City Council Meeting   4/9/2024

I'll call our Tuesday April 9th

2024 City Council meeting to order.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Here.

Council Member Jones.

Present.

Council Member Robinson.

Here.

Chief Warner.

Here.

Chief Tobias.

Please join me in prayer for you.

or so inclined, Father God, in the name of Jesus, we thank you so much for this opportunity to come to you in prayer.

We thank you for each and every life and soul that makes up the friendly city of Harrisonburg.

We thank you for the way that you blessed us.

You've been so good to us and we thank you and we could never thank you enough.

If we had 10,000 tongues, we ask that you give us the mind to do forth the business of the city today.

We ask that we do it not in a selfish manner, but in a manner that will be

actions of good stewards and those that are faithful to seeing Harrisonburg continue to move forward in a healthy way and most of all in a way that moves us all forward together and doesn't leave anybody out.

God, we ask that you touch those that are sick, those that are hurting, and those in need of help.

And we ask that you give us the tools and the guidance in order to send aid to those that are in help, that need help.

And most of all, give seed to the sower and the ability for those that can't help.

We ask that we continue to strengthen them, touch our staff.

They may continue to be the hands and feet of the ideas that we bring forth from the city council.

and most of all, if there's something that we're missing, God, I ask that you send it and send it quickly so that we can continue to be all that we can be.

In your son's name we pray.

We have two special recognitions tonight.

So I would like to start, or we would like to start with a proclamation recognizing Arbor Day.

Arbor Day Proclamation.

Whereas in 1872, J. Sterling Morton

proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees.

Whereas this holiday called Arbor Day was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska.

Whereas Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world and whereas trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs,

moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce life-giving oxygen, and provide habitat for wildlife.

And whereas trees are renewable resource, giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and countless other wood products.

And whereas trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community.

and, whereas trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal.

Now, therefore, I, Laura Dent, Vice Mayor of the City of Harrisonburg, Virginia, do hereby proclaim April 13, 2025, 2024.

As Arbor Day in the City of Harrisonburg, and I urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands.

and further encourage all citizens to participate in Black's Run Cleanup Day on Saturday, April 13, 2024.

Further, I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations.

Thank you Vice Mayor Dent, Madam Mayor, Council Members and Staff.

Yeah, thank you for your support in our urban forestry program and planning trees.

I'd like to introduce Brooke Ember.

Brooke is a art teacher at Keester Elementary School and she's been amazing.

Hello!

Thank you so much for having me.

I'm so thankful to be able to collaborate with Jeremy and Public Works for Arbor Day and just for all of the trees that have been planted at Keyster.

We are creating three new learning spaces.

One of them that we're focusing on right now is called the Mindfulness Meadow.

We'll have a grand opening on May 8th at 6 p.m.

and the Mindfulness Meadow will have a hammock haven area, a stone labyrinth,

and Eagle Scout Circle seating space for discussions and a class set of live edge wood tables.

We're super, super excited and a lot of research shows that when kids are learning in a natural environment, not only do their test scores improve, but they also gain a lot of confidence.

They've experienced a lot of experience collaborating with others.

They're more creative and they're

They are, their mental health improves.

Thank you.

We also have a fairy forest.

I spent all day out there.

We started making a new fort today.

We've been building habitats for the fairies and the birds.

We have Adventure Avenue.

We have Stump School.

This is all in our nature trail.

There's a lot going on.

There's a lot going on.

So what's going on this weekend?

Or something going on at Keister this weekend?

We'll be celebrating Arbor Day there from 9 until noonish.

We'll be planting 30 trees along with this project.

Okay, right.

And Vice Mayor, I think you're planting trees somewhere.

Hey, we'd like to plant some trees.

Coming?

Yeah.

Woo!

All right, thank you.

My son goes to Keester, and so he was out there today.

Steph.

Exactly.

He's great.

And our second proclamation is recognizing May 2024 as National Cities, Towns, and Villages Month.

Yes.

So proclamation recognizing May 2024 as National Cities, Towns, and Villages Month means a lot to us, especially with the amount of work and dedication that this particular council has given to National Legal Cities.

So, whereas the National League of Cities was founded in 1924 in Lawrence, Kansas as the American Municipal Association by State Municipal Leagues seeking more coordination and national representation as cities, towns and villages expanded rapidly.

And whereas the nonpartisan National League of Cities is the oldest and largest organization representing municipal governments throughout the United States.

representing the interest of more than 19,000 cities, towns, and villages across the country.

And whereas today the National League of Cities works in partnership with 49 state municipal leagues across the country to strengthen local leadership, drive innovation, and influence the federal policies that impact local programs and operations.

and whereas as the voice of cities, towns and villages in Washington, D.C.

the National League of Cities has successfully championed federal legislative solutions that support municipalities and has worked closely with Congress and the executive branch to educate policymakers on the realities of local implementation and whereas the City of Harrisonburg is a proud member of the National League of Cities

and has benefited from the organization's research, technical expertise, federal advocacy and opportunities to learn from other local governments.

And whereas local governments are the bedrock of American democracy, provide 336 million residents with the most accountable, responsive, inclusive, ethical and transparent government in the world.

and whereas from the nation's smallest village to its largest cities, America's local government have been essential in transforming the United States of America into the greatest, most influential nation in the world's history.

And whereas the city of Harrisonburg was first incorporated in 1916 and is proudly served today

by the city council, city manager, and municipal workforce of 849 dedicated public servants.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the city of Harrisonburg hereby proclaims May 2024 as National Cities, Towns, and Villages Month in celebration of America's local government and the National League of Cities historic centennial anniversary.

This day,

April 9th, 2024.

We're not the largest city.

We're not the smallest city.

We're actually like one of the ones right in the middle.

And it's been a great platform for us, our city manager and our staff.

And just to reiterate that they will be coming through their road show tour will be here in Harrisonburg Wednesday, April 17th from, well, they'll be here that morning till at least 11.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we will move on.

to our consent agenda.

Any items placed on the consent agenda shall be removed and taken up as a separate matter if so requested by any member of council.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

Council Member Jones.

Good evening Mayor, Council Members and staff.

It's not coming up Pam.

It smells not working.

I'm clicking it.

My name is Kristen McComb.

I'm the Community Development Block Grant Program Manager for the city and I'm here tonight to bring our annual action plan for the 2024 year of the CDBG program.

The Community Development Block Grant or CDBG is federally funded through the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development or HUD.

The CDBG program is a flexible program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community development needs.

haven't begun in 1974, the CDBG program is one of the longest continuously run programs at HUD.

The CDBG program provides annual grants on a formula basis to about 1200 general units of local government and states.

CDBG funds must be used for activities that benefit low and moderate income persons.

In addition, each activity must meet a national objective for the program.

The city of Harrisonburg receives an annual allocation that is then distributed to eligible projects within the city.

Applications for the Use of 2024 CDBG Funding in Harrisonburg were due in February.

Since then, the CDBG Selection Committee has read and scored each of this year's applications for the Community Development Block Grant.

Tonight, I'll be presenting our recommendations to you.

The following slides summarize the amounts that were requested, as well as the funding recommendations that our committee is making.

The allocation amount for our 2024 grant has not yet been announced, and therefore,

We're moving forward with the estimated allocation amount of $500,000.

Once we have the final number from HUD, we'll make some small adjustments to the grant recommendations that I will detail on the following slides.

We're also adding $136,237 from unspent funding in prior years, which brings our estimated total to allocate in this cycle to $636,286.37.

Under the category of housing and property improvements, there were two applicants this year.

The 2023 grant year represented the final year of the city's debt servicing commitment to the Housing Authority for the Harrison Heights renovations and therefore, space has opened up in this category to pursue other funding options.

The Selection Committee is recommending that $139,700 go toward the Habitat for Humanities Critical Home Repair Program.

and an effort to promote affordable housing by keeping low and moderate income individuals in their homes in a safe and accessible environment.

Three city department projects were chosen to receive funding this year or be recommended for funding this year and each of these projects represent city staff efforts to connect LMI residents with valuable services.

The three projects chosen for partial funding this year are an ADA accessible sidewalk at Hillendale Park

paving the walking trail over at Ralph Sampson Park and replacing the sanitary sewer line on South Liberty Street.

The city may use up to 20% of the CDBG allocation for planning and administration activities.

Harrisonburg has historically allocated this full amount to general administration and later moved this funding to other projects in the city as needed to rise.

The Public Services category is capped at 15% of the current year's grant allocation.

The maximum estimated amount that the city is allowed to allocate for the organizations on the screen is $75,000 this year.

So the four projects that the Selection Committee scored as highest are being recommended for funding.

And I'd also like to note that because we don't know the exact amount of the city's total allocation at this time, the committee is recommending that the following projects

will be adjusted slightly up or down once our funding is announced.

So from the last screen administration, from this screen, the suitcase clinic and Meals on Wheels would be equally adjusted to keep the public services category at its 15% cap and the Ralph Sampson Park walking trail, which was on the previous slide as well.

I would expect these amounts to be pretty minor adjustments as that comes through.

No action is needed at this time and the 30-day public comment period is scheduled to begin tonight.

All comments must be received by 9 a.m.

on May 10th.

And any citizens who wish to make comments on this plan may do so as our public hearing time begins tonight.

And we'll also accept comments through me, Kristen McComb, at the city manager's office by using the information listed on the screen here.

Any questions?

Yes, right.

Thank you.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

If anyone wishes to speak, please state your name and address.

How are you doing?

Great.

I'm really grateful to be here.

Mary council members and staff.

My name is Joyce Neusebaum with Valley Program for Aging Services, or V-PASS, and we're very grateful for your support for a lot of the things we do, specifically tonight for Meals on Wheels.

And I just want to clarify that Meals on Wheels is a meal.

It's pretty good.

More than a meal, though, it's a check-in.

Our volunteers and staff might be the only person, live person, these folks talk to in a day.

And we also

come across people who have needs.

We get reports that a gentleman doesn't look so good today at our case manager's check on them, or someone has fallen and we call 911.

Those kind of things happen fairly often as well.

And then we know that the whole social isolation issue is huge.

And by just having a friendly visit from a volunteer a couple times a week can really elevate a person's spirits.

and so I'm pleased to say that in the application I mentioned the possibility is now a definite go to add a third delivery day.

Thanks to the Valley Village organization they have come up with almost enough volunteers to staff a third delivery day.

So now instead of only two visits per week people will see three different people each week.

Pre-pandemic we delivered five days a week and

We've been at two for quite a while, so we're very excited that we can add a third delivery day.

And this will just increase a person's chances to speak to someone who cares and for us to recognize any needs that might come up.

And the other thing that happens with meals is that so often a person calls us for meals, but then we find out that there might be some financial issues that indicate

that there's a scam or some misuse of funds going on that's just happened very recently or maybe there's a tree that needs to come down and we figure out a way to get them help with that or they have other kinds of needs and we can connect them with community services so it's a meal but it's way more than a meal and we really, really are grateful for the support of the city and the city residents and community and I'll just say that we provided in Harrisonburg

in our last fiscal year, over 20,000 meals to 147 unique individuals.

And they're unique in many ways, but unduplicated individuals, right?

And that's a 9.3% increase over the past year.

So with costs going up and funding staying steady or going down, it's challenging.

But I just really, really appreciate your support.

And I thank you for that.

Thank you.

And thank you for your work.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

CNN in person.

One moment, please.

You are now live with City Council.

I'm a York East Channel Blue Rocks City Resident.

