City Council Meeting   2/21/2023

Yes, sir.

Mr. Mayor, Council, we would like to introduce Mr. Joseph Del Olio, a representative from Polko who will present the results of the 2022 National Community Survey.

While Mr. Del Olio will go into the background and data, the city was pleased that many members of our community were willing to engage with the survey and provide us with their thoughts.

Over 350 people,

provided their response to create the random sampling information that will be reported this afternoon.

An additional 195 community members responded to the open survey.

The full results of the report

and a copy of the presentation Mr. Del Olio is about to give are already available online under the initiatives managed by the city manager subsection of the city manager page.

Beautiful.

Thank you for that introduction.

I just want to make sure you can hear me all right, and I'm sharing my screen.

We can see you, we can hear you, but it would be helpful if you kept your voice up a little bit.

Beautiful.

Okay.

I can reject, definitely.

Thank you.

That helps.

Perfect.

And if at any point you'd like me to repeat anything, feel free to jump in.

But again, my name is Joe Delolio, Senior Survey Associate here at Polko NRC.

Very excited to be presenting the results for the National Communities Survey for Charlottesville, especially being I'm a UNC grad myself, so I love being able to

to be able to give these presentations to other folks who are closely tied to the ACC, although I'm not particularly excited for the UVA-UNC matchup this Saturday.

I'm not feeling too great about that.

But that being said,

This is true.

This is true.

No conflict of interest there.

Definitely not.

But before jumping in, I do want to just give a special thanks to Ashley Reynolds Marshall, who is our primary contact.

and primary point of contact, excuse me, throughout the survey development implementation.

They provided thoughtful, detailed feedback throughout the project.

Also do want to acknowledge my colleague, Steven Rickers, who was the project manager for this go around of the NCPS.

And a little bit about us.

Starting with National Research Center or NRC, we have been the premier provider of survey services to local government for the past 25 years.

We do have long standing partnerships with both ICMA as well as NLC.

And our founders quite literally wrote the book on these surveys.

In 2019, we joined POLCO, which is an online civic engagement platform to better service both the jurisdictions we work with as well as the residents that live in these communities.

And before diving into results, I want to emphasize that there are a variety of ways that these can be used.

Most commonly, the folks that we work with use survey data to monitor trends and resident opinion over time, measurement government performance, as well as ratings of public trusts to help inform the budgeting processes as well as strategic planning.

our results also allow you to benchmark community specific characteristics of services in the community against those and those same characteristics in other communities with our benchmarking database which I'll touch on a little bit and our hope is that these findings will be you know the spur of ideas for what can be done within the community and where there are other areas that you might want to dig deeper

and the National Community Survey of the NCS is a standardized five-page comprehensive survey and that

Measurer's resident opinion and what we refer to as the 10 facets of community livability.

These are the 10 areas identified by survey researchers and those being most vital to creating communities that folks want to live in.

So the presentation as well as the report follow these 10 facets of community livability and along with that we do also find that these facets do fall in line with department heads if they're looking for data that's most pertinent to them.

Going into an overview of this iteration of the NCS, this is the fifth time the city has run the National Community Survey previously also in 2012, 14, 16 and 18 and this survey effort was conducted in late 2022 between November and December very before that turn of the year and we employed a probability based random sample of 2800 households

So to build that base, we start looking at all addresses that according to the USPS at Service Charlottesville and from there using the most up-to-date municipal boundaries, we can geocode those addresses to make sure that we're looking only at those that are truly in those defined boundaries of the city.

From there, we employ what we refer to as probability based sampling.

And that's a process where every address, every household has a known probability of selection and the same probability of selection.

And we use that process to build out that base of 2,800 households.

along with that each household included in the sample received two points of contact the first being a pre-notification postcard giving a little bit of background information and inviting folks to respond online and that was followed up a week later with a physical survey packet so this had a letter again introducing the survey inviting folks to respond on the

as well as a physical survey and postage paid return envelope.

And this packet did also have a URL to respond online.

So every household that received this survey had the ability to respond either on Polko or with the physical survey packet.

So the households that received the survey, we had a total of 371 responses received back.

which correlates to about a 14% response rate overall at a plus or minus 5% margin of error and that's at a 95% confidence interval

And I do want to point out that that 14% response rate is definitely right in that range that we'd expect.

On average, we have probably around that 15% response rate.

And so that's definitely in the range that we look for.

along with that we did run that non probability open participation survey so anybody that wasn't included in that random sample had a chance to respond to the survey as well and both the open participation as well as random sample survey were statistically weighted to reflect Charlottesville overall and so we asked a few questions for folks to self-identify some of those demographics

and then we compare that with the U.S.

Census and we can consider some answers more than others or responses more than others to make sure that the results are a good representative view until those demographic groups and Charlottesville overall

And touching on this briefly before, one of the advantages that the local government had in participating in the NCS is the opportunity to compare ratings given by your residents to those from communities across the nation with our benchmarking database.

And this was born out of

Knowing that there are some areas that generally will receive higher ratings overall and other areas lower ratings overall.

For example, fire services tend to do well compared to let's say street related services which may on average not get as high of ratings overall.

So instead of comparing the ratings from fire services and street services, we can compare those fire services in Charlottesville to fire services in other communities across the nation, as well as with those street related services and comparing those to other street related services across the nation.

I think it gives everything a good even comparison.

and then jumping into an overview of the results we do ask two questions directly related to those 10 facets of community livability the first of which we ask folks to rate the overall quality of these 10 facets of livability

and then we do also ask them to place an importance level in a separate question on this 10 facets of reliability and with that data we're able to I think create an aptly named quality and importance matrix and we use this chart which is also included in the report to help determine any areas that

relatively speaking received a higher importance level and a lower quality level to residents and so we have those started in the right hand corner and while they're not let's say the end-all be-all these do help us to key on any key findings as well as point to any possible areas of focus for the community in the coming years

And comparing these individual items in Charlottesville to those in the national benchmarks, we have 123 survey items that were provided for evaluative ratings.

Of those, five received ratings more positive in the national benchmarks.

The vast majority were similar with 87 and 31 were more negative.

And then comparing to Charlotte, Charlottesville's ratings from 2018, nine received more positive ratings, 10 were similar, and 50 we saw a decline over time.

and before jumping into the key findings I do want to note that these are what stood out to us as survey researchers as as interesting and you as you all go through especially being the experts in Charlottesville I'm sure there are many many other highlights to be gleaned so this is what we found interesting and on top of I'm sure there's many many other interesting items to be found

the first of which being that residents generally feel safe in the city although do have some concerns about police services and residents rank safety as their overall top priority for Charlottesville in the next two years and a majority of participants indicated that they they did feel safe in the city overall and this is highlighted by folks feeling very safe and this is very somewhat safe in their neighborhood during the day over nine and ten

followed very closely from with fire flood natural disaster and strong ratings still in commercial and downtown area as well as property crime as well as violent crime fire services and emergency medical services were also rated positively by about nine to ten residents while the quality of fire prevention education received positive views by eight and ten participants

These were followed closely, again, by animal control, as well as emergency preparedness.

And these were all similar to the national and peer benchmarks.

And while most services related to safety received similar to those in the community,

Residents offer below average reviews for some of the police-related services.

You can see about half of residents approved of the overall quality of police and sheriff's service, while about 4 in 10 of their overall quality of prevention in Charlottesville.

And in a nonstandard question, we ask about some of these police-related services as well, which a high priority was placed on both

what folks felt the city with focus on reducing crime and disorder around seven and ten as well as a large proportion of folks rating that it was essential or very important for the city to increase their support both police patrol as well as investigative services around that seven and ten as well.

Our second key residents appreciate Charlottesville's natural environment as well as recreational opportunity

And ratings for survey items related to the natural environment tended to be on par with national averages.

More than 8 in 10 of respondents gave excellent and good review of overall quality of the natural environment, with the highest rating going to air quality at 9 in 10 mark.

and the two-thirds offered positive evaluations in the city's preservation of natural areas, recycling, as well as water resources.

The reviews for preservation of natural space actually increased by about points since the 2018 iteration NCS, 52%, or 66%, excuse me.

And then the question unique to Charlottesville, it's in response also named improving environmental quality as an essential or very important focus that the city in the next two years

And the majority of residents were also pleased with Charlottesville's parks and recreation.

We can see this with around eight and ten, identifying sufficient opportunities for fitness as well as sufficient available paths and walking trails, followed very closely by the ratings for the actual recreation programs and facilities.

and around 2010 identified it as essential or very important to provide more improved parks and open space.

And our third key finding, city residents widely use alternative transportation and support increasing transportation options.

Charlottesville residents reported more frequent use of alternative forms of transportation to other communities across but their comparatively lower ratings for the could suggest an area for additional focus for the coming years and nearly eight reported walking or biking instead of driving six and ten carpooled with others and four in ten used bus rail subway or other form of public transportation instead of

Each of these were actually a high-shore average, and when thinking about mobile and the city, walking received positive reviews from about 6 and 10 respondents remaining stated in the 2018 survey, and it's similar to the ease of travel by

about one third of respondents rated the ease of public parking and traffic flow as excellent or good and about a quarter of residents reviewed the ease of biking as well by public transportation favorably which was lower than comparison community and in a question unique to the city about three-quarters of

As a resident, it was essential and very important to increase transportation options for car slash bike shares as well as shuttles for the next two.

Our fourth key finding, while ratings for utilities are strong overall, Charlottesville residents point to affordable high-speed internet access as a possible area of opportunity.

I want to ask which aspects of the community the city should focus on in the next two years.

A strong amount of residents, about 80%, identified utility infrastructure priority.

Comparatively, around 6 in 10 rated the overall quality of the utility structure as excellent or good, both of which were on par with national.

That being said, a number of most items related to the infrastructure in Charlottesville garnered very strong remarks.

This was by sewer service by nearly 10, very closely by drinking water.

You can see that there's a three-quarter positive response for a majority of the other items in this section.

And resident point two, affordable high access to possible areas with positive results garnered by about half of residents.

