City Council Meeting   2/7/2011

Thanks for watching

Start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Let's see, I don't have any formal awards or recognitions tonight.

Are there any announcements that Councillors would like to share?

I have one.

I am pleased to announce the next Our Town Charlottesville City Council meeting in your neighborhood.

It's going to be on Wednesday, February 16th at Westminster Presbyterian Church on Rugby Road from 6 until 8 p.m.

and this is for especially the kind of JPA Venable neighborhood everyone is welcome but we're specifically calling for people in that neighborhood to come and let us know what some of the issues in your neighborhood are things that you think that we should hear that we don't always hear things that we may be doing well that you just want to compliment us about anything you'd like to talk about if that's the place to do it there'll be dinner served there'll be child care free so and all of our city department heads or at least as many as can make it and it's usually all

So I hope you will come.

I will note that City Hall will be closed on February 21st for the holiday.

However, that day there will be normal trash and recycling and normal bus service.

Also, our community scholarship program which offers college scholarships to local high school seniors and adults over 25.

The deadline for applying for the next round of scholarships is February 15th.

That's for the fall semester.

And if you'd like more information, go to our website, which is www.sevillescholarship.org.

That's C-V-I-L-L-E-S-C-H-O-L-A-R-S-H-I-P.org.

We have no other announcements, so we'll now move on to matters by the public.

And as is our custom, when you come forward, please state your name and address and keep your comments to three minutes.

Mayor Norris, council members, Mr. Jones, good evening.

My name is Tom Howard.

I live at 800 King William Drive, Charlottesville, and as a matter of disclaimer, it is in the county.

I'm a member of the Dunlora Home Owners Association Board of Directors and we have sent a letter to the council.

We delivered it Friday and I'm here to discuss the contents of that letter.

Basically we're asking the council to rescind a portion of an ordinance that was approved by the council on the 2nd of June 2006.

It has a rather lengthy title which would use up my three minutes actually but I want to, the essence of that ordinance is that it grants easements on property owned by the city that's located in the county to the state for the purposes of construction on the Meadow Creek Parkway.

and the granting of the easements was based upon five contingencies and one of those contingencies is that no portion of the parkway, not the county portion, not the interchange, not the McIntyre extended, be allowed to open until the entire parkway is ready.

And we agree that that was the right, sharp, smart thing to do at the time and in fact buildings and projects need to be complete before they're open piecemeal.

but we believe that things have changed a bit.

First of all, the county portion of the parkway is complete and has opened, it had opened for three weeks in October so that some of the traffic could be rerouted because of construction.

That's our concern.

The heavy construction on Rio Road, especially in our area near the CATEC area, the traffic is extensive, there's dangerous turns, the only way in and out of our housing area has been blocked and rerouted and it's very dangerous.

and we're asking that you rescind that portion of the ordinance that calls for that restriction so that that portion of the Parkway can be opened.

We believe it would provide no cost to the city to do that.

We've seen it.

It's not a theoretical, hypothetical thing.

It would be great.

I think lives, potential saving of lives and traffic accidents could be avoided if we could get that to happen.

And that's it.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Arvin.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council.

My name is Martha Levering.

I live at 712 Grove Avenue in the city.

I've been following the water debate for many years and have in the past come before you to speak in favor of the 2006 approved plan.

My support has hinged on an understanding that more water storage equates to better stewardship of the watershed.

I've also enjoyed hiking at Ragon Mountain down through the years.

Thank you for your recent vote to raise the reservoir pool level by 30 feet.

When I first heard about the vote, I thought the debate was finally over.

We would phase the building of the dam, but the most recent cost estimates from Schnabel have thrown a wrinkle into your decision-making process.

The top end of the updated cost estimate is about $19 million.

The cost for building the reservoir pool 30 feet higher is 99% of the cost to expand it to the full 42 feet.

That means that for less than $200,000, we can build to the full height now.

For the price of fuel and man-hours to move the extra dirt, we can spare future counselors from having to vote to tear up the land a second time

and to spend public funds for something that should have been dealt with in 2011.

The recent suggestion to build full height and only raise the pool level 30 feet is the more fiscally responsible plan.

The trails will be restored and hopefully a better lake access will be developed so that more people can enjoy boating and fishing.

Please vote to go full height to save money.

to let the land heal without the threat of future disturbances and so that the community can finally put this debate behind us.

Thank you, Ms. Levering.

Hello.

I'm Joanna Salidas and I live at 129 Goodman Street.

I am deeply disappointed in the January 18th move towards

filling a 30-foot dam instead of a 13-foot dam.

I would like to address a few fundamental misconceptions that I've heard over and over again.

I would like to never hear these same statements again, these same arguments again.

First, there's the statement quoted from Mr. Brown.

It seems obvious the more water that can be stored ahead of time when water is plentiful, the better off we will be when it is dry and the less we need to draw from our rivers.

The problem with this statement is we could use the same logic

to argue for excavating the entire city of Charlottesville and replacing it with a reservoir.

It ignores the question of how much water do we need and also the cost.

Over and over the proponents of the 2006 plan act as though the 18 plus million gallons a day number is a fact.

Yet the water usage studies are seriously flawed.

We are using 22% less water now than we were a decade ago.

The argument that these gains are due to low hanging fruit is utterly illogical.

because the increase in water use in the future, of course, will come from new development.

The new development will obviously incorporate at least the same easy ways to save water.

Yet the water usage studies did not account for this.

They are fundamentally flawed.

A second thing that I would love never to hear again is about the DEQ.

Proponents of the 2006 plan

claim that the DEQ says that the 13 foot rise will not meet stream flow requirements.

I read the August 2nd letter and it didn't say that.

It said that the permits will need to be reworked.

That's very different.

I wish that one of you had pointed out at the City-County meeting on January 18th the following.

One, questions about permitting could have been answered by a joint meeting with the DEQ.

If the Board of Supervisors was concerned about permitting issues, presenting a plan to the DEQ is the answer, not fear-mongering.

Two, it is obviously false that everyone agreed not to do anything that involved new permits.

Even the Earthen Dam would require a new permit.

A third thing I would like to never hear again is that the 2006 plan is better for the rivers.

The plan for the pipeline involves taking water out of the Rivanna around South Fork reservoir and putting it back in sanitized downstream of Riverview Park.

One DEQ official said that in that stretch of the Rivanna we might see drying up similar to what we've seen in the Mormons.

It is obvious that the 2006 plan prioritizes the health of the Mormons over the health of the Rivanna.

Why are city residents being asked to sacrifice the health of our river?

Furthermore, the water for a 30-foot rise will be coming from the Mormons for the foreseeable future, given the nonexistent detailed plan for the pipeline.

How will that affect the Mormons?

Please don't tell me that you want a 30-foot rise for the rivers.

I want to close by saying I love Ragon Mountain Natural Area.

I'm not speaking tonight to save trees.

Trees are what might be planted in mitigation far from the city.

I'm speaking to save a mature forest, diverse and rich.

and accessible to city residents.

I'm not here tonight because I care about the wood thrush's habitat or even the wood otters, although I do.

I'm here because I care about my habitat, my friends, my families, my neighbors.

For hiking, yes, but also for breathing, inspiration, relaxing and learning.

I'm Lou Hart.

I live in 477 Fontana.

I'm with a Hispanic church community here in Charlottesville.

During two weeks after over 16 anti-immigrant bills had been proposed and handled in the Virginia House, delegate Scott Sorbell from Mount Vernon said, Virginia has passed some of the most aggressive measures against undocumented

Immigrants, yet it never seems to be enough for these guys.

Delegate Saravell added, I find it fascinating that all these small government conservatives are advocating expensive, big government intrusions into duties the federal government already has.

I agree completely with Delegate Saravell and we support the resolution opposing anti-immigrant

Thank you, Mr. Hart.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors.

My name is Bill Ross.

I live at 210 10th Street.

My wife and I moved to Charlottesville about three years ago, so I'm new.

This is the first time I've spoken at this meeting.

By way of background, I've participated in a variety of construction projects over the past 50 years.

That being said, I would like to mention some concerns I have regarding the ongoing planning for revision and development of the Ragged Mountain Reservoir.

There are currently two engineering firms developing different approaches to what amounts to the footprint of an expanded reservoir.

The present reservoir is contained by a dam of questionable integrity.

Plans to raise the pond level of the reservoir continue to be debated.

My understanding is that the city and county are working toward a 30-foot increase in the pond level, but reserving the option to raise it to 42 feet at some future date.

In my experience, such planning for deferred expansion of a project runs into two problems made worse by long intervals between phases.

The first of these is the necessary site work and its associated inconvenience will need to be repeated.

The second obvious, I think, is that today's requirements for construction will not be the same in the future.

They will change over time due to improvements in applicable codes, regulatory requirements, construction techniques and the like.

Moving on, a larger pond has a distinctive advantage of being available for the community's water needs during periods of low rainfall, but will also, during such times, allow us to better preserve river flows in the Mormon and South Fork of the Rivanna Rivers downstream from their existing dams and reservoirs.

I look at this expansion of the community's water supply as an opportunity to plan for a more secure future, much as we might plan for improvements in our daily life.

Yes, the future has costs, but to the extent we can meet these in the near term, future costs can be curtailed.

In my view, there's considerable merit to providing long-lasting improvements for the future of our communities beginning now.

Thank you, Mr. Ross.

Good evening.

I'm Downing Smith, 810 Brooks Avenue, Charlottesville, Virginia.

Somebody's really happy about the votes y'all had at the last meeting.

For those of y'all who can't see it out there,

Well, there's only one problem with that.

The county didn't vote for you guys.

And you weren't supposed to be representing the county.

You were supposed to be representing us.

And I am disgusted and disappointed with your action.

But rather than saying what I think about it, I want to let you all know what some of your constituents and my fellow citizens say about it.

There were 185 posts on our article on the hook.

And I would like to share a few of them with you.

Thank you Mayor Morris and Vice Mayor Edwards for clear thinking and balance.

I'd like to thank Councillors Norris and Edwards.

They are congratulated for continuing the support of the interests of the people of Charlottesville.

Norris and Edwards on the side of the taxpayers.

Now for the gang of three.

Does anyone think these three stooges are qualified to make a decision like this?

Charlottesville is getting hollowed out by three stooges on council.

They don't care about facts.

Don't despair, my crystal ball sees a coup in the making.

Next election, the spin-thrift dam builders will be overthrown and the thrifty dredge vans will be brought to power.

Last night's vote was an abnegation of fiduciary responsibility to city residents on the part of Huja, Szakos and Brown in my opinion.

Seriously, are you guys going to pump water uphill for 10 miles?

You all are dumber than a box of rocks.

That was one of my favorites.

I like this one too.

I was wondering if somehow city council can get suckered into finishing up a certain hotel project on the downtown mall too.

You know in 50 years we need the hotel rooms, right?

Recall is a great idea.

It would not take many signatures to put the issue before a judge.

Only 10% of the number cast in the last council election.

That would be pretty easy to get.

Huja, Szakos and Brown have done more in this one vote to decimate the tree canopy than any greedy, forest-clearing developer ever dreamed.

Why are Huja and Szakos and Brown so determined to destroy our forests?

50,000 trees gone because of them.

Environmental devastation is their legacy.

They've sold out the city's interest and they've sold out the city's asset.

We need new city councilors ASAP.

Even if one agrees with Brown, Huja and Szakos, desire for a 30 foot dam, which I don't, it was a terrible decision from a negotiating point of view.

Negotiating 101.

Don't make a concession to the other party until that party agrees to make a concession to you.

These three came to the county.

What motivation does the county now have to agree to a reasonable cost sharing agreement or agree to dredge?

I'm not going to go on with this.

You should go out to the hook and read what they wrote about you.

Peter Loach, 1620 Rose Hill Drive in Charlottesville.

I wanted to thank the council for considering a resolution tonight that's against the anti-immigrant legislation that the General Assembly is looking at.

A number of us from Charlottesville have been to the General Assembly in the last couple of weeks and seen the legislation that's being proposed.

It really is, when people say Arizona-style proposals, it really does get to that point of saying, is Virginia going to be as anti-immigrant as any place in the United States?

The census data that just came out in the last two weeks confirmed that 1 in 10 Virginians was born outside Virginia.

And if you look at the numbers of the contributions those 1 in 10 are making for our economy culturally and in education, it's really fantastic.

It's hard to imagine that some of our most productive and contributing members of society are the ones that we want to target.

Some of this legislation asks police departments to begin to essentially enter into a situation where they'll be forced to do more racial profiling to try and check papers of people who may or may not have even broken the law.

