CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Members July 20, 2020 Nikuyah Walker, Mayor Sena Magill, Vice Mayor Heather D. Hill Michael K. Payne J.Lloyd Snook, III 6:00 p.m. Closed Session as provided by Sections 2.2­3711 and 2.2­3712 of the Virginia Code: Virtual/electronic meeting (Legal consultation) 6:30 p.m. Regular Meeting: Virtual/electronic meeting (Register at www.charlottesville.gov/zoom) CALL TO ORDER MOMENT OF SILENCE ROLL CALL AGENDA APPROVAL ANNOUNCEMENTS RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 1. Recognition: Government Finance Officers Association Certificate of Excellence in Reporting 2. Proclamation: Minority Mental Health Awareness Month CONSENT AGENDA* 3. Minutes: June 1 closed and regular meetings; June 8 closed meeting; June 11 closed meeting; June 15 closed and regular meetings; June 18 special/closed meeting; June 23 closed meeting; June 25 closed meeting; June 30 work session 4. Appropriation: Maintenance Vehicle Insurance Reimbursement – $40,706.32 (2nd reading) 5. Appropriation: 2020 Energy and Water Management Program (EWMP) Fund ­ $1,429.47 (2nd reading) 6. Appropriation: Grant Award from Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services ­ $242,770 (2nd reading) 7. Appropriation: Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program Fiscal Year 2020 ­ $80,781 (2nd reading) 8. Appropriation: Virginia Housing Solutions Program Supplemental COVID­19 Grant Award ­ $243,276 (1st of 2 readings) 9. Appropriation: Emergency Food and Shelter Program­C.A.R.E.S. act funding ­ $7,099 (1st of 2 readings) 10. Appropriation: Open Society Foundation Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities Grant ­ $250,000 (1st of 2 readings) 11. Resolution: Tax payment refund to Silverchair Science & Communications, Inc. ­ $90,342.49 (1 reading) 12. Resolution: Establishing the City Council policy on military style training and weapon acquisition for the Charlottesville Police Department (1 reading) Page 1 of 255 13. Resolution: Supporting legislation to declare racism a public health crisis in Virginia (1 reading) 14. Report: Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority ­ Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Quarterly Update CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY MATTERS (FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS) COMMUNITY MATTERS Public comment for up to 16 speakers (limit 3 minutes per speaker). Preregistration available for up to 8 spaces; preregistered speakers announced by Noon the day of the meeting as an update to the agenda. Additional public comment period at end of meeting. Public comment will be conducted through electronic participation as City Hall is closed to the public. Participants can register in advance at www.charlottesville.gov/zoom. ACTION ITEMS 15. Public SmartScale Grant Applications approval: West Main Streetscape Phase Hearing/Res.: Three; Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements; Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements; Emmet Street Multimodal Phase Two (1 reading) 16. Public Lochlyn Hill Subdivision: Vacation of Utility Easements and Right of Way Hearing/Ord.: (request to waive 2nd reading) 17. Ordinance: Flint Hill Planned Unit Development (PUD): consideration of a rezoning application, critical slope waiver, and right­of­way realignment a. Ordinance: Ordinance to amend and re­enact the Zoning Map for the City of Charlottesville, to reclassify certain property from R­1S to Planned Unit Development ("Flint Hill PUD") (1st of 2 readings) b. Ordinance: An Ordinance closing, vacating and discontinuing portions of Flint Drive and Keene Court within the area of the proposed Flint Hill PUD (1st of 2 readings) c. Resolution*: Resolution granting a Critical Slope Waiver for a development project described in Rezoning Application ZM20­00001 (“Flint Hill Planned Unit Development”) (1 reading) 18. Resolution*: Approval of the results from the Emmet Streetscape Design Public Hearing (1 reading) 19. Resolution*: Approval of a sidewalk waiver at Landonia Circle (1 reading) 20. Ordinance: Adding Section 33­10 to Chapter 33 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville (1990), prohibiting Firearms and Ammunition in Public Spaces, (1st of 2 readings) 21. Ordinance: Amending Section 2­6 of Chapter 2 (Administration) of the Code of the City of Charlottesville, to add June 19 as an Official City Holiday (1st of 2 readings) 22. Resolution*: Allocation of Vibrant Community Fund Dollars for the Fiscal Year 2021 Adopted Budget ­ $2,259,129 (1 reading) 23. Resolution: Request for legislators at the Virginia General Assembly special session to support legislation that establishes the duties, powers and authority of police civilian review boards, including subpoena powers (1 reading) GENERAL BUSINESS 24. Discussion: Consideration of honorary street naming requests 25. Report: Consideration of support for the Frontline Workers Fair Treatment Charter Page 2 of 255 26. Resolution*: Approval of guidelines for community meetings during Covid­19 OTHER BUSINESS 27. Action Item: Discussion of Boards and Commissions guidance: approval of board and subcommittee meetings for August and going forward; Sister Cities Commission request to schedule retreat in September MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC *Action Needed NOTE: Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in the public meeting may call the ADA Coordinator at (434) 970­3182 or submit a request via email to ada@charlottesville.gov. The City of Charlottesville requests that you provide a 48 hour notice so that proper arrangements may be made. Page 3 of 255 Page 4 of 255 Page 5 of 255 Page 6 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE PROCLAMATION NATIONAL MINORITY MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH – JULY 2020 WHEREAS, July has been designated as the National Minority Mental Health Awareness Month in honor of Bebe Moore Campbell, an African American author and journalist, who sought to eliminate mental health stigma in the black community; and WHEREAS, historically African Americans have been and continue to be negatively affected by racism, prejudice, bias and discrimination in the public health care system; and WHEREAS, it is essential to eliminate racial disparities in mental health by ensuring equity, access to quality care, culturally competent providers, and services and supports that respect cultural experiences; and WHEREAS, Black Lives Matter and Black Mental Health Matters too. The effect of racism and racial trauma on mental health is valid and should not be disregarded. Racism undermines mental health, and we must continue the work towards addressing individual, structural and systemic racism in our community as it relates to mental health; and WHEREAS, organizations such as Brave Souls on Fire and the Central Virginia Clinicians of Color Network (CVCCN) remain fully committed to support and mental health advocacy for African Americans, including recent collaborative efforts to establish a black mental health center; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that I, Nikuyah Walker, Mayor of the City of Charlottesville, and the Council of the City of Charlottesville, do hereby proclaim July as Minority Mental Health Awareness Month in Charlottesville, Virginia, thereby encouraging citizens to help spread the word through awareness, education, support, advocacy and commitment to equity. Signed and sealed this 20th day of July, 2020. _________________________ Nikuyah Walker Mayor Page 7 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 1, 2020 Minutes Virtual/electronic meeting 5:30 PM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met electronically on Monday, June 1, 2020. The meeting was called to order at 5:33 p.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically: - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for the discussion of prospective candidates for appointment to the Police Civilian Review Board. The meeting recessed at 6:40 p.m. to conduct the regular meeting of City Council. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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. Council voted during the regular meeting to reconvene the closed meeting at the conclusion of the final Matters by the Public. At 8:51 p.m., on motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by the following vote reconvened the closed session from 5:30 p.m.: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 11:11 p.m. Page 8 of 255 6:30 PM REGULAR MEETING The Charlottesville City Council held a virtual meeting for its regular session on June 1, 2020, in an effort to comply with social distancing requirements surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic Declaration of Emergency. Ms. Walker called the meeting to order at 6:41p.m. with the following members in attendance: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council by unanimous vote amended the meeting agenda to add the reconvening of the closed session at the conclusion of the final Matters by the Public. Ms. Walker called for a Moment of Silence. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Magill made an announcement about available funds for disposition of Confederate monuments. BOARD & COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by the following vote appointed Mr. Phillip Seay to the Police Civilian Review Board: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). CONSENT AGENDA* Clerk of Council Kyna Thomas read the following Consent Agenda items into the record: 1. MINUTES: May 13, 2020 Council work session; May 18, 2020 Council closed and regular meetings 2. RESOLUTION/APPROPRIATION: Resolution adopting the Budget and City Council amendments for the City of Charlottesville for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, and providing for the annual appropriation of funds for such fiscal year (2nd reading) 2 Page 9 of 255 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2020, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2021 AND PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR I. ADOPTION OF BUDGET WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 19 of the City Charter and Section 15.2-2503 of the Code of Virginia, the City Manager has caused to be prepared and presented to City Council a proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020, and ending June 30, 2021; and WHEREAS, a synopsis of such proposed budget has been published in the Daily Progress, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and notice duly given in such newspaper and public hearings held thereon on March 16, 2020 and May 18, 2020, and the estimates of revenues and expenditures therein debated and adjusted by City Council in open public meetings, all as required by the City Charter and Section 15.2-2506 of the Code of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville that such document, the statements of fiscal policy set forth therein, and the estimates of revenues and expenditures therein proposed by the City Manager and debated and adjusted by the City Council, are hereby adopted as the annual budget of the City of Charlottesville, for informative and fiscal planning purposes only, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020, and ending June 30, 2021; and that a true and correct copy of the same, as adopted, shall be kept on file in the records of the Clerk of the Council. II. GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville that: A. The sums hereinafter set forth are estimated as General Fund revenues for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020. Local Taxes Real Estate Taxes $78,353,270 Personal Property Tax 9,800,000 Public Service Corporation Tax 1,459,389 Penalty/Interest on Delinquent Taxes 415,000 Utility Services Consumer Tax (Gas, Water, Electric) 5,024,112 Virginia Communications Sales and Use Tax 2,600,000 Tax on Bank Stock 1,200,000 Tax on Wills and Deeds 625,000 Sales and Use Tax 11,504,331 3 Page 10 of 255 Rolling Stock Tax 19,319 Transient Occupancy (Lodging) Tax 6,282,721 Meals Tax 11,842,493 Short-Term Rental Tax 60,000 Cigarette Tax 575,000 Recordation Tax Receipts 205,223 Vehicle Daily Rental Tax 82,500 Total Local Taxes $130,048,358 Licenses and Permits Business and Professional Licenses $6,225,000 Vehicle Licenses 900,000 Dog Licenses 10,000 Electrical and Mechanical Permits 250,000 Building and Plumbing Permits 450,000 Temporary Parking Permits 150,000 Site Plans 75,000 Other Permits 140,500 Total Licenses and Permits $8,200,500 Intergovernmental Revenue Revenue from State Agencies PPTRA Revenue (State Personal Property Tax) $3,498,256 State Highway Assistance 4,291,324 Reimbursement/Constitutional Offices 1,698,184 State Aid for Police Protection 2,077,468 Trailer Title 1,200 DMV Select Office Commissions 35,000 Other State Assistance: Misc. Rev 50,000 Revenue from Other Intergovernmental Sources School Resource Officers (City Schools) 301,231 Regional Library Administrative Fee 117,144 Crisis intervention Team Revenue 105,910 Fire Department Ops (Albemarle County) 195,000 Fire Department Ops (UVA) 353,000 Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court (Albemarle County) 63,760 Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court Building Maintenance (Albemarle County) 57,913 Magistrate's Office (Albemarle County) 4,575 Payments In Lieu of Taxes (Housing Authority) 25,000 Service Charge (UVA) 46,000 Property Maintenance (UVA) 63,455 Total Intergovernmental Revenue $12,984,420 Charges for Services Property Transfer Fees $1,000 Zoning Appeals Fees 1,100 4 Page 11 of 255 Court Revenue (Circuit/General District Courts) 500,000 Circuit Court - Online Land Records Subscription Revenue 30,000 Internal City Services 1,882,925 Utility Cut Permits 185,000 Recreation Income 1,335,824 Reimbursable Overtime/Public Safety 331,579 Payment in Lieu of Taxes: Utilities 6,091,667 Indirect Cost Recovery 125,000 Waste Disposal Fees 1,115,000 Emergency Medical Services (Ambulance) Revenue Recovery 1,300,000 Other Charges for Services 125,000 Total Charges for Services $13,024,095 Miscellaneous Revenue $706,000 Interest Earned Rent 194,956 Refund of Prior Years’ Expenditures 50,000 Other Miscellaneous Revenue 613,000 Total Misc. Revenue $1,563,956 Transfers from Other Funds Landfill Reserve Fund $250,000 Parking Enterprise Fund 1,200,000 Total Transfers from Other Funds $1,450,000 City/County Revenue Sharing: Operating Budget $13,289,313 Total Operating Revenue $180,560,642 Designated Revenue City/School Contracts: Pupil Transportation $2,972,130 City/School Contracts: School Building Maintenance 3,816,780 City/County Revenue Sharing: Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund 900,000 Transfer to the Capital Improvement Fund - Mall Vendor Fees 93,750 City/County Revenue Sharing: Transfer to Facilities Repair Fund 400,000 Transfer to Debt Service Fund: Meals Tax Revenue 2,452,571 Total Designated Revenue $10,635,231 Total General Fund Revenue $191,195,873 B. The sums hereinafter set forth are hereby appropriated from the General Fund of the City for the annual operation of the City departments, other agencies and non-departmental accounts so set forth, beginning July 1, 2020. 