And while we did cover the additional topics that were asked residents, we did also ask folks an individual question for each of the following city services.

Please, if you think the current level of service should be increased or decreased.

And there are four results in the

a few that we thought were particularly interesting.

There was one item specifically that folks heavily pointed to service level.

That was bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

There were a number of items that had a near equal amount of folks voting to that they believe that there should be an increase in service as well as keeping levels at the current level.

This was community residents providing competitive money to local nonprofits, traffic system improvements, as well as police patrol and investigative services.

And then in that right-hand section, the number of items that a vast majority of residents pointed to levels at the current service level.

This includes downtown parking, proactive code enforcement, park maintenance, street sidewalk maintenance repairs, building permit inspection services.

And I do want to just note again that this is what's just as being particularly interesting.

And there are many, many other highlights gained from this data.

and we do plan on following with city officials in the next few weeks to debrief the results over there and cover some of the questions that we see here and we do also Charlottesville has access to Polko to post any follow-up questions and we can dive a little deeper in any of these sections and along the city actually does have nearly 500

panel participants.

These are folks who have taken surveys in the past and signed up for notification anytime that the city hosts new local source surveys to take.

So these are nearly 500 residents who are ready to provide some more input when available.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you for the presentation.

So for a city of 50,000 people roughly, the surveys that we ended up with I guess close to 350 actual responses.

I've followed through your points of the percentages and so forth.

Is this kind of a standard response you would get from a city?

That is a great, and I want to jump into it a little bit more depth.

Immediately, yes, definitely that there's enough data here to be reliable.

We see probably a range, the normal range as a response rate would be around that 8% to around 20%.

There's certainly outliers on trends and trends.

It's more of the individual community, and we see trends falling on either side.

So, because a community is larger or smaller, doesn't necessarily mean that correlates to a higher, lower response rate.

Along with that, I do want to note that that 15% response rate is right around average.

For us as survey researchers, it's really that margin of error as being the key number.

For the NCS, we shoot for between a 4% to 6% margin of error.

More or less refers to the accuracy of a certain data, that 95% confidence interval.

So what I mean by that, and from

A statistic standpoint, 95% of the if we go and talk to a random resident off the street and ask for their opinions are going to fall reliably within plus 5% the data we have here.

Mr. Minus 5%

Along with that, it's always been a thing for me that we use similar models to the polling for predicting many of the elections, both nationally.

And so we have a similar number of responses.

We can pretty reliably predict who our next elected officials are going to be localized communities and providing their opinions.

No questions.

Two comments.

One, I wonder how strong the selection bias is in terms of who responded and whether that is ski results.

But that said,

for reliability of the publication system is obviously pretty worrying and makes sense given the service that happened across the country with the pandemic, but that jumped out to me in action.

I'd figure out why the how to improve bus system.

Another question, we do kind of front end to end checks for demographic groups and so that front is fully randomized and so it will be an accurate representation of just a slice of Charlottesville overall and

so we know that there's a little bias on the front end and it is a great comment as well about what we refer to as the non-response on the back end and we know we have a randomness group that receives it but you know there's going to be a little bit of that bias in any

And so that's where the demographic reweighting comes in.

We do ask a number of demographic questions at the end of the survey.

Those closely do relate to the wording.

able to compare the responses and the numbers in those demographic groups of those who landed, comparing that to what we would expect according to the U.S.

and then from there we can actually consider some responses or a little bit less depending on

what group they fit into, make sure that we're getting a good representative group or look into the city overall.

And an example of that would be if we know that, let's say it's about a 50-50 split of identify as male and female in Charlottesville, but we actually hear from close to a 60-40 split, we can actually

Change that a little bit, consider those responses a little bit more so.

When we're doing our analysis, it actually looks closer to that 50-50 split.

So I guess what I'm curious, aside from just sort of trying to figure out whether it's a statistically valid sample and so on, I am particularly struck by the question or the answers about police and the sense of whether police are doing a good job and so on.

Oh, gotcha.

Yes.

No, that's a great question as well.

And so did in the paper PDF version just because of the interactive nature.

But we do provide demographic crosstab and those can be found on both Polko as well as the Tableau version of the report.

And so we will provide and we have the ability to provide

some of those stones by demographic group, as well as the individual statistical significant points.

I mean, one of the things that I think all of us think we know, and I emphasize the think we know, because it depends on what the

what you all are coming up with and whether what we're getting is just anecdote.

But we think we perceive differences in the way that African Americans in Charlottesville perceive the police from the way that white folks perceive the police and in some ways very, very differently.

Yeah, definitely.

And that's something that I unfortunately don't have the report in front of me, but I'd be more than happy to dive into and help to look at those results a little bit closer to answer some of those questions.

But you're totally right that a lot of it does come down to that perception and how folks individually, but also possibly how those individual groups at large

Well, if it involves in some way modifying or extending your contract, I'm not trying to get into that, but I just was curious whether the information was discernible.

Mr. Mayor, Council,

This body of work will be fundamental to our strategic planning process.

Our strategic planning consultant has been given this background information and will help form some of our discussion when we meet together to look at the implications of this data.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

All right.

Well, thank you very much.

Yes, good afternoon.

Thank you for taking the time to hear about

how things are going in our urban forest.

I'd like to introduce our outgoing Chairwoman Peggy Vanieres and Jeff Aiton.

Our incoming chairperson will be kind of giving a follow-up on the future and kind of where we're going trees and forest wise.

I don't know.

Mr. Delahunt?

Okay.

There we go.

I see trees.

There you go.

Thank you.

Thank you for having us for our annual presentation.

As Steve said, I am the outgoing chair and Jeff Hayton is the incoming chair.

I'm going to start off with our first two sections about what is the state of the forest and what the tree commission's been doing.

Jeff will end up with what we think the city could help us with the forest.

And then Steve, of course, is here to answer any questions, too.

So, okay, next slide.

Let's see, I don't, I think, okay.

Thank you.

So state of the forest vision versus reality.

Next slide.

So the city has recently adopted some visionary documents of one, the Climate Action Plan and the Comprehensive Plan.

Both of them have aspirational visions about the natural environment.

If you don't mean, if it doesn't matter, I'd like to just read this one.

Charlottesville will be an environmental leader with healthy air, water ecosystems.

as well as ample high quality and accessible open space, natural areas and a preserved enhanced tree canopies.

Next slide, please.

Well, when it comes to the forest, the city, we are not preserving or enhancing our urban forest.

We did a canopy study and we've done them approximately every four years.

And we know from 2004 to 2018 that we've lost 10 percent canopy.

And what's even more concerning is the rate of decline.

It took us 10 years to decline about 5%, but it took us only four years to decline the last 5%.

Next slide.

So what does a 10% canopy loss look like?

Well, it equals 660 acres, and you can see it on the map of Charlottesville, and it's quite a bit of forestry loss.

Next slide.

So here we are in 2023.

That's five years away from 2018 when we did our last canopy study.

And we can assume that we may have lost another 5% and we will be down 15%.

That equals 990 acres.

And there again, you can see it projected on the city map.

So it's growing.

The loss is growing.

The decline is growing.

Thank you.

Next slide.

Also, when we did our canopy study, we looked at the canopy in each neighborhood of our 19 neighborhoods.

And all of our neighborhoods have a declining urban forest except for two.

Twelve of our 19 neighborhoods are below 40 percent canopy.

That's sort of a minimum goal.

And we have eight below 30 percent, which is becoming rather dire.

And we have two

particularly as you can see gets the neighborhoods get green oranger and redder that are below 20% Star Hill and Tenth and Page next slide so what what are the effects of these worsening heat islands by the loss of tree canopy well we know that these neighborhoods particularly Tenth and Page have the highest energy costs in the city we know again that these neighborhoods have a higher rate

of diseases that are related to heat and pollution, such as heart attacks, strokes, and asthma.

These are diseases that trees can help prevent.

Next slide.

So just an experiment we did in September 2021, we went to Venable.

Venable has two playgrounds.

You can see on the left with the blue thermometer, that's their shady playground.

and then on the right they have a very hot playground and you can see it with a red thermometer so the blue playground we'll call it was 82 degrees and the red playground was 102 degrees that's 20 degrees difference you can see that no children are playing on the hot playground and which is what is sad is that we know that heat has a most detrimental effect on our young citizens and our older citizens

So next slide.

We always track how many trees we plant a year.

And our goal is 200 trees.

We've never met that goal, mainly because the cost of trees keeps going up.

FY21 was not normal.

That was COVID.

And rightly so, the city was worried about their financial situation.

Next slide.

One of our goals is always to plant shade trees.

And you can see on the on the chart that the shade trees are in the green.

And so we've been doing majority shade trees.

Next slide.

In F 22, most of the trees were planted in the right of way.

You can see the sort of teal color is the right of way.

Greene's or parks.

And we planted a lot.

What we did in 22, we were replacing a lot of trees that had died in our right of way.

But because I think because of what we found out at Venable, that we want to protect our children.

And so this year, we're planting most of our trees on school grounds, particularly where children and adults gather and play.

So that was our priority for this year.

Next slide.

The financial investment.

So this slide represents the money that's been approved for tree planting.

And you can see it's been continued to go up.

We had a little blurb there in 21, as we said, when the city had to be concerned about financial resources because of COVID.

But last year was the first year that FY23, you gave us $100

$50,000 for tree planting, which we much appreciate.

Also, $50,000 for ash tree removal because we're losing so many ash in the city.

Next slide.

So I'd like to go over the primary activities that the Tree Commission's been doing since 2022 into the early part of this year.

Next slide.

We have three committees on our Tree Commission.

First one, we call the Education Advocacy Committee.

These are some of the primary things they've been working on.

One, they've continued to try to work with the city to improve the Tree Commission's website to make it more accessible to the public.

The committee successively advocated for the CIP funding.

And a very important thing, we worked very closely with Steve to prepare the Downtown Mall Tree Management Plan RFP.

that is hopefully out on the street now.