Most police departments do not want this.

Another bill looks at

denying any undocumented immigrant from going to a university in Virginia regardless of whether they're paying out out-of-state tuition.

There's another bill that looks at asking every single parent who enrolls a child in school to confirm whether that child is in the country legally or not.

These are all really invasions of private, in many ways invasions of our private information as well.

I want to also point out Councilor Szakos' leadership on this.

It's been fantastic.

We very much hope that you can support this resolution and that the rest of Charlottesville will understand what's going on in Richmond and how it doesn't favor Charlottesville, it doesn't favor our community.

We can be a beacon of light.

Everyone in this room has an immigrant in their family tree and we hope you support this.

Brandon Collins, 536 Meade Avenue, I've lived in Charlottesville all my life

I want to thank you for considering this resolution opposing this racist anti-immigrant legislation going through the General Assembly and also to thank you for taking the time to whittle down the original two-page resolution into something that you feel you can pass.

I hope in that process maybe some of you have learned a little bit about the issues and it's given you some more background information that you can

engage with the public on this issue because we really need to bring a lot of attention to the issue.

That said, the actual resolution isn't posted on the website under the background materials for the agenda.

So it would be really great if you wanted to separate that from the consent agenda and read out the resolution before voting on it.

And I hope that will still mean that we can get a unanimous vote on that.

I think that would send a really, really strong signal.

And then also to ask you to get out there and not just pass this resolution but bring this up every chance you can in the press and everywhere else.

There's been a couple of sneaky developments in the last couple of days.

Friday, a bill that hadn't really been announced or discussed was kind of unveiled to everybody at the last minute and that's HB 2332 and that is actually exactly like the Arizona bill, which allows the police to basically decide whether to stop somebody or not, whether they have probable cause or not.

Maybe a little too late to get that in your resolution, but something to be on the lookout for.

These bills are going to pass the House, but we can really stop them in the Senate, and I think you guys are making a really, really great step bringing this to light.

With a lot of pressure, it can be stopped in the Senate, but it's going to take some hard work.

If you want to learn more about it and stay up to date you can visit virginiaunitedagainstdepression.wordpress.com or you can visit RichmondSunlight.com has really great legislative updates and look for the Vacalow profile on that website and in the spirit of

Good old Charlottesville Democracy.

I'd like everybody in the audience to stand up who supports this resolution opposing anti-immigrant legislation in the General Assembly.

And you can see there's a lot of people here in favor of that, so I hope you keep that in mind.

Thank you, Mr. Collins.

Hi, my name is Maria Jimenez.

I live in 1319 better North Gorge.

The community is so good.

My English is not perfect.

I can help.

You're doing great.

Everything, you know.

Many of them born here.

These laws affect everyone in general.

Children, youth, adults, and the old.

It would be chaos for all of us.

I don't get why they threaten us if we came here looking for well-being for our families and for work.

We are firmly against all these laws and we ask for support to the government to stop this assault against our community.

I had a special little treat for your honor and board, Eddie Banks at 500 First Street.

I'm at this Crescent Hall now, and I was in the building, so I just decided to stop by.

Everybody knew that I was still kicking and still trying to do what I was here for before when we was talking about the orchestra, choir, the chorus, back up singing, the dancing.

But coming out in

Spending time with all these people make me feel like my job is getting easier.

Being an independent filmmaker slash slash slash and trying to do what I come here to do.

I've been working on a documentary for 100 years and it's coming to a head and Charlottesville is my new life now.

I don't have pressures anymore.

I don't have needs or that is not fulfilled no more.

So I have to find something that's positive to do more so than what I was doing when I first came here.

And the last time I was here, we were talking about the orchestra, the choir, the choir, the backup singers and dancers.

Everybody participated with the boating and

It made me feel that I had a purpose being here.

And right now I'm getting ready to perform at the Blue Ridge Club on the 28th of February.

I'm on YouTube, Facebook, EditMaze33, across the board.

And I always like to close with a little something to remember me by.

And if you want to tell the truth, you just got to do your will.

Well, as I host another cover in a different episode.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm always in a lot of characters.

simply because characters help me to express where I'm coming from.

Your honor, I'm going to salute you one more time.

And every time that I see you, I'm going to salute you, sir, because you have given me something that's priceless.

And that's an honor of being here.

Can I close with a little bit of something sweet for you?

DJI News, bring it to you.

And we got a show for you on the clubhouse!

Thank you all and God bless you all.

Thank you.

I'm not going to be able to stay here too long because I got to get out the streets because I'm an old man now and I don't hang out like I used to.

But the officer of the choir is right there, starting at the Crescent House and everybody says, man, listen to me, I want to be a part of it.

Well, everybody just, everybody come in and be who you truly are.

Thank you, Mr. Banks.

Hello, my name is Alexandra.

I live at 201 14th Street.

I lived in Charlottesville my entire life.

I'm now a UVA student representing the Latino Student Alliance.

We just wanted to thank you guys for passing their, or not passing it yet, but being in support of the resolution.

We've also been at the General Assembly the past few weeks and it has been very, very disturbing seeing what's going on.

what's been attempted to be passing and just when you think about this resolution to think about the education factor of the thousands and millions in the country but in the state and in Charlottesville of the children who for the future need to be educated.

And then I'm also a student at the University of Virginia and what we also need to discuss in relation to all the anti-immigration bills is the stigma of illegality.

This is an attempt by those in favor of these types of legislation to impose in modern day discrimination using the law to legitimize the logic to discriminate against minorities.

So we need to understand that not only is it going to affect the target population that they wish to seek out, but also everyone in general, because then everyone's going to be imposed with this term of illegal.

And once when you hear that word, immediately what comes into mind?

Negative thoughts.

So that's the problem with all this legislation.

It imposes a negative connotation upon the community.

As a student at UVA and also being the son of undocumented immigrants, this issue hits straight at home because then I couldn't go to the university in my state of Florida because I was the son of the undocumented parents and I had to be considered as an out of state.

That happens here in Virginia too.

You have to understand that.

One of our classmates actually, he almost couldn't get into UVA even though he was qualified and everything.

but because of that situation, it almost prevented him from not going to UVA.

Charlottesville is in that special place, I feel, not only in Virginia but also in the United States.

Having the University of Virginia, having that bastion of education and the fact that UVA is a World Heritage site and in the World Heritage site, if you look at their website, it says one of the things that they demand is an education, every child has a right to an education.

and we have to live up to those ideas, not only of Jefferson, great man as he was, but we also have to live up to all the other titles we have as a city, as a world heritage site within our locality.

So with that, UVA students, you know, with the Latino Student Alliance and all of our allied partners on grounds, we're going to continue to march.

By the way, I hope all of you were able to catch that story of us marching on November 15.

If you didn't, you can go ahead and YouTube it.

NBC29 and CBS19, they did a good job on it.

You know, we marched and it was only 40 of us, but it was 40 people that came out and said, hey look, this is what needs to happen.

And we also collected over 2,600 signatures at the university, petitioning the university to go ahead and recognize the DREAM Act as a very necessary piece of legislation.

Thank you all.

Mayor Norris, ma'am, ma'am, gentlemen, I'm Bob Fenwick, 901 East Jefferson Street.

Community politicians say they favor dredging the Rivanna Reservoir for recreational purposes but not for additional water capacity.

What sense does that make?

The whole purpose of a reservoir is to ensure water capacity, not to float boats.

Floating boats is a bonus.

The community will be having this same discussion in the future because there is a serious omission in the dam plans.

There is no provision for future dredging of the Ragged Mountain Reservoir.

After all the time and money and effort spent on the community water plan, no one has had the foresight to put in a provision for dredging.

Every reservoir ever built has to be dredged at some point or abandoned.

Where is the drying area for future dredging at Ragged Mountain?

Where are the roads?

Where is the launching ramp?

The planning is short-sighted.

The consequences are costly.

This council has committed the citizens of Charlottesville to a huge public works project that won't be needed for 40 years, if at all.

and it is a myth to think that Charlottesville residents won't be required to bear a huge cost.

After all, we pay the bills.

Even without a new dam, my water bill has jumped almost 300% in nine years from $25 a month to $70 a month.

Citizens will pay dearly for this decision and the dam won't even be filled for 20 years because there is no pipeline to fill it.

And while all this money goes to a county project far into the future, what do the homeless do today?

The haven and the homeless shelters are bursting at the seams.

What do the citizens do who depend upon the food bank today?

Do they also wait 20 years to get their needs met?

You would say no, but where is the money to come from?

We have two bridges in need of major repairs.

We have sewer upgrades necessary.

In a way you can say this is payback time for carry politicians.

They chafe at having to pay us 18 million dollars a year, so this is an end around play.

They pay us 18 million dollars a year and it sticks in their craw.

So to be a good neighbor, we give them the Ragged Mountain Natural Area, two dams, and two reservoirs.

What a great deal.

Great for them, a disaster for the city.

If the city is that well off, why not give the small businesses in Charlottesville a tax cut?

We know for certain that will have a much quicker beneficial effect on our community.

One fact is for certain, we, the people in this room, and watching and listening across the city, will pay whatever bill is due.

But we are not sheep to be shorn.

Thank you Mr. Speaker.

I'm here, we're here as representatives of Charlottesville's concerned music lovers and we want to thank Mayor Norris and Mr. Tolbert for coming to a meeting that we organized at Random Row Books this past Sunday night.

The purpose of that meeting was to better inform the public at large of what exactly is happening with Charlottesville zoning regarding live music and to better organize the music community to help the city deal with this issue.

We've gathered a group of people consisting of business owners, booking people, musicians and lawyers to review the city's zoning code regarding live music in the city.

We look forward to meeting at City Space on the 15th of this month that Mr. Tolbert has organized to discuss his recommendations to council.

We want to work with the city as much as possible to ensure that zoning isn't used to target artistic expression,

and plan on providing our own specific set of proposals toward that.

I personally started attending shows here in 1994 and the music community here helped form who I am as a person.

It's deeply important to me that we keep music as accessible as possible throughout all of Charlottesville.

I'd like to meet with each of you individually within the next month to discuss this matter and we will be contacting each of your offices.

And if I can just add to that, again, thank you Mayor Norris and I don't know if Jim Tolbert is here tonight, but thanks to him very much for coming out and taking questions from folks last week.

It was really informative and just one thing I just want to leave you all with

regarding the code itself and the issue at hand.

It's a really simple problem and I think that there's a very easy fix to this.

It is primarily about the way that we define what is a music hall and what is a restaurant.

And right now the definition of a restaurant does not include amplified music.

It's specifically non-amplified.

So there's really a half-word difference there that if we take out that non, then really the problem is largely resolved.

But we do also need to look at the definition of music hall which is right now really incredibly broad and it treats places like the Jefferson just the same as any small restaurant that has live music.

And I think that we can all agree that that's not really the intent of the law when we talk about music halls.

So thank you very much for considering and we'll be in touch.

Thank you.

That will conclude matters by the public and we'll have another opportunity at the end of the meeting for our additional speakers.

Ms. Szakos?

Shall I read it now?

I would agree and I am also wondering if it might not be possible to add

HB 2332, just to the heading of this, since that's been introduced since we first had it.

I guess I was in response to Mr. Howard from Dunmore, are you still here?

I know that, of course, we're not going to decide anything about that tonight, but I know that for our schools, for the high school, it was a disaster when that road was open.

And so it's not just a simple matter of the traffic moves smoothly.

It really was difficult for the city schools to have that open.

So I think that it's not as simple as it might seem.

And I would also

I would suggest that, and maybe you have already, also go into the Board of Supervisors and ask if they can do something about that traffic, because it is difficult up there.

And I think it's probably going to be that way for a while, so it's probably worth fixing.

So thanks for coming.

I would also just thank all the folks who came to speak out about immigration and those who came to speak about other things but stood up about immigration.

We are not exclusively but largely a nation of immigrants and I think that these are important things for all of us to be considering.

I'm not, well, I guess I feel Mr. Smith not surprisingly has left

I never really thought that I would sit at a city council meeting and be called one of three stooges and dumber than a bag of rocks.

I'm pretty disappointed at the level of discourse that that sunk us to.

I'm not going to say some of the things I was going to say because I don't think I can say it better than that.

Sometimes this water issue is presented as if there's only really one reasonable side and the other side really doesn't have any legitimate points and that's just not so.

It's a complicated issue.

You know, rather than going through a laundry list of issues, what I'll say is that since that time, a number of people, thoughtful people in the community, have taken the time to email praising our action.

