to have effect and the general words with which it conflicts will be restrained and modified accordingly so that the two are to be deemed to stand together.

One is the general law of the land and the other is the law of the particular case.

In South and Western Railway Company versus Commonwealth, the court wrote, where there are two statutes, the earlier special and the latter general, the terms of the general broad enough to include the matter provided for in the special, the fact that one is special and the other general creates a presumption that the special is to be considered as remaining an exception to the general and that the general will not be considered as repealing the special unless the provisions of the general are manifestly inconsistent with those of the special.

The recent amendments to 24.2-222.1 has modified that statute to express the General Assembly's intent that from July 1st forward it will take precedence over any contrary charter provisions.

It will not take effect retroactively.

It will not legalize any past election that took place at the wrong time.

Not a single person acting as a counselor tonight was elected as the law requires.

And as a consequence of that, it is doubtful that any act of this body carries any legal authority.

Thank you.

Marnie Slawson.

Yes.

OK. Hi.

Hello, my name is Marnie Slauson.

First I want to say thank you all so much for allowing us to speak here tonight.

Hello City Council members, my name is Marnie Slauson and for the past couple months my group of students and I from Monticello High School have been working on a project for which we have been researching the possible installation of cameras on Charlottesville's historic downtown mall.

Through this research, we have come to the conclusion that it would be beneficial to the City of Charlottesville and the safety of its residents to install these city-owned surveillance cameras on the light fixtures on the downtown mall.

Although there has been debate over whether these cameras pose a threat to the privacy of citizens, we and those we spoke to about this issue believe that when in a public place, one weighs some of their rights to privacy.

Finally, having city-owned cameras would potentially decrease the time it would take to solve crimes, identify suspects, and locate missing people.

In cases of missing people such as Hannah Graham, the time is a very important element, and every minute wasted decreases the likelihood of finding the missing person.

Thank you all very much for coming.

Good evening, my name is John Cruikshak of the 324 Parkway Street.

On April 20th, 2015, Council passed a resolution which states that City Council is committed to reducing overall pesticide use and eliminating pesticide use where feasible in as many sites as possible, particularly in and on our school grounds and in city parks.

I'm here again

to ask City Council to make 2016 the year that Charlottesville ends the use of synthetic chemical pesticides in our parks and on our school grounds.

Of all the issues that come before you, what can be more important than the health and safety of our children?

1,205 citizens have signed the Sierra Club petition supporting pesticide-free parks and schools

Many people I speak with are surprised that city groundskeepers are still using products such as Roundup, QuickPro, Snapshot, Aurizalen, and ProStar.

I understand that the Department of Parks and Recreation has made efforts to reduce the applications of toxic herbicides.

The pollinator garden at the intersection of John Warner

Parkway and Melbourne Road is a good example.

To achieve our goal, however, it will be necessary in the short run to employ more gardeners.

It will cost more.

Pulling weeds and mulching does require more labor than spraying and dusting, but it's worth it.

I invite each of you

to visit the traffic circle at Park Plaza, which is at the northern terminus of Third Street Northeast.

This garden, which is on city-owned property, is maintained by the North Downtown Residents Association.

Last year, this association spent $105 on native perennial plants that attract pollinators.

More plants were also transplanted from the Shanks Greenway when that was being closed.

Almost all of these plants are now thriving.

It takes one person now about an hour a week to weed and mulch this circle.

No herbicides are being used there.

In August, my granddaughter will begin kindergarten at Clark Elementary School.

My grandson

will play several times a week at Belmont Park.

Please make all the parks and the schools safe for my grandchildren and all of the children in Charlottesville.

Thank you.

Diven Pernia?

Diven Pernia?

That's an email that I sent each one of you.

I've not received an answer.

And I'm looking at you all now and you're staring back at me.

I don't have a script tonight, but I'm upset.

We come here meeting after meeting and express our concerns.

We all have different concerns.

And then when we don't get a response, what are we supposed to do?

I'm concerned about my street and the change that's taken place.

I've asked for rezoning, but I've got no response.

I came in December.

I was referred to neighborhood planning.

I can't pronounce Mr. Alex's last name, but he was nice enough to come down and talk with me.

And he referred me back to you all after you all referred me to him in December.

So I come the first week in April, I'm back here again.

And then, nothing, I sent you an email.

I sent you this email.

Pay close attention to paragraph two.

Did you not get my email?

You know, we come here and we expect answers from you.

I worked at the police department for 33 years and I was told that citizens are our customers.

I feel that as taxpayers, I'm your customer.

And my locks went up.

I know the city needs money.

I need money too.

But my lock went up $10,000 and my son's went up $11,000 and he works two jobs to make ends meet.

I'm on a fixed income now.

and you want to take my lot and split it?

Because if the one next door to me is taken and split, my heat pump is right there almost on the five foot line.

That means that if it goes bad, how are you going to get down there to fix it if two houses, two story high, 14 feet wide, are 10 feet from mine and they put a privacy fence down between us?

The heat pump on the two stacks, I call them, across the street, the heat pump's on the back porch.

So, how do they get back there if somebody puts up a privacy fence?

I realize that the city is out of money, of land.

I can't help that.

When those lots were formed,

The people that bought them had to buy two lots to build a single story house.

Not many of them have basins, a couple of them.

And I'm concerned that I don't even get an answer from you all.

Thank you.

I'm here representing the Charlottesville Albemarle Health Department over on Rose Hill Drive.

Some of you may already be aware that we are in the process of engaging over 60 organizations in the district to conduct a health assessment of our communities.

The end goal is to develop a health improvement plan and this is our third round doing this.

So it's called Map to Health.

And here we are in the third round and it's the phase where we need to ask our community what they think is community themes or strengths and then also what are impact areas that need more attention.

So the month of May is set for that and I just came tonight to let you all know that we'll be out in the community asking residents opinion and feedback.

The survey is completely confidential.

We're not collecting any identifying information and we just hope that we can take the information back to our council and develop a health improvement plan that improves our community's health.

So thank you very much for your support.

For people who have questions about the survey or the health assessment, they can call me directly.

The number is 434-972-6232.

Thank you.

Good evening, Counselor.

My name is Jay James.

I live at 169 Brookwood Drive in the city of Charlottesville.

I'm here as the Assistant Director of the Bridge Ministry Rehabilitation Program and just wanted to talk to you all a little bit more tonight just asking for some special consideration of your discretionary funding.

I wanted to talk about our community impact and I have a testimonial that I brought with me and Mr. Morgan, but just want to quickly talk about a couple of things.

You're already aware we work with the indigent, the homeless, things of that nature, our success rate, we've covered that.

But I wanted to talk to you more about the fact that over our 22 years here we have, especially given what Mr. Pleasance received, we've worked directly with Chief Longo, we've worked with detectives in even murder investigations and apprehending suspects as well as overcoming addictive behavior drugs in our community.

And now with the opiate problems and the different things that are affecting people in our community,

We've been working to build our community to help people overcome these challenges for many years and we're coming back in.

We set up intern houses in communities that are drug infested and the guys in our program will go and encourage dealers to either leave that community or to change what they're doing and we have that track record as well so I don't want to take too much of your time but we just we're just continuing to ask that you would consider us because we believe

and what we are helping our community to accomplish, to build here.

This is William Morgan.

He is the owner of Piedmont Paint and Finish.

We have a young man who's currently from Charlottesville in a work release program and William's one of our graduates and William hired him.

And that's a cool, another piece of evidence that just shows what we want to do.

Yeah, so thanks for giving me your time this evening.

You know, when I first went to the ministry many, many years ago, I was a man who was out without hope.

I had lost my will to live, and I didn't know where to turn, and I didn't know what to do.

And to be honest, I needed help.

And the ministry provided that for me.

You know, it provided me

An opportunity to where I could work on myself and get to some of those deep-rooted issues.

It helped me with faith.

It helped me with hope.

The ministry told me that I was going to be okay, and I believe that.

And so once I concluded, I was able to do some dreams.

I went back to school.

I got my master's degree.

As Jay said, I'm actually the co-owner of this company.

We employ 25 to 30 men.

We manage those men.

And not only are we successful, but we give our services back to the community a few times out of the year where we provide our services for free to people who are in need.

I would just conclude, before my time, oh man!

Alright, the last thing I would say guys, thank you for the time.

Our executive director, William Washington, who's done this for 22 years, is on the bridge with the Bridge Builders Awards.

How much money are you asking for?

We're asking for $64,000, which would support about three of what it costs for our students that we have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I don't quite understand the hypocrisy or even the need for this blue ribbon commission.

Have we abandoned the core principles of our democracy of majority rules?

If so, then your elections are invalid, are they not?

You routinely vote for resolutions and other matters on a system of majority rule decisions, yet judging by the competing petitions for and against the removal,

with a 10 to 1 majority in favor of keeping them, our system of majority rules somehow doesn't seem to apply.

You people don't speak for me.

As a matter of fact, you don't seem to speak for the majority.