Certainly the oaks on the downtown mall are probably the most beloved trees in the city.

They were planted in 75 and now they're getting toward their elder years.

So we want to make sure we can preserve them as long as possible.

Plus, as you know, we've already started, we're going to have to figure out how we replace them and what kind of tree.

So that's very important we get this done.

The Arbor Committee participated in, which you'll see later, the tree planting and tent and page neighborhood.

And they're working really hard now to develop handouts or other ways to reach the public about tell them what we do.

Next slide.

We have an Arbor Committee.

Last spring we celebrated Arbor Day at Clark School.

You can see there Steve Gaines there engaging very excited kids and talking to them about the value of trees on their playground in the city.

In the background we have JW Townsend's crew who donated a wonderful willow oak and planted it for us at the school.

The Arbor Committee also worked with Steve to figure out where we're going to plant

and what kind of trees and where they're going to be this year.

They worked with the utilities department on their first ever tree giveaway program, which was also done on Arbor Day.

And then we've begun discussion with PHA on trying to preserve as many trees at Friendship Court as that very much needed renovation takes place.

So next slide.

Our third committee is we call the codes committee and it's zoning, zoning, zoning.

They've been working on recommendations for the zoning ordinance and they're going to continue to do that.

You'll hear more from them this year.

They also commented on the climate action plan, which we thank very much.

The department took many of our recommendations into consideration.

We commented on the critical slopes and floodplain ordinances.

they and mainly Steve has always consults with neighborhoods about their trees and then you've seen us before commenting on never a number of development proposals and projects so let's see next slide we we showed you last year one of our things we're very proud of that we initiated this program called Relief Seville

because we believe trees save lives and we want to improve the health of our low canopy neighborhoods so there are three ways we do it we plant trees where the city cannot on private property or we we want to preserve existing trees and we want to educate some of the main activities of relief could I have the next slide

in 22.

We had a very successful environmental career fair at Charlottesville High School in the spring.

We had 30 green industry vendors and nonprofit environmental associations.

We wanted to teach.

There are 250 kids came out.

We want to teach them about jobs in those industries and organizations.

And we had lots of fun.

We had a beautiful day, lots of popcorn.

Next slide.

In the summer, we had a Green Team Ambassador Program.

We partnered with the City of Promise.

We had about 10 teenagers for two weeks.

We taught them the value of trees.

We had lots of fun trying to climb trees, but not getting too high.

And we had the three Cs teach them about climate change.

We had other partners.

We had public lands, gave us all sorts of equipment for the kids.

The master naturalist took them to Ivy Creek.

We had James Bryant come and talk to him about the 10th and Page neighborhood and role play, how to talk to neighbors in that neighborhood about planting trees.

We had one of your very own, Vice Mayor Juan Diego Wade, come and give a little pep talk.

So it was a very successful program.

Next slide.

So then in the fall, we had these teenagers go around with knowledgeable volunteers, knocked on doors.

We knocked on over, we tried to knock on 70 doors.

We either knocked on the doors and left information.

Our goal was to get 20 trees and we basically doubled it.

So we were very excited.

The kids had fun planting trees in their own yards.

And we also had them hand out literature about how homeowners could save energy, get free money to save energy on their homes.

So it was a very exciting fall for us.

Next slide.

Thank you, Peggy.

Evening Council.

These next seven or so slides are aspirational.

We're going to talk a little bit about the next year and what tree commission will hope to achieve through the various committees and the work that we plan to do and to also ask for council and members of staff to help in some of these aspirational goals.

So the first one that we would like to put forward is asking for supporting

one of the goals of the comprehensive plan that was approved in 2021 and that is quoted here of requiring that zoning changes preserve and enhance natural resources and sensitive environmental areas designated floodplain areas steep slopes rivers and streams and you know as we saw in the presentation that preceded ours

and I think Charlottesvillians love their natural environments and they're prized in this community and seeking ways to preserve them is pretty key to making this a livable city and a city that we all appreciate.

So, next slide, please.

Also, the Tree Commission has various recommendations, I think, as Peggy touched on, that our codes committee is working on and that's for the zoning rewrite

and those main objectives are noted here in the bullets looking at increasing requirements for planting new trees and protecting existing trees that's a pretty key thing as we see develop various development pressures within the city to increase housing and other other projects establishing consequences for public tree damage and incentivizing saving of those trees

and that could mean that there are penalties associated with removing trees that could otherwise be saved and then also making it easier for developers to save existing trees within the public right of way.

The third bullet here is eliminating the no setback waivers which to date have prohibited street tree plantings in certain instances in the city and we'd like to see that eliminated.

Also encouraging new development on degraded land.

So not greenfield sites, not forested sites, not steep slope sites, but lands that already have parking lots or have already seen previous development is key to this particular bullet.

And then also not increasing density on forests and other environmental sensitive lands.

That's a pretty key component to keeping our green spaces and our forested land.

Next slide.

And part of that protection is protecting critical slopes and other environmentally important sites within the city.

So those are areas that are currently forested, heavily canopied and are either part of our recreational areas or they're in areas that are privately owned that are ready for certain development.

But where there are critical slopes, we'd like to see those slopes protected.

So the main objectives for this is noting that over the last several years not one of the critical slope waiver requests was denied so noting that that just increases impact on those forested areas that are within those critical slope zones and that just three approved projects of many I guess within the city are set to remove over 30 acres of mature forest so that's

Canopy that we are slated to lose in the very near future here.

We'd like to see a strengthening of the critical slope and other environmental ordinances now rather than waiting in the future for this to happen.

And then something that Steve Gaines and we have talked about is having an environmental assessment of large developments in sensitive areas.

So really doing a comprehensive look at those areas

relative to their soils, wildlife habitat, forested areas, water quality, and other components that are part of those environmental assessments.

Next slide, please.

So Tree Commission is pointed by you all, and we very much appreciate that because we become advocates for trees and for the environment within the city.

And these

Fiscal Year 24 CIP requests are for funding the Parks Department and specifically the work of Steve Gaines and Rion to do the plantings that we've talked about and that Peggy referenced for last year.

We'd like to see $100,000 for new tree plantings within the city to really get us up to the levels where we need to be.

To see that $100,000 is allocated for ash tree removals.

We all know

The hazards that can happen when a tree dies from emerald ash borer, those trees then become hazards and they can fall on pedestrians or cars if they're in the public right away.

And so those need to be removed and that's a health and safety issue.

We'd also seek for $75,000 in reduction of invasive plants and parks.

are significant areas that Steve has identified that really need work within our parks that will make those parks more accessible, will increase sight lines, will increase biodiversity.

So that's an important element of really making Charlottesville a beautiful, livable city.

And then also $100,000 for preservation and replacement of the downtown mall trees.

We talked about that a little bit before with what Peggy mentioned, and I'm sure you all are aware of what is happening currently in the mall and that those trees are being removed because of safety issues.

Next slide, please.

So again, aspirational here, but potential options for improving the city's organization to better manage these natural resources that we have, and that could be encouraging integration between parks

NDS and Public Works, potentially requiring a person from the Environmental Sustainability Department to attend tree commission meetings.

We could really use somebody there monthly maybe or bimonthly to weigh in on various issues that the city is trying to move forward.

And then perhaps offering support for creation of a natural resources manager or something else that Steve Gaines has professed a need for.

So next slide, please.

There could be an expansion of the Tree Commission's mission of really helping to be an advocate for all of the components that make this city and the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains here in the Piedmont the beautiful place that it is and should continue to be.

So that is protecting our air and our soil.

Making sure that there's habitat for wildlife and that trees and plants are here in abundance.

This was a mixed hardwood forest before there was lots of people here and it wants to be a mixed hardwood forest.

So making sure that we're still maintaining that and increasing that is key.

And then, of course, protecting our water resources.

So supporting commission's review of large scale development site plans could be a way of us being able to

participate in that protection.

And then, of course, exploring the notion of this natural resource commission or having somebody like a natural resources manager on staff.

And then last slide, I believe.

This was a flyer that Makisha Tolbert, one of our tree commissioners, found in the Crescent Hall neighborhood and took a photograph of and I think it's a great one that notes how important trees are to people and so we included this in the last slide and I just want to say that we appreciate the support of Parks and Rec and Rheon, Anthony and Steve Gaines for all their help that they provided over the last year and

continuing to partner with them in this next year because there's just a lot to do that we're pretty excited about.

And then making sure that it's clear from our standpoint that affordable housing and healthy environment is not in conflict, that those things can be one in the same.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I just, excuse me, yeah, thank you for that.

I just sent an email to staff asking if we in fact are planning to meet those CIP requests.

Yeah, fair enough.

Yeah, I just wanted to thank you for the report as well.

And I was walking just a couple of days ago in the 10th and Page neighborhood with a friend, and we saw, I guess, I'm not sure if they were staff or volunteers doing a tree inventory.

of the trees there that have been planted or plan to be planted there in the Tenth and Page neighborhood so it's great to see so many so much effort being made to you know retain and plant and keep trees so thank you all so much for your work I think it's one of the things to make this community special and and

I too will be looking for the efforts that we're doing in the CIP.

Yeah, and I'll be brief because I know our next topic is big and connects directly to this, but I'll just say that the report is concerning, and it's also interesting you reference Washington, D.C.

and Richmond, which our population is growing, there's growing in terms of development, and yet their tree canopy is expanding while ours is going down.

So it's clear that growth and development can happen with tree canopy increasing if we're serious about figuring out how to do it, and clearly we're just failing to do that so far.

I just have a couple of things one is your presentation this evening including the the PowerPoint or

whatever that you were showing has some detail that what was submitted to us does not have, some detail specifically on some of the recommendations and so much for this CIP entry and so on.

And could you send that on to us in some way, either send us the PowerPoint or

or send us the specific request at the end because I want to make sure that I've got all of that information from you because the document that's part of our packet does not have some of that detail.

That's point number one.

Point number two is that I have been concerned as I've been reading the first module of the zoning plan that was presented to us just a week or two ago, concerned

that as I understand the drawings, there will be a lot of parcels there where there's not going to be any room for any trees at all.

