CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Monday, March 18, 2019 5:30 p.m. Closed session as provided by Section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code Second Floor Conference Room (Boards & Commissions; Personnel) 6:30 p.m. Regular Meeting - CALL TO ORDER Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS PROCLAMATIONS Statement of Solidarity Virginia Festival of the Book 1. CONSENT AGENDA* (Items removed from consent agenda will be considered at the end of the regular agenda) a. MINUTES: March 4, 2019 Special Meeting; March 6, 2019 Special Meeting; March 7, 2019 Special Meeting b. APPROPRIATION: State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) Grant for 2019 - $14,086 – 1st of 2 readings c. APPROPRIATION: Domestic Violence Services Coordinator Grant - $49,336 (1st of 2 readings) d. APPROPRIATION: Virginia Behavioral Health Docket Grant - $50,000 (1st of 2 readings) e. RESOLUTION: Capital Funding Transfer for Smith Recreation Center Air Quality Project - $300,000 (1st of 1 reading) f. RESOLUTION: 10th & Page Park – land acquisition - $60,800 (1st of 2 readings) g. RESOLUTION: VDOT – Programmatic Project Administration Agreement (1st of 1 reading) h. ORDINANCE: Imposition of Fee for Fire Department Inspections (2nd of 2 readings) i. ORDINANCE: Telecommunications Franchise to MCI Communications (2nd of 2 readings) CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY MATTERS (FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS) COMMUNITY MATTERS Public comment is provided for up to 16 speakers at the beginning of the meeting (limit 3 minutes per speaker.) Pre-registration is available for up to 8 spaces, and pre-registered speakers are announced by noon the day of the meeting. The number of speakers is unlimited at the end of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Real Estate Tax Rate for FY2020 3. PUBLIC HEARING City Manager’s Proposed Budget for FY2020 4. PUBLIC HEARING/ Proposed Meals Tax Rate for FY2020 (1st of 2 readings) ORDINANCE 5. PUBLIC HEARING/ Proposed Lodging Tax Rate for FY2020 (1st of 2 readings) ORDINANCE 6. PUBLIC HEARING/ Rezone 918 Nassau Street (Hogwaller Farm) to Mixed Use Highway Corridor (1st of 2 readings) ORDINANCE 7. PUBLIC HEARING/ Special use permit for 918 Nassau Street (Hogwaller Farm) for increased density (1st of 1 RESOLUTION* reading) 8. REPORT: Bennett’s Village Playground OTHER BUSINESS MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC *ACTION NEEDED 1 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HELD ON Monday, March 4, 2019, AT 5:30 p.m. IN THE Second Floor Conference Room, City Hall, 605 E. Main Street, Charlottesville, Virginia. THE PROPOSED AGENDA IS AS FOLLOWS: Closed session as provided by Section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code (Boards & Commissions; Personnel) BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL BY Kyna Thomas Second Floor Conference Room – March 4, 2019 City Council met on this date with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Heather Hill, Ms. Kathy Galvin, and Mr. Mike Signer. Dr. Wes Bellamy arrived later in the meeting. Ms. Walker called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Galvin, Council voted (Ayes: Ms. Walker, Ms. Hill, Ms. Galvin and Mr. Signer. Noes: None. Absent: Dr. Bellamy) to meet in closed session as authorized by Va. Code sec. 2.2-3712, specifically: Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for the consideration and appointment of specific candidates for appointment to the Building Code Board of Appeals, Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Commission, Charlottesville Economic Development Authority, Housing Advisory Committee, and the Human Rights Commission. Pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3115, Ms. Walker provided the following disclosure: “I am an employee of the City of Charlottesville, within the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. I hereby declare that, during the City Council’s discussions of the proposed Budget, relative to issues relating to City employees (such as cost of living increases, living wages, health insurance benefits, and similar fiscal matters relating to City employees – individually and collectively referred to in this Written Disclosure as the “Transaction”) I may have a “personal interest in a transaction”, as that term is defined in Virginia Code §2.2-3101, by reason of the salary or other compensation, or employee benefits, that I receive as a City employee, in excess of $5,000 annually. I have previously 2 consulted with the Office of the City Attorney on this matter, and received an opinion that, pursuant to Virginia Code §2.2-3112(B)(1), even with this personal interest I may lawfully participate in City Council’s discussion of the Transaction, because I am a member of a group of three or more persons (i.e., City employees) the members of which are affected by the Transaction. I hereby affirm that I am able to participate in the Transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.” On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Galvin, Council certified by the following vote (Ayes: Ms. Walker, Ms. Hill, Dr. Bellamy, Ms. Galvin, and Mr. Signer. Noes: None.), that to the best of each Council member’s knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the Motion convening the closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session. The meeting adjourned at 6:17 p.m. NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HELD ON Wednesday, March 6, 2019, AT 4:00 p.m. AT THE Jefferson School African American Heritage Center, 233 4th St NW, Charlottesville, VA 22903. THE PROPOSED AGENDA IS AS FOLLOWS: Charlottesville City Council will interview three candidates for the City's next City Manager on Wednesday, March 6, 2019. City employees and the public are invited to observe each interview at the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center and to meet the candidates afterwards during an open house opportunity. SCHEDULE 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. - City Council Interviews (:35 minutes each). The public is invited to observe in the Jefferson School Auditorium. 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - Meet and Greet for public with candidates The names and resumes of the three finalists will be shared with the public on Tuesday, March 5, 2019. BY ORDER OF THE MAYOR BY Kyna Thomas Jefferson School African American Heritage Center – March 6, 2019 A special meeting was held on March 6, 2019, with the following Councilors present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Heather Hill, Dr. Wes Bellamy, Ms. Kathy Galvin, and Mr. Mike Signer. Mayor Walker called the meeting to order at 4:12 p.m. Ms. Walker welcomed the public participants and began interviews in the following order individually:  Michael Mallinoff, Glen Arm, MD  Tarron Richardson, DeSoto, TX  Theodore Voorhees, Powhatan, VA Candidates were asked to provide a five minute overview of why they are qualified for the position and why they are interested specifically in Charlottesville. They were then each asked questions surrounding the topics of:  Community Relations  Race Relations  Transparency in Government  Public Safety  Strategic Planning & Visioning Ms. Walker reminded public participants of the meet and greet opportunity at 6:00 p.m. and asked them to complete feedback forms. The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. *A copy of Ms. Walker’s conflict of interest disclosure statement is available in the Clerk of Council Office. NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE HELD ON Thursday, March 7, 2019, AT 4:30 p.m. IN THE Second Floor Conference Room, City Hall, 605 East Main Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902. THE PROPOSED AGENDA IS AS FOLLOWS: Closed session as provided by Section 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code (Personnel). BY ORDER OF THE MAYOR BY Kyna Thomas SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM – March 7, 2019 City Council met in closed session on this date with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Heather Hill, Dr. Wes Bellamy, Ms. Kathy Galvin and Mr. Mike Signer. Mayor Walker called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Galvin, Council voted (Ayes: Ms. Walker, Ms. Hill, Dr. Bellamy, Ms. Galvin and Mr. Signer. Noes: None.) to meet in closed session as authorized by Va. Code sec. 2.2-3712, specifically: Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for the discussion and consideration of prospective candidates for employment as Charlottesville City Manager. Pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3115, Ms. Walker provided the following disclosure: “I am an employee of the City of Charlottesville, within the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. I hereby declare that, during the City Council’s discussions of the proposed Budget, relative to issues relating to City employees (such as cost of living increases, living wages, health insurance benefits, and similar fiscal matters relating to City employees – individually and collectively referred to in this Written Disclosure as the “Transaction”) I may have a “personal interest in a transaction”, as that term is defined in Virginia Code §2.2- 3101, by reason of the salary or other compensation, or employee benefits, that I receive as a City employee, in excess of $5,000 annually. I have previously consulted with the Office of the City Attorney on this matter, and received an opinion that, pursuant to Virginia Code §2.2-3112(B)(1), even with this personal interest I may lawfully participate in City Council’s discussion of the Transaction, because I am a member of a group of three or more persons (i.e., City employees) the members of which are affected by the Transaction. I hereby affirm that I am able to participate in the Transaction fairly, objectively, and in the public interest.” On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Galvin, Council certified by the following vote (Ayes: Ms. Walker, Ms. Hill, Ms. Galvin, and Dr. Bellamy. Noes: None. Absent: Mr. Signer.), that to the best of each Council member’s knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the Motion convening the closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session. The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. 2 This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: March 18, 2019 Action Required: Approval and Appropriation Presenter: Leslie Beauregard, Assistant City Manager Staff Contacts: Leslie Beauregard, Assistant City Manager Gail Hassmer, Chief Accountant Title: State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (S.C.A.A.P.) Grant for 2019 - $14,086 Background: The City of Charlottesville has received the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program Grant (S.C.A.A.P.), on behalf of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail, in the amount of $14,086. These are federal funds to reimburse the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail for Fiscal Year 2017 expenses of housing alien inmates. Albemarle County is appropriating funds received under the same program that will also be passed through to the Regional Jail. Discussion: The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (S.C.A.A.P.) provides federal payments to states and localities that incurred correctional officer salary costs for incarcerating certain undocumented criminal aliens. The award amount is based on the number of undocumented persons incarcerated at the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail. As this is not a one-time grant, the Jail will receive future payments from the City as they are granted. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: These funds align with Council’s Vision for a Smart, Citizen-Focused Government -- Acceptance of these funds will support quality services at our Regional Jail and will help ensure that services are provided in the most efficient and cost effective way to citizens. These funds also support Goal 2: Be a safe, equitable, thriving and beautiful community, and Objective 2.1. Provide an effective and equitable public safety system Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: There is no budgetary impact as 78 percent of these funds will be passed through directly to the Regional Jail. The remaining 22 percent will be sent to Justice Benefits, Inc., which provides administrative support for the regional jail. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds to the Regional Jail. Alternatives: N/A Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) Grant for 2017 reimbursement $14,086 WHEREAS, the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) grant, providing federal payments for correctional officer salary costs incurred for incarcerating certain undocumented criminals has been awarded the City of Charlottesville, on behalf of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail, in the amount of $14,086. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that a total of $10,987 be appropriated and passed through to the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail and $3,099 be appropriated and passed through to Justice Benefits, Inc. Revenues $14,086 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900296 G/L Account: 431110 Expenses $10,987 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900296 G/L Account: 530550 $ 3,099 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900296 G/L Account: 530670 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $14,086 from the U. S. Bureau of Justice Assistance. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: March 18, 2019 Action Required: Approval and Appropriation Areshini Pather, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office Presenter: Areshini Pather, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office Staff Contacts: Crystal Rigsby, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office 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 $3,372. Albemarle County will provide a $6,000 cash match, and an in-kind match of $2,400. Graduate student and intern hours will provide an additional $1,182 in-kind match. The total anticipated cash and in-kind match of $17,954 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: A Healthy and Safe City, Objective 2.2 Meet the safety needs of victims and reduce the risk of re-occurrence/re-victimization and Objective 2.3 Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources. 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 (L.A.P.) used by Charlottesville, Albemarle and University of Virginia Police Departments. Budgetary Impact: There are no additional funding required. The grant requires a local match of $11,000, in which $6,000 will be provided by Albemarle County and the remaining $5,000 will be provided through previously appropriated funding in the Commonwealth Attorney’s FY19 General Fund Operating Budget. The funds will be expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. 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. 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: March 18, 2019 Action Required: Appropriation of grant funds Presenter: Susan Morrow, Offender Aid and Restoration Staff Contact: Leslie Beauregard, Assistant City Manager Susan Morrow, Offender Aid and Restoration Title: Virginia Behavioral Health Docket Grant - $50,000 Background: The City of Charlottesville, on behalf of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Therapeutic Docket program, has received a Supreme Court of Virginia Behavioral Health Docket Grant in the amount of $50,000 for operations of the therapeutic docket program, which is operated by Offender Aid and Restoration (O.A.R.). The City of Charlottesville serves as fiscal agent for the Supreme Court of Virginia Behavioral Health Docket Grant. Discussion: In its first year of operation, the Charlottesville-Albemarle Therapeutic Docket program is a supervised 6 to 12 month treatment program that serves as an alternative to incarceration for offenders. The Therapeutic Docket is a specialized docket within the existing structure of the court system given the responsibility to handle cases involving non-violent adult misdemeanor offenders who suffer from serious mental illness. The program uses the power of the court to assist non-violent offenders to achieve wellness and recovery through a combined system of intensive supervision, medication management, mental health treatment, and regular court appearances. The total program budget is $160,000 and includes three funding sources: Supreme Court of VA: $50,000 City of Charlottesville: $55,000, (previously appropriated) Albemarle County: $55,000, (previously appropriated) Alignment with City Council Vision and Strategic Plan: This relates to Goal #2 in the City’s Strategic Plan - A Healthy and Safe City. More specifically Objective 2.3 Improve community health and safety and outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources; and Objective 2.4 Reduce the occurrences of crime, traffic violations, and accidents in the community. The Therapeutic Docket is a valuable, less expensive alternative to incarceration for certain criminal offenders with serious mental illness which utilizes a blend of court-ordered supervision, mental health treatment services, court appearances, and behavioral sanctions and incentives to reduce recidivism and enhance personal accountability and mental health and wellness among participants. Community Engagement: The Therapeutic Docket is a direct service provider and is engaged daily with non-violent criminal offenders with serious mental illness who are at a high level of risk for reoffending and have a high level of need due to mental illness. By collaborating with the Court system, Region Ten Community Services Board, Partners for Mental Health, and the Sheriff’s department, the Therapeutic Docket provides these offenders with a highly structured, rigorously supervised system of treatment and criminal case processing that results in a significant reduction in recidivism rates for program participants and graduates. Participants gain access to the Therapeutic Docket through referrals from police, probation, magistrates, defense attorneys and other local stakeholders. Participants have active criminal cases pending in the General District Court. If they successfully complete the program which takes a minimum of 6 months, participants may have their pending charges dismissed. If participants are unsuccessful and have to be terminated from the program, they return to court to face their original charges. Successful Therapeutic Docket participants return the community’s investment in them by improving their mental health status, maintaining compliance with treatment regimens, including medications, and reducing their criminal behaviors in the community. Budgetary Impact: No additional City funding is required as the City’s match for this grant, $55,000, was appropriated within the FY 2019 Council Approved Budget as part of the City’s contribution to Offender Aid and Restoration. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation. Attachments: Appropriation APPROPRIATION Charlottesville - Albemarle Therapeutic Docket Grant Award $50,000 WHEREAS, the Supreme Court of Virginia awarded the Supreme Court of Virginia Behavioral Health Docket Grant in the amount of $50,000 for the Charlottesville - Albemarle Therapeutic Docket in order to fund salaries, benefits, and operating expenses; and WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville serves as the fiscal agent for this grant program; and WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County both have dedicated local matches to this grant, totaling $110,000; and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period January 1, 2019 through June 30, 2019. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $50,000, received as a grant from the Supreme Court of Virginia, is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues $50,000 Fund: Internal Order: #1900324 G/L Account: 430110 (State Grant) Expenditures $50,000 Fund: Internal Order: #1900324 G/L Account: 530670 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $50,000 from the Supreme Court of Virginia. This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: March 18, 2019 Action Required: Approve Resolution Presenter: Paul Oberdorfer, Public Works Department Director Staff Contacts: Brian Daly, Parks and Recreation Director Mark Zavicar, Facility Maintenance Manager Title: Capital Funding Transfer for Smith Recreation Center Air Quality Project - $300,000 Background: The City of Charlottesville Smith Recreation Center has a history of Indoor Air Quality (I.A.Q.) concerns that negatively impacts the quality of experiences for both residents and city employees while in this facility. Combining staff input, with a consulting engineer’s assessment, this facility has been identified as having infrastructure deficiencies contributing to the I.A.Q. issues. Request for Capital Funding Transfer will provide funding for a comprehensive system analysis and a corrective design and specification process that addresses the sustained I.A.Q. concerns from an engineering standpoint. Staff has identified two potential funding sources for this project – the Tonsler Park Master Plan Implementation account or the C.I.P. Contingency account. The Tonsler Park project has approximately $1.89M remaining primarily designated for the Field House design and construction. However final design and construction costs are not known at this time and will have to be reevaluated once final design is completed. The CIP Contingency account has approximately $2.6M in unallocated funding. Discussion: Public Works has partnered with Parks and Recreation to perform a collaborative review of the Smith Recreation Air Quality issues. Relying on historical Engineering analysis, as well as internal mechanical and facility process investigations, it has been determined that existing, and prolonged negative conditions inside the facility, are of a highly complex, and interactive relationship between Mechanical, Operations and Facility Expectations from city staff and residents alike. The historic nature of these issues, has resulted in a fragmented approach in identifying and solving the complex problems found at this facility and would take a fresh approach from all participants to correct the issues responsible for the ongoing air quality concerns. Phase 1: Employ a Consulting Engineering Firm to evaluate the facility and operations with the purpose of developing defined Scopes of work required to identify the issues at hand. This first Phase of this process has been completed and the comprehensive Scope and Report are attached to this request. Phase 2 and 3: Will employ an Engineering Firm bound to the Scope Report to specifically evaluate and determine facility deficiencies directly resulting in the poor air quality of Smith Recreation. Phase 3 will provide design elements and equipment specifications to correct deficiencies as documented in Phase 2. Request for fund transfer is for Phase 2 and Phase 3. Summarized Fund Transfer Breakdown: $291,000 towards M.E.P. Facility analysis and Engineering Design of facility process and mechanical systems $9,000.00 towards Parks and Recreation covered equipment storage system Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This request is driven by Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City: 2.3 Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: This has no impact on the General Fund. No new funding is being appropriated. All funds will be transferred from funding previously appropriated in the Capital Improvement Program Fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the recommendation to use already appropriated funds in either the Tonsler Park Master Plan Implementation project account or the C.I.P. Contingency account, or a combination of funding from the two accounts, to identify Smith Aquatics Air Quality concerns. Alternatives: City Council could decline this recommendation, and the funds would remain in the Tonsler Park Master Plan Implementation and C.I.P. Contingency accounts. Other funding sources would need to be explored in order to initiate the recommendations in this request. Attachments: Resolution Smith Aquatics Report Summary, September 26, 2018 Facilities Maintenance / Public Works / City of Charlottesville Smith Aquatics Scope Development Report T.L.C. Engineering Solutions RESOLUTION Transfer for Smith Recreation Center Indoor Air Quality Project $300,000 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the funding for the Smith Recreation Center Indoor Air Quality project is hereby transferred in the following manner: Transfer From; $300,000 Fund: 426 WBS: CP-080 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer To $300,000 Fund: 426 WBS: P-01011 G/L Account: 599999 TO: Paul Oberdorfer Brian Daley FROM: Mark Zavicar Created: September 26, 2018 SUBJECT: Smith Aquatics Report Summary Section Title: Smith Aquatics Report Summary Chemical Management: Note: Pools drained and refilled in Mid‐August  Combined Cl reading between .08 and .1 in mid‐September  History: LPA Pool Chemistry Assessment January 30, 2015 o Comment: No observable changes in methodology  Incomplete Data: “Total Chorine” o Unable