Why is that?

Who are you pandering to by not listening to the will of the people?

I don't know why you would want this commission to have as part of its charge to involve race.

Is it all aspects of race relations or is it just history?

Do we talk about both sides of race relations or just what you set as the agenda?

I've gone to several race relation meetings and hardly anyone shows up.

Either they don't care or maybe they don't think things are as bad as your white guilt leads you to believe it is.

I hear this litany of sins alluded to as reasons for this commission,

like Slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, Vinegar Hill.

And I need to remind you that these all were created by Democrats.

All of the sins of Vinegar Hill were done by a Democrat administration.

The Dialogue on Race, Human Rights Office, and others were created to deal with race-related issues.

and adding that as a charge to this commission only bogs down any solutions.

Although race is clearly a factor in this decision, you will never get people at the table to come up with a consensus on race relations in a six month time frame.

So following in the majority rules mindset, let's take this decision away from a liberal cabal and put it in the hands of the people by making this

as a ballot initiative on the November elections.

You can limit it to Charlottesville and Albemarle County voters as a single referendum question.

You put the decision making back where it belongs with the voters and the taxpayers.

I'm willing to adhere to the vote whichever way goes.

Are you?

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, Mr. Jones, Members of the Council, good evening.

I'm Ida J. Lewis from 605 13th Street, Northwest in the City of Charleston.

Some time ago I came down because I was concerned because we have no bus service from Great Avenue.

downtown.

It's true we have university bus service, but it's so inconvenient for us to have to ride the university bus to the University Hospital, transfer, and then come downtown.

And I was thinking about a solution that maybe would help, since I can't seem to get transportation downtown on the bus.

We do have a free trolley.

It does go up and down Main Street.

It can easily turn down 14th, come on down Grady, and bring us downtown, which would be a big help to us.

and I hope that you would take this into consideration and give the people, it's a lot of older people that has to go to 14th or go down to 10th to catch a bus and like me, I don't know the bus schedule, but maybe they do, but it's very hard and inconvenient for them.

So if you would take that into consideration as to give us some bus service down Great Avenue, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Peter Kleeman.

I live at 407 Head Street in the city.

That's part of the North Downtown area and the boundary of North Downtown is roughly McIntyre Road.

And I was very discouraged to learn of yet another incident on McIntyre Road involving an automobile hitting a pedestrian in that intersection.

I have been involved with issues of McIntire Road for probably 20 plus years and one of the major issues about the changes to the intersection, now the interchange at McIntire Road and US 250 Bypass was that there were safety issues at that intersection.

And I would very much like to suggest that the council work with VDOT or whomever as partners to do an evaluation of whether in fact there are improvements to the safety at that intersection or whether in fact we have a degradation of safety at that intersection.

I know from my own personal observations I travel both on foot and in my automobile on McIntyre Road and I see many incidents where people are in near collision situations because there's so much traffic at certain times of day that people will jump out into these smaller gaps that allow them to get to wherever they're going.

and I see lots of potential road rage situations and we have in fact had some serious injuries in that corridor, that very small section of road from county office building to US 250 bypass.

So I hope you will work with your partners, with the city staff and do a comprehensive analysis of what the traffic situation is on that now redesigned intersection interchange

and what the safety implications are of those changes.

And you will contemplate whether new modifications, signage, whatever, reconstruction might be necessary to, in my opinion, make it even safer than it is now, but perhaps safer than what it used to be.

I'm afraid that it may have degraded as a result of the so-called improvements.

Yes, I would.

Miss Marnie Slauson, thank you very much for coming out.

Now, is there another group of students here tonight?

Where are you from?

Charlottesville High School.

Charlottesville High School?

Okay, your teacher will hear this and he'll know that you were actually here.

Naomi Roberts, Miss Roberts, I've been over there three times, twice on your street, once on the street behind that duplex, and I'll come and talk to you about what the person back there told me.

So I'll come and see you.

I'm going to come see you.

I can't really hear what you're saying out there.

And I appreciate Jay James coming and giving us a testimonial as to the ministry.

Thank you.

I do have a comment and a question.

And I guess I'll direct it to Mr. Jones.

When I received Ms. Roberts' email, I immediately contacted the assistant city manager and Mr. Kefuna asking what was the update, what was the story.

because it appeared to me that the developer was operating under an existing by-right condition.

And then I did get a response back from Mr. Kefuna saying that what Ms. Roberts wants is for the city to stop the developer from completing the project and he said we can't, it is a by-right development.

The 35 foot maximum height provision in the ordinance is a bit too high for new infill development in established residential neighborhoods and he admitted that, but it is currently by right zoning.

I bring that up because we really do need to be moving on a review of our codes.

We have the code audit pending, but it hasn't started.

It's been conditional upon the streets that work.

So Mr. Jones, if we could get an update as to when the code audit will begin and what is the circumstances that the staff needs to kind of look at the city holistically.

That's mainly the main thing that I see that this is related to some of the many other issues that we have that people raise about zoning.

Yeah, I mean there's a process that needs to be explained to the public about that.

But the other thing is I just would like to underline that I'd love to find out if there's anything we can do for Ms. Ida Lewis's request and if there's anything that we can do to deal with Mr. Kleeman's observations.

And I, too, I'll just apologize, Ms. Roberts, for not getting back to you.

I think we all did read it and we did follow up and didn't make that coming back loop.

I think that you and I have talked about this, that it is what they did is legal and we can't stop them from doing that.

And, you know, I understand the concern about the property lines, but no one can make you divide your property.

So it's not

you know there's not really a whole lot we can do I think short of kind of massive zoning changes which I don't think we're in a position to do at this moment so if I had written back to you it would have been pretty much to say I heard you but I'm not it's not going to change the situation there now so I'm sorry that I didn't get back to you because that you were very clear that you wanted a response

To Ms. Lewis, I've been pushing for this Grady Avenue bus.

Where are you?

She left.

Oh, OK.

Since I first heard about it from Mr. Paul Long, who also lives down there, we have the university bus, which is great when the university is in session.

There's been some talk about when they don't have available drivers during the break, it doesn't always run.

And the issue of it coming downtown is a big issue.

I've talked to the

transit director about this.

And I think a lot of it has to do with funding.

And I know that the board of or the CAT advisory committee is talking about kind of how we can try to fill in when school's not in session.

But that doesn't really get at the downtown.

So I agree that I would love to get some sort of report back next time.

So we did, okay, Mr. Bellamy?

I would just remind everybody, we did pass new procedures where we're all going to defer responses generally to the city manager.

If we all respond for three or four or five minutes, it's going to add half an hour to our meetings.

Which we won't.

I think it's important for the public to understand also, there was a great deal of discussion in regards to the procedures that were passed as Mayor Signer was just discussing.

and how this may have potentially limited interaction or may stifle public comment but we have heard from essentially almost everyone who has signed up going through the lottery process.

We've heard from several different individuals who have been adamant in regards that they want their voices to be heard.

It appears to a certain degree that this process is indeed working, so that was my comment.

Ms. Roberts, I'm sure we'll be contacting you and Ms. Ida Lewis.

We'll be getting in contact with you very soon.

OK, great.

Before we go to the consent agenda, I'd just like to add one item for new business at the end of the agenda.

Great.

OK, consent agenda.

Item A, minutes for April 18th.

Item B, in appropriation, $200,000 to the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Marriott, Crawford, and Finnegar Hill, and $70,000 to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund, second of two readings.

Item C, in appropriation, Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund for Free Paint Program, $15,000, first of two readings.

Item D, in appropriation, loan repayment proceeds from Brown and Brown to the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund, first in two readings.

Item E in appropriation, Out of School Time Programs grant from the National Recreation and Park Association in partnership with the Walmart Foundation, $15,000, first of two readings.

Item F in appropriation, Domestic Violence Services Coordinator grant, $47,481, first of two readings.

Item G in appropriation, CATEC to the CATEC IT Network Academy Project, $47,194, first of two readings.

Item H in appropriation, Charlottesville City Schools to the CCS Enhanced Interns Security Project, $50,000, first of two readings.

Item I in appropriation, Albemarle County reimbursement for the Gordon Avenue Library main level restroom renovation.

$2,487.50, first of two readings.

Item J, a resolution, authorization of amendment to lease agreement for 608 Ridge Street, first of one reading.

Any discussion on any of the items?

Do you want to move any of the items off the consent agenda?

I have a motion to accept the consent agenda.

All in favor?

Motion carries five to zero.

Okay, public hearing resolution.

This is on a bond issue of $22.75 million.

Good evening Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, my name is Chris Cullinan, I'm the Director of Finance.

The city regularly issues bonds as part of its ongoing capital improvements program.

The resolution for you this evening represents part of that funding plan approved by council by authorizing the issuance of up to $22,750,000 of bonds.

All of the projects to be funded by this bond issue have been previously approved and appropriated by city council in prior years and or in the FY 16 budget.

There are two components of this bond issue.