I mean, they talk in some parcels about 80% coverage for the building and 10% for outdoor recreation or outdoor amenities of some sort.

And I'm sitting there thinking, okay, how much room is there for some trees there?

It doesn't seem like there's very much.

So I'm concerned because I've been telling folks, confident that in fact this was going to be the case,

that we would be able to write into the new zoning ordinance the kinds of protections that would give us some greater protection for trees in some of these areas.

And maybe I'm misunderstanding the draft that we've seen so far, but I'm not seeing how there is room for trees in an awful lot of these places.

So that's my other editorial comment.

I was thinking

We were just reading something yesterday about a tree grows in Brooklyn.

Maybe they don't grow so much in Charlottesville.

If not, we're about to turn, I guess, to Mr. Friese.

Mr. Friese.

Good afternoon, Mayor Stoke, members of Council.

So first, very excited to actually be in the room.

How about that?

It is.

Yeah, it is.

But quiet.

So yes, actually, the presentation was a great lead up to the conversation I wanted to have with you all.

I'll start by saying, feel free to interrupt any time.

I'm not doing a formal presentation.

I'm happy to just engage with you guys as we go along.

What I wanted to focus on today was our environmental regulatory program.

So just the regulatory program, not what we do in educational tree plantings or any of that other stuff, but just our regulatory program.

And I'm going to be going along more or less in order with the memo that I submitted to you all.

So feel free if you'd like to follow along with that as we go.

Broadly, what we are looking at doing right now, as was alluded to in the presentation, is a two-step process.

The first one is really just clarifying and doing some small steps within the current zoning rewrite process towards enhancing our environmental program with the idea that we would come back with a project afterwards that looks at an overall coordination

and strengthening of our environmental program across all the ordinances where it exists, right?

Because it's more than just a zoning ordinance.

Zoning ordinance is one piece of that that needs to be coordinated with the other parts of that program.

So I outlined what I identified as four objectives for that project.

One is strengthening the city's water quality protection program with really an idea towards this idea of expanding or strengthening a stream buffer program.

And I could talk a little bit more about that as we go along.

But the idea there is that we get a multitude of benefits off of that kind of program, both improving our

floodplain management, habitat protection, tree canopy preservation, all of those things kind of can fit into that idea.

At the same time, we want to make sure that our environmental protection program isn't having the result, to the extent that we can ensure it, not having the result of redirecting growth

outside of the city.

Fundamentally, one of the strengths I see in our comprehensive plan is that it is reopening the door of the city for development to come into the city, which I think is core to a climate response.

Because people who are living in the city inherently have less distance they have to travel to get to their services, to their jobs, et cetera.

We also want to look at how can we use regulations to promote development that is consistent with our flood resiliency planning and our climate action plan.

In particular, looking at how can we promote and expand on green design practices within the city in new buildings.

And then lastly, want to make sure that our regulatory program matches our staffing capacities.

that we have staffing necessary to enforce all of the rules that we put into place and support the type of development that we want to see.

So I outlined in the memo the five components of our existing regulatory program.

The first of those is our stormwater management ordinance.

That's us implementing a state program.

It has two parts, the erosion and sediment control, which is addressing erosion from active construction sites, and then the stormwater management piece of it itself, which is looking at the permanent kind of in perpetuity state of the development site and how it manages the quantity and quality of stormwater.

Notably, our existing program already goes above and beyond what the state requires.

So our program is triggered for both ENS and stormwater at 6,000 square feet of disturbance.

The state requirement is triggered at 10,000 square feet for ENS and one acre for permanent stormwater management.

So we're substantially below in both of those cases today.

Then we have the Critical Slopes Ordinance, which I know you guys are all very well familiar with.

We have an existing stream or waterway buffer program, but that only looks at the Rivanna River, Morris Creek, and Meadow Creek.

And then we have our floodplain overlay, which its particular focus is on limiting development in order to protect health and safety.

And then in terms of trees, we actually have two ordinances.

We have Chapter 18.

which is our tree preservation ordinance which basically allows the identification of specific trees, be the heritage, specimen, memorial, or street trees.

and then by council action those are identified for permanent protection and then within the zoning ordinance most significantly we have a tree canopy ordinance which is basically designates a percentage of every site that has to be that has to be covered by tree canopy basically

and those percentages range from 10 to 20 percent depending on the land use at play and we're retaining that in the proposed zoning ordinance.

We're already maxed out what we're allowed to do under the state law that enables that type of provision to exist.

So then looking forward into the zoning rewrite, we have a couple goals that we're looking at.

First off is clarifying the critical slopes ordinance.

That was a lot of conversation that occurred at the Planning Commission at their meeting at the end of January.

We're looking at provisions to strengthen the floodplain ordinance, in particular taking our existing one foot over base flood elevation and expanding that to two feet.

Also putting a requirement that when there are changes proposed to the flood

Can I stop you a second?

The question I had about the FEMA floodplain maps and so on, because we've had a couple of instances here recently where it seemed like we were almost caught by surprise to learn that there had been a change, although in fact there had been some things that had been run by some other people and so on.

So right now FEMA does require that there is consultation with

with the effect of locality, but ultimately FEMA approves changes to the map.

And then our zoning ordinance follows the floodplain maps.

Exactly.

That's what defines the boundaries of the floodplain overlay district.

A year ago, when we were talking about Nassau Street,

We were told that there was some effort underway, and I don't remember exactly what the parameters of it were, basically to re-examine the floodplain maps in the area of Moores Creek, and particularly Moores Creek and the Rivanna River.

So, FEMA is still in that process.

I don't know the details of exactly where that stands, but FEMA is in the process of reviewing.

And I think they're in an overall national process of reviewing floodplains, but they are reviewing those

I don't know exactly what the title is.

I remember last February, we were led to believe in some way, and I don't mean to imply by you, I don't know who, that we might expect to have something reported back on that by the fall.

as I understand it took the initiative upon himself to particularly with respect to that land on Nassau Street to engage FEMA to see I guess

how parameters might have shifted and whether the maps were still accurate or what he would be allowed to do in that area.

I guess my recollection from that is that, you know, it was sort of finished or decided and I'm glad to hear that maybe perhaps it's not.

There's more oversight involved.

At the time, I did not get the sense that the city, and this was well before you were here, didn't get the sense the city had been that active a participant, but I could be wrong.

And I'm not asking you to speak to all the details here, but it is, I think it's important for the community, particularly with this large development plan for the old circus grounds or whatever, that we have reliable, credible maps that we can all say, yeah, this is what

So anyway, yeah, and I think that's I think that's exactly right.

And that I wasn't here.

I'm going to I'm going to you guys have received some presentations in the past that looked at

that the particular process of those map changes that occurred.

So I'll defer those prior presentations.

The what I'll say is, you know, kind of segue to what we're looking at going forward.

when we look at this larger project.

And to clarify, the reason we're looking at a larger project is because we sat down as a group and started talking about what are things we can accomplish within this zoning rewrite.

And there were two things we realized immediately.

One, the zoning rewrite by itself is just tackling a piece of the overall puzzle of environmental regulation.

And two, that there was a lot more analysis and we got a sense a need for a lot more community engagement than we felt

was responsible to try and accommodate within the timeframe we're aiming to complete the zoning rewrite in.

Got it.

I stand by the quote given to us from the Comprehensive Plan, absolutely we want to use the zoning ordinance rewrite to do that, both this zoning rewrite and the next one.

So it sounds like you envision a focused effort on clarifying our maps, making sure it's clear what's what and something credible that the development community can engage with.

Because what's frustrating to me, and I recall the conversation with the mayor about a year ago, you know, it's like, well,

Yeah, I think...

And that's just really looking at the floodplain issue.

But I think what we realized as we were looking at this is there's a lot of coordination that has to happen between what are we requiring via the floodplain ordinance?

What are we requiring via stormwater?

If we are looking at a greater kind of buffer program, that's going to have different components to it.

It's going to have natural buffer areas, of course, and that gets more directly towards those goals that we see expressed.

with regard to critical slopes around tree canopy habitat protection and the values that we can get out of that.

But we need to be able to coordinate that with what we're doing on the stormwater ordinance.

So a buffer ordinance is clearly going to have natural areas that it can preserve, but there's also areas that are already built.

We're not going to mandate a forested area that applies there, but what can we do through stormwater management tools, through

Yeah, and you and I have corresponded about this with respect to the critical slopes ordinance.

I just want whatever it is to be clear.

The way it reads right now, you have a point one and then point two sounds almost like get out of jail free card.

If you can't develop the site, then...

with various protections, then, oh, just go ahead, develop it, is how I read that second.

And if that's not the case, I would love it to just be more clear.

And it feels like we're putting a lot of weight on this critical slopes ordinance to help us protect the environment.

And I'm hopeful that you all will be able to come up with more

clear ways, at least for me, and when developers engage us as well, clear ways so that we're sure what we're really talking about.

Because people use critical slopes as sort of a stand-in for a lot of different things.

And in particular, if you're telling me that, well, I don't have to go there, but

Anyway, any clarity that y'all can bring on the topic where it's repeatable, it's clear to people, we're sure what it is we're wanting it to do for us.

Because, as you pointed out in the Planning Commission meeting and other places, the revised new versions of stormwater management and erosion control and those things required by the state

Yeah, I think that's all really spot on.

And what we're aiming for, you know, I referenced we don't want to create a regulatory scenario that pushes development out of the city.

Exactly.

That's not going to help us address our objectives in affordable housing or economic development.

But that doesn't mean we can't have strong environmental rules.

It just means we make them easily understood, clear, you know, predictable,

enforceable in a way that's fair and, you know, readily understood.

So those are all things that we can accomplish.

Yeah.

I'll say I think I support the recommendations that were in the agenda memo.

When it comes to the critical slopes ordinance, I do feel that at this point it's important to still maintain that and to define the public benefits broadly.

maybe at some point in the future we'll be in a different environment where the critical slopes ordinance could be structured in a different way, but I just don't see how we're there yet.