Madam Mayor, it is my duty to again remind this body that these funds, these federal funds, come with a requirement to make disparate impact assessments.

And if the city is not doing well, the city is not entitled to these funds.

What is our status with this regard?

Well, we need look no further than the massive Blue Stone Town Center disaster

to see that federal funds require impact statements.

That project has gone forward without one.

Maybe it doesn't require one.

Maybe that's what they've done with their federal funds.

But our city was involved in approving something that large without doing the due diligence that the federal funding would have required.

Moving on to our zoning rewrite.

We have at least one member on the group that is going to be doing that rewriting who, when he was chair, actually cut off discussion of racial impact issues.

We have recordings of that if we need to reference that.

That is a problem going into shaping structural issues in our city.

Going through another advisory body, our recently reappointed was the chair of our planning commission who actually deluxe members of the public from accounts that visibly look to be doing business contrary to a recent Supreme Court decision on how the public should be allowed to participate.

And that participation that is being deluxe

is my strong voices for equity like what you are hearing tonight.

Finally, we have the enforcement season starting on our tall grass and weed ordinance.

An element of exclusionary housing practices these ordinances were and as I ride around the city I see troubling signs that people are panicking and cutting down

their natural landscapes, the places that they took solace in, in our increasingly difficult circumstances.

And I have read reports of that panicking as we look forward to the assistant city attorneys ruling that there can no longer be natural yards in Harrisonburg.

We are not ready to accept these funds, Madam Mayor.

The guidance attached to these makes sense.

Going for the icing without baking the cake can turn a good thing into something bad.

And people who have commandeered the lovers of power in our city, Madam Mayor, have taken the cake.

Thank you.

I will close public hearing on this item.

Okay, this item is an amendment to the 2020 and 2022 action plans.

I'm excited to let you know that the fabrication of the art installation

for the intersection of North, Maine, and Knoll is nearing completion.

During the month of April, we will see the base structure, and we're starting to already have the Island Foundation being installed at the intersection there along with the underlying infrastructure that needs to be updated as we build a permanent structure at this location.

These infrastructure and foundation costs were originally going to be funded through the public works budget, but due to some other CDBG projects that came in under budget last year,

We do have federal CDBG funding available to transfer to this project to cover the majority of the costs of it.

And so you can see on the slide here that there are two projects both on Vine Street that have been completed.

They came in under budget.

And so we have funding to help with that foundation and the costs that go with that.

This transfer triggers an amendment to the CDBG program and a public hearing and 30-day public comment period.

Any comments must be received by May 10th at 9 a.m.

This item will come back to you for approval at the May 14th meeting but no action is needed at this time.

It's the same information that we just went through a moment ago.

Any comments can be submitted to me here.

Any questions on this?

Thank you.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

If anyone wishes to speak, please state your name and address.

You will have five minutes.

Good evening, Adam Fletcher, Director of Community Development.

I always like to just pause for just a few seconds and thank all the many different city staff that have contributed to this project.

It is, it almost becomes a year long project anymore.

But I really want to thank the CIP review committee, which includes myself, city manager, deputy city manager, our director of finance and our environmental sustainability manager.

but the teamwork doesn't end there for sure because we have many folks all across the city departments that contribute to the CIP.

So it's a process that begins sort of late July and then culminates in this time period.

So I really appreciate the work that goes through this.

So high level review this evening and presentation of Planning Commission's recommendation.

Just a reminder for folks, if they're unaware, the CIP is not a budget but it is a planning tool.

For projects to be included in the CIP, they have to hit a threshold of at least $50,000 or greater The financing plan is put forth in the CIP to help fund projects as the annual budget is reviewed every year so we look to the CIP for potential guidance

as is the case.

If you ever go back and look at old CIPs or if you've been around long enough to hear this presentation and to review CIPs themselves, you'll see that projects that are outlined in the document are likely not funded exactly as they're shown.

These are

Projections out a few years to multiple years and as needs and desires change we look at those projects yearly and anticipate any any additional funds lowering of costs in situations but it is through the annual budget every year that the commitment for funds for particular projects is committed.

I'd like to just take a few seconds as well just to go through one project sheet just so folks who might not be familiar with this document or how to evaluate it can sort of go through each sheet.

So each sheet in the document is one project which is quite amazing because each project itself could be its own binder.

We try to fit as much information as possible on one sheet so it's a quick high-level summary to understand what it is, where it is, how much it might cost, and when it might happen.

So for this particular case we have the SIMS HVAC replacement.

On this sheet you'll see priority codes, in this case priority two.

We have priority codes of five really in the CIP document, but only those that are categorized from one through three make it into the document itself.

So we have one, which is absolutely required.

In essence, it's required by law.

We have very few Priority One projects, which is actually a good thing, because we are not required by law to do certain types of projects or programs.

But there are a few as you evaluate the document.

Project Priority Code Two are those projects that are highly desirable, they affect efficiency and effectiveness, and then three is a desirable project.

Those that do not make it really to the list are marginally desirable or unjustified.

We identify what type of project it is.

In this case it is a replacement.

We give start and completion dates.

We have a description of the project, an explanation of the project, and if there are known alternatives, we will provide those as well.

We refer each project back to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.

We give justifications for the projects that are identified here, the goals and objectives of the ComPlan identified here, and then on the bottom half of the project you see the expenditures that are planned, in this case $975,000 in fiscal year 27.

and then where that money might come from for this particular project is from the General Fund.

Each project is then placed into, early in the document, to summary tables where you can then evaluate these projects across the department as well as across the different departments.

So in this particular case, this is just one sheet from the summary tables here for the General Fund.

You have the SIMS project,

Listed with the other projects within Parks and Recreation, then you can then see across the board where they fall and the five-year horizon and compare them with those other projects, the totals for the department, and then at the bottom, in this case, it just happens to be at the bottom of the list here, the total for the entire general fund.

So prior pages within, of course, show you what all the funds are across the different departments.

If you really want to take a big picture, look

There are a couple other summary tables.

In this case, this one here shows the five year request by departments.

So this is the total amounts in each fiscal year on the five year horizon for each department.

You can see then at the bottom here the subtotals for those.

You will then see us removing funds from each fiscal year and that's because we're accommodating for bond funds, maybe grants that the city is anticipating being able to apply for or have been already dedicated to be provided to the city.

We then see what the total needed by departments then after those funds are removed.

And then sadly, the bottom line indicating really that that bottom number is usually quite far from the desires and demands from the city.

And that's just the reality of our demands of who we are as a city.

So very difficult decisions made as to which projects get funded.

All this data here, I'll show in just really just different formats, just so you can sort of visually see some of the demands as we look across the five year horizon.

Same information here shown on the next slide showing the pie chart here of where the funds are really being requested from.

Oftentimes you do see some of the major, the larger ones being public works, transportation schools as well, and it does fluctuate from year to year.

So this is within the five year horizon.

and Planning Commission, of course, recommended for you all to look for your approval to this request.

It was a unanimous recommendation from Planning Commission.

We did have one vacancy, I believe, at that time, or one absent.

There was an individual that was absent that evening, my apologies.

So it was a six to zero unanimous decision for recommendation for approval.

Do we have any questions?

Hey.

Adam, I was just looking back through the extract from Planning Commission and saw that there was kind of a follow-through that I had asked a question about the water in sewer.

Let me see what it was.

Repeated comment to the effect of sustainability is by asset management practices.

I said that might be a question from Mike Collins, our public utilities manager.

Yes ma'am, I'm here to do that.

So that question, yeah, so the way I phrased it for Mike when I spoke with them was, what does it really mean for public utilities with regard to sustainability?

How is sustainability met by asset management practices?

It was kind of your question, is that correct?

That's right.

I always learned a great deal from Mr. Collins when I speak with him and he gave me a great explanation.

So I'll try to summarize that for you.

But really he spoke to me about really getting the most out of projects from both an aspect of the cheapest cost without losing the point of the project.

So asset management sort of at its core

Dr.

of the asset itself.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

I want to say thank you for doing this work.

I think, you know, it's

It's a really high-level document for us, but it's revisited every year.

It's a dynamic document.

It's not something that's set aside and allows us to kind of look in the future and often avoid things that could be big expenses in the future without us being prepared for it.

Okay, thank you.

We will open this item up for public hearing if anyone wishes to speak.

Please state your name and address.

You are now live with City Council.

Madam Mayor Pena York City Residence, Madam Mayor, the

The plan that we are looking at today is a long-term strategic plan as the Director of Community Development has pointed out and I would call to your attention a couple of details.

First of all, the Department of Community Development is slated to continue increasing its budget more or less aside from a couple of irregular items in the past, but the

Department is on an upward expanding trajectory.

This is one of the few places, documents that shape budgets where city council can actually give direct guidance in the work of city staff.

This budget should be going down and should be growing in other areas.

Instead, we've seen the Department of Community Development continuing

to hire people in its planning and zoning division.

Those are the people who during growing season spend a good portion of their time coming out to measure the height of your grass.

Is that really where we as a strap city need to be?

And should we perhaps instead be going ahead and making those hires, but making those hires, let's say, in community development among the people, for example, who we saw hosting the pollinators in your backyard event?

These are strategic direction questions, and I would imagine that the CIP might be a forum in which to have those discussions about the direction of the city.

Also to the question of water, I had just now got the Rockingham Harrisonburg Water Agreement and haven't had a chance to process it, but I have seen our water data, and almost all of our water, practically speaking, vast amounts of our water go to

and the poultry industry.

We need to think about what's going on with that with regard to our eastern raw water line and the arrangement of those assets.

Again, this might be a place to get something like the magnitude of funds that we got for bicycle infrastructure, reportedly, which in the previous CIP was actually for industrial trucks going to downtown.

This is a place, maybe to have the discussion of can we put those massive users of which there are only three and who are plastered in about the same place on a separate line?

Can we put them on the eastern or our water line?

This is a problem, a question I keep raising so that we can continue in terms of sustainability and equity and environmental justice, continue drinking pristine water and giving that to residents.

These are capital questions.

We know of late that Congress is able to vote money into existence.

We are coming around to that.

Let's strategize and have a big vision in this plan.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Public hearing for this item is now closed.

Thank you.

Second.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

We will now go to 60.

The request is to apply for section 10397 subsection 2, which allows for convenience stores within the M1 district.

So on your screen here we have image showing the residential map of the area.

The site is surrounded by M1 property.

It in itself is zoned M1.

Long term plans here, it's a corridor that is predominantly designated commercial.

In fact, this small little section is the section that is designated industrial, but the majority of this corridor is designated commercial.

And as you get closer to North Liberty Street, you pick up a medium density designation there in the left side of your image.

The site itself is designated commercial, excuse me, is designated industrial, but it is on that edge where the remaining portions to the east are designated for commercial use.

and then an aerial photograph of the sites.

You can see a large majority of this area around the property is graveled area for some of the operations that are nearby have been industrial operations for quite some time.

The site, again, is surrounded by M1 properties and is itself its own M1.

So just to give some context to the request and how the applicants really came to us.

So going as far back as 10 years ago, almost 10 years ago, July 2014,

The property at 210 Charles Street was applied for a special use permit to Lafort Church and it was during that site visit and during our evaluation of that application that staff had identified that there was potentially a use that was operating illegally in the M1 district, which was a convenience store at 206 Charles Street.

So we reached out to them to help them get into compliance.

and they did so.

So then a year later they then went through their own special use permits to have their convenience store which has been successfully operating since that time at 210 Charles Street.

