CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, April 17, 2017 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting - CALL TO ORDER Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL AWARDS/RECOGNITIONS Arbor Day Proclamation; Child Abuse Prevention Month ANNOUNCEMENTS CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC Public comment is provided for up to 15 speakers at the beginning of the meeting (limit 3 minutes per speaker.) Pre-registration is available for up to 10 of these spaces, and pre-registered speakers are announced by noon the day of the meeting. An unlimited number of spaces are available at the end of the meeting. 1. CONSENT AGENDA* (Items removed from consent agenda will be considered at the end of the regular agenda.) a. Minutes for April 3, 2017 b. APPROPRIATION: Supplemental Appropriation of FY 2017 Transit Grants -$97,528 (2nd of 2 readings) c. APPROPRIATION: Reimbursement from RWSA for Paving Costs to Ragged Mountain Roadway - $11,796.48 (1st of 2 readings) d. APPROPRIATION: Domestic Violence Services Coordinator Grant - $49,336 (1st of 2 readings) e. APPROPRIATION: Use of Charlottesville-Albemarle Convention & Visitors Bureau Fund Balance for Marketing - $100,000 (1st of 2 readings) f. RESOLUTION: Fund Transfer from CIP Reserve to Comprehensive Plan 2018 Account - $100,000 (1st of 1 reading) g. ORDINANCE: Historic Conservation District Ordinance Amendments (2nd of 2 readings) 2. RESOLUTION* Adoption of Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines (1st of 1 reading) – 10 min 3. RESOLUTION* Initiate Zoning Text Amendments for Legal Audit of the Zoning Ordinance (1st of 1 reading) 10 min 4. RESOLUTION* Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust Allocation of Funds for Nassau Street Development - $240,000 (1st of 1 reading) – 15 min 5. ORDINANCE* Increase in Salary Compensation for City Council Members (1st of 2 readings) – 10 min 6. RESOLUTION* Welcoming City Update – 10 min 7. REPORT Removal of Robert E. Lee Statue – 20 min 8. REPORT Ivy Creek Foundation – 15 min 9. REPORT Community Health Improvement Plan – 20 min 10. REPORT Murray/Van Yahres Memorial Grove in McIntire Park – 15 min 11. REPORT Integrated Pest Management Report (Written Report Only) 12. REPORT Quarterly Update by Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (Written Report Only) OTHER BUSINESS MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC *ACTION NEEDED GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT We welcome public comment; it is an important part of our meeting. Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular City Council meeting for Matters by the Public. Please follow these guidelines for public comment:  If you are here to speak for a Public Hearing, please wait to speak on the matter until the report for that item has been presented and the Public Hearing has been opened.  Each speaker has 3 minutes to speak. Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks.  Please do not interrupt speakers, whether or not you agree with them.  Please refrain from using obscenities.  If you cannot follow these guidelines, you will be escorted from City Council Chambers and not permitted to reenter. Persons with disabilities may request reasonable accommodations by contacting ada@charlottesville.org or (434)970-3182. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 3, 2017 Action Required: Supplemental Appropriation of Project Funding for Transit Division Staff Contact: John Jones, Transit Manager Ryan Davidson, Senior Budget & Management Analyst Presenter: John Jones, Transit Manager Title: Supplemental Appropriation of FY 2017 Transit Grants -$97,528 Background and Discussion: CAT is requesting that the City authorize a supplemental budget appropriation for FY17 federal capital grant funds in the amount of $97,528. This amount will partially fund the federal portion of two FY17 projects; (1) support vehicles, and (2) bus shelters. At the direction of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), CAT did not apply for FY17 federal capital assistance as there were enough unused funds remaining in previous grants to fund these projects in total. However, it was recently discovered that FTA’s new grants system is unable to process budget amendments, which is the required mechanism for converting unused grant funds into new projects. $97,528 of unused federal grant funds cannot be applied to these specific FY17 projects as expected, and will have to be used on other future projects. As a result the FTA and DRPT have instructed CAT to apply for the required funds as “new” federal capital assistance. CAT has completed the FY17 capital assistance grant. Please note that the overall Federal, State and Local match commitments and apportionments to FY17 capital projects have not changed and the required state and local matches have already been appropriated. The only change is that the 80% federal funding share of two projects are now coming from new federal capital funds instead of unused (leftover) federal capital funds. All project totals and match commitments remain the same as listed on the FY17 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and the Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). Community Engagement: Charlottesville Area Transit utilizes the Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Public Participation Plan to fulfill its public engagement requirements. The MPO’s PPP includes an opportunity for members of the public to request a public hearing on CAT’s Program of Projects. No public hearing was requested. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Priority Areas: Approval of this agenda item aligns directly with Council’s vision for Charlottesville as a Connected Community, where the City is part of a comprehensive, transportation system that enables citizens of all ages and incomes to easily navigate our community. Budget Impact: There is no budget impact if approved. Any required matching dollars for this grant will come from previously appropriated funding. If not approved, this would result in having to fully fund these projects with local dollars, thereby reducing the amount of projects that could be accomplished with the previously appropriated funding. Recommendation: Approve appropriation. Alternatives: City Council may choose not to appropriate funds for these Transit Division projects. Without an appropriation these two projects will not be fully funded. APPROPRIATION Transit Division Project Funds $97,528 WHEREAS, a new Federal Capital Grant of $97,528 has been awarded to Charlottesville Area Transit for FY17; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the following is hereby appropriated in the following manner, contingent upon receipt of the grant funds: Revenue (Capital) $97,528 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2804001000 G/L: 431110 Expenditures (Capital) $97,528 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2804001000 G/L: 541040 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $97,528 from the Federal Transit Administration. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Approve Appropriation of Reimbursement Presenter: Doug Ehman, Parks Division Manager Staff Contacts: Doug Ehman, Parks Division Manager Title: Appropriation of Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Reimbursement for Paving of The Ragged Mountain Access Road ($11,796.48) Background: The City of Charlottesville Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for the management and improvements to City recreational sites. The Department recently paved a gravel roadway at Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority’s Ragged Mountain Dam. This roadway provides access to the dam, serves as an impoundment access point, and is used by recreational users for parking. Paving the road will eliminate the high levels of maintenance needed and help ensure accessibility and user and staff safety. In addition, rain bars were installed to divert sheet flow into an existing stormwater collection system. Discussion: Since the roadway at the Ragged Mountain Dam serves additional purposes other than recreational use, the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority will reimburse the City 50% of the total projects costs for the paving project. An appropriation of these funds is necessary to replenish the Parks and Recreation Small Cap Lump Sum Account (FR-001/P-00482) for project related expenses. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: This request supports City Council’s “Smart, Citizen-Focused Government “vision. It contributes to Goal 4 of the Strategic Plan, to be a well-managed and successful organization, and objective 4.1, to align resources with the City’s strategic plan. Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: Funds have been expensed from the Parks and Recreation Small Cap Lump Sum Account (P-FR- 001/P-00482) and the reimbursement is intended to replenish the project budget for the County’s portion of those expenses. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of the reimbursement funds. Alternatives: If reimbursement funds are not appropriated, the Facilities Repair Small Cap Lump Sum Account (FR-001/P-00482) will reflect a deficient balance. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Reimbursement for the Paving of the Access Road at Ragged Mountain WHEREAS, Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority was billed by the City of Charlottesville in the amount of $11,796.48 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that $11,796.48 from Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority is to be appropriated in the following manner: Revenues - $11,796.48 Fund: 107 Funded Program: FR-001 (P-00482) G/L Account: 432030 Expenditures - $11,796.48 Fund: 107 Funded Program: FR-001 (P-00482) G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $11,796.48, from Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Approval and Appropriation Presenter: Areshini Pather, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office Staff Contacts: Areshini Pather, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office Maya Kumazawa, Budget and Management Analyst Title: Domestic Violence Services Coordinator Grant - $49,336 Background: The Charlottesville/Albemarle Domestic Violence Community Services Coordinator assists in the efficient delivery of services and access to the court process for the victims of domestic violence in both Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Examples include helping in the preparation of domestic violence cases for prosecution and assisting victims in obtaining protective orders. The Coordinator serves as a case manager on behalf of victims in relation to their interactions with community agencies that deliver needed services such as shelter, civil legal assistance, and counseling. No other person in local government fills this specific function on behalf of victims of domestic violence. Discussion: The City of Charlottesville has been awarded $38,336 from the Department of Criminal Justice Services for the Charlottesville/Albemarle Domestic Violence Community Services Coordinator in the City’s Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office. This grant requires that 25% of project funds must be provided by cash or an in-kind match. The City’s Commonwealth Attorney’s Office will provide a $5,000 cash match, and an in-kind match of $4,213. Albemarle County will provide a $6,000 cash match, and an in-kind match of $3,000. Graduate student and intern hours will provide an additional $1,062 in-kind match. The total anticipated cash and in-kind match of $19,275 is more than sufficient to meet the minimum requirement. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Approval of this agenda item aligns directly with Council’s vision for Charlottesville to be America’s Healthiest City and contributes to their priority to: Provide a comprehensive support system for children. The program also aligns with Strategic Plan Goal 2: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, Objective 2.4 Ensure families and individuals are safe and stable. The Domestic Violence Coordinator contributes to the health and safety of the community by connecting victims of domestic violence and their children to service providers for emergency shelter, medical and mental health services, housing resources, legal assistance and other services. Community Engagement: The Charlottesville/Albemarle Domestic Violence Services Coordinator is a direct service provider and is engaged daily with victims of domestic violence and stalking who access services through referrals from police, court services, social services and other allied agencies. The Coordinator works with over 300 individuals yearly and serves on several coordinating councils: the Albemarle/Charlottesville Domestic Violence Council, the Monticello Area Domestic Violence Fatality Review Team, and the Charlottesville/Albemarle Blue Print for Safety group. The Coordinator has actively been involved in the implementation of the Lethality Assessment Protocol (LAP) used by Charlottesville, Albemarle and University of Virginia Police Departments. Budgetary Impact: The funds will be expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. The terms of the award require a local match of $5,000 which will be provided by the current City appropriation from the Commonwealth Attorney’s General Fund Operating Budget. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: In the event that the grant is not funded or that the funds are not appropriated, this position will cease to exist, as there are no other funds to support it. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Domestic Violence Services Coordinator Grant $49,336 WHEREAS, The City of Charlottesville, through the Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, has received the Domestic Violence Services Coordinator Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services in the amount of $38,336 in Federal pass-thru funds, Albemarle County is to contribute an additional $6,000 in local cash match, and the City Commonwealth Attorney’s Office will contribute up to $5,000 cash match, as needed to meet salary and benefit expenses. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $49,336 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues $38,336 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 1414002000 G/L Account: 430120 $ 6,000 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 1414002000 G/L Account: 432030 $ 5,000 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 1414002000 G/L Account: 498010 Expenditures $49,336 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 1414002000 G/L Account: 519999 Transfer $ 5,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 1401001000 G/L Account: 561209 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $38,336 from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, and $6,000 from the County of Albemarle, Virginia. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Appropriation of Fund Balance Presenter: Brigitte Warner, CACVB Director of Sales & Marketing Staff Contacts: Kurt Burkhart, CACVB Executive Director Title: Request by the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau to Appropriate Fund Balance Account to the CACVB Operating Budget - $100,000 Background: In the Charlottesville-Albemarle Agreement for Operations of a Joint Convention and Visitors’ Bureau, Section 3, funding for the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau (CACVB) is derived through the collection of the Transient Occupancy Tax (T.O.T.). Visitors to our area pay this tax when staying overnight in a hotel. Thirty-percent (30%) of the first five- percent (5%) of T.O.T. revenue collected goes to fund the CACVB, while the remaining amount is retained by each respective locality. The CACVB also maintains a Fund Balance that is available to provide monies for additional initiatives. The CACVB Board of Directors unanimously adopted a resolution at its March 27, 2017 meeting approving additional marketing initiatives presented by CACVB staff that will require funding in excess of what the CACVB currently has available through the remainder of Fiscal Year 2017. That resolution requests the transfer of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) from its Fund Balance to its Operating Account to accomplish this initiative. This is in keeping with the CACVB Board’s intent to use its Fund Balance for when additional opportunities become available. Discussion: The CACVB Board of Directors has also expressed its receptiveness to accept recommendations from CACVB staff on marketing initiatives that could supplement the Fiscal Year 2017 media marketing plan. On March 27, 2017, CACVB staff presented to the CACVB Board a number of creative and exciting opportunities for review and discussion. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: An appropriation of funds from the CACVB Fund Balance to its Operating Account embraces several goals within the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan – Goal 1: An increase in the collection of T.O.T. revenue from lodging establishments within the City provides additional resources to the City that enhances its “financial health”; Goal 3 – Engaging travelers at the Charlottesville Albemarle Airport provides the CACVB the opportunity to “promote diverse cultural tourism” assets. The CACVB has partnerships with local arts & cultural organizations, and promotes the arts, festivals, and entertainment venues (Vision Statement: C’ville Arts & Culture); also, as an official Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Green Certified Sponsoring Organization & Regional Virginia Green Chapter, the CACVB embraces the “greenness” of the local environment and promotes healthy outdoor recreational opportunities that avail (Vision Statement: A Green City). Community Engagement: Several of the initiatives presented to the CACVB Board of Directors involve nationally known personalities coming to Charlottesville for specific events that would involve community participation and attendance. Events could include large venues such as The Paramount. Budgetary Impact: As the funds requested currently reside in the CACVB Fund Balance, there is no impact to the City’s General Fund. Recommendation: It is respectfully requested that City Council approve this request as outlined in the attached to appropriate $100,000 to the CACVB Fiscal Year 2017 Operating Account, Fund: 986, Cost Center: 8101001000. Alternatives: There are no alternatives to meet the immediacy of these initiatives to be funded. Without approval of this request, the CACVB believes its ability to fulfill its mission will be hampered. The mission of the CACVB is to market and promote this destination, and the transfer of existing funds from the Fund Balance account to the CACVB Operating Account is the only option in which to implement these marketing initiatives. Attachments: Resolution to Approve Drawdown of Funding From CACVB Fund Balance For the Purpose of New Marketing Initiatives; Appropriation RESOLUTION TO APPROVE DRAWDOWN OF FUNDING FROM CACVB FUND BALANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF NEW MARKETING INITIATIVES WHEREAS, it is the mission of the CACVB, “to enhance the economic prosperity of the City and County by promoting, selling and marketing the City of Charlottesville and County of Albemarle, as a destination, in pursuit of the meetings and tourism markets”; and WHEREAS, the current media buy plan prepared by the CACVB’s former agency-of- record has been implemented through FY17; and WHEREAS, new marketing initiatives that are were not included in the FY17 media buy plan have now been presented to the CACVB Board of Directors; and WHEREAS, the CACVB Board of Directors has always encouraged additional avenues and new marketing initiatives for expanding marketing efforts to reach out-of-area prospective visitors; and WHEREAS, the CACVB Board of Directors has expressed its desire to spend down each year a portion of its accrued fund balance; and WHEREAS, the estimated costs for these new marketing initiatives exceed the monies available in the current FY17 CACVB budget to bring each to fruition; WHEREAS, accessing the CACVB’s fund balance for the purpose of adding additional marketing/advertising exposure in key markets that have a high propensity for attracting would-be visitors to the greater Charlottesville area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention & Visitors Bureau Board of Directors approves funding of $100,000 to be drawn from the CACVB’s fund balance to be used for new marketing initiatives that could include but is not be limited to advertising on cable television, radio advertising and promotions, podcast productions, bus wraps, and a nationally known syndicated travel writer with programming on television and radio. Approved by the CACVB Board of Directors, March 28, 2017 APPROPRIATION CACVB use of Fund Balance $100,000 WHEREAS, the CACVB has a governmental fund balance of $452,955 as of the end of Fiscal Year 2016; WHEREAS, a portion of that fund balance will be used for various marketing expenses in excess of CACVB’s Fiscal Year 2017 operating budget; and WHEREAS, the CACVB Board has approved the use of an additional $100,000 of the remaining fund balance for this purpose: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $100,000 is hereby appropriated in the following manner according to the following budget: Expenditures - $100,000 $100,000 Fund: 986 CC: 8101001000 G/L Account: 599999 This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Adoption of Resolution Presenter: Alex Ikefuna, Director, NDS Missy Creasy, Assistant Director, NDS Staff Contacts: Missy Creasy, Assistant Director, NDS Title: Fund Transfer from CIP Reserve Account to Comprehensive Plan 2018 Account - $100,000 Background: On September 6, 2016 City Council approved a resolution with accompanying work plan outlining projects and timelines for the regulatory framework review and alignment with the 2018 Comprehensive Plan review. The Community Engagement Strategy component was given approval to move forward on March 20, 2017 by Council as well as approval for funding to implement. Discussion: The Planning Commission began development of the Community Engagement Strategy at a January 3, 2017 work session and continued their work for multiple sessions in January and February 2017 (summaries of “project activities” are attached). The Commission was tasked with creating the strategy and identifying resources needed to implement. This request provides for the formal transfer of funds to address the plan that was approved by City Council. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: As this project is associated with the Comprehensive Plan, all aspects of the Council Vision are addressed in one way or another. It also contributes to Goal 5 of the Strategic Plan, to foster strong connections, and objective 5.3, to promote community engagement. Community Engagement: At the March 20, 2017 City Council meeting, Council requested that staff reach out to the community for further guidance on how best to involve community groups. Staff has reached out and plans to have some of these discussions in advance of the kick off meetings and other meetings as the process progresses. Budgetary Impact: No additional funding needs to be appropriated to the CIP. The necessary funds will be transferred from CIP Contingency account funds that were previously appropriated by City Council. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this resolution. Alternatives: N/A Attachments: Proposed Resolution Resolution approved March 20, 2017. RESOLUTION Transfer from CIP Contingency Account to Comprehensive Plan 2018 Project $100,000 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the following is hereby transferred in the following manner: Transfer From $100,000 Fund: 426 WBS: CP-080 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer To $100,000 Fund: 426 WBS: P-00935 G/L Account: 599999 This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 3, 2017 Action Required: Approve ordinance (1st of 2 readings) Presenter: Mary Joy Scala. Preservation & Design Planner, Department of Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) Staff Contacts: Alex Ikefuna, Director, Department of Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) Title: ZT-17-01-01 Zoning Text Amendments to Historic Conservation District Ordinance Background: The Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review (BAR) is recommending certain revisions to the Historic Conservation District ordinance regulations to clarify what actions would require BAR review, to add a section allowing administrative review, and other adjustments based on the BAR’s experience with the ordinance that has been in place since 2009. City Council is being asked to approve the zoning text amendments, which were recommended unanimously by the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) on January 17, 2017, and unanimously by the Planning Commission (with minor edits) on March 14, 2017 (Attachment 1). Discussion: The Historic Conservation District ordinance was created as a second, less stringent type of local historic district to supplement the existing Architectural Design Control (ADC) District. A Historic Conservation District is intended to protect the character and scale of a historic neighborhood through required review of proposed demolitions and new construction, without imposing excessive requirements on the current residents who may want to remodel their homes. There are currently two Historic Conservation Districts in place: in the Martha Jefferson Neighborhood and along Rugby Road in Venable Neighborhood. A potential third district, Woolen Mills Village, went to public hearing on November 9, 2016, when the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval to Council. The City Council has not yet considered the designation, since the neighborhood association requested deferral until proposed ordinance and guidelines changes are adopted. Even before the currently proposed Woolen Mills District was initiated, the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) had been discussing needed changes to the ordinance language, and related changes to the Guidelines. The pending Woolen Mills designation has made more pressing the need for clarity in the ordinance. The Planning Commission initiated this zoning text amendment on January 10, 2017. The BAR held a work session on January 5, 2017, and made a recommendation to Council on January 17, 2017 regarding text amendments and design guidelines changes. The City Attorney’s office added non-substantive changes to the text amendments, then a public hearing was held on March 14, 2017. (Attachment 2 discusses the proposed ordinance changes by section number, including changes made by the City Attorney’s office, and changes recommended by the Planning Commission.) Following City Council’s approval of the text amendments, BAR-recommended changes to the design guidelines (not contained in the zoning ordinance, so therefore not a part of these amendments) will come to City Council for approval. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The project supports City Council’s Vision, specifically “Charlottesville Arts and Culture.” It contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan, “Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community,” specifically Objective 2.5, “Provide natural and historic resources stewardship;” and Objective 2.6 “Engage in robust and context-sensitive urban planning.” Community Engagement: Several members of the public spoke at the public hearing, including the president of Woolen Mills Neighborhood Association, and several residents of Woolen Mills neighborhood. Some comments were made specifically regarding the proposed Woolen Mills district designation, rather than the ordinance text amendments being considered. There were several comments regarding the decision to cease review of paint colors, and comments about larger issues, such as lack of coordination between historic districts and zoning ordinance allowances. Budgetary Impact: The proposed amendments have no budgetary impact. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Historic Conservation District zoning text amendments as submitted. Alternatives: City Council may approve the zoning text amendments as submitted, or may approve them with edits, or may deny the proposed changes. Potential consequences of not acting on the proposed amendments are that the Woolen Mills historic designation may not move forward, and the continued ambiguity of the ordinance may discourage the proposal of any future historic conservation districts. Attachments: 1. Proposed Historic Conservation District Ordinance Amendments – marked-up copy with language to be removed and language to be added 2. Discussion of the proposed ordinance amendments by section number For 2nd reading on April 17, 2017 (amended on 1st reading) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE II (OVERLAY DISTRICTS) OF CHAPTER 34 (ZONING) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, 1990, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO HISTORIC CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICTS. WHEREAS, City Council has determined that certain amendments to the text of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, as set forth within this ordinance (“Zoning Text Amendments”) are required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2017 a joint public hearing was held by the City’s Planning Commission and City Council for the Zoning Text Amendments, pursuant to public notice as required by Virginia Code Sec. 15.2-2204 and applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, following the joint public hearing, the Planning Commission, by motion duly adopted on March 14, 2017, voted to recommend that City Council should adopt the Zoning Text Amendments because they are required by the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that Sections 34-336, 34-340, 34-341, and 34-343 through 34-349 of Chapter 34, Article II, Division 5 of the Charlottesville City Code, 1990, as amended, are hereby amended and reordained, as follows: CHAPTER 34. ZONING ARTICLE II. OVERLAY DISTRICTS Division 5. Historic Conservation Overlay Districts Sec. 34-335. Purposes. The City of Charlottesville seeks, through establishment of its historic conservation overlay ("CV" or "conservation") districts, to protect community health and safety, and to promote the education, prosperity and general welfare of the public through the identification and conservation of buildings, structures, and areas with special historical, cultural, architectural and archaeological significance. To achieve these general purposes, the City of Charlottesville seeks to pursue the following specific purposes: (1) To identify and preserve buildings, structures and areas with special historical, cultural, architectural and archaeological significance, or with a collective character and quality, which serve as important visible reminders of the heritage of this city, the Commonwealth of Virginia, or this nation; (2) To assure that new structures, additions, and related elements will be in harmony with the scale and character of the existing buildings, structures and areas; (3) To document and promote an understanding of the social history of city neighborhoods, and to protect their cultural institutions. Sec. 34-336. Establishment of, and additions to or deletions from, conservation districts. (a) City council may, by ordinance, from time to time, designate properties and areas for inclusion or removal within a conservation district. Any such action shall be undertaken following the rules and procedures applicable to the adoption of amendments to the city's zoning ordinance and zoning map. (b) Prior to the adoption of any such ordinance, the board of architectural review ("BAR") shall define, taking into consideration information that may be provided by neighborhood residents, the architectural character-defining features of the proposed conservation district. Those features would be referenced and reinforced when applying the conservation district design guidelines. (c) Prior to the adoption of any such ordinance, the city council shall consider the recommendations of the planning commission and the BAR as to the proposed addition, removal or designation. The commission and BAR shall address the following criteria in making their recommendations: (1) The age of buildings and structures; (2) Whether the buildings, structures and areas are listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register or the National Register of Historic places, or are eligible to be listed on such registers; (3) Whether the buildings, structures or areas are of locally important historic, cultural, architectural or archaeological interest; (3) Whether the buildings, structures or areas are associated with an historic person or event or with a renowned significant architect or master craftsman, or have special public value because of notable features relating to the cultural or artistic heritage of the Charlottesville community; (4) Whether the buildings, structures or areas are part of a geographically definable area within which there exists a significant concentration or continuity of buildings or structures that are linked by past events or, aesthetically, by plan or physical development, or within which there exists a number of buildings or structures separated geographically but linked by association or history; and (6) Whether the buildings, structures or areas, when viewed together, possess a distinctive character and quality or historic significance. Sec. 34-337. Conservation districts. The following areas have been determined by city council to meet the criteria for designation as a conservation district, the limits of which are shown on the city's zoning map: (1) The Martha Jefferson Historic Conservation District; and (2) The Rugby Road Historic Conservation District. Within each district designated above, city council has determined that only certain buildings are considered "contributing structures." Those contributing structures are identified on a map of each district included within the city's conservation district design guidelines, copies of which are available within the department of neighborhood development services. Sec. 34-338. Relationship to individually protected properties. (a) Within a conservation district all individually protected properties listed in section 34-273 shall retain that designation, and shall be reviewed under the Code provisions applicable to those properties. (b) Before an area is designated as a historic conservation district, each of the structures that may qualify for designation as an individually protected property under section 34- 273 within that area shall be identified. Sec. 34-339. Contributing structures. Before an area is designated as a conservation district, each structure shall be determined to be either "contributing" or "non-contributing." Thereafter, at least once every fifteen (15) years, this determination shall be reconfirmed. Sec. 34-340. Actions requiring certificate of appropriateness; exemptions; penalties. (a) Within a conservation district no building, structure or addition shall be constructed, and no contributing structure should be demolished, razed, or moved, in whole or in part, unless and until an application for a certificate of appropriateness has been approved by the board of architectural review (BAR), or by city council on appeal. (a) A certificate of appropriateness (COA) must be approved in accordance with this division, prior to the commencement of construction, erection, alteration, or demolition of certain buildings, structures or improvements, as follows: (1) (b) All proposed new construction buildings and structures requires approval of a COA by the BAR if they require a building permit, and unless they are concealed by the principal structure from all abutting streets. (2) All new fences and walls that abut a street, or which are located in a side yard between a street and the front of the principal structure on a lot, require a COA. (c)(b) The following proposed additions to existing buildings or structures require approval of a COA: (1) Additions located on a corner lot. (2) (1) Additions located wholly or partially to the side or front of an existing building. the principal structure on a lot, or (2) Additions located on a lot that abuts a street on the side or rear, or (3) Additions that are equal to or greater than fifty (50) percent of the total gross floor area of the existing building., or (4) Additions located to the rear that exceed the height or width of the existing building or structure. (d)(c) The proposed demolition, razing or moving of any building or structure requires approval of a COA only when: (1) The building is a contributing structure; and, (2) The proposed demolition is located in whole or in part to the front or side of the contributing structure, or (3) The proposed demolition is located on a lot that abuts a street on the side or rear, or (3) (4) The proposed demolition is equal to or greater than thirty-three (33) percent of the total gross floor area of the existing building. However, the removal or replacement of windows or doors shall not constitute a demolition under this conservation district ordinance, provided the size of the opening is not altered. (d) The proposed painting of previously unpainted brick or other masonry requires a COA. (e) The following shall be exempt from the requirement of a COA certificate of appropriateness: (1) Interior features, details, alterations and improvements; (2) Ordinary maintenance or repair of exterior elements or features; (3) Painting or repainting a material other than unpainted brick or other masonry; (3) (4) Construction, reconstruction or other improvements to a building or structure made pursuant to an order of correction issued by the city's building code official, upon a determination by the city's building code official that a building or structure is an "unsafe structure," as that term is defined by the state's building code and regulations. In the event any such order or determination is issued with respect to a building or structure subject to BAR review pursuant to this division, the director of neighborhood development services shall notify the BAR of any alterations or repairs ordered by the building code official; and (4) (5) The demolition, razing or removing, in whole or in part, of any contributing structure allowed pursuant to an order of the city's building code official, upon a determination by the city's building code official that a building or structure is in such dangerous, hazardous or unsafe condition that it could reasonably be expected to cause death or serious injury before review under the provisions of this division. Upon such a determination, the building code official shall deliver a copy of the order to the director of neighborhood development services and to the chairperson of the BAR. (f) Failure to obtain a COA as required by this section for the demolition, razing or moving of any contributing structure shall be subject to the civil penalty described within section 34-86(b) (i.e., not to exceed twice the fair market value of the building or structure). Sec. 34-341. Criteria for approval. (a) In considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the conservation district design guidelines; and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the conservation district in which the property is located. (b) The BAR’s Rreview of the proposed new construction or addition to a building or structure shall be limited to factors specified in section 34-342. The BAR, or council on appeal, may require conditions of approval as are necessary or desirable to ensure that any new construction or addition would be compatible with the scale and character of the historic conservation district. Prior to attaching conditions to an approval, due consideration shall be given to the cost of compliance with the proposed conditions. The BAR’s review of the proposed demolition, razing or moving of any contributing structure shall be limited to the factors specified in section 34-343. (c) Review of the proposed demolition, razing or moving of any contributing structure shall be limited to the factors specified in section 34-343. The BAR, or city council on appeal, may require conditions of approval as are necessary or desirable to ensure that any new construction or addition would be compatible with the scale and character of the historic conservation district. Prior to attaching conditions to an approval, due consideration shall be given to the cost of compliance with the proposed conditions. Sec. 34-342. Standards for review of new construction and additions. The following features and factors shall be considered in determining the appropriateness of proposed new construction and additions to buildings or structures: (1) Whether the form, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable conservation district; (2) The harmony of the proposed changes in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances and windows; (3) The impact of the proposed change on the essential architectural form and integrity of the existing building; (4) The effect, with respect to architectural considerations, of the proposed change on the conservation district neighborhood; (5) Any applicable provisions of the city's conservation district design guidelines. Sec. 34-343. Standards for review of demolition, razing or moving of a contributing structure. The following factors shall be considered in determining whether or not to permit the demolition, razing or moving, in whole or in part, of a contributing structure: (1) The historic, architectural or cultural significance, if any, of the specific building or structure, including, without limitation: a. The age of the building or structure; b. Whether it has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register; c. Whether, and to what extent, the building or structure is associated with an historic person, architect or master craftsman, or with an historic event; d. Whether the building or structure, or any of its features, represent an infrequent or the first or last remaining example within the city of a particular architectural style or feature; e. The degree to which distinguishing characteristics, qualities, features or materials remain; (2) Whether, and to what extent, a contributing structure is linked, historically or aesthetically, to other buildings or structures within the conservation district, and whether the proposed demolition would affect adversely or positively the historic or aesthetic character of the district; (3) The overall condition and structural integrity of the building or structure, as indicated by studies prepared by a qualified professional engineer and provided by the applicant, or other information provided to the BAR; (4) Whether, and to what extent, the applicant proposes to preserve portions, features or materials that are significant to the property's historic, architectural or cultural value; and (5) Any applicable provisions of the city's conservation district design guidelines. Sec. 34-344. Validity of certificates of appropriateness. The same requirements and procedures specified in An approved certificate of appropriateness shall be and remain valid for the same time period(s) and under the same circumstances as set forth within section 34-280. shall apply. Sec. 34-345. Application procedures. (a) Applications shall be submitted to the director by a property owner, contract purchaser, or lessee of the property, or by the authorized agent of any such person. Each application shall be accompanied by the required application fee, as set forth within the most recent zoning fee schedule approved by city council. A landowner who proposes to initiate any action(s) referenced in sec. 34-340 shall contact the NDS Director and shall submit information sufficient to allow the director to render a preliminary determination as to whether a certificate of appropriateness is required, and if so, whether the COA must be reviewed by the BAR or may be reviewed administratively pursuant to sec. 34-346. (b) If the NDS Director determines that review and approval by the BAR is required, then a complete application shall be submitted to the director, including all of the following information: (1) A written description of proposed exterior changes; (2) A general sketch plan of the property including: the location of existing structures; property and setback lines; and any proposed new construction, additions or deletions, parking areas, and fences; (3) The total gross floor area of the existing building and of any proposed additions; (4) Elevation drawings depicting existing conditions and proposed exterior changes; (5) Photographs of the subject property in context of the buildings on contiguous properties; (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates (unless the building is the applicant's primary residence) for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer. Applications shall be submitted to the director by a landowner or authorized agent (such as a person authorized under a power of attorney, or a contract purchaser) or a lessee of the property, or lessee’s authorized agent. (b) The director shall require the applicant to submit sufficient information for the a preliminary review to make a determination whether further review and a certificate of appropriateness is required. If the director determines that review and approval by the BAR is required, then the applicant shall submit a complete application that includes the following information: (1) A written description of proposed exterior changes; (2) A general sketch plan of the property including: the location of existing structures; property and setback lines; and any proposed new construction, additions or deletions, parking areas, and fences; (3) The total gross floor area of the existing building and of any proposed additions; (4) Elevation drawings depicting existing conditions and proposed exterior changes; (5) Photographs of the subject property in context of the buildings on contiguous properties; (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates (unless the building is the applicant's primary residence) for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer. (c) Each application shall be accompanied by the required application fee, as set forth within the most recent zoning fee schedule approved by city council, except that no fee shall be required for any of the following: (1) an application subject to administrative review under sec. 34-346, (2) an application subject to BAR review (other than an application seeking a COA for new construction or demolition of a contributing structure, which shall be subject to the required application fee); and (3) an appeal of a BAR decision to city council pursuant to sec. 34-347(a), if the original application seeking approval of a COA was not subject to an application fee. Sec. 34-346. Administrative review (a) The director of neighborhood development services may review, and may approve or deny, or may refer to the full BAR for review and approval, the following types of applications for certificates of appropriateness: (1) Fences; (2) Applications that have previously been reviewed by the BAR, if the BAR has authorized final review by the director; (3) Applications for minor accessory buildings or additions, after consultation with the Chair of the BAR. (b) In reviewing an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the director of neighborhood development services shall be deemed the agent of the BAR and shall apply the same criteria and design guidelines that the BAR must use in its review process. (c) Within ten (10) working days after the date an application is submitted, the director of neighborhood development services shall take one of the following actions: approve, deny, or refer the COA to the BAR for action. (d) Upon approval of an application by the director of neighborhood development services, the director shall issue the approved certificate. If the application is denied, the director shall convey written notice of this decision to the applicant, which notice shall set forth the specific reasons for the denial, with reference to specific provisions of this ordinance or applicable design guidelines. The director shall inform the BAR of his administrative decisions at the next regular meeting following the date of such decisions. (e) Following a decision of the director of neighborhood development services upon an application, the applicant, or any other aggrieved party, may appeal that decision to the BAR within ten (10) working days from the date of the director’s decision. (f) In considering an appeal from a decision of the director of neighborhood development services, the BAR shall review the application as if the application had come before it in the first instance. In an appeal the BAR may consider any information or opinions relevant to the application, including, but not limited to, those provided by the director. Sec. 34-346 347. Approval or denial of applications by BAR. (a) The BAR shall afford each applicant, and any other interested party, an opportunity to be heard, prior to rendering its decision on any application. The director of neighborhood development services shall send written notice of the time, date, place and subject of a meeting to the applicant, or his agent, and to each property owner, or his agent, abutting or immediately across a street or road from the property that is the subject of the application, and to all properties having frontage along the same city street block. Notice sent by first class mail to the last known address of such owner or agent, as shown on the city's current real estate assessment books, postmarked not less than fourteen (14) days before the meeting, shall be deemed adequate. Additionally, a sign shall be posted at the property which is the subject of the application, at least ten (10) days prior to the BAR's meeting, and identifying the time, date, place and nature of the application which has been scheduled for a hearing. (b) Failure of the BAR to act on an application submitted under this division, and determined by the director to be subject to BAR review, within sixty (60) thirty (30) days after receipt thereof shall be deemed approval. (c) Upon BAR approval of an application, the director shall issue the approved certificate. Upon denial of an application (approval of an application with conditions over the objections of the applicant shall be deemed a denial), the applicant shall be provided written notice of the decision, including a statement of the reasons for the denial or for the conditions to which the applicant objects. Sec. 34-347 34-348. Appeals. (a) A decision of the BAR may be appealed to city council by the applicant, or any other aggrieved person, by filing a written notice of appeal within ten (10) days from the date of decision. An appellant shall set forth, in writing, the grounds for an appeal, including the procedure(s) or standard(s) alleged to have been violated or misapplied by the BAR, and/or any additional information, factors or opinions he or she deems relevant to the application. The applicant, or his agent, and any aggrieved person, shall be given an opportunity to be heard on the appeal. (b) In any appeal the city council shall consult with the BAR and consider the written appeal, the criteria set forth within section 34-276 or 34-278, as applicable, and any other information, factors, or opinions it deems relevant to the application. (c) A final decision of the city council may be appealed to the Charlottesville Circuit Court by the owner of the land for which the certificate of appropriateness is sought, subject property to the Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville, by filing with the court a petition setting forth the alleged illegality of the action taken. Such petition must be filed with the Circuit Court within thirty (30) days after council's final decision. The filing of the petition shall stay the council's decision pending the outcome of the appeal; except that the filing of the petition shall not stay a decision of city council denying permission to demolish a building or structure. (d) Any appeal which may be taken to the Circuit Court from a decision of the city council to deny a permit for the demolition of a building or structure shall not affect the right of the property owner to make the bona fide offer to sell as described in section 34-286(d) and section 34-286(e). Sec. 34-348 34-349. Responsibilities of BAR. With respect to conservation districts, the city's BAR shall oversee the administration of this division. In addition to any other responsibilities assigned to the BAR within this division, or in section 34-288, the BAR shall: (1) Recommend surveys of potential conservation districts, and recommend properties for inclusion in, or deletion from, conservation districts. (2) Develop and recommend to the city council for council's approval design guidelines for the city's conservation districts ("conservation district design guidelines"), consistent with the purposes and standards set forth within this division. Conservation district design guidelines shall have the status of interpretive regulations. The BAR shall undertake a comprehensive review and shall update the conservation district guidelines at least once every five (5) years. Sec. 34-349 34-350. Reserved. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Approve Resolution to Update Historic Conservation (HCV) District Design Guidelines Presenter: Mary Joy Scala, Preservation & Design Planner, Department of Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) Staff Contacts: Alex Ikefuna, Director NDS Title: Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines - 2017 Update Background: The Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review (BAR) is recommending certain revisions to the Historic Conservation (HCV) District Design Guidelines. The HCV District ordinance was created on March 16, 2009 to allow a second, less stringent type of local historic district to supplement the Architectural Design Control (ADC) District. The original HCV District Design Guidelines were adopted at the same time as the ordinance. The guidelines are required to be reviewed by the BAR and updated every five years. The recommended updates would keep the guidelines consistent with the HCV District ordinance, which Council recently amended. Discussion: The process to amend the Historic Conservation District Guidelines is a recommendation from the BAR, followed by City Council review and approval. The BAR discussed the guidelines changes at a work session on January 5, 2017, and unanimously recommended the proposed changes to City Council on January 17, 2017. Most of the BAR’s recommended changes are clarifications. The only substantive change to the guidelines is that painting of unpainted brick is discouraged. Following the public hearing on March 14, 2017 for the ordinance amendments, the proposed guidelines language was adjusted to be consistent with the planning commission recommendation that unpainted masonry (in addition to brick) should not be painted. In addition to specific changes to the guidelines for New Construction and Additions (note there are no proposed changes to guidelines for Demolitions), the BAR added a new “Introduction” section, and a section called “Adopted Historic Conservation Districts” that combines in one location the district map and other information for each adopted district. (Attachment 1.) Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The project supports City Council’s Vision, specifically “Charlottesville Arts and Culture.” It contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan, “Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community,” specifically Objective 2.5, “Provide natural and historic resources stewardship;” and Objective 2.6 “Engage in robust and context-sensitive urban planning.” Community Engagement: Public notice was provided for the BAR work session on January 5, 2017, and regular meeting on January 17, 2017, when the proposed guidelines changes were discussed. There has been little public comment. A resident of the Woolen Mills District, who attended the work session, urged the BAR to remember the original intent of the Historic Conservation Districts, and not make the ordinance more stringent. Budgetary Impact: The proposed updates have no budgetary impact. Recommendation: Staff recommends that City Council should approve the 2017 updates to the Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines as submitted. Alternatives: City Council may approve the updates to the Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines as submitted, or may approve them with edits, or may deny the proposed changes. Potential consequences of not acting on the proposed updates are that the Design Guidelines would be inconsistent with the Historic Conservation District ordinance, and the ordinance would be difficult to administer. Attachments: 1. Proposed Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines – marked-up copy with language to be removed and language to be added Attachment 1. Charlottesville Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines Proposed revisions for City Council approval INTRODUCTION The “Historic Conservation District” designation is intended to protect the character and scale of the more modest historic Charlottesville neighborhoods that are facing tear-downs and increased development, without imposing excessive requirements on the current residents who may want to remodel their homes. Therefore, the ordinance regulations and the following guidelines focus on preventing demolitions of historic buildings, and preventing construction of inappropriate new buildings and additions. Modern and sustainable, energy-efficient construction is encouraged when done thoughtfully in concert with older structures. A Historic Conservation District is different from an Architectural Design Control (ADC) District in three main respects: (1) Unlike in an ADC District, where review is required of all exterior changes to existing buildings, in a Historic Conservation District no approval is required from the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) for certain smaller structures, additions, and demolitions that are not in view of a public street; (2) The Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines have been greatly condensed and simplified; and (3) The residents of a Historic Conservation District help identify architectural character-defining features (included in these Design Guidelines) to be referenced and reinforced when applying the Design Guidelines. A map of each designated Historic Conservation District is included in these Design Guidelines, with each structure determined to be either contributing or non-contributing. A non-contributing building or structure does not require BAR approval prior to demolition. Otherwise, both contributing and non-contributing buildings and structures follow the same design review process. The following Design Guidelines offer general recommendations on the design for all new buildings and additions in Charlottesville’s Historic Conservation Districts. The guidelines are flexible enough to both respect the historic past and to embrace the future. The intent of these guidelines is not to be overly specific or to dictate certain designs to owners and designers. The intent is also not to encourage copying or mimicking particular historic styles. These guidelines are intended to provide a general design framework for new construction. Designers can take cues from the traditional architecture of the area and have the freedom to design appropriate new architecture for Charlottesville’s historic districts. The Design Guidelines are based on the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, which are intended to assist the long-term preservation of a property’s significance through the preservation of historic materials and features. Charlottesville Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ADDITIONS Building Location – setback and orientation spacing 1. Align a new building close to the average building setback line on the same street, if established, or consistent with the surrounding area. 2. Maintain existing consistency in average spacing between buildings on the same street. 3. The front elevation should be respectful of the neighborhood characteristics and features of adjacent buildings. Building Scale – height and massing 1. Keep the footprint, and massing of new buildings consistent with the neighborhood characteristics and compatible with the character of buildings on the same street. 2. Keep the height and width of new buildings within the prevailing average height and width. Exceptions up to 200% of the prevailing height and width in the surrounding neighborhood may be approved when contextually appropriate. 3. An addition needs to be perceived as an addition and therefore should not visually overpower the existing building in scale and design. 4. An accessory building should appear secondary to the main building in scale and design. 4.5. Multi-lot Larger buildings (commercial or multi-family) otherwise permitted by zoning should be designed and articulated to be compatible with the scale of the majority of adjacent buildings on the same street or block. Building Form – roofs and porches 1. Roof forms should be respectful of reference contributing buildings on the same street or surrounding area. Other roof forms may be approved when contextually appropriate. 2. If many of the contributing buildings on the same street have porches, then the design of a new residence should include including a porch or similar form of similar width and depth. in the design of a new residence is strongly recommended. Building Openings – orientation, doors and windows 1. A single entrance door (or both doors, if a two-family dwelling, or main entrance if of a multifamily dwelling) facing the street is recommended. 2. Window and door patterns and the ratio of solids (wall area) to voids (window and door area) of new buildings should be compatible with contributing buildings in the surrounding area. 3. Windows should be simple shapes compatible with those on contributing buildings, and should be oriented vertically (taller than they are wide). which are generally vertically oriented in residential areas. Building Materials and Textures 1. The selection of materials and textures for a new building should relate architecturally to the district, Charlottesville locality, and should be compatible with and complementary to neighboring buildings. 2. Sustainable Long-lasting, durable and natural materials are preferred, including brick, wood, stucco, and cementitious siding and trim, and standing seam metal roofs. Clear glass windows (VLT of 70% or more) are preferred. Building Paint 1. The selection and use of colors for a new building should be coordinated and compatible with adjacent buildings, not intrusive. 2. More lively color schemes may be appropriate in certain sub-areas dependent on the context of the sub-areas and the design of the building. 1. Painting unpainted brick or other masonry is discouraged because it is irreversible and may cause moisture problems. Site 1. Fences or walls in front yards that abut a street (including or fences located in the a side yards between the a street and the front of the house principal structure on a lot) should not exceed three and one-half feet in height. DEMOLITIONS The following factors shall be considered in determining whether or not to permit the demolition, partial demolition, encapsulation, or moving of a contributing structure: 1. The age of the structure or building; 2. Whether it has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or the Virginia Landmarks Register; 3. Whether, and to what extent, the building or structure is associated with an historic person, architect or master craftsman, or with an historic event; 4. Whether the building or structure, or any of its features, represent an infrequent or the first or last remaining example within the city of a particular architectural style or feature; 5. The degree to which distinguishing characteristics, qualities, features or materials remain; 6. Whether, and to what extent, a contributing structure is linked, historically or aesthetically, to other buildings or structures within the conservation district; and whether the proposed demolition would affect adversely or positively the character of the district. 7. The overall condition and structural integrity of the building or structure, as indicated by a study prepared by a qualified professional engineer and provided by the applicant (may be waived if primary residence of applicant); or other information provided to the board. 8. Whether, and to what extent, the applicant proposes to preserve portions, features or materials that are significant to the property’s historic, architectural or cultural value. 9. The public necessity of the proposed demolition and the public purpose or interest in buildings to be protected. Charlottesville Historic Conservation District Design Guidelines ADOPTED HISTORIC CONSERVATION DISTRICTS For each adopted Historic Conservation District, this section includes:  A list of defined architectural character-defining features (See Sec.34-336(b);  A list of identified properties that may potentially qualify as Individually Protected Properties (see Sec. 34-338(b); and  A map that outlines the boundaries of the district, and identifies which structures are contributing or non-contributing (see Sec. 34-337). 1. MARTHA JEFFERSON Historic Conservation District Adopted October 18, 2010 Architectural character-defining features: 1. Encourage one-story front porches; 2. Encourage garages to be located in the rear yards; 3. The levels of a building’s stories should be consistent with those on surrounding structures with respect to the natural grade [for example, a first floor should not be raised so that it is higher than most surrounding first floors]; 4. Do not exclude well-designed, new contemporary architecture [there may be a misconception that only historic-looking new buildings are permitted]; 5. Encourage standing seam metal roofs; 6. Maintain and encourage tree canopy [Maintain the existing tree canopy and encourage new large shade trees]; 7. The following Historic Conservation Overlay District Design Guidelines are especially pertinent: maintain neighborhood massing and form; encourage the use of sustainable materials; and limit the height of fences in front yards to 3 ½ feet in height. 8. Regarding the future development of the hospital properties, the neighborhood’s focus has been: not to tear down the old houses; to encourage low density residential development north of Taylor Walk (with the suggestion that Taylor Street be reinstated); and to expect the High Street area to develop as a sensitively designed, high-quality, mixed use development; 9. Encourage good stewardship of Maplewood Cemetery. Potential Individually Protected Properties: No additional structures that may potentially qualify for designation as Individually Protected Properties (IPP) IPP structures have been identified. 2. RUGBY ROAD Historic Conservation District Adopted September 2, 2014 Architectural character-defining features: 1.5, 2.0, or 2.5 story dwellings with stucco, red brick or painted brick, or wood siding, Front porticos or porches, Slate shingle roofs, gable or hipped roof forms, roof dormers, Contributing outbuildings, and deep-set, planted front yards mostly unpaved with no visible garages. Potential Individually Protected Properties: Structures that may potentially qualify for designation as Individually Protected Properties (IPP) are identified as: 712, 924, 928, 929, 933, 936, and 1007 Rugby Road. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Adoption of a Resolution Initiating Planning Commission and Public Review of Legal Audit of the Zoning Ordinance (zoning text amendments) Presenter: Craig Brown, City Attorney Staff Contacts: Lisa Robertson, Chief Deputy City Attorney Title: Recodification and Audit of Chapter 34 of the City Code (Zoning) Background: Periodically, the City Attorney’s office conducts a legal review of all of the various chapters of the City Code, and recommends changes as necessary to conform code provisions to applicable requirements of state enabling legislation, to applicable state and federal law (as reflected in court decisions), and to reorganize and edit text so that provisions will be clear and user-friendly. This review process, referred to as a “recodification” is currently underway within the city attorney’s office. (FYI, the 1976 City Code was re-codified in 1990 (after 14 years). The 1990 City Code—the edition currently in effect—is now 27 years old; however, the Zoning Ordinance was previously comprehensively reviewed and updated in 2003 (13 years ago)). Recodification of the zoning ordinance, including substantive changes, is a unique process, because zoning text amendments require a special public hearing process. The City Attorney’s office has completed its audit of Chapter 34 of the City Code (Zoning) and now requests City Council to consider referring the recommended changes to the Planning Commission to (i) set a date for and to conduct a joint public hearing, and (ii) to review the Legal Audit and make its recommendations to City Council on the document. Discussion: The portions of Chapter 34 which are proposed by the City Attorney’s Office to be edited, deleted or added are set forth within a large edited manuscript which has been posted on the city’s website since the last week of February 2017, at the NDS page (under “What’s Hot”): http://www.charlottesville.org/departments-and-services/departments-h-z/neighborhood- development-services/zoning/legal-review-2017 Also posted at that location are (i) a document that explains how the city attorney’s office approached its review of Chapter 34 (“Approaches to Legal Updates”), and (ii) a “Questions and Corrections” document that responds to a number of comments that the City Attorney’s Office has been receiving, on an ongoing basis, since the manuscript was posted back in February. The Questions and Corrections document will continue to be updated throughout the review process (not more than weekly). We encourage everyone to review the Q&C document. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: Keeping the City’s ordinances updated is a very important strategy in implementing Council’s Vision, Strategic Plan, and (specific to the zoning context) the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Community Engagement: By resolution adopted in September 2016, City Council publicly directed that the legal updates should be brought forward as the first phase of a larger review of the City’s zoning ordinance, and requested that the Legal Audit be completed by March 2017. The Legal Audit was delivered to the Planning Commission at its workshop meeting at the end of February 2017, and was posted on the NDS web page within 48 hours. To date, the City Attorney’s Office has received some helpful input from the legal liaison of CADRE (Charlottesville Area Developers Roundtable), and from the legal team at the Southern Environmental Law Center. Planning Commission and City Council were previously provided the link to the NDS web page so that the documents could be shared with any interested parties. At City Council’s first meeting in March 2017, NDS staff and the Planning Commission presented the first Quarterly Report on the progress of the Comprehensive Plan 5-year review/ Code Audit process, and staff noted during its public presentation that the Legal Audit was available on the website for public review and comment. Initiation of a public hearing process for the Legal Audit will allow additional public comment and refinement of wording over the course of the next 100 days, and will allow the updates to be brought forward to City Council for final action consistent with the timeline established with Council’s September 2016 Resolution. Following any updates that may be enacted by City Council at the conclusion of this process, any and all provisions of the zoning ordinance can be re-visited, and further refined, over the course of the Planning Commission’s ongoing project for the 5-year review of the Comprehensive Plan, and subsequent zoning ordinance updates as may be necessary or desirable for implementation of the updated Comprehensive Plan. Budgetary Impact: None Recommendation: Approval of the attached Resolution initiating zoning text amendments Alternatives: City Council is not required to consider updating the zoning ordinance, but has previously requested that the Legal Audit be completed and that the City Attorney’s recommended changes should be brought forward through a public hearing process on the timeline in which they have been submitted. Council’s request coincides with the City Attorney’s desire to update Chapter 34 as part of the larger re-codification project that is underway. Council may change the timeline set forth within the September 2016 Resolution for completion of the Legal Audit, if it desires to do so. Attachment: Proposed Resolution RESOLUTION INITIATING ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO AMEND AND RE-CODIFY CHAPTER 34 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE (1990) (ZONING) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville that City Council hereby finds and determines that certain amendments of Chapter 34 (Zoning) of the City Code are required by the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice, and therefore, City Council hereby initiates such zoning text amendments, as set forth within the Legal Audit which has been presented by the City Attorney’s Office, and City Council hereby refers the proposed Legal Audit to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations, and for a joint public hearing with City Council. The Commission is requested to report its recommendations back to City Council within 100 days after its first regular meeting following the date of this resolution, in accordance with Va. Code Sec. 15.2- 2285. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Approval of Resolution Staff Contacts: Stacy Pethia, Housing Program Coordinator Presenter: Stacy Pethia, Housing Program Coordinator Title: Allocation of Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust site acquisition and development -- $240,000 Background: The Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust (TJCLT) is seeking assistance through the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for the acquisition and development of four (4) parcels located on Nassau Street. The parcels, once developed, will provide affordable homeownership opportunities for lower-income families (with household incomes less than 80% of area median income) within the City of Charlottesville. A copy of the TJCLT’s proposal is attached. Discussion: The TJCLT makes homeownership affordable for low-income homebuyers by relieving the cost of land from the purchase price of a home. Under the community land trust model, the TJCLT maintains ownership of the land conveying use of the land and associated structures to qualifying homeowners via a 90-year ground lease. The land trust model allows low-income homeowners to enjoy the benefits of homeownership, including increasing household wealth, while maintaining the affordability of the property for future homebuyers. The TJCLT is actively working to increase the number of land trust properties located within the City of Charlottesville. To that end, the TJCLT is requesting CAHF assistance, in the amount of $240,000, for the purchase and development of four vacant parcels (Section 3 Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8) located on Nassau Street. A brief overview of their proposed project can be found below: Project Description: The TJCLT will purchase four undeveloped parcels on Nassau Street, and partner with Habitat for Humanity of Greater Charlottesville (Habitat) during the development phase. Habitat will construct four (4) single family homes affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of area median income (AMI). Project Budget: Nassau Street, Section 3 Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 Lot acquisition $120,000 Construction of single family homes $120,000 Total $240,000 Identification of Homebuyers: Habitat will identify four (4) homebuyers through their program. Habitat will ensure household incomes meet the affordability requirement of less than 80% AMI. Current City of Charlottesville residents will be given priority during the selection process. Maintaining Affordability of Units: The financing model used by Habitat--direct mortgages, appreciation sharing, right of first refusal and deed restrictions--provides the affordability mechanisms necessary to qualify Habitat housing units as “supported affordable housing” per City policy. The community land trust model further enhances the long-term affordability of housing units 1) by removing the cost of the land from the home purchase price, and 2) by retaining ownership of the land via a 90-year ground lease. Accordingly, the proposed project will help the City toward its goal of incorporating 15% supported affordable housing throughout the City. Project Timeline: The TJCLT and Habitat anticipate completing the construction of all four (4) homes within twelve (12) months from the date CAHF funding is received. Organizational Capacity: The TJCLT is working with Leadership Charlottesville Class of 2017 and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, to develop a scope of work, budget and timeline for the hiring of a part-time Executive Director. Primary responsibilities of the position include: strategic planning for the organization, fundraising, and managing the TJCLT’s land acquisition and development activities. The TJCLT anticipates funding the position with a recently awarded $100,000 matching grant. Expected start date for the Executive Director is July 2017. Until that time, the TJPDC will provide management and leadership support to the organization. Currently, the TJCLT has six (6) houses in its portfolio, providing safe, affordable housing for 24 individuals. Providing CAHF support to the TJCLT will allow the organization to assist an additional four (4) low-income families achieve the dream of homeownership, as well as meeting several important affordable housing outcomes: 1. Creating a sustainable and permanent housing resource in the City, which will provide affordable homeowner opportunities for multiple families over time; 2. Permanently adding to the stock of affordable single-family homes for purchase in the City of Charlottesville. Additionally, such support aligns with the Housing Advisory Committee recommendations from the Charlottesville Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis presented to City Council on November 21, 2016. Community Engagement: None. Alignment with City Council Vision and Strategic Plan: This proposal aligns directly with the City Council Vision for Charlottesville to provide quality housing opportunities for all. The proposed project also supports the Strategic Plan’s Goal 1.3: Increase affordable housing options. Additionally, this proposal supports a number of objectives from the Comprehensive Plan, specifically goals 2.1 (continue to work towards the City’s goal of 15% supported affordable units) and 4.3 (promote the long-term affordability of units). Budgetary Impact: No additional funding is required, and the proposed project will require $240,000 from previously appropriated CAHF funds. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. The proposed project will increase affordable housing in the City, as well as create an affordable homeownership opportunity for low/moderate income families well in to the future. Alternatives: Council could elect not to fund this request and/or to reduce funding below the recommended amount; however, this would impact the City’s ability to invest in, and increase, the supply of supported affordable housing units. Attachments: TJCLT proposal. Resolution RESOLUTION Allocation of $240,000 from the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for the Purchase and Development of Properties on Nassau Street by the Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $240,000 is hereby allocated from previously appropriated funds in the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund to the Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust for costs related to land acquisition of land and construction of four (4) homes on Nassau Street for an affordable homeownership project. Fund: 426 Project: CP-084 G/L Account: 530670 Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust $240,000 Aulhentisign ID: 11B475B2-AEC4-484A-4!404..fFEA38898D3F Tuesday, March 28, 2017 CAHF Funding Proposal, Nassau St. l ots. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA Backgroynd The Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust (TJCL T) (Exhibit "A") makes homeownership a possibility for homebuyers by relieving the cost of land from the purchase price of a home. T JCLT maintains ownership of the land while the homeowner owns the house. Use of the land is conveyed to qualified homeowners by means of a 90-year ground lease that assures long­ term stability and security. The land trust is designed so that its homeowners not only benefit from homeownership but also pass the affordability of the property on to the next owner. Funds invested in the land trust model create a lasting and sustainable resource of affordable housing. TJCLT is growing its portfolio of single family properties and program participants. Program participants must meet low to moderate income requirements. We are seeking Two Hundred and Forty Thousand Dollars ($240,000.00) from the City of Charlottesville for the purchase of four (4) building lots on Nassau St. project pescrjptjon and Matrjx • The T JCLT shall purchase four (4) undeveloped lots (raw) on Nassau Street. from Franklin Street Land Trust Ill as per the terms and conditions of the attached Contract of Purchase dated 03/08/17. • The T JCLT shall enter into the attached agreement dated 03/22/17 with Habitat for Humanity of the Greater Charlottesville Area (Habitat). • Habitat shall develop the lots per the terms and conditions of the agreement. • T JCLT shall reimburse Habitat for the costs to develop (COD) per the terms and conditions of the agreement. • Habitat shall secure the fund to construct four (4) single family homes for sale to families (residents) with incomes of 80% or less of the area median income. • Habitat shall construct four (4) single family affordable homes as per agreement. • Habitat shall identify four (4) families to purchase the homes through the Habitat program. Families will have incomes of BO% or less of the area median income. • T JCL T shall own and be the stewards of the four (4) lots. • T JCLT shall enter a ninety (90) year lease with the purchasers, which will 1\Pa ge Authentlslgn ID: 11B475B2-AEC4-484A-84D4.fFEA38898D3F outline the resale and appreciation sharing terms and conditions. Project Bydget Project Budget Nassau St. Sec. #3 Lots 5,6,7 &8 Purchase ··­ TJCLT Land/Lot acquisition, 4 lots= $120,000.00 TJCLT cost of development to Habitat, 4 lots= $120,000.00 Total funding request, acquisition & development. $240,000.00 Recjpjents and Resylts • The recipients shall be Four (4) families (residents) with incomes of 80% or less of the area median income. • The results shall be Four (4) families achieving the dream of home ownership! • Every effort will be made to identify current residents of the City of Charlottesville as the homebuyers. Why Commynjty Land Trysts CCLJ's) matter! • CLT's create affordable housing while still allowing low-income residents to build equity as homeowners. • Moreover, because the CLT retains ownership of the land, the housing remains permanently affordable, even as the, original owner sells and move on to bigger and better opportunities. • The long-term. continuing affordability makes CLT's an efficient use of affordable housing funds. Project Tjmeline • The T JCLT & Habitat projects to deliver within Six (6) to Twelve (12) months of receipt of funds, Four (4) new homes for families (residents) with incomes of 80% or less of the area median income. 2 1P a ge Authenlislgn ID: 11B475B2-AEC4-484A-MD4-FFEA38898D3F !JCLT js committed to creatjng and growing jts capacjty, • T JCLT shall hire a part time Executive Director (ED) with available funds. The tasks and deliverables of the ED shall include but not be limited to the following: • Manage the land trusts • Community Outreach and Education • Fundraising and Donor Relations • Legal Compliance • Financial Management • Board Relations and Development • Administration • Strategic I Policy Planning and Development • TJCLT is currently considering the attached proposal recommending that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission {TJPDC) provide Executive Director services to the T JCLT for a Two (2) year period. Respectfully submitted, [~stawt 03/28/2017 ~~~1~2~era~a1~1 ~n- ·n~·MwP•M~sm,,.__~~~~~~~'~~~~~- Mr. Greg Slater, Vice Chairmen Date Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust Contact lnformatjon Mr. Frazier Bell, Chairmen Mr. Greg Slater, Vice Chairmen Thomas Jefferson Community Land Trust P.O. Box 1601 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Phone: 434-422-4822 3 1P a ge This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Actions Required: Yes (First of two readings) Staff Presenter: Craig Brown, City Attorney Staff Contacts: Maurice Jones, City Manager Craig Brown, City Attorney Re: City Council Salaries Background: As provided in City Code section 2-40, the annual salary for the Mayor is $16,000, and $14,000 for the remaining members of City Council. For cities with a population between 35,000 and 74,999, such as Charlottesville, the maximum salaries allowed under state law are $18,000 for councilors, and $20,000 for a mayor. Virginia Code sec. 15.2-1414.6. Discussion: The salaries of the Mayor and members of the Charlottesville City Council have not been increased since July 1, 2008. Prior to that date the salaries were $12,000 for the Mayor and $10,000 for the other members of Council. Virginia Code sec. 15.2-1414.6 also provides rules that govern the timing of any salary increase for members of a city council: the salaries must be set by ordinance, and every proposed increase in the salary of a member of council must be adopted at least four months prior to the date of the next municipal election. Also, increases in the salary of a member of council cannot take effect until July 1 after the next regularly scheduled general election of council members. If City Council approves a salary increase it would therefore not take effect until July 1, 2018. Community Engagement: There has been no community engagement on this issue. Budget Impact: If the salaries for the Mayor and members of City Council are increased to $20,000 and $18,000, respectively, the impact on the City budget, beginning July 1, 2018, would be an additional annual expense of $20,000 ($4,000 increase x 5). Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance increasing the salary of council members to $18,000, and to $20,000 for the mayor. Alternatives: City Council can decline to approve a salary increase for the Mayor and members of Council, or can approve a smaller increase than what is proposed. Attachment: Proposed Ordinance AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REORDAINING SECTION 2-40 OF ARTICLE II (CITY COUNCIL) OF CHAPTER 2 (ADMINISTRATION) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, 1990, AS AMENDED, TO PROVIDE FOR AN INCREASE IN THE ANNUAL SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that Section 2-40 of Article II of Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: ARTICLE II. CITY COUNCIL .... Sec. 2-40. Salaries of members and mayor. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5(c) of the Charter to the contrary, and pursuant to the authority of Code of Virginia, Section 15.2-1414.6, the annual salary of members of the city council, except the mayor, shall be ten fourteen thousand dollars ($10,000.00 $14,000.00), and the annual salary of the mayor shall be twelve sixteen thousand dollars ($12,000.00 $16,000.00), until July 1, 2008 2018, at which time the annual salary of members of the city council, except the mayor, shall be fourteen eighteen thousand ($14,000.00 $18,000.00), and the annual salary of the mayor shall be sixteen twenty thousand dollars ($16,000.00 $20,000.00). This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Vote on resolution, which includes financial support of the Legal Aid Proposal Presenters: Maurice Jones, City Manager Charlene Green, Manager of the Office of Human Rights Staff Contacts: Maurice Jones, City Manager Charlene Green, Manager of the Office of Human Rights Title: Welcoming City Update Background: During the last year and a half our country has been engaged in an on-going debate over the future of immigration. This contentious issue has created an atmosphere of fear within our immigrant population here in the Charlottesville area. Recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids throughout the nation, which were well publicized, have heightened the anxiety for documented and undocumented immigrants alike, leading to unsubstantiated rumors concerning federal, state and local law enforcement. The City Council has on several occasions in recent history publicly supported our community being a Welcoming City for all, including a Proclamation approved by Council members on October 5th, 2015 (attached). The proclamation asserts that being a Welcoming City to all people, including immigrants, promotes economic prosperity and global competitiveness, and is crucial to individual and community success. Over the course of the last six months, representatives from the City have engaged with immigrants in our community and the organizations that provide support to them. Officials have tried to allay any fears people have had concerning the request of information on the legal status of immigrants and federal immigration detainers. Our law enforcement officials do not request the immigration status of residents who are detained. However if there are outstanding warrants on the subjects those warrants will be served. The detainment of undocumented immigrants for the purpose of turning them over to ICE agents is a request made under civil law, according to a 2015 opinion from Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring. Mr. Herring’s opinion states, in essence, that a local jail may not hold a person beyond the expiration date of their state or local custody on the basis of an immigration detainer. A federal criminal warrant for a substantive offense or a federal immigration-related criminal warrant is required to enable a state penitentiary or local jail to hold a prisoner for federal immigration authorities. The Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail notifies federal immigration authorities when they receive a person into custody for whom there is a federal immigration detainer, but they may not hold someone beyond the expiration of their state or local period of confinement without a criminal warrant. Discussion: The City is developing an informational brochure that outlines its immigration related procedures while also offering resources for local immigrants. The brochure will be available on the City’s web site, in City buildings and offered through our non-profit partners. The Council is being asked to vote on a new Welcoming City resolution that addresses the concerns raised by residents of our community who are concerned about the treatment of immigrants in our City. Additionally, the Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) has submitted a request for funding to the city “to help immigrant families in Charlottesville to understand and assert their legal rights.” The proposal is attached to this memo. Staff recommends if the Council approves funding for the initiative that it requires the funding to be used only for City residents. That was not explicitly expressed in the proposal. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: A Community of Mutual Respect “In all endeavors, the City of Charlottesville is committed to racial and cultural diversity, inclusion, racial reconciliation, economic justice, and equity. As a result, every citizen is respected. Interactions among city leaders, city employees and the public are respectful, unbiased, and without prejudice.” This also aligns with Strategic Plan Goal 5: Foster Strong Connections, and the initiative to respect and nourish diversity. Budgetary Impact $10,000 in funding from the City Council’s Strategic Fund to support Legal Aid’s proposal to provide legal services to local immigrants. Alternatives: Council could choose to not approve the resolution. Attachments: Welcoming City Update Resolution Legal Aid Proposal to Provide Legal Assistance to Local Immigrants City Council Welcoming Proclamation 10-05-15 Welcoming City Update Resolution April 17, 2017 WHEREAS, Charlottesville City Council passed a Welcoming City Proclamation on October 5, 2015, and WHEREAS, the recent executive actions and immigration enforcement announcements by the administration, paired with intimidating and divisive statements, have created a climate of fear, rumor and distrust of federal, state and local governments, and WHEREAS, Charlottesville City Council seeks to address this climate of fear by providing a positive statement of our values and actions to a community seeking reassurance, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, the City of Charlottesville embraces the values of a Welcoming City, and we stand for the principle that all members of this community are our neighbors and deserve trust and protection, and that those values should be embodied by our public safety, law enforcement and social services professionals, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council upholds Attorney General Mark Herring’s January 2015 conclusion that localities in Virginia can and must have discretion when faced with federal mandates regarding immigration issues, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, as a locality, we have limited public resources, both in terms of staff and funds, for public safety, law enforcement, and social services, and we believe that our professionals should employ those limited resources to meet their obligations under local and state law and to serve all the members of our community, consistent with the values of a Welcoming City, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, in service of providing vulnerable populations with information about their rights and resources available to them in our Welcoming city, we request that the Office of Human Rights prepare, promulgate and maintain a research guide on these topics for the public, and to work with appropriate partners in our government and our community to ensure that these populations have access to the guide and underlying resources, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that whereas public safety is a paramount mission of local government, that we defer to the considered judgment of our law enforcement and public safety professionals that the limited and welcoming approach to immigration questions they currently employ, which emphasizes local discretion and the maintenance of trust between residents and our public safety professionals, is our best option for maintaining security in our local community; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, in this time of confusion, intimidation and fear regarding immigration, we approve an allocation of $10,000 be provided to our non-profit partner, Legal Aid, to support a program providing legal services to immigrants in our community. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (1 of 9) Charlottesville Conditions of Eligibility Report Form To submit a funding application, an organization must meet these criteria/answer these questions: ORGANIZATION NAME: Tim Wallace 1. Is the organization organized, qualified, and recognized as nonprofit and tax-exempt as defined by the Internal Revenue Service under 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)? Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of your IRS status letter 2. Does the organization provide services that directly benefit human beings? Yes No 3. Does the organization have a direct and substantial presence in the City of Charlottesville? Yes No 4. Is the organization incorporated as defined by the State Corporation Commission? Yes No Date of agency incorporation: 1967 ** Please include a copy of Articles of Incorporation 5. Is the organization registered completely with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Consumer Affairs, Charitable Solicitation Section? Yes No 6. Is the organization directed by a volunteer Board of Directors that meets at least quarterly? Yes No 7. a. If the organization’s annual budget is over $200,000, is the organization audited by an independent certified public accountant each year? Yes No b. If the organization’s annual budget is under $200,000, is the organization audited by an independent certified public accountant at least every three years? Yes No 8. Did this organization request funding for this specific program during the budget cycle? Yes No ___________________________________ __3/23/17__________ Signature of Chief Professional Officer Date Off Budget Program Funding Application- (2 of 9) Off Budget Funding Request City of Charlottesville Organization Name: Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC) Chief Professional Officer: Mary Bauer Address: 1000 Preston Ave, Suite A, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Telephone: 434-977-0553 E-mail: mary@justice4all.org Amount Requested: $10,000 Briefly describe the program for which funding is requested (25 words or less). Efforts to help immigrant families in Charlottesville to understand and assert their legal rights in the face of increasingly aggressive immigration enforcement. Briefly state the organization’s mission. Our mission is to seek equal justice for all by solving clients’ legal problems, strengthening the voices of low-income communities, and rooting out the injustices the keep people in poverty. Why is this funding needed outside of the City’s normal funding cycle? The urgent need for this program arose only after the presidential election and the subsequently aggressive enforcement activies by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel. Signatures: Executive Director Board Chair Date Submitted:___3/23/17____________________ Off Budget Program Funding Application- (3 of 9) Program Narrative to be completed by all programs requesting operational funding. 1. Need: Indicate which Council Vision Area(s) and goal(s) in the City’s Strategic Plan (www.charlottesville.org/strategicplan) the program addresses. Describe the local needs the program addresses. Who are the beneficiaries (include number served and relevant demographic information) This program directly impacts the City’s goal #2 of Charlottesville being a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community. Specifically, the program addresses 2.4 “Ensure families and individuals are safe and stable.” The beneficiaries of this program are the immigrant population in Charlottesville and the surrounding communities. According to the most recent census data, there are over 18,000 foreign-born residents living in the City of Charlottesville and the surrounding counties. The majority of these residents are immigrants from Spanish speaking countries (particularly Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador). It is unknown how many are undocumented, but regardless it is a significant population. Our immigrant neighbors are being threatened right now by our federal government in a way that feels unprecedented. Previous administrations have “taken the gloves off of” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers before, but never in the modern era has that happened in an environment where the tone of national leadership displayed this level of racial and religious animus towards immigrants. That tone makes a difference, and we are already seeing that reflected in the cruelty displayed by government personnel as they detain homeless men leaving shelters and victims of domestic violence at the courthouse where they were seeking a protective order. All of this has resulted in already vulnerable families facing the very real risk of being ripped apart without notice. A student at Walker Upper Elementary School recently told us that she didn’t want to go to school because from the moment she walked out of the house to the moment she saw her again, she was terrified her mom might not be there when she got back. That risk and the fear that it generates in parents and their children has a devastating impact. Undocumented and mixed-status families have always lived with a certain amount of dread. That dread has been shown to manifest in trauma-like impacts on the children of those families.1 It has also been shown to have dramatic negative health impacts.2 It is also well established that panic and fear cause individuals to make bad decisions. Today, an entire population is facing unbelievable levels of that fear and trauma, and our community is suffering for it. 2. Strategies: Explain what strategies the program uses to effectively address the identified needs. 1 https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/01/the-educational-and-emotional-toll-of- deportation/426987/ 2 http://www.salon.com/2017/01/27/how-an-iowa-immigration-raid-effected-infant-health_partner/ Off Budget Program Funding Application- (4 of 9) Our overall goal is to protect undocumented and mixed status families from the harm caused by overly aggressive immigration enforcement actions through meaningful access to the protections of the law. In addition to preventing detentions and deportations, our goal is also to mitigate the damaged caused by fear and panicked decision making. We will accomplish our goals through three primary strategies: Know Your Rights (KYR) Presentations: We will gather immigrants from all over the greater Charlottesville region together in churches, mosques, schools, and other safe spaces and provide educational information about their rights relative to immigration enforcement. Over the course of the next year, hundreds of attendees will learn how to respond if ICE agents approach them at their home, workplace, or in public as well as the latest information that will help them to judge what precautions to take and what not to take. For example, in times of fear, families wonder whether it is safe to send their children to school, to apply for free-lunch, to sign up their citizen children for SNAP benefits or take them to the emergency room. Other parents are concerned about what will happen if they attempt to claim their children who have been apprehended at the U.S. border or whether or not to call the police if they witness or experience a crime. Our services will give them the information they need to make reasoned decisions about risk and their families’ well-being that benefit them and the community as a whole. Our local police will not inquire about crime victims’ immigration status. Terrified families need more assurance than the police themselves can provide that this is true. If families don’t trust the police, then everyone is less safe. The information we provide regarding responding to ICE can be the difference between ICE taking a whole family and leaving an attempted raid empty-handed. The night after one of our first KYR presentations in Fairfax after the inauguration, there were a series of ICE raids at the apartment complex across from our Falls Church office. ICE officers went to one apartment with a warrant for the arrest of one man who no longer lived in that apartment. The occupants of the apartment opened the door, and ICE arrested everyone in the apartment. At another apartment in the same complex on the same day, the occupants refused to open the door, and the ICE officers left empty handed. Emergency Preparedness Workshops: We will recruit volunteers (attorneys and lay volunteers) to assist dozens of families one-on-one to put together emergency preparedness plans that address both the personal and legal aspects of preparing for one or both parents to be detained/deported. Preparing for the loss of one or both parents because of deportation is very much like making end-of-life arrangements for a terminally ill parent, except with the added terror of the timing being absolutely and completely unpredictable. When an ICE raid picks up a parent, there is no notification to the rest of the family unless the detention was witnessed. In many instances, the detained person simply disappears. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (5 of 9) Our emergency preparedness workshop covers powers-of-attorney paperwork, orderly record keeping of essential documents (prescriptions, bank info, ID’s deeds, car titles etc), making and communicating plans for who will pick up kids from school, financial arrangements regarding what bills are owed to whom and when, and what information to keep on hand at all times (including a lawyer’s phone number). This information helps families in crisis be more stable, and gives them some measure of peace of mind. Legal Representation of Detained Immigrants: We will represent an estimated 10 -12 individual immigrants statewide who have been detained and put into the deportation process. We lack the capacity to do this at a high volume, but we are actively seeking clients who are the victim of clear civil rights violations in how they were identified/detained. Our goal is to mount a highly visible constitutional challenge to ICE practices and in so doing limit the aggressiveness of ICE procedures in Virginia and beyond. One of our goals in attempting to bring a constitutional challenge of this kind is to make a symbolic statement about the rule of law. The Trump administration is acting very much on a symbolic level (e.g. the wall), and we hope to make our lawsuit a symbolic gesture of defiance on behalf of the immigrant community. We want to make a statement that individuals have legal rights under the United States Constitution regardless of their immigration status. A Note About Collaboration: LAJC provides a critical and unique value to Charlottesville’s immigrant communities, but we do so in close coordination with the individuals, local government, churches, and other non- profits. Our staff have worked tirelessly since the election to help convene conversation and build coalition efforts to respond to community demand for information and help protecting their families. Our KYR presentations and family preparedness workshops are hosted by and promoted by our partners. We have worked with the International Rescue Committee to help their client community understand their rights when contacted by federal officers and discuss immigrants’ legal rights in the workplace (for example to be free from religious discrimination). We have met with local officials including police officers and jail official in an effort to ensure that immigrant families and local institutions maintain productive relationships. Much is unsettled now at the federal level and that creates uncertainty and fear that has a ripple effect throughout our community. LAJC is playing and will continue to play an essential role in helping the community as a whole respond in ways that keep people safe and stable. 3. Evaluation: What specific outcomes are expected as a result of the requested funding? Describe how the program is evaluated. This project will have three primary short-term outcomes. First, the individuals who we serve through this project will have their fear reduced and be able to make better decisions. That means more children in school, more bread-winners working, more access to social services, and stronger relationships between immigrants and the police and other local authorities. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (6 of 9) All three of our activities will bring about this outcome. It is hard to overstate the degree of fear in this community and the harm that panic can cause. While we are not proposing to spend resources measuring changes in fear before and after services in a rigorous way, we receive constant anecdotal feedback from participants in the relief they express to us and their insistence that we continue to do presentations and hold workshops for their communities. Several of our events to date have been filled to capacity resulting in follow-up events specifically for those turned away. The second outcome is that if/when ICE conducts raids in the Charlottesville area, fewer people will be deported. As the story above about an ICE raid across the street from our Falls Church office demonstrates, the choices that immigrants make when confronted by ICE can and do make a material difference in the outcomes of those encounters. Legal representation for those actually detained will be challenging, but we are optimistic that we will have positive outcomes to report there as well. A successful systemic challenge to ICE procedures could reduce the number of collateral arrests that happen very broadly. An increase in collateral arrests is one of the clear changes in ICE procedures under this administration. Previously, when conducting a raid, ICE would only arrest the individual(s) for whom they had warrants. Today, ICE is arresting every undocumented person in the vicinity when they execute a warrant. It is our hope, and we stress this at our trainings and workshops that when families have contact with ICE that they report those contacts to us. This will allow us to both learn more about ICE procedures to help develop a systemic case and provide us more specific feedback regarding retention of the information we present. For the third outcome, those families that do experience a detention or deportation will be more stable in the immediate aftermath. Children will be more likely to stay at the same school and less likely to be put into foster care because it will be clear who is to take care of them and what their educational rights are. Fewer families will be evicted because a plan will be in place for who will pay their rent and utilities or where they will live. A deportation is devastating no matter what, but our project will make it less so. Each presentation and workshop will be fully documented in our case management system as to the location, date, community partners, number of attendees, and number of people receiving one-on-one assistance. We will track case data rigorously including the outcome of the legal case, the direct benefit to the client, and the number of family members impacted. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (7 of 9) Activities and Outcomes Plan and Report Indicate which Council Vision Area(s) and goal(s) of the 1. Strategic Plan Alignment City’s Strategic Plan the program addresses (www.charlottesville.org/strategicplan) This program directly impacts the City’s Vison Area of being a Community of Mutual Respect and the City’s goal of Charlottesville being a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community. Specifically, the program addresses goal 2.4 “Ensure families and individuals are safe and stable.” Provide at least two meaningful indicators that this project 2. The indicators this project will address. addresses are… 1) Palpable community fear leading to refusal/hesitation to engage in civic life including signing kids up for school, applying for free-lunch, accessing medical care, seeking employment, and working with the police on issues of public safety. 2) Charlottesville reputation as a welcoming City will be enhanced by visible efforts by the City to support immigrants in this very tangible and public way. Describe what you provide, to whom, how many, and time 3. The goal of this project is to frame produce/provide… Our overall goal is to protect undocumented and mixed status families from the harm caused (products or services, by overly aggressive immigration enforcement output) actions through meaningful access to the protections of the law. 4. To accomplish… Explain what you expect accomplish In order to: 1) reduce the likelihood of Charlottesville families being deported; 2) reduce the harm that would be caused by any deportations that do happen; and 3) reduce fear of deportation and the authorities. Describe what changes you expect 5. So that So that our immigrant communities can make participants/beneficiaries reasoned decisions about how to both continue can… to function as members of our community and to protect themselves from devastating harm. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (8 of 9) 6. Resulting ultimately in… Describe projected FY 17 outcomes with numbers and percentages, as well as methods of measurement Hundreds of Charlottesville area residents will be better informed of their rights and how to access the protections of the law. 100% or nearly 100% of qualified^ requests for presentation/workshops will result in a presentation/workshop. ^Requests must come through community groups and have reasonable expectation of 12 or more participants. Provide FY 14 or FY 15 actual results 7. Current outcomes Since the election, we have done KYR for over 500 individuals and family preparedness workshops for 150 families. Off Budget Program Funding Application- (9 of 9) Agency: Legal Aid Justice Center Program: Protecting Immigrant Families Funding Request Prior Yr. Yr. 2015/16 2016/17 Revenue: Actual* Budget 1. City of Charlottesville 0 10,000 2. Albemarle County 0 3. Other Local Governments 0 4. United Way –Thomas Jeff. Area 0 5. Albemarle County-other 0 6. City of Charlottesville-other 0 7. State Funding 0 8. Federal Funding 0 9. Grants: Foundation and Corp. 0 10. Fees: Program Service Fees 0 11. Fundraising/Gifts and Bequests 0 18,432 12. Investment Income/Transactions 0 13. Miscellaneous Revenue 0 14. TOTAL REVENUE 0 0 Expenses: 15. Personnel (Salaries/Fringes) 0 22,392 16. Operational Expenses 0 6,040 17. TOTAL EXPENSES 0 24,832 18. Surplus/(Deficit) * 0 0 Explain any Surplus or Deficit: Note about FY 15 Actuals – Project the actuals as you best know them at the time of this funding application. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Direction from City Council Presenters: Maurice Jones, City Manager Staff Contacts: Maurice Jones, City Manager Mike Murphy, Assistant City Manager Title: Lee Statue Removal Options Renaming of Lee and Jackson Parks Background: City Council created the ad-hoc Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials and Public Spaces (BRC) on May 2, 2016 to address the questions and concerns brought before council regarding the statues of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Eleven commission members were appointed after an application process. They were charged with providing Council with options for telling the full story of Charlottesville’s history of race relations and for changing the City’s narrative through our public spaces. A final report was presented to Council on December 19, 2016. The Council reviewed the Commission’s recommendations at its January 17, 2017 meeting. On February 6, 2017 the City Council voted 3-2 to remove the Lee statue from Lee Park. The motion read: “NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Charlottesville shall remove the statue of Robert E. Lee from the park currently known as Lee Park; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we hereby direct staff to bring Council a range of recommended options for moving forward with decisions on destination and design within 60 days for our consideration.” In separate motions, the Council voted unanimously to rename both Lee and Jackson Park and to move forward with developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional design services to create a Master Plan for the Historic North Downtown and Court Square Districts that would;  Redesign and transform Jackson Park through the addition of a new memorial to Charlottesville's enslaved population while retaining its ability to function as a community gathering space,  Redesign Lee Park, independent of the Lee statue while retaining its ability to function as a community gathering space,  Replace (as possible) the current plaque at the slave auction block with one that is legible,  Identify and acknowledge the site of the Freedman's Bureau. Staff is developing the RFP for the design services with the goal of posting it in late May or early June. Discussion: The staff has developed several options for the Council to consider concerning the removal of the Lee statue and the renaming of both parks. Removal There are several options for the Council to consider on the disposition of the Lee Statue:  Auction City Council could declare the Statue to be surplus property; thereafter, staff would sell the Statue at an auction to any purchaser willing to pay for it, and would require the purchaser to bear the cost of removing it from City property within a specified period of time after purchase. The purpose of a surplus auction is to maximize the value that the City can recover; the use and disposition of property after being auctioned off is at the purchaser’s sole discretion.  Bid The City could advertise that it’s interested in selling the Statue to an individual or entity (including, without limitation, a non-profit organization or entity, a for-profit company or corporation, a local government, etc.), subject to conditions Council may determine to be appropriate, which might include any one or more of the following: (i) the purchaser would bear cost of removal, and would repair damage to city property resulting from removal, (ii) the purchaser would partner with the City to obtain advance National Park Service (NPS) approval of the proposed relocation site, in order to preserve the Statue’s NRHP listing (further discussed in Option 2, following below); (iii) the purchaser could be required to give binding assurances that the Statue will be preserved and maintained at a new location, regardless of whether the Statue’s National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listing is maintained. This alternative could take place on a schedule determined by Council; the initial timing decision to be made would be how, and for what period of time, Council would wish to advertise its interest in receiving Offers to Purchase.  Donation The City could donate to a government entity within the US (local, state, or federal) authorized by Va. Code §15.2-953(C), or donate to a non-profit entity authorized by Va. Code §15.2-953 (e.g., a public or private non-profit engaged in commemorating historical events). The City would have to negotiate with the entity over who would be responsible for the costs associated with removing the statue from the park and moving it to its new location. One of the BRC’s recommendations was to move the statue from its current location to a new space in McIntire Park. Council did not include this option in the resolution it passed in February; however, staff believes it is important to explain what procurement steps would need to take place in order to move the statue within the City limits. It is not recommended that the City undertake removal and relocation itself. We are not aware of any similar type work with which existing City employees are experienced, and assigning City employees to perform this task would present OSHA issues, potential workers’ compensation liability and potentially other issues, should the Statue be seriously damaged or destroyed as a result of the means/methods used by City employees to move it. If an experienced contractor is hired, risk of personal injury and property damage in the moving process can be both minimized and financial responsibility can be shifted to the contractor and its forces. A contractor would need to be selected through our procurement process. Renaming of Lee and Jackson Parks The City has a Naming Policy for its parks and recreation facilities, which is attached. Under normal circumstances, it is recommended that the parks “be named in accordance with geographical, historical or ecological features indigenous to the park site or to the immediate vicinity of the site” or named for an individual who has made a significant gift of land, significant contributions to the park system or significant contributions to the City’s park system. After deliberation, the final action on naming of a new park or facility rests with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Because of the uniqueness of this situation, a renaming of two parks that have been in our parks system for over 90 years, staff believes there should be extensive community outreach associated with this process and ultimately the decision on the renaming of the parks should rest with the City Council. The staff proposes establishing several ways for the City to solicit input on names for Council to consider:  Email – The City will set up a special email that would collect proposed names.  Water Bill Insert – The City would offer an opportunity for our water and gas customers to submit suggestions through a special insert that would be delivered with their water bills. Our customers could return the ballots with their water bills.  Online Survey – The City would post a survey on its web site that would collect names.  Social Media – Names could be collected through the City’s social media outlets including Facebook and Twitter. The City would receive submissions for a period of 45 days. Once the names are collected, the staff would work with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to narrow the suggestions down to 5 to 10 for further consideration. At that point, Council could begin deliberations of the final submissions or offer another round of polling to gauge public reaction. If Council chooses the latter then the staff would utilize the same tools from the first round of engagement to collect. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Community of Mutual Respect – “In all endeavors, the City of Charlottesville is committed to racial and cultural diversity, inclusion, racial reconciliation, economic justice, and equity. As a result, every citizen is respected. Interactions among city leaders, city employees and the public are respectful, unbiased, and without prejudice.” This also aligns with Strategic Plan Goal 5: Foster Strong Connections, and the initiative to respect and nourish diversity. Budgetary Impact Council has already approved $500,000 from the FY16 year-end appropriation dedicated to the recommendations of the BRC. Any additional funding will be determined based on decisions the Council will make concerning the removal of the statue. Initial costs associated with the renaming of Lee and Jackson Parks will be minimal. There will additional costs associated with new signage once the names are determined. Alternatives: Council could choose an alternative for removal that has not been proposed by the staff. Also, in lieu of soliciting names from the public for Lee and Jackson Parks the Council could direct staff or the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to follow the procedures associated with naming new parks and parks facilities. Attachments: Attachment A – Disposition Alternatives – R.E. Lee Statue Policy – Naming of Parks and Parks Facilities The full report from the BRC can be found at: http://www.charlottesville.org/home/showdocument?id=49037 The City Manager’s office has requested information regarding the fiscal/ procurement requirements that may govern a disposition of the statue of R.E. Lee, located in Lee Park (hereafter, the “Statue”). Option 1: City divests itself of ownership of the statue  Do we need to get an appraisal of the Statue in order to meet our fiduciary responsibility and have a basis of comparing offers? Answer: no, an appraisal is not required by the applicable legal procedures.  What alternatives do we have? Auction, bid, donation, government-to-government? What are the pros/cons, timelines associated with each? What terms or conditions can we place under each option to minimize cost/risk to the City? For example, cost of removal and transportation are the responsibility of whoever is taking the Statue; removal within any set time period? Is there a need for any special conditions i.e. minimize damage to the statues, contractor’s ability to handle public scrutiny that will come with this project, contractor’s ability to provide secure removal and transport? Answer:  Donate to a government entity within the US (local, state, or federal) authorized by Va. Code §15.2-953(C).  Donate to a non-profit entity authorized by Va. Code §15.2-953 (e.g., a public or private non-profit engaged in commemorating historical events)  Auction as surplus property: City Council could declare the Statue to be surplus property; thereafter, staff would sell the Statue at an auction to any purchaser willing to pay for it, and would require the purchaser to bear the cost of removing it from City property within a specified period of time after purchase. The purpose of a surplus auction is to maximize the value that the City can recover; the use and disposition of property after being auctioned off is at the purchaser’s sole discretion. Usually, City staff sells surplus property via online auction or via the public fixed-price sale held monthly at the City warehouse. An online auction or special auction could be scheduled at any time, and once the parameters of the sale are identified, it will likely take approximately 90 days to plan and complete the sale. Alternatively, the City could hire (via an IFB, RFP or small purchase procedure, depending on cost) a professional auctioneer experienced in selling works of art, and instruct the auctioneer to conduct a special auction at the site of the Statue.  Issue Offers to Purchase (a disposition of property in this manner is not subject to Procurement Act or surplus property procedures). The City could advertise that it’s interested in selling the Statue to an individual or entity (including, without limitation, a non-profit organization or entity, a for-profit company or corporation, a local government, etc.), subject to conditions Council may determine to be appropriate, which might include any one or more of the following: (i) the purchaser would bear cost of removal, and would repair damage to city property resulting from removal, (ii) the purchaser would partner with the City to obtain advance National Park Service (NPS) approval of the proposed relocation site, in order to preserve the Statue’s NRHP listing (further discussed in Option 2, following below); (iii) the purchaser could be required to give binding assurances that the Statue will be preserved and maintained at a new location, regardless of whether the Statue’s National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listing is maintained. This alternative could take place on a schedule determined by Council; the initial timing decision to be made would be how, and for what period of time, Council would wish to advertise its interest in receiving Offers to Purchase.  What if no one bids? Leave the Statue in place; repeat the offered-for-sale process multiple times until an acceptable offer is received; go to Option 2. Option 2: City retains ownership of the Statue, and moves it from its current location to another location in the City  Can the City do it with its own forces (public works employees?) Answer: It is not recommended that the City undertake removal and relocation itself. We are not aware of any similar type work with which existing City employees are experienced, and assigning City employees to perform this task would present OSHA issues, potential workers’ compensation liability and potentially other issues, should the Statue be seriously damaged or destroyed as a result of the means/methods used by City employees to move it. If an experienced contractor is hired, risk of personal injury and property damage in the moving process can be both minimized and financial responsibility can be shifted to the contractor and its forces.  Do we have to go through a formal procurement process to hire a contractor to relocate the Statue? Answer: yes.  Is there a need for any special conditions (i.e. minimize damage to the Statue; contractor’s ability to provide secure removal and transport; contractor’s ability to handle public scrutiny that will come with this project?) Answer: yes. The Statue is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), under the category of “Recreation and Culture: Work of Art”. If City Council wishes to preserve that listing, a process must be followed BEFORE any move is commenced. Also, the City should seek a contractor who has prior experience moving works of art of similar size and materials. (No special conditions are necessary relating to “public scrutiny”; if a contractor does not wish to be associated with the move, it should not compete for the contract). Step 1: engage a consultant via RFP, if NRHP listing is to be preserved. City Council should initially make a determination of whether or not it wishes to attempt to preserve the NRHP listing for the Statue. If so, the City should conduct a competitive negotiation (RFP) process to engage a consultant who can: (i) assist with recommendations for selecting one or more appropriate relocation site(s); (ii) assist with the documentation and application process necessary to comply with 36 CFR 60.14 (see attached); and (iii) prepare a “scope of work” identifying any special protective measures to be used by a contractor in the removal/ relocation process, and identifying any necessary qualifications that a qualified contractor should have. Step 2: engage a contractor to physically move the Statue, consistent with the “scope of work” referenced above. Competitive sealed bidding (IFB) is the procurement to be used for selection of the relocation contractor. The successful contractor should be required to provide liability insurance and a performance bond. Note: If protecting the NRHP listing for the Statue is not a priority for Council, OR if the NPS determines that it will not maintain the NRHP listing after the Statue is moved to a particular proposed site, then the City can (i) make a final decision as to the site to which it would be moved, and then (ii) proceed with the procurement of a contractor to move the Statue—using an IFB process. As part of the IFB process, it is recommended that the City should use a pre-qualification procedure to ensure that contractors competing for the contract will each have prior experience in moving works of art of this nature. The IFB could specify that an experienced contractor would be responsible for preparing a protocol describing the “means and methods” it will utilize in performing the moving services.  What’s the best method to procure removal services? Answer: see above responses.  What are the timelines associated with each? Answer: selection of a consultant by RFP: 90 days. Application to move a Statue listed on the NRHP will take time (est. 60 days for consultant’s services), assuming a site has already been selected by Council. After application is submitted to NPS, it should take at least 90 days to receive a response. IFB to select a moving contractor: 90 days, from solicitation to award of contract. Completion of work: est. 30 days from mobilization to completion. Possible total time: 12 months.  What terms or conditions can we place on it to minimize cost/risk to the City? Answer: see the responses given above, p. 1. What if no one bids? Answer: leave the Statue in place; re-bid repeatedly, until a bid is received; or go to Option 1. Title 36 C.F.R. Part 60 (National Register of Historic Places) Sec. 60.14 Changes and revisions to properties listed in the National Register. (a) Boundary changes. (1) A boundary alteration shall be considered as a new property nomination. All forms, criteria and procedures used in nominating a property to the National Register must be used. In the case of boundary enlargements only those owners in the newly nominated as yet unlisted area need be notified and will be counted in determining whether a majority of private owners object to listing. In the case of a diminution of a boundary, owners shall be notified as specified in Sec. 60.15 concerning removing properties from the National Register. A professionally justified recommendation by the State Historic Preservation Officer, Federal Preservation Officer, or person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program shall be presented to NPS. During this process, the property is not taken off the National Register. If the Keeper or his or her designee finds the recommendation in accordance with the National Register criteria for evaluation, the change will be accepted. If the boundary change is not accepted, the old boundaries will remain. Boundary revisions may be appealed as provided for in Sec. Sec. 60.12 and 60.15. (2) Four justifications exist for altering a boundary: Professional error in the initial nomination, loss of historic integrity, recognition of additional significance, additional research documenting that a larger or smaller area should be listed. No enlargement of a boundary should be recommended unless the additional area possesses previously unrecognized significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture. No diminution of a boundary should be recommended unless the properties being removed do not meet the National Register criteria for evaluation. Any proposal to alter a boundary has to be documented in detail including photographing the historic resources falling between the existing boundary and the other proposed boundary. (b) Relocating properties listed in the National Register. (1) Properties listed in the National Register should be moved only when there is no feasible alternative for preservation. When a property is moved, every effort should be made to reestablish its historic orientation, immediate setting, and general environment. (2) If it is proposed that a property listed in the National Register be moved and the State Historic Preservation Officer, Federal agency for a property under Federal ownership or control, or person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program, wishes the property to remain in the National Register during and after the move, the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer having ownership or control or person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program, shall submit documentation to NPS prior to the move. The documentation shall discuss: (i) The reasons for the move; (ii) The effect on the property's historical integrity; (iii) The new setting and general environment of the proposed site, including evidence that the proposed site does not possess historical or archeological significance that would be adversely affected by the intrusion of the property; and (iv) Photographs showing the proposed location. (3) Any such proposal with respect to the new location shall follow the required notification procedures, shall be approved by the State Review Board if it is a State nomination and shall continue to follow normal review procedures. The Keeper shall also follow the required notification procedures for nominations. The Keeper shall respond to a properly documented request within 45 days of receipt from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Federal Preservation Officer, or within 90 days of receipt from a person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program, concerning whether or not the move is approved. Once the property is moved, the State Historic Preservation Officer, Federal Preservation Officer, or person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program shall submit to the Keeper for review: (i) A letter notifying him or her of the date the property was moved; (ii) Photographs of the property on its new site; and (iii) Revised maps, including a U.S.G.S. map, (iv) Acreage, and (v) Verbal boundary description. The Keeper shall respond to a properly documented submittal within 45 days of receipt with the final decision on whether the property will remain in the National Register. If the Keeper approves the move, the property will remain in the National Register during and after the move unless the integrity of the property is in some unforeseen manner destroyed. If the Keeper does not approve the move, the property will be automatically deleted from the National Register when moved. In cases of properties removed from the National Register, if the State, Federal agency, or person or local government where there is no approved State Historic Preservation Program has neglected to obtain prior approval for the move or has evidence that previously unrecognized significance exists, or has accrued, the State, Federal agency, person or local government may resubmit a nomination for the property. (4) In the event that a property is moved, deletion from the National Register will be automatic unless the above procedures are followed prior to the move. If the property has already been moved, it is the responsibility of the State, Federal agency or person or local government which nominated the property to notify the National Park Service. Assuming that the State, Federal agency or person or local government wishes to have the structure reentered in the National Register, it must be nominated again on new forms which should discuss: (i) The reasons for the move; (ii) The effect on the property's historical integrity, and (iii) The new setting and general environment, including evidence that the new site does not possess historical or archeological significance that would be adversely affected by intrusion of the property. In addition, new photographs, acreage, verbal boundary description and a U.S.G.S. map showing the structure at its new location must be sent along with the revised nomination. Any such nomination submitted by a State must be approved by the State Review Board. (5) Properties moved in a manner consistent with the comments of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, in accord with its procedures (36 CFR part 800), are granted as exception to Sec. 60.12(b). Moving of properties in accord with the Advisory Council's procedures should be dealt with individually in each memorandum of agreement. In such cases, the State Historic Preservation Officer or the Federal Preservation Officer, for properties under Federal ownership or control, shall notify the Keeper of the new location after the move including new documentation as described above. City of Charlottesville Department of Parks and Recreation Post Office Box 911 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 434-970-3260 “A World Class City” Policy - Naming of Parks and Park Facilities As a general policy, parks shall be named in accordance with geographical, historical or ecological features indigenous to the park site or to the immediate vicinity of the site. Parks may be named for an individual under the following conditions: 1. Where the individual has made a significant gift of land for park purposes to the City, or 2. In memoriam for an individual who has made a significant contribution to the park system of the City of Charlottesville. 3. For an individual who has made a significant contributions to the quality of life in the community. Recreational facilities or resource management areas within a park may be named for an individual, living or deceased, who: 1. Has made a significant contribution to the protection of natural, cultural, or horticultural resources of the City’s park system; OR 2. Has substantially contributed to the advancement of commensurate types of recreational facilities and opportunities within the City’s park system; OR 3. Has made a significant contribution to the betterment of a specific park, consistent with the established criteria and standards for the designated park classification as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. In support of this policy, nominations for naming parks, recreational facilities or resource management areas shall be evaluated on the basis of the above criteria and upon appropriate documentation. Final action on naming of parks and facilities shall be made in open session by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Adopted by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board – May, 2010 www.charlottesville.org/parksandrec This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Consideration of Ivy Creek Natural Area Landscape Plan Presenter: Diana Foster, Secretary, Ivy Creek Foundation Staff Contacts: Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Title: Ivy Creek Natural Area Landscape Plan Background: City Council is asked to consider a proposed Landscape Plan from the Ivy Creek Foundation (ICF) for the Ivy Creek Natural Area. The Ivy Creek Foundation, in conjunction with local Landscape Architects Warren Byrd and Sue Nelson, has developed a proposal for significant improvements to the entrance and trail connections around the main visitor area of the Ivy Creek Natural Area. This information was presented to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors earlier this year as Albemarle County jointly owns the Ivy Creek Natural Area with the City. Discussion: Ivy Creek Natural Area receives nearly 100,000 visits annually. These visitors include over 2,000 local school students on docent led interpretive tours, naturalist programs, volunteer guide training, farm and barn tours, history programs and many other offerings. The Natural Area is a very busy location and the ICF is desirous of making significant improvements to the entry off Earlysville Road, the parking area and entrance trails to improve pedestrian safety and the visitor experience. Community Engagement: The project design was presented to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors earlier this year. The Ivy Creek Foundation maintains relationships with more than forty (40) community partner organizations who offer public programs at the park, and meet in the education building or on the grounds. (A list of these partner organizations can be found within Attachment 1) Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This project aligns with City Council’s “Green City” vision and contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, and objective 2.5, to provide natural and historic resources stewardship. Budgetary Impact: Fiscal Impact of this action is unknown at this time as the design is only at the schematic stage. Further design work will be required to complete realistic cost estimates. Recommendation: Staff are in agreement with the ICF that improvements to the main park entrance, parking lots and entrance trails are needed. The design as put forth by the ICF addresses those issues in a thoughtful and practical manner. Alternatives: Council may choose to an alternative path forward or approve the project. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Project Description & Design Schematics City of Charlottesville, City Council, Agenda date: April 17, 2017 Action requested: The Ivy Creek Foundation requests that City Council support our moving forward with City staff to explore implementation of the Ivy Creek Natural Area Landscape Plan. Presenter: Diana Foster, Secretary, Ivy Creek Foundation Staff Contact: Brian Daly, Director Parks & Recreation Title: Ivy Creek Natural Area Landscape Plan BACKGROUND: IVY CREEK NATURAL AREA LANDSCAPE PLAN GOALS Improve the safety, accessibility, environmental stewardship, and aesthetics of Ivy Creek Natural Area IVY CREEK NATURAL AREA 219-acre natural area co-owned by City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. The park is open to the public year round IVY CREEK FOUNDATION 501/C/3 non-profit organization, overseen by a volunteer board, that manages and funds many park operations and programs through a memorandum of agreement ISSUES AND CONCERNS Park entrance at Earlysville Road is dangerous, as is the drop-off area in the parking lot, used by many children Primary park features are not ADA- compliant/universally accessible Orientation and wayfinding features are outdated and insufficient LANDSCAPE PLAN Prepared by internationally-known landscape architects Warren Byrd and Sue Nelson to address the Foundation’s articulated goals, issues, and concerns NEXT STEPS Approve the plan and consider funding the proposed improvements Page 2 of 16 DISCUSSION: IVY CREEK NATURAL AREA LANDSCAPE PLAN Ivy Creek Natural Area provides an unparalleled opportunity for City of Charlottesville and County of Albemarle residents to enjoy the outdoors, participate in an educational program, and experience an important part of our region’s history. The 219-acre public park features miles of trails of different challenge levels, connections to a variety of upland habitats, water resources including the Rivanna Reservoir, Ivy Creek, and Martins Branch, and trained docents available to provide guided walks and tours. Ivy Creek Natural Area also protects the cultural heritage of the Carr-Greer family in the form of a historic barn, house, cemetery, and field and woodland patterns. The area where the park now stands was part of the Hydraulic Mills community, settled by African American farmers and others following the Civil War. The property is included on the Heritage Trails map of sites important to the African American story in Charlottesville-Albemarle. The property was also cited as an important property to protect and interpret by the City of Charlottesville’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials, and Public Spaces. The Ivy Creek Foundation, which helps to operate and manage the park through a memorandum of agreement with the county and city, partners with scores of local groups engaged in natural history and environmental stewardship, manages the use of an Education Building used by many groups for meetings and programs, and offers a wide variety of programs to visitors of all ages. The Foundation regularly raises funds to support these efforts. Examples of the benefits afforded to our community by the Ivy Creek Natural Area and the Ivy Creek Foundation follow. Page 3 of 16 VISITATION The park regularly serves nearly 100,000 visitors each year based on traffic counts recorded in 2016: Traffic counts Annual visitation: 48,829 cars Daily average: 134 cars Monthly visitation: Jan - 2,446 Feb - 3,540 Mar - 3,739 Apr - 4,017 May - 4,859 Jun - 3,919 Jul - 3,989 Aug - 5,072 Sep - 4,273 Oct- 5,072 Nov - 4,188 Dec - 3,715 Quarterly visitation: Q1 (Jan, Feb, Mar) - 9,725 cars (107/day) Q2 (Apr, May, Jun) - 12,795 cars (141/day) Q3 (Jul, Aug, Sep) - 14,186 cars (145/day) Q4 (Oct, Nov, Dec) - 12,123 cars (133/day) Peak visitation: May, August, and October Visitation grew 26% in Q3 over 2015, and 13% in Q4, when the first traffic counts were conducted. The single busiest week of the year was November 7-14, 2016, when 1,436 cars were counted (a daily average of 205). The least busiest periods are the last week of January and first week of February, when 372 cars were counted entering Ivy Creek Natural Area. Page 4 of 16 SCHOOL TOURS (PRIMARILY ELEMENTARY) The Ivy Creek Foundation School Tour Program is one of the most important outreach and educational efforts conducted by the Ivy Creek Foundation. The program provides approximately 2,000 to 2,500 secondary-school children with guided nature walks each year. Over the past four years, the program has benefitted regional students as follows: • 2013: 37 buses, 1316 students, 359 chaperones • 2014: 37 buses, 1402 students, 380 chaperones • 2015: 37 buses, 1495 students, 372 chaperones • 2016: 52 buses, 1573 students, 374 chaperones Other Programs (all ages) • Little Naturalists • Junior Naturalists • Farm & Barn History docent led tours (seasonal) • Ivy Talks (offered six times per year) • Learning Native Trees program • Native Shrub and Vine Walks • First Saturday Bird Walks (offered every month) • Native Plant Walks Page 5 of 16 COMPLETE LIST OF PROGRAMS CONDUCTED IN 2016 EXCLUDING SCHOOL TOURS Date Plan # Kids Name 1/2/2016 1 20 9 First Saturday Bird Walk 1/4/2016 x Become a Virginia Master Naturalist 1/11/2016 1 8 2 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 1/11/2016 x Natural History of Virginia - PVCC 1/14/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 1/18/2016 0 Jr. Nats First Meeting 1/23/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 1/28/2016 1 7 2 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 1/30/2016 1 5 Day of Cleaning 2/5/2016 1 15 2 First Fridays Under the Stars 2/6/2016 1 15 2 First Saturday Bird Walk 2/6/2016 1 25 15 Young Birders' Club 2/7/2016 1 18 2 Learning Native Trees (Ragged Mountain) 2/8/2016 1 6 2 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 2/10/2016 x Rivanna Master Naturalist Training - Day 1 2/11/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 2/13/2016 x Field Ornithology - Day 1 2/14/2016 1 46 Ivy Talks - Heritage Trails 2/20/2016 x Kid*Vention 2/25/2016 1 27 14 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 2/27/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 3/5/2016 1 16 2 First Saturday Bird Walk 3/10/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 3/13/2016 1 16 Ivy Talks - Plant Survey & Herbarium 3/14/2016 1 6 2 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 3/19/2016 1 6 Native Plant Walk 3/22/2016 1 4 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 3/23/2016 1 28 The Songs of Frogs and Toads /////// 3/26/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 3/29/2016 1 5 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 3/31/2016 1 29 17 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 4/1/2016 1 4 First Fridays Under the Stars 4/2/2016 0 0 Barn Docent Training 4/2/2016 1 55 14 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 1 4/2/2016 1 29 10 First Saturday Bird Walk 4/2/2016 1 15 12 Young Birders' Club 4/5/2016 1 5 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 4/9/2016 1 11 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 2 4/10/2016 1 32 13 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 2 4/11/2016 1 31 19 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 4/12/2016 1 5 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 4/14/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 4/16/2016 1 21 5 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 3 4/16/2016 1 16 Native Plant Walk 4/17/2016 1 31 Celebration of Nature in Music & Art 4/19/2016 1 4 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 4/23/2016 1 19 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 4 Page 6 of 16 4/23/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 4/24/2016 1 67 25 Farm and Barn History: Week 4 Sunday 4/26/2016 1 4 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 4/28/2016 1 15 8 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 4/30/2016 1 42 22 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 5 5/1/2016 x Native Plant Sale 5/3/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 5/7/2016 1 2 Barn Docent Training 5/7/2016 1 43 16 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 6 5/7/2016 1 18 First Saturday Bird Walk 5/9/2016 1 20 10 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 5/10/2016 1 5 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 5/12/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 5/14/2016 1 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 7 5/15/2016 1 18 8 Butterfly Walk 5/21/2016 1 9 5 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 8 5/21/2016 1 12 3 Native Plant Walk 5/22/2016 1 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 8b 5/22/2016 1 64 10 Ivy Talks - Farming in Albemarle County in the 1930's and 1940's 5/25/2016 1 25 RMN Final Class - Interpretation 5/26/2016 1 15 25 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 5/28/2016 1 13 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 9 5/28/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 5/29/2016 1 21 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 9b 6/3/2016 1 5 First Fridays Under the Stars 6/4/2016 1 2 Barn Docent Training 6/4/2016 1 41 13 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 10 6/4/2016 1 36 8 First Saturday Bird Walk 6/4/2016 1 24 12 Young Birders' Club 6/5/2016 1 16 5 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 10b 6/5/2016 1 7 Learning Native Shrubs and Vines (not Trees) 6/9/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 6/11/2016 1 3 1 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 11 6/12/2016 1 9 Butterfly Walk 6/12/2016 1 10 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 11b 6/13/2016 1 14 8 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 6/18/2016 1 12 3 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 12 6/18/2016 1 14 Native Plant Walk 6/19/2016 1 16 6 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 12b 6/25/2016 1 21 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 13 6/25/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 6/26/2016 1 23 9 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 13b 6/30/2016 1 41 24 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 7/2/2016 1 2 Barn Docent Training 7/2/2016 1 15 3 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 14 7/2/2016 1 29 12 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 14 7/2/2016 1 21 1 First Saturday Bird Walk 7/3/2016 0 0 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 14b 7/9/2016 x Day Soiree 7/9/2016 1 13 2 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 15 Page 7 of 16 7/10/2016 1 11 3 Butterfly Walk 7/10/2016 1 23 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 15b 7/11/2016 1 15 7 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 7/14/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 7/16/2016 1 17 5 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 16 7/16/2016 1 14 Native Plant Walk 7/17/2016 1 18 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 16b 7/23/2016 1 6 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 17 7/23/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 7/24/2016 1 3 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 17b 7/28/2016 1 10 5 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 7/30/2016 1 30 7 Dragonfly Walk 7/30/2016 1 4 1 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 18 8/5/2016 1 3 First Fridays Under the Stars 8/6/2016 1 2 1 Barn Docent Training 8/6/2016 1 8 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 19 8/6/2016 1 20 3 First Saturday Bird Walk 8/6/2016 1 12 6 Young Birders' Club 8/7/2016 1 19 8 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 19b 8/8/2016 1 18 10 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 8/11/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 8/13/2016 1 12 3 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 20 8/14/2016 1 7 2 Butterfly Walk 8/14/2016 1 1 0 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 20b 8/20/2016 1 21 10 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 21 8/20/2016 1 16 2 Native Plant Walk 8/21/2016 1 11 3 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 21b 8/25/2016 1 15 5 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 8/25/2016 1 50 9 Nighthawks 8/27/2016 1 17 9 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 22 8/27/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 8/28/2016 1 22 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 22b 8/30/2016 1 30 Nighthawks 9/3/2016 1 1 Barn Docent Training 9/3/2016 1 32 10 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 23 9/3/2016 1 19 First Saturday Bird Walk 9/4/2016 1 57 23 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 23b 9/6/2016 1 6 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 9/8/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 9/10/2016 1 11 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 24 9/11/2016 1 26 10 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 24b 9/12/2016 1 65 34 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 9/13/2016 1 4 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 9/17/2016 1 12 2 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 25 9/17/2016 1 20 5 Native Plant Walk 9/18/2016 1 22 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 25b 9/18/2016 1 22 Ivy Creek Foundation Meeting 9/20/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 9/24/2016 1 11 4 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 26 9/24/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 9/25/2016 1 32 17 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 26b Page 8 of 16 9/27/2016 1 1 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 9/29/2016 1 24 13 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 10/1/2016 1 3 Barn Docent Training 10/1/2016 0 0 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 27 10/1/2016 1 18 8 First Saturday Bird Walk 10/1/2016 1 22 16 Young Birders' Club 10/2/2016 1 19 2 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 27b 10/4/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 10/7/2016 1 2 First Fridays Under the Stars 10/8/2016 1 29 11 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 28 10/9/2016 1 50 25 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 28b 10/10/2016 1 27 18 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 10/11/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 10/13/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 10/15/2016 1 76 21 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 29 10/15/2016 1 7 Native Plant Walk 10/16/2016 1 45 18 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 29b 10/18/2016 1 8 Barn Visitors 10/18/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 10/22/2016 1 50 22 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 30 10/22/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 10/23/2016 1 53 16 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 30b 10/23/2016 1 36 22 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 30b 10/23/2016 1 7 Learning Native Trees 10/25/2016 1 3 Ivy Creek Volunteer Guide Training 10/27/2016 1 6 3 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 10/29/2016 1 21 6 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 31 10/30/2016 1 32 11 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 31b 11/5/2016 1 125 53 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 32 11/5/2016 1 25 5 First Saturday Bird Walk 11/6/2016 1 78 32 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 32b 11/10/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 11/12/2016 1 53 17 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 33 11/13/2016 1 44 Ivy Talks: Enslaved to the Kitchen 11/14/2016 1 15 8 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 11/19/2016 1 7 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 34 11/19/2016 1 14 Native Plant Walk 11/20/2016 1 11 Farm and Barn History Day: Week 34b 12/2/2016 1 8 First Fridays Under the Stars 12/3/2016 1 19 3 First Saturday Bird Walk 12/3/2016 1 15 9 Young Birders' Club 12/4/2016 1 26 1 Exploring Winter with Mary Jane 12/8/2016 x Volunteer Work Day 12/12/2016 1 36 18 Little Naturalists (fka Toddler Time) 12/14/2016 1 30 Kestrel Talk TOTALS 3198 1009 NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS / KID PARTICIPANTS Page 9 of 16 OTHER AMENITIES River View Farm The former River View Farm comprises the majority of Ivy Creek Natural Area. It is recognized as a significant African American historical site by “Journey through Hallowed Ground” – a Congressionally-designated National Heritage Area spanning four mid-Atlantic states; by the state-wide Virginia Foundation for the Humanities African American Heritage Trail and Historic Sites Database; and locally by the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center. River View Farm has also received the attention of Preservation Piedmont, the Albemarle County Historic Preservation Committee, Charlottesville’s Historic Resources Committee, as well as the City’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials, and Public Spaces. The landscape plan recommends expanding the ability of the property to tell the story of the Carr-Greer Farm through new plantings and treatment of the cultural landscape to depict historic activities and uses. River View Farm connects visitors with an African American family headed by a former slave, Hugh Carr, who built a thriving farm, mentored other farmers, both black and white, and educated their children to become teachers, doctors, and lawyers. Carr’s daughter, Mary, married Conly Greer. Greer became the first African American extension agent in Albemarle County, helping black farmers learn modern farming practices. River View Farm became a model in the county and farmers frequently visited frequently to observe Greer's methods. River View Farm Barn. The River View Farm barn, once the centerpiece of Conley Greer’s working farm, is the focus of many programs and activities. The barn was renovated through a cooperative effort between the Ivy Creek Foundation and Albemarle County, with the Foundation focusing on interpretive programming and the county on capital improvements to the structure. Exhibits and docents are available in the barn to interpret the history of River View Farm. Carr-Greer House. Currently used to house a park caretaker, the Carr-Greer House is a nineteenth-century historic structure thought to have been built by Hugh Carr circa 1883. Fields. Fields and meadows located within the park were once used to grow corn, wheat, and hay. Cemetery. A small family cemetery is located along the main entry path from the parking area to the kiosk, barn, and education building. Hugh Carr, his wife Texie Mae, Marshall Carr, and Mary Carr and Conly Greer are buried in the cemetery. Page 10 of 16 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE -- VISION STATEMENTS AND STRATEGIC PLAN The Landscape Plan supports three of the vision statements put forth by Charlottesville City Council: “C’ville Arts and Culture,” “A Green City,” and “America’s Healthiest City,” as well as the Comprehensive Plan. C’ville Arts and Culture Our community has world-class performing, visual, and literary arts reflective of the unique character, culture, and diversity of Charlottesville. Charlottesville cherishes and builds programming around the evolving research and interpretation of our historic heritage and resources. Through City partnerships and promotion of festivals, venues, and events, all have an opportunity to be a part of this thriving arts, cultural, and entertainment scene. A Green City Charlottesville citizens live in a community with a vibrant urban forest, tree-lined streets, and lush green neighborhoods. We have an extensive natural trail system, along with healthy rivers and streams. We have clean air and water, we emphasize recycling and reuse, and we minimize storm-water runoff. Our homes and buildings are sustainably designed and energy efficient. America’s Healthiest City All residents have access to high-quality health care services. We have a community-wide commitment to personal fitness and wellness, and all residents enjoy our outstanding recreational facilities, walking trails, and safe routes to schools. We have a strong support system in place. Our emergency response system is among the nation’s best. Comprehensive Plan The Landscape Plan is also consistent with the city’s vision as articulated in the current comprehensive plan in the following topic areas: • 2.5. Provide natural and historic resources stewardship • 3.4. Promote diverse cultural tourism • 5.1. Respect and nourish diversity • 5.2. Build collaborative partnerships Page 11 of 16 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Ivy Creek Foundation maintains relationships with more than 40 partner organizations. These groups offer public programs and often meet at the Education Building or on grounds. Current partner organizations include: • Albemarle County • Albemarle Garden Club • Albemarle-Charlottesville 4-H • Alpha Phi Omega of UVA Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Virginia • American Chestnut Foundation • Blue Ridge Prism • Blue Ridge Young Birders Club • Buck Mountain Garden Club • Building Goodness Foundation • Central Virginia Beekeepers • Central Virginia History Researchers • Charlottesville Area Tree Stewards • Charlottesville Astronomical Society • Charlottesville Earth Week • City of Charlottesville • Go Into Nature • Horological Association of Virginia • Jefferson School African American Heritage Center • MEDIC SOLO Disaster + Wilderness Medical School • Monticello Bird Club • Monticello Garden Club • OAR – Jefferson Community Corrections • Piedmont Garden Club • Piedmont Master Gardeners • Piedmont Virginia Community College, Physical & Natural Sciences Dept. • Rivanna Master Naturalists • Sacred Plant Traditions • Sierra Club, Piedmont Group • Sierra Club, Virginia Chapter • Stream Watch (now Rivanna Conservation Alliance) • TeensGIVE • Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission • Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District • University of Virginia’s Brown College Environmental Writing Program • Victoria Dye Photography • Virginia Cooperative Extension Piedmont Master Gardeners • Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation Page 12 of 16 • Virginia Department of Forestry • Virginia Department of Game & Inland Fisheries • Virginia Museum of Natural History • Virginia Native Plant Society • Virginia Natural Resources Leadership Institute • Virginia Society of Ornithology • Virginia Tech Cooperative Extension • Wild Virginia Page 13 of 16 County of Albemarle—Comprehensive Plan Adopting the Ivy Creek Natural Area Landscape Plan meets the goals put forth in the County of Albemarle Comprehensive Plan as follows: Natural Resources Goal Albemarle’s ecosystems and natural resources will be thoughtfully protected and managed in both the Rural and Development Areas to safeguard the quality of life of present and future generations. Relationship to the Vision Relationship to the Vision Albemarle County’s natural resources are essential parts of its rural heritage and scenic beauty. These finite features help to support the County’s tourist economy and are enjoyed by residents and visitors alike. Objective 1 Ensure clean and abundant water resources for public health, business, healthy ecosystems, and personal enjoyment by preventing shortages and contamination. Strategy 1d Educate the public on how they can help with water resource protection. Objective 4 Protect the biological diversity and ecological integrity of the County in both the Rural Area and Development Areas. Strategy 4c Collaborate with federal, State, and regional partners, who have geographic information on biological resources, to help build a biodiversity inventory. Strategy 4e Encourage the use of native plants in landscaping to protect and provide habitat for native biodiversity, to save water, and to connect landowners to the local ecosystem. Page 14 of 16 Strategy 4f Increase the community’s awareness of the importance of biodiversity to encourage protection of biological resources. Objective 6 Retain and improve land cover near rivers and streams and protect wetlands. Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Goal Albemarle’s historic, cultural, and scenic resources will be preserved. Relationship to the Vision Historic, cultural, and scenic resources create the jewel that is Albemarle County. They are key features for tourism and help provide the quality of life enjoyed by residents and business owners. School children learn the importance of preserving these critical features. Without preserved vistas and historic sites, Albemarle County could look like large-lot rural suburbia - the polar opposite of what Albemarle wishes to be. For that reason, economic development opportunities need to be expanded with care to ensure that new activities are compatible with and not destructive of these important resources. Objective 1 Continue to identify and recognize the value of buildings, structures, landscapes, sites, and districts that have historical, architectural, archaeological, or cultural significance. The relatively large number of Albemarle County historic resources listed in the State and National Registers are examples of successful preservation efforts in the County and attest to the commendable efforts of their owners. Over the years, historic resource surveys have identified buildings and sites in Albemarle that are eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. However, there is no consolidated or updated list of these properties. In addition, many property owners are not aware of the historic significance of their properties, and many historic resources are demolished, leaving no record behind. Objective 2, Strategy 2d Practice good stewardship of the historic resources under County control by using recognized practices for the preservation of historic resources. Page 15 of 16 The County owns several historic properties and has responsibilities as an active participant in the historic community. One of those responsibilities is setting an example for the community in it stewardship of County-owned historic resources. By maintaining and rehabilitating these resources in appropriate ways, the County can set an example that historic buildings can contribute significantly to everyday life. Objective 3 Provide educational programs in the community about historic resources and preservation. County residents and visitors are reminded daily of Albemarle’s rich history when they view structures and landscapes that have remained practically unchanged for hundreds of years. Successfully communicating the value of Albemarle’s historic resources helps engender in the community a sense of common responsibility for those resources. Year 2000 Historic Preservation committee document “A primary responsibility of the County is the continued good stewardship of the historic resources under its control.” Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, Green Systems Goal Albemarle will have a system of high quality parks and recreational facilities throughout the County that is interconnected by greenways and paths. Relationship to the Vision Relationship to the Vision Vibrant communities are places where residents enjoy living. Key components of enjoyable places are parks and recreational areas located within a short walk from homes and work. Greenways in natural areas help connect places and, when complete with trails, can provide an alternative to driving. Parks and play areas provide places for school children to play and adults to enjoy the outdoors. In the Rural Area, parks preserve natural and scenic beauty. All of these things are important to the economy because of their strong contribution to quality of life for existing and new County residents. Objective 1 Preserve and maintain important natural areas, rivers, and lakes in County-owned parks in the Development Areas and the Rural Area, in parks jointly owned with the City, and in City-owned land surrounding drinking water reservoirs in the County. Page 16 of 16 I. Purpose of this PresentaLon The City of CharloNesville and Albemarle County co-own the Ivy Creek Natural area, the site of historic River View Farm. For more than 35 years, the volunteer board of the Ivy Creek FoundaLon has managed the area. Based on our day-to-day oversight of the property, the FoundaLon has idenLfied issues of concern about safety, accessibility, and visitor experience. The good news is we are presenLng to you a comprehensive landscape plan that improves, restores, and interprets both the natural and cultural aspects of the property in such a way that the Ivy Creek Natural Area (ICNA) and the historic River View Farm will appeal and speak to all ciLzens both now and in the future. 1 II. Who We Are The Ivy Creek FoundaLon has managed the 219 acres that protect our public drinking water and raised monies to establish and maintain more than 6 miles of trails, refurbish a historic African American barn, build an educaLon facility, provide partnership opportuniLes for more than 40 community organizaLons, and offer an extensive array of natural and cultural history educaLon programs to the public, including our school children. In fact, we are the only organizaLon that provides such programming at liNle to no cost in either a city or a county park. The Landscape Plan we are presenLng focuses only on what we call the core visitor use area, as highlighted in yellow. 