The first is new debt for new projects, which totals

$8,250,000.

These bonds will be paid off over the next 20 years with annual level principal payments.

The second portion of the bond issue is to refinance up to $14.5 million of existing debt at lower interest rates.

The bonds are planned to be sold in mid-May by a competitive sale, with the bonds being awarded to the lowest bidder based on true interest cost.

The city management is meeting with the rating agencies this week.

And in a slightly different way of doing it this year, they're actually visiting Charlottesville.

We had one agency in today.

We had another one coming in this Wednesday.

And we are confident that the AAA bond rating will be reaffirmed.

Staff recommends the council approve this resolution authorizing the city manager to accept the low bid on the bond sale on behalf of the city for a competitive transaction

or negotiate the final price with the chosen underwriter for a negotiated transaction.

I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Not one.

We sometimes do that.

We get the proceeds and they are invested as we draw them down.

In actuality, a good chunk of that money is actually money that we've already spent.

We're paying ourselves back, so to speak, for actually having done the project.

We issue the debt on a cash flow basis, and so we look at both projects that have been completed and ones that are coming up as well.

It's just part of the, it's part of the Adopted Appropriated Capital Improvements program.

It's really, you don't necessarily see any budget document as opposed to just in terms of the city's internal cash flow, in terms of actually paying for the projects.

Any other questions?

OK, we're going to open the public hearing.

Is there anybody signed up on it?

OK, public hearing is open.

Any comment?

Anybody want to stand up and speak to it?

OK, I'm going to close the public hearing.

Is there a second?

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Carries five to zero.

Thank you.

Hello.

My name is Tiara Howard.

I'm the grants coordinator for the Department of Neighborhood Development Services.

And I'm here seeking approval.

of the fiscal year 2016-2017 action plan for home and CDBG funds.

And then I have another related item right after this that's related to the budget of the action plan.

The consolidated plan sets forth goals to support our community development needs over a five year period for low and moderate income individuals in the city and counties that make up the planning district.

Each year, localities are required to complete an action plan that details goals and objectives to be carried out in the upcoming program year.

This is the third action plan of the 2013 to 2018 consolidated plan.

This document also serves as the city's application for Community Development Block Grant or CDBG funds and a Thomas Jefferson plan and district application for home funds.

It is due in its final form to HUD on May 13th.

On March 8, 2016, the proposed fiscal year 1617 CDBG and Home Action Plan slash budget came before the Planning Commission for a public hearing.

The CDBG and Home Budget slash Action Plan had a public hearing, which was held at the Water Street Center of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission on April 7, 2016, and an additional public hearing, which is being held today.

The action plan has been advertised for a 30-day public comment period, March 23 through April 22, before being sent to HUD for approval.

The Housing Directors Council had an opportunity to make comments on the action plan at their March 15 and April 19, 2016 meetings.

Comments received from the housing directors will be incorporated or have been incorporated into the action plan.

The plan is still in draft form pending approval from council tonight.

Following approval of the action plan, data will be entered into the HUD database, which will then create a final formatted version of the action plan.

The participation section of the action plan summarizes all community engagement efforts, as well as all comments received and incorporated into the plan.

Budgetary impact.

The HOME program requires the city to provide a 20% match with the approval of this action plan.

The some necessary

to meet the fiscal year 16-17 match is $11,641.40, which will need to be appropriated out of the Charlottesville Housing Fund at a future date.

The action plan will have no additional budgetary impacts.

Recommendations.

Staff recommends approval of the 16-17 action plan of the 2013-2018 consolidated plan.

Funds will not be available or eligible to be spent until HUD releases funds.

There are no alternatives proposed, and then you have

I do have a question.

So, and I was looking for the actual name of it to make the answer easier, but I can't find it off the top of my head.

There are several actual actions outlined in this, things that are expected to happen between now and next year using these funds.

Should they be

And there's a report that's due to HUD that gives an evaluation of the ones from last year.

Because I notice every year there are specific things that are supposed to happen.

And we don't get that report, so we approve this.

I'm perfectly happy to do.

But I tried to find a copy of that report that was sent to HUD, and I could not find it.

I didn't try for a long time, but it wasn't easy to find.

You can contact me.

But how could a member of the public find it?

We can put it online.

That would be great.

It's your recommendation to put it online.

I'd appreciate it, because I think we do these plans and I think it's really helpful to not only hold ourselves accountable, but just so the public can know that, hey, Wiley did those things.

And we're also revising the CDBG code, and you'll see it maybe in June.

We're working on that.

Basically the code's outdated and we're required to report.

It's called the CAPER consolidated annual performance report, evaluation report.

And that we're recommending that we present that when we set priorities because it's due around the same time that we set priorities.

So you should be seeing that hopefully within the next couple of years.

OK, well, I don't need it in order to vote on this, but I do want it.

Thank you.

Just so everybody knows, we've got actually four different items coming up here.

There's no other hearing, but OK. All right.

So we're opening up.

Thank you.

We're opening a public hearing on this matter right now.

And I don't think anybody signed up.

Anyone want to speak to it on the floor?

Going, going, going.

OK. Public hearing is closing.

Is there a second?

Any discussion?

All in favor?

That motion carries five to zero.

Okay, and this item usually goes on the consent agenda, but since I was here, I was like, might as, and it goes together with the action plan, might as well present.

So basically, I am seeking approval for the budget allocations that actually go with the action plan.

And basically, in your attachment, you'll see

And basically that's the priority neighborhood from CDBG funds recommended that two hundred forty three thousand one twenty eight forty four be used for the 10th and Page priority neighborhood the next round.

CIC Community Investment Collaborative Scholarships, $12,500 Seed Planters Women Entrepreneur Academy, $10,000 Office of Economic Development Small Business Development ACE Program, $12,000

For public service projects, these have a cap of 15% based upon our entitlement that we received for next year.

So OAR Reentry Services Task Force recommended $14,856.

United Way Child Care Subsidies $14,106.

Office of Economic Development Go Driver Program $12,021.

City of Promise, and Road to Launch Child Care Access Program, 9,857, Community Attention Youth Internship Program, 4,856, and then of course, Planning and Admin has a 20% cap, so 74,261, and then you can see the grand total, which is 407,585.44.

For Home, the Task Force and Planning Commission provided a recommendation to provide AHIP with

It's 58,207 that we're actually estimated to receive from HUD.

but that also has to be matched so it's a total of 69,849.

Thank you.

Are there any questions?

So in your notes, the task force, they basically used an evaluation scoring tool to evaluate the projects.

And then based upon the scores, then they made decisions about allocations.

And as you can see, public services has a cap of the actual entitlement.

So 15% of 371,309 is what can be allocated for public services.

And then admin and planning has a CAT.

And then the SAT made recommendations on economic development projects because council provided a set-aside for economic development projects.

And so basically the task force determines the allocations and the percentages and the amounts.

And then once we get our actual final estimate from HUD,

I do have a question about that.

It is specifically about the launch program, because I'm reading about the discussion and the scoring, and it did say that the group felt that the City of Promise child care program needed

They needed to see more detail, and they reduced the score for past performances.

Could you please explain that?

So when the task force reviews the proposals, there's an evaluation tool that's used to evaluate, in which all of the applicants were able to see that up front after their workshop.

And so basically,

in addition to being able to meet previous, basically previous performance, consistency with the consolidated plan.

There's an array of categories on the evaluation tool.

And so you may score lower on one category than another category.

And so basically what that, what the information, the minutes are saying is that they scored low in that section because they hadn't spent all of their money.

There's a certain percentage that you have to spend by a certain amount of time.

So yes, in each section here, in the actual agenda,

breaks down the housing projects.

So for AHIP, it says that estimated benefits include five homeowner rehabs.

For the economic development projects, you can see that the CICC planners and Office of Economic Development, the estimated benefits are that scholarships, technical assistance, and business support services would be provided to an estimate of 12 qualified Charlottesville businesses and at least 20 entrepreneurs.

And then for the public service projects, you'll see a breakdown as well.

I was just interested in the child care program.

I couldn't find that information.

A somewhat related question.

First, I appreciate the work that's gone into this.

Not just staff work, but community work.

And for anybody still listening or watching, this is how the money gets distributed to organizations like OER, United Way, City of Promise, Community Attention.

So it's very important and thank you for the work that you've done.

My question is, in the minutes, in any kind of a deliberative situation, you're going to have disagreements.

And once or twice I saw the information was not timely or it was incomplete and they referenced like we talked about last year.

So when you're getting to the end of this

We have a lot of lessons learned for next year.

Actually, the group has talked about, when I say the group, I'm talking about the SAT, Strategic Action Team, and the Task Force.

They're the ones who make funding recommendations.

And so there had been discussions about, you know,

Blips and the actual process, application process and how those can be ironed out so that expectations are clear on both sides and that everything is consistent.

And so we are going to be working on actually improving the application process and hopefully maybe getting it online so that, you know, the format and everything, everything's just consistent to make it easier to, to, for them to evaluate the proposals.