People like Kay Slaughter, former mayor, former city councilor, former attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

Dave Hirschman, people involved with environmental, especially water issues, no Dave Jason Halbert, on our housing authority, former mayor and councilor Blake Caravati, I know councilor Taliaferro is in the audience

So it's not as simple as there's one side on this and we're somehow on the other side.

It's a complicated issue.

I would hope people could respect that and just argue on the issues.

And speaking about the issues, I will reply briefly to Mr. Fenwick.

who has concerns about the silting in of Ragged Mountain.

And as I understand it, the drawback of Ragged Mountain is it doesn't fill very fast, but that creates an advantage as well in which it doesn't have a large

And in particular it's not a developed area, it's not agricultural, it's not suburban, it's not developed and therefore what still occurs is going to be very slow compared to

I just wanted to thank Mr. Banks for reminding us, even if it was just for a moment, that Charlottesville is a special place to live, to grow, and to disagree.

You indicated that Charlottesville is your new life right now.

We have a lot of issues that we're going to be struggling with.

I hope that we can all find new life, even as we disagree.

And as you were speaking, the thing that came to mind was to bloom when you were planted.

And it's clear we still have a lot of growing to do.

Very well said.

I want to thank all the speakers who touched on the anti-immigration legislation that's coming before the General Assembly and specifically want to thank Maria Jimenez for speaking on how these efforts really are an assault on your community.

And by extension, they're an assault on our community, our whole community.

I really appreciate your courage in speaking up and coming forward.

I want to thank Jacob and Bailey.

Thank you.

I thought that was an excellent discussion the other night about live music and how we can all work together to make sure Charlottesville stays a good place for live music.

So thank you for your efforts, you and Bailey for that.

Joanna Solitis, wow, that was one of the best summaries I've heard yet of the need to retool our water supply plan and I really appreciate the comments that you made and the cautions that you urged because we can't be led by misinformation so thank you for that.

And speaking of misinformation, I do want to correct the record.

Mr. Ross, you mentioned the questionable integrity of the Ragged Mountain Dam.

I have yet to see a study that calls the dam's integrity into question.

There is certainly an issue regarding the spillway and the inadequate spillway, but I have yet to see any study that

has been based on current research which calls the dam itself into question, the integrity of the dam itself into question.

I just want to make that clear.

Again, thank you all for coming to speak tonight.

We're now going to move on to the next item on our agenda, which is appointments to boards and commissions.

Dr. Brown.

move that we appoint Pascal Bussiere to the police advisory panel, and then I'd like to further move the following council appointments to boards and commissions.

To the Albemarle, Charlottesville Regional Jail Authority, Kristin Szakos.

To the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Dave Norris.

To the Housing Advisory Committee, Kristin Szakos.

To the Jefferson Area Board of Aging, Board of Directors, Satyendra Huja.

to the Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Board, Mr. Huja, Ms. Szakos to the Police Advisory Panel, Holly Edwards to the Retirement Commission, Dave Norris to the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority, Holly Edwards to the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, David Brown to the Social Service Advisory Board, Kristin Szakos to the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, Mr. Huja

to the 250th anniversary committee, Mr. Huja, to the Piedmont Workforce Council, Mr. Huja, to the Rivanna River Basin Commission, David Brown and Holly Edwards, to the Community Scholarship Committee, Ms. Szakos, to the Planning and Advisory Committee, Mayor Norris and Vice Mayor Edwards, and to the Dialogue on Race Committee, Ms. Edwards.

Then moved and seconded.

Any discussion?

If not, please indicate your vote.

Carries unanimously.

Thank you very much, Dr. Brown.

Before we move to our consent agenda, I would like to, in response to, I think, an excellent request from Mr. Collins, I'd like to ask Ms. Szakos to read the resolution that's been referenced regarding anti-immigration legislation that we'll be voting on momentarily as part of the consent agenda.

OK, it's long.

But not as long as it once was.

A resolution expressing opposition to pending Virginia General Assembly legislation SB789, HB1468, HB1420, HB1421, HB1482, HB1574, HB1465, and HB2332.

Whereas the city of Charlottesville is better able to protect and serve its community when all people, regardless of residency status, can communicate with law enforcement and public agencies without fear of arrest, deportation and imprisonment, and whereas legislation in the Virginia General Assembly is being proposed which puts state and local police in the position of enforcing federal immigration law,

requiring verification of residency or citizenship status by a police officer suspecting any misdemeanor or felony as having been committed, being committed or about to be committed regardless of the conviction of a crime and whereas legislation is being proposed in the Virginia Assembly, General Assembly making non-identification to a police officer a misdemeanor crime and

whereas legislation is being proposed that restricts localities from awareness and oversight of federal immigration enforcement in our communities while simultaneously mandating that localities and state police enforce federal immigration law and whereas such legislation inhibits the ability of police to gather information from witnesses and victims, invites racial profiling, and presents an undue financial burden on Virginia's localities and taxpayers.

and whereas the city of Charlottesville remains a safer community for all when its residents have access to public services, higher education, driver's licenses and employment and whereas legislation in the Virginia General Assembly is being proposed which greatly restricts immigrant access to public services and higher education.

and whereas legislation is being proposed in the Virginia General Assembly that reduces immigrants' access to driver's licenses and whereas legislation is being proposed in the Virginia General Assembly that requires the Virginia Employment Commission to verify immigration status and report any offenses.

Whereas the city of Charlottesville recognizes that all people living or working in Virginia are entitled to respect and inalienable human rights regardless of residency status.

And whereas undocumented people in the Commonwealth, held in detention on immigration offenses, are often held for more than eight months while awaiting deportation.

And whereas the imprisonment of undocumented people living in the city of Charlottesville

could violate their human rights and would unduly burden the city's law enforcement and jail facilities.

Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia.

Charlottesville City Council expresses its strong opposition to Virginia Assembly Bills and I'm not going to read them again.

Okay, thank you Ms. Szakos.

So the items on our consent agenda.

We have item A, the minutes of January 18th.

Item B is an appropriation of $9,480 reimbursement from Albemarle County for additional wayfinding signage, seconded to readings.

Item C is an appropriation of $14,598.42 Smith Aquatic Center appropriation of Boys and Girls Club reimbursement, seconded to readings.

Item D is an appropriation of $1,485, Virginia Department of Fire Programs Training Mini Grant Award, second of two readings.

Item A is an appropriation of $7,500, Family Finding Training, first of two readings.

Item F, a resolution amendments to agreement between CEDA and Jefferson School Community Partnership, first of one reading.

item G the resolution anti-immigration legislation which we just heard first of one reading I will note that item H on the original agenda an ordinance regarding the sale land of southern development second two readings has been deferred for further consultation with the neighborhood is there a motion to approve the consent agenda any questions or comments I so move second

It's been moved and seconded.

Any discussion?

If not, please indicate your vote.

And the motion carries.

Thank you very much.

The next item on our agenda tonight is a public hearing and an ordinance regarding the sale of 409 Stadium Road.

Good evening.

I was not here the last time this matter was brought before the Council.

However, Jim Tobert had been here at the December 20th meeting at which time a proposal had been submitted by Mr. Rick Jones to increase his original offer

Up to $250,000 for the purchase of this land at 409 Stadium Road.

To give you a little background, initially this had been valued at roughly $300,000 by Mr. Barber.

We solicited proposals

Request for proposals for people to come in with both a price and a development plan for this particular property.

We received four, one of which was quite late.

The proposal that jumped out was one submitted by Charlottesville Apartments for $250,000.

Initially the one from Mr. Jones representing Management Services Corporation was $150,000.

There is a spreadsheet attached with your council packets.

At the meeting on the 20th of December, Mr. Jones had came back and increased that offer from up to 250.

There had been an interim.

I believe it was a $175,000 offer.

However, his proposal now is to leave the land undeveloped or as is.

There's two maps behind you on my left.

One is an aerial photo to the far left there.

Shows you this particular land that's outlined in blue right there at the corner of Emmett and JPA.

You can see the tree canopy and basically it's just an undeveloped lot.

There is a house, stone house that's owned by MSC that abuts right on that, the property line there to the west.

The other

Mount.

Unfortunately, with the city seal in the middle, we couldn't put both landscape versions.

For you to view, I had to turn it and scoot it up on its edge, but you can see the property there and the way the stone house comes right up to the edge of the property down the west side.

But that is a lot in question.

You have two

Ordinances.

Staff is recommending passage of Ordinance A, which would be conveyance to the Charlottesville Apartments for the $250,000.

This was the original proposal that was received and reviewed by staff.

The second alternative ordinance is Ordinance B, which would instead

That's all I have.

Well, we just felt it was consistent with the original proposal.

All right, we have representatives here from both bidders and I believe, do you have a preference over who goes, we wanted to give them an opportunity to sort of refresh us and refresh the public about the nature there.

Good evening, Mayor Norris and Council.

There's several here.

I'm sorry I didn't bring my harmonica with me tonight.

I won't be quite as entertaining as Mr. Banks, but I'll do my best.

I'd like to take just a brief amount of your time to conduct a community planning charade here and the amount of time you have available.

I think we'd like to explain why we think our proposal is a solid proposal and why it's reasonable for you to endorse your planning staff's recommendation.

I'd like to think it would be as easy as just saying the planning staff is right, let's go home, but I understand it's a little more detailed than that.

So, if you look at the images that I've handed out, this second page with some graphics shows you the site in context, and I think maybe that helps frame this discussion.

So if you see this, you'll see here the site in yellow is the site under discussion.

It's about a quarter of an acre and we had a very limited time to respond to the proposal but we think we put together a very nicely scaled and detailed project that if you look on the second page is shown in a footprint.

and you can see that it is more or less in context and scale with the rest of the properties around the area.

You'll notice UVA is in blue across the street, large institutional buildings.

I've highlighted a couple of new apartment buildings in brown just to give you some context for some of the new apartment work that's going on there.

Everything else is kind of undistinguished as to whether it's student housing or private housing.

It's all shown at the residential scale irregardless of whether it's rental or owner-occupied but you can get a sense of the general scale there and then you can also see the properties highlighted in orange are properties currently owned by MSC just for context.

What we think are the highlights of this proposal

would be that on this corner it's actually appropriate to have a small appropriately scaled building that addresses the corner.

I think it would be a nice feature for JPA and Emmett and Charlottesville to have a very handsome classical building as opposed to leaving an open space there.

I know there's a lot of discussion about saving some trees and I think we would

proposed and we would assume that we would be doing a long public workshop once this process is done that would replace all of the trees that are on the site with urban street trees of the city's choice and plant it as appropriate.

This project does meet the goals of getting student housing close to the UVA, which is what we're doing here.

I think that the other thing to keep in mind here is that if this site is left bank and the development rights are shifted to the MSC site then we don't really have a clear vision of what's proposed but if you look at the third page of the graphics you'll see that there is a very large parcel that is created and all we have to go by is what we were shown in MSC's proposal which stated that

The vision for this entire block bound by JPA, Emmett Street, Steady Road and Montebello Circle is a new high density multifamily or residential condominium with some ground for retail which would allow extensive structured parking underground.

So I would point out that

Ground floor retail would certainly generate a lot of traffic.

Our site we discovered with Woodrow Street that still remains wouldn't need an additional curb cut, so student housing with student parking would be very low traffic.

And I have some concern simply as an objective observer about the idea of a single developer doing the entire block

and to what level of quality it could be done.

I think in general urbanism is better if done by many hands and many designers and I'll say that as an architect and a designer in general it's desirable to have a lot of people working on projects in the city.

So I think that we've got a project that's the right scale and the right site and if it's left undeveloped you're running the risk of a larger project of unknown quantity and quality that may in fact be

less desirable on that site.

I think that sort of sums it up.

We can answer any question that you have.

I know that Dr. Brown had a question about traffic and safety.

We would have about 25 to 30 bedrooms which would add very, very little traffic and safety issues to that corner.

There would be no additional access on JPA.

It would all be served from the same existing roads that are there.

Most students leave their cars parked most of the time.

On the weekends they may go home, but in terms of generating additional traffic during the week it would be minimal.

Can I care for this, Council Brown, also?

You will probably hear arguments implicating that there's only one solution to this, which is to leave it undeveloped.

But, in fact, it's a complicated issue with different solutions, and I'd like to entertain the notion that we've given you a very reasonable proposal.

Thank you very much.

While I'm handing these out, I'm Rick Jones.

I happen to work for Management Services Corporation, but none of this property is owned by Management Services Corporation.

As a matter of fact, Management Services Corporation does not own

Any real estate in the city of Charlottesville, the person that has made the offer is myself and Doug Caton.