And I appreciate the reference that we don't want this to be

kind of a backhanded way to block housing development in the city because certainly across the country and historically it's been used that way at times.

But I also think

it's critical we get this right and we get it right in tandem with the zoning rewrite because you know we're on pace to up zone and increase density throughout the entire city and we know that climate change has fundamentally changed floodplains stormwater runoff and I think it would be incredibly short-sighted to not for us to not do this and have it be as strong as possible in conjunction with changes that are going to lead to more density in development in the city

and to that point I think it would be important for some of the floodplain overlay recommendations for us to try to even pursue some of them before you know the entire zoning rewrite is even done because we know with climate change there are decisions that are going to be made today they're going to have a massive impact 20-30 years from now and I think it's important for us to try to be as proactive as possible on that and I think

Particularly with the floodplain overlay, I wonder if there are some things we can do on even a faster timeline than our entire zoning rewrite being finished.

If my memory is correct from the Planning Commission meeting, one thing that stood out to me is that in the community rating system for flood resiliency, we have the lowest possible score.

Yeah, and I just wanted to chime in along those same lines is that, you know, being in planning for many years before I'm doing my current job, I know that we have to write these guidelines and regulations kind of with a legal lens, but, man, it's really difficult to understand, you know, for the public as we're saying, you know, we only have certain

lead way to respond and you could read the same thing and different people can interpret it.

I just would like you know as we rewrite the comprehensive plan rewrite the zoning ordinance that it's playing language so that anyone I mean I know you know typically you know newspapers and things I've done to the fourth or fifth grade kind of reading level and I don't know if we can do it to that point but it just has to be easier to read because we're kind of put behind the eight ball that we

can only respond within certain parameters, but the public, they just don't see it.

I'm really glad that you made that point.

That's one of our key objectives with the zoning ordinance is to make it readily approachable document, and critical slopes ordinance is part of that.

So it's getting a rewrite to put it into plain language while preserving this program as it exists today with the broad interpretation of public benefit.

but otherwise it's still going to be a a waiver though I'll admit one of the things we're considering is that because it's the only place in the entire zones we have a waiver making it kind of a unique provision we might consider making that for the for the interim at least until we come back actually use it use a special permit for that so that it actually or so she's permanent for credit for critical slope okay rather rather than

And I'll just say, recognizing the ambiguity and difficulty of this strange moment we're in between the zoning rewrite being finished and where we are right now, that idea makes sense to me.

And I would add, in addition to that, I mean, I think using that same process

One other matter that was mentioned by the tree commission folks, that they were suggesting a natural resources committee or commission or something like that.

I know that in Fairfax they've got an environmental commission.

I haven't looked at their ordinance in enough detail to know exactly, but I know that at least some planning commissioners think of themselves as being

in part the Environmental Commission, that they feel that it is part of their job is to implement the environmental protections that are in the zoning code.

I'm just wondering, do you have a sense of whether having a separate committee to represent the, I mean, in a sense that the tree commission is sort of it, but they're looking for something

bigger and more than that.

Is there a role there that we should be looking to find a way?

I mean, we have plenty of people who are environmentally conscious who would love to say, gee, I'm going to be on the environmental committee.

I have no idea at this point what that committee would do, but I wonder if it would be possible to figure out a niche that they might fill that

Right.

I mean, I think when you think about a committee, it's got generally, broadly, one of two roles.

Is it a policy advisory committee that is providing advice to you all on policy matters, or does it have a role in the regulatory process?

One of the things you're always trying to balance with any committee that has a role in the regulatory process is now you're extending that process.

You're adding time into it.

And that's always going to be the case because it takes time to set up meetings and to advertise them and do all those things.

So I don't have an answer for you, but one of the things I'm paying attention to, as I said, is staffing capacity, right?

We need to pay attention.

If we're going to put together this environmental regulatory program, what's the staffing capacity necessary to look at that?

Thank you.

So I don't know whether you were done or whether we jumped in before you were done.

I was done.

The only thing, I mean, I focused a lot on the environmental regulations with regards to really water quality and all that stuff.

But the other piece of this that I've, in particular, spoken a lot with our sustainability team about is this idea of how do we use the zone ordinance to promote green design.

So in this first step of the zoning ordinance, we're just trying to identify where there are barriers to green design and removing them.

So a small example of that is solar shades over windows, right, making those exempt from setback requirements so I can

not worry about hitting the setback line and I can size those appropriately to provide the shading interior of the building.

So looking for those, making sure we're not creating any barriers inadvertently that would steer a project away from green design.

But what we'd like to look at going forward is are there ways we can actually

require or incentivize more green design in the buildings that get built in the city, you know, energy efficiency and primarily energy efficiency, really.

Yeah.

Definitely agree with that.

I don't know what the solution is, but also definitely agree about the point about setbacks.

I know there's a number of projects where there was a lot of effort to try to preserve very mature tree canopy, but setback issues meant that the development

Yeah, and we're trying to, the ordinance that we're working on has a lot more flexibility in the world of setbacks.

We're exploring with our legal advisor the degree to which we can mandate projects, plant street trees and those types of things.

The canopy requirement is still in play.

And I'll just quickly note to your point, Mayor, it was written in the chat that the tree commissioner said we were suggesting a natural resource manager within Parks and Recreation Department, a staff member, not necessarily a committee.

Okay.

Anything else?

Thanks, James.

All right.

So we have come to the end of our 4 o'clock agenda.

Yes.

pursuant to section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code I hereby move that City Council close this open meeting and convene in the closed session as authorized by Virginia Code section 2.2-3711A1 to discuss the following appointments 1 to the vacant City Council position

Second.

Discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Okay, motion carries.

We are now going into closed session.

For those who are watching online, we will expect to be back at 6.30.

Hope to see you then.

Thank you.

Okay, folks, sorry we're a little bit late coming back.

Second

Ms.

Councillor Pinkston?

Yes.

Yes.

That passes 4-0.

And the first item of business, I think the printed agenda, the pre-printed agenda has a little bit off, but the first item of business is the council seat announcement of, or actually election, of a

to take that seat.

Yes, Mr. Mayor.

Is there a second to that motion?

Second.

Do we want to have any discussion now or do we want to hold that for after a vote?

Let's just go ahead.

Ms.

Councillor Payne?

Yes.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Wade?

Yes.

That motion passes four to nothing.

Congratulations to our newly elected City Councilor.

The clerk of the court is here and is ready to swear you in so you don't have to go find her tomorrow.

This doesn't make you officially on council tonight because there are a bunch of forms you got to fill out first, but at least we'll get the swearing in taken care of.

You sure?

Positive?

Repeat after me.

I please state your name.

I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia and that I will faithfully and impartially

Mr. Mayor if I could just say a few things yeah just a few words grateful for everyone who put their name in the hat it was a difficult choice to make I'm confident that

It just makes me feel good about the city and the future that we have, and we have particularly some newer folks that have expressed interest in service.

I'm very grateful for that, and I appreciate the people that did spend the time and the effort to put in an application to come and sit down with us.

Yes, and I concur.

Most appreciative to the 20 candidates and to the final six that we had, it was very difficult.

We were there literally to the last minute because everyone just had just so much positive attributes to serve on council.

This was difficult and, you know, this is a

trust that the public gave to us to make this decision for the next 10 months or so.

And it's not there's something that we did not take lightly as we went through this discussion.

So I look forward to working with Leah again.

We worked many years on the school board together and as well as other candidates that express interest because we have a lot of work to do in this in this city.

I would also say that I was really impressed with the folks who applied.

I was really impressed with the folks that we interviewed, but also a lot of the folks that we didn't interview.

And I said it a couple weeks ago, and I'll say it again, that there are a lot of folks on this list of applicants that I really hope we will see in other connections, in other times, other opportunities, because there are a lot of very intelligent people who have told us that they care very much about the city.

And I want to put everybody to work as we can.

Everybody said it all, but I don't know.

I'd like to say thank you to all of the council members for all the time and energy and effort you put into this process.

I'd like to say thank you to all 19 people plus myself that apply and to those of us that made the final round.

I had some very tough competition and I was very much aware of that but I am willing to do the work and roll up my sleeves and get started.

and I just want to say thank you again for entrusting me with this position and all of the rights and privileges thereof that go along with it and I'm excited to join the four gentlemen that are before me this evening.

Thank you and Ms.

Thomas wants to make sure that you come see her and she'll catch up with you afterwards.

Thank you so much.

The next thing on the agenda supposedly is a moment of silence, but that usually happens before we start back up again, so why don't we move on to the announcements.

Counselors, are there any announcements?

Well, one announcement that I think we need to make is about the meetings this week to discuss the zoning rewrite modules.

The first one is tomorrow night, February 22nd, in the CHS cafeteria from 6 to 8.30.

There is another one Thursday night in the Buford cafeteria, 6 to 8.30.

And then on Saturday noonish, 11 to 1.30 p.m.

at City Space, it is

I would say if we added up all of the different things we were supposed to have read about Module 1, it's about 160 pages of reading.

And it's interesting and I hope that people will really engage with it because I think that there are a lot of things that people are saying about the zoning rewrite that I'm not entirely sure are accurate.

And until you sit down there and really engage with it yourself, you won't know whether the friends that you thought you have trusted all these years, whether they're actually giving you the straight scoop.

So I encourage everybody to get involved.

Come to one of these modules, probably one of these meetings.

There will be another module released in March, similar schedule of meetings.

Another module released in April, similar schedule of meetings.

So we hope everybody will be involved.

The second thing I wanted to mention in terms of announcements is that many people may have been at the fundraiser that was held for the family of Skeeter Smith.

That was on Saturday.

and I just want to give a shout out to Wes Bellamy for organizing that because it took a lot of work and he did it real fast and it was a fun event for a lot of people came to.

Any other comments or announcements?

Okay.

Recognitions and proclamations.

I don't have any proclamations so that leaves us next to the boards and commissions and the first thing we wanted to talk about was the PCOB.