Thank you.

OK, a couple of motions.

And then these were questions on both.

Is everyone good with questions on all matters?

OK, so motion to approve CDBG appropriations.

Second.

I'll move that.

So moved.

First motion.

Who did it?

OK, second.

Mr. Fenwick.

Any questions, comments?

All in favor?

Motion carries five to zero.

Motion to approve home funds appropriations.

So moved.

Second?

Second.

All in favor?

Any questions?

That was first.

Oh, so no vote on that first one.

The third one is a vote.

So on the first two, we didn't even need a vote.

OK. OK. On the third, a motion to approve the resolution for reprogramming of funds.

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any questions, comments?

Okay, now this one we do vote on.

Any?

Okay, all in favor?

Five to zero.

The flag is in the way for me.

Okay, five to zero.

All right, thank you, Ms. Howard.

Mission accomplished.

Thank you.

All right.

Item number five has been removed from the agenda because of an administrative issue.

So we'll be revisiting that in a future one.

Item number six, abandonment of sanitary sewer and slobies.

Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, this agenda item is a proposed ordinance with an accompanying public hearing that would authorize the abandonment of sanitary sewer and slope easements on property at the corner of Ridge Street and Cherry Avenue for a proposed development known as William Taylor Plaza.

This is an approved PUD.

New easements have already been dedicated to the city.

Once, if this is approved by council, these are live sanitary sewer lines, so they will remain operable

until the new sewer lines are constructed and inspected and accepted by the city.

So it is offered tonight on first reading.

There's also a small slope easement along the property on the Cherry Avenue side that is also subject to this abandonment.

Any questions?

things that I just happened to be following on Facebook as some folks were talking about this and there was the thought that we were sort of giving something to a developer that we wouldn't otherwise do and just wanted to clarify that this

The developer has to build new lines, and that the old lines won't be closed until they have, at their own expense, put in new lines.

All right.

Any other questions?

Okay.

I'm going to open the public hearing.

It doesn't appear that anybody has signed up for it.

Anybody want to speak to this issue in the crowd?

Okay.

Public hearing is closed.

Okay, moving on to agenda item number seven.

Good evening, Carrie Rainey, City Planner with Neighborhood Development Services.

Good evening.

Here today to speak about a special use permit request at 750 Hinton Avenue.

Hinton Avenue United Methodist Church by Sue Woodson, its trustee chair, has submitted a special use permit request to allow elementary school education and daycare uses on its property located at 750 Hinton Avenue, identified on city real property tax map 58 as parcel 161, hereby known as the subject property.

Subject property also has additional street frontage on Church Street and Rialto Street.

No additions to the existing buildings or additional buildings are proposed.

An outdoor fenced play space approximately 50 feet by 50 feet is proposed between the existing building and the existing parking lot.

The Planning Commission discussed this matter at their April 12, 2016 meeting.

The topics of discussion for the Commission focused on traffic concerns during drop-off and pick-up activities,

appropriate hours of operation for the proposed uses, pedestrian safety between the subject property and the main International School of Charlottesville's campus at 830 Monticello Avenue, proper installation and maintenance of the proposed playground equipment, and whether existing trash concerns regarding the subject property will be multiplied by the proposed uses.

The Planning Commission held a joint public hearing with City Council as well on April 12, 2016.

Several members of the public came out to speak.

Concerns included drop-off and pickup traffic, the trash issues mentioned before about the subject property, in addition to the concerns about the playground equipment.

Several members of the public expressed support for the idea, noting that it was a win-win for the community and also for the church.

The applicant held a community meeting on February 23, 2016 at the subject property at which staff attended.

Property owners within 500 feet of the subject property in the Belmont-Carlton Neighborhood Association were notified of the meeting.

However, no noticed recipients attended the meeting.

Additionally, the applicants from the International School of Charlottesville attended the Belmont-Carlton Neighborhood Association meeting on April 11, 2016.

Subsequent to that meeting, the Association, by way of an email from the President to the Planning Commission, stated that after careful consideration by the Board and the membership, it is our opinion to support the request for the special use permit.

The Commission took the following action.

Mrs. Green moved to recommend approval of this application for the special use permit in the R1S zone at Hinton Avenue to permit daycare and elementary school uses with the list of conditions that are provided in attachment A.

The recommended conditions focus on maximum permanent students, limitations to hours of operation, and procedures for drop-off and pick-up.

Mr. Kiesecker seconded the motion.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the special use permit and I'm happy to read the attachment A, which specifically lists out the conditions if you would like.

Condition number one, no more than 48 students may attend daycare in elementary school at 750 Hinton Avenue location.

An increase in students will require a new special use permit.

The permitted hours of operation for the daycare and elementary school uses are 830 a.m. until 4 p.m. Monday through Friday.

An expansion of hours or days of operation will require a special use permit.

A safety plan for the daycare and elementary school uses must be submitted annually to the zoning administrator for approval and kept on file.

The main drop-off and pick-up activity shall occur in the parking area of the subject property.

A trash removal plan shall be submitted annually along with the safety plan to the zoning administrator for approval and kept on file.

Playground equipment shall be installed per manufacturer specifications and for so long as it remains on the subject property shall be maintained based upon the specifications.

The playground equipment shall be located as shown in the location map provided by the applicant shown as exhibit C1 as provided by the applicant and as shown on the following page of attachment A.

No, I was actually at the Planning Commission meeting when they were being grilled of sorts.

I thought you answered all of the questions.

Good evening, Councillors.

My name is Eric Anderson.

I'm the head of school at International School of Charlottesville.

I'm joined by Heather Hill, who is the chair of our building transition committee.

On behalf of the school, I just want to thank you all.

And on behalf of the church as well, I want to thank you for your consideration of our application for this permit for the Hinton Avenue Methodist Church.

As outlined in the application, we are applying for official permission to allow a limited number of late preschool and early elementary education classes to be conducted on the premises weekdays from approximately 845 until approximately 315.

We are pursuing this permit because our school has been experiencing steadily increasing demand for our holistic and nationally accredited language immersion education for young children.

presumably in part as ever more globally minded Charlottesville citizens recognize the value of an education that empowers children to build bridges to and embrace a better understanding of peoples from diverse cultures.

For the last two school years demand has significantly exceeded our capacity.

and our current location in the Belmont Baptist Church four blocks away on Monticello Avenue constrains not only the number of students that we can serve but also the socioeconomic diversity of our student body.

Approval of this permit would enable us to serve up to 48 more students each year to develop a more robust financial aid program

and to serve a greater cross-section of young people to bring to fruition a partnership we've been working to develop with the Virginia Bright Stars Pre-K program and finally to advance our school's financial health as we pursue more long-term goals to create a custom design building on a campus of our own.

Currently the education wing of the church is utilized for only a handful of generally intermittent daytime activities throughout the week, including a clothing closet and collection of emergency relief supplies.

And we believe that the services that ISC would provide there will provide a revitalizing daytime complement to the activities and services currently found

in the neighborhood with only minimal potential inconvenience that we have already developed plans to mitigate.

Educational activities for young children during the weekdays would complement the vibrant nightlife that now exists in Belmont and an expansion of educational services for children as young as age two would complement the K-4 primary education at nearby Clark Elementary School.

For the Hinton Avenue Methodist Church, the revenues from the terms of our lease will provide revitalizing funds to enable pursuit and expansion of valuable church missions like their clothing closet and Sunday soup kitchen for low-income families and also help them to address some important and long-awaited improvements to their beautiful and historic building.

Through this process of applying for this permit and in concert with Charlottesville's Planning Commission and Belmont-Carlton's Neighborhood Association, we've been able to explore and develop some possible solutions to concerns that have been raised around the minor traffic impacts of this endeavor and the appearance and safety of the play space that will be situated on Hinton Avenue between the front of the building and the parking lot.

Between the adjustments and fixes that have been identified in this process and our commitment to continued partnership with the BCNA, we feel confident that the presence of this little school on this section of Hinton Avenue will be a win-win-win for the church, the school, and the neighborhood.

Thank you.

Ms.

Hull, do you want to say anything?

OK. All right.

Just, it's going to be a statement question.

Great to have more child care up there, like Kathy said.

Okay, motion to approve this resolution?

I move.

I guess we have to read it?

I move that we adopt the resolution granting a special use permit to Hinton Avenue United Methodist Church to operate a daycare center with elementary school uses for up to 45 children on property at 7750 Hinton Avenue.

I think it's 48 children.

Second?

Second.

Any questions?

All in favor?

All right, we are on to item number eight, BAR appeal attic addition at 513 14th Street Northwest.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

I'm Mary Jo Scala, Preservation and Design Planner.

I'm here tonight to present the staff report for the appeal of a BAR decision at 513 14th Street NW and the BAR decision was to deny a rear addition to this building.

After I present my staff report, the applicant will make a presentation and then the BAR's position will be presented by the current chair of the BAR, Melanie Miller.