We as general partners of Woodrow Limited Partnership and another LLC together

do own the adjoining parcels.

So for whatever that's worth I want to make sure that I'm not identified as representing Management Services Corporation.

I'm really here today to speak as your neighbor.

As Ms. McHugh pointed out, my house that I own is almost touching that blue horizontal line.

I bought that

Approximately two years ago you had had it condemned.

It was, well obviously it was in such poor shape the city had closed it down, it had been condemned for five years.

Doug and I, if we were planning to

develop anything and I will address this large scale high density property issue in a second.

If we had any immediate or near term grandiose plans for development of all the rest of this property, believe me,

We would not have sunk a boatload of money into that house.

Our staff actually urged us to tear it down.

They said, this is a tear down.

Why would you do this?

Well, because we like what's there.

We didn't want to see it torn down and we wanted to preserve it.

So what you have before you is a proposal to build a building which will be 10 feet from the corner of our property.

In this package that I gave you, and I'm not going to try to go through all this because I tried to do it

at my office and it takes longer than you all are going to let me speak.

But it's on page 16 and it shows you the actual scale and context of what my building, which is this black box here, looks like as you're standing in JPA, in the sidewalk, looking at the new elevation and

The fact that it soars 65% higher, 25 feet over my stone house.

And as for the building that is directly down JPA from the right hand side of your building, it's literally double the height.

of the adjoining property.

So I would have to take issue that this building is appropriately scaled and fits into the context of the neighbors.

There are trees on that property.

I've developed before.

I know what you have to do for a site plan.

And typically what you go back with is what, a three to four inch caliper tree.

Your smallest tree on that property is 12 inches.

Your largest tree is 30 inches.

So every single one of them is going to come down except for one.

It was ironic when the RFP went out on, when I turned in my RFP on October 29th, that same day, this article came out in the paper talking about focus on foliage.

The first line was, Charleston would soon recognize a group of tree advocates tasked with keeping a watchful eye on the city's foliage.

Well, I've got a close eye for you and I spoke to your urban forester.

He doesn't even know you own this property.

Never surveyed the trees.

I'm not the biggest tree hugger in the world, but as your neighbor, I would really be opposed to seeing every single one of them chopped down.

We have also made an additional offer to the city.

We have agreed to put an individual protected property designation not only

on that parcel.

And that may not be the most appropriate way to do this.

You know, our intent was to say to the city, we don't want to build on this land.

Our proposal was strikingly different than what you all as a city council decided to do.

And I have some sympathy with the fact that Charlottesville Apartments

did what you all asked to be done.

We're just 180 degrees in the opposite direction.

We're willing to pay a quarter for a million dollars.

and assure you that we're not going to build on it.

We also said that we would put the IPP designation on the adjoining house.

That's not your property.

It's not part of this deal, but we're willing to make it a part of this deal.

Charlottesville Apartments proposal shows a 25-foot setback.

I've put in my package essentially a map that shows

All of the adjoining properties going up and down the street.

All of the other setbacks are 35, 43, 55 foot setbacks.

The zoning code doesn't allow 25 feet when everybody else is much further back and to that extent I think again the context is not appropriate there.

The access onto existing streets, if you look at the curb cut there on JPA where their driveway is going to, where they show their driveway

It is parallel to Woodrow Street.

It starts at the 10 foot setback and it's 20 feet wide.

When that driveway is built, and I also, real quickly, have a picture in here of what that looks like when you're standing out in the street and you're looking, here it is, it's page seven.

and you're standing right at the edge of the curb cut and looking at your property, when you go 30 feet over to the far edge of this driveway, you're not lined up with that curb cut either.

The city is going to have to make that curb cut go much further north or kids who are trying to get into that building are going to literally be going the wrong way up JPA

The parking is in the setback.

It's called a driveway, but when you have an asphalt surface in your front yard, I had said repeatedly,

that students are going to park there.

And I don't know who's going to be there to tell them that they can't park there.

The rear parking lot goes into the setback.

There's supposed to be a 10-foot side yard setback.

It goes within three feet of the property line.

So as, again, as your neighbor, if this was your house

You had salvaged that home, I'm sure you would feel exactly the way I do.

I don't want something that's 65% higher than my house built right next door.

So my proposal is for change.

Chelsea Apartments essentially, I'll remind you, it's not a done deal.

If you sign a contract, it has a 90-day due diligence period.

And 90 days from now, you know, they can walk away.

I don't have that.

You know, I'm ready to close and, you know, pay you the cash and promise not to do the building there.

Any questions for Mr. Jones?

We will use Woodrow Street.

Also, I'd like to point out that while we're discussing the height of our proposal, this is not a final proposal, this is a concept that we understand we will need to go to public hearing, planning commission, we've talked to staff, you'll get to comment on it again, so we fully expect to be working with Mr. Jones on what would be acceptable to him and to the neighborhood.

Also, you do not have any competing proposal from NSC about what they will build on their site.

High density, mixed use, commercial, underground parking, I guarantee you that's taller than his house, so

Also, I'd like to point out there are about 30 trees on his site, which we've heard nothing about.

There are a lot of things at play here, but there are some things that you should consider.

You're not given the full picture of what you will be seeing.

Can you sort of address that at least in concept?

I don't have a big picture vision.

I think in context, what I said was

Very, very, very far down the road, I would think that the city of Charlottesville would prefer to have high density in that location.

Right now, I have 57 apartments at Woodrow.

I'm allowed by Wright 57 apartments.

It's zoned R3.

You know, I don't have any plans.

I don't have a vision.

I'm 63.

I don't think that in the next 10 years we're going to have a market or zoning that's going to let me tear down 57 apartments.

And if I could get a special use permit from Planning Commission and you guys, then I'd be allowed

I don't know, one and a half times that amount, but I'm speaking more from the city's long-term perspective in planning, you know, 10, 15, 20 years from now, what you envision there.

I don't have any vision.

Oh, a question?

Yeah, just before you sit down.

It was my understanding at our last council meeting when this first came forward that you were talking about that the fact of leaving the trees on this lot would enable you to sort of have a cap and trade

sort of arrangement.

So if you wanted more development on the other parts of the lot, you could use this as an offset for that.

Yes.

No, that's still the case.

I understand.

I would still like to take that density, the density that I'm allowed and use it somewhere else on my property

I don't really want to pay a quarter of a million dollars for a park.

and I don't really want to own a stone house that I can't use the by right density that I'm allowed 20 years from now.

But what I am willing to do is have it protected.

If Mr. Kraefack is allowed five dwelling units, that's what I want somewhere else, but I don't have

I don't have a plan for those five units.

I don't have a vision.

That's all.

All right.

Well, thank you all.

Now, we do have a public hearing scheduled on this matter, and we're going to move forward and have the public hearing before we continue with council discussion.

The first person who signed up to speak for the public hearing.

And again, when you come forward, please state your name and address and keep your comments to three minutes.

My name is Nina Barnes.

I live at number 12, Gildersleeve Wood.

I'm here representing our JPA Neighborhood Association.

and would like to read a statement regarding the city's sale of 409 Stadium Road.

Several JPA-NA members are here tonight because we know that a bid has been made for the city-owned property at 409 Stadium Road that is for sale.

There are two proposers, Mr. Rick Jones and Mr. John Kwafik, and we neighbors have met with each individually to listen to their proposals.

Those of us in attendance applauded each man for his careful attention to maintenance and beautification of his properties in our neighborhood.

Mr. Jones on Woodrow Street and Mr. Krafick at 1815 Jefferson Park Avenue.

Our neighborhood association is extremely interested in the outcome of this transaction.

We had no idea that this 0.25 acres was owned by the city.

nor that this very tiny space is considered, quote, ideally situated for use as a multifamily development, unquote.

Neighbors are very much in agreement that this small pivotal cornerstone property, just yards from the UVA grounds, seems not only inappropriate for development, but could be ideally suited for use as a green space.

Hopefully it might be cleaned up and maintained and beautified.

Our sensors in the JPA area need a resting place with some good landscaping in the midst of so many buildings, roadways, and heavy traffic.

Because Rick Jones has said that he would leave the parcel undeveloped, our Jefferson Park Neighborhood Association board and other members of our association

feel that this would be the better proposal and we would support him for the sale of 409 Stadium Road with the idea and hope that council would ask that if he is to buy the property that one, he accepts historic designation for both his renovated stone house and the newly purchased property.

Number two, the property be cleaned up, maintained and beautified and three, he communicates with our neighborhood

in the future planning of the 409 Stadium Road site.

We would hope that if the sale goes to Mr. Jones, that it will bring money for the housing fund, give Mr. Jones the opportunity to complete his larger parcel of land that he owns, and work for our neighborhood to make a beautiful green space at this busy intersection.

Also, good landscaping along Woodrow Street and at each entrance could make this an impressive

Thank you, Ms. Barnes.

Hello.

Sally Brown, 110 Chum Walk Road, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Jones and other council members.

Diverting from my notes, I would just like to begin by saying my family and I moved here in the early 1970s.

And the first remark I make is not as a member of the JPA and A association, but more just as a person who loves Charlottesville and is considering the city in total.

In the best of all worlds, I would love to see that lot that we've been speaking about as a small urban park, but I won't go any further because that's not to be.

I very much appreciate the need for funding for other housing, affordable housing in the city, and so that's just sort of a dream, but I thought how nice it would have been if we were in the financial position to actually have an urban park.

As Nuna mentioned, you know, we do need a place to rest in this neighborhood that has undergone, in all the years that I have lived there, so many drastic changes with the growth of the university and the city's commitment to put as much housing as possible in that part of town to relieve congestion in other parts of the town.

But frankly, the students want to live there and, you know, there are trade-offs.

I still love our neighborhood, thousands and thousands of students

despite.

What I would like to do now is speak a little bit more as a member of the Neighborhood Association and I would like to also support Mr. Jones' idea for this parcel of land.

I liked his proposal to delay development.

Development will come there and probably a lot of development, possibly not in my lifetime, but down the road that was the city's commitment.

I'd like to have a couple of, just a few observations.

First of all, looking at that map, and I know that intersection so well, and by the way, do you realize how many people use it, both vehicles and pedestrians?

It's busy, but you know the traffic moves safely, efficiently, swiftly.

The city has very nicely landscaped those islands that help to safely direct the traffic in the various directions that it goes.

If you stand on one of those islands and look around the whole intersection, it really does have a lot of space, a feeling of space and openness and proportion and maybe even scale and building

A big building there is going to destroy that.

Just a few further reflections.

I think I have been told and have known for a long time that of all the neighborhoods in the city of Charlottesville, the JPA neighborhood has the least amount of green space.

Now, one could say, well, there's the lawn of the University of Virginia, but I don't count that, as beautiful it is.

I'm speaking of our neighborhood.

And you know, when you have high density urban development with lots of people coming and going, you have all that excitement, but you also have to have a place where you can rest.

and have a little respite.

And it is my hope, although Mr. Jones is not bound to do that, that it will be, since he does not plan to develop immediately, it will be cleaned up and maybe people could just sit down on the ground, if not an actual bench.

One other thing I'd like to mention, the city's commitment not only to the high density development, but it's also been to our tree canopy.

and I know that the city has appointed a tree commission to preserve the canopy we have and to further our tree canopy.

Here we have an example of a very small parcel, but nonetheless very important.

So I say to you simply, build if you must, but please save the trees.

Thank you, Ms. Brown.

Is there anybody else from the public who would like to speak on this topic?

Well, not from the public.

Let's hold off on that and just make sure there's nobody else from the public who would like to speak first and then we'll be happy to give you that chance.

Anybody else from the public like to speak?

Okay, we'll now close the public hearing.

Ms. McHugh.

Oh.

Ms. Foster, would you like to speak?

I'm Jane Foster.

I live in Gilbert's Lee Road, which is very, very close to this.

And we've had lots of meetings at my house because we all care so much about saving our neighborhood as much as possible.

And we would be thrilled if we could have this hunk of land to be a small pocket park, or at least wild and green and beautiful.

Thank you, Ms. Foster.

Anybody else like to speak?

Okay, we'll now close the public hearing.

Yes, just one clarifying point.

I know Mrs. Barnes had indicated that Mr. Jones' proposal that having an individually protected property could be done for both the stone house and the property, but you can't have an IPP for a vacant piece of land.

So that's not feasible.

Could you ask a question then?

Would you please come back?

Ms. McHugh?

Other questions for Ms. McHugh?

Otherwise, we'll open it up for council comments and discussion.

I'd like to see this property left undeveloped.