to calculate Chloramine Levels off SA submitted water test report  ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential” o Consistently lower than recommended levels; 650 mV APSP (Association of Pool and Spa Professionals)  PH levels is one indicator  PH levels maintaining consistent 7.4 levels as indicated on submitted chemical report  Low Free Chlorine levels promote higher Chloramine  FC levels ranging from 1 to 3 as indicated on submitted chemical report  UV o Optimum density for effective results is 60 mJ/cm3 o Combined Chlorine disassociation occurs at 245 – 365 nm o No PM records provided on unit service or bulb change o Unit Lamp Specified for Wallace & Tiernan WTL2000 rated at 200 to 300 nm  Bulbs changed recently on both units (August 17)  Recreation: 134 hours 125% output at “Base” intensity (1 bulb)  Lap: 125 hours 115% output at “low” intensity (2 bulb) Mechanical:  Design Conditions o Outdoor Summer db / wb 82/77 o Indoor Summer db 86  Well Delta T Average: 5 to 6 degree F  Design recommendations per 2rW is 10 degrees F for similar systems o Supply Temperature: observed 88.6 o Return Temperature: observed 94.0 Page 1 of 3  Water Bleed  Set Point 88 degrees  Total System Bleed reportedly @ 22 + gal / min consistently o BAS: Well Water Management:  No BAS Modeling available  User manipulations, 2 way valve, used to regulate return and bleed conditions o Sediment and drought will affect metering of systems  OA System: OA damper to main SA trunk o Per Plan Views (Attached)  OA trunk to SA does not flow through Cooling coil  OA does flow through Heating Coils (Gas and Well diversion) o OA damper static setting at 55%  Specified at 3,025 CFM  Current OA supply 1,664 CFM o Key point to consider during “Event” conditions as OA damper is opened 90%  Specified at 3,350 CFM  Event OA supply 3,015 CFM  TAB: Report Date August 21, 2015 o Fans set and balanced per engineer and city specifications. PDU units set as designed. All flow stations calibrated.  Natatorium Negative Pressure o Unable to maintain negative pressure  ACES Inc. 09.07.2018 Report  Doors opened Summary: Combined processes for facility operations incomplete, or inadequate. BAS / Facility Mechanical management relies on manually manipulations (Trial / error methodology). Example would be attempts to manage well water return and bleed rates. Well water bleed off around 21 gpm or more depending on conditions. Possible water dump into sewer line at 20,160 gallons in a 16 hour day. Trending data shows temperature set point at 88 is consistently exceeded as PDU’s are 24/7 run times. Water sediment is not fully extracted and is reportedly found in system loop in both PDU and GSWP. Chemical feeds reportedly insufficient. Water Flow to Cal‐Hypo chlorinators need to be examined. Water Chemistry test processes need to be examined. Submitted data does not contain TCl levels and is incomplete in data. UV PM Logs not available. TAB reportedly shows systems operating in specified parameters. Natatorium not in negative pressure. Steps being taking to address. OA supply ducted to supply side of heating coils. OA completely bypasses cooling coil. Ducting suggest direct feed to Natatorium. Page 2 of 3 Recommendations:  Create and implement single point contact between FM and SA o Work request, collaborations, communication  Commission Engineering Contractor Specializing in Pool (Natatorium) Operations o Project Scope: TBD  Facility Operating Windows must be established o Well effectiveness / LEED  Comparative Study (Well / Cooling Tower) o Evacuators and immediate environment: Door openings, commercial fans, pocket evacuator o Internal examination of GSWP and PDU water lines for sediment erosion  Funding  Facility Re‐Commissioning: o Chemical o BAS o Mechanical o TAB  Third Party Chemical and Mechanical System Management (6 Months) o Map Processes / Develop SOP o Training o Liability Sharing Page 3 of 3 IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report For Smith Aquatics Center – City of Charlottesville, VA Robert M. Coble, II, PE, CxA, EMP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Mechanical Engineer - Principal 1650 Prudential Drive – Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL 32207 904-306-9111 Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................3 OBJECTIVE. .......................................................................................................................................3 Current Facility Requirement (CFR) ................................................................................................3 1) Natatorium Design ................................................................................................................3 2) Improvement in indoor air quality..........................................................................................4 3) Establish, manage and control the pressure difference........................................................5 4) Resolve the HVAC system capacity .....................................................................................5 5) Reduce the frequent maintenance........................................................................................5 6) The air movement for condensation .....................................................................................5 7) Energy Efficiency Impact ......................................................................................................5 8) The control system revisions and upgrades: ........................................................................5 BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................................6 DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................................................6 Ground Water Condenser Cooling Water System...........................................................................6 Building Automation System Controls .............................................................................................7 Ventilation & Pressurization: Natatorium & “Dry” Spaces...............................................................7 Ventilation Air ...............................................................................................................................7 Dry-Side Spaces. .........................................................................................................................8 Natatorium....................................................................................................................................9 Natatorium Envelop Thermographic Review .................................................................................11 Exterior Thermographs ..............................................................................................................11 Interior Thermographs................................................................................................................11 PREVIOUS STUDIES & MITIGATION..............................................................................................12 LPA Study......................................................................................................................................12 Dry-Side Spaces............................................................................................................................13 Smoke Air Flow Tracking...............................................................................................................13 Paddock Study...............................................................................................................................13 January 17, 2019 Investigative Site Visit & Interview Meetings With City Staff. ...............................14 A. First Meeting...........................................................................................................................14 B. Second Meeting......................................................................................................................16 C. Third Meeting. .....................................................................................................................18 D. Pool Water Treatment.........................................................................................................18 Page 2 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Robert M. “Mac” Coble, II, PE, CxA, EMP, LEED AP BD+C of TLC Engineering for Architecture was contacted by the Mark Zavicar, Facilities Maintenance Manager for the City of Charlottesville, VA. TLC was tasked to develop a scope of services for a professional engineering firm to resolve the remaining IAQ and HVAC issues experienced at the Smith Aquatics Center in Charlottesville since its opening in 2011. After reviewing the material forwarded at TLC’s request, Coble traveled to interview the city management and operations and maintenance staff associated with the Smith Aquatics Center (refer to notes of those meetings at the end of the main report.) Recommended Scope of Work. The conclusion of the review and interviews result in the following main scope items: 1) Condenser Cooling Water-Heat Sink. The design intent for the ground water to function as the building heat sink through the cooling season has failed and must be replaced or supplemented to provide a reliable heat sink and source of condenser cooling water at or below 90° F. 2) Natatorium Air Pressure. The air balance and controls must be controlled and monitored by the building automation control system to establish and maintain a dry side positive pressure difference over and between the natatorium to reduce that transport flow to the dry side resulting in migration of chloramines from the natatorium to the dry, administration spaces, 3) Chloramine Dilution, Sweeping & Capture & Exhaust. The recommendation of this report is to increase the air change rate to 6 air changes using the existing air distribution system as installed. Smoke studies demonstrated the current air flow broke from the wall approximately 12 feet above the pool deck. A computational fluid dynamic analysis of that air distribution before and after the increased air circulation is recommended prior to developing contract documents for the next phase to assure the effectiveness of the approach to achieve the goals in operational modes of heating, cooling and shoulder seasons. 4) Condensation Control. Integral perhaps to item 3 above is air turnover rates and wall wash with dehumidified air the specific intent to limit and prevent condensation. Currently the air change in the Natatorium is just under 4 air changes per hour (ACH). ASHRAE recommends 4 (minimum) to 8 air changes. The recommendation is to increase the air supply to 6 air changes. The existing air distribution system should be used and supplemented to assure air movement in the natatorium is sufficient to keep the vertical wall surfaces at or above the dew point. 5) Building Controls Expansion. The building automation and controls should be expanded, revised augmented or upgraded to facilitate controlling of additional equipment, energy and water consumption, space temperatures, humidity and pressure at multiple points in natatorium. The owner and operations management should be involved in determining what operational alarms and monitoring screen revisions would improve their management of the facility indoor environment via the HVAC equipment and systems. 6) Systems commissioning. Once the design of the corrections is complete it the systems should be commissioned to functional test the sequences recommended were implemented and all controlled actions occur per the designed revisions. Commissioning is the quality assurance process that eliminates the discovery of constructed operational errors and Page 3 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report deficiencies that otherwise would have been revealed over time at the cost of functional, performance, efficiency, comfort and air quality less than it could be. INTRODUCTION Following the initial opening of this aesthetically attractive natatorium and fitness facility occupants and staff experienced breathing discomfort, respiratory tract and eye irritation, and other symptoms typically associated with presence of high concentrations of chloramines. Discomfort was experience due to hot space temperatures due indirectly to warm condenser water supply from the warm ground water. The warm condenser water lead to reduced capacity in all the water-to-air ground sourced heat pump units (GSHPs) and the water-to-air pool dehumidification (PDUs). Exposed painted structural bar joists and stainless steel water cooler in the administrative “dry side” spaces began showing signs of corrosion. This LEED Platinum project included temperature control zones conditioned by a number of constant volume water-to-water ground source heat pumps. Four GSHP serve the second level and two GSHPs serve second level east and west. Ventilation air for the respective temperature control zones and associated GSHP units is first preconditioned by an ERU also located in second level mechanical equipment space. While pool water treatment mismanagement can contribute to unnecessarily higher combine chlorine (a.k.a., chloramine) levels, it is the conclusion of this author the Smith Aquatics Center Operations Management team is following practices and procedures for the maintenance and operation of the pool water treatment that meet or exceed an industry standard of practice. Hence, if that professionalism, maintenance and operation standard is continued this project becomes one of HVAC changes only. OBJECTIVE. The objective of this scoping effort is to 1) Develop understanding of the issues plaguing the operation of the Smith Aquatics Center HVAC & control system, and 2) Define the operation deficiency issues to be addressed in determining the scope of work for a professional design engineering firm to address as corrections of those issues. 