At their March 15, 2016 meeting, the BAR denied by a vote of 4 to 2, with one abstaining an application to add a rear addition to a circa 1925 contributing structure brick building located in the Rugby Road University Circle Venable Neighborhood Architectural Design Control District.

and the reason they denied it was because it does not satisfy the BAR's criterion guidelines because of its size and is not compatible with this property and other properties in the ADC district.

The motion is worded very specifically that way because the BAR criteria requires that they shall approve an application unless it finds that the proposal does not meet specific standards and

applicable provisions of the guidelines and also number two they have to approve it unless they find that the proposal is incompatible with the architectural character of the district.

So in terms of the standards

There are a couple that are very pertinent.

The first one is whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass, and placement of the proposed addition, modification, or construction are compatible with the site and the applicable design control district.

The other one is number four, the effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood.

And then the very pertinent guidelines are the first one under additions, function and size, and that says that you should limit the size of the addition so it does not visually overpower the existing building.

There's another one under design that says the new work should be differentiated from the old and should be compatible with the massing size scale

and Michael Kochis.

Thank you very much.

Some members thought that the proposed design was appropriately detailed and resolved, but that the maximum zoning envelope allowed by zoning was not compatible with that ADC district.

Certain members noted the addition tripled the size of the house, I think that's important, that it set a bad precedent, and that none of the other houses in the area had additions like this, and the neighborhood would be drastically changed if every building would be done like this.

It's important to note that certain members urged the applicant to reconsider the massing and resubmit with a smaller footprint possibly reducing the footprint by a third so it would be compatible and then the two dissenting BAR members noted that first the addition was not impactful from the street and

And secondly, that the original intent of the zoning, which is university medium density, was to encourage density near the university to protect other low density residential areas.

And I'll say more about the zoning in a minute.

The applicant indicated they were not interested in considering the suggestion.

They said that design was within their zoning rights.

In response to that, I would say that the BAR has received, has work sessions, received counsel from the city attorney's office.

and they know that they must balance two sets of directions.

First there is the general zoning and that's what the applicant was referring to when they said they were within their zoning rights.

But then there's also the overlay historic district and that's as important as the underlying zoning.

So ideally you would want that zoning and the guidelines to mesh.

It doesn't always, it frequently doesn't.

And so then in that case the BAR has to make the determination as fairly and consistently as possible.

about those criteria that I mentioned.

So I did want to point out that the zoning to UMD, when that was put in place in 2003, council also directed staff at the same time to look at placing the historic district on 14th and 15th Street.

They are aware that there could be conflicts, but they went ahead and adopted the ADC district in January 2006.

So the BAR was within their jurisdiction to discuss the overall size and massing of the addition.

In staff opinion, the BAR is correct in its finding that the proposed addition does not meet the standards and guidelines related to size and mass, and that the proposed addition is incompatible with the architectural character of the ADC district, and the City Council should uphold the BAR's decision.

If an alternative would be that you could overturn the BAR's decision or uphold it, if you decide to overturn it, then I would say that you should stipulate that applicants should return to the BAR for approval of unresolved items, which may include a landscape plan, window specifications, and eve details.

Note that in either case, in addition to obtaining a certificate of appropriateness, the applicant must also apply for site plan approval.

They have talked to staff, but they have not applied for site plan approval yet.

So there may be other items such as parking requirements, buffer areas, things like that that get resolved with the site plan.

I do have a couple of questions.

When I was reading over the packet, I guess on March 15, 2016, the staff recommendations were as follows.

That the porch removal was not a problem.

That the addition was well located to minimize its visual impact.

And the one comment was that it shouldn't share a roof line.

I listened to the entire tape and I think the applicant was in agreement about lowering the roof line.

There is a specific guideline that says that the addition should not be at the same height or higher than the main building.

So that the applicant did lower that.

Just step down a little.

Same with the eave.

The eave should be a little bit lower.

Okay.

I don't remember them talking about density at the meeting.

They don't get into that.

They sometimes are asked, you know, if there's a special use permit application, they're asked to advise on density in terms of how it would impact visually the building.

But they don't really get into that.

They don't get into traffic, things like that.

Okay, thank you.

It's kind of the same question.

I thought you were going to go exactly where I went, but mine was a little different.

which was that in your initial staff report to the BAR, as Councillor Galvin said, you said that it was, it seemed appropriate and then in your recommendation to us tonight, basically saying that we should uphold the BAR and is that, I mean I know that all, we wouldn't have a BAR if things weren't kind of a judgement call, so is your recommendation tonight just saying that they are,

I'm completely supportive of them.

I would like to clarify my recommendation in the staff report.

I guess the BAR is used to me, but what I usually do is try to hone in on the issues so that they don't discuss everything.

the meetings go on and on.

So what I do is something is really egregious.

I would point to that or if it's very well done.

You know, if it's clear cut, I might say I recommend approval.

I rarely say I recommend approval or disapproval.

Things just aren't that cut and dried usually.

So what I do is, and I think I did it here, was make it pretty clear

that the, for instance, the removal of the rear porch would not diminish the character.

The proposed addition is larger than the original building, but is well located to minimize its visual impact.

The addition should not share a roofline with the original building.

So those things, I think, are very neutral, kind of in tone, and

and then the suggested motion makes it sound like I'm recommending approval but the motion, we don't do alternative motions like city council and planning commission.

It's all kind of combined in one.

They use it as a prompt.

So I guess in a case like this, I would imagine that they might approve it with modifications and that was kind of what I was anticipating.

Spell me?

No?

Good.

I'm an architect here in Charlottesville and I'm representing the owner, Mr. Bonner, on this property.

I wanted to start by saying that as a former many, many year, I think eight plus year, member of the Board of Architecture Review and as chairman for six or seven years, I understand the

the nature of the process that we're going through and how unusual it is to overturn a BAR recommendation like this.

But I felt strongly in this case that this was one that was worthy of some additional discussion because of the way that the project unfolded.

And I wanted to start by just giving you a couple of reasons why we think this is one of the ones that you should strongly consider to overturn.

And I will start by saying that I think the staff actually got it right the first time.

And if you look at the discussion that was had by the BAR, we started out by acknowledging that the zoning code is the foundational sort of starting point as an architect and designer by what we do.

It's the set of rules that defines the setbacks, the heights, the nature of what we do.

And if those rules don't apply, one is sort of left floating around in space without a clear idea.

The UMD zoning is pretty clear about this.

and almost everybody who's done work in the neighborhood has followed the zoning fairly carefully and we tried to do the same thing.

So the building completely fits within the zoning envelope and we were very careful to make sure that it did so.

Secondly,

It's important to note that as you consider the beginning of this project, you really can't see the addition at all from 14th Street.

The building is set back completely.

We followed the National Park Service guidelines on insetting the building immediately behind its primary mass so that it really can't be read at all from 14th Street side.

The Heights, there were some good suggestions by the BAR.

I thought they were fair in their consideration and we don't have any problem at all.

In fact, I think the design was improved by their comments relative to the roof line and also the inset of the eave line at the inset that we did immediately behind the board.

So we're in agreement with those.

Those were improvements to design and we don't have any problem following those at all in a resubmission.

When you start to look at the design guidelines implied by the BAR's list under 34-276, it's pretty clear that the focus of the design exercise, once one has started with the zoning, is to then conduct the design of the building in an appropriate manner.

And we were very careful about the windows, materials, and if you read the transcript, neither staff nor the BAR really had any significant comments at all

other than the ones that were mentioned about the building as designed and in fact they were complementary about the work that had been done on the project that it fit the neighborhood and it was appropriate within that context.

As I read through 34.276, as an architect, I'm less struggling to figure out how, if you follow the rules, and you follow the design guidelines, and you follow the general accepted practices outlined by the National Park Service guidelines, and you come up with a project that, for all intents and purposes, meets all of the pieces, you don't obtain at least some semblance of a reasonable approval for a certificate of appropriateness.

And we were left sort of figuring out what's going on here.

And these were raised by Ms. Scala relative to the comments of the board, or at least two members or three members of the board, relative to the zoning density.

The issue really comes up with the zoning density if you look at the character of the neighborhood, the historical guidelines, the focal points that the staff in its secondary review raised.

The addition exists within an alleyway, effectively.

When you walk down that alley, you will realize that it is surrounded by large three and a half story apartment buildings to the rear, and that probably half of the structures in that alley are a hodgepodge of additions that have been done exactly like this building on the side, on the back, in various configurations, and not nearly as nice as this building.

So if one wants to talk about a precedent,

As an architect, I would say this actually should be a precedent for how you do an alley design in a UMD zoning district in an appropriate way.

And we're here today to try to bring a really quality project that meets the intent of the zoning and the city's master plan and strategic plans in a way that makes some sense.

I find it really difficult to look at the quality of the buildings in the alley and the randomness of what was built all around it and to see how we had anyway disrupted the historic fabric of that alley or the configuration.