It is contrary to what our RFP said.

I feel sympathy for Shawerson partners group because they did it in their good faith many proposals from what was requested.

So I do sympathize with them but not to the extent that I would like to sell the land to them.

The reason is that I would like to see that those trees saved, that open space saved and I think in the long run we still can gain higher density from Mr. Jones's property without destroying this open space which we have in a very important congested area.

As to development itself, in spite of

Great drawings, I miss a minute today.

I think it will be out of scale, it will cause traffic problems, and it will cause confusion on this site.

And I think in the long run, I think it will be best to send it to Mr. Jones, who would not necessarily, but also her condition as Paul Deed, that it will not be developed, and that it will be a historic designation when combined with the storehouse.

I had one question before we proceed.

Ms. McHugh, I know several suggestions have been made that the request that the parcel, if Mr. Jones does buy it, that it be maintained, cleaned up, beautified, landscaping, etc.

I don't know who that question is.

Mr. Brown?

Actually, Ms. McKee, while you're standing there, you may not be the person who knows the answer to this, but you might.

What was the kind of

We prepared the request for proposal.

We did a couple of things.

One, we placed it in the newspaper and it ran for one, two, three, four, five, six, ran for an entire week in October.

In addition, we came up with a list, some from just people who had expressed an interest in that particular piece of property and we sent it out to basically realtors.

So we did a mass emailing in conjunction with the week long

Request for proposal in the paper.

Proposals were submitted.

We ended up placing a sign at that point in time before the first public hearing and consideration by the council.

So that was done after RFP was initially advertised.

No, sir.

I'm not here and I think I can clarify one thing that Kathy doesn't know.

The procedure says we mailed notice to everybody within 500 feet.

That was done at the time we put the sign on it.

So we mailed to owners of record within 500 feet.

That was a requirement of the sale procedure.

I didn't mean for after that, I meant really before, when was the deadline for the proposals for sale?

October 29th.

I know we put the sign up for it and filling the SRO property the same day and I just can't tell you exactly when that was.

Do you have any thoughts you want to share on this issue?

Not yet.

I have no comment.

Do you agree with Counsel Huja?

Yes.

I've been a strong advocate on preservation issues and I do appreciate the efforts that have been made in renovating that existing house.

With the

I'm in agreement with Mr. Huja.

We have three counselors that have expressed interest in

selling the property to Mr. Jones.

For myself, I'm willing to go with the majority.

No.

That was easy for me.

But that was not very hard for me.

This one,

Because there's two very strong compelling interests here that are at odds and one is the interest that we have in creative urban infill development.

and then the other obviously is an interest in preservation and tree canopy.

At the end of the day though, I think I was swayed by the input from the neighborhood.

I would not be interested in simply selling off this parcel and leaving it as is because I think what makes the idea intriguing to me of

of not developing this parcel is the opportunity to clean it up, beautify it, create a pocket park there of some sort even if it is privately owned.

So I would certainly want to put that as a condition of the sale.

And I appreciate the interest in

Having the adjacent property have an individually protected property overlay, which I think was a well-welcome gesture.

I was similarly conflicted.

I think in addition to the need for housing, which is huge, and especially I think that housing in this neighborhood is something that helps offset housing

Pressures in some of our more low income neighborhoods that don't have as much kind of ability to absorb it.

But I really, and I also am a big, I'm sure many of you know, I'm a big fan of process.

I think that when you set up a process, it's a good idea to do what you say you're going to do.

and this is a case when we're not doing that and I find that a little dismaying.

But I also think that I wish that the neighborhood had been a part of this to begin with because I think that their opinions are something that needed to be in this and they weren't until after the deadline and so the notification thing to me is important when that happened.

All right, so before us tonight is an ordinance that's before us on the first of two readings.

I move that we sell this property to Mr. Jones and Mr. Caton with conditions that

that will not be combined with the stone house property and IPP designation for historic preservation.

Secondly, the property be cleaned up so that it is more open and more clean and more attractive to the neighborhood.

So I second to that motion.

Just for purposes of clarification, Mr. Mayor, members of Council, I think we're working from alternative ordinance B, which specifies a purchase price of $250,000.

With the additions and I think with the correction that alternative ordinance B identifies the proposal coming from Management Services Corporation, I understand tonight that that's not correct.

All right, it's been moved and seconded.

As outlined by Mr. Brown, it will carry forward to our next meeting for our final vote.

Thank you all for coming tonight.

Next item on our agenda is a report, I'm sorry, public hearing, another public hearing and ordinance regarding Longwood Park, planned unit development, exchange of land before us tonight, also on first of two readings.

Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, this is a proposed exchange of land that has its genesis and an ordinance adopted by City Council in 2009 which rezoned the property on Longwood Drive to a planned unit development and as part of that rezoning to a PUD there was a development plan and subsequent site plan and subdivision plan which

includes a complete reconfiguration of the lots in the subdivision as well as a redesign of the terminus of Longwood Drive.

and this particular item that's before you tonight involves the conveyance of two parcels of land from the developer to the city and the conveyance of two pieces of properties from the city to the developer.

If I can refer to these drawings, the terminus of Longwood Drive as it is currently planted is this bulb-shaped cul-de-sac.

The proposal from the developer is to change that terminus into a loop, which will replace the circular cul-de-sac.

As part of this loop, there will be a large island in the center.

This part outlined in red is part of the city right of way so the developer is asking that this portion which is currently part of the right of way be conveyed so that it will be part of this island which will ultimately be maintained as I understand it by homeowners association.

The second piece of city property that would be conveyed under this ordinance is a narrow

This is an outright conveyance.

Right now, this is not an easement.

This is actually part of this parcel.

The property line comes up here, comes over to the cul-de-sac, ends and comes back and then heads that way.

So it is part of this parcel which would be conveyed to the developer.

What the developer is proposing to do is in exchange we convey parcel C which is located here which will become part of the city parcel and parcel D

which will also become part of the city parcel and which will be connected to this street by new pedestrian access easement that the developer will grant to the city.

So this lot and this lot would come to the city.

This piece of this lot and this piece of the current right-of-way would go to the developer from the city.

Thank you, Mr. Brown.

Any questions for Mr. Brown before we open the public hearing?

Hearing none, we'll now open the public hearing.

Is there anybody from the public who would like to speak on this matter?

Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing.

Has anybody heard anything from anyone about this?

I haven't.

I'll move approval.

Is there a second?

I'll second it, and that will carry forward to our next meeting.

Thank you very much, Mr. Brian.

We now have a report and a resolution regarding the Carver Recreation Center lease before us tonight, first of one reading.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council.

Tonight, before you, we have a draft lease for the Carver Recreation Center, the portion of the Jefferson School renovations that will be operated by our department.

Tonight represents the culmination of a lot of work by an awful lot of people for many years to bring this project to fruition.

Our staff have worked directly with the partnerships architect for the better part of a year.

to develop very specific upfit specifications for the spaces within Carver to expand the footprint of the recreation center as well as repurpose certain spaces in the building so that we can be able to provide spaces for a multipurpose room, which its current function will remain, a gymnasium upstairs, a new fitness room,

New dance studio, movement areas, arts and crafts, gymnastics, a catering kitchen, an elevator, which the facility does not have currently, a new front desk entry point for our staff, new restrooms, shower facilities, and a drop-in teen center.

Additionally, as part of the space in the

The building that the lease covers there is approximately 1880 square feet of area that is proposed to be subleased to Martha Jefferson Hospital for a community health clinic and their women's initiative.

The language specific to a sublease with Martha Jefferson has yet to be worked out and would need to come back to council for your approval.

The lease itself and the letter of work agreement has also been negotiated at length by city staff, the city attorney,

the city manager's office as well as the representatives from the partnership and their project manager.

One of the things that we have done to reduce the cost of this lease to the city is that our department will be assuming grounds maintenance responsibilities on the site post warranty.

That includes landscape maintenance, turf care, and so forth, as well as sweeping of the new parking deck that's proposed for the facility.

We will also be incurring our own staff, doing all the custodial work inside our spaces,

and any mechanical systems that are inside our spaces that would require our maintenance.

That's reducing the cost to the city significantly over the life of the lease.

Is there anybody from the partners who would like to make a comment about this proposal that's before council?

Don't feel obligated, but you're welcome.

Mr. Stoner?

You're all good with this?

Okay.

Actually, this is a slightly aside thing, but you were mentioning the Teen Center, which I think is certainly something that's needed.

I'm for it.

There actually is, and I've actually spoken with Mr. Bellamy about this over the past number of months.

Okay, well I want to thank you and thank the members of the partnership for, I know this has taken probably hundreds of hours to get to this point.

And so I want to thank you personally and thank the partners for getting it to where we are now.

I would love to move that.

It's been moved and seconded.

Any further discussion?

If not, please indicate your vote.

I believe it passes unanimously.

So thank you very much, Mr. Daly, and thank you all.

Thank you.

Next we have reports.

We have invited, well, I think Mr. Jones will probably give sort of a recap, but we've invited two engineering firms to join us tonight to sort of give us

The project reports on two competing visions for expanding the Ragged Mountain Dam.

Mr. Mayor, you actually did a very good job of setting the stage for us.

But a real quick recap at our January 18th meeting, City Council decided to support a 30-foot dam or raise for the dam.

What was left undetermined was which dam we wanted to go with, whether or not we wanted to build.

on the current dam and expand that or go with the new Earthen Dam.

Well it was the dam, I guess that's another question we could address tonight is the intent of council but according to what we changed the resolution to it was a 30 foot dam and it was based on a conversation but council can clarify that tonight if they'd like.

Thank you for having me.

May it please the Council, there's a very short, trust me, very short PowerPoint presentation, so your picture's worth a thousand words, so you'll have to relocate yourselves.

Alright.

Can everybody hear me?

Alright.

I was asked by the city to prepare a brief summary of where we stand regarding our portion of the project, which is the potential raising of the existing dam.

This is just a very brief summary.

I'm not going to dive into it basically.

The pertinent pieces here is we started to evaluate the structure, found that it was feasible to raise, found that it was feasible to raise it up to 45 feet.

Now that's the reservoir raise.

Now I'm going to get to the reservoir versus dam thing in a second.

and then from there we had a workshop with the ITRT, addressed some comments from them and worked through a couple different scenarios, a couple different cost estimates ultimately resulting in a letter that we forwarded to the city last week with an updated cost.

I don't know if the council has had a chance to review it.

This will capture some of the major points of that letter.

So the city asked us to develop a cost for a 30 foot raise as well as the potential for phasing and the 30 feet being an initial raise.

So the initial, I'm sorry, I'm gonna try to step through this so everybody can understand.

The maximum or ultimate raise to the reservoir level

is currently 42 feet.

And that would get you to an elevation that would, in my understanding, provide the necessary water and flow-by for a 50-year build-out according to the water supply plan.

and what was voted on a couple of weeks ago by council was rather than going to the full 42 foot raise of the reservoir level raise it just 30 feet with the potential in some distant future to raise it the last 12 feet and that's again the reservoir level, okay.

As

Easter Jones mentioned earlier, there's a little difference between what the reservoir is doing and what the dam is doing.

The dam needs to be a smidge higher than the reservoir in order to handle stormwater flows and pass them safely.

So when referring to 30 feet, 42 feet, 13 feet as a historic number, those were all reservoir raised values.

So basically we developed a conceptual layout for a 30 foot reservoir raise that could ultimately be raised easily to a 42 foot reservoir raise.

So basically, just to draw a picture, the existing dam, that's just a cartoon of the existing dam, there's a big pile of earth on the downstream side of it, but it's basically that shape, okay?

And what we're talking about

is an initial 30 foot raise that is configured so it can be raised once again perhaps in the future without a massive increase in that footprint.

So if you can imagine that the size of the bottom of that structure is such that ultimately this structure could be raised simply by adding a bit to the top.

So the stability of the structure is inherent even if the reservoir was to be raised again.

So we're going to be working with just the 30 foot raise.

Now, so what we did is we developed an estimate for the full 42 foot raise because that's the ultimate configuration.

And then we chopped off 12 feet from the top of it.

So when you read the letter, which presumably is available, that's the essence.

And it gets a bit confusing, so my apologies.

Okay, so going from reservoir rays to dam rays to now elevations.

Engineers work better in elevations.

So, the crust of the existing dam is 644.

The existing normal pool is 641.

So there's just a three-foot difference, and there's your earth buttress, okay?

So I've got a little animation here to try to explain what the intended project will include.

So first, we would install anchors through the existing structure to help support it during construction because we intend to remove all the earth on the downstream side.