2 One of the unique aspects of the property is its cultural heritage as River View Farm, established post EmancipaLon by Hugh Carr, a former slave. The property has been recognized as a significant site of African American heritage by the Journey through Hallowed Ground, a Congressionally-designated NaLonal Heritage Area, the statewide Virginia FoundaLon for the HumaniLes, CharloNesville’s Jefferson School African American Heritage Center, the City’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials, and Public Spaces, PreservaLon Piedmont, the Albemarle County Historic PreservaLon CommiNee, and CharloNesville’s Historic Resources CommiNee. We regularly offer special programs and interpretaLon about River View Farm in the historic Conly Greer barn. 3 III. Issues and Concerns Addressed by the Landscape Plan Approximately 100,000 visitors come to Ivy Creek each year to walk the trails, enjoy the outdoors, and parLcipate in programs. With the popularity and success of the ICNA comes a responsibility to ensure the safety and comfort of visitors. The Plan addresses issues of concern and presents opportuniLes for both natural and cultural history interpretaLon. 4 5 6 Safety concerns begin at the entrance to the ICNA, which falls within a curve of Earlysville Road with limited site distance, no dedicated turn lane, and rapidly-moving traffic. The entrance has been the site of numerous accidents. School children arrive in buses for field trips, but there is no appropriate drop off or pick up locaLon that protects children from cars arriving or backing out of parking spaces, and there are no dedicated bus parking spaces. The parking area is insufficient for the volume of visitors. It is not ADA compliant. The parking area lacks clear delineaLon or markings. People regularly park on top of tree roots thus compacLng soil and damaging trees. Finally, drainage systems have not been maintained. Stormwater flow is contribuLng to erosion of the pavement and surrounding soil. 7 The main entrance lacks signage for welcoming or orienLng visitors to the site. The main trail leading to the informaLon kiosk, barn, and educaLon building is confusing for visitors because a porLon of it doubles as a service road for park maintenance and delivery vehicles. The main trails lack ADA-compliance. 8 The kiosk where visitors can learn about the ICNA and River View Farm is badly in need of updaLng. It is dark and unwelcoming, and potenLally unsafe due to the extent of its enclosure. We would like to have more area for interpreLve displays. 9 One of the key elements of historic River View Farm—the farmhouse—has been neglected in recent years and is badly in need of repair. The farmhouse presents an opportunity to more fully tell the story of River View Farm. We support (and are supported by) local groups who have recently recommended protecLng the heritage value of the farmhouse. River View Farm, of which the city and county took ownership in order to create ICNA, is recognized as a significant African American historical site by “Journey through Hallowed Ground” – a Congressionally-designated NaLonal Heritage Area spanning four mid-AtlanLc states, by the state-wide Virginia FoundaLon for the HumaniLes African American Heritage Trail and Historic Sites Database, and locally by the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center. River View Farm has also received the aNenLon of PreservaLon Piedmont, the Albemarle County Historic PreservaLon CommiNee, CharloNesville’s Historic Resources CommiNee, as well as the City’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Race, Memorials, and Public Spaces. 10 IV. The Landscape Plan Following discussions with the County’s Parks and RecreaLon department about the FoundaLon’s interest in addressing these issues and concerns, we were fortunate to have two long-Lme members — Warren Byrd and Sue Nelson, internaLonally recognized landscape architects — work with us to prepare a landscape plan on a pro bono basis. Again please note the yellow oval, which marks the core visitor area on which we are focusing. 11 The Landscape Plan is exciLng because it presents a vision for how we can address issues and problems within this core area, while also enhancing the interpreLve and educaLonal potenLal of the natural as well as the cultural heritage of the site. The Plan improves the safety and aestheLcs of the entrance road, enlarges parking capacity, provides a safe drop-off locaLon for school children, idenLfies a dedicated bus parking area, improves stormwater management, relocates the service road, establishes ADA-compliant parking and trail systems, illustrates new educaLonal demonstraLon naLve plant areas, and reimagines the role of the River View Farmhouse as an interpreted feature. 12 V. Next Steps The landscape plan affords an incredible blueprint for the future. ImplemenLng the plan in phases will be necessary, and we believe the following sequence would best benefit visitors. Phase 1. Improve entry drive, improve parking lot, and relocate Service Road Phase 2. Improve Main Entrance Paths, Signage, and InformaLon Kiosk Phase 3. Improve Built and Landscape Features of River View Farm and their InterpretaLon As part of Phase 1, we have already begun exploring how to improve the safety of the entrance by iniLaLng discussions with VDOT and County Supervisor Diantha McKeel. The project may qualify for VDOT’s RecreaLonal Access Funding to plan and construct the roadway improvements. We have also idenLfied a willing neighbor to support the possible introducLon of a turn lane at the entrance. 13 Improvements to the parking area, in addiLon to the essenLal incorporaLon of a safe drop-off and pick-up area for school children and ADA compliance, include integral stormwater management soluLons, such as permeable paving or rain gardens, and the potenLal to educate visitors about these green pracLces. 14 The plan illustrates designs for improved and ADA-compliant trails, improved signage, and an expanded welcoming informaLon kiosk with a gathering spot where schoolchildren can congregate away from the parking lot. 15 The Plan offers design ideas for new naLve planLngs in educaLonal demonstraLon gardens. 16 Finally, the Plan provides design concepts for beNer integraLng the surviving elements of River View Farm into interpreLve programming. This presents an exciLng opportunity consistent with recommendaLons of both city and county organizaLons to protect and interpret our African American history. 17 VI. Conclusion – In Lmes driven by technology and urban sprawl, where children are becoming more and more nature deprived, we see this Plan as an opportunity and a responsibility to future generaLons. We hope the County and City will recognize and financially support proceeding with the objecLves presented here today. The improvements, restoraLon and interpretaLon of Ivy Creek Natural Area and our unique African American history will appeal to and speak to all ciLzens for years to come. Thank you. 18 This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Information Presenter: Denise Bonds, MD, MPH, Health Director, Thomas Jefferson Health District Staff Contacts: Denise Bonds, MD, MPH, Health Director, Thomas Jefferson Health District Title: Thomas Jefferson Health District Community Health Improvement Plan Background: Community organizations partnered with the Thomas Jefferson Health District, Sentara Martha Jefferson, University of Virginia Medical Center, and University of Virginia Department of Public Health Sciences to conduct the third community health assessment and develop a community health improvement plan. This presentation will provide an overview of the process and our health priorities for the next 3 years. Discussion: Staff of the health department, staff of Charlottesville city government, and members of Charlottesville City Council participated in the local community health assessment councils and the overarching leadership council. All members had a voice in the process. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The Community Health Improvement plan aligns with Goal 2: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community. Specifically, it aligns with “2.2 Consider health in all policies and programs” and with “2.4. Ensure families and individuals are safe and stable” Community Engagement: Over 100 community agencies and 10 coalitions participated in the process of the health assessment. The citizens of Charlottesville were invited to participate in a public survey available at community events, partner location, and on the internet. Budgetary Impact: This is a presentation only – no request for funds. Recommendation: This is an information only presentation . Alternatives: This is an information only presentation Attachments: Presentation attached. MAPP2Health 2016 Charlottesville City Council Monday, April 17, 2017 Our Values: Teamwork, Accountability, Inclusivity, Respect MAPP2Health Engagement Framework Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships (MAPP) The Community Health Improvement Plan is the result of the assessment process. The Plan is a living document, driven by locality action plans. With participation from 105 community partners and 10 community coalitions Charlottesville/Albemarle CHA Council Members  Albemarle Department of Social Services  On Our Own  Albemarle Fire and Rescue  ReadyKids  Region Ten Community Services Board  Boys and Girls Club of Central Virginia  Sentara Martha Jefferson Hospital  Central Virginia Health Services, Inc.  The Bridge Performing Arts Initiative  Charlottesville City Council  The Planning Council  Charlottesville City Manager’s Office  The Senior Center, Inc.  Charlottesville Department of Social Services  Thomas Jefferson Health District  Thomas Jefferson Health District Medical  Charlottesville Fire Department Reserve Corps  Charlottesville Free Clinic  University of Virginia Department of Public  Charlottesville Human Services Health Sciences  Charlottesville / Albemarle Health Department  University of Virginia Family Medicine  City of Promise  University of Virginia Health System  Virginia Cooperative Extension  Community Mental Health and Wellness  Virginia Department of Housing and Coalition Community Development  Improving Pregnancy Outcomes Workgroup Local Public Health System Assessment Link to/Provide Care = 90% Inform, Educate, and Empower = 90% Mobilize Community Partnerships = 85% Develop Policies and Plans = 65% Monitor Health = 60% Evaluate = 55% Research = 45% Assure Competent Workforce = 30% Enforce Laws = 25% Diagnose and Investigate = 15% Forces of Change Assessment • Understand • Freedom or and respect ability to each other’s obtain or differences make use of something Cultural Diversity Access and Humility Laws and Economics Policies • Material • Rules prosperity Community Themes and Strengths  Obtain input from community members on the health of their communities  Where do you live?  What makes your community a healthy place to live?  What should your community improve? 800 700 600 500 282 427 400 170 80 113 300 87 82 114 98 200 92 91 51 288 100 176 210 196 181 147 0 Albemarle Charlottesville Fluvanna Greene Louisa Nelson In-Person Partner Locations Online Community Themes and Strengths 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Healthcare 318 Food options 287 Outdoors 228 Safe Streets 214 Culture and Arts 207 Recreation 187 Jobs 177 Housing 164 Neighborhoods Local schools 114 147 Strengths Spiritual Life 113 Transportation 103 Local business 80 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Mental health care services 303 Housing 297 Alcohol and drug misuse and prevention services 240 Children and youth services 239 Education 234 Obesity prevention and healthy weight services 195 Areas for Aging Services Tobacco reduction services 108 186 Improvement Pregnancy and infant health 93 Community Health Assessment Data, data, data … • Over 140 indicators reviewed • District-wide and locality specific Age and Gender Distribution, 2014 85&OVER 80-84 75-79 Population Change 70-74 65-69 60-64 55-59 50-54 45-49 45,593 40-44 43,475 35-39 30-34 25-29 2010 2014 20-24 18-19 15-17 10-14 5-9 1-4 0 Promote Health Eating and Active Living GOAL: Increase access to healthy foods and recreation through education, advocacy, and evidence-based programming Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 By 2019, decrease the By 2019, decrease the By 2019, implement data percentage of TJHD adults percentage of TJHD children collection and analysis of who are overweight or obese who are overweight or obese obesity across the lifespan in all of TJHD Charlottesville Strategies Strategy 1: Increase availability of fresh Strategy 2: Consider implementing a tax on fruits and vegetables at corner markets (see sugar-sweetened beverages or restrict the Richmond’s Healthy Corner Store Initiative availability of unhealthy snacks in public for reference). venues. Address Mental Health and Substance Issues GOAL: Improve capacity to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate mental health and substance abuse prevention and treatment services Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 By 2019, reduce the need for By 2019, increase the capacity of By 2019, leverage partnerships mental health and substance use Community Mental Health and across local coalitions to disorder hospitalization in TJHD Wellness Coalition partners to implement 3-5 policy, system, through improved access to provide mental health and and environmental changes to upstream outpatient care substance use disorders services prevent substance use disorders in TJHD by 10 and promote mental health Charlottesville Strategies Strategy 1: Increase culturally Strategy 2: Implement a mental Strategy 3: Develop a culturally and linguistically appropriate health and substance abuse and linguistically appropriate mental health and substance public awareness and stigma behavioral health workforce and abuse services by expanding reduction campaign and other include opportunities for support integrated care, medication policy, system, and from peer and family members assisted treatment, and overall environmental changes. with lived behavioral health access to care. experience. Mental Health Providers in Charlottesville, 2014 35 Mental Health Providers There is 1 Mental Health Provider for every: Charlottesville Virginia 118 724 Individuals Individuals Days Mental Health was Not Good, 2012-13 Mental Health in TJHD, 2012-13 During the past 30 days, how many days was your mental health not good? 80 Percentage of TJHD Adult 70 67 Respondents (%) 60 50 40 30 20 17.8 15.2 10 0 0 1 to 7 8 to 30 Number of Days Mental Health Was Not Good Source: Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) Drug/Narcotic Arrest Rate per 100,000 Population Three Year Averages, 2000-13 1200 1100 1000 865 900 800 700 600 527 500 400 447 300 398 200 100 69 0 Albemarle Charlottesville UVA UVA & Charlottesville Virginia Source: Crime in Virginia - Virginia State Police - Uniform Crime Reporting Program Improve health disparities and access to care GOAL: Increase health equity and narrow the gap for health conditions through outreach and education to healthcare providers and community members Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 By 2019, identify up to three By 2019, decrease the 2010-14 By 2019, support TJHD employers health condition with marked TJHD African American infant and community partners to disparities and reduce the mortality rate from 10.6 to 5.0 develop cultural humility and disparities infant deaths per 1000 live births workforce diversity to ensure all citizens have the opportunity to achieve the highest levels of health Charlottesville Strategies Strategy 1:Pick one Strategy 2: Develop an Strategy 3: Explore best Strategy 4: Create a or two concrete health effective coalition practices to ensure a healthcare workforce disparities to improve around improving health medical home for that reflects the (while still maintaining disparities to guide everyone. diversity of the pregnancy outcomes). progress toward community. achieving this goal. Infant Mortality by Race Infant Deaths Per 1,000 Live Births By Place of Residence in 14 TJHD, 5-Year Rolling Averages 2003-2013 11.9 12 10 7.4 8 6.6 6 5.7 4 5.3 3.5 HP 2020 Goal = 6 2 0 Albemarle Charlottesville Virginia Healthy People 2020 Goal Source: Virginia Department of Health. Division of Health Statistics Foster a Health and Connected Community GOAL: Increase well-being across the lifespan by supporting education, prevention, advocacy, and evidence-based programming Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 By 2019, decrease the By 2019, strengthen health By 2019, decrease the rate of founded/substantiated child relationships across the lifespan unintentional injury and adult abuse and neglect through expansion and hospitalizations due to falls report rates implementation of evidence- based programing Charlottesville Strategies Strategy 1:Expand evidence-based Strategy 2: Implement a Strategy 3: Provide a handout programs for promoting healthy measurement of wellness on parenting skills and relationships and decreasing sexual across the age continuum resources when every child assault. Expand trauma-informed (look to WHO model, enters school. approaches to care and develop structure and benchmarks). strategies and training to promote healthy relationships and resilience. Child Abuse & Neglect (Founded Reports), Rates Per 1,000 Children, 5 Year Averages, 2000-13 8 8 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1.2 1.0 1.3 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.0 0 Albemarle Charlottesville Source: Virginia Department of Social Services Percent of Unintentional Injury Hospitalizations by Cause in TJDH, 2003-13 Falls Motor Vehicles/ Other Transport Crashes 25.5% 55.3% Poisoning 5.3% Other/ Unspecified 4.9% Stuck by, against 2.7% Fire/Flame or Hot Object/Substance 1.6% Overexertion 1.4% Bites/Stings 1.0% Cut/Pierce 0.8% Machinery 0.7% Drowning/Submersion or Suffocation 0.4% Firearm 0.3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Source: Virginia Department of Health On-line Injury Reporting System Full report can be found at: http://www.vdh.virginia.gov/content/uploads/sites/91/2016/07/2016- MAPP2Health-Report.pdf Data slides can be found at: http://www.vdh.virginia.gov/thomas-jefferson/council-information/ Contact Putnam Ivey Population Health and Outreach Team, Thomas Jefferson Health District 434-972-6241 Putnam.ivey@vdh.virginia.gov This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Consideration of Chamber Promenade to the Murray Van Yahres Memorial Grove – McIntire Park Presenter: Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Staff Contacts: Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Title: Chamber Promenade to the Murray Van Yahres Memorial Grove – McIntire Park Background: City Council consideration of a proposal from members of the community to create a promenade of trees within McIntire Park as well as a memorial to the Paul Goodloe McIntire Award winners as well as three community members, Mitch Van Yahres and Jim and Bunny Murray. Discussion: The proposal calls for a promenade of trees from near the pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks to the uppermost part of the park identified as “The Great Lawn” on the 2015 Schematic Design. Trees would be planted in honor of each of the Chamber of Commerce Paul Goodloe McIntire Award winners. The Promenade would lead to the grove of trees in the Great Lawn where a memorial would be constructed to Mitch Van Yahres and Jim and Bunny Murray. The specific proposed design is included as Attachment 2 to this memorandum. Additionally, the proposal includes the creation of a tree maintenance endowment fund to care for the large oak trees in The Great Lawn for many years into the future. Community Engagement: The project design was presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board in January 2017. The design was favorably received by the Advisory Board and recommended to be presented to City Council. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This tree maintenance endowment proposal could potentially contribute to City Council’s “Green City” vision and contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, and objective 2.5, to provide natural and historic resources stewardship. Budgetary Impact: Fiscal Impact of this action is minimal. The project is proposed to be privately funded and maintained. Recommendation: Although the Parks and Recreation staff believes the design of the proposed new memorial is thoughtful and attractive, there remains concerns about process and consistency related to the City’s adopted Master Plan for McIntire Park and the schematic design for the park which was approved by the City Council in 2015. Staff is concerned that Council approval of this project, regardless of the quality of the project design, will indicate to the community that the adopted Master Plan and Schematic Design can be changed or altered based upon singular requests of the Council without adequate public engagement. Consideration should be given to the creation of a formal process that provides for adequate engagement when an individual or group proposes a use within a park outside of uses approved in the Adopted Master Plan. The proposers disagree with the Staff position and view the project as an enhancement to the Schematic Design. Alternatives: Council may choose to an alternative path forward or approve the project. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Project Description Attachment 2 – Design Schematics Chamber Promenade to the Murray - Van Yahres Grove A Gift to the Community Overall Goal: Working with the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Murray and Van Yahres families will raise funds to create a place on the hill top in McIntire Park east which will: • Honor all Paul Goodloe McIntire Citizenship award winners, past and future. • Preserve the Oaks and create a stone terrace for people to enjoy these trees. • Comply with and enhance the McIntire Park’s 2015 Schematic Plan. Process: • Before designing this project, we obtained preliminary approval for our goals from the City Manager, the Parks and Recreation Director, the Parks Advisory Board and individual City Councilors. • Working with our design committee composed of Warren Byrd, Sue Nelson, Chris Murray, Roxanne White and Mike and Peggy Van Yahres, we hired a local landscape architectural firm, Waterstreet Studio, to design the project. • We also collaborated with the Parks Department throughout the design process and recently obtained approval for the design from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. • We have established a fund at the Charlottesville Area Community Foundation to accept donations for the project. • Working with Waterstreet Studio, J. W. Townsend Landscapes projected a preliminary budget for the project of $475,000. Future Schedule: • Next, we will seek approval for the design from City Council. • With these approvals in hand, we will form a fund-rasing committee to raise the necessary funds. The Chamber is also going to assist with fund-raising. • We project that we will begin construction in the Spring of 2018 with a completion date of October 1, 2018. February 8, 2017 THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE waterstreet studio A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC PLAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS CIVIL ENGINEERS 6 | JANUARY | 2017 CHAMBER PAUL GOODLOE McINTIRE CITIZENSHIP AWARD RECIPIENTS JIM MURRAY BUNNY MURRAY MITCH VAN YAHRES The Chamber Promenade will lead to the Murray - Van Yahres Grove located at the top James “Jim” Brady Murray, 1920 - 2015 of the hill on the east side of McIntire Park. The five major goals include: An ardent hunter, fisherman, organic farmer, astronomer 1. To honor all past and future Chamber Paul Goodloe McIntire Citizenship Award and ornithologist, he educated his family and community recipients including Mitch Van Yahres and Jim and Bunny Murray. about the natural world. In 1991, he received the Virginia William J. Kehoe • 2016 Conservationist of the Year award from the Virginia Outdoors Marcus Martin, M.D. • 2015 Foundation. In addition to being a leader in the community, Cathy Train • 2014 industry and agriculture, he served in the House of Delegates Cole Hendrix • 2013 for eight years where he worked to establish the Rivanna as Mike Gaffney • 2012 the first Wild and Scenic River in Virginia and Piedmont Virginia Martin V. Burks III • 2011 Community College, later serving as the first Board Chair. He also Alvin Clements • 2010 served on numerous community organizations including OAR, John T. Casteen, III • 2009 MACAA and CASA, where he volunteered until the age of 80. Dan & Lou Jordan • 2008 Because of these achievements, he and his wife, Bunny, received Harold Wright • 2007 the Chamber Paul Goodloe McIntire Citizenship Award in 1991. Grace Carpenter • 2006 Joseph Teague, Sr. • 2005 Jean “Bunny” Brundred Murray, 1920 - 2012 E. Marshall Pryor, III • 2004 In addition to presiding over their large farm and family, Leonard Sandridge • 2003 Bunny made her mark in the community by serving on many William L. Howard • 2002 organizations, including the Martha Jefferson House, Hospice James S. Kennan • 2001 of the Piedmont and UVA’s Human Investigation Committee. As Paul H. Wood • 2000 Richard & Julia Nunley • 1999 a conservationist on the state and national level, she served Mary Ann Elwood • 1998 on the boards of the Piedmont Environmental Council and the Dr. George & Ann Spence • 1997 Environmental Defense Fund. Her lasting legacy consists of her Laurence Richardson • 1996 faith, her values, her industry, her humor, her gardens, her love of Guy Agnor • 1995 beauty, and—cherished beyond measure—her eight boys. When The Jessup Family • 1994 reflecting on her time on earth, Bunny concluded that it was Nancy O’Brien • 1993 “a wonder.” When she received the Chamber Paul Goodloe Darden Towe • 1992 McIntire Citizenship Award, the community agreed that Mr. & Mrs. James Murray • 1991 Bunny was a wonder, too. Elizabeth B. Gleason • 1990 Drewary J. Brown • 1989 Mitchell “Mitch” Van Yahres, 1926 - 2008 John B. Rogan • 1988 As a dedicated arborist and politician, it was said that “Mitch Hovey S. Dabney • 1987 tended trees for a living and people for a lifetime.” His service Leigh B. Middleditch, Jr. • 1986 to the community included eight years on City Council, two of Francis Fife • 1985 which as mayor, where he championed increased diversity on Bernard J. Haggerty • 1984 Council, public recreational facilities and planting trees in the George C. Palmer II • 1983 middle of Main Street to create the once controversial Downtown James E. Bowen • 1982 Mall. He also served 25 years in the House of Delegates, where Junius R. Fishburne • 1981 he worked to right wrongs, fight for civil rights and promote equal Laurence Brunton • 1980 opportunity for citizens of all incomes and races. Because of these Mary Victoria Craw • 1979 commitments, he was the first recipient of the Chamber Paul Lionel S. Key • 1978 Goodloe McIntire Citizenship Award in 1975. A proud Democrat, Randolph H. Perry • 1977 he counted Republicans among his close friends, too. You might Joel M. Cochran • 1976 disagree with Mitch, but it was nearly impossible to dislike him. Mitchell Van Yahres • 1975 GOALS waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 2 6 I JANUARY I 2017 GOALS 2. To comply with the City of Charlottesville’s “2015 McIntire Park East Schematic Park Plan” by providing passive play, accessible paths and preservation of McIntire Botanical Garden natural resources. Murray-Van Yahres Grove 3. To preserve and enhance the historic Oak trees. by creating a preservation endowment Chamber Promenade Rt .2 50 By pa ss 4. To provide a stone terrace and open lawn in the Grove for picnicking, playing or contemplating these grand trees. 