They now are hoping to take over operation of the entire site 206 and 210 together and to really to redevelop the site and have a parking facility that is appropriate in size and scale for their use and to also remove

Some unsafe parking conditions that actually have vehicles backing out into the public street, which have been there for quite some time.

So we're really appreciative of the fact that they're looking for that improvement to take place.

So the site here before you, so we have 206 and 210.

206 to the right, 210 to the left.

So you can see in this image, the left-hand side is where the convenience store is currently operating.

The church used to operate on the right side of the building there.

and they are looking to redevelop to what is shown here conceptually on the screen although this is you'll likely see a redeveloped site that looks very similar to this but this at this time is conceptual so what you're seeing is the demolition of the 210 site to make way for a parking layout for the convenience store they would continue to operate here on the right hand side

It's this area here in the front that we're really appreciative that they're going to have landscaping in this area rather than parking because if we go back to our previous image, you'll see the parking here, which is really just a continuation of the pavement along Charles Street, which is not a safe situation to have.

because you can see this white line here, which is the shoulder line of the of the travel lane going westbound.

And it is an unsafe commercial situation when you have property where vehicles back directly out onto the public street.

So with their redeveloped plans, they will take that unsafe condition away and then really revitalize the property and bring new life to the space.

So excited for them to do so.

We offered as staff a favorable recommendation to Planning Commission who in turn

offered a favorable recommendation four to zero for approval.

I do want to take just this time to state all of the matters that I'll be talking about this evening.

I only had four voting members.

That is because we have one vacancy on the planning commission, and then there were two people that were absent at this meeting, Vice Mayor Dent and Commissioner Alcindy.

So there were just enough that we had a quorum at this meeting.

Okay, thank you.

Do we have any questions?

Thank you, Ed.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

Anyone who wishes to speak, please state your name and address.

You'll have five minutes.

Gil Coleman with Coleman Engineering.

Good to see you all.

I'm here representing the applicant for this request.

I was in planning commission when they came through the first time and it was interesting the discussion about that parking back into that road I would say it's not always unsafe back into a street if it's a local street you know most of us back into our street but in a street like this is a lot of industrial trucks and vehicles driving through this is very very unsafe so it's good that they are doing this the

I guess what they're bringing together here is they have a special use permit for the current use of the one side of the building and they want to move to the other side of the building.

But there are three properties there and the special use permit was approved only for the one property, not for all the properties.

So this request is just to consolidate all that, all the properties under one special use permit that would allow them to operate as a

as a convenience store there, which is a great location because the service says all that area, you know, all the areas, that place is busy.

I don't know if you've been there, but the times have been there.

I noticed in reading the planning notes that

The backing in and out is not proffered, it's given.

Yes, they're not required to do that, but that's one of the intents of what they want to do there.

Yeah, it's a good point.

I think there are some requests from Public Works that we agree that we're going to block that area, landscape and all that.

So it's not a proffer on this.

I don't know that there are a requirement for proffers on a special experiment like this, but at the same time, we've been negotiating with Public Works, because initially we had entrants on each side.

We've been going back and forth on where to locate, where they are at,

and put in the parking on the other side and then found out this is much better for their cost and their building and all that to stay on the one side, which clears the parking all in on the left side.

I mean, I don't just discomfort.

It doesn't make sense what I'm saying, but what I'm saying is like the the idea is to get the parking out of the street into into the property, you know, and not in the street like it is right now, basically.

But yeah, there were

We didn't have any conversation with staff about a proffer on that, but there was a lot of conversation from public works in terms of saying, hey, this is what we'd like to see, and we agree that that's what we're going to do.

And I'm glad you mentioned they decided to move all together, not just go from one side to the other, because in the notes it also said that

That allows for just one entrance as opposed to two.

When you're reading these notes, it gets kind of confusing.

You're trying to picture it in your head.

And the reason for that is because initially we had one entrance on one side and another on the other side.

It was to be able to allow for parking to circulate through that.

It was very tight.

So we decided, okay, let's just go with only one side for other reasons also, which makes the parking a lot more proper, you know, and

Some of the issues there were people not only parking back into the street but also parking on neighboring parking lots and that was something our neighbors weren't happy with.

So this kind of solves a lot of problems for them and for the neighbors.

Yeah, good question.

Right, so we'd have a program for landscaping purposes, so if we have a small business owner that could take advantage of that.

Yeah, no, it's good.

I think when you re-imagine the space like this, what really struck me is like a positive in this

And this particular plan is that someone noted that it's close to Jefferson Street and that we're really trying to promote a walkable neighborhood.

You know, you have a store that's where you can get some basic goods close by.

And what I was thinking when they said let's just eliminate the parking in front and make that more aesthetically pleasing, I think in my mind too,

That makes it seem like it's more walkable because when I drive through there now, I very much think, oh, this is commercial, industrial, don't walk, you know, it's not necessarily safe.

Yeah, I think so, and hopefully more infrastructure is developed there in terms of, you know, sidewalks and things like that, allow people to get to services like this.

I know we miss them in our neighborhood.

Yeah.

Having that, you know,

You are now live with City Council.

Please state your name and address in your five minutes.

Madam Mayor Panayaki Sienakura, City Resident.

This application brings together a number of interesting elements.

I will start by saying that not too long ago we heard something very similar to this, where creative residents of the city found a use

for a piece of property that was not zoned for that use and that was sitting, being at less than its potential.

You might know that I'm pointing to a situation where a resident had an idea for a food truck and the repair area, and in that time you will recall, let us keep in the front of our mind who was on which side.

Council Member Fleming said the rules are the rules,

Council Member Jones, we lost maybe sight of in our recent resolution discussion, fought, fought for that business person whose father was stuck in Iraq to be able to save his business.

That person lost his business with the votes of Vice Mayor Dent, Council Member Fleming, and Council Member Robinson.

Today we have a chance to revisit that with again a use like this and I would make the same testimony I made last time that until we get our zoning right let's give flexibility to our people and not just give it to folks like the second person who applied at that previous meeting, folks who are well connected who know all of us and we give the appearance and maybe the reality of

that the rules don't apply in the same way to everyone.

This looks good on that front.

I hope that these folks will be able to expand.

There's also been a good rational discussion of parking.

When we eliminate parking, appropriate parking, we put that parking onto the public.

And that reduces the scope of the public and the public land, which is exactly the agenda of libertarian forces

like the Strong Towns movement that are overly influencing the planning and the thinking about our city.

I'm glad to see that there was proper deliberation of this.

And finally, we hear about this area and where the real risks and the real pressures on our city are coming from.

Industrial trucks going through a busy area.

Those who like to talk about the big industries

and corporate interests doing their share.

This is a place to think about this.

Let's make spaces for the ordinary people of our city to have a fighting chance and to have some flexibility.

By all means, let's approve this.

And I hope that we can take some lessons from this finally for the landscaping.

Why don't we apply for landscaping?

Because those landscaping

Incentives come with heightened supervision from the city that gives us a reasonable fear that we could lose our home or lose our business to a city inspection from the Department of Community Development.

That's why people like me and I would guess other of my fellow recent immigrants and refugees are afraid to apply for these things.

Thank you.

Can we have any other callers?

One moment.

Mayor Reed, there are no other callers.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor, I move to approve the request from Mr. Ochoa and Ms.

Lopez for a special use permit to allow a convenience store at 206 and 210 Charles Street.

Second.

Roll call.

Do you all be familiar with this process?

This property is zoned R2.

It's located at 1088 and 1094 College Avenue, and it is to allow for a short-term rental within this district.

As you can see, it's getting close to Mucklin Pike here, which is the broad white line there across the northern part of the property.

Mix of different zoning classifications in this area.

So we have commercial there in the orange.

You're picking up the Village of Chicago Park, which is the master plan community in the purple color, which is on the bottom part of the image.

And then you see the institutional overlay, the hatching of the R3 to the north.

That's Eastern Mennonite University's campus.

So they have an institutional overlay for their property.

Long term plans for this area is really sort of a combination of a couple of different things here.

So we have institutional use continue to be planned to the north of Mount Plant and Pike.

Neighborhood residential in the red and then we're picking up some mixed use potentials here in that Chicago Avenue corridor.

So you're seeing that northern end of where we're hoping to promote some mixed use opportunities in that hatched area coming off of Chicago Avenue.

And then the aerial photograph of the site is an established built out neighborhood.

The property itself has a single family dwelling and then an accessory structure to the rear of the property, which is the location for the short term rental that they plan to have on site.

So the single family dwelling to the front of the property taken from College Avenue.

The conditions that we are recommending be placed on this and before I get to those conditions, let me just point out that there are three accommodation spaces that they're planning in the accessory structure.

The three accommodation spaces would have no more than six people, which is as presented by the applicant.

I always like to remind folks the difference between short-term rentals and home stays.

So a short-term rental is above and beyond the buy-right permissions that are permitted by the home stay operation that all residential properties have across the city.

So a short-term rental differs from the buy-right use by allowing operators to exceed 90 lodging nights per year.

in allowing more than four guests at one time and in having the ability to use an accessory building as a transient lodging structure.

So said differently, a homestay is limited to 90 nights a year and up to four people in the principal dwelling.

You cannot have a homestay and accessory structure.

So in this particular case, they are wanting to exceed all three.

So they hope to have more than 90 nights per year.

They are located in an accessory structure and they want to have more than four guests at one time.

The suggested conditions are consistent with what you've seen coming from us before.

They include all short-term rental accommodation within the detached structure, which is this circumstance here for this particular application.

There should be no more than three

and Dr.

that the minimum off-street parking spaces that are required for this do not need to be delineated.

What that means is you do not have to actually indicate so that when you drive by this property, you wouldn't see like a parking space.

They can actually utilize the driveway that actually circles to the back of the property as the parking area necessary for the parking spaces.

In this particular case, they would have to have four total, one for the principal dwelling and then three for each accommodation space.

and then last but not least here is the the nuisance provision that if for some reason planning commissioner city council found that this particular use becomes a nuisance it can be recalled for further review where it could be revoked additional conditions could be placed on it and would just be under further evaluation by this group.

We offered a favorable recommendation, a planning commission, who then in turn offered a favorable recommendation with the suggested conditions that were part of the request.

Oh, yes.

Yes.

I'm thinking of the CIP review.

Thank you.

And Chair Finnegan.

Thank you.

I have a question.

Yes, ma'am.

I could just be, I mean, just not knowing.

Okay.

So in the second paragraph of the planning notes, it talks about if currently the R2 district doesn't allow for two single family detached dwellings on one lot, but eventually the applicant stated in the letter

that they like to utilize 1094 for a long-term rental unit.

Would what we vote on tonight somehow have effect on that?

No ma'am, it would not.

Thank you, Ed.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

Good evening, Josh Defnall.

I'm the owner and the applicant of 1088 College Avenue.

This is my son, Theodore, getting a crash course in local government.

We purchased this property in 2020, 1094, which is the structure in the back.

It's 1,800 square foot.

a kind of rectangular center block building had been vacant for a number of years it had been commercial use back alley bikes I think was the last business to operate in that structure and it had been some time it was pretty rough rundown not great to look at we approached the city at that point zoning building officials to kind of see hey what can we do with this and based on current zoning laws R2 you know we were told hey you can't

put a full kitchen in there.

So that kind of, you know, a long term tenant wouldn't have been feasible without a full kitchen.

And a lot of that just stemmed from setbacks.

So we had a survey done, trouble finding some property lines, but we only have a one foot setback on one part of the property.

