City Council Meeting   2/19/2019

All right, good evening.

I heard you.

All right, Ms. Thomas, roll call, please.

Mr. Signer?

Here.

Ms. Galvin?

Are there any announcements?

Thank you.

So just wanted to let you all know that, the consent agenda, Ms. Thomas.

F, ordinance, increase in limit for small purchase procurement, second of two readings.

Is there a motion?

I move to adopt the consent agenda.

on C and then again just to note that on E for the lease for the Albemarle, Charlottesville Historical Society that I disagree with the lease terms.

OK. All right.

So, Madam Mayor, C will be pulled and put to the end of the agenda.

Put to the end of the agenda.

No.

The mayor's poll will see.

OK. All right.

and I'll start with the, oh I'm sorry.

That's where I'm at Mike, forgetting all about you, sorry.

So interim city manager, Mr. Mike Murphy, thank you.

and then finally, you know, while I think people only brought this up as a joke, I will remind folks that last night we began our annual deer culling and that will be in process probably over the next two to three weeks, so.

Or were they returned?

I would assume that as the others were previously approved by BAR that in the designations that were already approved in the 2008-2009 re-bricking of the mall that we could put some of those benches back into place.

I mean, if they've already approved them, then we don't need another VAR approval, correct?

And I'll confirm that with Jeff Warner and Mr. Blair.

Now I think one of the things would be to look at the actual certificate to see the exact composition of those benches to make sure that they are the same benches that Mr. Murphy is referring to.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments?

The first speaker is Eileen Bartell.

Thank you.

Susan Sherman.

Thank you.

Joy Johnson.

I don't know what else you want us to do, but we're asking Mike if there is something else that we need to do, then I'm just asking and pleading with you all to approve that critical slow so that tax credit can go in so Crescent Hall and we can start doing something there.

Thank you.

We were going to be allocating funds for them to look at all of South First Street comprehensively and I think I guess the definition that I thought we were engaged in included all the acreage and then follow-up conversations when this critical slopes came up on our agenda made me realize that maybe that even the folks in CRHA who are in the audience that I thought were nodding their heads in agreement might have been thinking of just a portion of that and so I was just curious of my colleagues' perceptions of that conversation.

And that's something that I have been talking about in every conversation that we've had.

And we're in touch with the people that you suggested to us to work with us.

But that was my understanding last meeting as well, Mayor Walker and Vice Mayor Hill.

And I didn't know anything about the tweaks that you all were expecting.

I verbalized my concerns.

I hope we can still meet.

So, yeah.

Thank you.

But until I hear differently from the applicant, staff is prepared to continue to execute all of the timelines, although it has evolved a bit since we're not talking critical slopes tonight.

So, thank you.

Terry Kent.

Thank you.

Audrey Oliver.

Thank you.

Joan Fenton.

Thank you.

Brandon Collins.

Thank you.

that these disrespectful comments only further demonstrate how much work our community must do in a way of healing and deep self-reflection.

Katrina Turner.

What could have happened to me when I know I did nothing wrong?

Now, as we know, he did not and stated that there would not be a prosecution because he did not believe there was a violation.

because she has some kind of vendetta going on.

All right, David Redding.

Thank you.

who wishes to speak.

And if you would Google that name, you would also see he's got places in Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina that's doing just what he's doing here.

I just want to know why.

It's just been some questioning about the site.

Yes.

Well, we know the situation.

And I mean it's not just this council, it's been all councilors.

to rehab that building have been looked at and that have everyone I think is in agreement with.

If not I'll be back.

And what's the date on?

Pharr is doing a good job with their engagement of the residents.

People have been hearing this for 20 years and nothing has been done, so yeah.

And I understand the demonstration.

I saw the construction crew was on site.

And I would say that this is the first time that the housing authority and the city have been in the alignment and in the readiness that we are today.

Okay, so you say April the 8th?

And all of that money, in theory, should it be approved, would be available July 1.

Okay, I'm going to write all these dates down.

It's on video, it's not.

Ziona, would like for you to say the dates again.

All of those monies, should they be approved, would be available on July 1 of this year.

So that was my statement without all the dates.

So what do we need to do to provide assurances to VHDA that when they see their LIHTC applications we have committed these dollars?

As long as we understand ahead of time what the process is now during these next six weeks.

Thank you.

You're next.

Thank you.

I trust this is one of the things you're going to come back to.

But I will certainly, based on the comments tonight, be going back to Brennan and talking about what the next level interventions are that can happen outside of that striping and bring them back to Council.