5 Page 12 of 255 Operating Expenditures Management Mayor and City Council $572,629 Office of the City Manager/Administration 1,536,483 Office of the City Manager/Communications 552,602 Office of the City Manager/Economic Development 1,129,622 Office of the City Attorney 1,030,055 Office of General Registrar 671,840 Contributions to Organizational Memberships and Workforce Development Programs Virginia Municipal League 16,820 Chamber of Commerce 2,000 Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission 86,454 Piedmont Workforce Network 7,971 Virginia Institute of Government 2,500 Alliance for Innovation 2,550 Virginia First Cities Coalition 18,000 Central Virginia Partnership for Economic Development 24,640 Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District 13,049 Central Virginia Small Business Development Center 19,200 Rivanna Conservation Alliance 11,000 National League of Cities 5,000 Center for Nonprofit Excellence 600 Non Departmental Activities City Strategic Plan/P3: Plan, Perform, Perfect 105,000 Participatory Budgeting 15,000 Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (Local Match) 108,415 Citizen Engagement Opportunities 15,000 Food Equity 155,000 Citizen Review Board (CRB) 150,000 Innovation Fund 20,000 Performance Agreement Payments to CFA 250,000 Citywide Reserve - Economic Downturn 6,674,971 Ivy Landfill 210,000 Transfer to Debt Service Fund 8,560,788 Transfer to Fund Balance Target Adjustment Fund 481,905 Employee Compensation and Training 1,926,887 Internal and Financial Services Finance Department - Administration/Purchasing/Assessor 2,544,984 Human Resources 1,215,923 Commissioner of Revenue 1,344,901 Treasurer 1,356,697 6 Page 13 of 255 Information Technology 2,996,483 Healthy Families and Community Transfer to Children's Services Act Fund 2,004,722 Transfer to Social Services Fund 3,602,777 Transfer to Human Services/Community Attention Fund 641,280 Neighborhood Development Services 2,406,657 Office of Human Rights/Human Rights Commission 238,438 Parks and Recreation 11,535,820 Transfer to Convention and Visitors' Bureau 1,212,691 Unallocated Agency Funding Unallocated Vibrant Community Funds 2,104,683 Unallocated Arts and Culture Funding 154,446 Contributions to Children, Youth, and Family Oriented Programs Virginia Cooperative Extension Program 52,297 Thomas Jefferson Health District 612,708 Region Ten Community Services Board 1,180,092 Jefferson Area Board for Aging (JABA) 319,192 United Way - Thomas Jefferson Area 192,504 Contributions to Education and the Arts Jefferson Madison Regional Library 2,015,037 City Center for Contemporary Arts 47,970 Piedmont Virginia Community College 12,317 McGuffey Art Center 24,035 Historic Preservation Task Force 5,000 Contributions to Housing Programs Rent Relief for Elderly, a sum sufficient estimated at 20,099 Rent Relief for Disabled, a sum sufficient estimated at 219,133 Tax Relief for Elderly, a sum sufficient estimated at 130,738 Tax Relief for Disabled, a sum sufficient estimated at 61,542 Homeowners Tax Relief Program 1,443,488 Stormwater Fee Assistance Program 20,000 Infrastructure and Transportation Public Works: Administration, Facilities Development, Facilities 3,258,129 Maintenance Public Works: Hedgerow Properties 49,820 Public Works: Public Service 9,199,706 Transfer to Charlottesville Area Transit Fund 2,513,651 JAUNT Paratransit Services 1,744,416 Public Safety and Justice 7 Page 14 of 255 City Sheriff 1,275,198 Commonwealth's Attorney 1,155,259 Clerk of Circuit Court 749,452 Circuit Court Judge 88,864 General District Court 21,143 Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court/Court Services Unit 415,260 Magistrate 9,150 Fire Department 12,539,795 Police Department 18,017,555 Contributions to Programs Supporting Public Safety and Justice Regional Jail 4,316,546 Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Center 576,870 Emergency Communications Center 1,485,643 Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 282,415 Public Defender's Office 59,512 Local Contribution to Public Schools Operational Support 58,709,623 Total Operating Expenditures $180,560,642 Designated Expenditures City/School Contracts: Pupil Transportation $2,972,130 City/School Contracts: School Building Maintenance 3,816,780 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund 900,000 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund - Mall Vendor Fees 93,750 Transfer to Facilities Repair Fund 400,000 Transfer to Debt Service Fund - Meals Tax Revenue 2,452,571 Total Designated Expenditures $10,635,231 Total General Fund Expenditures $191,195,873 C. Of the sum of $14,589,313 to be received in the General Fund from the County of Albemarle under the revenue sharing agreement of May 24, 1982, $400,000 shall be transferred to the Facilities Repair Fund. D. The amounts hereinabove appropriated for salary accruals, education, training and employee benefits, or portions thereof, may on authorization from the City Manager, or his designee, be transferred by the Director of Finance or the Deputy City Manager to any departmental account, and notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to the contrary, be expended for salaries or employee benefits in such account in the manner as sums originally appropriated thereto. 8 Page 15 of 255 E. The portions of the foregoing appropriations to individual departments or agencies intended for motor vehicles and related equipment shall be transferred to the Equipment Replacement Fund for expenditure as hereinafter provided. F. The amount above appropriated for Debt Payment shall be transferred to the Debt Service Fund. In addition, an amount equivalent to 1 percent of the meals tax rate will be deposited into the Debt Service Fund. G. The amount above appropriated as Council Strategic Initiatives shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuring fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. H. The amount above appropriated as Ivy Landfill Remediation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, and any unspent funds are hereby transferred to the Landfill Reserve account in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. Further, any amount in the Landfill Reserve may be immediately appropriated for use to cover costs associated with the landfill remediation budget in the current fiscal year. I. The amount above appropriated as Hedgerow Properties shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. J. The proceeds of the sale of any real property shall be appropriated to the Strategic Investment Fund. K. The amount received for $4-For-Life revenue shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year and will be appropriated into the Fire Department budget, unless altered by further action of City Council. L. Of the above amount of funding appropriated to the Fire Department budget for Emergency Medical Services (EMS), $450,000 is the City’s contribution to the Charlottesville Albemarle Rescue Squad (CARS). In addition, a 10% contingency of $91,064 for the EMS System shall be set aside per the agreement between the City and CARS. Any contingency funds remaining unexpended at the end of the fiscal year shall be transferred into a separate EMS Equipment Replacement Fund to be used for future EMS equipment needs to support the provision of emergency medical services in the City of Charlottesville. M. The amount above appropriated as Historic Resources Task Force shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. N. The amount received as drug forfeitures and seizures revenue collected by the Police Department and Commonwealth Attorney’s Office shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. 9 Page 16 of 255 O. The amount received as Courthouse Security Revenue is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year and appropriated into the Sheriff Office budget to be used for court security related expenses (personnel and equipment) per the Code of Virginia. Further, any unspent funds in the Court House Security account shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless further altered by Council. P. Funds from the Citywide Reserve account may be transferred to other funds at the discretion of the City Manager for the purpose of addressing unforeseen expenditures in those funds. Any amount remaining in the Citywide Reserve account shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. Q. The amount above appropriated as Corporate Training Fund, within the Employee Compensation and Training funds, shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. R. The amounts received unspent for donations and grants in the General Fund received for specific purposes shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year and hereby are appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year. S. The amounts above appropriated as Sister City Commission shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. T. Sums appropriated for the Stormwater Assistance Program shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. U. The amounts above appropriated funds for the City Strategic Plan - P3: Plan, Perform, Perfect shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. V. The amounts above appropriated funds for the Innovation Fund shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. W. The amounts above appropriated funds for the Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. X. Sums appropriated in the General Fund which have not been encumbered or expended as of June 30, 2021, shall be deemed to revert to the unassigned balance of the General Fund, unless Council by resolution provides that any such sum shall be a continuing appropriation. 10 Page 17 of 255 Y. Sums appropriated in the General Fund which have not been encumbered or expended as of June 30, 2021 and are in excess of 17% of General Fund expenditures for the next fiscal year shall be deemed to revert to the Capital Fund contingency account for future one-time investments in the City’s infrastructure as part of the year-end appropriation, unless further altered by Council with year-end adjustments. III. SCHOOL OPERATIONS APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: The sums hereinafter set forth are hereby appropriated for the annual operation of the school operations, effective July 1, 2020; the City contribution to the School operations having hereinabove been appropriated from the General Fund. School Budget (All Funds) Local Contribution $57,834,623 State Funds 21,014,925 Federal Funds 5,280,802 Fund Balance 720,649 Misc. Funds 3,167,089 Total School Operations Budget $88,018,088 A net increase in the School Operations general fund balance at June 30, 2021 shall be deemed to be allocated as follows: • Surplus operating budget up to $100,000 will be allocated to the School Facility Repair Fund, however Charlottesville City Schools will be required to commit $100,000 of their annual budget to the Facility Repair Fund • Funds in excess of $100,000 up to $200,000 will be retained by the City of Charlottesville School Division • Funds over $200,000 will be shared equally (50/50) between the City and Charlottesville City Schools IV. HEALTH BENEFITS FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: There is hereby appropriated from the Health Benefits Fund sums received by said Fund from individual departments and agencies for the payment of health and medical benefit program costs, and for insurance covering such costs, and in addition, for the accumulation of a reserve for future expenditures to pay for such health and medical benefit program costs. This appropriation shall be effective during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, but shall not be deemed to expire at the end of that year. Instead, it shall continue in effect unless altered by further action of City Council. V. RETIREMENT BENEFITS FUND APPROPRIATION 11 Page 18 of 255 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: There is hereby appropriated from the Retirement Benefits Fund sums received by said Fund from individual departments and agencies for the payment of retirement benefit program costs, and for insurance covering such costs, and in addition, for the accumulation of a reserve for future expenditures to pay for such retirement benefit program costs. This appropriation shall be effective during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021, but shall not be deemed to expire at the end of that year. Instead, it shall continue in effect unless altered by further action of City Council. VI. TRANSIT FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Transit Fund, for the operation of the transit bus system during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, the sum of $8,982,666 or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020. Except as is otherwise expressly provided herein, the balance of any General Fund contribution to such funds not expended or encumbered as of June 30, 2021 shall be deemed to revert to the unassigned balance of the General Fund, unless the Council by resolution provides that any such sum shall be deemed a continuing appropriation. VII. RISK MANAGEMENT APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that all sums previously appropriated to the Risk Management Fund, all sums received by such fund as payment from other City funds, are hereby appropriated for the uses prescribed for such fund, pursuant to the terms of, and subject to the limitations imposed by Article V of Chapter 11 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended. VIII. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: There is hereby appropriated from the Equipment Replacement Fund other sums received by such fund as payment from the General Fund and vehicle sales, and proceeds from vehicle loss insurance settlements for the lease, financing or purchase of motor vehicles and related equipment and for accumulation of a reserve for future equipment purchases during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020; provided that such appropriations shall not be deemed to expire at the end of such fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. Of the sums received by the Equipment Replacement Fund, a sum sufficient to 12 Page 19 of 255 service the debt on any pieces of general governmental equipment obtained under a master lease, credit line, or an installment purchase agreement shall be transferred to the Debt Service Fund. IX. FACILITIES REPAIR FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: The sum of $400,000 transferred to the Facilities Repair Fund from the General Fund, and such sums as may be transferred to the Facilities Repair Fund from other funds during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 are appropriated for carrying out the purposes of this fund during that fiscal year. However, such appropriation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. X. JOINT HEALTH DEPARTMENT BUILDING FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: The amounts received as Health Department Building Account revenue during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 are appropriated to the Joint Health Department Building Fund to be used for general improvements, maintenance and small capital projects related to the Thomas Jefferson Health District building. Further, any unspent funds in the Health Department Building account shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless further altered by Council. XI. DEBT SERVICE FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville: A. The Debt Service Fund shall serve as a permanent reserve for the payment of principal and interest of bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness and the cost of issuance thereof issued by the City pursuant to its Charter and/or the Virginia Public Finance Act. B. The sum of $8,560,788 transferred to such fund by Part II of this resolution, as well as the designated Meals Tax transfer (estimated at $2,452,571), or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. C. Appropriations in the Debt Service Fund shall be deemed continuing appropriations, and balances remaining in such fund at the end of each fiscal year shall be carried forward to pay principal and interest due on City obligations and costs associated with the issuance of those obligations in future years. XII. SPECIAL REVENUE FUND APPROPRIATIONS 13 Page 20 of 255 BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that the following appropriations are hereby approved for agency expenditures accounted for as separate funds of the City, for their respective programs during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021; the City contribution to each such fund having hereinabove been appropriated from the General Fund: A. There is hereby appropriated from the Human Services/Community Attention Fund, for the operation of the Community Attention Homes and related programs during such fiscal year, the sum of $6,784,014, or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever shall be the lesser amount. B. There is hereby appropriated from the Social Services Fund, for the operation of the Department of Social Services during such fiscal year, the sum of $14,981,907, or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever shall be the lesser amount. C. There is hereby appropriated from the Children’s Services Act Fund, for the operation of the Children’s Services Act entitlement program, the sum of $8,444,864, or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever shall be the greater amount. Each such special revenue fund appropriation shall be deemed effective July 1, 2020. Except as is otherwise expressly provided herein, the balance of any General Fund contribution to such funds not expended or encumbered as of June 30, 2021 shall be deemed to revert to the unassigned balance of the General Fund, unless the Council by resolution provides that any such sum shall be deemed a continuing appropriation. XIII. INTERNAL SERVICES FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville that the following appropriations are hereby approved for internal services accounted for as separate funds on the books of the City, for their respective programs during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021; the payments of individual departments and agencies to each such fund having hereinabove been appropriated in the General Fund and other applicable funds: A. There is hereby appropriated from the Information Technology Fund, for the operation of the various functions within this fund during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020, or the amount of revenue actually credited to such fund from other City departments and agencies, whichever shall be the greater amount: 14 Page 21 of 255 1. For the operation and infrastructure of City Link, the sum of $1,200,000. However, such appropriation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year into the City Link Infrastructure cost center unless altered by further action of this Council. 2. For Technology Infrastructure Replacement, the sum of $291,900. However, such appropriation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. B. There is hereby appropriated from the Warehouse Fund, for the operation of the Warehouse during such fiscal year, the sum of $163,218, or the amount of revenue actually credited to such fund from other City departments and agencies, whichever shall be the greater amount. C. There is hereby appropriated from the Fleet Maintenance Fund, for the operation of the Central Garage, Vehicle Wash and Fuel System during such fiscal year, the sum of $1,169,528 or the amount of revenue actually credited to such fund from other City departments and agencies, whichever shall be the greater amount. D. There is hereby appropriated from the Communications System Fund, for the operation of the citywide phone system and mailroom operations during such fiscal year, the sum of $273,587, or the amount of revenue actually credited to such fund from other City departments and agencies, whichever shall be the greater amount. XIV. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND APPROPRIATIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that: A. The following are hereby designated as revenue of the Capital Projects Fund: 1. The sum of $900,000 shall be transferred from the General Fund. 2. The sum of $93,750 collected as mall vendor fees will be transferred from the General Fund and used to fund infrastructure repairs for the Downtown Mall. 3. The proceeds of the sale of any real property, as prescribed by resolution of this Council adopted November 3, 1986. 4. The proceeds of the sale of any real property to be used for housing shall be appropriated to the “Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund” account in the Capital Fund. 15 Page 22 of 255 5. Funds received as donations and/or contributions for sidewalks shall hereby be appropriated into Sidewalks account (P-00335) to be used for the replacement, construction or repair of sidewalks. These funds shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year and shall be hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. B. The sums hereinafter set forth are hereby appropriated from the Capital Projects Fund of the City for the respective capital purchases or projects so set forth, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020; provided that such appropriations shall not be deemed to expire at the end of such fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. C. The Capital Projects Fund Fiscal Year 2021-2025 will reflect the budget delineations set forth below for Fiscal Year 2020-2021. The Capital Projects Fund grouped by area: Revenue Transfer from General Fund $900,000 Transfer from General Fund - Mall Vendor Fees $93,750 Contribution from Albemarle County 500,000 Contribution from City Schools 200,000 VDOT Revenue Sharing 200,000 PEG Fee Revenue 40,000 CY 2021 Bond Issue 23,861,092 TOTAL REVENUE $25,794,842 Expenditures Education $3,400,000 Public Safety and Justice 1,295,500 Facilities Capital Projects 4,120,491 Transportation and Access 14,445,101 Parks and Recreation 93,750 Affordable Housing 2,400,000 Technology Infrastructure 40,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $25,794,842 XV. GAS FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Gas Fund, for the operation of the gas utility during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, the sum of $27,837,698 or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020. However, the appropriations for the Vehicle Replacement Program, the Gas Fund Capital program, the Thermostat Program the Strategic Energy Initiatives program and the Gas Assistance Program shall not be deemed to expire at the end of 16 Page 23 of 255 the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. The Gas rates for our customers indicated in the Utility Rate Study are reviewed and approved by Council each year. At that time the Gas operations budget, including any new programmatic requests, and the Gas capital improvement program budget are reviewed and may be amended. XVI. WATER FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Water Fund, for the operation of the water utility during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, the sum of $17,272,327, or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020. However, the appropriations for the Vehicle Replacement Program, Water Fund Capital program, Water Conservation Program, Water Assistance Program, Rain Barrel Program and the Toilet Rebate Program shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. The Water rates for our customers indicated in the Utility Rate Study are reviewed and approved by Council each year. At that time the Water operations budget, including any new programmatic requests, and the Water capital improvement program budget are reviewed and may be amended. XVII. WASTEWATER FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Wastewater Fund, for the operation of the wastewater utility during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, the sum of $17,203,764 or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020. However, the appropriations for the Vehicle Replacement Program, the Wastewater Fund Capital program, and the Wastewater Assistance Program shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. The Wastewater rates for our customers indicated in the Utility Rate Study are reviewed and approved by Council each year. At that time the Wastewater operations budget, including any new programmatic requests, and the Wastewater capital improvement program budget are reviewed and may be amended. XVIII. STORMWATER FUND APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Stormwater Fund, for the operation of the stormwater utility during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, the sum of $2,794,572 or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. Such appropriation shall be effective July 1, 2020. However, the appropriations for the Stormwater Fund Capital program shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. 17 Page 24 of 255 XIX. UTILITIES FUNDS DEBT SERVICE APPROPRIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Utilities Funds (Gas, Water, Wastewater and Stormwater) for the payment of principal and interest of bonds, notes and other evidences of indebtedness and the cost of issuance thereof issued by the City pursuant to its Charter and/or the Virginia Public Finance Act., during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. However, such appropriation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but is hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. A. There is hereby appropriated from the Gas Debt Service Fund, the sum of $300,000 as revenue (transfer from Gas Fund) and $133,166 in principal and interest payments or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. B. There is hereby appropriated from the Wastewater Debt Service Fund the sum of $3,000,000 in revenue (transfer from the Wastewater Fund) and $2,731,162 in principal and interest payments or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. C. There is hereby appropriated from the Water Debt Service Fund the sum of $1,800,000 in revenue (transfer from the Water Fund) and $1,696,008 in principal and interest payments or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. D. There is hereby appropriated from the Stormwater Debt Service Fund the sum of $129,683 in revenue (transfer from the Stormwater Fund) and $119,039 in principal and interest payments or as much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to pay such debt service expenses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021. XX. PARKING FUND BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Parking Fund, for parking operations the sum of $3,657,155, or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. 1. The Parking Operation budget includes a budgeted transfer to the General Fund in the amount of $1,200,000 or the actual net revenues received from public serving parking facilities, permits, meters and fines, whichever is the lesser. 2. Revenue received for parking development contributions shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. 18 Page 25 of 255 XXI. PAY PLAN APPROVAL BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville that the Employee Classification and Pay Plan for the City of Charlottesville dated July 1, 2020 and effective on that same date, which assigns salary ranges to each class or position in the City service is hereby approved pursuant to Section 19-3 and 19-4 of the City Code, 1990, as amended and a copy of the same shall be kept on file with the records of the meeting at which this resolution is approved. XXII. GOLF FUND BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, that there is hereby appropriated from the Golf Fund, for the operation of the golf courses during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 the sum of $989,940 or the amount of revenue actually received by such fund, whichever is the greater amount. 3. APPROPRIATION*: Appropriation from Department of Human Services Fund Balance for the Pathways/Community Resource Hotline ­ $400,000 (2nd reading) APPROPRIATION Human Services Fund Balance for the Pathways/Community Resource Hotline $400,000 NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $400,000 in Department of Human Services fund balance, is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Expenditures - $400,000 Fund: 213 Cost Center: 3411001000 G/L Account: 561105 Transfer From: Fund: 213 Cost Center: 3411001000 G/L Account: 561105 Transfer To: Revenue: Fund: 105 Cost Center: 974302008000 G/L Account: 498010 Expense: Fund: 105 Cost Center: 974302008000 G/L Account: 599999 19 Page 26 of 255 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the amount above appropriated from the Human Services Fund balance for the Pathways/Community Resource Hotline shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby automatically appropriated in the ensuring fiscal year unless altered by further action of City Council. 4. APPROPRIATION: Supplemental State Funding for the Children’s Services Act ­ $880,522.88 (carried) 5. APPROPRIATION: Department of Social Services Additional Funding for Adoption Assistance ­ $625,000 (carried) 6. APPROPRIATION: Appropriation of CARES Act funding designed to provide emergency assistance for Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) and JAUNT. Total funding $7,143,582 – CAT $5,357,686 and JAUNT $1,785,896 (carried) 7. ORDINANCE: Taxicab Driver Ordinance Amendment (carried) Ms. Walker opened the floor for comments from the public on Consent Agenda items. The following people spoke: • Mr. William Elder spoke about the taxicab registration window opening and closing. • Ms. Nancy Carpenter, City resident, spoke in support of defunding the City budget for School Resource Officers. • Mr. Chris Meyer, City resident, spoke about the City budget regarding the school system operating budget, and about a way to recover some funds, if necessary. As local director for LEAP (Local Energy Alliance Program), he spoke about the Vibrant Community Fund allocation process. • Mr. Andy Orban spoke about removing funding for School Resource Officers. Ms. Walker spoke about a Memorandum of Understanding between the Police Department and City Schools regarding School Resource Officers and the willingness of the Chief of Police to further discuss. Mr. Blair advised that City Council could not direct Schools operating expenditures. On motion by Mr. Snook, seconded by Ms. Hill, Council by the following vote approved the Consent Agenda: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY MATTERS City Manager Tarron Richardson addressed a question from Mr. Walt Heinecke from the May 18 City Council meeting regarding City subsidization of parking for businesses in the 20 Page 27 of 255 parking deck. Dr. Richardson advised that businesses pay the same as others in the parking deck. Ms. Walker recessed the meeting at 7:05 p.m. and reconvened at 7:14 p.m. COMMUNITY MATTERS Ms. Walker opened the floor for public comment. Ms. Tanesha Hudson spoke about systemic race issues in Charlottesville. Mr. Rory Stolzenberg spoke about transparency of the City budget for Police and about the downtown parking garage subsidies. Ms. Anna Hennessy, representing Carlita Thompson, read a letter that they co-authored regarding the Charlottesville Police Department. Ms. Jennifer Koch, representing Cville Plans Together, spoke about community engagement opportunities for the process for developing the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Chris Meyer spoke in opposition to systemic racism. He spoke about the University of Virginia response to Covid­19 and asked that they be a better neighbor. Ms. Angela Ciolfi with Legal Aid Justice Center, spoke about the Vibrant Community Fund and gave an update on Covid­19 impacts to racial equity and efforts to help lower income residents. Ms. Nancy Carpenter, City resident, spoke in support of communities of color and in support of the University of Virginia playing a larger role in helping the community during the Covid­19 pandemic. Mr. Walt Heinecke spoke in support of Mayor Walker's statement regarding racial justice, naming recent victims: George Floyd, Breanna Taylor, and Ahmaud Aubery. He asked for a review of the Police Civilian Review Board by­laws, the Disproportionate Minority Contact Report follow-up, and the Police Department budget line items. Mr. Tim Wallace spoke in support of the Police Civilian Review Board (PCRB) and about tying the amount of funding for the PCRB to one percent of the Police Department budget. 