3) The effort has been to develop an understanding of the capacity and operational (HVAC & pool water chemistry control) deficiency issues. Once understood the effort is to define that “scope of work” for the design firm to achieve in their design that when those design is implemented the HVAC system will function as it should to achieve and meet the Current Facility Requirements (CFR). Current Facility Requirement (CFR) of the Smith Aquatic Center systems are as follows: 1) Natatorium Design : a. Air change rate recommended by industry: 4 – 8 air changes. Current design is slightly less than 4 air changes of the natatorium air volume. b. Ventilation air supply rate: The ventilation air should turn over the natatorium air volume not less than once per hour, 1 ACH. c. Pressurization: Relative to adjacent spaces industry recommendations are to keep the “wet” side, natatorium side negative , 0.05”w.g.-0.15”w.g. (Current operation is Page 4 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report not achieving net negative air pressure relative to the adjacent, “dry” occupied spaces. d. From ASHRAE Applications Handbook and the articles regarding natatoriums the recommended water maintenance temperatures for various pool uses are as follows: Table 3 - Natatorium Operating Conditions Air Temp, Water Type of Pool Ta (F) Temp, Tw(F) RH Recreational 78 - 85 75 - 78 50%-60% Therapeutic 80 - 85 85 - 95 50%-60% Competition 78 - 85 70 - 82 50%-60% Diving 80 - 85 80 - 90 50%-60% Elderly 84 - 90 85 - 90 50%-60% Hotel 82 - 85 82 - 86 50%-60% Whirlpools , Spa 80 - 85 97 - 104 50%-60% Smith Family Pool 86 - 88 87 (obs’d) 46%-60% Smith Lap Pool 86 - 88 80-82(Obv) 46%-60% From the observations and data gathered the Natatorium air was at 46% RH but with low air velocity (approximately under 30 fpm) ASHRAE recommends air velocities at the pool level not exceed 50 fpm as higher air speed raises the level of discomfort from rapid cooling. 2) Improvement in indoor air quality by appropriate displacement, dilution and evacuation of chloramines, and space air pressure control to industry accepted standards. a. Effectively evacuate chloramines at points of higher concentration utilizing the existing Paddock “evacuators” and exhaust duct and fans. The goal is to eliminate causes of staff and public complaints associated with chloramines in the pool side areas. This does not mean there will be no complaints as that is not achievable. b. The original design failed to isolate and capture the chloramines generated in the two pools. Subsequent modifications and improvements to the building air distribution and ventilation systems (e.g. phase 1 Paddock chloramine evacuators) have notice- ably improved the air quality of the natatorium area. As recommended in the LPA study air velocities should increase in the entire pool deck breathing zone and mix or sweep chloramine concentrations that rise to levels causing staff and patron com- plaints. The phase 2 Paddock or other HVAC modification must generate air veloc- ities of >30 fpm and < or = 50 fpm at the pool surface, breathing zone for staff and occupants from chloramine concentrations. c. Achieve minimum (in high use) to no “chlorine smell” in low use to be present in the natatorium and no “chlorine smell” to be present in the dry side. (Note: the “chlorine smell is actually the “combined chlorine” – a.k.a. “chloramines.) Page 5 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report 3) Establish, manage and control the pressure difference between the pool and dry spaces to be negative pool side. Stop the chloramine migration to the “dry side“ spaces by achieving a pool side net negative 0.01”w.g. – 0.05”w.g. pressure difference across the separating partition(s) between the “dry side” spaces and the natatorium. i. That negative air pressure must be monitored, controlled to be net negative constantly relative to the dry side at both the lower level and upper level spaces. ii. The difference may be achieved either by pressurizing the dry side more, or decreasing the pool side or both. iii. Control system logic, sensors, monitoring screens, and alarms should be installed to indicate when that differential is being compromised, when pool side exterior and interior doors are being maintained open around the pool and alert the managers if the doors are when doors are note closed beyond reason. This could also require modification of the controls of the PDU and GSHPs and or adding VFDs for exhaust fan control. 4) Resolve the HVAC system capacity deficiency issues is the second goal is to related to high temperature ground water supply to the condensers of the GSHPs and PDUs through the peak cooling season. Achieving that should eliminate the need to bleed ground water (well water) to the room wasting that resource. This will require a full capacity closed circuit condenser water loop with an evaporative cooler or cooler(s). It could involve imple- menting the original ground source closed circuit earth wells supplemented by evaporative cooler(s). 5) Reduce the frequent maintenance issues and expenses related compressor failures, staff and customer complaints, cleaning filters of the sand and sediment in the condenser water and of high condenser water temperature caused compressor failures. The product of the efforts should provide the GSHPs and PDUs and or other added equipment sufficiently cool condenser cooling water supplied to facilitate that equipment to operate at their design capacities or better, with CWS at or less than 90°F. 6) The air movement for condensation control across vertical wall surfaces must con- tinue to mitigate and not cause increase in the condensation on those surfaces. 7) Energy Efficiency Impact – Measurement and Verification. To the extent possible the energy use should not be increased above what it would have been in the original design if the heat sink capacity had been installed as designed and of sufficient thermal capacitance and the chloramines had been adequately removed. The net impact should be to not reduce the LEED Energy and Atmosphere credit points for exceeding the energy code reduction of LEED certification of not below Silver of the original Version 3 LEED system. In the years since the facility opened, electrical energy use has gone down year to year while gas con- sumption has risen significantly in that time. 8) The control system revisions and upgrades: The sequence of controls and input output listing should be revised to operate the system to achieve the pressure, temperature, humidity and air quality and monitor the systems operations to alarm operators when critical issues arise that would jeopardize the operation. The control system should stage capacity, monitor and alarm out-of-specification conditions and maintenance issues that would lead to compromised pressure, temperature, humidity and control of the chloramines. And compro- mised air quality. Page 6 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report BACKGROUND. Smith Aquatics Center was designed in 2009 and opened in 2010. The 27,000 GSF facility includes a high bay, 12,800 GSF, 36.5 foot high, two pool natatorium and a two level, dry-side. In the natatorium, one pool, the “lap” or “competition”, has six lanes with a Colorado timing system infrastructure for swim meet competition. The other “family” or “recreational” pool includes features such as lazy river, water slides. Two offices inset into the dry side house pool staff. The volumes of the pools are 212,000 gallons (Lap) and 52,000 gallons (Family) as related from City staff. Since that original project various two studies have been commissioned toward identifying causes of the operational and environmental issues. One study was conducted by LPA Engineering out of Roanoke, VA. That study focused on the HVAC systems predominantly. A second study was by Counsilman-Hunsaker under LPA. Both studies are available from the owner for review and technical data as well as other internal reports by staff of the City of Charlottesville. Recently completed was a wall sealing project to caulk and seal all penetrations and paths for air from the natatorium to the dry side space. DISCUSSION Ground Water Condenser Cooling Water System Water pumped from the five 200 ft.-300 ft. deep wells, filtered of sand and other debris, circulated to the GSHPs and PDUs, then piped back to the same five wells. 1) The ground source condenser cooling water supply and return system has insufficient thermal capacitance to absorb and or dissipate the buildup of heat through the entire cooling season. The design basis maximum condenser water supply temperature to the GSHPs was 90F. GSHP entering condenser water as high as 110F was experienced in early July as the facility was entering the peak of the cooling season loads. 2) Well pumps have failed and dropped into wells as the well piping into which they were installed expanded. Well pipe has had to be replaced. 3) In order maintain cooling equipment with some capacity though the cooling season hot return water was bled onto the Smith Aquatics Center roof in order to draw in cooler water into the wells from the ground. It fails to and must be revised to provide that heat sink capacity and reliability. 4) Excessive labor is required to maintain the HVAC and ground source water filters. Every GSHP has had at least one if not more compressor replaced presumably due to the high refrigerant pressures and temperatures in the cooling circuits. In cooling season the PDUs can reject heat to the pool water to offset the energy /temperature loss due to evaporation. Also there are gas-fired, high efficiency condensing boilers, one for each independent pool filter recirculation loop, to raise the pool water temperature in heating season. Page 7 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report The offices, public entrance lobby, group exercise, exercise equipment rooms on the second level and support spaces and toilet, showers and locker rooms on the lower level get their ventilation air through their respective GSHP and the ERV. The ERV recovers heat from 3215 cfm (design basis) exhaust air at 92F cooled by 1850 cfm of 78 F exhaust air resulting in ventilation air to the GSHPs at 83 F. Heat transfer is via an air-to-air heat exchanger between the intake air stream and the exhaust air stream. The air streams are filtered in the Energy Recovery Ventilator (ERV). When the ERV unit is OFF the motorized intake and exhaust air dampers close. The unit was designed to be constant volume of both air streams when operating. Supply and exhaust fans are provided integral to the ERV. Exhaust fans are provide drawing from the lower level pool equipment room and the filter room and from the upper level mechanical equipment room, the elevator equipment room, and a storage closet Building Automation System Controls From the interview with City Operations and Maintenance staffers and review via their lap top of the graphic user interface screens the current operation data was visible. The conclusion of that review was the staffers have mainly experience the frustration of complaints, failures, and increased system maintenance associated with the ground water condenser water heat sink. The calibration frequency, agility of the staff with the BAS and GUI screens conveyed a high sense of engagement and system knowledge. Refer to the BAS Screen Attachment. Ventilation & Pressurization: Natatorium & “Dry” Spaces Ventilation Air The mechanical equipment room is located in