So I think if there's a way of communicating with the neighborhood that the city's care and intent, that would be really appreciated.

Time Efficient manner.

Beard, did you not see our retreat?

But no, we have to do it all in public.

If we don't have the sufficient numbers, so what happens?

That is the goal.

I hope so, because this is stressful.

I understand.

A legal document that the city's going to follow and eventually somebody's going to really follow through with this board.

Yes, that's the goal.

All right, thank you.

All right, is there anyone else who would?

I'd appreciate it.

Can we get your name?

So we're going to take a break.

I thought we had created a system so that it could be applicable to other situations, other corridors, but I'm hearing that that's not the case with Water Street.

And so the specifics of what may be going on on water I can't speak to in the moment, but we will certainly revisit it tomorrow.

I am in firm support of the Civilian Review Board.

So we'll break until 8.10.

you

Music playing

you

I'll see what Albemarle says, I'll give you an update at the end.

I know that there was certainly supposed to be a fiscal feasibility for the whole

Because if you see the title on the way down, they said it was about 12 acres, which is absolutely

I want to leave a bunch of co-authors and I want to make sure that we have a discussion.

I don't have any of this here, so I would like to do that.

The vet who's used transportation and innovation in the county.

They're going to use ride shares and they're going to show the class today on what they're doing.

Good evening.

First, a one reading.

We can take your questions for a week after the public hearing.

Did we get a copy of the letter from?

It was at the close of business pretty much.

This was sent on Friday?

Yeah.

So we had that meeting this morning.

When do you have to turn in the report back?

We have to turn it sometime in May, but we like a much faster action by the city council.

So will we receive the updated?

And then depending on what kind of comments, if it's relevant, staff will incorporate that into this particular document.

The Fair Housing Report that was in our packet does not include modifications that respond to the Legal Aid's letter.

They met this morning to review the comments and then it was decided that after presentation to the city council or the presentation, we let the council know that they will receive the only comments at the close of the public hearing on Friday.

But according to our staff memo, we are being asked to approve the 2018 analysis of impediments to fair housing choice report, but we haven't seen the final report that reflects the changes.

Council didn't receive this.

And I understand that, so how can we approve what's before us then tonight?

There are a few recommendations here we think we can incorporate into the plan, then council can take action at the next meeting.

That was my main question.

Is there anyone here who would like to speak?

No?

Is there, so do we just?

I think, if I may Madam Mayor, I think considering the council's digesting the information in this correspondence tonight and the director of neighborhood development services as well, what you can do is either ask that the final report be on the next consent agenda or as an action item.

So if it's on the consent agenda with these modifications, unless we have questions, we can pull it.

We can still pull it.

Two weeks?

OK. OK. Move on to the next.

OK.

So next we have a public hearing ordinance for the rezone of 918 Nassau Street, Hogwalla Farms to mixed-use highway corridor, first of two readings.

Could you help set the stage for this?

Public Hearing based on the proffer amendment.

Okay, so in a way we're starting fresh?

Tonight you'll hear the presentation and there will be a public hearing, but then if the applicant does offer amended proffers at your March 18th hearing, there will be more chance for another public hearing as well.

And that's when we make motions?

and that doesn't require going back to the Planning Commission.

No, that's your prerogative.

Whether we send it back.

Whether you send it back or not.

I do have one question but what's the typical protocol if there is, I don't know how substantive these changes to the proffers are so is there some threshold that when you cross it, it should go back to the Planning Commission?

The Council can send it back to the Planning Commission if you wish, but it's really for you all to evaluate and you have the option to send it back or you can, in effect, hold a public hearing March 18th.

I'm sure that you're crossing the, you know, everything, but I don't, my understanding was they are always run through staff and that the elected officials don't, in a live way,

No, and you would not be.

We don't weigh in on or even are involved with knowing about it.

and the applicant will make their presentation but they heard feedback from the public and I think since these proffers were placed in your packet that they would like to amend these proffers and as long as they are voluntarily doing it that's up to them.

Is this a proper forum for that to happen?

Okay.

It's just that I can't remember that ever happening.

and that's up to you all as to your prerogative, but I think you have all three options and again, not wanting to speak for the applicant before they get up here, but I think when you hear what they're proposing, it's my understanding it's actually going to be a less intense use of the property than what is already proposed.

then coming directly to council with their proffers as opposed to going to the planning commission first because there's some, I don't know, perception of success that's in one body versus another.

I think maybe once you hear the proposal it might make a little more sense.

With that, I'm happy to answer questions and then the applicant has a presentation prior to the public hearing.