21 Page 28 of 255 - City Attorney John Blair provided a response to earlier comments regarding the Taxicab Ordinance, advising that the City's Declaration of Emergency has closed City Hall and opening will be addressed through a phased approach. Mr. William Elder spoke about taxicab driver registration requirements and the need to open the window for application processing. Mr. Blair, Dr. Richardson, Ms. Walker and Police Chief Brackney shared clarification. The meeting recessed at 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at 8:16 p.m. ACTION ITEMS ORDINANCE*: Appropriation of remaining $250,000 from FY20 Real Estate Tax Relief for the elderly and/or disabled and Charlottesville Housing Affordability Program to fund one­time COVID­19 Real Estate Tax Relief Grants Commissioner of the Revenue Todd Divers gave introductory remarks. Ms. Walker expressed her enthusiasm for expanding the program. Mr. Payne asked about evaluation and measurement of the impacts of this and various funds. After further discussion, on motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by the following vote approved the ordinance. With at least a four-fifths vote, the ordinance passed on the first reading. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING ONE TIME GRANTS TO CHARLOTTESVILLE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROGRAM AND REAL ESTATE TAX RELIEF FOR THE ELDERLY AND DISABLED PROGRAM RECIPIENTS GENERAL BUSINESS There were no General Business items. OTHER BUSINESS There were no Other Business items. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC Ms. Walker opened the floor for comments from the public. Ms. Tanesha Hudson spoke about race issues in the City. 22 Page 29 of 255 Mr. William Elder asked Council and staff to come up with a solution for opening the taxicab service window at the Police Department. Mr. Walt Heinecke spoke about raising rates for downtown parking by business owners and residents. He expressed concern about affordable housing related to rental assistance. He also spoke about empowerment for the Police Civilian Review Board. Mr. Don Gathers spoke about recent events and the need for empowerment for the Police Civilian Review Board. Mr. Rory Stolzenberg spoke about recent nationwide events and acknowledged Charlottesville City Police handling of peaceful protests. He also spoke about downtown parking funds. Councilors followed up with comments. Ms. Walker adjourned the meeting at 8::51 Ms. Hill read Council into closed session at 8:51 p.m. 23 Page 30 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 8, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 11:30 AM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met on Monday, June 8, 2020, at 11:30 a.m. The meeting was called to order at 11:33 a.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically: - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(7) for consultation with legal counsel from the City Attorney’s Office concerning the matter of Payne, et al. v. City of Charlottesville, et al.; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(8) for consultation with legal counsel from the City Attorney’s Office for legal advice concerning attorney-client privilege and City boards and commissions. The meeting recessed at 1:57 p.m. and reconvened at 2:27 p.m. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 was adjourned at 4:41 p.m. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council Page 31 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 11, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 9:00 AM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met on Thursday, June 11, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. The meeting was called to order at 9:05 a.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2- 3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager. The meeting recessed at the following times for break: Noon to 1:40 p.m., 2:30 to 2:45 p.m., 4:45 to 4:55 p.m., and 5:45 to 6:15 p.m. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 7:50 p.m. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council Page 32 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 15, 2020 Minutes Virtual/electronic meeting 3:30 PM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met electronically on Monday, June 15, 2020. The meeting was called to order at 3:35 p.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically: - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(7) for consultation with legal counsel from the City Attorney’s Office concerning the matter of Payne, et al. v. City of Charlottesville, et al. and probable litigation concerning a First Amendment claim where discussion in open session would adversely affect the negotiating or litigating posture of the City of Charlottesville; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for discussion and consideration of prospective candidates for the following boards and commissions: Board of Architectural Review; Charlottesville Area Transit Advisory Board; Charlottesville Economic Development Authority; Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Board; Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee; Historic Resources Committee; Human Rights Commission; Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board; Jefferson Madison Regional Library Board; JABA Advisory Council on Aging; JABA Board for Aging Board of Directors; Measurements and Solutions Group; Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee; Piedmont Family YMCA Board of Directors; Piedmont Virginia Community College Board; PLACE Design Task Force; Planning Commission; Region Ten Community Services Board; Ridge Street Priority Neighborhood Task Force; Sister Cities Commission; Social Services Advisory Board; and Tree Commission; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(29) to discuss the terms and scope of a contract for legal services where discussion in an open session would adversely affect the negotiating strategy of the public body. Page 33 of 255 On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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, with one exception. Ms. Walker advised that she received an email during the meeting and shared with Councilors that the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority was awarded the Governor’s Vibrant Communities grant. The meeting adjourned at 6:34 p.m. 6:30 PM REGULAR MEETING The Charlottesville City Council held a virtual meeting for its regular session on June 15, 2020, in an effort to comply with social distancing guidelines surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic Declaration of Emergency. Ms. Walker called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. with the following members in attendance: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council by unanimous vote approved the meeting agenda. Ms. Walker called for a Moment of Silence. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Magill made an announcement about the June 19 tax deadline for personal property taxes and real estate taxes. BOARD & COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) APPROVED the following appointments to Boards and Commissions: Appointments from March 16, 2020 delayed due to Coronavirus: - Charlottesville Economic Development Authority: James Cauthen, Olivia Gabbay 2 Page 34 of 255 - Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee: Lucas Beane, Joseph French, Ray Heron - Historic Resources Committee: Rachel Lloyd, Philip Varner, Robert Woodside - JABA Advisory Council on Aging: L.D. Perry, Christina Rees - JABA Board for Aging Board of Directors: Richard Brugh, Elayne Phillips - Measurements and Solutions Group: Marcia Wilds - Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee: Jeffrey Fracher - PLACE Design Task Force: Andrew Mondeschein (Multi-Modal Representative) - Ridge Street Priority Neighborhood Task Force: Pat Lloyd, Audrey Oliver - Social Services Advisory Board: Shayla Givens - Tree Commission: Emily Cone-Miller, Jeff Jennings, Jeff Pacelli, Lynn Rush, Mark Rylander, Peggy Van Yahres June 15, 2020 regularly scheduled appointments: - Board of Architectural Review: Cheri Lewis - Charlottesville Area Transit Advisory Board: Jonathan Kropko, Connor Kurtz, Anson Parker, Rabia Anne Sandage - Historic Resource Committee: Alissa Diamond, Genevieve Keller, Jalane Schmidt - Human Rights Commission: Jessica Harris, Laura Keppley - Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board: Hosea Mitchell - Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Board: Kathy Johnson Harris - Piedmont Family YMCA Board of Directors: Tom Bowe - Piedmont Virginia Community College Board: Pam DeGuzman, Janet Morrow - Region Ten Community Services Board: Helayna Banks - Sister Cities Commission: Michael Grinnell (At-Large), Stella Mattioli (Poggio), Elizabeth Smiley (Besançon), Adrienne Ward (At-Large or Poggio) - Social Services Advisory Board: Kathryn Gallanosa - Tree Commission: Mark Zollinhofer CONSENT AGENDA* Clerk of Council Kyna Thomas read the following Consent Agenda items into the record: 2. MINUTES: May 27 and May 29, 2020 closed meetings 3. APPROPRIATION: Supplemental State Funding for the Children’s Services Act - $880,522.88 (2nd reading) APPROPRIATION Supplemental CSA Funding -$880,522.88 WHEREAS, the Virginia Office of Children’s Services has approved supplemental funds for the purpose of serving children and families through June 30, 2020. 3 Page 35 of 255 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $880,522.88 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue-$880,522.88 Fund 215 Cost Center: 3353001000 G/L Account: 430080 Expenditures-$880,522.88 Fund 215 Cost Center: 3353001000 G/L Account: 540060 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is c nditioned upon the receipt of $880,522.88 from the Virginia Office of Children’s Services. 4. APPROPRIATION: Department of Social Services Additional Funding for Adoption Assistance - $625,000 (2nd reading) APPROPRIATION Additional Funding for Adoption Assistance - $625,000 WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Department of Social Services has received $625,000 from the Virginia Department of Social Services to provide assistance to adoptive families. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $625,000 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue-$625,000 Fund 212 Cost Center: 9900000000 G/L Account: 430080 $625,000 Expenditures-$625,000 Fund 212 Cost Center: 3311007000 G/L Account: 540060 $625,000 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $625,000 from the Virginia Department of Social Services. 5. APPROPRIATION: CARES Act funding designed to provide emergency assistance for Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) and JAUNT. Total funding $7,143,582 – CAT $5,357,686 and JAUNT $1,785,896 (2nd reading) APPROPRIATION Transit Division Project Funds - $7,143,582.00 WHEREAS, the Federal Transit Administration a Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act allocation of $7,143,582.00 4 Page 36 of 255 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the following is hereby appropriated in the following manner, contingent upon receipt of the grant funds: Revenue (Operating) $5,357,686 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2200037000 Expenditures (Operating) $5,357,686 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2200037000 Revenue (JAUNT) $1,785,896 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2821002000 Expenditures (JAUNT) $1,785,996 Fund: 245 Cost Center: 2821002000 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $7,143,582.00 from the Federal Transit Administration. 6. APPROPRIATION: Maintenance Vehicle Insurance Reimbursement – $40,706.32 (carried) 7. APPROPRIATION: 2020 Energy and Water Management Program (EWMP) Fund - $1,429.47 (carried) 8. APPROPRIATION: Grant Award from Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services - $242,770 (carried) 9. APPROPRIATION: Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program Fiscal Year 2020 - $80,781 (carried) 10. ORDINANCE: Taxicab Driver Ordinance Amendment (2nd reading) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 32-3 OF CHAPTER 32 (VEHICLES FOR HIRE) 11. ORDINANCE: Ordinance Amendment to modify deadlines, modify public meeting and public hearing practices and procedures to address continuity of operations associated with the COVID-19 pandemic (may be passed with one reading by 4/5 vote) Ms. Walker opened the floor for comments from the public on Consent Agenda items. The following people spoke: 5 Page 37 of 255 - Mr. Neil Williamson spoke on Item #11, requesting that Council approve accepting all new development applications, without limitation. - Mr. William Elder spoke about Item #10. - Ms. Ashley Davies, Chair of CADRe, spoke about Item #11. At the request of Ms. Hill, this item was pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion at the end of the regular agenda. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by the following vote APPROVED the Consent Agenda: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) and moved Item #11 to the end of the regular meeting for further discussion. CITY MANAGER RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY MATTERS City Manager Tarron Richardson advised that there were no items to address from the June 1 City Council meeting. He noted the number of emails received from the public regarding defunding the police, and suggested that there will be some public work sessions to discuss services provided and what the public is requesting. COMMUNITY MATTERS Mayor Walker opened the floor for public comment. Ms. Elizabeth Stark, City resident, asked Council to revert to the original Police Civilian Review Board bylaws, increased oversight in the near term, and a long­term plan for police reform, including defunding. Ms. Ashley Davies, City resident, congratulated the city on the Vibrant Community award. Mr. David Swanson endorsed comments from Ms. Stark and read a petition that was signed by over 500 residents regarding police oversight, banning militarized equipment, and de- escalation training. Ms. Kate Fraleigh ceded her time to Mr. Jeff Fogel, who spoke about recent protests against racism, about the Disproportionate Minority Contact report, and the Police Civilian Review Board. 