5. To highlight the cultural and ecological history of the Park by highlighting the site’s geology and, “Clermont”, the Mason family’s farm of the mid-19th to mid-20th centuries. waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 3 6 I JANUARY I 2017 OAK, HICKORY, POPLAR, BEECH FOREST - Interpreting mesic site with climax forest species/companion species forming this ecological Piedmont landscape zone SPECIMEN WHITE OAK - Over 150 years old MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE TERRACE - Memoral walls and plaza to Mitch Van Yahres, Jim Murray, SUCCESSIONAL SAPLINGS and Bunny Murray - Interpreting succession - Interpreting geology of site as a natural process ELLIPSE - Accessible walk showing grandeur of the oak grove SEATING AND VIEWING - Views to Carter Mountain FUTURE TREES and Montalto - represent future Chamber Paul Goodloe - Expresses geology of site McIntire Citizenship Award recipients CHAMBER PROMENADE - Intrepretation: introduce contributions and significance of Chamber Paul Goodloe CHAMBER PAUL GOODLOE McIntire Citizenship Award MCINTIRE CITIZENSHIP AWARD RECIPIENTS AND NAME OF GROVE - Pavement bands with names SPECIMEN WHITE OAK TO PARKING ALLEE OF 40 TREES - Represents the current P.G. McIntire HOMESTEAD SITE Award recipients - Interpretive panel with historic photograph showing farmstead and landscape waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 4 6 I JANUARY I 2017 feet OVERALL CONCEPT PLAN 0 100 waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 5 6 I JANUARY I 2017 MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE TERRACE SEATING AND VIEWING MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE ENTRANCE AND NAMES OF ALL CHAMBER PAUL GOODLOE McINTIRE CITIZENSHIP AWARD RECIPIENTS PAST AND PRESENT feet CONCEPT PLAN 0 50 waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 6 06 I OCTOBER I 2016 feet 0 20 ELLIPSE - DETAIL waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 7 6 I JANUARY I 2017 PRECEDENTS waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 8 6 I JANUARY I 2017 MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE AND CHAMBER PROMENADE MASTER PLAN TRAIL feet 0 100 OVERLAY WITH MASTER PLAN TRAIL LAYOUT waterstreet studio THE CHAMBER PROMENADE TO THE MURRAY - VAN YAHRES GROVE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS A Gift to the Community SCHEMATIC DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERS 9 6 I JANUARY I 2017 This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: April 17, 2017 Action Required: Report Only (No Presentation) Staff Contacts: Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Doug Ehman, Manager, Parks Division John Mann, Landscape Manager Title: Annual Integrated Pest Management Policy (IPM) Report Background: In April of 2015, City Council adopted the City’s first Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Policy. The IPM program is a tool for protecting the environmental assets of the city while maintaining a high level of safety for the public and staff of the City of Charlottesville. The IPM approach has been utilized by the Department of Parks and Recreation in grounds management activities for over ten years. Participation in the Environmental Management System (EMS) led the Parks Division to adopt the tenants of an IPM program resulting in reductions in pesticide use, safer pesticide products, and greater environmental responsibility in pesticide applications. The Annual Report is a required step outlined in the adopted Policy, and has been reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Tree Commission. Discussion: In 2016 there was a major reduction in glyphosate usage in the City overall. This reduction was also seen in parks and schools, with the majority of herbicide usage restricted to right of way areas. The City also realized the goal of reducing the use of Round Up and systemic herbicides. A transition to organic herbicides was initiated on school grounds. While glyphosate was not completely eliminated on all school grounds, emphasis was placed on using organics on the grounds of elementary schools. Appropriate future funding will help the Parks Department realize the goal of organics only on all school grounds. The City received significant new vegetated areas to maintain such as the McIntire Interchange, new park lands along the John Warner Parkway, new construction along Route 250 between Barracks Road and Emmett Street, and 79 newly planted trees. Initiatives were taken to reduce problematic areas. These areas include the juniper banks at Jackson-Via Elementary School. A large portion of the existing juniper was removed due to invasive vine proliferation and inaccessibility. The vines in these areas were historically weeded by hand and treated with herbicides with minimal long-term success. Unintentional damage to the shrubs while accessing this area deemed it problematic and prompted its removal. The area was converted to a pollinator friendly meadow planting. A habitat restoration project occurred at Pen Park. The natural area between the tennis courts and the Parks Department office was cleared of invasive vines, non-native trees, debris, and then integrated with native plantings. These improvements were accomplished with the help of goats, volunteers, and Parks staff. No herbicides were used on general turf areas managed by the City. Turf managers continued to practice IPM methods such as maintaining proper mowing heights to inhibit weed growth and mulching leaves to increase organic matter and fertility of turf areas. Several turf managers received certification from the State of Virginia as fertilizer applicators. The Weed Dragon, a flame based weed control device, was utilized in specific areas where deemed appropriate. This pilot program presented safety concerns and will be confined to parking lots or other areas where fire concerns are at a minimum. Other pilot programs proved more successful. The interior of McGuffey Park, for example, has remained free of synthetic chemicals. This is largely due to increased mechanical controls such as weed trimming and the efforts of volunteers. Another successful pilot program was utilizing a mulch blower for mulching applications. Increased mulch applications are a major goal of the IPM program as they reduce weeds and chemical applications while building soil health. Community Engagement: The IPM Annual Report was developed by a Committee that includes representatives from the Council Appointed Tree Commission and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The IPM Policy supports City Council’s “Green City” vision and contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, and objective 2.5, to provide natural and historic resources stewardship. Budgetary Impact: This report has no impact on the General Fund. Recommendation: N/A - Report only. Attachments: Attachment 1 – 2017 IPM Annual Report City of Charlottesville Parks and Recreation 2016 Annual Report Integrated Pest Management What is a pest? Pests are organisms including insects and undesirable plants that damage landscapes, structures, infrastructure, or that impact human or animal health. Integrated Pest Management Program Charlottesville Parks and Recreation Department IPM Coordinator John Mann, Landscape Manager/Horticulturalist IPM Program Manager Patrick Hagan, Gardener II IPM Committee Brian Daly, Director, Parks and Recreation Doug Ehman, Parks Manager Kristel Riddervold, Environmental Sustainability Manager Dave Hirschman, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Representative Ineke Dickman, Charlottesville Tree Commission Representative Introduction The intention of this report is to disclose the current activities of the City of Charlottesville’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program as adopted by City Council in 2015. It will provide insight into the decision-making process as it pertains to the implementation of the IPM program and analyze the past goals as well as highlight the future goals of the program. An effective IPM program requires constant planning and revision. Looking critically at the level of service and methods used to maintain this level of service are paramount to the success of the program. Assessing these methods and practices maintains a level of responsibility and transparency to the public and promotes innovation in the IPM program. The Parks and Recreation Department strives to be proactive rather than reactive in the implementation of IPM methods. Establishing environmentally sustainable practices in IPM methods requires analyzing the landscape as an individual ecosystem. Proper amendments and the introduction of beneficial microbes into the soil of these landscape systems will promote healthier plants. Healthier plants sustain a higher resistance to pests and diseases. Maintaining the correct balance and integrity of the soil is crucial to long term health of the ecosystem. This strategy includes increasing mulch and compost applications, appropriate pre-emergent applications in weed-prone right of way areas, and continued exploration of safer and more effective products and methods in the implementation of the IPM program. Looking back on 2016 Many of the IPM goals set forth in 2015 were realized in the past year. • Round Up was phased out as the primary source of glyphosate due to public concern over its adjuvants • A transition to organic herbicides was initiated on elementary school grounds • Initiatives were taken to remove problematic landscape areas • A habitat restoration project occurred at Pen Park • No herbicides were used on general turf areas managed by the City of Charlottesville • Several turf managers received certification from the State of Virginia as fertilizer applicators • The Weed Dragon (flame-based weed control device) was piloted • The interior of McGuffey Park remained free of synthetic chemicals • A mulch blower was piloted with great success • Volunteer efforts helped to control invasive species in natural areas • Trunk injections to combat Emerald Ash Borer were allocated to preserve the most valued ash trees throughout the City. Overview of 2016 In 2016 there was a major reduction in glyphosate usage in the City overall. This reduction was also seen in parks and schools, with the majority of herbicide usage restricted to right of way areas. The City also realized the goal of reducing the use of Round Up and systemic herbicides. A transition to organic herbicides was initiated on school grounds. While glyphosate was not completely eliminated on all school grounds, emphasis was placed on using organics on the grounds of elementary schools. Appropriate future funding will help the Parks Department realize the goal of organics only on all school grounds. The City received significant new vegetated areas to maintain such as the McIntire Interchange, new park lands along the John Warner Parkway, new construction along Route 250 between Barracks Road and Emmett Street, and 79 newly planted trees. Initiatives were taken to reduce problematic areas. These areas include the juniper banks at Jackson-Via Elementary School. A large portion of the existing juniper was removed due to invasive vine proliferation and inaccessibility. The vines in these areas were historically weeded by hand and treated with herbicides with minimal long-term success. Unintentional damage to the shrubs while accessing this area deemed it problematic and prompted its removal. The area was converted to a pollinator friendly meadow planting. A habitat restoration project occurred at Pen Park. The natural area between the tennis courts and the Parks Department office was cleared of invasive vines, non-native trees, debris, and then integrated with native plantings. These improvements were accomplished with the help of goats, volunteers, and Parks staff. No herbicides were used on general turf areas managed by the City. Turf managers continued to practice IPM methods such as maintaining proper mowing heights to inhibit weed growth and mulching leaves to increase organic matter and fertility of turf areas. Several turf managers received certification from the State of Virginia as fertilizer applicators. The Weed Dragon, a flame based weed control device, was utilized in specific areas where deemed appropriate. This pilot program presented safety concerns and will be confined to parking lots or other areas where fire concerns are at a minimum. Other pilot programs proved more successful. The interior of McGuffey Park, for example, has remained free of synthetic chemicals. This is largely due to increased mechanical controls such as weed trimming and the efforts of volunteers. Another successful pilot program was utilizing a mulch blower for mulching applications. Increased mulch applications are a major goal of the IPM program as they reduce weeds and chemical applications while building soil health. Acquisition of a mulch blower would contribute to further anticipated reductions in chemical applications and a move to a fully organic protocol. Conclusion A major goal of the IPM program in 2015 was the continued reduction of glyphosate usage. As the data shows, this goal was met Citywide and in parks and schools, respectively. This reduction is related to the usage of pre-emergent products, increased mulching and mechanical maintenance controls. For more information please see: http://www.charlottesville.org/departments-and-services/departments-h-z/parks-recreation- /parks-trails/landscape-management/pest-management System Location Facility Pa rks Aza l ea Pa rk Athl eti c Fi el ds Ba i l ey Pa rk Curbs /Si dewa l ks Bel mont Pa rk La nds ca pe Beds Fi fevi l l e Pa rk Na tura l Area s Parks & Recreation Pesticide Application Database: Data Model Fores thi l l s Pa rk Pl a ygrounds Greenbri a r Pa rk Stormwa ter Structures Greenl ea f Pa rk Ja cks on Pa rk Jorda n Pa rk Lee Pa rk McGuffey Pa rk McInti re Pa rk Ea s t McInti re Pa rk Wes t Mea de Pa rk Mea dowcreek Pa rk Mea dowcreek Strea m Va l l ey Northea s t Pa rk Pen Pa rk Qua rry Pa rk Ri vervi ew Pa rk Ri ves Pa rk Schenks Greenwa y Sta rhi l l Pa rk Tons l er Pa rk Wa s hi ngton Pa rk School s Buford School Athl eti c Fi el ds Burnl ey Mora n School Curbs /Si dewa l ks CHSchool /PAC La nds ca pe Beds Cl a rk School Na tura l Area s Greenbri a r School Pl a ygrounds Ja cks on Vi a School Stormwa ter Structures Johns on School School Admi n Vena bl e School Wa l ker School Publ i c Bui l di ngs Ci rcui t Court Curbs /Si dewa l ks Ci ty Ha l l La nds ca pe Beds Ci ty Ha l l Annex Na tura l Area s DT Tra ns i t Stormwa ter Structures Jeffers on Center McGuffey Arts Pa rks Admi n Pa vi l l i on PW Avon PW Ci ty Ya rd Smi th Ri ght of Wa y 250 Bypa s s Curbs /Si dewa l ks 5th Street La nds ca pe Beds Avon Street Na tura l Area s Ba rra cks Roa d Stormwa ter Structures Brown Bl vd DT Ma l l Emmett Street Fonta i ne Ave Jeffers on Pa rk Ave Mci nti re Roa d/Ri dge Street Mea dowcreek Pa rkwa y Other Ci ty Street Pres ton Ave UVA Corner Cemeteri es Ma pl ewood Cemetery Curbs /Si dewa l ks Oa kwood Cemetery La nds ca pe Beds Pen Pa rk Cemetery Na tura l Area s Da ughters of Zi on Hort Sector 250 Bypa s s Sector La nds ca pe Beds 5th & Bel mont Sector Downtown Sector JPA & Ma i n Sector Pres ton & McInti re Sector Gol f Cours e Mea dowcreek Cours e Curbs /Si dewa l ks Mea dowcreek Cl ubhous e Fa i rwa ys Green Surrounds Greens La nds ca pe Beds Na tura l Area s Roughs Stormwa ter Structures Tees Parks Horticulture Pesticide Applications by Product Name 2013-2016: Liquid Products Units Active Ingredient Product Name 2013 2014 2015 2016 Gallons 2,4,D Brushmaster 0.10 2,4,D Total 0.10 Azadirachtin Azatrol 0.12 Azadirachtin Total 0.12 Clopyralid Lontrel 0.00 0.05 Clopyralid Total 0.00 0.05 d-Limonene Nature's Avenger 1.38 0.25 d-Limonene Total 1.38 0.25 Fluazifop-P-butyl Ornamec 0.82 0.25 0.10 0.37 Fluazifop-P-butyl Total 0.82 0.25 0.10 0.37 Glyphosate Aquamaster 0.21 Gly Star Plus 2.89 10.18 3.80 Honcho 9.84 QuickPro (Roundup) 0.47 7.69 1.72 Ranger-Pro 8.96 Roundup Pro 0.33 0.04 Round Up Custom 0.21 Glyphosate Total 21.91 10.98 7.73 5.74 Horticultural Oil Hort Oil 3.00 Horticultural Oil Total 3.00 Lithium salt of Bromacil Brom 7.5 0.93 Lithium salt of Bromacil Total 0.93 Monosodium acid methanearsonate Trimec Plus 0.02 Monosodium acid methanearsonate Total 0.02 Oryzalin Oryzalin 4 5.18 7.12 11.45 8.09 Prokoz Surflan AS 0.38 Surflan AS 4.71 Oryzalin Total 5.55 7.12 16.16 8.09 Prometon Primatol 25E 1.80 2.31 2.16 Prometon Total 1.80 2.31 2.16 S-Kinoprene Enstar 0.01 S-Kinoprene Total 0.01 Sodium Salt of bentazon Basagran 0.89 Sodium Salt of bentazon Total 0.89 Triclopyr Pathfinder 0.25 0.69 0.48 1.20 Triclopyr Total 0.25 0.69 0.48 1.20 Pelargonic Acid Scythe 0.27 Pelargonic Acid Total 0.27 Tetramethrin Wasp Spray 0.44 Tetramethrin Total 0.44 Gallons Total 34.37 23.75 26.86 16.16 Parks Horticulture Pesticide Applications by Product Name 2013-2016: Granular Products Units Active Ingredient Product Name 2013 2014 2015 2016 Pounds Glyphosate Roundup QuikPro 0.26 Glyphosate Total 0.26 Halosulfuron-methyl Pro Sedge Selctive Herbicide2 0.08 0.04 Pro-Sedge 0.07 0.06 Halosulfuron-methyl Total 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.04 Imidacloprid Merit 5.00 Zenith 0.5G 0.50 Imidacloprid Total 5.00 0.50 Oryzalin XL 2G 10.00 31.50 Oryzalin Total 10.00 31.50 Trifluralin+Isoxaben Snapshot 1050.00 550.00 445.00 690.00 Trifluralin+Isoxaben Total 1050.00 550.00 445.00 690.00 Pounds Total 1055.07 560.82 445.08 721.54 Golf Course Pesticide Applications by Product Name 2013-2016: Liquid Products Units Active Ingredient Product Name 2013 2014 2015 2016 Sum of GallonConversion Date FinalUnit ActiveIngredient ProductName 2013 2014 2015 2016 Gallons 24d/mcpp/dicamba triplet 3/ way herb. 17.63 24d/mcpp/dicamba Total 17.63 Azoxystrobin Heritage TL 7.72 8.64 2.55 6.39 Azoxystrobin Total 7.72 8.64 2.55 6.39 Bifenthrin Bifenthrin Golf & Nursery 1.16 0.87 1.16 1.16 Bifenthrin Total 1.16 0.87 1.16 1.16 chlorothalonil Daconil WeatherStik 5.41 24.30 12.85 15.66 Daconil ZN 7.73 7.69 3.84 11.51 chlorothalonil Total 13.15 31.98 16.69 27.16 dithiopyr DITHIOPYR 40 WSB. 0.51 0.51 0.39 0.47 dithiopyr Total 0.51 0.51 0.39 0.47 Glyphosate Gly Star Plus 0.00 Honcho 0.02 QuickPro (Roundup) 0.29 Roundup Pro 0.16 Glyphosate Total 0.02 0.16 0.29 0.00 HERBICIDE PYLEX 0.00 HERBICIDE Total 0.00 Iprodione Chipco 26GT 38.67 7.73 3.87 7.71 Iprodione Total 38.67 7.73 3.87 7.71 Mancozeb FORE 80 WP 5.06 Mancozeb Total 5.06 Metalaxyl-M Subdue Maxx 3.23 3.24 1.30 1.30 Metalaxyl-M Total 3.23 3.24 1.30 1.30 Metconazole TOURNEY 0.47 0.47 0.94 Metconazole Total 0.47 0.47 0.94 Propamocarb hydrochloride Banol 9.42 6.88 5.11 7.65 Propamocarb hydrochloride Total 9.42 6.88 5.11 7.65 Propiconazole Banner Maxx 1.65 1.29 Propiconazole Total 1.65 1.29 pyraclostrobin Insignia SC 0.88 1.77 1.77 1.86 pyraclostrobin Total 0.88 1.77 1.77 1.86 pyraclostrobin,bascalid Honor 2.81 17.81 pyraclostrobin,bascalid Total 2.81 17.81 WETTING AGENT 0ARS 7.64 7.64 7.64 CONDUT 90 20.39 oars ps 12.78 12.78 WETTING AGENT Total 28.03 20.42 20.42 Trinexapac-ethyl Primo Maxx 9.03 Trinexapac-ethyl Total 9.03 fluxapyroxad Xzempler 0.60 fluxapyroxad Total 0.60 Sulfentrazone Nassau 4SC 3.00 Sulfentrazone Total 3.00 dichloro , 2,4D On deck 27.56 dichloro , 2,4D Total 27.56 Gallons Total 79.83 109.57 56.82 134.35 Golf Course Pesticide Applications by Product Name 2013-2016: Granular Products Units Active Ingredient Product Name 2013 2014 2015 2016 Sum of GallonConversion Date FinalUnit ActiveIngredient ProductName 2013 2014 2015 2016 Pounds boscalid Emerald 6.00 2.00 5.50 3.88 boscalid Total 6.00 2.00 5.50 3.88 chlorothalonil Daconil 5% Granular 25.00 Daconil 2787 50.00 chlorothalonil Total 75.00 flutolanil ProStar 48.00 1.00 42.00 flutolanil Total 48.00 1.00 42.00 Glyphosate Roundup QuikPro 4.00 Glyphosate Total 4.00 Halosulfuron-methyl Pro Sedge Selctive Herbicide2 0.25 Pro-Sedge 0.22 0.00 Halosulfuron-methyl Total 0.22 0.00 0.25 Oryzalin XL 2G 4.00 Oryzalin Total 4.00 Prodiamine Prodiamine 65WDG 36.00 75.00 Prodiamine Total 36.00 75.00 Trifluralin+Isoxaben Snapshot 10.00 Trifluralin+Isoxaben Total 10.00 Vinclozolin Curalan EG 10.00 20.00 9.38 42.21 Vinclozolin Total 10.00 20.00 9.38 42.21 Fungicide X Fungicide X 105.72 Fungicide X Total 105.72 Chloroneb Fungicide IX 210.00 Chloroneb Total 210.00 Chlorophenoxy Fungicide vII 117.00 Chlorophenoxy Total 117.00 Pounds Total 64.22 23.00 171.88 568.06 Importance of Pre-Emergent Products Pre-emergent products are a type of selective, low toxicity herbicide that impedes the germination of weed seeds by utilizing enzyme inhibitors with no effect to established plantings. These products are extremely effective given that they are applied concurrently with mulching and that the timing of their application is correct. Typically these products are applied in the spring and fall when air temperatures reach 60 degrees for four consecutive days which coincides with seed germination. A second spring application 6-8 weeks later will optimize the success rate through the summer months. Pre-emergent products are especially useful in high vehicular traffic areas and other right of way locations where motorist and staff safety is a concern. The Park Street ramp beds and liriope medians on 250 Long Street, for example, represent locations where pre-emergent applications are beneficial. IPM in Golf The Meadowcreek Golf Course is an 18-hole public golf facility operated as an enterprise division of Charlottesville Parks and Recreation. It is a revenue-generating course that requires healthy turf in order to provide for competitive play. The fairways, tee boxes and greens have a lower tolerance for weed and fungal infestations. Routine scouting and early intervention in disease suppression aid in turf health. Many cultural controls are utilized such as fertilizer applications and efficient irrigation planning to maintain healthy turf. Much of the chemical applications on the golf course are contracted and outsourced. IPM in Trails and Natural Areas The Parks Department is responsible for the management of nearly 600 acres of natural lands. These lands include over 30 miles of nature trails linking neighborhoods to a variety of recreational opportunities. Over six miles of trails are paved for hiking, biking and other outdoor activities. The control of invasive and exotic species such as Autumn Olive, Ailanthus, Porcelain Berry and Bittersweet, is the most common maintenance issue associated with IPM in natural areas. These invasive species are mechanically cut back and the cut stumps or stems are individually treated with herbicide. This method limits the application of chemical control and confines it to only the surface area of the cut invasive plant as opposed to swath-spraying an area. Ragged Mountain Natural Area is one example where these invasive species are prevalent, especially along the western border of the property. A management plan for this area is under development to address the issue of invasive species. Volunteer efforts with Charlottesville Area Tree Stewards and at Ragged Mountain continue to aid in the control of invasive species in these natural areas. IPM in Urban Forestry One of the City’s most extensive and valuable infrastructures is its trees. With over 7,000 trees throughout the City and overall City canopy coverage of over 45%, the Urban Forester closely monitors trees for pests and diseases. Cultural controls such as mulching, pruning and proper irrigation are effective tools in the prevention of pest attacks. Currently all first and second year trees are watered and monitored as often as once a week during the summer months. Treatment measures are taken to protect the health of high-value trees throughout the City. Specimen American elm trees are trunk-injected every three years with fungicide to control Dutch elm disease. These treatments are contracted to certified professional arborists. The threat of Emerald Ash Borer is present in Albemarle’s neighboring counties. This pest is fatal without immediate treatment. The Parks Department has allocated treatment in the form of trunk injections to preserve the most valued ash trees throughout the City. These treatments are outsourced to private contractors. 2017 Goals at a Glance • Increase funding strategies to allow for the acquisition of a mulch blower to reduce pre- emergent applications • Increase mulching applications • Reduce pre-emergent applications on City School grounds • Increase funding to provide organic herbicides for City Schools and Parks • Eliminate use of glyphosate at City Elementary Schools • Procure new signage indicating organic pesticide applications • Increase biological controls through the use of organic bio-stimulants in the form of humic acid • Enhance mechanical weed maintenance frequencies on athletic fields Looking ahead in 2017 The year ahead presents an opportunity to realize the continued goals of the IPM program. The reduction in glyphosate usage in 2016 is directly linked to the use of pre-emergent products. It is, however, the intention of the Parks staff to reduce the use of these pre- emergent applications, particularly in areas where mulch applications can be increased. This reduction can be applied in low traffic areas where mulch applications will increase. New landscaped areas such as Schenk’s Greenway will be completed and placed on the maintenance schedule. Typically new areas require more maintenance than established areas. While further reductions in chemical controls are always a goal of the IPM program, the level of service in new landscapes requires increased maintenance inputs. Increasing the level of funding to provide a mulch blower will help to realize the goal of reducing pre-emergent applications. Steep bank areas such as Park Street and Clark School beds would benefit from increased mulch applications. An increase in funding to provide organic herbicides for use on school grounds and in parks frequented by children, such as Forest Hills and Greenleaf Park, is necessary to achieve the goals of the IPM program. While these organic herbicides are more costly and require more frequent applications, it is the responsibility of the Parks Department to provide a higher level of safety to children and citizens. New signage indicating organic pesticide applications will be used in the upcoming year. This signage is intended to better inform and educate the public of the activities occurring in their parks or schools. Although all areas that are treated with pesticides are currently flagged, this new signage will distinguish a synthetic application from an organic application. Increasing biological controls is also a goal of the IPM program in 2017. The Parks department has utilized several bio-pesticides in the past such as essential oils and Neem oil. Bio-pesticides contain naturally occurring substances obtained from plants, microbes, fungi and nematodes. They do not affect photosynthesis or plant physiology, are biodegradable, and come from renewable resources. These environmentally sustainable products are also more beneficial to pollinators. Many organic farming systems utilize this approach to pest control. The IPM program calls for a continued review of historically problematic areas. The gravel areas at Washington Park, for example, require constant attention during the growing season to maintain a weed free appearance. Transitioning this area back to grass will reduce chemical applications. Enhanced maintenance frequencies on athletic fields will also contribute to herbicide reductions. Concluding Statement The goals of an IPM program cannot be focused solely on numbers and reductions. There must be exploration and innovation in the program that challenge the current operational methods. The program objectives have to become proactive toward environmentally sustainable practices that take into account the entire landscape system. It is the intention of the Parks Department to become an innovator and model of sustainable landscape practices. This page intentionally left blank Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority Rivanna Solid Waste Authority 695 Moores Creek Lane Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-9016 434.977.2970 • 434.293.8858 Fax www.rivanna.org MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: BILL MAWYER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RIVANNA WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY SUBJECT: QUARTERLY UPDATE DATE: APRIL 3, 2017 This is a written quarterly update to be included with your April meeting material and information packets as needed. Please let your staff know that if you have any follow-up questions, I will be happy to provide additional information. A general overview of the current and upcoming Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) follows: 1. Odor Reductions at Moores Creek Wastewater Plant Scope: Provide two clarifier covers, one air scrubber, wastewater containment pipe, and chemical neutralizers. Status: Chemical neutralizers have reduced odor levels. Construction of permanent facilities continues. Final Completion: January 2018 Cost: $9.8 million 2. Rivanna Wastewater Pump Station Scope: Replace existing pump station and increase wastewater pumping capacity from 25 to 53 million gallons per day. Completion: June 2017 Cost: $33 million 3. Granular Activated Carbon Facilities Scope: Add GAC contactors at all five water treatment plants to remove disinfection byproducts from drinking water. Completion: December 2017 Cost: $30 million 4. Water Treatment Plant Improvements Scope: Replace equipment which has reached end-of-service life at the South Rivanna, Observatory, and Crozet Water Treatment Plants. Construction: 2019-2021 Cost: $20 million 5. South Fork Rivanna to Ragged Mountain Reservoir Pipeline Right-of-Way Scope: Determine alignment and acquire rights-of-way for pipeline to transfer raw water from South Rivanna Reservoir to Ragged Mountain Reservoir as set forth by the community water supply plan. Completion: 2017-2022 Cost: $2.3 million 6. Sugar Hollow Dam Crest Gate Replacement Scope: Replace inflatable rubber gate which is attached to the top of the concrete dam and controls water levels in the reservoir during extreme storm events. Completion: 2017-2018 Cost: $150, 000 8. Replace Ivy Transfer Station Scope: Provide 11,600 sq. ft waste transfer station and demolish existing transfer station. Construction: 2017-2018 Cost: $2.5 million cc: RSWA Board of Directors RWSA Board of Directors 2 This page intentionally left blank