Yes.

And just to be clear, let's see, George Dillard is being appointed as the non-voting person with law enforcement experience.

And the other members are just general members.

And Patricia Jones Turner is the social justice representative.

Is that right?

I think so.

Yes.

And there's one other thing we need to clarify, and that is that the length of time for each is going to get changed a little bit.

The reason is that we suddenly realize that having

So for anybody who thinks, gee, I don't know whether I'm getting appointed to a one-and-a-half-year spot or a three-year spot or what, don't worry.

It's going to get sorted out.

Is there a second for that nomination?

Second.

Okay.

Any discussion?

Yes.

Okay.

That slate passes 4-0.

We also at the last meeting

appointed Elise Noyes.

It turns out, however, that we should not have, that she actually doesn't qualify.

And being a county resident, there was some little screw up there.

So I don't know that we need to formally rescind her appointment.

She doesn't qualify.

So she's just not going to be on the Housing Advisory Committee.

We also, let's see, we have a Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund Committee.

Yes.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Ms.

It passes 4-0.

Next, appointing membership of the CDBG and Home Investment Partnerships Program Task Force.

I've got a note here, Mr. Icafuna or Mr. Sanders, do you have any input before we take this vote?

I'm told I'm supposed to ask the question.

Who's Alex Ikifuna, Office of Community Solutions Director.

I know there are

There are two individuals I know that are up for appointments.

And I believe there was another application that was received.

So I think staff will listen to what council has to, who council is going to appoint.

Okay.

Okay.

All right, so Salethea Carr and Jaquana Mason and Helen Sporkin.

Is there a second to these nominations?

Second.

And discussion?

Ms.

Yes.

Vice Mayor Wade?

Yes.

Consent agenda.

Ms.

Consent agenda, number six, minutes, February 6th, council meeting, February 8th, school board work session, February 10th and 13th, special meetings, seven, resolution appropriating funds for the Safe Routes to School program, non-inference, $229,803, second reading, eight, resolution, appropriating Supreme Court of Virginia behavioral health docket grant,

in the amount of $6,500 for operation of the Therapeutic Docket Program, second reading, nine resolution creating state criminal alien assistance program grant.

21 reimbursement in the amount of $7,743 second reading 10 resolution appropriating funds for appraisal services at Zero Street $3,800 second reading 11 resolution creating funds for the purchase of Charlottesville area transit radio equipment $200,000 second reading 12 resolution considering a special use permit notched

Brewery Expansion, one reading, 13 Resolution Appropriating Funds for Reimbursement of United Way Community Resource Hotline Stats $45,559.02, 14 Resolution Authorizing Signature Authority

for Department of Transportation.

One reading.

15, resolution supporting redevelopment of 1025 Park Street, A and B, formerly for redevelopment.

Thank you.

So we'll now take public comment on the consent agenda.

Those would be those ten items that were just read to us.

Each speaker will have up to three minutes.

If you're calling in via Zoom, you can select the raised hand option to be placed in the speaker queue.

If you've joined and wish to speak on the consent agenda, you may press star 9.

If there's anybody here in the council chambers who would like to speak on either of those items,

Is there a second?

Second.

Any further questions or comments?

I had one, maybe I should ask this before, but the three-notch brewery may be when we heard it in the Planning Commission, but this is deferred to Council?

Yeah.

It was not expected to be a controversial motion.

because the important thing is that they're not actually expanding the physical plant of the brick.

They're just producing more.

They'll have a few more truck trips every week.

Okay.

Are we ready to vote?

So we're ready for Ms.

Thomas.

Mr. Mayor and Council, that night for the written report, we do that the first meeting of the month, but there are a couple of items I would like to highlight.

Given the news about the trailment in Palestine, Ohio, and the tragedy there, I've been asked, you know, is our community, and we've taken a look at that.

I have a report from the Fire Department, kind of details

our contacts with the companies on the trains that come through this community and the kind of cargo that's on the train and the knowledge that the department has about it.

I have a note from the emergency manager when I asked him, are we ready?

His statement is this.

The City of Charlottesville is prepared to respond to disaster, natural or man-made, with a comprehensive outline in the Emergency Operations Plan.

Our plan is built on work that leverages our local resources with that of our state partners through cooperative and collaborative agreements.

The city is currently undergoing a complete update of its emergency planning as a result of hiring the first emergency management corps back in November.

Jeremy Evans is working with Bob Thomas, Chief Kochis, and Directors Sue Moffat, and Ms.

DeGreuthers to ensure that the residents and visitors of our city of Charlottesville can rest assured that this government is prepared to respond

any moment requiring emergency management.

Thank you.

And I would say I had asked for that report because I am aware of the fact that there are some neighborhoods in this city where rains go by at a pretty good clip and within 100 feet, 50 feet of houses.

And having seen what happened in East Palestine, folks were calling me up

Rightfully concerned, saying, are we going to have a problem here?

And I want to make sure, obviously, there's no guarantee of anything in life, but if there's a guarantee of effort, that's about the one thing I'm sure.

And I know we have a well-trained head crew, and the fire department is very well trained in this regard.

Yes.

So now we're coming to the other community matters time.

The second person is Kevin Cox Is Mr. Cox I do not see Mr. Cox either.

Okay.

Third person is Matthew Gilliken.

Yes, I will say technically not gifts.

Thank you.

This is from Seville Loaning Library.

Oh.

Yeah.

My name is Matthew Gillican.

I'm a resident of Flint.

I'm here on behalf of Livable Seaville to talk about homelessness in the Charlottesville and Albemarle.

Housing is a human right and it's a clear violation of that basic right when someone experiences this in our community.

The underlying problem is also clear.

Insufficient homelessness is worsening in our area.

According to the Blue Ridge Area Co-Homeless, the point-in-time count for our area jumped by 50% from 2022 to 266 people, and more than 40 people out of Havens day shelters more than 19,000 times in 2022.

We need to overcome inaccurate stereotypes and address the factors that cause people to experience homelessness.

While certain factors increase the likelihood of losing access, attributing how to individual choices or behaviors not only misunderstands why people become homeless, it results in harmful policies and defers real solutions.

In their recent book, Homelessness is a Housing Problem, Greg Colburn and Clayton Page Aldrin analyzed data from across the country and concluded that it's not levels of drug use, poverty, unemployment, or mental health problems that predict levels of homelessness in an area, nor is it weather or the relative generosity of local social services.

Rather, it's about housing.

The authors found that the cost and variability of housing explains regional variation in homelessness, specifically low rental vacancy rates and high rent.

That should sound very familiar to us in Charlottesville and Albemarle.

We have low vacancy rates and we have high rent and we have a worsening homelessness issue.

We need to move beyond stigmas to solutions, ensure there's adequate funding and adequate housing to prevent homelessness from occurring in the first place and get people experiencing homelessness back into secure housing.

I'm here this evening to give copies of the book.

Homelessness is a housing problem to each of you.

We've included a flyer from our friends at the Haven with information about the invaluable work that they do.

We hope that you'll read this book and that as the city rewrites its zoning code and develops its budget for next year, you'll implement its lessons so that homelessness in our area will be rare, brief, and non-recurring.

And once you finish reading it, please pass it on to someone you think will benefit from learning more about this important topic.

Thank you, Mr. Gillikin.

I will tell you already own a copy, so I don't need one.

I'll put it.

Okay.

Yeah, we can put it in her box.

If I'd known I was going to have them, I wouldn't have bothered to buy it.

Okay.

Our next speaker.

Mayor Snook, I see no raised hands.

If we want to take just a moment to let folks click the raise hand icon if they would like to.

Star 9 if you're joining by phone.

We do have 23 attendees currently on Zoom outside of the panelists, but no raised hands.

All right.

So we'll close community matters at this point, and we'll move into our action items.

is 507 Ridge Street, BAR Denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Demolition of a Cottage or Shed.

All right.

Okay, good evening.

I'm Jeff Werner.

I'm the city's preservation design planner and in that capacity one of my roles is to serve as the staff for the Board of Architectural Review or the BAR and I'm here tonight regarding the appeal of the BAR's December 20, 2022 denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness or a COA to allow demolition of a single story

Wood Framed Cottage Shed constructed circa 1895 at 507 Ridge Street.

As allowed by the City Code, the property owner has appealed that decision to City Council and I want to stress also that I make this clear to the BAR that the ordinance was set up to allow for this appeal.

The BAR

considers things within a certain box.

Council is allowed to consider other factors and other issues.

So I think a lot of folks look at an appeal as a rebuke, but it's really just a continuation of the process.

507 Ridge Street is located within the Ridge Street ADC District.

That's the Architectural Design Control District.

both the house and the cottage shed cottage slash shed are identified as contributing structures and that's a designation the city applies and it deems that contributing structures contribute to the historic character of the district and per city code the demolition of a contributing structure requires BAR approval

Additionally, the city code grants the owner of a historic property the right to appeal to the circuit court any final decision by city council.

So tonight's decision by you can be appealed further up.

And then council's role tonight in this appeal is to make a decision on that COA.

That is to determine if the requested demolition is approved or denied.

And per city code for an appeal, council shall consult with the BAR

and consider the appeal and also consider the BAR's review criteria and any other information factors or opinions it deems relevant to the application.

Being I am staff representing the BAR, our recommendation is Council should make a final decision tonight not refer this back to the BAR and for that staff has provided two suggested motions, one to approve the demolition request

and another to deny that demolition request.

Those are in the staff report.

And finally, if the owner of 507 Ridge Street is aggrieved by council's decision, they do have a right to appeal that decision to the Charlottesville Circuit Court.

And David, if you're out there, I just emailed you some images that I can share.

But very quickly, the Ridge Street ADC district is one of eight

historic districts, design control districts in the city.

It's described as located one of the city's principal thoroughfares.

This residential street is lined with architecturally significant structures.

Many of these residences belong to Charlottesville wealthy merchant families and date to the last quarter of the 19th century.

Smaller residences on the street were the homes of the African-American domestic community.