I have questions after the presentation.

With that, I'll turn it over to the applicant for the presentation.

I want to bring up Hannah Patrick, who will be operating the farm portion of this, and let her speak for a few minutes about this, what her vision is for this.

I think this opportunity to have a fresh food market and greenhouse inside the city limits directly aligns with those values and we'd all miss out if we passed up that opportunity.

I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.

So any insights on that?

So again, the rezoning to highway commercial was to get the greenhouse.

than is currently allowed and currently in the future land use map?

which is we have more kitchens basically rather than having a larger structure with one kitchen, three or four bedrooms.

The letter you sent this afternoon, it only addressed I think the concerns maybe that one of the other planning commission members had.

I can't say how he would have voted, but the reason he changed or he was against it was a procedural one, not necessarily a...

But we still don't know how they would have voted.

Nobody told me afterwards I wanted to communicate that because I asked him specifically why he voted that way.

Can you just talk a little bit more about what's for us to know that it will succeed as a nonprofit business?

And there's also an element of classes and describe some other.

So is it?

And then there's also the educational component where there's a lot of opportunities to raise money through teaching classes, education about it.

Okay.

But I think there are just so many more opportunities for this to be a successful nonprofit with collaboration from the community if there is also a greenhouse and also a farm store.

Do you mind expounding on that or breaking that down?

Gotcha.

That's the only question.

So is there anyone who would wish to speak?

That's critical.

including the individuals at those income brackets in the first place.

But that's not affordable housing according to your rules.

No, affordable housing, that's one of the conversations we've been having about fully defining it.

Right, I think it has to be absolutely fully defined.

Yes, but it still should have been understood that people in those income brackets cannot afford the market rate units in this area, and that's not just talking about the lowest income people.

Now if you allow a lot more development to go on, then of course you have a larger supply.

and that hasn't been working.

Well, but how are you going to fix it?

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

I'll end this to you all, but PBS did a series in the fall on Sinking Cities, what it was called, but it has a lot of good information on what was facing as a world, also has good information on urban flooding.

This is something that you all can have.

Final thing I want to say is that you can engineer something to handle what you think is going to be to take care of the water that may be in this area, but mother nature cannot always be controlled.

Alright, is there anyone else who would like to speak?

If you can get some good affordable housing out of it, that'd be awesome.

Is that what I understood, the number of units?

It did, but the requirement is the 5% per the ordinance.

50% is what I receive.

And the 12 years, how did you arrive at that?

That's as much as we can afford to throw forward, basically.

Thank you.

And I really urge you all to vote in favor of this.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak?

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here who would like to speak?

Thank you.

All right, we're going to close public hearing.

There's nothing preventing them from building on these lots by right.

Right now at R2 they can build on these lots.

I think what I said was that it's by bedroom scale.

And I also, again, when I saw this, the opportunity to me was to do a cool urban farm.

There's 30 units with the highway commercial.

Yes, I see that.

That's all I really wanted to clarify.

So are you all colleagues opposed to this going back before the Planning Commission?

I like the point.

Application, so I don't know if we talk about it tonight or we talk about it later.

Would you want it to go back to the Planning Commission, Ms. Galvin?

That would be, I don't think that that would make too much of a difference.

No, we don't make a motion.

Like they stated, they got a comment on Friday, our office was contacted today about this and the only change is really to cut down the square footage for commercial use from 4,000 to 2,000 square feet.

a church that still required 4,000.

Right now, the way those proffers, the way the proffers are currently worded, the church can be larger than 4,000 square feet.

So I don't see how this is any different than how we approach the Booker Street project.

So I think, I'm sorry.

I'll listen to your response.

What would satisfy you in order for this to move forward?

So I just find that this is a real undermining of a process that is supposed to be community driven.

Would you agree with that?

what holds this government accountable to the public.

You're not wrong.

I share those concerns and I just know that there was very limited options for which they could pursue to fulfill the vision that they want and so I can understand that frustration as well but I do see the risk that we run by setting a precedent like this and I do share the concerns about the impact that it has on just the overall street given how out of place it is and

Or excuse me, what are they supposed to do?

Or you rezone to the comp plan.

because they have to wait on us to get our quote unquote act together.

I haven't seen or been convinced that this farming operation is viable.

Nah, she's not wrong.

People would have gotten too excited if we had put together a proper nonprofit plan because...

It was two parts.

This is like, we're going to shift our zoning and then on base on that zoning, I can now ask for this.

I think sitting here, it sounds to me like the pros outweigh the cons, but I'm not 100% decided.