And I guess I have an issue with that subjectively.

It's not my place to do that.

That's to be ours.

But I think it's what I'm asking you to look at, at least in part, for how this was viewed.

I think what really got me concerned a little bit was the fact that, as one of the members said during the discussion about this, they really had a problem with the zoning density and the fact that the zoning allows higher density student housing in this area, which is part of what the UMD zoning is designed to do.

And I think it's perfectly reasonable for the BAR as a interpretive body to take a look at that density and say, gee, we think it's too much or it's historically inappropriate or whatever.

But it really violates the spirit of what the BAR and the zoning code are about.

The zoning code is a legislative action that you as council take in order to support a basic set of rules about what a developer and an architect can design and build, number of units, setback, parking,

Those are the rules that we have to start with and there shouldn't be sort of a back door process where the BAR has an argument about the zoning and it attempts to do that through making the example of a project, which is frankly what we thought happened in this instance.

I don't think it was malicious, I think it was well intentioned by the board, but I think it was misdirected in terms of how this process unfolded.

My suggestion would be that if the BAR has a problem with the zoning or the density, those may be perfectly reasonable questions to ask.

It may well be that the historic fabric of that neighborhood is disadvantaged by the density of the zoning.

The appropriate format for that is for the B.A.R.

to recommend to the City Council that they open a legislative action to consider the zoning and to change the strategic plan and the comprehensive plan and to do it in that manner, which is prescribed by law.

so that we get to a result that architects like me can design around without being deeply confused by what the intention of either the zoning code or the BAR is about.

So I mean no malice to the BAR.

I will finish simply by saying that the last thing I feel about is I spent many, many years of my life helping to develop and support the design guidelines in this community.

It's sad for me to see a scenario unfold in which a very well-directed and well-intentioned scenario by the board kind of goes off the rails and, in fact, undermines what we're trying to do as architects and designers and members of this community to bring quality projects to the community, to these areas that follow the rules.

If we don't have a basic set of rules, it's very hard to function as designers.

And for that reason, and with all sympathy to the BAR, I urge you to support the staff's original motion and intent, which is to support this application and to, hopefully if you find it of merit, begin a process to reconsider the zoning through the regular process that the city council might go through.

Any questions?

I think we're going to take a break before we get to Ms. Miller's presentation, because we're past nine o'clock.

Thank you very much.

Let's take a five minute break.

Back in our seats in five minutes.

And there are lots of cookies down here, Ms. Szakos again.

They're not pretty, but tasty.

I don't know.

Music playing...

The End

I don't know.

Oh, well, 10 minutes we're sending to.

That's fine.

First I wanted to start with an explanation of how the packets work in the staff report.

If you want to look through any past meeting and go through all of our packets, you'll see that almost never can you tell what staff is instructing the BAR to do.

Mary Joy presents the information very neutrally and then

she leaves it to the BAR to make a decision.

So you're right.

In this case, she didn't recommend for this not to be approved.

But you have trouble finding a packet where she does recommend for something to be denied.

The next thing I wanted to talk about is the zoning issue.

So, yes, the proposed addition apparently meets the criteria set in the zoning map.

But this building is also within an architectural design control district, which is also a function of zoning.

So it needs to meet the zoning criteria in terms of setback and size, but it also needs to gain a certificate of appropriateness from the BAR.

So just like the BAR can't trump zoning and say you can have a smaller setback, et cetera, the prescribed zoning doesn't matter unless the addition can gain a certificate of appropriateness from the BAR.

So the two things have to work together.

And what is unique to this property is the size of the proposed addition is enabled to be larger on a technicality.

that is because the owner of the property owns adjacent properties and so is able to utilize parking on the adjacent properties and build all the way out where parking would otherwise have to occupy.

So this lot size wouldn't allow an addition of this size if this was the only thing owned by the owner, if that makes sense.

and that's mentioned in the packet.

So in 2003, the current zoning was actually adopted in the historic district.

In 2006, like Mary Joy said, it was acknowledged at the time that some of the principals were in conflict, but the idea was to allow density near the university overall, but protect the neighborhood around the school and within the ADC district.

Kind of a quid pro quo, like

We're maximizing the density, but we're also going to take a look at it through the BAR when things come forward.

So if you think about the zoning map, it's like the large chunks of color are applied with a wide brush.

The zoning map doesn't go parcel by parcel, that's spot zoning.

And the zoning doesn't do a particular property

or even a particular street, it's a big chunk.

And then the finer detail is assigned to the BAR to paint.

So we're tasked with using a tiny brush.

We walk the area, we gain an understanding of it, and then we have to interpret the guidelines as they apply to that tiny little spot on the bigger map.

So I would present that whether or not members of the BAR agree with zoning is irrelevant.

In this case and in every other, we're tasked with

interpreting the guidelines and applying them to a particular case, and so it doesn't matter if you agree.

And in fact, I would argue that many members probably do agree with that large chunk of color on the zoning map that this makes sense for an area to be dense.

The BAR members who are appointed by you,

are to determine if the application meets the guidelines, which are also adopted by you, and the proposed addition does not meet the guidelines.

Since we're short on time, I won't go back over them.

Mary Joy did, but I will explain how we feel like it doesn't meet the guidelines.

The addition will visually overpower the building,

and a number of mature trees will likely need to be removed.

We weren't provided a landscape plan but just standing in the alley you can see the handicap ramp is existing where mature trees are now and so it will be much more visible than the street once the trees are gone.

The addition is not compatible with the massing size scale

and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and, importantly, its environment.

It triples the size of the home and it's incompatible with massing size and scale of the houses on this block and those in the surrounding blocks.

The value and the size and expense of potentially removing this addition later would basically make it impossible to remove.

So it doesn't meet the criteria regarding if additions or alterations were removed in the future, the essential

Form and integrity of the building would be unimpaired.

And overall, it doesn't meet our second criteria, which asks if it's compatible with the historic cultural architectural character of the Rugby Road Venable neighborhood district.

So massing size and scale were clear issues throughout the discussion of the meeting.

Actually, I was out of town, so I didn't get an opportunity to officially vote on it, but I have reviewed the video.

and the applicant was clear from the very beginning that the massing was non-negotiable.

It was said right at the beginning of the meeting that there's no debate that it will just be appealed to council.

And so because it was clear the massing wasn't going to be approved, I don't think the BAR got into the details of detailing and the same kind of thing we do with an application that's heading for approval.

And I just wondered if anybody has had a chance to walk around this house and neighborhood since this has landed in your packets.

So you kind of know, I provided some pictures, but for anybody that wasn't able to walk it, this is definitely not the 14th Street of Wirtland corner.

It's very different.

And so there's some pictures of what that looks like down there with lots of huge additions and giant apartment buildings.

This is four blocks from Preston Avenue.

and unlike 14th Street near the corner, it's filled with single family homes.

So while it's clear these homes are currently housing students, the houses themselves are intact, which are pages two and three, show some pictures of that.

Along West Main Street, the BAR has recently approved 1,549 new bedrooms.

595 are now available and the next 342 come online in August.

So if students should eventually turn this neighborhood back over to the people of Charlottesville, the houses on this block could once again house families.

The homes are still homes and they haven't been spoiled.

and Neighborhoods Changed.

My neighborhood was originally built with single family homes but times changed.

People were able to live in the county and commute into the city for work.

Suburbia was trendy and downtowns were dead.

So people left the neighborhood, houses got run down, they got divided into apartments and then into boarding houses.

and then times changed again.

All of a sudden downtown living was once again cool and desirable and so people started moving back and the divisions for apartments could be taken away and the deadbolts off all the bedroom doors could be filled in and removed and once again they can be single family homes.

and for the most part they are.

But I invite included a picture of a house where a giant duplex was added as an addition, which I think is a funny thing.

The code audit might want to look at what's considered an addition.

And this house, the values have risen in the neighborhood.

And so the property owner said, hey, great time to sell.

But turns out nobody wanted to buy the house.

They reduce the price by over one hundred thousand dollars and nobody wanted to buy the house because

The duplex is too expensive to remove and it fills up the entire backyard and it devalues the house overall.

So Charlottesville can't grow and we are limited in perpetuity by our borders and we don't have a lot of lots left so our single family home stock can't grow either.

If you stand on the front steps of 513 14th Street Northwest you can see Venable Elementary and behind the house is the quaint alley.

There's pictures of it in the

Attachment.

And on each side you can see outbuildings and backyards.

And actually I disagree that this alley is a mess.

I think it's really cool and it's a great place to walk and enjoy.

And this whole neighborhood could easily be for regular non-student people of Charlottesville.

The Gordon Avenue Library is right there.

Venable is literally a half block away.

And you can go to Preston Avenue and get cookies from Bread Works.

So you're probably under pressure to overturn the BAR decision.

And while we all want Charlottesville to grow and thrive, but I think standing up for the neighborhoods and telling the developer not on this lot does not preclude us from further development.