So we have worked with the billing officials, we've put in two hour firewalls, and we've done all of the things needed so that hopefully in the future,

as we can get some higher density housing that might allow us the more flexibility for a long-term tenant.

Yeah, thank you.

Any questions?

Thank you.

Thank you Theodore.

Glad you're here.

Anyone else in person?

Send your five minutes.

We'll begin.

and that is before the Housing Commission in their upcoming meeting and that was something that comes under the heading of auxiliary dwelling units.

This would be a great candidate for that and having this as a short-term rental would furthermore set an example of how that could really work for people.

What is being expressed here is a desire by the applicant to have flexibility in how we live.

That, I would say, is the benefit of short-term rentals, as we discussed at great length.

The fact that we haven't seen one of these in a very long time, as was pointed out in the introduction, affirms my continuing assertions

that there's not a business plan for short-term rentals to become a problem in Harrisonburg, contrary to what Mr. Fleming keeps reaching out for, trying to see if, well, somehow maybe, but no, we made a reasonable restriction upon my advice, I would point out, that there be an owner occupancy requirement to the parcels, and that limits the potential speculation that could happen.

Since then, I've had a chance to talk to a nearby locality that has had problems with investors.

That's because they don't have that.

And because they are a short hop away from a whole bunch of resorts, a business model.

Madam Mayor, this provides flexibility in how we live, we live using that creativity that we depend on until our public bodies and ultimately our federal government entered to level the playing field.

as the Biden administration showed it has power and even the will to do during the COVID response that could not be seen through, unfortunately, because of internal resistance by, for example, our own Senator Warner, who with Senator Cain had what appear to be other ideas as we see in how poultry is being implemented here in Harrisonburg.

I hope that you go ahead and both approve this application and that you do

taking the consideration more broadly how we think about housing and not think of it just as build more by giving more incentives to engineering firms and developers.

But let's think about the resident side as well.

Give us the flexibility to live creatively, live intergenerationally, and be able to be in neighborhoods in which we otherwise would not be able to be, as per my earlier discussions, but to disparate impact.

on the exclusionary housing practice in the first item.

Thank you.

Do we have any other callers?

Thank you.

moved to approve the special use permit as presented by staff for Joshua, Sarah, Jimmy, and Lynn Deffano for a short-term rental at 1-0-88 and 1-0-9 for college avenue as presented.

Second.

This is located at the intersection of Hawkins Street and Reservoir Street.

The physical site address here is 220 Reservoir Street and the request is to allow personal service establishments in R3.

That is Persection 10348.4, Subsection 5.

The R3 zoning districts allows many by-right uses that are not residential, so non-residential uses that are by-right.

Those include hospitals, medical offices, professional offices, churches, schools, daycares, governmental uses and terrible and benevolent institutional uses.

Personal service establishments include a little bit higher turnover, so this is like hair salons, barbershops, nail salons, those types of places, which is why it gives a little bit more scrutiny in the residential district in R3, and that is also how tattoo shops are classified, and that is the particular case here this evening.

So we have an applicant that is hoping to purchase the property, the owners of Alley Cat Tattoo, which are just down the road on Reservoir Street, are hoping to

relocate their business to this location and own their property.

So that is the request that's before you this evening.

Property here, which is on three sides anyway, adjacent to more R3 property, and then across Reservoir Street, you have R2 property of Franklin Heights Development.

Long-term plans for this area of the city continue pressuring for more medium density residential, so

It really is a mix of different residential uses from a higher-level perspective of what we'd like to see in this area.

So this includes single-family duplex, townhomes, multi-family types of units, all at that medium density, density around 15 units per acre.

That's what that brown color represents here.

And then the aerial photograph of the site.

Folks who've been around the area for quite some time will know that this site has been used as a medical office for the past 32 years, Walther & Associates Rehabilitation Services.

operated out of there for a number of years.

There it is today.

The change of use does require increased parking requirements.

There are only 18 spaces that are actually designated, but there is appears to be enough space in the rear of the property to accommodate the additional parking requirements.

So, so nothing that we saw to be concerned at right there, but they will continue to work with us for the change of use and to make sure the site is in compliance with all the regulations.

but staff did not have any concerns with this particular request.

We believe it doesn't really have any more impact on the surrounding areas other by right non-residential uses.

You also note that Kenmore Street is a stone's throw away commercial designations high level traffic in this area and this is a great reuse of that property.

So we offered our fable recommendation to Planning Commission and they did the same unanimously to you at 4-0.

Where are you at now?

You're right across from CVS?

Yeah, you got to back out to get in and all that.

Yeah, so this is a great location for you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so I will open this up for public hearing if anyone wishes to speak.

Please state your name and address.

Dany Fleming

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And you stay busy and there's always a line and there's cars all over the place.

And it is a busy intersection where you're at.

Yeah.

Are you going to use the whole space?

Or are you going to sub-lease an amp?

No, no, we're going to use the whole space.

We're very fortunate to be that busy for so long.

We offer high quality service and a lot of experience.

Absolutely.

Are you going to keep the pool in the building?

It's filled in!

I'm assuming just, you know, moving away from, say, a crowded intersection will be good for business.

Absolutely.

Good.

Congratulations.

I've watched you grow.

You're good.

Do we have any collars?

I don't know why I just put two to two together.

This is you.

You are now live with City Council.

Hi Madam Mayor, Pajaki Sianakura, City Resident.

I almost ended this call because of the way the discussion started on this item.

As I said last time, I'm really heartened by seeing how our elected representatives can be trusted to make wise decisions on our behalf.

The only reason I did call on this item was that in previous discussions I had heard disparaging remarks that could potentially have been taken to be directed against people.

when, for example, our vice mayor talked about vape shops, and I don't know if she mentioned Ted II parlors as well, as somehow being problematic.

The way that you celebrated this business absolutely shows that that's not the case.

People who use these services, they are us.

They are the residents that we represent, and I just wanted to be sure that that was properly addressed, even though in cases like the vape shops,

It is unfortunate that that is a diversification of the business model of big tobacco, but that's not the fault or the problem of us.

The residents who are taking part in that, the senator from Altria who provided that path, those pathways, is the place where we should be looking there and we should be raising our voices rather than following the dictates of those big business interests and their representatives.

I think the small business

is a great example of how our resilience in our creativity can help us build from the grassroots up to make and build better communities.

Thank you.

Any other callers?

One moment.

Mayor Reed, there are no other callers.

Thank you.

Madam Mayor, I move to

Second.

Any other discussion?

Council Member Jones.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Aye.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Council Member Fleming.

Aye.

Aye.

Congratulations.

I have a rezoning to discuss with you here this evening.

This is actually a proffer amendment which is classified as a rezoning.

So this is a B1C property which has existing regulating proffers to which the property owner would like to amend those proffers and they do have to go through the same process as any rezoning would.

This property in particular is the site in which contains Sagebird Cider Works and is located in the northern section of the city at 325 and 335 North Liberty Street.

This particular property was part of multiple properties that were all rezoned at one time to make way for many of the establishments that are existing out there and successful today, including Sagebird Cider Works.

Magpie, The Perch, Chestnut Ridge Coffee Roasters, Liberty Mercantile, Rootstock Wine Bar, and Provisions, and for the constructions of townhomes and some parking lots that serves all those uses.

So if you're familiar with this site, that is because it was part of the rezoning back in 2018 that made way for those opportunities to come to fruition.

Sagebird, in fact, after the rezoning came back to the city in 2019,

to apply for a special use permit to allow for the small-scale manufacturing to be positioned on that B-1 property because the B-1 zoning district does not allow manufacturing as a buy-right use but does allow it as a special use and it was approved in 2019.

The purpose, however, this evening is to rezone the site by removing some regulating proffers associated with parking that is on the property.

Specifically, this site had proffers that said that at minimum seven parking spaces would be provided on this particular component, this part of that property, which is part of multiple properties there that was rezoned.

And it specifically said that seven parking spaces would be provided on the site.

Sagebird operates a food truck and they park the food truck in one of the required parking spaces.

Required parking spaces cannot be used for food trucks, so they would have to find another location, or they could have amended the proffers, which is what they're doing this evening, which is to take the proffers away so that they can maintain having their food truck on site.

So getting into some of the more of the details here, the property really isn't sort of that edge of the downtown, the northwestern edge, you'll see

We have R2 zoning just to the west, the light green color along Colisello Street.

And then some, I sort of casually refer to as sort of old M1 zoning because we have sort of this old M1 zoning classification, which is adjacent to the railroad, which is following the railroad, even in our gown town area.

In fact, the property we're talking about this evening was zoned M1 and was rezoned to the B1 district.

Very clearly indicated break in the planned uses in this area.

So neighborhood residential there in the red to the west and then the continuation of our downtown mixed use area then in the hatched area.

So you can see we're really pushing and promoting for mixed use that includes residential and non-residential uses, things like retail, professional offices, businesses, all in this area, restaurants of course as well.

and the aerial photograph of the site.

If you were in this area in 2018 and then you came back and visited this area now today, you would be like, am I even in the same place?

Because they really did a great job rezoning this space and really bringing new life to this area.

Great life before, but just new life and a new dimension to this area of the city.

As indicated, this is the proffer written verbatim here that they would like to eliminate.

In fact, they want to eliminate some other.

It would disassociate this property with the other proffers that are

that would maintain on the other properties that were part of the rezoning.

So a little complicated, but basically they will end up with their own proffers if you approve this this evening.

So this is what they would like to remove.

To understand this though, you know, we had even promoted, hey, why don't you just get rid of the parking altogether, create a space in front of your building, look at like landscape in the air creating an outdoor dining space.

Dany Fleming

They would close that entrance onto the site.

They would actually pick up four parallel parking spaces along the street.

So although there's seven there today, if they wanted to close in the future, they could, by right.

And then the city could go back and then mark off what we think is about four more parking spaces in the parallel space.

What about the little one that we added?

That would still be there.

Yes, sir.

Magpie.

It's still tough down there.

and their own trivia night.

I think they need that one night.

I know you need it because I can't get my dog.

So this is the space we're referring to.

And as you can see, sort of in the left side of the image, it is a rather wide ingress egress to get into the parking space.

And that's why you can pick up so many parallel spaces.

If they chose to in the future, close it off.

We would be able to pick up some more on the on street parking and the public space.

So I don't typically like to put so much text on the screen, but basically what I wanted to bring to attention is, if you approve this this evening, they will have their own set of proffers.

The proffers more or less mimic what the existing proffers are and what the remaining proffers will be on the adjacent properties that receive their reserving approval back in 2018.

But these are the proffers that they've submitted where they did not include the parking as part of it.

So they're maintaining that it'll be retail stores, government and professional offices,

These are all the uses that they would permit by right hotels, motels, theaters, religious educational, general service repair shops, accessory buildings that may go with those small self facilities, public libraries, public uses, research and development, home occupations, radio and television, and then any special use permit that might be brought to you all all would be permitted by right.

And again, they just eliminated the parking proffers.

We really have been taking a good look at parking, and there's a lot of best practice out there today about having faith in removing parking, especially in your downtowns.

Harrisonburg is somewhat on the forefront that we've had no parking in our downtown for a long time.

but it's just really pushing in the planning realm to become more comfortable with eliminating parking minimums potentially but reducing parking requirements and that's really what we're talking about here this evening which is eliminating that parking.

Thank you.

Hot dogs are great there.

I go there often.

Do you have any feedback from Richmond?