In the early 20th century, due to the advent of the automobile, many merchants moved to the suburbs.

Their homes were acquired by African-American community for use as rental properties, home ownership,

and infill current.

Sorry, this is an extraneous sentence that's in the, but the city's historical survey of this property identifies this outbuilding at 507 Ridge Street as a servant's cottage.

Evidence suggests that it dates to the circuit 1895 construction of the house.

Staff found no conclusive evidence that the roughly 12 foot by 10 foot building had or had not been used by servants or that it was ever occupied by anyone as a residence however during the BAR two meetings they they noted the possibilities that it had been occupied and they also reflected on the uniqueness of this building

and in summary the the BAR on its review on November 15th 2022 they voted to defer action to the December 20 meeting and then following their discussion on December 20 the BAR voted four to two to deny the requested COA and again I guess if David doesn't have he didn't get my note but I wanted to share some of the images of of the building but I think some are included in the staff report

Regarding the City Council's vision upholding the BAR's decision it aligns with Council's vision for Charlottesville's art and culture and that is Charlottesville cherishes and builds programming around the evolving research and interpretation of our historic heritage and resources.

It also relative to community engagement as required by code

Public notice was made prior to both the BAR's meetings in November and December.

The budding landowners were notified by letter and the meeting was publicly posted.

At both of the meetings, only the property owner spoke.

No one else did.

However, prior to the December meeting, we did receive an email from a nearby owner who did oppose the demolition and urged the BAR not to approve it.

So based on the application material, the information standard set within the city code, and for the reasons set forth within the staff report, which that would be the BAR staff report, our recommendation is that the BAR should render a final decision tonight and deny the COA to demolish the cottage shed at 507 Ridge Street.

And I do have

The BAR Chair and Co-Chair are online and available after Mr. Lauter gets to speak.

They have a brief statement and can also answer any questions.

One question, I believe this was brought up at the BAR meeting.

Absent

physically moving the shed, something that was suggested, is there any ability to basically kind of approve the demolition and have a scan done of the shed to just have a permanent visual record of it?

Is that a feasible option?

What would it take to do that?

I'm obligated here to sort of respond to what the BAR's decision was and but yes that's that's typically for any project that the BAR does review for demolition the request is that it is documented photographed drawings measured drawings the elevations and floor plans so that's there's nothing unusual about that why the BAR

Yeah, and typically we request that of the applicant, for example, at the courts, they're going to take down the

Mr. Werner, one thing that struck me is I was looking at the B.A.R.

at the ordinance that governs all of this and I was struck by the fact that whereas in most of the architectural design control districts there are exceptions made for certain structures in this district

It says literally every single structure within the district is deemed to be a contributing structure.

And I guess my question is that was probably done 30 years ago or something.

I don't think that was what they I mean reading through the notes of the survey it was actually a lot of attention was given to this and for to this little yes because of its

being reported as being used as a servant's cottage.

So you're right about the contributing structures, and there are things listed as contributing.

For example, the Salvation Army came in last month for demolition requests.

for some reason that's blocked as a or highlighted on the map as contributing structure.

So and also want to be clear so that there are National Register historic districts in the city of Charlottesville.

for instance North Belmont is on the National Register as a historic district Fry Spring is on the National Register Tonsillar Fifeville but only local historic districts fall then under the purview of the BAR and then that contributing structure status is what's what's designated by City Council so there are also contributing structures relative to a National Register District I just want to

opportunity to say that because sometimes there's some confusion now in this case this is a contributing structure on the national register district it's also contributing structure on the local district so but um I would agree with you the um there are structures that are highlighted that we scratch our heads at um there are some that are no longer there um I think when I come up for air someday we can maybe get and review all those um but

The challenge with this structure, and here it is, this is the rich street as you mentioned.

So it is identified as contributing.

The thing is, David, if you go down to the next slide, I believe, or it's up, this building has moved a couple of times.

It is at least in its second location, possibly its third.

So it's a building that stayed on the property.

Well, there is a provision.

I was curious about this so I went looking a little bit and found the National Register criteria for evaluation and it distinguishes moved properties and says a property removed from its original or historically significant location

Correct.

And there's, I said, with conversations with folks in Richmond,

informally but the question was raised because we're supposed to ask if this shed were removed does it place the overall district at risk no and so like I say this is a it's we are the BAR reviews the National Register criteria but this designation is is local and I'll give you a good example my house is

It is designated by the city.

It is not on the state register.

It is not on the national register.

But the BAR would have to review and approve its demolition.

Yeah, yeah.

Actually, it was the winemaker of the Monticello Wine Company from the 1880s.

So I think there was some fame to him.

But my point being is the criteria for the BAR is about that local designation.

That's what brings it into play.

I think you all can consider other factors and you're correct.

The City Ordinance, I don't believe, contains a definition of contributing structure.

The single reason within the code for a contributing structure is that its demolition is subject to BAR review.

If it's not contributing, it doesn't go to BAR.

Alter it, yes.

Build something new, yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Well, I'm sorry, sir.

So I'm kind of confused now.

So is there conclusive evidence that this was a slave quarter or not?

Never a slave quarter.

Very clearly constructed at the same time as the house, not whether that was 1894 or 1896, the transaction of its construction.

The information that tells you who was there at the house, I would first look to the 1900 census and say, you know, because they listed that, you know, starting in the 1850s when you saw households listed everyone in the household by their name, their relationship to the homeowner.

For 1900, Mr. Giannini didn't live here.

He lived over on

Before I get going, I just want to thank the gentleman's comments regarding homelessness earlier.

And this is in some way adjacent logically to that.

I'm a former Marine.

Thank you for your service.

Thank you.

Thanks for saying so.

And many in our community are homeless.

It's near and dear to my heart.

I've done work throughout my life after my time in the United States Marine Corps to try to help.

So I get it.

Anyway, that's not why I'm here tonight.

Pardon me.

My name is Clay Lauder.

I live at 507 Red Street.

My wife and I and our three children have lived there for about 13 and a half years.

And I wanted to appear before you tonight regarding a potential win-win for the city and for my family.

Simply put, I have an 81-year-old father-in-law who is an old 81.

and we are seeking to you know he's approaching the end of his days and you know in this time of life needs to be near family I also have a shed on the back of my property this historic home that Mr Warner referred to that has been there

in this location for, I found out today, at least 15 years.

A gentleman stopped by who had lived there a number of years ago and was able to confirm that it had been there and also in disrepair for the last 15 years.

In November of last year, we approached the Board of Architectural Review asking for permission to demolish this structure, which is a great place for me to put my table saw, but does little else.

and construct an ADU for my father-in-law so that it's near enough to the house so that he could be with us and we could provide care to and for him towards the end of his days.

He has limited resources and as many of you may know the costs associated with assisted living are significant $7,000 to $8,000 a month and even with the savings one might have that goes very very quickly

So the notion would be, as we approach the bar, is to demolish this structure, construct an ADU in the same format, color, characteristics of our existing home, because we love our home and we love our community, and have it serve him towards the end of his days.

Then repurpose it for future value, be it one of our children doesn't launch, or a rental unit, or something of that nature.

Insofar as saying that, and owning a historic home, we understand the value of the Board of Architectural Review.

We understand its delegated authority by this council to attempt to maintain the community of the past, I believe you said the fabric of our community.

in fact I've approached and been before the council three times in the 13 years that we've lived here once for gutters in this very room with my three young children to get approval for to install gutters on the front of my home and then additionally in the erection of solar panels in non-historic in the non-historic managed space of my yard because green is good you know I work in the environmental health and safety field and spend a significant amount of my time regarding sustainability and environmental work

Anyway in that process the bar as you have heard denied our wish to remove the shed and construct an ADU for my father which is why I'm here tonight.

So I don't want to take too much time so I just want to hit a couple brief points with you.

There are two broad tenets I want you to consider.

Then first of all the presumptions and assumptions of the staff report, the good work that Jeff did, and also and more importantly the value proposition, the win-win.

The value of the construction of AEDU at this location does two things, one personally and one publicly.

As I indicated, my father-in-law's life, Craig Dietrich is his name, is really important.

It's important to us and I know it's important as a community because we have an aged population in this town and many of them can't and don't have the appropriate assistance that they need.

We're trying to mitigate that on property we already own.

with a construction using the existing ADU process the city has designated, which is well, I think, documented.

The value of his life compared to this 10 by 12 falling down, if you will, shack.

I know it's been referred to lovingly as a cottage.

I don't see it as such.

It's bucolic?

Absolutely.

In fact, the day Jeff and his team came out last fall to take pictures, it was a gorgeous day.

The leaves were coming down, it was in bloom, and one might take a step back and say, why would you want to demolish them?

Well, a lot of good reasons.

The value of this, maintained in perpetuity versus a man's life,

I'm going to go with my father-in-law on that.

This doesn't serve that purpose.

Secondly, it's not historically attributable, to which Mr. Werner, Jeff, just answered your question, sir, with regard to.

There's no one we can connect.

No citizenry can be connected to this location.

Is it possible?

Sure.

Is it probable?

Who knows?

but there's no straight line connection.

It's not in its original location.

In fact, as Mayor Snook, I was able to explain to him on Sunday, it sits right on top of my sanitary line.

I know that because I unintentionally perforated my sanitary line and had what we lovingly refer to as poop-a-palooza.

Coming straight up about 10 feet.

We know where the line is and it sits right on top of that sanitary line.

Thirdly, we talk about value and I'm using words like value.

What is the value of a structure?

Some things do indeed have value.

Monticello has value.

The Taj Mahal has value.

Mount Vernon has value for their own sake because they represent a significant historical time in our history that is valuable moving forward.

A window to the past, if you will.

This structure, you can't even see it from the road.

The only people who see it are me, my family, and our neighbors.

And they're not that interested.

Maybe the hotel guests on the corner of Cherry that was approved and constructed some years ago can see it but probably only with a telescope or a pair of binoculars.

We're not selling tickets.

It's not roped off.

It's barren on the inside.

And there was some discussion about attempting to move it.