As long as developers can make money here, they'll be here.

and upholding the decision helps us keep the city special.

And keeping the city special is what keeps developers here and investing in our community.

So that's what I'm asking you to do tonight.

Are we that desperate for eight more bedrooms when we just have 1,500 being approved?

So gaining eight rooms here is not worth spoiling a neighborhood because, after all, if you overturn the BAR here, then what happens next door and across the street and two doors down?

So please support the Venable Neighborhood and the BAR and uphold our decision.

Okay.

Any questions for anybody here?

I would be willing to make a motion.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, I'll just say my default position is always to be respectful of the BAR and the Planning Commission and the citizen volunteer organizations that are set up to protect the city.

Unless there's a compelling reason

to overrule.

And I don't see that compelling reason in this situation.

And I'll just, since I made the motion, I will say that I read this very carefully and I did go over there.

And I think that both positions in here have really valid points.

And I think because the

B.A.R.

was not unanimous.

That's always something I look for to say, you know, what were some of the reasons for disagreement?

But I think overall in reading and also hearing the staff report and nothing tonight changed my mind.

I think that because like Mr. Fenwick, I tend to side with our boards and commissions when there's not a compelling reason not to.

Mayor Signer, I guess I shall bring up an alternative view.

I empathize with the frustration between the disconnect between our zoning ordinances and the architectural controlled guidelines.

However, I do not think any applicant should get caught in that conflict between zoning and the guidelines.

What we need to do, and it's been said, is that we need to complete our code audit and we need a revision of our zoning that better align with our conference of plan vision.

However, at this point in time, when I see what the applicant provided and what I see what our zoning is requiring in terms of

infill development that promotes more students, more people living within walking distance of where they need to go, that existing zoning does have some sense to it.

I look at the drawings, I look at what was submitted, and I believe that it was a very sensitive infill project that increases density modestly without increasing the scale of the street.

I mean, so it keeps the character of the context, especially from the street.

In many ways I find myself wondering that would that all infill projects adhere to the roof ridges as this one does?

Adheres to the adjacent details and massing in a manner that diminishes the scale of the project in keeping with the context and at the same time it inserts a little bit more density which is something that

we're all grappling with because as Ms. Miller has said, we do not have any other place to grow.

This was a project that seemed to successfully do an infill project that increased density ever so moderately and did it within the context of the existing scale of the neighborhood.

So this is to me exactly the kind of project we need to be advocating for.

I kept going over and over the list of the standard of review.

Nowhere did I see anywhere that the BAR's charge is to regulate density, regulate land use in any way.

Housing policy is not its purview.

That is the purview of the council.

We are working and been pushing for the code audit.

The same issues came up on West Main Street in terms of BAR being given projects that they believe were far too big given the existing zoning.

And what the council did do was change the zoning.

But the BAR didn't deny the projects based on the fact that the zoning, they felt the zoning was inappropriate.

In this case, it feels like the BAR

is denying this project because they don't agree with the existing underlying zoning.

And I think that's a very bad precedent and something that we really need to be very careful of approving.

That's the part, yeah, so you've raised that discussion.

Mr. Bellamy, do you have any?

So this one was very difficult for me just after reading through

The background information as well as listening to both presentations, I'm honestly somewhat inclined to agree with Ms. Galvin from the standpoint in which I think

This is reminiscent to a certain degree of West Main and while I have a ton of respect for the BAR, the utmost respect for the volunteers, I feel as if sometimes they get outside of their peer view and they may make decisions that

may not be essentially what they were designed to do.

And I think we may put them in that position and it kind of puts you all between a rock and a hard place.

But just as Councilor Galvin eloquently stated, this was kind of the plan and the model that we want developers to use.

And that's what they did.

I lean toward this view as well, toward Vince Galvin's view.

I think it's a really close call and I think a lot of the cases that come down to us are really close and in my time on the council so far I've demonstrated, I mean I've had a great willing, you know,

interest in supporting our determinations.

I think we generally do defer to our boards, but it was a divided decision.

I think that this presentation that Mr. Wassenaar made was very compelling, and Ms. Galvin's arguments, I think, are as well.

I don't know if my standard is that there's an overwhelming reason.

I think it's a very close call, but I do, I think if this could be a forcing function for bigger

I think we need that.

I think we need not to try to make lemonade out of lemon but

I think it's a close enough call that the arguments in favor of the project and the way that it's designed, and I do defer to Miss Galvin on some of these quality issues about architecture, and it sounds to me like

if it's a matter of potentially perceiving BAR stretching as a regulatory stretch as compared to a fairly narrow application of the design within the existing code that I would

advert to the narrow application of the architecture within the existing code, although it's a very tough call, and then I would say this shows the urgency of figuring out our zoning issues quickly.

So I would, it's a tough call.

I mean, there's no question that's where I am.

Okay.

I move, Mayor Signer, that the City Council overturn the BAR's decision regarding the size of this project.

I'll second.

Second.

Any further discussion or questions?

OK, all in favor of that motion?

OK, carries 3 to 2.

Close call.

Thank you all.

All right, we are moving on to the final item in our.

Second.

No, I'm sorry.

We have.

New business after.

Yeah, the final item on our announced agenda.

Item number nine, Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Monuments and Public Spaces.

So we had a work session on this.

I'll present on this briefly.

We had a work session on this for over two hours on Thursday night, where we worked through publicly and with public comment at the end a lot of details about this.

I wanted to advise my colleagues.

There was one.

It was three bullets after bullet two on the second page, which just what we did, this was just technical.

The way that we rewrote it was cost, revenue, sites, and siting and fundraising applies to all three of those bullets.

But if the draft that you had talked about revenue, costs, and fundraising additionally.

But I think now they're not as the bullets have been.

It's not a big deal.

Well, this I downloaded today.

Well, I think that these three bullets here, it's specific a recommendation.

It may be that the second one could be

taken off, but it specifically talks about revenue, which I think the others are not bringing in the same way.

It doesn't... Yeah, it's not a...

I mean, now this was more expansive.

So I saw that.

So this is not a big deal.

This was just meant...

Okay.

I would prefer to leave those three in.

We can keep them in as far as I'm concerned.

Okay.

Should we read this out loud?

It's in the agenda.

We typically wouldn't read a material like this.

Mayor Signer, I would just like to make one more suggestion based on some of the comments or the very detailed letters that we received over the past week from people that have a lot of experience in dealing with process and dealing with historic research.

and we all got these emails.

And I was contemplating this idea that what can take additional time are some of the very technical aspects of finding precise alternative locations, doing cost estimates, coming up with a fundraising strategy.

So I

wondered if we could entertain a possibility of adding the word preliminary in key locations and then be it further resolved that the counter reserves the right to extend the function of this commission to develop more detailed directives on

the locations where memorials may be relocated, cost estimates, fundraising strategies, and recommendations for the erection of additional monuments.

It's not slowing down anything in terms of determining what happens to the statues, but it builds in more time to get more accurate data about cost, about where these monuments could go.

and that was an attempt to respond to some of the very cogent and detailed emails that we received.

So I just offered that and where I would put preliminary is again just before the word location in the first bullet and in front of the word cost in the

I actually agree on the addition of the word preliminary.

I'm a little less sanguine about adding more time at the end, even after decisions are made, because I think that if we're asking people to apply for this commission,

It makes sense to have an end date so that they know when their job is done.

Okay, I can accept that as long as we're willing to say that we could get this really excellent report, but it's not

detailed enough for us to take action in a very specific way other than the more obvious one, but in terms of identifying a fundraising strategy.

That will take a long time to figure that out.

In the first bullet, where?

I'm sorry, that would be the

Second page of the resolution, the second to the last further resolved.

Yes, so be it further resolved that council charges the Blue Ribbon Commission with providing a written report by no later than November 30th, that's the be it further resolved I'm looking at.

So when you look at the first bullet under that be it further resolved, you go to the very last line

and it says and determine appropriate preliminary locations where memorials may be relocated if applicable.

That's the first preliminary.

The second preliminary would be you go down to that second bullet and then you go to that second sub bullet where it says estimate the costs.

I have estimate the preliminary costs.

and then the next bullet down, develop a preliminary fundraising strategy.

So my question, if I may, after which

If we just use the terms preliminary, when the commission comes back to us, do we then say, well, these were all just preliminary findings and we need to go back and appoint them again?

My only issue with the preliminary piece is that we task the commission, we give them a job, they come back to us with the recommendation, and then we move forward.

I'm not quite sure why we need

More additional, after we've already given them additional time as well as a multitude of different resources at their disposal to figure out what it is that we're tasking to do and then come back to us.

Thank you.

My only concern, well excuse me, my second concern is that while we have also heard emails from or received emails from some people saying that this may need more time and people need to think this out, we've also seen or received emails and communications from people who said that this shouldn't take that long.

Y'all should be willing to be able to allow them to make a decision and we move on it.

So then we get into the battle of

Well, we received emails from these people and then he's like, how do we balance the two?