So we specifically reached out to Richmond.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

If anyone wishes to speak, please state your name and address.

You'll have five minutes.

Hello, good evening.

Thank you.

Oh, my name is Sam Carlson, owner, operator of Sagebird.

Yeah, did a great job of explaining what we're trying to do.

It really comes down to we operate the truck there as kind of our kitchen to provide a better experience for our customers really.

At that time of evening, there's not much open down in that end, so it just works well for

Yeah, offering the best that we can for them.

We do intend to keep the parking there, at least for the time being, as Councilman Jones pointed out, it is busy down there sometimes.

So the parking is beneficial for us, I think it's beneficial for the entire area at times, but

And I'm sure, I know the food truck is, I'm giving you an opportunity to say, it is busy.

Yes.

Well, it's good with kind of the whole everything that's going on out there.

We're really excited to be a part of it.

I do want to say this because I don't think, I know some of you couldn't be there and I don't think the mayor was able to attend, but you hosted Jeremy and our, I think the last time we were talking about when we had all the trees come down there, gosh, Andy help me out.

Brian Scholl, Parks and Rec, myself.

I don't think that we ever kind of publicly thanked you for that opportunity at the moment.

So thank you.

Thank you for hosting because that was early, early on.

And so thank you for being a volunteer and

and Dany.

about not getting one of those fancy Shakuta reports.

That's a whole nother subject.

But thank you, Nozak, and tell Amber Lee we said hi.

Anyone else in person?

Just one moment, please.

You are now live with City Council.

Madam Mayor, this item is good for a couple of issues three that I'll try to go through.

One, off the top to remember that

We're talking about a zoning issue here.

We're talking about a land use issue.

So it's important to separate that from the people and our relationships and our good feelings about the people and or the current business and to continue to remember that if or after this business leaves that the decision that the zoning will remain.

the use will remain.

So how would that look?

And that brings us to the second question, which is a question of privatizing the public, which is what I alluded to in my earlier comments.

In this case, we have the issue of reducing parking, which is wildly popular in some very, very small quarters, as Director Fletcher pointed out.

But we see the common sense

of a business person, a person who actually has to run a business saying, well, no, really, this would be harmful overall.

And so the applicant is not taking the full on ideological position, dogmatic position on parking.

And for that, I am grateful.

I do appreciate that.

But let us do think about the fact that we are broaching this issue.

and then maybe the place to broach this is in our zoning and in our comprehensive plan and I don't know if it's possible to perhaps delay this and to treat it systemically and have this discussion.

Now when having that systemic discussion I don't see how on earth Richmond could in any way be relevant to a decision made in Harrisonburg.

Parking is driven as Mr. Jones has pointed out in the past

by people's dependence on cars.

If we have students, the student dynamic on cars runs a certain way.

And Richmond is by no means a university town the way Harrisonburg is.

So the insights we could gain from them, even though they do have a number of fine universities, it's a much bigger city.

The other half of the city, we are agricultural processing, poultry, related services, people who

Because of the way we've laid out our city, our car dependent, they don't have a choice about third shift because we don't have that five minutes, every five minutes bus that we have improved.

For example, the ICS shuttle running at times of working people can become potentially independent of their cars.

We need to bake the cake before we go to the frosting appointment again when we do have that discussion.

So if we had faith in our processes, in our boards and commissions, having experts rather than political appointees, people maybe with business experience, if we had faith in those processes, I would be inclined, I would recommend

Delaying this, not approving this, letting the business owner wait for a little while until we come up with a systematic solution.

If we don't trust that we're going to be able to turn those processes around in time, we do have a small business that there is a current going use, and maybe we have to bite the bullet, but let us do consider all those things.

Thank you.

One moment, please.

Mayor Reed, there are no other callers.

I'll second that.

I'll say that I understand the caller's point and having that discussion when we look at the comp plan and the rezoning would be a healthy discussion.

but we can't let them operate out of compliance conscientiously.

In fact, Ergo, the Charles Street example that we just had and I guess the mayor will, she definitely remembers the special use permit and the gentleman was operating out of compliance as well.

So just to remain consistent even though I agree with the idea

that we probably, this would be a good example.

So we should probably note that for staff.

I do think that we have to move forward accordingly and hopefully Zach and Amberleast, you know, outgrow the space and then we will have that problem.

So I pray that both things happen actually.

I hope that their business flourishes and they get to move or their business flourishes and they stay.

But either way, I do think that the call is right.

Anything else?

Vice Mayor Dent?

Aye.

Council Member Robinson?

Aye.

Council Member Fleming?

Aye.

Aye.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Alright, last one item.

I actually have more than just this one still.

I know you're wishing that I had last, but it's okay.

The next item is a zoning ordinance amendment brought to you by SNK contracting, their representative being Monteverde Engineering and Design Studio.

This is an amendment very narrowly tailored to amend the M1 district by adding a new subsection, subsection 21, which is a new use to the by-right uses.

Nasser Alsaadun

The way I describe it this way, but anyway, I can sort of do it casually.

Think of like an auto zone, sort of, you know, the, trying to think of other businesses that are similar to that, that's for cars, where you go and get your car parts.

This is specifically for tractor and trailers.

So this is a desire used by the property owner.

They're hoping to utilize this up on Mount Platt and Pike.

And the Mercantile is permitted in M1, but it has to be associated with an already by right use for manufacturing, processing, and assembling stuff.

Like if you're processing and making a particular product, you can sell it on site.

But this mercantile is unassociated with anything else that's on this particular property So as they were beginning their processes to go through engineer comprehensive site plan, they're planning for a truck wash on the property This is a separate use they'd like to have and it came to our attention during the review and we discussed with the applicant that basically what they wanted to do wasn't permitted

So we started down the path of doing an ordinance amendment, which is what brings me here this evening.

So again, very narrowly tailored, they're just adding this particular use to M1.

Know that the repair of tractor and trailers and heavy equipment is only permitted in M1, so this is basically an efficient space for having a use that supports another use that's only permitted in M1.

So we did not have concern with it again, very nearly tailored.

It would be by right.

So this is not a special use permit that would be added to the list.

This would be by right and administratively reviewed and approved.

So staff offered a fable recommendation to Plain and Commission to adopt the amendments, believing it does provide for efficiency and convenience for users in that area of M1 properties because this is not just rent in Mecklen Pike, but all across the city in M1.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Thank you, Adam.

I will open this item up for public hearing.

If anyone wishes to speak, please state your name and address.

Good evening, Seth Roderick with Monteverdi Engineering and Design Studio representing the applicant.

Yeah, the crux of this is pretty simple as Adam stated any and all uses associated with heavy trucks tractor trailers aka Those are all relegated to the M1 district But if you want to buy the parts to actually do that repair you have to go to a different district So this is purely there's some language that is was existing narrowly defined as Adam explained

and the interpretation is that retail, if it's not produced on site, can't be sold.

So therefore, this is very narrowly opening that retail window specifically for these heavy vehicles and machinery.

Otherwise, it seems pretty straightforward putting synergetic uses collectively together.

Thank you.

Anyone else in person?

C. N. Nunn.

One moment please.

You are now live with City Council.

Hi Madam Mary.

This is my Yorkey, C. Yonah Kulis, City Resident.

Ken wasn't going to call in on this one.

but something peaked my interest, the question of truck wash, what does that look like and where does that flow into and is this an opportunity to think about our water again and the question of that traffic that's come up several times now, what's really going on that we're getting tens of millions of dollars poured into infrastructure around?

The reason that I would call on this item is that a number of times, again and again, just in the last few months, we've seen the Department of Community Development appear around something seemingly unrelated, like somebody working on a porch or somebody having an inoperable vehicle.

And that having the consequence that a certain business man or a person's home is taken away.

Now, is this a way where we can find the silver lining in that cloud over our ability to live with, peaceably enjoy our property?

To think about, is this really a truck wash?

Is that something that we want there?

Yes, it's zoned M1, but kind of on the flip side of, okay, so these things are not zoned the way they're being used.

And we'd like something there that we've done in the previous couple of items.

I wonder if we might have a discussion of what's going on here and is that something that we like and that we want or shall we maybe raise a little bit of a cost to doing business and have folks think twice and potentially even have a deeper consideration of that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Public hearing for this item is now closed.

Second.

you gotta clean them to service them and you gotta clean them to use them and you gotta clean them to keep them on the road so it's a different it's not a normal cleaning so my daddy built tires a good year tire and rubber for 30 years it's a different kind of cleaning and I'm sure my neighbors will tell you about me using my backpack air blower to clean my own car every couple days but

Dany.

It's actually good for public works to have clean cars.

So as you can see, and it's good for public safety, I'm sure our chief would agree.

Council Member Jones.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Aye.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Aye.

No, I have got to go to the bathroom.

So I need like two minutes and then we're going to so I need to take a recess two minutes not gonna be long but I we're gonna I'm gonna make an adjustment because I know that some people have to go to school in the morning so if I'm gonna make sure I'm right Priya

Elizabeth, Bo, Penny, if y'all will go, you will come up next after I get back.

Virginia Department of Transportation's VDOT Highway Historical Marker, commemorating federal judge John Paul Jr.

We have Priya, Elizabeth, and Bo, and

Penny.

Yes, ma'am.

Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council members and staff.

My name is Priya Dua.

I'm joined here by my classmate, Elizabeth Kidd and our mentor, Bo Dickinson.

To give some background on how we got to this point, this initially started as a research project called Knocking Down Walls.

The two cases that we focused on were Betty Ann Kilby vs. Warren County School Board and Allen vs. Charlottesville City School Board.

Immediately following our debut, we hosted a Q&A panel for members of the community to interact with the few of the plaintiffs featured in our film.

With this goal in mind, we are now working to submit a Virginia Department of Historical Resources marker proposal by the deadline of May 1st.

This process requires multiple components, and over the past several months we have received funding from Rocktown History, drafted the marker text, and had it approved by the State Judge John Paul, which is the late Judge John Paul's nephew, as well as the other plaintiffs that we interviewed.

and we have now received both state and national support for our proposed location.

I'd like to begin by recognizing these students are the inaugural winners of the Barbara Johns Youth Change Agent Award given by the Virginia Council of Social Studies at the state level.

They presented their film in Farmville, actually in Jarman Hall, which tragically was the location where that community voted to close down its public schools in order to an attempt to prevent integration.

They remade that space for a day and uplifted the voices and the stories of the student plaintiffs that wrote a very different chapter of our history.

A more encouraging one and a more hopeful one and they actually received a standing ovation from Mrs. Joan Johns Cobbs who is a Moten student striker, a brown plaintiff and the younger sister of the late Barbara Johns.

So I wanted to recognize their work has received that level of attention.

This process has been very interesting.

This has been a civics lesson in and of itself.

So we endeavored to take this project a step forward, of course, with the historical marker.

We've been in contact with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, and we've sought guidance with former members of that state agency, primarily namely Randy Jones.

We considered a number of locations and that was very interesting.

Of course, there in that corner on that little grassy area, that green space on the front right of the federal courthouse, we thought would be the most ideal spot.

It faces that intersection between Elizabeth Street and Main Street and would be most visible to folks going north on Main Street on Route 11 there.

We thought historically, obviously very powerfully, that would be on the very grounds where these dissensions were rendered.

It's complicated by the fact that that is federal property, which we thought would be easier than it turned out to be.