the center of the second level of the “dry side” admin building and has not exterior walls. The mechanical room houses most the air side conditioning equipment for the facility. The mechanical equipment room houses single zone ground source heat pumps (GSHPs). Three GSHPs serving the lower level and 4 serving the upper level spaces. The GSHP units are supplied pre-conditioned outside air (OA) from roof mounted ventilator via and Energy Recovery Ventilator ( ERV) rated to supply 3215 cfm of filtered recovered energy tempered air at 83°Fdb / 70°Fwb when OA is at 92Fdb and 78°Fwb. The ERV exhaust is scheduled to be 1650 cfm of 78°Fdb/ 65°Fwb of dry-side space air. The two pool dehumidification units (PDUs) each rated at 15,100 cfm with normally 3025 cfm OA and 3350 cfm OA in “Event Mode” (when activity and occupancy would be high.) The PDU is schedule / rated to remove 217.5 lbs. water/ hour each based on the “lap pool” at 78F and space RH at 60%. (NOTE: the conditions when observed on 1/17/19 were 46.5% RH, 82F LAP Pool water temperature and 87F family pool water temperature. Assuming a pool air velocity of 30 feet per minute (fpm) and conditions noted on the BAS the evaporation rate would have been 260 lbs per hour or 31.2 gph. AT the recommended conditions per ASHRAE the evaporation rate would have been approximately 50% of that. That impacts the cost of makeup water for evaporation and blow down for controlling TDS. Per the building automation monitoring system the pool exhaust was operating at 9,600 cfm in EF 1 and Page 8 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report 900 cfm in EF 2 for natatorium exhaust in excess of 10,000 cfm, for 1.35 air changes and above the recommended minimum of 1 ACH. Also there located are 5 potable water instant heating Rinnai™ units and condenser water recirculating pumps. . The first level of the “dry side” includes main electrical room with electrical service entrance and the pool water treatment room. Access to the pool equipment room is via the main electrical room. Also on the first level are male and female locker rooms and showers, and the piping penetrations to and from the ground water source wells and filtering equipment and effluent recharge piping. The pool water treatment room and pit house two independent pool water pumping, monitoring, filtering and water treatment loops. Dry-Side Spaces. The dry side second level has direct access entry from the parking lot through a vestibule to the entry reception lobby on the east side of the building south end, a door that opens to a second level spectator seating section in the natatorium, and a south side personnel door. In that upper level of the “dry side” are two administration offices, toilets, mechanical equipment space, workout and exercise equipment areas, and an open stair way to the lower level. There is a second level access door to the natatorium space spectator benches. The separation partition between the “dry” public areas (other than the mechanical room) and “pool” side is a glass storefront. The staff at the reception desk and in the two offices as well as patrons using the other spaces have experience effects associated with chloramines and have learn to mitigate those by opening the door or doors to vent the bad or “heavy” air. On occasion of January 17 site visit the staff had opened the south door. Cold air was entering then flowing down the open stairway as the warm air from below was being displaced and force up. The set point for the upper level GSHPs was 72 F and for the lower level GSHPs was 78 F. Such protocols are understandable for comfort and health. They also explain in part the rise in gas consumption by over 500% since the facility opened. Page 9 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report Natatorium. The code required minimum ventilation of outside air introduction for occupied spaces and exhaust air flow from shower, toilets and locker rooms was achieved in the original design. Those rates met the mechanical code and ASHRAE Std. 62 prescribed rates. The natatorium fresh air (outdoor air) requirement is 0.48 cfm per SF of pool and pool deck resulting in a minimum outside air flow rate of 6,144 cfm supply air. The ventilation air for the spectators would add to that outdoor air requirement. The exhaust air flow should be designed to achieve the following: 1) Removal of chloramines near where they are concentrated, 2) Facilitate introduction of the outside air to the breathing zone of staff and spectators and swimmers, and 3) Exhaust sufficient air to keep the natatorium negative relative to any adjacent spaces. The recommended pressure difference between the natatorium and adjacent spaces is 0.05-0.15” w. g. (Note: For safety and ADA reasons the differential pressure should not exceed 0.05-0.08 “ w. g.). 4) However, when checked the system was in the “Purge/Event“ mode (higher outside air via the PDUs) and the natatorium was positive relative to the “dry side spaces”. Commanding the system out of the “Purge” or “Event” Mode via the Trent building automation system (BAS) graphic user interface (GUI) the pressure in the natatorium remained slightly positive (~+0.0005 in w.g.) compared to the “dry side” spaces and very slowly reduced finally going very slightly negative for a few moments then returned to be very slightly positive.. The natatorium temperature control, filtration and ventilation is provided through the two PDUs, Munters™ units. The PDUs located in the second level mechanical space. The supply air to the high bay round ducts in the pool area with return air entering via linear return grilles above and below second level spectator area on the south wall of the pool. Each of the PDUs was designed to supply 15,100 cfm of which up to 3025 cfm was outside /fresh air and had exhaust fan rated at 3710 cfm (more than supply by 685 cfm each to draw the pool side negative). Each unit’s exhaust fan that was subsequently disabled in phase 1 of the Paddock Evacuator implementation project and that capacity was replaced and increased by the EF-Pool-1 fan rated at 8,000 cfm. The PDUs units were designed to condition the natatorium to 86°F and 60% RH when the ambient conditions were at 92°Fdb and 78°Fwb with maximum condenser water supplied temperature of 90°F. The PDU has a design feature that was puzzling which was to introduce the ambient ventilation air downstream of the dehumidifying cooling coils. The net Page 10 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report dehumidification capacity of those units was to remove 217.5 lbs. per hour, 435 lbs. per hour total. water per hour each PDU, 95.1 lbs. per hour in circuit A and 122.4 lbs. per hour in circuit B. (NOTE: at the observed operating conditions on January 17, the required dehumidification rate / evaporation rated of the pools would have been in excess of 490 lbs. per hour.) The exhaust from the pool areas originally include exhaust via the PDU return air stream and relief fan then through a roof ventilator discharge on the roof. (Those fans were removed from operation in conjunction with the Paddock Evacuator implementation.) The supply air from the PDUs is distributed to the east and west sides of the natatorium via round, double-wall ducts and “drum louvers to the two high-wall perimeter walls and deck and to center of the pools. A perimeter high wall supply air duct conditions the eastside tracking along the east wall (parking lot & berm wall side) north then across ½ of the north wall. There is a center duct for the east side as well mounted over the pools just off the center north south axis of the building. This scheme is mirrored for the west side except a below floor supply duct with floor grilles was provide to provide air to the low level glass. Air movement in natatoriums must be sufficient to keep air motion on all the walls and glazing to prevent or significantly limit condensation. (NOTE: At 84°F the dew point at 60% RH is 62°F. In winter conditions wall surface temperatures and glazing surface temperature are easily below that temperature.) The “drum louvers” discharge air onto the respective walls on the perimeter ducts directing air down the wall. The center ducts direct the air down toward the pool. There are two returns: one wide linear grille above the second level pool spectator area and a similar one immediate below that same spectator area. Diagnostic smoke testing with smoke generators has been done to evaluate the effectiveness of the air from the overhead supplies moving air to the breathing zone. The City staff observing the smoke test included facilities maintenance staff Gerry Martin and Parks and Recreation staff Vic Garber and Doug Ehman, Deputy Directors with Parks and Recreation. The smoke test indicated the air clung to the wall until approximately 10 ft. to 12 ft. above the pool deck according Phillip and “Gator” Batton that observed the testing. Page 11 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report Natatorium Envelop Thermographic Review In an effort to identify any potential wall insulation or HVAC wall washing issues TLC took a number of thermographic images with a FLIR™ camera. Those are provided as an attachment to this report for reader reference. Exterior Thermographs The first of the series of thermographs are of the exterior. Cold purple skin with bright yellow warm window mullions viewed from the parking lot. Thermal bridging can be viewed in the corner structure framing with the bright yellow to white colors. The north end wall is warmed by the air flow onto the wall unevenly as viewed from the outside. The Paddock evacuator exhaust louver if visible clearly as a bright yellow feature on the wall. The views of the east wall north end indicate locations of the lights and where air flow hits the wall and structure connects to the wall. Low level glazing and the engine compartment of the pickup truck are clearly much warmer than the bulk of the wall. Generally the wall is has only a few very cold areas which might translate to colder (below dew point) sections on the interior. The view of southern end of the east wall clearly shows the temperature difference between the dry side and natatorium side, the thermally bridging of the double door of the personnel door. At the upper edges of the natatorium the air hitting the interior wall, lights below are warmer spots. The close-up of the double door separates the thermographs of the exterior from those of the interior walls. Interior Thermographs The first interior thermograph is from the NW end of the lap pool looking SW to the exterior door and west end of the shared partition between the natatorium and the dry, exercise room. The exercise room is at 70°F and the area immediately around the natatorium personnel door is deep purple. The purple sections of the east wall are those areas where condensation would be more likely to occur if the temps there are below the air dew point. The thermographs are ordered to move clockwise around the interior to the north, along the west wall then the south wall. Again the darker hues from yellow to purple would indicate warmer to colder with darkest having the highest potential for occurrence of condensation due to the high natatorium dew points ranging from 62°F – 65°F. Page 12 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report PREVIOUS STUDIES & MITIGATION LPA Study After the facility was operating the complaints noted above were raised. The City contracted with LPA to review natatorium HVAC and pool water treatment. Counsilman–Hunsaker were sub consultants to LPA to review the water treatment. The current operation of the water treatment complies with the recommendations of water management and treatment. The LPA recommendations included modifying the air diffusers to increase the velocity and redirect locate the DF fans. Paddock Chloramine Exhaust Enhancement implementation project. Parks and Recreation staff learned of and researched the Paddock Evacuator system for chloramine removal implementation. Subsequently, The City contracted with LPA to develop the implementation of the Paddock system. The project increased the exhaust capacity for the natatorium and changed where that exhaust is captured. That project was planned as a two phase project. Phase one provided two Paddock evacuator bench intakes on the south end of the 6 lane competition pool and one evacuator intake unit below the slides at the north end near the recreational pool slide feature with round exhaust duct to the north high wall. The EF-Pool-1 fan exhausting the Paddock bench intakes on the south end was scheduled for 8000 cfm and performance tested by TAB at 7800 cfm. That exhaust which would be directed out through the PDU exhaust fan outlets