And I did not nor intend to front the thousands of dollars that would be necessary to get an engineering's report to determine whether or not it could be moved.

To my eye, having done construction like many of you folks have done, you try to move that on a flatbed, it's falling down.

the only thing you could do would be to disassemble and reassemble it elsewhere and I'm sorry folks I'm not a millionaire my own family and I are not many of you many might go before council in the bar with significant amount of funds my family and I do not have them and therefore do not intend to front it and I've said it's in poor shape the notion initially was to attempt maybe you know fancifully we could renovate it and use it for an ADU it's it's not it's not gonna work

The only real, and trying to build an ADU elsewhere on my property in the non-historic managed area, it's just not realistic monetarily.

We would have to run city waters, city lines.

This we can tie into my home.

So that's the win-win.

Personally, publicly, it increases tax base.

Further, when and if we do decide to move, it becomes a rental unit.

It addresses in a very small way, but a real way,

affordable housing in the city.

It adds to the color of the community.

It adds to the inventory, if you will.

Not immediately, but in future, it can.

so it adds that potential.

Now there was some discussion in the staff report regarding us not in parallel applying for a construction permit which felt a little catch 22 when I read it because to my mind and maybe I just didn't understand it if we want to build it where we want to build it and the bar doesn't allow us to build it

Then didn't we just waste a bunch of money getting design plans and things of that that we can't use?

So, again, that felt a little catch-22.

I will pass these around.

Notionally, this is kind of what we're thinking it might look like.

And this is, you know, this is presumptive.

It's not final.

We understand that we have to go before the bar to get approval.

We would very much want it to reflect the demeanor of the houses that they currently have, stucco and whatnot.

But notionally, we want it to look something like that.

Again, that's not proportionally the right size, and we would need to change it because we're not going to give an 81-year-old man a porch.

He might fall and hurt himself.

But notionally, that's kind of what it would look like.

So that's why we did not do that.

And then, you know, future affordable housing, you know, if we were able to construct this, as I said, publicly, it has an upside for urban growth and efficiency.

So quickly, because I know I'm out of time, the existing shed cannot be connected or connected to any

Historical Citizenry.

It's not in its original location.

It's been moved at least twice.

If you want me to stop at three seconds, I will, Councilman.

Thank you.

It's not viewable.

It offers no real value to the community than its existence.

I don't know that that's value.

If it can't be seen, it's not historically available to the community.

again the professional assessment don't intend to spend the money unless we're forced to because those you know I've got three special needs kids a type one diabetic daughter and three autistic sons our money goes to them frankly not this shed you know

It may be historic, it may not.

I think the value proposition, the win-win I offered is a compelling argument.

I hope the council agrees.

The bar could not consider that argument because it's not within their guidelines, and I understand that.

Again, as I indicated, we respect the bar.

We respect the process, which is why I'm here tonight in front of you fine people.

Eventually, the shed will fall down.

We have no plans nor intent to maintain it in perpetuity.

We're not going to.

Our funds are limited.

We had things we had to pay for, including college and braces and cars and insulin.

I think the ADU, as I said, is a win-win for the community, for the city and for us.

Thank you, Mr. Louder.

Anybody have any questions for Mr. Louder?

No questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

We also have the BAR chair and vice chair available.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Thank you, members of City Council.

I just have a brief statement.

The BAR carefully considered the demolition application on two different occasions.

We had the benefit of not only client presentations from Mr. Lauder, but also a thorough staff report and staff history of the property.

The proposed demolition of this small structure is behind the significant Gianni Bailey House on Ridge Street.

And even though this is small, the shed is both old, at least 1895, and unique.

and it has been identified as a contributing structure in Ridge Street Architectural Design Control District and the National Register's Ridge Street Historic District.

And I'll just note parenthetically that that is for us a fact.

We don't debate whether it should or should not be contributing.

It is a contributing structure.

The city historical survey from 1994

made a point of identifying this shed as one of three remaining servants quarters in the district.

And after some additional information from staff, it's unclear that any others remain today.

So this could be the last remaining servants quarters in the district.

Sometimes these seemingly insignificant structures can be an important thread of our community history

Historic preservation is not just about the big fancy buildings, but sometimes the relationship between the smaller structures say a lot about social structure of our community.

And the relationship between this building and a larger historic home reflects a social relationship that was very especially part of Charlottesville.

The city's architectural district

sorry the architectural design control district design guidelines and the secretary of interior standards are clear that demolition of such structures should be a last resort and only when there is benefit to the public and other alternatives have been exhausted the applicant and both presentations demonstrated very little interest in preserving the structure either in its current location or by other means

and nor was the BAR presented documentation prepared by a qualified professional who evaluated the condition and integrity of this building and made clear that demolition was required.

And I'll also note that the BAR, it's been a bit confusing in the presentation today.

To be clear, we did not review any proposal of an ADU on this site.

It was mentioned, but there were no drawings that were shared with the BAR.

We've not seen the sketches that were passed around today.

And in short, it was not made clear to us that the removal of the building was necessary.

So after careful consideration of the application and the standards within the city code and the design guidelines, the BAR voted 4-2 to deny the COA.

I'll just note a couple of other brief things that came up in the questions.

To be clear, the shed does include windows and includes an internal fireplace as to the question of whether it was inhabited.

And I think that I'll also note it was alluded to, but several aspects that the applicant brought up

related to familial situation, the potential of an ADU, the cost of the project, the increase of the tax base.

To be clear, it's probably, but it's worth reiterating, those are not considerations that the BAR takes on as a volunteer board tasked with applying the city's guidelines.

I have no questions.

Hold on.

I have no questions.

Is Ms.

I don't believe so, but she's here if there are any questions.

I was not presiding over the meeting when the final vote happened, so that's why, Ms.

Okay.

Well, I just noted that my little script here says that both you and she were going to be presenting, so I wanted to give her the opportunity if she wanted to, but if not, then fine.

So, all right.

Okay.

That's what I would like to move.

I would just say, you know, it sounds like the applicant is open to having it documented.

We definitely encourage that to happen.

It sounds like it will anyway.

But I think it's clear, you know, I appreciate that historic preservation is a real important criteria for the city.

It's just clearly overly burdensome here.

Yeah, I agree.

I can empathize with taking care of an elderly family member, mother-in-law who's 97, lived with us.

but she's in a nursing home now and you're right on point with that cost per month and savings can go really really quickly so it's very noble of you all to try to address it in this manner so and I want to thank the BAR because they just you know we I think like you said Jeff they just have some parameters and they

couldn't act out of it.

So that's why we have this process.

And thank you for your efforts and their efforts to care for this as a piece of architectural history.

We're all grateful for that.

Those are the things that you all are allowed to review.

In fact, sort of teeing up sometime in March, the First United Methodist Church and the solar panel will be coming to you.

But I know you had a vote to take, but thank you for your time.

Thank you.

So are we ready to vote?

Ms.

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Councilor Payne?

Yes, sir.

Good evening, Council.

Chris Engel, Director of Economic Development.

This item did come to you at your February 6th meeting, and we had a presentation and some discussion.

There were two tweaks, as you referenced.

They are both contained in the resolution piece, so not in the staff report, but in the resolution, and the language in concert with the acting city attorney of the language of the resolution has been clarified to be a little more clear.

Okay.

Anybody have any questions for either one?

Or Ms.

No, I have nothing additional to add at this time.

Okay.

I have no questions.

All right.

Okay.

I'll move the resolution for New Hill Development Corporation, Beacon's Kitchen, $500,000.

Second.

Ms.

Councillor Payne?

Yes.

Yes.

Passes for nothing.

Thank you, Mr. Engel.

Thank you, Ms.

Harrell.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Okay, so the next item which we added just at the beginning of this meeting is an item authorizing City Council to engage the executive search firm Polyhire to assist the Charlottesville City Council in the selection of a new city manager and to enable the mayor to execute documents related thereto.

And I know that we have

As counsel, we have discussed this topic a number of different times in closed session.

I will tell the general public that we had five different responses to our request for proposal.

We interviewed two of the firms and we have decided that we would like to, assuming this resolution we're about to present passes,

and we would like to engage Polyhire.

Do we need to?

I move the following resolution, authorizing City Council to engage the executive search firm Polyhire to assist the Charlottesville City Council in selection of a new City Manager and for the Mayor to execute documents related thereto.

whereas the city of Charlottesville, Virginia the city is currently served by an interim city manager and whereas the city issued a request for quotations RFQ to assist the Charlottesville City Council in the selection of a new city manager the services and whereas the services are more fully described in RFQ number 23-56 and whereas the interim city manager has recused himself from all aspects of procuring said services

whereas City Council has the power to award a contract to procure the services pursuant to Code Section 2-36 and whereas City Council desires to engage the firm of Polyhire to provide said services and whereas City Council has the power to authorize the mayor of the city of Charlottesville to execute documents necessary to engage Polyhire to provide said services pursuant to City Code Section 2-36.

Now, therefore,

Be it resolved by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that City Council shall engage Polyhire to assist the Charlottesville City Council in the selection of a new City Manager.

And be it further resolved that the Mayor for the City of Charlottesville is authorized to execute documents approved as to form by the City Attorney to retain Polyhire to assist the Charlottesville City Council in the selection of a new City Manager.

Second.

Motion, second.

Okay.

Ms.

Yes.

Motion passes.

Council, are there any other business items for consideration?

I do have one.

This is not an urgent issue, Mr. City Manager, but it's one that I've gotten a couple of questions on and I've had for years but never thought about asking about it, and that is the traffic signal at

on Water Street at the Nations Bank.

Is there an engineering purpose for that?

Is that Water?

Is that Third?

Third Street is just a stub, basically, that runs down to it.

We had a couple questions about that just recently.

I'm sure it probably seemed like a very good idea at the time.

Speakers will be given up to three minutes.

You may join the speaker queue by selecting the raised hand option in the Zoom webinar by pressing star 9 if you've joined by phone or by raising your hand if you're here in council chambers, but we have no public left here in council chambers.

All right.