Very briefly, that story began with our own city manager, Mr. Banks, who's been a great advocate and

also a source for guidance and advice and he encouraged us in his support to reach out to our local congressmen, the Honorable Ben Klein of the 6th District which we live and we also worked in collaboration with the Honorable Elizabeth Dillon as you can see a federal judge at

at that particular federal courthouse, as well as the Chief Judge, Michael Orbansky.

And Judge Dillon gave us a cautionary note that despite the power that a federal judge has in the courtroom, the General Services Administration does not always listen to those voices.

And we were initially denied as discouraging as that was.

I have to give it to Mr. Banks to encourage us to continue in our efforts

and in working with our local congressman and our national senator Tim Kaine, we received a favorable response from the General Services Administration recognizing the importance of that history to be recognized and commemorated on those very grounds and that's something that happened this past March 26th, less than a month ago.

Thank you.

Do we have any questions?

Well, I'll say one.

I went to the showing, of course, for a theater, and it was really moving.

It was, yeah, it was just so moving to see what you guys did.

And in particular, to see the people who were the subject of that film and the relationship that the students had, Priya, you and Elizabeth,

The relationship you had with those folks was really amazing to see.

It kind of defied your age, really.

It was inspiring.

I mean, you could see it and hear it in the voices of the folks who were telling their story.

Probably in a way they never thought would happen.

I think, you know, would be lost to history.

And so I just, it was, and just kind of the professionalism of the production is really phenomenal to see.

and also just to note, you know, kind of the other Harrisonburg connections.

So, as I mentioned to Priya, her father and uncle were neighbors and were in Spanish elementary school with me many, many years ago.

So it's even more gratifying to see someone who's connected with Harrisonburg, you know, who is the daughter of someone who grew up here

And you grew up in a time, certainly a time was probably challenging for them going through school as well.

And so I think it's just really inspiring.

And then of course we have another connection to the Paul family with Penny Paul Limason there.

I think that you guys have experienced

What I would hope that most young people your age would take advantage of and that would be taking the time to hear the story directly from the mouths of those who lived it and to read of history is one thing but to experience it and feel it through the live narration of someone whose heart and soul they have poured into a moment that has been forever life-changing for them

is another thing and so I know you were well guided by Mr. Dickinson because he's just wonderful in what he does but I am just so thankful that you will be able to tell your children and your grandchildren the importance of listening and slowing down and just taking a moment to ask questions because once people have passed on we always say oh I wish I would have asked

Oh, that person was living when I was 18.

And I didn't think their story was important.

Anyone else?

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

It's an opportunity for the younger generation to tell the stories of the elders.

And so I appreciate what you have done.

And I'm trying to get you home so you can go to bed and be at school in the morning.

So if there's no other discussion, then we are going to give

I need to give our blessing and I want to do that with a vote.

Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the installation of Virginia Department of Transportation's Highway Historical Marker Commemorating Federal Judge John Paul Jr.

as presented by, I guess, second.

Congratulations.

I would like to add that this began with a grant that was administered by Rockdown History that came partially from the city of Harrisonburg.

So that's where this story began.

Thank you.

for getting us back to the presentation.

I bring an item that we don't talk about quite as much as we do rezoning and special use permits.

This is an item that comes up from time to time.

This is a 15.2, 22.32 review.

And I'm going to quote some sections of our own code here.

So our city code section, release, paraphrase some of them, our city code section 1016 stipulates that, and here's where I quote, if a public facility subject

Subject to Section 1522232 of the Code of Virginia is not already shown on the comprehensive plan.

The Planning Commission shall determine whether the location, character, and extent of such public facility is in substantial accord with the comprehensive plan as provided by Section 1522232 of the Code of Virginia and the terms and conditions set forth therein and may be amended from time to time.

15.22232 is a portion of the Code of Virginia that has a couple of different subsections to it, but the section that is specific to our item here this evening talks about whether or not the plan, the plan is the comprehensive plan, and how it controls the general location or approximate location and character and extent of each feature shown on the plan.

It goes on to list multiple things that need to be shown in the plan and if they're not shown in the plan then a review needs to be conducted by the Planning Commission to determine whether or not the item, whether it's a building or in this case it is a public building, is being positioned in a location in the locality and that that location is in conformance with the Conference of Plan goals and objectives.

As briefly as possible, that's what a 15.2232 review is.

It says in that code section that the plan, it, the plan shall control the general or approximate location, character, and extent of each feature shown on the plan.

Public buildings or public structures, among many of the other things that are listed, are features that, unless are already shown on the plan, a quote here again, shall not be constructed, established, or authorized unless and until the general location or approximate location, character, and extent

Uh, thereof has been submitted approved by the commission.

That's the planning commission as substantial in accord with the comprehensive plan.

So what we did was is we brought this item to their attention.

We described the plan, which is to build a new fire station, which you all are very familiar with fire station number five at the property that's identified here at 450 Mount Clinton Pike.

Uh, and to determine whether or not the idea of constructing it there is in line with the comprehensive plan.

Just a few details here.

The site is zoned M one.

in the M1 zoning district, public uses is permitted by rights.

The fire station is classified as a public use, it is a city governmental entity, so therefore it is a use that's permitted by rights.

The property and all of the surrounding properties are zoned at M1.

Long term plans of this area is for it to be industrial, so the zoning is in line with the comprehensive plan.

and the general idea of having another fire station speaks specifically to the Comprehensive Plans section, specifically on page 1315 of the Comprehensive Plan Objective 15.2, which states to provide a well-prepared first response force that is capable of response and mitigation as an over

as in all hazards organization and by locating a new fire station at this location we believe it is increasing our response times and will serve the community well and is in line with the comprehensive plan.

We shared our determination with Planning Commission with the hopes that they would also find that it is in line with the comprehensive plan and they did so and they offered their findings to you.

It's just the site.

In-house engineers that we have on staff gave a general design here.

So this is the site itself with a, our plan here is to build an extension of a public street to have the fire station facility directly off of that new public street, which then has direct access to Mount Clinton Pike.

But in brief, we believe that it does conform with the comprehensive plan and believe that you all should, or the planning commission should have found it in and their findings that it is also in line with the comp plan.

which they did so, and I present this information to you this evening.

Thank you.

Thank you, Adam.

Mayor, I move that we accept the findings from Planning Commission regarding city code section 1016 and that the proposed fire station number five public facility at 450.

Second.

Any discussion?

Council Member Jones.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Aye.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Mayor Reed.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

My last presentation for you this evening.

A preliminary plat for Tuscan Village, Country Club Road, and Kieseltown Road.

And this is the preliminary subdivision plat for the rezoning development.

I should just say the development that required a rezoning.

just a few months ago in January of this year that you all reviewed that.

So the image on the screen demonstrates and reflects the new zoning of this property.

So it's split-zoned.

It's R8C and R5C.

The applicant and the representative are here this evening if you have any particular questions, but I will go into some of the details this evening.

So the request is to subdivide multiple acres of property here near the intersection of

Country Club Road and Kieseltown Road, and it would be dedicating Public Street right of way for two new public streets, creating one lot for the existing office that's addressed off of Mount Clinton Pike.

That's actually in the R3 zone that's adjacent to the property.

To have five multifamily lots created, which would contain a total of 54 units with nine apartment buildings,

57 town home lots would also be preliminarily subdivided to duplex lots, actually a duplex structure, two lots, and one single family detached home parcel, which is planned to contain the existing single family home that's out there today.

So that is a high level view of what the plot is presented for you here this evening.

And they are also requesting a few subdivision ordinance variances, which is what necessitates your review this evening.

Otherwise, these variances, if they had not been requesting variances, could have been approved by Planning Commission.

Long-term plans for this area.

You might recall that during the rezoning, they also amended the comprehensive plan land use guide and that is also reflected on the screen.

So the orange color there on the screen is the area that was changed from the light green.

So it went from low density mixed residential to medium density residential.

and then a portion of the property is designated for mixed use, really capturing that corridor of Country Club Road where we're promoting the mixture of residential and non-residential uses in that section of the city.

And then the aerial photograph here, it is predominantly undeveloped right now, just a few outbuildings and a single family dwelling, but multiple acres here to be developed.

Hopefully this image looks familiar.

This is a very similar image to what was presented earlier this year with regard to the rezoning show.

It's showing all of the lots that would be created, the units, types, townhomes, apartment buildings, the one duplex structure near Kiesel Town Road and the single-family home lot also near Kiesel Town Road, excuse me.

The variances that are being requested this evening, there are a few.

The first is to section 10242 subsection C. That's a variance you hear me talk about quite a bit.

That is the variance of the subdivision regulations that allows for townhome lots, really any lot, that does not have public street frontage to exist.

So many of the townhome lots that are in this plot will require that variance to be approved so that those lots do not have public street frontage.

The second is to section 10243 that is associated with a public general utility easement.

Our public general utility easement language in 10243 is really designed for a very traditional layout of lots, so just kind of picture in your mind a public street going down the middle and sort of squared off lots where the public general utility easement is sort of centered on property lines.

10 feet off of the public street.

They want to deviate from that to accommodate their layouts, which is often done in townhome communities, and we have no concern with them doing so.

They are providing the necessary easements to service the lots.

And then the final variances are two combination of 10241A, 10261A, and 10266.

This is all associated with the public street design standards.

And then also for

I'll get to the last one here in a minute.

So specifically they are requesting to deviate from vehicular travel lanes.

So the end result is what's shown on the screen.

This is a cross section view looking at the street widths.

So typically they would be required to have 15 foot wide lanes on a public street, but they're requesting to narrow down to 10 foot wide lanes and to also reduce the public street right away with

for one of the public streets, just a half a foot from 50 feet to 49 and a half feet, and then to the other public street from 50 feet down to 40 feet.

The idea of this has been known from the beginning.

It was something that staff had supported and was in suggestions to them as we worked through this in the early stages.

So these are variances that we are in favor of.

The very last variance is to the design and construction standards manual appendix F and specifically section 3331.

And this is the section of the DCSM that requires for public streets to have sidewalk on both sides of the street.

This is a variance you don't hear staff recommending in favor of very often very, very particular situations in which we would offer our favorable recommendation to deviate from that standard as we do want to continue to promote pedestrian facilities.

and

Bicyclists and Pedestrians.

And it's not that they're not putting sidewalk on both sides of the street throughout the entire development, but really just a small section.

That section being what this red line demonstrates here.

So it's along the side of the public street that does not have direct lots currently today subdivided off for residential use.

Part of our ability to offer the favorable recommendation comes with a condition which I'll have up on the screen here in a moment, but essentially

The condition is that if you all find this to be favorably accepted, that it also comes with the condition that they provide a raised crosswalk, which is in this area, generally speaking, where sidewalk is located on both sides of the street up until this point.

And then there was a raised crosswalk that then connects the two points.

does two things, connects the pedestrian facilities and also provides for an opportunity for traffic control, for reduced speeds as a speed hump in that area as well.

So that comes with that condition.

All in all, the subdivision, aside from the variances I talked about here this evening, does meet the requirements of the subdivision ordinance and we offered a fable recommendation to Planning Commission who did the same to you all and it comes with the condition that the developer shall install the race crosswalk or a similar type of infrastructure

Sometimes the raised crosswalk may become a little slightly different in design when we work through those.

So we wanted to allow some accommodation as we work with Coleman Engineering to work through the engineer comprehensive site plan design phase of the project.

So some flexibility there.

So basically that it comes with this condition and that the design has to be accepted by public works to make sure that ultimately it achieves the goals we're wanting it to.

I will try to answer any questions you might have and Mr. Coleman and Mr. Schripscher are here this evening to answer any questions as well.