But we also intend to maintain much of the reservoir during construction.

So we remove the earth, we don't want the dam to become unstable, which is possible because it wasn't designed to handle those loads.

Those anchors will allow the reservoir to stay effectively at the same elevation that it is today.

with a little bit of variance depending on other aspects of the project.

We would move the top bit and then install a grout curtain.

That grout curtain, if you can imagine, would run in and out of the page here.

along the valley bottom and would also go through the existing structure in an attempt to grout if there are fractures or areas of potential seepage to the existing concrete.

We would try to attack those with that curtain.

We then would remove the rest of the embankment on the downstream side.

And again, because of the anchors, the structure is stable with the reservoir behind it.

Remove some rock at the bottom and then construct the 30 foot raise, which plus or minus gets your dam pressed to about 681.

Okay, so that results in the ability to raise it to 671, the reservoir.

So that's your 30 foot reservoir raise.

The dam's a bit higher than that, again, to store water during storms and then release it over the top.

Now into the future, however distant it may be, we can simply add a cap to the top, taking it to the ultimate height and then it would allow you to raise the reservoir to the intended ultimate maximum, which is the 683.

So with that as sort of the background of the project and there's historic correspondence from Black and Beech that explains in more detail some of those aspects.

We then prepared a cost estimate to try to capture what the construction costs would be.

And again, this is a repeat from before.

We attempted to stay with previous cost estimates so the council could compare them and look at one and the other and have them look reasonably the same.

and the other note is that attached to our cost estimate it's not just a summary of all the construction items but it also has an accuracy band attached to it.

So given our, at this point, lack of design, there's a wide variance of 40% where the construction costs might be.

So we've captured that in that accuracy band.

So this is a summary of

of the configurations in our letter.

So the first line is the phase one.

That's the 30-foot reservoir raise.

So when you look at the project, and we break it down to the various pieces – and this is detailed out in the letter, the cost estimate itself – that's the range of construction costs.

The future potential raise is 2.7 to 1.9 million or 1.9 to 2.7.

It should be noted that that's an estimate done in dollars today.

Whenever you decide, if ever, to do this, it's not going to be that because construction will be different than it is now.

So you can't predict what that might actually cost.

But if you were to sum those, it's 12.5 to 18 million if you did it in two parts.

But if you built it all at once, your reservoir would cost about 11.8 to 17, somewhere in that range.

So that difference is a little bit – that difference isn't particularly large because all we're doing is adding a bit at the top.

But the second phase, because of a number of reasons, would be more costly if done as a second.

So that's a quick summary.

It's been asked before whether or not the modifications to the I-64 embankment or environmental mitigation as a result of raising the reservoir were included in the costs that Black and Beech prepared.

And all along the way I've maintained that they have not been so they could be compared to other estimates.

And that's just a footnote that restates that.

Thank you Mr. Ziminski.

I would like to see a copy of our original resolution.

I attended in the audience the last water authority meeting and that question was asked and I represented that my intention was the reservoir level.

That's really what we've been talking about all the time.

Of course I was saying that without

consulting the other two people who voted for 30 feet.

Well, the language that I offered up at that meeting was that my sense was that the council at that point was comfortable with a dam that would support a maximum of 30 feet, that there hadn't been

What is the difference?

You mentioned and I didn't write it down in your estimation of the difference between the height at 30 feet of water and dam.

The dam's about 10 feet higher.

It says to permit a dam with a height of up to 30 feet by adding additional feet to the existing dam or by constructing a new dam up to a height of 42.

I want to make sure we said what it means.

Yeah, this is mainly semantics at this point, but it is to clarify that Council understands that there would be an additional 10 feet as we know it with the Black and Beach approach.

And we believe it's similar with the Earthen Dam as well.

Can you discuss the advantages of using this approach if we're going to do a phased approach?

In other words, build a certain amount of

at a certain amount of height now and then do another if it becomes necessary.

What are the advantages of this approach versus building an earthen dam, a new earthen dam at that site, specifically as it relates to, for instance, the spillway?

I can't speak specifically for the earthen dam design, but I can generally describe the difference.

The spillway that would be required for raising the existing structure is integral to the structure itself.

So there's no separate structure.

Literally there's a notch in the middle of the concrete dam that allows flow over top of it.

So it's integral and you can see that I can provide pictures if you're interested.

But it's a very traditional design.

For the earthen dam, the guys from Chanawah will obviously can talk in detail, but there's a separate spillway.

You're not really not supposed to put a spillway over top of an existing or a new earthen structure.

So it's next to the structure and the water is directed around the earthen embankment.

Well, the material would be batched on site, so the material consists of aggregate, cement and water, so those things would be transported to the site, although the water would most likely be used from the reservoir.

Of the aggregate and the cement together?

Thank you.

I will once again ask for your patience and we have another short PowerPoint presentation and you'll be getting your exercise this evening I'm sure with making to the seat where you could comfortably see the presentation.

Again, I'm Chris Webster, a principal with Schnabel Engineering here at our local office and it's a pleasure to give this presentation again to you this evening.

Also I would like to share I have Randy Bass our project manager and lead designer with us this evening so after the presentation I'll invite Randy down if you have any questions of him.

So we'll start off with the presentation.

This is a similar presentation to the one that Schnabel gave to Rivanna at the last board meeting.

It is a shorter version of it.

And we do include information regarding phasing as requested.

First a little bit of background.

As I alluded, we have provided a 60% design cost estimate just this past month in January.

This comes down from the preliminary design work that we did last year.

which originally was from about 20.3 to 27.1 million.

And the new estimate, 15.9 to 19.5 million, does take into account a very extensive underground investigation.

So it was a $325,000 study, included over 70 additional test holes,

a review of 340 water pressure tests.

So we used that information to help us refine the new cost estimate and then as you see there we also have included the fees regarding the remaining engineering and services that would be provided during the construction phase.

First we thought we'd give you an indication of the full height cost versus the phased approach.

And we actually have presented this in two fashions.

The first is considering a phased construction.

Again, similar to what Greg has said, we're also considering the 30 foot reservoir raise.

And then I'll also point out to some differences in the dam height versus the reservoir raise.

and as you can see for the first phase it would be approximately 99% of a cost.

So it is up somewhat from the last time I spoke to you.

At that time I indicated it would be in excess of 95%.

The costs are $15.8 to $19.3 million and the second part of this

would be again this would be in 2001 dollars but 1.5 to about 1.8 million to come back for the additional phase to raise the dam the remaining height.

So combined would be 17.2 to 21 million

or 108% of the single phase height.

That number is a little bit lower than from what I'd indicated previously.

I think I'd indicated to Counselor Szakos last time I was thinking maybe up to 120%, so not quite that.

Similarly, we have provided costs for considering constructing the earth dam to its full height but considering a phased raise of a reservoir.

In other words, there would be less clearing associated with this.

and for this situation the phased reservoir filling is again 15.8 to 19.3 million, 99% of a cost.

In this case you'll see that most of the cost in comparison to the previous one has to do with raising the dam itself.

There would be a modification to the spillway needed for phased construction.

and so in summary the total cost would be $16.2 to $19.8 million.

There is about a half million dollars of work for the second phase even with the full height, about half of that is relating to erosion and sediment control matters and then of course the clearing costs.

So again, 102% of a single phase full height.

Next I thought I would, this is a nice rendering that was done last year for the public presentation put together by Bob Pinnio.

But it makes a very nice illustration of what the dam looks like.

So here we have our earthen dam and it will be grass covered and basically it acts as an extension of the two ridges that we have to each side.

The principal spillway which is where the water flows either from the reservoir to be removed and taken down by means of a pipe or pumped up for pump storage is this principal spillway.

This is a pipe.

a 36 inch pipe that goes through a new tunnel that will be constructed through this rocky ridge and again this is the main means of conveying water right here and here is the access vault to that tunnel.

For large flows where we would see the water due to a very heavy precipitation event

in excess of about 20 inches over 24 hours which would be an extreme event.

This auxiliary spillway would come into play and water would then start to work across there but again keep in mind this would be an extreme event so in excess of about a 500 year event.

I thought it would be worthwhile to give you a little bit of history of how we came to the earth dam.

As you may remember, the original conceived dam was a concrete dam, a new concrete dam, and we looked at that initially.

We were thinking if we could make use of shallow rock at the site and crush it, we could then use it for the aggregate for a new concrete dam, but once we got underway and started drilling, we found

quite a bit of soil in excess of 60 feet.

So instead we felt if the soils were of the proper properties we could then use an earth dam and that's where we are now.

The advantage of course is that it's a reduction of several thousand truck trips down Reservoir Road by making use of those on-site soils and excavated rock from on the site.

The spillway, again this structure here will be blasting and cutting rock from and the contractor will be breaking that rock so we can use it for riprap and also fish structures.

We've had conversations with Department of Forestry and the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries regarding fish habitat and they've given us very positive response of the fish habitat that would be incorporated into the project.

Another advantage with a rock is although it's not part of the dam project to work at I-64 also will require some riprap and by using the rock from one site there's about a $150,000 savings for that.

The, as I mentioned, the earth allows us to use a smaller staging area and less stockpiling at the site.

And again, it's green, it's grass covered, so it'll be a natural extension of a ridge.

And the other thing that's nice with the Oracle economy is earth construction is not, I would say, not as

Specialized as you would have for roller compacted concrete.

So consequently contractors in the area have a very strong interest in building the project and it really opens up the field for contractors in our area.

Here's a cross section of our dam and you can see here the, here's our existing dam, the 1908 structure and in our case you can see it's a new dam, it's not resting on top of a dam relying on the integrity of that but we do make use of that existing dam for water control.

so that as the new dam is constructed the water can be kept back and this can act as a coffer dam and the contractor can work in the dry.

The light orange material is our sandier soils, again, available at the site, and the dark orange represents the more clay soils.

All dams have some water that seeps through them, be they concrete or soil, and the idea is we want to cut off as much of that water as we can, and any water that does get through, cover means to control it, and this yellow is represented

Here is our drainage system, which is a combination of sand and gravel that would be put into place to control the water.

You want to control it so you don't have any erosion on the dam.

The other very important component, which I'll speak a little bit more, is this drought curtain or wall of grout, if you will.

So as I mentioned, we're now at 60% design as a whole.

Many elements of design were actually at 90%.

The permanent work we're just getting underway with, so that's at a lesser amount, but as a whole we are at 60%.

Again, so we're using the existing dam for water control.

We have a good budget in for water control.

It's an important issue, so $200,000 in for that.

And I pointed out the principal spillway where we're drawing the majority of our water from.

It's a set of dual valves that we can replace, Rivanna can replace those valves, so it makes easy maintenance and replacement.

and those are all remotely controlled and automatically operated and that's a good budget item there too at $550,000.

The cost also includes almost 400 feet of new 36 inch pipe that will become the first section of the future pipe connecting to South Fork, Rivanna and again that's $120,000.

Here is this grout curtain or wall of grout and just to orient you here, this would be as if you were looking up towards the dam, you're downstream looking up towards the dam, this triangle represents our dam and

This will be the ground surface and this cross-hatching represents our grout.

It's oriented in different ways to intercept the fractures in the rock and it extends 100 feet deep.

It's important to note that the over 340 test that we did along with those done previously by Gannett showed the majority of seepage is taking place at depths greater than 50 feet.

and there's lots of interconnection, there's some sand all over so we feel it's very important to cut off that seepage into rock which is where the majority of seepage will take place so it's 100 feet deep and the total length is 1500 feet long extending beyond the dam into these narrow ridges to each side and also for those of you who've been up there, there is a quarry, the 1908 quarry and this goes behind it so we'll

cut off any seepage in the area of that quarry.

So in summary, it's two zones.

We have about 200% of the soils available for the Corps, 145% for the shelves and abundance of soils on the site.

The important thing on pricing, I do want to point out,

is the prices that we use for our cost estimate considered the direct input from local contractors and it really considers the scale of a project.

Here you can see 617,000 cubic yards of soil to be moved on site.

So the prices we use considered economy of scale.

So any extrapolation of those prices beyond this project, I think it would be very worthwhile to get additional input from contractors.

So we'll move on to the next slide in the interest of time.

This is our existing reservoir footprint and our existing dam.

Here it is with the 30 foot raise.

You can see where the water goes and again this is the section that goes beneath I-64.

This crosshatching represents the barrow area that again the Barbamis barrow area would be below the water surface but this portion would be restored at the end of a job with additional vegetation.

and I also have a cartoon that is helpful to kind of conceive what's going on with the project.

So here we have our new earth dam constructed.