repurposed as the PDU exhaust was deactivated. Page 13 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report Dry-Side Spaces At least twice there was attempt made to seal the partitions separating the natatorium from the dry side. Refer to the photo below of the storefront partition between the fitness and natatorium. The most recent occurring in past 18 months. All the dry side door hardware has been replaced and the bar joist exposed structure has been re-painted after the corrosion was removed. While the odor of chlorine (chloramines) has been materially reduced the occupants of the dry side still sense the chemicals and mitigate that by opening the doors for hours. The south side personnel door (middle photo) was opened by those at the desk during the meetings (when the OAT was in mid 30s. Smoke Air Flow Tracking. Phillip Seay and Vic Garber stated there had been two (2) smoke tests to determine where the air was going and what it was doing. One outcome of the smoke test were that there were “dead spot“ where there was very little air movement. Another result of the smoke test was the air flow down the wall from the air distribution system broke from the wall to a more horizontal path at approximately 12 feet above the pool and pool deck. Paddock Study. Phillip Seay noted the Paddock Evacuator Company had done subsequent reviews and perhaps a study following the installation of the Phase 1 of the Paddock evacuator installation. The author has not yet spoken with the point of contact at Paddock regarding their findings or recommendations. Page 14 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report January 17, 2019 Investigative Site Visit & Interview Meetings With City Staff. Mark Zavicar provide an inventory of technical reports, and design documents. That information was reviewed to become familiar with the design intent, design features, controls, etc. prior to making the trip to Charlottesville. Upon arriving Mr. Zavicar had organized a number of interviews with City of Charlottesville management and directors and operations and maintenance staff. A. First Meeting. The first interview was at the City offices with Brian Daly with the City since before the center was constructed, Paul Oberdorfer (with the city 2 years), and Mark Zavicar (with the City since May 2018) 1. Smith Aquatics opened in 2010 replacing a 1975 facility. It was designed in 2007-2008. 2. The design was to be cutting edge USGBC LEED and (was certified LEED Platinum.) 3. The construction manager was Barton Mallow with each discipline with separate contractor. 4. TLC’s challenge is to define the scope of effort to once fix the facilities issues vs previous piece meal approach. 5. It is believed the PDUs don’t have sufficient capacity, and in the warmest part of the cooling season the PDUs essentially shutdown. 6. The Ground Source Heat Pumps water is circulated to and from the same locations of the wells. The loops are open to the ground water ingesting sand and sediment into the loops. There are 30 filters that capture most of the sand and sediment. These wells have had at least two pumps fail dropping out of the piping into the wells. 7. The facility has had condensation issues on the west wall. De-stratification fans (DFs) were added to enhance the wall wash air and general air circulation: 2 at the south wall and 4 at the north wall. 8. The moisture barrier was re-sealed. 9. The “dry side air has led to corrosion on the bar joists which has recently been removed and repainted. 10. After some of the problems were experienced Mr. Daly was introduced to Paddock Evacuators at a Pool Management Association meeting. Paddock took him to Queens College in Charlotte and to another YMCA in Virginia. The YMCA had had such chloramine issues as to require the facility to close for periods of time. 11. Staff complaints of irritated eyes and throats noting most occurred when OAT was either very high, when hot and humid. 12. The water chemistry management and control is not outsourced but managed by permanent staff. 13. The pool water treatment systems are two independent loops. Each loop has a Neptune Benson synthetic DE filter unit, Siemens UVC Units, and Accu-TAB™ Calcium Chloride sanitization / chlorination. 14. There is approximately 212,000 gallons in the lap pool and 52,000 gallons in the family/ recreational pool.. Makeup water comes from the Riana Water and Sewer Authority. Activated Charcoal filters had been removed from the GSHPs serving the dry side offices. Mr. Zavicar had resumed use of those after his arrival in May 2018. 15. The pools are maintain at temperatures as follows: and Recreational pool a. Lap/Competition Pool: 80°F-81°F b. Family/Recreational Pool: 83°F-84°F. c. The space temperatures are in 82°F-84°F range at 50% RH. 16. Pools are open 7 days per week most of the year with 50K-75K visits per year. Page 15 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report 17. Goals: a. Solve the Issues! b. Continuous improvement. c. Issues must be rectified and fixes must be permanent. d. Have <100 complaints per year 18. Facility had been used by local high school but that team moved to another facility given the air quality issues that were plaguing the facility. 19. The facility won an award in 2011 and is an aesthetically pleasing with tile wall intended to portraying a waterfall. Page 16 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report B. Second Meeting. The second meeting was at the facility with the facilities management staff: Vic Garber, Deputy Director - Parks and Recreation, Gator Batton Operations Manager, Phillip Seay Aquatics Manager, Aquatics Maintenance Manager and Assistant Maintenance Managers were absent. 1. Philip started with the City of Charlottesville in December of 2013 with no background in HVAC or Aquatics. 2. Philip started having headaches within 30 days (his office is one of two on upper level of the “dry-side“ adjacent to the entrance lobby and reception desk. 3. Chlorine smell was very strong when he started but not is rarely noticed as such. 4. He received A.F.O. (Aquatic Facility Operations) training very soon after starting with the City. 5. Complaints are being logged and tracked by “Gator” Batton. Life Guards were initially complaining of red irritated eyes, “heavy” air, breathing issues (prior to Phillip’s employment). 6. There have been two (2) smoke tests to determine how air was moving in the pool. Those reveals the air was moving toward the back (north east) corner. 7. There have been significant complaint volume from the slide tower. That has been shut down several times. Prior to Phillips starting the pool had been shut down for high chloramine levels even leading to guards experiencing nausea 8. The de-stratification fans (DFs) were added. 9. The pool chemistry in last several years been consistently been monitored consistently and was reported to be currently holding correct levels of chlorine 90%-95% of the time. 10. Prior to Phillip’s employment humidity and corrosion issues persisted on the “dry” side. Corrosion was occurring on the copiers and metal surfaces rusting. All the door hardware has been recently replaced in the dry side spaces. Some rust is still visible on the vent openings of the stainless steel recessed electrical water cooler. 11. The natatorium doors are often open for swim meets. Time to time all the doors have been opened to relieve the temperature and air quality issues. For a while the double doors were opened and filled with plywood with openings with two fans to blow air into the natatorium to dissipate the chloramines. The double fan door equipment was removed after the Paddock equipment was installed. 12. The Paddock evacuators were designed to be installed in 2 phases but only the first phase has been implemented. That included the installation of EF-POOL exhaust fan (scheduled for 8,000 cfm) to draw air through the bench evacuator on the south side that was replacing the PDU exhaust fans that were deactivated. 13. The Paddocks were installed initially in August of 2016 but there were still issues. The bench intake evacuator and a second evacuator (intake unit), ductwork and wall outlet (rated at 950 cfm) was installed at the north end to relieve the chloramine build up around the slide tower/ water flumes (north east) corner of the natatorium. Phillip estimated there was a 75% improvement in the conditions around the poll. Paddock did a second study in 2017. 14. He commented that when staff members arrive early in the mornings beginning around 2015 began to complain, noting “the air was always “heavy” at the front door” but opening doors would resolve that heaviness within an hour or so. Open doors lead to temperature being too hot and humid (in summer) or too cold (in winter). Symptoms of the heavy air was stinging eyes. 15. The mechanical equipment space on the second floor was “sealed” to stop migration of pool air to the dry side spaces twice and most recently was 18 months ago (in 2017) 3 months after the Paddock installation. 16. Grilles were relocated in Linda’s office in conjunction with that. Page 17 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report 17. Following a meeting in July of 2018 the charcoal filters were re-implemented in the GSHPs. 18. Additional portable filters were added to the upper level offices in August of 2018. 19. The issues with air quality do not appear to be correlated to humidity or temperature. 20. The water from the 5 ground wells is tremendously warm. 21. While Philip still has headaches he said they may be related to his previous stroke. 22. It is more infrequent now to get patron complaints now and those are of irritated eyes or respiratory tract. 23. Philip stated Paddock now says they put the evacuator on the wrong wall. (The staff member from Paddock Evacuator Company that made that statement is no longer with Paddock.) Paddock has come back and changed a pulley on EF-POOL to get more air flow. (There is a need to discuss the location of each Paddock unit in order to maximize their effectiveness.) 24. The building has experienced power issues related to the Paddock system fan. Paddock is operating at approximately 88% of capacity or of fan speed (the EF has a VFD to control the speed.) When the fan was set at 90% the breaker would trip which had been set to increase the natatorium negative pressure. They are not aware of who directed the higher fan speed but Paddock states the 88% is the correct operation setting but the unit speed is (approximately at 98%) 25. The Aquatics Manager is in the process of finalizing the operation protocols and documenting them. 26. He has requested City Maintenance to keep him aware of why they come and what they are doing to the system. 27. Gator is keeping an “Air Quality Issue“ file. 28. Phillip stated the event mode was implemented when the occupants exceed 200 .Per the City Maintenance staff …The PDU Event mode is being scheduled to be the control mode most of normal day hours. The system is operating 24/7/365 (except when the pool is being drained.) 29. They have increased the outside air to 100% open 3-4 time. 30. Linda (office off the entrance lobby) and Andrea (reception desk) noticed a “glue” smell recently AFTER the implementation of the carbon filters again. 31. Now most of the Life Guard complaints are in afternoon at the water features (slides) on the weekend days (Friday-Sunday) and occasionally in the center areas of the pool deck. 32. In early days, 2011-2012 some folks complained of feeling nauseous when it was very hot due to the wells system being offline. Page 18 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL Smith Aquatics Center – Charlottesville, VA IAQ Issues Resolution Scope Development Report C. Third Meeting. The third interview was with the maintenance staff assigned to control and maintain the facility HVAC systems: Gerry Martin, HVAC Manager, and Kevin Childress (in charge of the buildings in this zone of the City.) 1. These men are in charge of the facility HVAC operations, control and maintenance. 2. Kevin access the system via a laptop with a “Trent” front end graphic user interface to the Alerton Controls. Photos of screen shots were attached. 3. At the time checked the water in to the well was 76.8°F and 76°F out with the “roof bleed water temperature at 88°F 4. The well pumps are on VFDs as a function of system pressure. 5. The well pumps were indicating 36.9, 42.6, 32.3, 46.0, and 46.5 gpm when checked. 6. The water from the wells brings in sediment (sand) that is filtered in system with auto- strainer that removes sand by “spin down” filter with an Auto-flush feature. 