So speed limit design typically comes with a lot of the

Rady Eye of the Streets.

Honestly, I don't want to steal Gil's thunder here.

He could probably speak this a little better than I could, but it has to do with the type of street that it is, whether it's a collector, a local street, widths of streets.

Anyone else?

Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the request from Daniel R. and Naomi R. Shink.

Harrisonburg Co-Housing LLC and Brenda G. Castello and Ted A. Morris to preliminarily subdivide three parcels addressed as 1816 and 18 Country Club Road and 640, 650, 660, 670, 680, isn't it?

I'll second that.

Any more discussion?

Council Member Jones?

I. Council Member Robinson.

I. Council Member Fleming.

I. Mayor Reed.

Attorney Brown.

Thank you Madam Mayor.

The next two items or items, at least one of them was addressed by council at its last meeting.

That is the request from PRR1 LLC to rezone some property on Port Road and then there was an associate special use permit.

At the last meeting there was a public hearing held, and there was a vote to approve the rezoning, I'm sorry, a motion to approve the rezoning, and that motion failed.

There were two votes in favor, three votes against that motion, and then we moved on, our council moved on, it did not address the special use permit.

So technically from Robert's rules of order standpoint, which have been adopted by ordinance, by council,

That is still an outstanding item.

The fact that three members voted against a motion to approve does not equate to a denial.

So it is sitting there.

It's subject to whatever action council would like to take.

And then if, by chance, there is a motion to approve that, and that motion is successful, then there is also the special use permit issue.

As you know, often, in fact, usually Mr. Fletcher will address related items like that together, and the discussion is together.

And so certainly if there are points of discussion or questions, let's see, Mr. Ray is here, and I believe representative of the developers here, if there are questions, you can discuss those two items together and then have two separate votes if necessary.

Chris, do I have to give a motion to rescind?

Yeah, if that's the will of council, but you could also make a motion tonight.

So we just move it again Yes, so madam mayor I move that we approve the request from PRR 1 LLC to rezone 1211 1225 1245 and 1261 Port Republic Road as presented previously

And I'd like to discuss this a little bit because... You've got to get a second hold on this.

Okay, second.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

Second.

Now, we can have a discussion.

Gotcha, thanks.

So, this is being revived in a revised and improved form because we have worked out the special use permit with the representatives of the developers to somewhat mitigate the density that seemed to have been a major concern of Council before.

and once we have approved the zoning we can go then to the special use permit and I'll discuss that in more detail then.

The gist of it is to decrease the maximum size of the building so that it adds more space between the buildings and lessens the density to some degree.

I'm confused because I thought you voted for it.

I voted for it and

given that there was some concern, we worked out of... Oh, that didn't have anything to do with my motion to resent, I guess.

No, we don't need to resent.

I call Attorney Brown because of R1.

The fact of the matter is the R1 isn't there.

And when I say it's not there, it's not on projected.

When we look at our projected plans of

We look at projects that are forecasted to be developed in the city of Harrisonburg.

There are tons and tons and tons of townhouses.

There are not any single family homes.

And so I voted no because even though I begged and pleaded and wanted to see more single family homes,

and this project offered that the amount of traffic being bottled on Port Republic Road when I see in our forecast all of them because from my purview we have to I have to believe that every developer that tells us that they're going to build is going to do that and so when I forecast and see 20 years from now I've got to imagine Port Republic Road

I think about what it looked like in 1990, in the 90s, and I won't tell everything, but in the 90s when I was here, the 2000s, the 2010s, and now we're in the 2020s.

When I see the growth of that and then I imagine everything that's being built, it's frightened me to see another development when we hadn't seen all the other ones that we forecasted to be built.

And so, I wanted to see this item brought back up.

I thought it would be a disservice

County for building single family homes on the edge of the city where they can take advantage of the services.

For me, it had nothing to do with the density because quite honestly, the density is already there without this project.

That's going to create the impact that I saw on the traffic.

And so I just wanted to clearly stay where I was coming from.

I wasn't part of any other conversations.

But this is where I was coming from when I voted no.

the greater good of the project far outweighs my traffic concerns and quite honestly there's hopefully and prayerfully will be less cars better modes of transportation and so on and so forth in 20 years but I don't think it'll change game day in Harrisonburg and I don't think it'll change move in day and I don't think it'll change the collegiate schedule that we're on in our area with

with the major university in the city and proper right on Port Republic Road and another university on the edge.

I think it's only going to grow and get more connected.

And so that was some of my fear and trepidation.

But we need the R1.

And we need the variety of housing.

And I applauded the developer two weeks ago about the diversity of his housing.

And I still will do that again.

And quite honestly,

I believe he's going to build it.

I've seen a lot of people, we've approved a lot of things, but a lot of shovels haven't hit the ground.

But I believe he's going to build it, and so I hope and pray that he's going to build it, and I think we need it.

And as further evidence of that, I asked staff to look up just to make sure I wasn't wrong.

and we don't have any R1 in the pipeline, I don't believe.

So from what we see and have approved, but we hope that hopefully Adam is seeing something that we haven't seen yet and hopefully some will come down the pipeline, but as of now we don't.

Well, when I voted, the thing that really stuck out to me is when Mayor Reed said, we don't know what do we have in the pipeline?

Do we have too much?

And that really struck a faring to me because I felt like, wait a minute, maybe that is the case.

I knew we had voted for a lot of stuff and I just thought, okay, I want to be absolutely sure we're doing what's best.

So when I found out that it was back on the agenda, I said I got to do my due diligence here.

So I made an appointment and I met with

Liz Webb, our housing coordinator, and we talked in specific about this development and the data, a lot of data that I saw that you had pulled up, Mr. Ray, and kudos to you for your blog.

Good work.

And we started looking at what's in the pipeline and then

Liz also looked up certificates of occupancy to better get a clearer picture of exactly what's being built.

And in 2223, where 112 units, 17 multifamily, 47 townhomes, 12 duplexes, and 36 single families attached,

But then I asked her, what about by right building?

How do we know what's happening for single family housing, which was what you bought up, Council Member Jones, for stuff that's just happening out there that doesn't have to be bought before council?

And so we discussed how, when it's a townhouse, you have to do the supplemental use permit.

and so that's the stuff that we see a lot of.

So I feel that there's a fear that because we see that, bam, right here, that we assume that there is kind of some crazy number of things going on where we're giving more emphasis to one that we're not giving to the other.

And then I also looked into what about mismatch housing?

What does that mean for this area?

a home whether it's detached single family or attached it's still a home for them so affordability for them or for an individual is really based on the individual and so I thought that's leading to home ownership doesn't really matter if it's attached or detached to the particular family they're buying a first home and that's a good thing for them but then does that open up perhaps some other rental property

that maybe we had some mismatched things going on with people who can't afford to purchase can then move into that.

So I thought about this whole moving chain and how one section ends up moving here to open up housing for another group.

And I thought about BTC and the Bluestone development and also about the Spangler property on Garber's Church Road, which

is in the pipeline, but we know that it's now for sale.

So there's nothing happening.

And we even looked at the numbers on a chart from your department, Adam, where it shows when's the last time someone has actually made a contact about a property that's in the pipeline or development that's in the pipeline.

So I kind of start weighing all of those things out and realize that

Maybe we don't have too much in the pipeline.

That this started to make more sense to me.

And I think that I've been so focused on affordability and, you know, not every development is going to have an affordability aspect to it, lie tech credits.

So that has been my focus.

I had to start thinking about affordability and housing for all in Harrisonburg, like who's living here and who are we allowing to live here by our votes.

And that's been something that Mayor Reed has bought up consistently.

We need one bedroom apartment for the young professionals.

I looked in the housing study, what do we need?

One bedrooms and then we don't have anything over four bedrooms.

So who are we allowing to live here?

So that affordability piece for everyone and access for everyone comes in different development opportunities.

And that's when I realized I've been looking at things wrong.

And I said, wait a minute, gotta make sure that we're

having equitable access or equitable allocations of resources, equitable opportunities for all across the board, not just for the marginalized populations of people.

And I think that my focus has been there so much that I forget that everyone needs that same access where they're at.

So I voted no and I wasn't really trying to be that deep about it It was just that I wanted to make sure that we were strategically looking at Where we are and what's in the pipeline and I explained that to you all You know it wasn't nothing against your development.

I was just I think we need to do that Because at some point What is too much right if we're just sitting here?

just approving everything that comes across and that's where I was coming from.

We got a transportation study that will be coming out and then at some point I feel like we might have to kind of pause a little bit until that comes through because then are we going to be approving things and then we don't even know what that transportation study is coming from.

So that's where I was coming from.

That's it.

But they prompted me to look further.

Call to question.

Well, I don't have much to say.

I supported this when it came through.

I think this represents housing that we aren't seeing being developed at a range that we need to provide for folks here.

We can look and see there's single family housing is just not available for folks and this can provide that.

Otherwise, as Councilman Joe says there,

and we're leaving and moving out.

All right.

So we got our first one.

Okay.

Council Member Jones.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Aye.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Council Member Fleming.

Aye.

Now you want to just go on straight to the special use permit.

Well, the special use permit is typically required for town homes, and that's where we have a tool we can use from council to impose conditions on the special use permit.

I talked about that with Adam to make sure that that works.

Pam, can you pull up the presentation?

Yes.

And so I got to thinking about, well, if we want to make this better in some way, what would that mean?

And when I looked at that map, I thought the townhome sections of it look awfully crowded, very large buildings, a kind of monolithic wall along the top row, and much more prominent throughout the development.

So I thought if we could limit the size of the buildings to some discussion and wound up with sort of six units maximum instead of the standard eight,

that could help open up some space.

He said they deliberately made some smaller townhouse buildings, like three or four units per building for breathing room.

And I love that for breathing room.

There's not a lot of breathing room here.

So

We worked out with the developer that they'd be willing to limit the size to six units maximum per townhouse building with some variation to four or five.

So, for example, when the duplex is transitioned to the townhomes, maybe there could be two, four, four plexes there.

So it makes a more gradual transition from the lower to the higher density.

Now, we don't need to micromanage your layout,

It gives you some creativity, you know, room for a creative layout that expands the sense more of a village feeling is what I would suggest you'd be going for.

So once we worked out that, I thought, well that might address some of the slightly lower density and at least improve the impression of a lower density and more breathing room, more space around the buildings.

So given that, I would like to propose that we approve the request from PRRL-1 LLC for a special use permit to allow townhomes that these addresses on Port Republic Road with the added condition of maximum size of the townhouse buildings of six units per building with some variation of lower

numbers.

Is that an adequate condition to add, Adam?

I wasn't quite sure.

No more than six.

Basically, yeah, that's, that's fun.

And that's, is that enough to say?

That is an allowable condition.

Sure.

Okay.

I guess I'm just real confused as to why that even is from the from the people that voted yes I don't understand why we're changing the man's project for no reason because it was okay for you two weeks ago I'm real confused so I'm not completely baffled actually because I was the one that voted I was the third vote I was the tie-breaking both I don't even understand why that's

Yeah, I'm just completely confused.

That's why I wanted to make it really clear as to why I voted no and why I'm saying yes.

That had absolutely nothing to do with it.

So I would hate for the developer to not be able to pencil out the project over breathing room when it was okay two weeks ago.

That's literally what we were talking about.

That was the discussion was

the fact that he made the mixture so that he could pencil out the project.

So to just cut into his profit for breathing room doesn't really make sense to me.

And you get a smaller amount of housing.

So I don't get it.