This is our principal spillway where we draw water and pump water from.

And here we have our reservoir raise of 30 feet.

And you can see here the water level compared to the height of a dam.

There is some difference in elevation there.

And then so what happens under a storm event is

We have our storm come in, runoff from all the precipitation starts to go into the reservoir and the primary spillway will draw the water out and this is actually not going through the dam but through the abutment next to it, just for clarification.

And then over time that of course recedes.

And here's three examples of existing dams, two of them are earth dams, one concrete.

and you can see for each of these the water level is lower than the height of a dam here for illustration purposes is a person probably six foot tall for scale and then the similar for this more recently constructed dam in Georgia and likewise for this project in North Carolina you can see here we have the spillway this one's integral as Gray had mentioned earlier an earth dam is going to have a separate spillway but again you see the height of a dam in comparison

There is a difference there.

So, finally, our next steps, as I mentioned, we're 60% complete.

The design addresses all of the expert panel's comments in a workshop that we had with them this past month.

with input also from Rivanna, Almarque County Service Authority and the city.

The 90% design is scheduled for completion and presentation in March and we are on schedule for having our design complete in April to meet dam safety's deadline at the end of that month.

So with that, I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have.

I just have a real kind of specific question.

Yes, indeed.

We have two spillways there, the principal spillway which is part of a tower and that would not change as you saw in the cartoon illustration there are several gates and those are located at elevations where we can accommodate the 30 foot raise and then the auxiliary spillway which would be

used in, again, an extreme storm event.

For that case, if we were to go with a phased construction approach, the spillway, the existing spillway would need to be excavated about 17 additional feet deeper, or say 17, 18 feet deeper, and then over

Time when there was a desire to move forward with the raising of a reservoir to the remaining height, the lower portion of that spillway, a concrete wall, if you will, would be constructed for that.

And what would you do with the materials that get dug out of there?

Yes, well that's a good point.

There would be extra materials and the

Excess material would predominantly be used as fish habitat structures.

We anticipate that the contractor, when they're doing the work, would be bringing a crusher to the site so that the rock that's blasted could be run through the crusher.

Some of that could be used for more fine aggregate, possibly as road-based material for improvements or maintenance to Reservoir Road.

So we want to use as much of those materials as possible.

But as I alluded to it when I came before you last time, there is of course additional impacts to mobilize for a second time with more traffic on Reservoir Road, the core material

yet we'd have to look at whether or not it would make sense to stockpile that in phase one to reuse it or if it makes sense to import that up the road.

I think probably the best way to do that, to visualize it, I don't know if you've had a chance to go up to the reservoir itself and walk around, but I mentioned earlier in the presentation that the earth dam does have a larger footprint, but basically it would be an extension of the two ridges, the two ridges coming together, so the width as

would be similar to that of ridges and height as well.

Regarding the existing dam, the earth buttress that's in place now would be removed once the new dam was constructed and then earth placed against it.

Our design does not include the rock anchoring.

but it would be again at the end of it.

So the height is going to be very similar to that of the concrete dam.

It's just the footprint is larger but about the same as the ridge.

Randy, do you happen to have the dimension for that bottom?

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, if I understand the question is, if a concrete dam you saw from the cartoon has a very narrow footprint, the height of the dam and the base of the dam are about the same.

With an earth-filled dam, obviously for earth you've got to have flatter slopes.

So like for the concrete dam might have a footprint if it's 130 feet tall, maybe 130 feet, give or take a few.

Earth-filled dam would be more like 600 feet wider.

You've got to have the three to one slopes.

So it takes more dirt, obviously, than it does concrete.

But then the dirt costs $3 a yard and the concrete's $100 a yard.

So there's a difference in that.

I do want to point out when Chris mentioned the grout curtain, because that's an important consideration for any dam, earth or concrete.

If you look at a dam, particularly a concrete dam, usually the concrete doesn't fail unless it gets real old.

It's usually the foundation that it sets on.

An earth dam, it can fail through the earth or the foundation.

You've got to watch both of them.

So the grout curtain is extremely important.

As Chris mentioned, it goes 100 feet deep because we've got all these fractures below the 50 feet.

And actually there's artesian.

When Gannett drilled some holes, water actually squirted out of the holes of them.

So there's some significant issues deep inside the foundation of the dam.

So the earth fell down while it's 600 feet long.

That means if water has to seep under 600 feet to come out from under the dam,

When water flows under a dam or in the rock, just like water in a pipe, it has friction so it slows down.

With a concrete dam, your grout curtain has to be a bit more robust because the footprint again is only 130 feet versus 700 feet.

Other questions for Schnabel?

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Just kind of dive in.

One place where I think that there was some difference is an area that I'm finding myself unmoved by.

In looking at whether it's more economical to build 40-some feet now or 30 feet now, to add on later, I still find that the 30 feet

is as much as I would consider building, and I understand the reservoir height.

My hope is that the SAKOS is the right that we don't need anymore in the future.

Well again, I think for both of you, do you have a sense of at this point if you're compelled for

You feel more compelled by the earthen dam versus extending the existing concrete.

I have some concerns about the concrete dam.

I think there's always the idea that it is physically smaller.

It's also more visually, once it's done theoretically, it's more visually jarring, I think, than an earthen dam might be.

But really it's the ecological impact that I've been looking at at these two and just thinking about the concrete being brought in, the

The road coming up there, the impact on the local, the area right around the dam, it seems to me that the earthen dam, although kind of intuitively you look at it and say, oh my god, it's huge, may well have less of an environmental impact on both the people below and also the actual site.

Given that the cost of the new dam, earthen dam, and the concrete dam are almost pretty close to each other, I'd rather see new dam built, earthen dam built, than old dam added on.

That would be my inclination.

That is also not because of the cost, but also because of the environmental concerns.

I think when you build a concrete dam, you're going to have a lot more tracks, a lot more material back and forth.

I'm comfortable with either approach.

I do think that the Earthen Dam has been engineered further so the costs are more certain.

As far as I'm concerned, I think we should be firm, as Ms. Szakos put it, in 30 feet.

I don't think there's any compelling reason to

build a full height dam just because it's a cheaper thing to do.

I think it does create a disincentive for conservation and for dredging.

So having said that, I think if we remain firm in our commitment to a 30 foot rise in the reservoir level, I think we should just simply work with the other players, with the service authority in moving forward with one of the designs.

I think they're committed

With an earthen dam, we would have the potential to hire more people locally without special skills.

Is that?

Sure.

The roller compacted concrete is indeed quote unquote specialized.

I would also submit that putting in earth for an earth dam is specialized.

You don't just get an earthworks contractor to do it.

It needs to be somebody experienced in building a dam.

But with that said, you would look for contractors that have experience with roller-convective concrete.

Those contractors exist in the East Coast, exist in Virginia, but they don't exist down the street.

Ms. Edwards, any thoughts you'd like to share?

For me, it's not even close.

I think the idea of building upon our existing dam allows for more flexibility in phasing construction of the new dam or the larger reservoir.

It has significantly less environmental impact on the natural area itself in terms of the amount of clearing that's going to have to happen and in terms of the amount of earth that's going to have to be moved, the amount of destruction to the natural area and I want to just say thank you to Mr. Ziminski for

Presenting an option which I think is a very compelling option and even if it doesn't necessarily have the support of a majority of council, I think you've done great work in laying out a vision for how we could have utilized our existing assets in a fiscally responsible and environmentally

Well, I think it's not even close.

Sure, but it's artificial.

Well, I just think it's a statement of fact, but as I was saying, I think there's a majority on council who are leaning towards or prefer the earthen dam

I think it would be helpful to have an official action for tonight.

I think for clarity it does because there are certain portions of the existing resolution that are not the subject of debate, the other elements of the water supply plan that I don't think there's any objection to, so I think if we could

I think we definitely need to clarify that we talked about 30 foot reservoir, not 30 foot dam.

Actually, can I ask one more question of Mr. Webster?

It's actually quite similar to the concrete.

I believe Greg indicated the concrete was 10, so within a foot or so, it was 11, 12 feet, so it's very, very similar.

I think clarification-wise, I would be happy to make a motion to clarify our resolution that we are talking about a 30-foot reservoir and a 30-foot dam.

I guess I'm not, I would rather pop, you know, I think that we do need to clarify the 30 foot reservoir rise and I'm comfortable with that.

I'm more inclined to pop the decision back to the Rivanna board about the actual construction of the dam because I think that

Okay, they had said they were going to, but I don't know if that's happened.

I'd kind of like to wait and see if that happens.

I think that that information is valuable.

I think, Mr. Norris, if you are convinced that it's an environmentally better thing, I think that it's something that

The Rivanna board should look at.

I wouldn't make it contingent, but I think we could certainly, we'll meet again before the next, we'll meet a time or two before the next Rivanna meetings, right?

We'll meet one more time for the next one.

I would say that the next meeting, we should communicate with the county to find out if they intend to have a timely presentation.

Well then why don't we wait to amend the resolution until then and you have the sense of counsel in the meantime on that at least the 30 foot part.

Alright, thank you very much.

Thank you gentlemen.

The last item on our regular business tonight is a report on our Dialogue on Race and I really appreciate your patience sitting through this whole meeting.

And here to give us an update are the co-chairs of the Dialogue on Race Steering Committee, Mr. Bob Gross and Ms. Gertrude Ivory.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Norris, City Councilors, City Manager Jones and all here assembled.

We are the co-chairs of the steering committee for our city's dialogue on race.

I'm Gertrude Ivory and my colleague is Bob Gross.

In September 2008, the city council recognized that there was much work to do if Charlottesville was to become a leader in promoting racial harmony.

racial diversity and racial justice.

Council proposed a citywide dialogue on race with the aim of engaging our residents in an ongoing discussion to better understand each other, our backgrounds, our history, our perceptions, and how past actions continue to affect life in Charlottesville today.

A steering committee was appointed that reflected the diversity of the community.

And we do have a PowerPoint presentation that is not showing at this time.

Thank you.

The initial phase of our work is called the dialogue phase.

Charlottesville Dialogue on Race kicked off in early December 2009.

Over 300 people came out on a very snowy Saturday morning.

During the next January, February and March, about 600 adults and 100 high school students agreed to take part in a series of small group discussions about race and race relations in Charlottesville.

Those 47 groups were led by pairs of trained volunteer facilitators.

The groups came up with hundreds of suggested actions at all levels.

An action forum was held on May 15, 2010, where those actions were listed on newsprint on the walls of Charlottesville High School by more than 350 people in attendance.

Members of the steering committee and the acting city manager prioritized these suggested actions into four categories, education, economics, government, and sociocultural.

Having accomplished the dialogue's initial mission, the steering committee has moved from the discussion phase to the critical next phase, the action phase.

Four work groups were established and encompassed 15 action teams, as seen on the graphic above.

that have been working on turning suggestions into successful actions since last summer.

There are more than 150 citizen volunteers from many parts of our community, business people, students, parents, teachers, retired folk, pastors, and others, and they're cooperating with dozens of groups and organizations that have already been working on some of these problems for many years.

They are preparing recommendations for action by private

and public entities as well as the city of Charlottesville.

And if you will, actually the slides are out of order but that's okay.

While it is not all inclusive, some of the, since the summer of 2010 the action teams have arranged

for trained CHS students to successfully facilitate discussions about race among students in the teacher education program at the Curry School.

This was the education work group.

We conducted a forum on the achievement gap in council chambers with over 70 attendees from the general populace and 20 community organizations, also an education work group activity.

We participated in creating the youth television program, and what, from the social cultural committee.

We've succeeded in having city council pass a resolution in the fall that declared Charlottesville to be a city of second chances for ex-offenders from the government group.

We've collaborated in the preparation of a proposal to the federal department of education to plan for a promised neighborhood project.

The Education Group.

And we created and have run several public service announcements about positive racial awareness on local television.

The social cultural group did that also.

And we'd like to share those two pieces with you at this time.

In the coming months, some of the things proposed by the action teams are to one, present weekly youth dialogue activities at the Boys and Girls Club.

Establish historical markers honoring our local African American predecessors.

Put on a Spring 2011 Economic Summit Conference with the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic Development designed to convey the concerns of minority business people and create new communication networks.

Produce a youth-driven documentary featuring young people's perspectives on their Charlottesville neighborhoods.

Participate in planning for the commemoration of Charlottesville's 250th anniversary

On the other part of this act, hundreds of community volunteers have given about 9,500 hours of their time to this endeavor.

and the conservative estimate of the value of that time is over $200,000 according to the group called the independent sector.