Again, I'm responding to two very strong emails that we receive from people who are very experienced in a lot of this kind of work since I'm taking this very seriously.

The last thing I think any one of us wants to see is that this committee or this commission gets down a rabbit hole trying to figure out a very particular detail about a cost estimate

when we're not getting the big picture.

May I, can I offer a thought?

I actually have one.

Would you feel more comfortable if the preliminaries were taken out of the second bullet point?

Because the other things are really very large and I think what I worry about and the reason that I'm interested in seeing preliminary in one and three

I have a, can I, may I, please, it's sort of possible compromise in this because I just want to, so we received one email from a very thoughtful, well-respected community member who's worked on commissions like this in the past and had a lot of expertise, so those who, her estimate was that we could have 18 separate public meetings if you look at the, the

The eight different things that we specifically look at and she was saying well you might want to do two meetings on this item and a couple on this and if the commission is meeting every two weeks like a lot of commissions are then she just was kind of factoring out from there to look at the amount of time.

It was very thoughtful.

It was by no means, you know, final because you could have them figure out these problems or do less or combine meetings, so etc.

But it was just a thoughtful email.

I think that is part of what Ms. Galvin, what if, but I actually think that I side with Mr. Bellamy on this because I'm worried about

Watering down the advice we get and giving, that would concern me.

I think we're calling this a blue ribbon commission for intentional reasons.

We want it to be a kind of supercharged mission, that is.

So what if you, so just a thought.

So if they're blue ribbon, if they're charged with doing holistic, they're really putting all this thought and all these things together.

What if we gave them the ability to come back to us if they determined and applied us for more time?

I specifically wanted to avoid that.

Yeah, I want to avoid that too.

Because then that, but I just, I mean, I'm certainly

I'm not going to fall on my sword on this.

I just want to make sure that we're not asking for the impossible, in which case we will get bogged down in details and we won't get the recommendations we need.

And it's a pretty big task to come up with a fundraising strategy within this amount of time.

I think number two is not that complex, the second bullet point.

We're in the be it further resolved that council charges the Blue Ribbon Commission with providing a written report later than November 30th.

That be it further resolved.

The first one is talking about how council can best complement the previous and ongoing work of these other groups.

Right.

Either through a policy or specific plan.

That, I think, is somewhat general.

And I'm sort of coming back a little bit on this, but I think the second one, too, is pretty specific.

We want to know these two particular statutes, what happens to them.

and I think, you know, if we want to say a preliminary fundraising strategy, I'm comfortable with that because I think that we can do a fundraising strategy and we don't need that to make a decision.

And so, if the concern is the location, where was it, the, including the memorial sort of, let's see.

Well, there was a preliminary in the first bullet.

See, if applicable.

So I think that even with ALPA, it is pretty general, and I think it may not need one.

And I think the second one may not need one.

I think the third bullet, any recommendations involving the erection of additional monuments, memorials, and historical markers, especially if you're talking about costs, revenues, and siting, that is too big for them to, you know, it would be great if they come back by November 30th, but I think with that one, if they have preliminary plans,

That's enough for me to then say, thank you, job well done.

Well, I would like to see the flexibility part stay in there.

If we do our job right, we're going to have nine very good people doing this.

And at this point, we certainly don't know what direction they're going to go in.

And they don't.

They haven't even been appointed yet.

So I would let them have their head in this.

Give them a date but not a date certain, perhaps.

I would encourage the flexibility part.

What happens if they suddenly reach some kind of consensus and they're not quite there yet?

We won't be cutting it off.

One of the things I feel, the city as a whole, and this goes back for several different years, we have had issues with just making a decision

and when we put ourselves in positions in which we say well we may not be able to do this because of that we may need to look at it some more or we may need to like those things have happened for far too long let's just allow the commission to come back to us with whatever it is that they find

Whatever their recommendation is, and then we go forth from there.

They're going to have a ton of different resources.

They have flexibility within the time frame that's been provided.

These kind of discussions are literally going on across the Southeast and across the South as a whole in the United States of America.

It's not undoable.

I agree with what Councilwoman Szakos just alluded to.

This isn't anything new.

This isn't something that is absolutely undoable.

They're essentially taking their time.

They're going to be speaking with the community.

They have the resources and they're going to come back to us with the recommendation.

I'm just not quite sure why we're looking to give them

even more reasons to not just provide us with what we asked them for.

If this was the planning commission, when they review something, they provide us a recommendation and then we decide what happens next.

Essentially no different from this.

Mayor Signer, may I offer one possible way out of this?

Sure.

completely nixed the word preliminary, but go to that third bullet and say, specify any recommendations involving the erection of additional monuments, memorials, or historical markers, including the need for additional research.

So that specify any recommendations involving additional monuments, but also including the need for additional research.

So that way, if they're saying that they need, in that last bullet, they need to do more research about these monuments, then they will recommend that.

You know, there's probably nothing, I mean, there's nothing that would preclude this commission from doing what I said.

I mean, they could come back to us and we could say, no, we're gonna have interchange with them for future

I don't know, what are other responses to Ms. Galvin's?

I mean, because that would only apply to that one to the direction of additional monuments, whereas they're looking at, if you look at the first page, they've got, you know, eight other, they're looking at naming opportunities.

There's a lot of other stuff that they're doing.

Well, again, I just wanted to make sure that we did not ignore

this very, very well reasoned appeal for more time.

And that we're commissioning this group of people to do something that is extremely difficult.

And I just wanted to make sure that we were not in our zeal to get this done by a certain date in many ways hampering the effectiveness of this group to give us the real answer that this community needs.

and so I understand the importance of getting this done within the calendar year.

I'm not hearing any consensus about the addition of the word.

I'm assuming that the staff will give the

Can I try to gather the sentiment here so it sounds...

I was going to make a motion.

Where were we on preliminary being in there in a couple different places?

Well the motion that I just said was without it because I wasn't hearing that there was a lot of support for it and I think as we went through those

I think that, and I just wanted to add to this discussion, so the calculation from this person said that we'd have a minimum 18 meetings if they were bi-weekly.

I think one of the things we learned from this is that if we're all wedded to the pretty tight timeline, the commission is going to have to work.

Yeah.

Do you have any specific formulation of that?

I would accept what Kristin is saying, just to get this thing going.

But I also read that email.

And it seemed to me they're packing an awful lot into there.

And if that's the case, would it have value to revisit the alternate part of it?

My response to that would be that this is all helping us a great deal.

It's fleshing out just a little bit more the demands that we're going to be placing.

And I think it may influence the application that we have.

It may say we're looking at a tight, intense schedule of meetings.

We're looking for you to be available in town.

That may be over this five-month period of time.

It's actually going to be close to six months with the November 30th date.

That's right.

These are items that we need to allow the commission to decide.

Not someone who's sending us an email before the commission becomes appointed.

Again, we've decided, excuse me, not decided, but we have spoken at length.

not only last Thursday but in previous council meetings about what the commission would look like, how this conversation has started.

Why not empower those commission members to be able to decide these items on their own opposed to allowing someone who would send us an email in the midst of us receiving hundreds of other emails who I personally believe there have been several people who have given us very fine and well-crafted ideas about how things should go.

but we set a very dangerous precedent when we bring in one individual's email who may have experienced while there have been others who have experienced in other areas and we speak about what that in particular person believes we should do and take that responsibility out of the hands of the commission.

Okay, that's a properly seconded motion.

I would second myself with that.

I don't think there was anything inappropriate in the slightest in the discussion we just had about a very thoughtful and we've had, we've deliberated extensively about many other communications we've gotten and I thought that was an entirely appropriate discussion.

That's why we have this on the agenda.

in a proper council meeting.

Last week was a work session.

This is where we're actually making the decision.

So that would be my response.

Any other further comments on the motion on the table?

Thank you, Mr. Bellamy.

Any other comments or questions?

OK.

I think all in favor of that motion.

Motion carries 5 to 0.

All right, we have new business.

I brought two letters.

They are at the request of former counselor Meredith Richards.

There is the, let's see, I don't want to go into it at too much length than yet.

Actually, should I just read one?

Actually, most of it.

Well, the FAST Act, which was the US Transportation Act, was passed to include consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvement funding for up to $190 million in order to cover a broad range of rail projects.

But then after the FAST Act had come through some of the process in the Senate, the Senate Appropriations Committee subcommittee, THUD subcommittee, I don't know what THUD stands for,

narrowed the scope of the program by stripping eligibility for passenger-specific goals, such as investment in stations, upgrades to reduce train congestion, and enhancement to facilitate ridership growth.

And because we actually have funding to start the process of a second train set for Amtrak through Charlottesville, and because we're really committed to passenger rail, she felt and I agreed, and so I am submitting it for your consideration

that it would be appropriate for us to write a letter to each of our two senators asking them to please work within the Senate to restore funding for passenger specific goals under the FAST Act.

Very good.

Let's not overstate right.

I'm going to sign.