7. Maintenance issues experienced include a. Well motors have failed frequently. b. TXVs (thermostatic expansion valve) failures on the GSHPs c. Compressor Failures 8. The BAS interface indicated the lap pool temperature at 83°F and 87.9°F. These set points are as directed by Phillip the facility manager. 9. Control input sensors are calibrated every 24 months, most recently in August of 2018. 10. The set point for the GSHP operation on the first level was 78F, and 72 F on the upper level. The open stairway between the two levels is allowing the warm air from the first level rise via the stair way to the second level. The cooled air (from the GSHPs and the open side door) into the second/upper level is flowing down the stairway cooling down the entry to the locker rooms. D. Pool Water Treatment. The last exercise was for Gator and Philip to lead a review of the equipment and protocols of the pool water treatment system, operations and maintenance. 1. Gator walked through the operation of the water chemistry system in detail thoroughly identifying set point or operational targets and protocols for the following: a. Targeted level of free chlorine levels of 2.5 ppm, b. pH management to 7.1-7.8 alkaline with 7.4 as the primary pH control set point by CO2 injection to buffer the chlorination, c. Siemens UVC units operation for additional sanitization and reduction of combined chlorine (or chloramines) d. Operation of the Neptune Benson synthetic DE filters, filter maintenance and media replacement, e. Pool temperature control and management of total dissolved f. Sensors are checked and calibrated annually to every two years (maximum) Page 19 TLC Engineering Solutions – 1650 Prudential Drive-Suite 200- Jacksonville, FL This page intentionally left blank CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: March 18, 2019 Action Required: Resolution Presenter: Alex Ikefuna, Director NDS Staff Contacts: Missy Creasy, Assistant Director NDS Sebastian Waisman, Asst. City Attorney Title: Acquisition of Parcels/Land Adjacent to 708 Page Street for the CDBG Priority Neighborhood 10th & Page Passive Park Project Background: The City of Charlottesville receives annual funding from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Program. Each year, City Council initiates a process to allocate CDBG funds to projects throughout the community. First, Council designates a priority neighborhood within the City to receive funding. A Priority Neighborhood Task Force is then established to identify eligible projects. The 10th and Page Neighborhood was the CDBG Priority Neighborhood for FY 14-15, FY 15-16, FY 16-17, and FY 17-18. In 2015, the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood Task Force selected a project that would improve site conditions at the corner of 8th St Lane, 8th St NW and 7th St NW by creating a neighborhood park. After Council approved the allocation of funds, City Staff engaged the Priority Neighborhood Task Force and members of the greater 10th & Page Neighborhood to develop the project in further detail. The project team identified the need to acquire property owned by Norfolk Southern Railway adjacent to the site in order to build the park. The City and Norfolk Southern recently reached an agreement pursuant to which the City would acquire this parcel for $60,800.The documentation needed to close on the transaction is nearly complete and Council approval is now required to proceed with the acquisition. Discussion: After the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood Task Force expressed interest in improving conditions at the site, the Department of Parks and Recreation developed a proposal for a passive neighborhood park and presented it to the Grants Coordinator and the Task Force. The Task Force reviewed the proposal and agreed that a passive park would be sufficient to address its concerns regarding site conditions. The proposal also identified numerous constraints on development at the site, including storm water drainage issues, the presence of underground utilities, the presence of a box culvert carrying Schenk’s Branch located beneath the site, the presence of an underground stream (a part of the City’s storm water management system), anticipation of a major sewer replacement project in the future, and Norfolk Southern Railway’s ownership of the adjacent parcels. After City staff determined that the proposal would be eligible for CDBG funding, staff began to gather feedback from the Task Force and from members of the neighborhood as to a project design that would both respond to community needs and adapt to the constraints at the site. As described below, general guidance for site improvements was received from the community and staff from 2015 - 2018 to inform preliminary and final drawings for the site improvements. During 2018 and 2019, consultants were selected to draft preliminary plans and opportunities were made available for the community to provide feedback in response to these preliminary plans. Subsequently, the consultants met with City staff, including the Development Review Team, to combine the community’s input with City requirements. As a result of this community engagement, staff consultation, and the site constraints, it was determined that acquisition of the railroad property would enhance the project and respond to community needs. Accordingly, City staff began negotiations with Norfolk Southern Railway to acquire property for the project. Norfolk Southern worked with the City in good faith to establish a reasonable price for the land and, since mid-2018, staff has been coordinating HUD, City, and Norfolk Southern requirements for acquisition transactions, including, among other steps, completion of an appraisal, submission of a legal plat, and title work. Community Engagement: Since 2015, City staff has been engaging the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood Task Force in this process. In early 2015 meetings, the Task Force identified the need for CDBG funds to improve the project site due to issues related to blight (inadequate maintenance, trash, flooding, and an unsafe culvert). The Task Force met several times throughout the process as indicated below. For all public community/neighborhood meetings and open house events, invitations were sent by mail to the entire 10th & Page Neighborhood, including Westhaven residents, along with several fact sheets regarding the proposed project.  June 6, 2017 – Priority Neighborhood Task Force met to brainstorm ideas for improving the site and to discuss opportunities for community engagement.  June 26 – August 31, 2017 – Staff issued a Neighborhood Survey (online) to request general ideas, opinions and observations related to the site.  July 2017 – Staff met with City of Promise to provide information, gather input, and answer questions.  July 2017 – Staff presented Task Force priority for improvements at the site at the CRHA Board Meeting.  July 24, 2017 – Staff provided a brief presentation about Task Force priorities, which included information about the site conditions, and invited residents to the upcoming neighborhood meeting.  July 26, 2017 – Staff (NDS, Parks & Recreation) and the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood Task Force held a public neighborhood meeting to provide information for potential site improvements, discuss existing site conditions, and facilitate small group discussions regarding opportunities and ideas for the site. A durable yard sign was placed at the site to encourage residents to complete the survey and to invite residents to the meeting.  August 5, 2017 – Staff participated at Westhaven Community Day to collect ideas and opportunities for the site. Staff conducted outreach through surveys and one on one discussions with residents about the site and site improvements. In general, all residents supported the idea of a park.  October 4, 2017 – Staff presented information and collected initial feedback from Jefferson Area Board of Aging (JABA) regarding opportunities for senior citizens within the site.  October 12, 2017 – Staff presented information and collected initial feedback from the Westhaven Health Coalition Meeting at Crescent Hall.  October 24, 2017 – Staff met with PHAR to discuss the site and opportunities for involving and/or engaging residents in the project.  October 2017 – Staff presented community feedback received to date with the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood Task Force.  November 2017 - Presented preliminary feedback with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board at the Carver Recreation Center.  December 2017 – Staff requested input from CRHA and PHAR with the drafting of the engineering consultant proposal (no input was received).  January – May 2018 – Ongoing consultations with City Staff and other stakeholders include Parks and Recreation, the Police Department, City Attorney’s Office, and the Department of Public Utilities.  May 17, 2018 – Staff held an open house at the Westhaven Community Center specifically for Westhaven Residents to view preliminary designs for proposed improvements, to vote on designs, provide feedback, provide new ideas and ask questions.  May 2018 – Staff held a meeting with the Executive Director of CRHA to gain input on preliminary design.  June 6, 2018 – Staff held an open house at Carver Recreation Center to learn about the proposed improvements, to view preliminary designs based upon community feedback to date, vote on designs, to provide feedback and ask questions.  August 5, 2018 – Engineering consultant participated at Westhaven Community Day to collect input on the preliminary plan/design to inform final plans.  Late Fall 2018 – Staff solicited comments/feedback from the Development Review Team to inform final plans for site plan submission. Once the site plan is submitted, the community will have an opportunity to comment on the final plans. As a result of engagement, the community identified the following goals for the site: preserve open green space, create a multi-generational space, create a gateway or entrance into the neighborhood, create a community gathering space/social space (allow for movie screenings in the park), create a safe space that includes crime prevention design principles (improve lighting, increase sidewalk safety and provide fewer access points), tell the neighborhood history, provide signage and art, incorporate vegetation (trees, flowers, plants), and build low-maintenance and durable infrastructure. The community goals were then shared with the Development Review Team to create a final plan for site plan submission, which will occur in the future). Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Approval of this agenda item aligns directly with Council’s vision for Charlottesville to have a Green City and Quality Housing Opportunities for All. It contributes to variety of Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives including: Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City and Goal 3: A Beautiful and Sustainable Natural and Built Environment. Budgetary Impact: There is no impact on the General Fund. Funds are currently appropriated for this project through CDBG. Grant funding is also appropriated for all aspects of park design and construction and it will enter Parks maintenance once completed. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the resolution. Alternatives: If the resolution is not approved, the property will not be acquired and the City will not be able to spend the remaining amount of funds left within the 10th & Page Priority Neighborhood allocations, which could place the City at risk of losing its CDBG funds due to failure to spend them on a timely basis. . Professional services, including appraisal services, engineering services, and title services, have already been invested in the project. Non-approval of this item would waste CDBG resources that have already been invested in the project and would delay the CDBG spending schedule. Attachments: Resolution Approving Land Acquisition Norfolk Southern Transaction Agreement Property Plat RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF LAND ON 8th STREET LANE AND PAGE STREET FOR PASSIVE PARK PROJECT WHEREAS, the Norfolk Southern Railway Company (the “Railroad”), the owner of land on Page Street and 8th Street Lane, identified on the attached review plat as Parcels A and B, hereinafter the “Property”, has indicated a willingness to convey the Property to the City of Charlottesville for creation of a passive park to serve the 10th and Page Street neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Railroad has agreed to convey to the City the Property for the purchase price of $60,800.00; and WHEREAS, funds are available for the purchase and development of these parcels through the Community Development Block Grant program; and WHEREAS, the Department of Neighborhood Development Services seeks the endorsement of City Council to proceed with the purchase of the above-described land at a purchase price of $60,800.00, with funding supplied through the CDBG Fund; and WHEREAS, an Agreement for the conveyance of said land has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney’s Office; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Charlottesville that it hereby authorizes the purchase of the above-described Property on 8th Street Lane and Page Street for creation of a passive park to serve the 10th and Page Street neighborhood. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the above-referenced Agreement, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign a deed of conveyance, both in form approved by the City Attorney or his designee. The City Attorney’s Office shall take whatever actions are necessary to effect the acquisition of the above-described Property, pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the aforementioned Agreement. November 5, 2018 Activity No.: 1265917 Dear Ms. Tierra Howard: This letter refers to the interest of CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE (hereinafter referred to as "Offeror") in acquiring from NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as "Railroad") a certain parcel of property located in CHARLOTTESVILLE, Charlottesville (city), Virginia (hereinafter referred to as "Premises"). The Railroad will consider an offer from Offeror to purchase the Premises, subject to the approval of its Management, based on the following: (1) The purchase price is SIXTY THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND N0/100 DOLLARS ($60,800.00) for 0.17 acres, more or less, of land as shown on the attached drawing dated July 19, 2018 and marked as Exhibit A. The purchase price shall be tendered to the Railroad in cash or by cashier's or certified check at the time of closing. (2) Within sixty (60) days of the date of this offer, Offeror shall furnish the Railroad with two copies of a survey and legal description prepared by a land surveyor registered in the State of Virginia (unless such requirement is waived by the Railroad's Engineering Department). The survey shall be certified to the Railroad. The Offeror shall pay all costs associated with the same. (However, if the Railroad does not accept this offer, the Railroad agrees to reimburse the Offeror for their reasonable surveying costs upon receipt of an invoice reflecting said costs.) The survey and legal description shall be in a format acceptable for recording in the County or City where the Premises are located and subject to the approval of the Railroad. The Railroad may elect to use the survey in its preparation of the conveyance documents. (3) The conveyance shall be by Quitclaim Deed. If there are existing signboards or existing fiber optic lines, poles, pipes, wires, communications and signal facilities and facilities of like character used in the operation of a railroad located on the premises, the Quitclaim Deed shall include an exclusive reservation of easement by the Railroad (which for purposes of this paragraph, includes the Railroad's successors, assigns, licensees, and lessees) for the existing signboards and the existing fiber optic lines, poles, pipes, wires, communications and signal facilities and facilities of like character used in the operation of a railroad. The Quitclaim Deed shall also provide that the conveyance is subject to any and all other conditions, restrictions, reservations, easements, licenses, and leases, whether or not of record. (4) Offeror shall secure any title insurance commitment it may require and shall pay all costs associated with the same. (5) All property taxes, assessments and rentals shall be prorated between Offeror and Railroad as of the date of closing. Railroad shall be responsible for preparation of the deed and obtaining any necessary mortgage releases. All closing costs, including but not limited to transfer taxes, shall be the responsibility of the Offeror. (6) Offeror shall take possession of the Premises at closing. (7) Any and all required permits, licenses, approvals, zoning, subdivision compliance and financing shall be obtained by the Offeror at its sole effort and expense. (8) It is agreed that no real estate commissions are due or owed by Railroad with respect to this transaction. Offeror hereby agrees to hold harmless Railroad from and against any and all claims and liabilities for real estate or brokerage fees arising out of this transaction which are made by any broker or real estate agent claiming to have represented the Offeror. (9) The Premises will be sold "as is" and "where is" without any express or implied representation or warranty with respect to its habitability, condition or suitability for any purpose, including but not limited to, the condition of the soil, the presence of hazardous materials, substances, wastes or other environmentally regulated substances, whether known or unknown, and the presence of underground storage tanks and other physical characteristics. Offeror shall perform at its own expense and rely solely on its own independent investigation concerning the physical condition of the Premises (including but not limited to environmental assessments) and the Premises' compliance with any applicable law and regulation. If, as part of its independent investigation, Offeror desires to perform a Phase 2 environmental study or otherwise perform any intrusive sampling, it shall execute a separate Right of Entry Agreement with Railroad on a form to be provided by the Railroad. In the event that Offeror's investigation shall disclose the presence of any hazardous material, substances, wastes or other environmentally regulated substances or other physical characteristics at the site which render the Premises unusable, Offeror, at its option, shall either (a) furnish Railroad with a written statement of said characteristics affecting the suitability of the Premises for Offeror's purposes or which give rise to possible liability under federal, state or local environmental laws and regulations or (b) withdraw its offer and receive a refund of its earnest money deposit. If Offeror does not withdraw its offer, Railroad shall have thirty (30) days, after receipt of such 2 written statement, to remedy such conditions, but shall be under no obligation so to do or Railroad may terminate this offer letter and refund Offeror's earnest money deposit. If Railroad fails to remedy such conditions within the prescribed time and does not terminate this offer letter, then, at Offeror' s option, evidenced by written notice to Railroad, Offeror may either (i) withdraw its offer and receive a refund of the earnest money deposit or (ii) waive any or all objections not cured by Railroad and proceed to close hereunder without diminution in price. If Offeror consummates the purchase, Offeror shall assume all responsibility for the environmental conditions of the Premises, including but not limited to, the presence of underground storage tanks, regardless of cause, and Offeror shall hold Railroad harmless from any and all liability arising out of such conditions. Further, Offeror shall be deemed to have waived any and all claims against the Railroad relative to such conditions, including but not limited to those arising under Sections 107 and 113 of CERCLA, other comparable federal or state laws or common law. In the event Offeror withdraws its offer to purchase as provided in this paragraph, Offeror shall promptly provide Railroad with copies of all reports, including but not limited to, environmental reports, secured in connection with its investigation of the Premises. (10) If this offer is accepted by the Railroad's Management, the terms and conditions contained herein shall ripen into a contract and said contract shall survive delivery of the deed and closing. Closing shall occur no later than thirty (30) days after receipt by Offeror of a copy ofthe deed to be used to convey the Premises to Offeror. (11) If this offer is accepted by the Railroad's Management and ripens into a contract, Offeror may not assign its interest in the contract without first obtaining the express written consent of the Railroad. Offeror understands that such consent may be withheld for any reason. (12) In the event this transaction or any part of it requires regulatory approval by any State Public Service Utility Commission or similar agency, Railroad shall proceed with said approval process, and the closing date shall be adjusted to within thirty (30) days after Railroad has received all appropriate regulatory approvals. IfRailroad is unable to secure the approval within six (6) months of the date on which the request is submitted to the appropriate agency, this offer and contract shall terminate and Offeror shall receive a refund of any earnest money deposit. Please be advised that the undersigned does not have the corporate authority to legally bind the Railroad in connection with this proposed transaction. Further, the recommendation of the undersigned may be approved, modified or rejected by Railroad's duly authorized management. Accordingly, your offer shall not, under any circumstances, be deemed accepted 3 until you have been advised in writing that the Railroad's Management has approved this transaction. If you wish to submit an offer, please arrange for the appropriate acknowledgment in the space provided below and return one original counterpart of this letter to me, together with a check made payable to NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMP ANY, in the amount of $6,800.00, representing the earnest money deposit, within ten (10) days from the date hereof Sincerely, ()]~ P&perty Agent - Real Estate OFFER I offer to purchase the Premises on the basis outlined and described above. Enclosed is a check made payable to NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, in the amount of $ which constitutes the earnest money deposit. I understand that said money will be deposited by the Railroad and shall be (1) credited without interest to the purchase price at closing, or (2) refunded without interest should this offer not be accepted or this offer is withdrawn prior to its acceptance by Railroad, or (3) retained by the Railroad as liquidated damages should this offer be accepted and Offeror does not close within thirty (30) days after receiving a copy of the deed of conveyance to be used in this transaction. This Offer is submitted to the Railroad, this - - -day of _______ _,. ---­ Title: Name to appear on Deed: If corporation, company or partnership, state of formation and type of entity: Tax Mailing Address: 4 NSOfferLetter (LumpSum) 10/07/08 JLM Monday, November 5, 2018 1265917\Novcmber S, 2018\iManage #1683360vl 5 lMP.31·287 TMP.31-282 I TMP.31-281 // I / ~.-----------s;:--~-.!L---------~~-~jfr±-1y:e: ~ _[ _ ___ __/,, ---, - '":'1 0:::::::::::::: - , -­ ..........._ ... Strn. t1.1!""\ l ~ ) / / "~ ~ ~ 1MP.31-2BB ... -.; Qty of ChatlotloMle INSl2ll1~ / INSl201o-.4738(pla1) O.B.82 P.364(pla1) O.B.3 P.373(plat) i / 0.B.338 P.415(pla1) i~ / ' lMP.31·289 City or Cha~orteMlle t~ "'~ j CittVAC lMP.31-293 • SOUIHERN R>JLWAY O.B.34 P.227 D.B.34 P.230 / .~ D.B.1 075 P.623 D.B.1075 P.62S(pial) D.B.338 P.415(pla1) l~II City of O>orlottes\/lllo INSl2014·2465 D.B.3 P.373(pla1) ii! ..; ~ D.B.407 P.326(pla!) INSl2ll1~74 / ~ ~'- pk. ·~--- -- ·~~ I D=~ !" 1ll / y ~- -­- - - - - - --­ F .,, 0.169AC.(ourvoy) oSoL ~ //' ~'-,Qi:!) ~ 'IM?.31-290 CltyofO>ak>tt- I ;;;;;-,....._,_::~ ti D.B.616P.216 • D.8.A08 p.662 ' ~ O.B.1075 P.62.S(plat) 0.8.338 PA15(plat) SS. llh. Ooclbf1 lor c.w.t ' . i ~P.31-291 :;;I ~~~ ~ .... SS. ' City : I~~-· ~ ~ !~ ! D.B.3.18 Pli34~ : 6~ ~'6~ i 5J.t0' I 11.10· hs. ss9·19 ·55·E Pon:el'B' m.132· 40.0J' Ji O.o:!9AC.­ IS. H7l0W22'N 102. 25 ' I I lMP.31·294 SOU1l!ERN RAJLWAY ..... CClflt. Sidelfal.k O.B.34 P.227 L_ ____ ___ D.B.34 p.230. D.B.27 P.132()lla0 8lh st. l..ane N.W. 0.B.338 PA15(plat) """ i i SOUTHERN fl>JLWAY O.B.34 P.227 O.B.34 P.230 / CURllETABl.ENEWPARCBS A&B I ALTA/NPS SURVEY A PORTION OF O.B.27 P.132(plat) / """' ""'-' lMP.31-1.s ' I TAX MAP 31 PARCEL294 / / CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA / I j Prepare d fo r: Th~ City of Charlottesville, Virg inia / SCALE l ' • 20 ' ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOCIATES,INC. / t. .,. FEBRUARY 13, 2019 SHEET ~ ENQJ~, A SUR'lfEY'ORSANDLANOMANNIVUI ~ ltO l'••• I O H,AL 00 1t~ O ltA1" t O H • • ltVI H G V lltO I NI A • IHO• f • • • £ ,/ """"""' SCALE: 1' - 20' 2\2 M4..otrme:al.e> llOiloO·~ WGNo\ - • PtQE-....n'.mlll•H.lt....aNIZl· DMll.. NIOllAQ 9W.COW &• O,\Rc.<\'IMAAOJ\1U313..ALTA\B.