Our action teams and staff have collaborated with a variety of local organizations in pursuit of our mission and that was the slide you saw a moment ago.

The role of our program coordinator is critical to the functioning of this complex enterprise.

In a typical week,

Our coordinator attends one or two work group meetings and provides guidance and coaching.

Assists with perhaps three action team meetings and acts as a coach to the volunteers.

meets with the city manager and the co-chairs of the dialogue steering committee, fields phone calls from numerous citizens and organizations, prepares documents for meetings, sits on committees of other organizations that view the dialogue as a critical component of their group's work, and supervises the work of the Dialogue on Race intern.

Now to our recommendations.

After examining the events of the past 18 months, the steering committee requests that City Council consider the following recommendations for the future of the Dialogue on Race and its funding for fiscal year 2011.

Number one, reauthorize the Dialogue on Race initiative for 2011-12 and reauthorize the position of program coordinator for 2011-2012.

Now we have the graphic.

Yes.

We ask you to allocate an additional $15,000 for expenses as detailed in this budget worksheet up on the screen.

Please note that during the remainder of this year and next, the Steering Committee will seek private funding to supplement the City's generous financial support.

Number three, to reflect Council's intention to make sure it's for the leader in racial justice and race relations, we ask you to amend the City Council's vision statement and strategic plan initiatives and goals.

And lastly, we recommend that Council proclaim an annual Race Unity Day to commemorate this initiative.

As we continue our work we may come back to council with additional recommendations.

I'd like to call your attention to our mission which is to engage every segment of our community in an open, honest, ongoing discussion of race, racism and diversity

and to identify problems and propose concrete solutions and paths to action that promote racial reconciliation, economic justice and equity.

On behalf of the Steering Committee, we thank you, members of the Council, for taking the bold step of creating the Dialogue on Race and launching our community on having these initial dialogues to be followed up with an array of effective actions to improve race relations in our region for the long term.

And with Council's permission, I'd like to ask members of the Steering Committee who are here tonight to stand and to be recognized.

Is that all right?

Thank you.

And thank you for your attention and your support, and we would be pleased to answer your questions.

Okay, and other people who are participants who are here.

I'll start off with a question.

First, I'll comment to you.

It's really impressive all that you guys have gotten done this year and it's, you know, it's actually really amazing how the communities come together in this area where everyone does need to come together.

Okay.

Okay.

And so that would be something we would consider during our budget discussions?

The additional $15,000?

No, that would be part of the budget discussion.

Okay.

Let me make a few comments also Mr. Mayor if it's okay.

I also concur with Dr. Brown's comments that I think this has been a very successful process and I have a little bit of history here.

About 20 years back we started, talked about these issues, did a lot of studies and what was successful about this one is that it has been one of the people who have participated in it and then we are doing some follow up on that ongoing process rather one shot deep which I think is very important

to maintain that continuity and I think that will be helpful in our community.

Another thing I wanted to mention is that the race ratio was intrigued by the census in 2010 census.

I was really surprised to know that there were more Asian, people of Asian origin in Charlottesville than Latin origin, which was a great surprise for me as well.

You had mentioned the intention of coming up with funding from other sources, and I wondered, are you talking about corporate sources or foundation sources or government sources or all of them?

Well, we expect this may come as a surprise to other members of our steering committee, but it's going to be our steering committee.

A subcommittee of that group is going to be

responsible for that as of our next meeting.

They don't know it yet.

They don't know that yet.

Yes, but we also have people on staff and I'm not trying to find more work for them but it probably is also a good idea to run things through that office just to make sure that you kind of avail yourself of resources and see what they already know.

Indeed.

I want to get down in the weeds just a little bit in terms of the action items that your committees are considering.

I've long felt that one of the most important, if not the most important things that we need to be doing in terms of matters of race in this community is to rebuild the black middle class in Charlottesville and encourage more

Workplace Diversity by growing and attracting and retaining more professionals of color here in this community and in City Hall for that matter.

I'm wondering is there among all those committees is there a group that's looking at issues of workplace diversity and not just making our

As Bob was saying, our economic work group is planning, currently planning an economic summit focused on minority businesses for right now, tentatively scheduled for May 23rd.

We have

and we're planning that with the help of Mike Harvey and the Thomas Jefferson Economic Development Office.

Chris Ingalls is also assisting in terms of providing his expertise from his office and suggesting speakers and panelists for certain things that we're trying to provide for community members that we think would be helpful.

One of our action teams right now is publicly, I should say, focused on public employees in terms of workplace diversity but I don't think the private aspect of it is beyond their scope of discussion and I think as we take baby steps to figure out what's going to be the best way to

Just to follow up on Mayor's comments, the two other areas which interest me, and Bob Gross is a member of the same church, we had a race relation group.

I'm wondering if other churches can be involved in diversity discussions.

because they represent a large segment of the community in many ways.

So that's one area I wonder if you could explore.

Secondly, I'm very clear to my heart is good food, the diversity of food.

So I would be happy to see the International Festival just started.

Oh, yeah.

Food is definitely a good way to bring people together and have discussion.

Any other thoughts for the... Just to add to your comment because we've had this conversation several times over the years and I think one resource that we don't tap into well enough is that the University of Virginia has the best and the brightest of the African American students and we need to work harder in having those graduates to have reasons to stay in our community

So I think there's still a lot of work to be done to that end in terms of another resource we need to explore.

I also just wanted to thank the standing committee and all the people that have worked with the standing committee over the past few months in bringing us to this point.

A lot of work has been done and

I just want you all to know that I really appreciate the commitment that has been made to this initiative.

Things will never be the same.

And all of you are part of our history now.

Because things have to change.

We have to grow.

I think just general, yeah.

Keep moving in the right direction.

Exactly.

You're heading in the right direction.

We support these things and the recommendations that were provided generally, yes.

I think you have our full support.

Yes.

Thank you.

That concludes our regular business tonight.

Is there any other business before council?

Mr. Jones, anything?

No, sir.

We'll now open up for one final Matters by the Public session.

Good evening, I'm Peter Kleeman.

I live at 407 Head Street in the city.

I'd like to make two comments about today's agenda.

First of all, Mr. Tom Howard came before you from the Dunlora Neighborhood Association or whatever that association is officially called, making a request that you change or amend an ordinance related to the limiting of opening any portion of the

Meadow Creek Parkway area of that project and I support not opening that.

I believe that the information about the safety issues are more than just safety at the entrance to that neighborhood at Dunlora and that the community safety issues need to be considered in total.

and not just to respond to that one.

I'm personally disappointed that VDOT has gone ahead and built that project and to have a road constructed that has these limitations and they may have these limitations for some time.

So I applaud Ms. Szakos bringing that to our attention that she also agrees with that position I believe.

Second of all, this is the second meeting where there's been an item on the agenda related to the water plan discussion where there's no notice that there's any action pending, yet actions have been considered.

I think as a citizen, and as we see we have many involved citizens, just from the last item on your agenda, who are interested in participating in decisions by the city, I think it really is important that

Council, if there's going to be actions under consideration it should appear on the agenda and that there should be an opportunity for the public to have a conversation with Councillors about the information that has been presented upon which those decisions would be based and that information was only presented to you moments before that action was considered giving the community absolutely zero opportunity

to have any kind of interaction with counselors about their concerns and about what the maybe the unexpected consequences of some decisions might be.

So I would encourage that according to the city's vision statement that used to be present on the wall here,

and on the backs of these sheets.

And I don't know whether it's taking a second tier role now, but I recognize that as a citizen action or a citizen-centered government, there ought to be opportunities for the citizens to express their concerns about pending resolutions, ordinances, et cetera.

And I hope that will become a standard practice in the city, that unless an action is on the agenda, it not be taken,

Thank you Mr. Kleeman.

Anybody else like to speak?

Rebecca Quinn, 104 4th Street.

I want to address

and I may not have done as much studying as you have about some of the differences in environmental impacts.

But I can think of two ways that an earthen dam will have more adverse environmental impacts on site, both permanent impacts and certainly during construction.

One is, remember the existing Ragged Mountain Reservoir stores our best water.

And if they have to excavate some 600,000 cubic yards of dirt

which and I will put my reputation as an engineer on the line here, I think is something like 5,000 times the volume of this room and that excavation will take place right next to our best water.

If you've seen stormwater management practices after storms, they don't always work.

And they certainly don't always work during big storms.

So that will put at risk our existing water supply every time it rains.

The other is we heard a number of a footprint.

I don't think Schnabel clearly answered the question about the footprint.

But I heard 600 feet.

This is 600 feet of untouched stream that will be buried.

With the concrete dam expansion, I heard maybe about an additional 100 feet, which would be immediate.

Well, first of all, they've got to take off the earth, and then they're going to add the concrete.

So I believe the concrete dam will

fill only stream length that is already filled.

So there will not be a permanent stream impact associated with it.

Good evening.

Dede Smith, 2652 Jefferson Park Circle.

I just actually have two comments.

These two pieces of paper that are identical, they're really just kind of notes

I just can't help but since the census information just came out to note that the growth was not only pretty much in line with the predictions of the water plan but actually more and probably more even in the urban area of the county

than we heard reported because they didn't break it out.

But despite the fact that overall our local community has seen a 15% increase in population, we are still way down, way below.

Our decrease in water is at least 17%, which when you put the two together, we're in the 30% below what this plan was sized for and what it's designed for.

And I just wanted to point that out because

It's so timely.

The second thing I wanted to say was actually there's been a number of PUDs on the agenda which sort of fascinate me and the Terry and Ridge thing was taken off and I don't claim to know a lot about the housing that's being proposed in these.

but I would really request that as you consider them you ask a couple extra questions and maybe you already are and I apologize I don't want to assume that you're not but to look at this holistically and one of the things that came to mind with particularly with the Cherry and Ridge and with the Longwood too although it doesn't look like perhaps it's

as much low income housing, but where are these kids going to go to school?

I'd like you to think about if you're going to put a high density, particularly if it's low income, and they tend to be on the south side of town, that already has the biggest challenges in its schools, ask yourself the question, not only how many children do you expect, but how will that impact the school that they go to?

How will that impact the overall poverty level of the school that they go to?

because that will then impact all the other children.

It will also impact whether or not other residents in those neighborhoods will be willing to use those schools.

The ramifications can be really quite dramatic.

And if, in fact, I have total sympathies with providing housing, but if so often we can just shoot ourselves in the foot, we can make things worse because of the sort of domino effect.

Just request is to, among many other ramifications of your decisions, please consider the schools.

Thank you, Ms. Smith.

Anybody else like to speak?

I will close matters by the public.

I want to acknowledge Mr. Kleeman's comment and request, and I will take full blame for that in

not making sure that we had noted on tonight's agenda that there was an expectation of some sort of council action regarding the composition of the dam.

So I will take the blame for that.

It's an excellent point.

Oh sure, please.

I actually disagree.

I think that, I mean, if you look back over our time on city council, I think there's numerous occasions, I think we could go back through the last couple years and find numerous occasions where we've had an item on the agenda and we've decided to make a motion to do something that night.

And I think that we need to be careful not to suddenly find ourselves slowing to a snail's pace on issues, you know, just because we feel like, well, we actually didn't say that, so we'll have to bring this back up next time.

I think it's utterly important that we have

items we can take action on need to be on the agenda and they should not be placed on the agenda that night under other business.

I think in previous councils that actually has occurred and that's definitely out of the public eye.

I think on the water supply issue in particular, in the first meeting we had in January received a lot of emails from people who assumed we were going to take action even though it actually wasn't even on the agenda.

I don't quite get that, so I'd want to be careful about establishing a policy that might in some ways really decrease our effectiveness and our ability to be timely.

I mean, emergency is not quite the standard I would want to see set.

I think a lot of times it's just we have a discussion and someone has a good idea and we make a motion and we move on with it and it's in the public eye.

I also, I even disagree with the premise that if we receive a report we can't take any action until members of the public have had a chance to tell us what they thought of that report.

I mean, we're basically elected

to be a representative body to carefully consider information and move ahead.

I don't think you and I are actually that far apart because I think my point was that on tonight's discussion I think Mr. Jones was clear probably going back several weeks now or at least a couple weeks now that he was looking for guidance from council tonight on

Earthen vs.

One more comment on the role.

I basically agree with Peter in principle, but as you realize that you need to make decisions sometimes when you have information, and I especially agree with him when it is a very narrow issue.

For example, a set of land in a certain neighborhood

and people who have been informed, that kind of thing.

It has happened now two or three times that we are sitting in line somewhere and the neighbors have never been informed.

All right.

Thank you all very much.