I was just going to say, I did see that Mr. Ray and developer representative nodding in agreement for what that's worth.

I want to make sure that they're comfortable with that condition.

Oh, yeah, nah, it doesn't matter who it is.

We voted yeah for it, and then in a change, I don't get it.

I don't know what you say y'all, I don't know who you're referring to, Dany?

Because I thought density was an issue before is what I was under the impression was that density was an issue so if we do have items in the pipeline my thinking is that if we had a fear of too many townhomes

and I'm looking at the numbers that Liz referred me to that this is what I'm thinking from what Laura just said would decrease it by from eight to six.

What does that mean?

Part, excuse me?

Part building.

That's right.

With these projects in the concept phase, before you get into the engineered site plan, you don't know how many units you're going to get

Just for a more village feel and not long rows of townhouses, we feel like we can make the project work with a minimal loss of density, but it certainly won't be any more than what was proffered.

Okay, and so, Laura and Chris Brown, you guys met too.

I was confused.

When she said the word we, I didn't know the we was.

It's an acceptable condition.

And if it decreases the number of townhomes, which was the fear initially, then I'm happy with it.

It won't increase them, it may decrease.

Okay.

May decrease.

Okay.

I'm still happy with it.

I don't need to go all the rest of the conversations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, so do we, we have the motion, we have a second, any more discussion?

Uh, Attorney Brent, when you confuse this hail, what do you do?

Can you abstain?

Yeah, I'll say yes, I'll say yes.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Council Member Fleming.

Aye.

No.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I bring this forward on behalf of the Director of Public Utilities.

He is requesting approval to write off 128 accounts for the water and sewer accounts she moved between

January 1st, 2022 and December 31st, 2022.

The total value of these accounts is $26,119.27 or .11% of the total billings for the period.

And as you all are aware, we do this every year.

We bring

to you the accounts that we don't think we can collect and we write those off.

Now, those are, there will be collection activities and by chance they are collected and they will be entered on the books.

The memorandum has some detail about the efforts that Chair Sherman and her staff at the public utilities office go through as far as letters, phone calls, and refer them to a collection agency.

I do want to make a point real quickly for Sherry and her staff.

The reason they have such a tremendously low ride-off is, well, there are two reasons.

One, people don't pay control of their water, and that's a pretty big incentive for people to pay.

But it's so low, not because Sherry and her staff are hard-nosed collection agents.

They spend a lot of time putting together people who are having financial difficulties and having trouble paying their bill with financial resources.

are governmental entities, sometimes they're private entities, but Sherry and her staff have a great system of resources that they can get people help when they need it, and they spend a lot of time doing that.

So again, that's one of the primary reasons that this ride-off amount is incredibly low.

residential business and I think non-profit but I can verify that for you.

Motion.

I'll make a motion to accept the approval of the right also 128 utility bills from January

Second.

Any more discussion?

Council Member Johns.

Vice Mayor Dent.

Aye.

Council Member Robinson.

Aye.

Council Member Fleming.

Aye.

Like I totally wish you spelled your name wrong or something like that.

I was hoping you would like to spell something wrong.

You remember the little fan that used to sit here?

The most bored of that.

Oh, I was going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

I'm going to say that.

Deanna A. would have all these books piled up.

It was something, it was a sight, man.

I appreciate it.

He was on it.

I appreciate it.

But he, I mean, he laid out.

Great.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Members of City Council, Anti-Bank City Manager, and I am presenting to you this evening the proposed FY25 budget.

Begin with, we like to clearly indicate how everything that we do here is tied to the City Council's vision, which you can see here on the screen.

We're very familiar with this.

Members of the public may be less so.

The budget process, as we all know, begins in December.

Budget instructions, Mr. Props to our finance director, Ms.

Snyder, our deputy city manager, and I put together a letter that provides some parameters and projections, financial projections of what we're envisioning for the upcoming year.

That letter goes to our department directors, which initiates them to then begin looking at their proposed budgets for their department for the next fiscal year.

At the same time in December, the Civic and Community Organization grant is opened up.

January 22nd represented the date at which departments needed to provide their proposed budgets to the city manager's office.

January 30th by City Code is the date at which any organization or entity seeking an allocation from the city needs to request that and thus the Civic and Community Organization grants deadline was January 30th.

February through March, Ms.

Snyder, Mr. Props and I are meeting independently with, or excuse me, meeting with each independent department director reviewing their proposed budgets, oftentimes line item by line item, to try and gain a better sense of the wishes and the needs and the competing priorities across the entire organization.

That brings us to the end of March where we are diligently working to try and create a balanced budget

and then this evening with the first presentation of that budget.

The focus of the proposed budget increases the real estate tax rate to accommodate the opening of Rocktown High School and the other city schools operational expenses.

It accommodates increases to compensation, a salary increase for city employees and the employer contribution to health insurance.

I've shared with City Council that over the past two months we've been employed through a robust analysis of the benefits package.

As you may all recall from our discussions about the classification and compensation study we implemented in this year's budget, I pledge to our city employees that we would also review city benefits in an essence of taking a look at the total rewards, salary and benefits.

And our HR department as well as a team of our executive leadership

have been doing that over the past several months through series of focus groups.

Individually, we have heard back from over 600 of our employees.

And one of the important takeaways was the crucial essence of health care coverage for our employees.

So this budget also proposes increasing the employer contribution to those costs from 75% to 78%, also thereby leaving some more money in the pockets of our employees.

It also continues the gradual adjustment to our utility rates, our water and sewer, per Mr. Collins' long-term financial model to ensure that that water and sewer infrastructure is solid for the decades to come.

It also begins to implement many of the priorities set forth in City Council's 2043 vision plan.

As we began working on this budget, several prominent challenges presented themselves.

There is less projected growth in upcoming FY25 and the city property tax and other local tax revenue compared to FY24, as you all may recall from Mr. Prop's presentation several weeks ago.

coming out of COVID, the assessments and value of property spiked.

In this year, or last year, we experienced a 13% increase in those revenues associated with assessments.

This year, we're looking at a much more modest 5% growth that's still solid growth, but it's much less revenue coming to the city.

The city schools requested a $6.6 million increase over this year's funding over FY24 adopted budget.

4.2 million of that 6.6 they shared is direct cost associated with opening Rocktown High School.

The state budget is not yet adopted.

This is principally important because that will probably mean additional funding coming to our city schools from Richmond.

City departments continue to experience increases in the costs of goods and services we purchase to provide the services to our residents.

And much of those same costs are being experienced by our partner agencies, Community Services Board, Rockingham County.

They're also seeing these increases as well as challenges with recruitment and retention of employees.

So they are also seeking increases to those allocations to meet those needs.

Some of the budget highlights on this slide I want to point out.

Several, of course, at the top is that increased requests by the city schools.

This budget does balance itself by providing the full 6.6 million being requested by the schools.

This, for a second year, we are proposing to set aside $5 million of one-time money to address the future renovation of the municipal building, which would expand needed office space.

Some of you may recall that City Hall was designed

to work in tandem with the renovated municipal building, and we are now 10 years beyond that because of additional priorities that came up in our community.

That renovation project has been stalled.

I would like to point out that as we move into that project, probably not completed until next year, FY26, we will have completed a massive renovation of a historic building without borrowing money and without raising taxes.

Another one I'd like to point out is the $1.5 million that is the cost associated with staffing and equipping fire station five, which we are excited at that next chapter.

And then finally at the bottom $300,000 there was discussion earlier in the agenda about the city's

Capital Improvement Plan.

A major part of that in our Parks and Recreation amenities is the replacement of restrooms at many of our parks.

Mr. Mancini, our Director of Parks and Recreation, has a plan to replace those restrooms over the course of the next five to six years.

The next one is Morrison Park.

This budget does include several new full-time positions.

I'd like to point out to you on this slide that the majority of those are public safety positions.

In fact, if you look under the category of the fire department, that is the staffing for station five.

Fifteen firefighters, two firefighter lieutenants, one firefighter captain to expand our ability to respond in times of crisis.

We had 42 organizations apply for funding from civic and community organization grants with a total request of over $800,000 City Council may recall a presentation from Mr. Luke Morgan who brought to you all some options after discussions over the previous several years

about funding categories and funding caps.

In your binders, there's a thumb drive.

You will find the recommendation on funding to those nonprofit organizations, those 42 organizations.

Funding caps were instituted, and those funding caps were dependent upon the size of the operational budget of those organizations, determining how much they could request.

So moving on to the budget overview,

As I stated, this budget does accommodate the increases for the schools through an 8-cent increase to the real estate tax rate.

We are currently at $0.96 per $100 of assessed value.

We are proposing to move that to $1.04 per $100 of assessed value.

Everything else on this slide remains the same except some minor additions to our water and sewer utilities and again that is part of the long-term financial model that has been presented to you to address the replacement of that important infrastructure in the coming decades.

This slide shows where we are measured again some of our comparables that we look to on a pretty routine basis.

I would point out the fact that in that 96 cents per hundred dollars of assessed value as well as the other taxes and fees that the city collects, Harrisonburg in 96 cents per hundred dollars of assessed value is accommodating the ongoing debt service for two high schools because we are still paying off Harrisonburg High School, Rocktown High School, two elementary schools, a middle school and an early learning center.

So at the 30,000 foot level, all funds, so the city's entire budget, on this slide, you'll see the general fund, which makes up the largest portion of the city's budget, at $173 million.

One other I'd like to point out on this slide is the general capital projects.

That's a pretty significant increase in the budget at $28 million, about halfway down the slide.

20 million of that are the smart scale projects.

that you've heard presentations on from Mr. Hartman and his staff.

So that money is coming in from the federal and state governments and hitting our books.

That brings the entire city's FY25 proposed budget to $404 million.

Now a closer look at the general fund, the largest fund within the city's budget,

two-thirds to three-quarters of the total revenue coming into the city.

So then a comparison of those revenues year over year, a couple of ones that I want to point out to you on this slide.

The general property taxes, FY24 to FY25, that increase obviously has the 8 cent proposed tax increase to the real estate property.

Fines and forfeitures, a large chunk of that

expansion from FY24 to FY25 are the speed cameras on East Market Street.

Use of money and property.

So as you have heard Mr. Props and I bring to you all, as we've had one time expenses crop up, we have proposed using interest earnings.

So under use of money and property, we are projecting continued interest earnings

based on the large number of ARPA dollars still sitting in the city's bank account accruing that interest.

And finally an increase in state revenue about two-thirds of the way down the slide from 11 million to 12.3 million that's additional state funding

coming to the city for the maintenance of our road infrastructure.

On the expenditure side, the pie chart, as you can see, and has been historical, the vast majority of our expenditure is actually a transfer to our school system for the education of our children.

That's the large green section transfers education 28.3%.

The next largest is public safety, which of course includes our fire and police departments.

In a comparison year over year on the expenditure side, the one thing I wanted to point out on this slide is that in general, these increases to the far right, those increases are the implementation of the classification and compensation study in the FY24 budget.

So the salary increases.

that we committed ourselves to to ensure that we're a competitive employer and continue to recruit and retain the best employees.

That's those costs working their way into the FY24 budget.

As we said, certainly one of the largest expenditures that the city commits to the revenue coming in is the expenditure going out to our schools.

So a little closer look at this.

Pointing out that the school's entire budget fund, the school fund, is going up from 114 million to 118 million.

And I know this is a little confusing considering I said that they requested a 6.6 million increase.

It's obviously any budget of this size is complex.

Federal funding was going away.