6 Page 38 of 255 Ms. Tanesha Hudson spoke about the original bylaws of the Police Civilian Review Board, and gave a list of suggestions for the Police Department. Mr. Brandon Collins, City resident and member of PHAR (Public Housing Association of Residents), spoke about CARES Act funding for housing. Mr. Rory Stolzenberg spoke about recent protests, commended local police for their restraint, and asked about the presence of Virginia State Troopers. - Mayor Walker and Chief Brackney responded. Ms. Hayley Elszasz spoke in support of defunding the Charlottesville Police Department and the redirection of funds to programs that directly impact social and healthy family programs. She shared eight demands from the Defund CPD movement. Mr. Don Gathers asked for reallocating funds from the police department, and about Police Civilian Review Board bylaws. He asked that Council consider postponing the summer meeting break. Ms. JoJo Robertson spoke about dismantling the current Social Services foster care system as related to black and brown clients. Ms. Adele Roof, citizen, spoke about demilitarization and defunding of the police, and asked Council to endorse the petition presented by David Swanson. Ms. Nancy Carpenter spoke about community engagement for the Police Civilian Review Board and other City meetings. She also spoke against the presence of State Police near the recent protests. Mr. Brad Slocum spoke about the deployment of police resources over the weekend of protests, particularly a plane looping around the Barracks Road area. Mr. James Watson spoke about the re­start of school, and the unemployment status of many citizens, possibly leaving children at home for extended periods of time. He spoke about enacting the Peace Corps. He suggested that some funds from Transit be re-allocated to services for families and children. Mr. Walt Heinecke spoke about Item #11 on the Consent Agenda, supporting a slower reopening in response to the pandemic. He spoke about reverting to the Police Civilian Review 7 Page 39 of 255 Board original ordinance and bylaws. He spoke about fixing problems with the Human Rights Commission to deal with racial and housing discrimination. Ms. Emily Dreyfus expressed concern about affordable housing, and asked Council to intervene. She also asked about programming for youth to decrease social isolation and decrease unstructured time. Mayor Walker closed public comment as the allotted sixteen slots were filled. Mr. Snook asked that Police Chief Brackney give information in response to demands and concerns from citizens regarding police, as well as the Disproportionate Minority Contact Report. Chief Brackney provided a response advising that the City of Charlottesville has not participated in the 1033 program and has not accepted equipment from the government or military since 2008 and in 2015 severed from the program, returning any and all equipment that had been acquired under her predecessor’s tenure. She shared information about de­escalation, crisis intervention and other training for officers, as well as details about data that is made publicly available. Ms. Walker commented about having authentic conversations regarding race and police. Mr. Snook responded to a concern about his support of the Police Civilian Review Board. Ms. Hill confirmed that the Police Civilian Review Board has been given approval to meet. The meeting recessed at 8:27 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m. ACTION ITEMS APPROPRIATION: Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding - $4,123,776 (carried to the June 18, 2020 City Council meeting) Dr. Richardson introduced the item, sharing considerations made by department directors and management in developing the recommendation. Finance Director Chris Cullinan shared information about allowable uses for CARES Act funding. Dr. Richardson requested reconvening on Thursday, June 18, for the second reading. Council confirmed with City Attorney John Blair that they would hold the second reading of this item during the open portion of the June 18 meeting at 11:00 a.m. 8 Page 40 of 255 Director of Human Services Kaki Dimock shared information about the CARES Act funding request for human services. Ms. Walker asked for clarification on funds being used for Operational Modifications. Dr. Richardson advised of needing to retrofit buildings to make them less touch-intensive. Deputy City Manager Paul Oberdorfer shared details of proposed building modifications. RESOLUTION*: Approval of the Third Amended Grant Agreement, Charlottesville Supplemental Rental Assistance Program (CSRAP) Redevelopment Manager, Brenda Kelley, provided a summary of the request. Ms. LaToya Jackson, Housing Authority member, provided an annual update. Councilors asked clarifying questions. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council by the following vote APPROVED the resolution: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). RESOLUTION APPROVING THE THIRD AMENDED GRANT AGREEMENT FOR THE CHARLOTTESVILLE SUPPLEMENTAL RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2020 WHEREAS, on June 19, 2017 the City of Charlottesville approved the creation of a City-funded Supplemental Rental Assistance Program (“CSRAP”), and on April 8, 2019 City Council approved an allocation of $750,000 from Capital Improvement Program funds and on June 1, 2020 City Council approved an allocation of $900,000 from Capital Improvement Program funds to be used for the CSRAP program, which will be administered by CRHA; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions under which the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority (“CRHA”) will administer the CSRAP Program are set forth within a written grant agreement effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 which has been reviewed by City Council this same date; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, THAT: 1. The CSRAP program shall be administered by CRHA in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth within the CSRAP grant agreement effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020, which is hereby approved by this City Council; and 9 Page 41 of 255 2. The City Manager is authorized to execute the CSRAP grant agreement on behalf of the City of Charlottesville and the City Manager and City staff are authorized and directed to apply the funding allocated above to the CSRAP program in accordance with the terms set out within the CSRAP grant agreement. Resolution*: Allocation of Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic - $1,155,000 Mr. John Sales, Housing Program Coordinator, presented the report, detailing three proposed programs. Councilors asked clarifying questions. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Payne, Council by the following vote APPROVED the resolution: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). RESOLUTION Allocation of Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. $1,155,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $1,155,000 be allocated from previously appropriated funds in the Charlottesville Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF) for the creation and implementation of four (4) programs utilizing CAHF funding in response to immediate community needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Fund: 426 Project: CP-084 G/L Account: 530670 Short-Term Homeless Rental Assistance Program (ST-HRAP) $264,000 Short-Term Re-Entry Housing Assistance Program (ST-RHAP) $264,000 Short-Term Landlord Rental Assistance Program (ST-LRAP) $264,000 Short-Term Homeowner Mortgage Assistance Program (ST-HMAP) $363,000 ORDINANCE: Ordinance Amendment to modify deadlines, modify public meeting and public hearing practices and procedures to address continuity of operations associated with the COVID-19 pandemic (may be passed with one reading by 4/5 vote) At the request of Ms. Hill, this item was pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion at the end of the regular agenda. 10 Page 42 of 255 Director for Neighborhood Development Services, Alex Ikefuna, shared background information for the request. Council asked clarifying questions and discussed ways to provide flexibility to Neighborhood Development Services regarding acceptance for applications, and the desire to continue a mandate for community engagement. Mr. Ikefuna reiterated Council's ordinance requiring developers to conduct community engagement meetings and he shared concerns related to social distancing requirements and employee safety. Mr. Blair made comments to address community concerns about a "development moratorium". He explained that the actions of Council during the Covid-19 pandemic have not created a development moratorium. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) APPROVED a resolution to extend its electronic meeting policy through July and August, as needed, for the boards and commissions that were previously approved: Board of Architectural Review, Board of Equalization, Community Development Block Grant Task Force, Housing Advisory Committee, Human Rights Commission, Planning Commission, Police Civilian Review Board, and Retirement Commission. Council added approval for one virtual meeting each of the Tree Commission, Sister Cities Commission, and Community Policy and Management Team through August, as staff is able to accommodate. On motion by Ms. Magilll, seconded by Mr. Payne, Council by a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) APPROVED the following Ordinance amendment. AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE TO MODIFY DEADLINES, MODIFY PUBLIC MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES TO ADDRESS CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PANDEMIC DISASTER On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Payne, Council by a vote of 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none), directed Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) to accept and hold new development applications and payments, with the understanding that NDS would present options to City Council on July 20, 2020, regarding community engagement. 11 Page 43 of 255 GENERAL BUSINESS There were no General Business items. OTHER BUSINESS On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council by the following vote APPROVED that pursuant to Charlottesville City Code Section 2-213(d) the City Attorney’s Office is authorized to retain Taxing Authority Consulting Services: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). Mr. Blair advised that this request is in reference to a suit concerning the Business License Occupancy Tax. MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC Ms. Walker opened the floor for comments from the public. Mr. Brandon Collins, City resident and representative for PHAR, expressed concern that the City could do more for housing and rent relief efforts with the CARES Act funding received. Ms. Tanesha Hudson spoke about distrust of the Police Chief and race issues in the City. Mr. Don Gathers spoke about an honorary street naming request that he submitted. Mr. Rory Stolzenberg spoke about a possible joint work session between the Planning Commission, City Council and consultants to discuss housing issues. He advised Council of an email that he sent to Council, including photos of the presence of State Troopers and aircraft over the previous weekend near a protest site, contradicting comments from Chief Brackney earlier in the meeting. He submitted a verbal Freedom of Information request. With no additional speakers coming forward, Ms. Walker closed public comment. The meeting adjourned at 11:32 p.m. 12 Page 44 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 18, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 11:30 AM CLOSED MEETING with Open Meeting Action Item The Charlottesville City Council met on Thursday, June 18, 2020, at 11:30 a.m. The meeting was called to order at 11:40 a.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. ACTION ITEM APPROPRIATION: Appropriate Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding - $4,123,776 (2nd reading) At the June 15, 2020 regular City Council meeting, Council advised that it would hold the second reading of this item before convening in closed session on June 18. Mayor Walker turned the meeting over to City Manager Tarron Richardson, who provided a summary of the CARES Act funding appropriation second reading. Finance Director Chris Cullinan explained minor changes to the report since the June 15 meeting, advising of a correction and more detailed accounting. Ms. Walker added comments about funds for housing stability and providing a safe environment for employees to return to work. Council discussed estimates for expenses and asked clarifying questions. Deputy City Manager Paul Oberdorfer shared details of expected expenses and phased reopening of City facilities. Interim Public Works Director Marty Silman provided additional information about facility needs for HVAC remediation. Director for Human Services Kaki Dimock answered questions about Virginia Housing, rent and mortgage relief funds, and food relief. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council by the following vote APPROVED the appropriation: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none). APPROPRIATION Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Act (CARES) Funds $4,123,776.00 WHEREAS, Commonwealth of Virginia has allocated federal funds from the Coronavirus Aid Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act to the City in the amount of $4,123,776 to address the COVID-19 pandemic; Page 45 of 255 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the following is hereby appropriated in the following manner which conform with the conditions and guidance established by the Commonwealth, U.S. Treasury, and the City: Revenue $4,123,776 Fund: 208 Cost Center: 9900000000 G/L Account: 430127 $4,123,776 Expenditures Business Support $75,000 Corridor Dist. Fund: 208 Order: 1900353 G/L Account: 599999 $750,000 Grants Fund: 208 Order: 1900360 G/L Account: 599999 Community Support $654,000 Fund: 208 Order: 1900354 G/L Account: 599999 Operational Modifications $1,164,000 Fund: 208 Order: 1900355 G/L Account: 599999 Employee Support $420,000 Fund: 208 Order: 1900356 G/L Account: 599999 Technology $636,300 Fund: 208 Order: 1900357 G/L Account: 599999 Contingency Reserve Fund $424,476 Fund: 208 Order: 1900358 G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the amounts above appropriated appropriation shall not be deemed to expire at the end of the fiscal year, but are hereby appropriated in the ensuing fiscal year unless altered by further action of this Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the amounts hereinabove appropriated for the categories of Business Support, Community Support, Operational Modifications, Employee Support, Technology, Contingency Reserve Fund, may on authorization from the City Manager, or his designee, be transferred between categories as needed to meet unforeseen circumstances, and consistent with the City Council's direction. Mayor Walker opened the floor for comments from the public. - Mr. Rory Stolzenberg, City resident, advised that he was following up on communication from June 15 and awaiting a response. With no one else coming forward to speak, Ms. Walker closed public comment. 2 Page 46 of 255 On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2- 3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager, the Charlottesville Police Chief, the Charlottesville Council Chief of Staff, and the Charlottesville City Attorney. The closed meeting convened at 12:27 p.m. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 5:04 p.m. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council 3 Page 47 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 23, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 11:00 AM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met on Tuesday, June 23, 2020, at 11:00 a.m. The meeting was called to order at 11:08 a.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Ms. Magill, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically: - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager, the Charlottesville City Attorney and the Charlottesville Clerk of Council; and - as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2-3711(A)(1) for the discussion, consideration, and interviewing of prospective candidates for the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority and the Charlottesville Planning Commission. Mr. Snook left the meeting at 2:00 p.m. to attend a previously scheduled meeting. The meeting recessed at the following times: 2:03 to 2:20 p.m. and 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 4:00 p.m. with all Councilors present. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 closed meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. and Ms. Hill announced the appointment of Lisa Green and A'Lelia Robinson Henry to the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Board; and Lyle Solla-Yates to the Planning Commission, by unanimous consent. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council Page 48 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL June 25, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 11:00 AM CLOSED MEETING The Charlottesville City Council met on Thursday, June 25, 2020, at 11:00 a.m. The meeting was called to order at 11:01 a.m. with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne and Mr. Lloyd Snook. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council voted 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. Noes: none) to meet in closed session as authorized by Virginia Code Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712, specifically as authorized by Virginia Code Section 2.2- 3711(A)(1) for discussion of the performance of the Charlottesville City Manager. On motion by Ms. Hill, seconded by Mr. Snook, Council certified by the following vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Hill, Magill, Payne, Snook, Walker. 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 1:06 p.m. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council Page 49 of 255 CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – VIBRANT COMMUNITY FUND June 30, 2020 Virtual/electronic meeting 1:00 PM WORK SESSION - Vibrant Community Fund The Charlottesville City Council met in a work session on June 30, 2020, to discuss the Vibrant Community Fund, with the following members present: Mayor Nikuyah Walker, Vice Mayor Sena Magill, Ms. Heather Hill, Mr. Michael Payne, and Mr. Lloyd Snook. Mayor Walker called the meeting to order at 1:03 p.m., and turned the meeting over to City Manager Tarron Richardson who reviewed the purpose of the meeting, which was to further discuss the appropriation of funds to various organizations through the Vibrant Community Fund. DISCUSSION Mr. Ryan Davidson, Senior Budget Analyst, shared background information about the Vibrant Community Fund, past presentations to City Council regarding scoring of applications, and updates to Council priorities, and advised that approval would be needed for a resolution to allocate the funds. Council discussed the 83-page Fiscal Year 2021 Vibrant Community Covid Updates Report. The following staff answered questions from City Council: Kaki Dimock, Director of Human Services; Letitia Shelton, Deputy City Manager; and John Blair, City Attorney. Council discussed moving some organizations up the rating scale based on equity considerations. Council asked for and received input from: - Erin Tucker, Executive Director of the "On Our Own Operations" program - Ross Carew, Executive Director of OAR (Offender Aid and Restoration) - Sunshine Mathon, Chief Executive Officer of the Piedmont Housing Alliance - Lexie Boris, Advancement Director and Alicia Lenahan, President of Piedmont CASA - Jon Nafziger, Executive Director of Child Health Partnership - Kate Lambert, Chief Development Officer of the Boys and Girls Club of Central Virginia. Page 50 of 255 - Jessica Maslaney, Chief Executive Officer of the Piedmont Family YMCA. - Brandon Collins with PHAR (Public Housing Association of Residents) - Daniela Pretzer, Executive Director of The Bridge Line Council discussed the need to address and prioritize direct services for basic needs, given the impact of Covid-19. Council discussed funds in the Council Strategic Initiatives Equity Fund, and whether to use any of those dollars to support the Vibrant Community Fund. Council agreed to have staff bring back an updated report at the July 20 City Council meeting for a one reading resolution. PUBLIC COMMENT Mayor Walker opened the floor for public comment. - Mr. Jay James of the Bridge Ministry spoke. With no other speakers coming forward to speak, Ms. Walker closed public comment. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Walker adjourned the meeting at 5:10 p.m. BY Order of City Council BY Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council 2 Page 51 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: June 15, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Mike Rogers, Deputy Chief – Business Services, Charlottesville Fire Dept. Staff Contacts: Mike Rogers, Deputy Chief – Business Services, Charlottesville Fire Dept. Title: Maintenance Vehicle Insurance Reimbursement – $40,706.32 Background: City asset, vehicle # 3338 – a 2017 Ford Utility Pickup (Maintenance 1), was involved in an auto incident 12/20/2019 in which the vehicle was struck in an intersection. Vehicle # 3338 was inspected by industry professionals and was deemed a total loss pursuant to Code of Virginia § 46.2-1600 as the vehicle was not economically repairable given the extensive damage from this loss. Discussion: A settlement was reached with Erie Insurance for the total loss disposition of this vehicle. Risk Management has secured payment in the amount of $40,706.32. The insurance monies will be utilized to replace this vehicle. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The reimbursement of the insurance monies for the vehicle loss associated with vehicle #3338 support the City’s mission - “We provide services that promote equity and an excellent quality of life in our community”. The anticipated use of the reimbursed monies also aligns with Goal 5 - A Well-managed and Responsive Organization. Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund, as these are reimbursed funds from an insurance carrier for a loss. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of insurance monies. Alternatives: If the insurance reimbursement is not appropriated, the Fire Department will not be able to utilize this funding to replace this vehicle. Attachments: Appropriation Page 52 of 255 APPROPRIATION Maintenance Vehicle Insurance Reimbursement $40,706.32 WHEREAS, Erie Insurance Company is reimbursing the City of Charlottesville for a vehicle loss associated with an accident involving vehicle #3338; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that a total of $40,706.32 be appropriated in the following manner: Revenues - $40,706.32 $40,706.32 Fund: 106 Cost Center: 3201001001 G/L Account: 451110 Expenditures - $40,706.32 $40,706.32 Fund: 106 Cost Center: 3201001001 G/L Account: 541040 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of funds from Erie Insurance. Page 53 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: June 15, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation of Funds Presenter: Kirk Vizzier, Energy Management Coordinator Staff Contacts: Kirk Vizzier, Energy Management Coordinator Kristel Riddervold, Environmental and Facilities Development Manager Title: 2020 Energy and Water Management Program (E.W.M.P.) Fund - $1,429.47 Background: The City’s Energy and Water Management Program has identified opportunities to generate revenue that can be invested in projects that support the enhancement of energy and water management in the City. Examples include but are not limited to payments from participation in an energy efficiency program offered by the utility grid (P.J.M.) and from events that raise awareness and support conservation and efficiency throughout the community. Discussion: Since January 2020, the City has received $1,429.47 from participation in a P.J.M. energy efficiency program (CPower), which provides a quarterly payout for each qualifying energy efficiency project. We can expect to receive this amount at a minimum over the next year (payments continue up to 4 years after completion of project) and additional income will be added to this payment as more completed projects are submitted. Allocating these funds to a dedicated energy and water management account will provide opportunities to support internal program initiatives. Should any money be carried over, it will remain in this dedicated account for future efforts. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: This aligns with Goal 3.4 “Be responsible stewards of natural resources” in the City’s Strategic Plan. Community Engagement: No community engagement occurred with these payments. Budgetary Impact: There is no fiscal impact. Initiatives such as participation in the P.J.M. energy efficiency program generate revenue. Recommendation: Staff recommends the appropriation of these funds to the dedicated account. Alternatives: N/A Attachments: Appropriation Page 54 of 255 APPROPRIATION Energy and Water Management Program Fund $1,429.47 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through the Department of Public Works, has received payments from the PJM energy efficiency program and may conduct other activities that result in payments. WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville adopted an internal Energy and Water Management Policy in June 2019 that established a foundation for the Energy and Water Management Programs to realize commitments regarding reductions in emissions and resource waste; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville funding is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue $1,429.47 Fund: 105 Internal Order: 2000157 G/L Account: 451020 Expense: $1,429.47 Fund: 105 Internal Order: 2000157 G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any remaining funds will carry over into the following fiscal year and future income received in this account for the purposes of supporting energy efficiency and water efficiency measures will be automatically appropriated unless otherwise altered by Council. Page 55 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: June 15, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Title: Appropriation of $242, 770 Grant Award from Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Background: The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services has awarded the Department of Human Services $242,770 from its Victims of Crime Act program to provide trauma-focused, evidence- informed case management and clinical services. Discussion: This is the second year of a two-year grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services. Funds support two full-time behavior interventionists that provide services to students in 5th and 6th grade at Walker Upper Elementary School and Buford Middle School. This partnership with Charlottesville City Schools targets students that have been the victims of crime in or out of school. 30 students will receive trauma-focused, evidence-informed case management and clinical services per year including:  Girl’s Circle – evidence-based structured group intervention  Council for Boys and Young Men group curricula – evidence-informed group intervention  Teens Give – social skills development, service learning program  Family Check-up – evidence-based family and parenting support program. All services are focused on improving social skills development, sense of self-efficacy, and engagement in school. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This project is strongly aligned with City Council’s Strategic Plan Goal #2: Healthy and Safe City; specifically Goal #2.2: meet the needs of victims and reduce risk of recurrence. Page 56 of 255 Community Engagement: Community partners, including Charlottesville City Schools, were critical in the development of the original grant proposal to the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services. Families and youth involved in the first year of programming have helped influence its development. Budgetary Impact: This appropriation will not impact the city’s general fund. $194,621 will be appropriated from the state and $48,149 of Department of Human Services’ funds will be used as the required match. Recommendation: Staff recommend appropriating the funds as written. Alternatives: If grant funds are not appropriated, trauma-focused, evidence-informed services for victims of crime will not be provided. Attachments: Appropriation Page 57 of 255 APPROPRIATION Charlottesville Student Victim Outreach Program Department of Criminal Justice Services Victim of Crimes Act Grant $242,770 WHEREAS, the Human Services Department of the City of Charlottesville has been awarded $242,770 from the Department of Criminal Justice Services Victim of Crimes Act, and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $242,770 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $242,770 $194,621 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413018000 G/L Account: 430120 $48,149 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413018000 G/L Account: 498010 Expenditures - $242,770 $175,654 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413018000 G/L Account: 519999 $67,116 Fund: 209 Cost Center: 3413018000 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer - $48,149 $48,149 Fund: 213 Cost Center: 341300300 G/L Account: 561209 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $194,621 from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services. Page 58 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: June 15, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation of Funding Presenter: Megan Arevalo, Budget Analyst, Charlottesville Police Department Staff Contacts: RaShall Brackney, Chief, Charlottesville Police Department Megan Arevalo, Budget Analyst, Charlottesville Police Department Title: Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program Fiscal Year 2020 - $80,781 Background: As a component of the COVID-19 stimulus legislation recently approved by the federal government, the Commonwealth of Virginia received approximately $16 million in assistance. Of that amount, the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) received approximately $10.9 million to assist localities and state agencies in their mitigation and response efforts to the COVID-19 pandemic. The remainder has been set aside for specific localities to apply for, as determined by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). The BJA allocation for the City of Charlottesville was determined to be $80,781. The purpose of the BJA Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding (CESF) program is to provide funding to assist eligible states, local units of government, and tribes in preventing, preparing for, and responding to the coronavirus, as authorized by Division B of H.R. 748, Pub. L. No. 116136 (Emergency Appropriations for Coronavirus Health Response and Agency Operations). Discussion: The City of Charlottesville, through the Police Department, applied for the FY 2020 BJA CESF funding from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program. Notification of award approval was received on June 6, 2020. The BJA FY 2020 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding award amount is $80,781 and requires no local match. The Charlottesville Police Department is requesting to use this funding for the purchase of personal protective equipment (PPE), cleaning supplies and a logistics trailer. Page 59 of 255 Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The CESF award supports Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan, to be a safe, equitable, thriving, and beautiful community. With this funding, CPD will be able to enhance its ability to provide personnel with needed personal protective gear and equipment to ensure the safety of our officers and community during public health emergencies. The funding also aligns with Goal 2.1, to reduce adverse impact from sudden injury and illness and the effects of chronic disease, as well as the elements within Goal 5, which include being a well-managed and responsive organization. Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: There is no direct impact on the General Fund. The grant funds do not require a City match and will be expensed and reimbursed through a separate internal order in a Grants Fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds. Alternatives: Should the City decline to approve the appropriation request, the department would be ineligible to participate in the grant program. Attachments: Appropriation Page 60 of 255 APPROPRIATION BJA FY20 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program Grant # 2020-VS-BX-1485 $80,781 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through the Police Department, has received the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance FY 2020 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding grant in the amount of $80,781 to be used to prevent, prepare for and respond to the Coronavirus. WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from period January 1, 2020 through January 31, 2022. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $80,781, received from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance, is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue $ 80,781 Fund: 211 I/O: 1900351 G/L: 431110 Federal Grants Expenditure $ 9,250 Fund: 211 I/O: 1900351 G/L: 520050 Cleaning Supplies $ 27,171 Fund: 211 I/O: 1900351 G/L: 520070 Safety Supplies $ 3,900 Fund: 211 I/O: 1900351 G/L: 520900 Mach/Equip/Furn (NC) $ 40,460 Fund: 211 I/O: 1900351 G/L: 541040 Acq Com Itm-Veh (MA) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $80,781 from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Assistance. Page 61 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Approval and Appropriation Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Human Services Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director, Human Services Title: Virginia Housing Solutions Program Supplemental COVID-19 Grant Award ($243,276) Background: The Department of Human Services in coordination with the Thomas Jefferson Area Coalition for the Homeless (T.J.A.C.H.) and the Service Provider Council (S.P.C.), applied for and received a grant from the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. A supplemental award of $243,276 for emergency shelter operation expenses related to COVID-19 global pandemic has been provided. Discussion: The City of Charlottesville has staff from Human Services and Social Services taking a leadership role in the governance of T.J.A.C.H. V. H. S P. is an important resource in our community’s efforts to end homelessness. The grant provides services in several points along the local continuum of services including coordinated assessment, emergency low barrier shelter, rapid re-housing and housing navigation, case management, and coalition coordination. This supplemental award must be used for costs associated with emergency shelter operations including case management and supportive services, maintenance, rent, supplies, utilities, transportation and administrative costs, capped at 5%. Community Engagement: The original grant and plan are the product of extensive engagement of the service provider community for persons experiencing homelessness. This partnership is reflective of the city’s recommended governance model for T.J.A.C.H. and the priority requests of the Interfaith Movement Promoting Action by Congregations Together (IMPACT). Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This grant advances the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan Goal #1 of an inclusive community of self-sufficient residents. Specifically, it will facilitate the objective of increasing affordable housing options. Page 62 of 255 Budgetary Impact: This grant will be entirely State, and Federal pass-through funds. No local match is required. There is no budget impact for the City of Charlottesville. All funds will be distributed to sub- recipients for service provision. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: Council may elect to not accept the funds and the community will not have the capacity to administer the following services to persons experiencing a housing crisis during this global pandemic. Attachments: Supplemental amendment and appropriation are attached. Page 63 of 255 APPROPRIATION V. H. S. P. Grant $34,457 WHEREAS, The City of Charlottesville, through the Department of Human Services, has received the V. H. S. P. Grant from the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development in the amount of $243,276. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville,Virginia that the sum of $243,276 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues $243,276 Fund: 209 IO: 1900352 G/L: 430127 State COVID Expenditures $243,276 Fund: 209 IO: 1900352 G/L: 530550 Contracted Services BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon receipt of $243,276 in funds from the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. Page 64 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Approve appropriation Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Staff Contacts: Sue Moffett, Assistant Director, Department of Social Services Title: Emergency Food and Shelter Program-C.A.R.E.S. act funding Background: The Emergency Food and Shelter Program (E.F.S.P.) Local Board in Charlottesville allocated the City of Charlottesville Department of Human Services $7,099 from the Corona Virus Relief Fund (C.A.R.E.S. Act). This funding supports the cost of alternate lodging for community members who must quarantine or isolate due to COVID-19 and are unable to return to their usual place of residence. Funds will be prioritized to support alternative housing options for people that test positive for the disease at testing initiatives. Discussion: The Emergency Food and Shelter Program (E.F.S..P) is a federally funded program administrated by F.E.M.A. Authorized by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 (P.L. 100- 77; reauthorized under P.L. 100-628). E.F.S.P. supplements and expands ongoing work of local social service organizations, both nonprofit and governmental. The C.A.RE.S. Act Corona virus relief fund was established to mitigate the impact of the corona virus pandemic. The C.A.R.E.S. Act requires that the payments from the Coronavirus Relief Fund only be used to cover expenses that—  are necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency with respect to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19);  were not accounted for in the budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020 (the date of enactment of the C.A.R.E.S. Act) for the State or local government; and  are incurred between March 1, 2020, and December 30, 2020. Page 65 of 255 Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This appropriation request is aligned with the City Council’s vision, which includes being flexible and progressive in anticipating and responding to the needs of our citizens, and supporting self- sufficiency of residents. Community Engagement: The Department of Human Services in collaboration with other Regional Emergency Operation Center partners: The Department of Social Services, The Thomas Jefferson Area Health District, and the Thomas Jefferson Area United Way; is working to meet the shelter and support needs for vulnerable community members impacted by COVID 19. Budgetary Impact: There are no general funds required or being requested. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of these funds. Alternatives: We may not be available to meet the isolation and quarantine needs of our community members if the appropriation is not approved. Attachments: Appropriation Page 66 of 255 APPROPRIATION Emergency Food and Shelter Program $7,099 WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Department of Human Services has receives $7,099 from the Emergency Food and Shelter Program-C.A.R.E.S. Act funding, , NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $7,099 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues $7,099 Fund: 210 IO: 1900367 G/L: 451022 Other Grant Funding Expenditures $7,099 Fund: 210 IO: 1900367 G/L: 530550 Contracted Services BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon receipt of $7,099 from the Emergency Food and Shelter Program – C.A.R.E.S. Act funding. Page 67 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Approval and Appropriation Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Human Services Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director, Human Services Title: Open Society Foundation Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities Grant Appropriation ($250,000) Background: The Department of Human Services in coordination with Albemarle County Office of Equity and Inclusion has been awarded a $250,000 grant from the Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities, a project of the Open Society Foundation, to provide emergency financial assistance to community members of Charlottesville and Albemarle County that are ineligible for federal stimulus relief from June 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020. Discussion: Based on requirements of the grant award, direct financial assistance, in the form of prepaid cards, will be provided to members of the Charlottesville and Albemarle community that identify as undocumented, immigrant, migrant or domestic workers. Priority will be determine by the following criteria:  severe economic risk  households with children under 18 years of age  medical vulnerability Screening for eligibility and distribution of direct financial assistance will be provided by community partners with pre-existing trusting relationships with this population. Data will be collected in the aggregate only, ensuring that no personal information is shared with city or county staff managing implementation. These funds will be matched by $50,000 in Department of Human Services funds that were previously appropriated. Community Engagement: City and county staff have met regularly with service providers focusing on improving the well- being of undocumented, immigrant, migrant and domestic workers to ensure that implementation could be achieved in partnership. Decisions around data collection, screening criteria, and government engagement were informed by community service providers with direct knowledge of the needs, conditions, and fears of the targeted population. Page 68 of 255 Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This grant advances the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan Goal #1 of an inclusive community of self-sufficient residents. . Budgetary Impact: This grant will be private foundation funds. Local match was appropriated from the Department of Human Services Fund Balance on May 18, 2020. There is no budget impact for the City of Charlottesville. All funds will be distributed to sub-recipients for service provision. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: Council may elect to not accept the funds and the community will not have the capacity to provide emergency financial relief to community members ineligible for the federal stimulus relief. Attachments: Supplemental amendment and appropriation are attached. Page 69 of 255 APPROPRIATION O.S.F. Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities Grant Award ($250,000) WHEREAS, The City of Charlottesville, through the Department of Human Services, has received the Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities grant award from the Open Society Foundation in the amount of $250,000. , NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville,Virginia that the sum of $250,000 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenues $250,000 Fund: 210 IO: 1900359 G/L: 451022 Other Grant Funding Expenditures $250,000 Fund: 210 IO: 1900359 G/L: 530550 Contracted Services BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon receipt of $250,000 in funds from the Open Society Foundation Emma Lazarus Campaign on Cities. Page 70 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Approval of Refund of Tax Payment Presenter: Jason Vandever, City Treasurer Staff Contacts: Jason Vandever, City Treasurer Todd Divers, Commissioner of the Revenue Title: Refund of Tax Payment to Silverchair Science & Communications Inc Background: Silverchair Science & Communications Inc. has filed amended business license returns with the City of Charlottesville for tax years 2017, 2018, and 2019 wherein it claims deductions in those years due to having conducted business in other states where it was liable for an income or other tax based upon income pursuant to Virginia State Code §58.1-3732(B)(2). Having reviewed the documentation provided by Silverchair Science & Communications Inc., the Charlottesville Commissioner of the Revenue agrees that refunds are properly due for the years in question. Discussion: City Code requires Council approval for any tax refunds resulting from an erroneous assessment in excess of $2,500 (City Code Sec. 30-6b). Payment of interest is also required in accordance with Section 14-12(g) of the Charlottesville City Code. The refund has been approved for presentment to Council by the City Attorney, Commissioner of the Revenue, and City Treasurer. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: n/a Budgetary Impact: The refund will reduce current year Business License Tax revenue (GL 410150) by $75,520.22 and Interest Revenue (GL 400120) by $14,822.27. Recommendation: Approval of the tax refund. Alternatives: Page 71 of 255 n/a Attachments: Interest Calculation Council Resolution Page 72 of 255 Refund Interest Calculation‐ Account 6534 Silverchair Science & Communications Inc Payment Paid Today Months Rate Annualized Interest Overpayment New Balance Tax Refund Interest refund 2017 BL 3/1/2017 6/15/2020 39 8.00% $ 2,762.90 $ 34,536.19 $ - $ 34,536.19 $ 8,979.41 2018 BL 3/1/2018 6/15/2020 27 8.00% $ 1,744.45 $ 21,805.67 $ - $ 21,805.67 $ 3,925.02 2019 BL 3/1/2019 6/15/2020 15 8.00% $ 1,534.27 $ 19,178.36 $ - $ 19,178.36 $ 1,917.84 Interest Refund Due $ 14,822.27 Total Refund $ 90,342.49 Tax Refund $ 75,520.22 Interest refund $ 14,822.27 Total Refund $ 90,342.49 Page 73 of 255 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REFUND TO SILVERCHAIR SCIENCE & COMMUNICATIONS INC OF BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES PAID FOR 2017, 2018, AND 2019 WHEREAS, the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined that Silverchair Science & Communications Inc. incorrectly paid 2017, 2018, and 2019 Charlottesville business license tax on gross receipts that were subject to income or other tax based upon income in other jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the 2017, 2018, and 2019 business license taxes for Silverchair Science & Communications Inc. were paid on time and as filed; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of the Revenue has certified that a refund of taxes paid is due in the amount of $90,342.49; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 30- 6(b) requires City Council approval for any tax refund exceeding $2,500.00; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Treasurer to issue a refund of $90,342.49, payable to Silverchair Science & Communications Inc. Page 74 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Adoption Staff Contacts: John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: John Blair, City Attorney Title: Charlottesville Police Department Training and Weaponry Resolution Background: David Swanson, a Charlottesville resident, crafted a petition requesting the Charlottesville City Council to prohibit the use of military style or “warrior” training for the Charlottesville Police Department as well as to prohibit the Charlottesville Police Department from acquiring weaponry from the United States armed forces. Discussion: The petition has received over 1,000 signatures. The Charlottesville Police Department does not currently employ military style or “warrior” training, nor does it acquire weaponry from the United States armed forces according to Charlottesville Chief of Police, Dr. RaShall M. Brackney. This Resolution establishes the Council’s policy on these types of training as well as weaponry acquisition. Budgetary Impact: None. Attachments: Proposed Resolution Page 75 of 255 RESOLUTION OPPOSING CHARLOTTESVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT RECEIVING MILITARY-STYLE TRAINING AND ACQUIRING WEAPONRY FROM THE U.S. MILITARY WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Police Department does not receive military-style or “warrior” training by the United States armed forces, a foreign military or police, or any private company; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville Police Department does not acquire weaponry from the United States armed forces; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council opposes the Charlottesville Police Department receiving military-style or “warrior” training by the United States armed forces, a foreign military or police, or any private company; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council opposes the Charlottesville Police Department acquiring weaponry from the United States armed forces. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the Charlottesville Police Department shall not acquire weaponry from the United States armed forces. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the Charlottesville Police Department shall not receive military-style or “warrior” training by the United States armed forces, a foreign military or police, or any private company. Page 76 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Adoption Staff Contacts: John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: John Blair, City Attorney Title: Resolution Supporting the Declaration of Racism as a Public Health Crisis Background: Virginia Governor, Ralph S. Northam, is expected to convene a special session of the General Assembly in August 2020 pursuant to Article IV, Section 6 of the Constitution of Virginia. One of the topics that the special session is expected to address is law enforcement. Discussion: In anticipation of the special session, the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus (VLBC) released a set of its legislative priorities on June 24, 2020. One of the VLBC’s priorities is to introduce legislation which declares racism a public health crisis in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The attached Resolution requests the City of Charlottesville’s legislative delegation to support legislation to declare racism a public health crisis in Virginia. Budgetary Impact: None. Attachments: Proposed Resolution Page 77 of 255 RESOLUTION REQUESTING LEGISLATORS SUPPORT DECLARATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS WHEREAS, Virginia Governor, Ralph S. Northam, is expected to call a special session of the Virginia General Assembly in August 2020; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus (hereinafter “VLBC”) released a set of priorities it plans to pursue during the special session; and WHEREAS, one of the VLBC’s priorities for the special session is to declare racism a public health crisis in the Commonwealth of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that it requests that Delegate Sally L. Hudson and Senator R. Creigh Deeds support legislation at the special session declaring racism a public health crisis in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Page 78 of 255 434.977.2970 RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY 695 Moores Creek Lane Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-9016 434.293.8858 RIVANNA WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY www.rivanna.org RIVANNA WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY MEMORANDUM TO: THE HONORABLE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: BILL MAWYER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RIVANNA WATER & SEWER AUTHORITY RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY SUBJECT: QUARTERLY UPDATE DATE: JULY 2020 This quarterly update is to provide general information on the drinking water, wastewater and solid waste programs managed by the Rivanna Authorities, as follows: 1. As we move into the hot and dry summer months, we are pleased to report that our water supply reservoirs are full, and our public drinking water and wastewater treatment systems are doing a great job for our community. We continue to receive significant drinking water quality benefits from the Granular Activated Carbon filtration systems installed in 2018. We recently completed the 2020 Urban Water Demand and Safe Yield Study. The study assessed the capacity of the Urban area’s available water supply, as well as the community’s future water demand, to ensure our long-term water supply is adequate. The results of the study indicate additional water supply will be required to serve the estimated population (162,000) and water demand (13.7 million gallons per day) in the Urban area by 2060. 2. Refuse transfer services at the Ivy Material Utilization Center (IMUC), as well as recycling services at the McIntire Road Center, continue to be used by many residents and businesses in the community. Construction of the new Recycling Convenience Center at the IMUC has been substantially completed, and the facility will open later this month. 3. The production of drinking water for the Urban area (Charlottesville and adjacent developed areas of Albemarle) averaged 8.39 million gallons per day (mgd) in May 2020, which was below the five-year average for May (9.56 mgd), as shown by the following graph: Page 79 of 255 4. Urban wastewater flow for May 2020 (9.66 mgd), including flows from Crozet, was below the five-year average for May (11.16 mgd), as shown by the following graph: 5. A general overview of significant current and upcoming Capital Improvement projects includes: A. Water Treatment Plant Improvements Scope: Replace equipment which has reached end-of-service life at the South Rivanna and Observatory Water Treatment Plants. Increase water treatment capacity from 7.7 to 10 million gallons per day at the Observatory Water Treatment Plant. Completion: 2020 - 2023 Cost: $43 million 2 Page 80 of 255 B. South Rivanna Dam – Gate Repairs Scope: Repair original gates installed in 1966. These gates are located near the bottom of the dam, and are used to release water from the reservoir. Completion: Fall 2020 Cost: $900,000 C. Sugar Hollow Dam – Gate Replacement and Intake Tower Repairs Scope: Replace the inflatable rubber device that sits on top of the concrete dam and regulates the normal water level in the reservoir. The gate is over 20 years old, and has reached the end of its service life. Concrete repairs will be made on the intake tower. Completion: Fall 2021 Cost: $1.1 million D. South Rivanna to Ragged Mountain Reservoir Pipeline Easements Scope: Determine alignment and acquire easements for a pipeline and pumping station to transfer raw (untreated) water between the South Rivanna Reservoir and the Ragged Mountain Reservoir, as required by the Community Water Supply plan. Acquisition offers have been made to nine of 11 private property owners, with seven acceptances. Documents are also being prepared to acquire rights from three public property owners (VDOT, City Council, County School Board). Completion: 2021 Cost: $2.3 million E. Ragged Mountain Reservoir to Observatory Water Treatment Plant Raw Water Line and Raw Water Pump Station Scope: Replace two 18-inch cast iron raw water pipes, which have been in service for more than 70 and 110 years, respectively. Replace the existing Stadium Road and Royal raw water pump stations, which have exceeded their service lives or will require significant upgrades, to support the Observatory Water Treatment Plant expansion. Completion: 2023 - 2027 Cost: $18 million F. Upper Schenks Branch Wastewater Piping Replacement, Phase II Scope: Replace sewer piping installed in the mid 1950’s in conjunction with the City’s sewer upgrade program to increase system capacity. The new underground piping would be located near McIntire Road. Completion: TBD Cost: $4 million Please let me know if you have any questions. cc: RSWA Board of Directors RWSA Board of Directors 3 Page 81 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Presenter: Tony Edwards, Service Manager, Public Works Staff Contacts: Jeanette Janiczek, UCI Program Manager, Public Works Amanda Poncy, Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, Public Works Kyle Kling, Project Manager, Public Works Brennen Duncan, Traffic Engineer, Public Works Title: Resolution of Support for 4 SmartScale Grant Applications – West Main Streetscape Phase Three Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements Emmet Street MultiModal Phase Two Background: Virginia’s SMART SCALE (§33.2-214.1) is a grant process where transportation projects are scored and funded based on an objective, outcome-based process that is transparent to the public. The Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) continues to refine the process in each round with this being the fourth round. Eligible projects include newly constructed facilities that increase capacity or improve operations – for vehicles, transit, rail, bicyclist and/or pedestrians. Project applications must also meet an identified need in the Commonwealth’s long-range transportation plan – VTrans2040 - under one or more of the following categories: x Corridors of Statewide Significance (CoSS) – certain key multimodal corridors x Regional Networks – certain multimodal networks that serve urbanized or intraregional travel areas x Urban Development Areas (UDA) – areas of identified concentrated growth and development x Transportation Safety Needs – Statewide safety needs identified in VTrans2040 Each project in the Culpeper District are scored by the 6 factors and their weighted basis: x Safety – 20% x Congestion Mitigation – 15% x Accessibility – 25% x Environmental Quality – 10% Page 82 of 255 x Economic Development – 20% x Land Use – 10% Once a project is scored, that score is divided by its submitted budget/estimate to create its final ranking/funding priority. Even if a project has many benefits, if the cost of implementation is too high, it will receive a low final ranking/ funding priority. One method of improving a project’s score is to commit local or other grant funding to lower the amount of funding being sought, or cost of the project for the SmartScale application. All of the projects addressed herein are competing for VDOT’s “District Grants Program” against projects from all other localities within the Culpeper district for a total pool of approximately $20 million. Some projects may also qualify under the High-Priority Projects Program which allows the projects to compete for another pool of funds if they provide capacity on a Corridor of Statewide Significance or regional network, however, there is a lower likelihood that our projects would be competitive statewide. Some of the candidate projects discussed below have been submitted to VDOT previously and have scored well. Complete applications are due August 3, 2020 which require a Resolution of Support from City Council being sought tonight. Next Steps: VDOT will evaluate all applications received and will issue a Recommended Funding Scenario of projects to receive funding in January 2021. February to April 2021, public meetings will be held to discuss Funding Scenario to inform the Commonwealth Transportation’s Board adoption of the Six Year Improvement Plan (SYIP) which finalized awards to projects in the Funding Scenario in June 2021. These SmartScale funds for Round 4 will be scheduled for at least 6 years out with the earliest possible availability of July 2027. Discussion: The following four projects were identified as highly ranked needs in previous planning documents (Streets That Work, 2015 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan) which were developed with the community via multiple public meetings, surveys and websites. Two projects, West Main Streetscape and Ridge Street Multimodal, also benefited from individual corridor studies with additional public involvement. Each project has been evaluated to ensure they meet SmartScale eligibility as well as address the 6 scoring factors. If an application secures funding, this funding will allow for the preliminary engineering phase to begin which will include additional public involvement opportunities to include formal Design Public Hearings. 1) West Main Streetscape Phase 3 Cost Estimate $7.9 million Plan/Estimate Status 60% Application Project Manager Jeanette Janiczek Scope – Streetscape project on West Main between 8th Street NW to 10th Street NW. Improvements include - widened sidewalks, redesigned on road bicycle lanes, intersection upgrades for safer crossings (including signal work) and landscaping with water quality treatment. Aesthetic treatments will focus on creating a human scale, pedestrian-oriented corridor with greenery, street furniture and historic interpretation. Page 83 of 255 Current Plan Development Status and Public Engagement – Master planned and overall concept has been vetted through public process to advance plans of streetscape to 60% via 3 public meetings and early coordination with the Board of Architectural Review. Steering Committee has transitioned from stakeholder group to City Council. Detailed plans outline ROW limits and construction details that can be refined into construction documents. Additional Details– Two phases of the 4 phase project have been previously funded through SmartScale, Revenue Sharing and Local Contributions. West Main has seen and continues to experience redevelopment with high density buildings increasing travel demand that would be best met with multimodal improvements within this constricted corridor – walking, biking, mass transit or scooting. West Main is the main east-west route between Downtown Mall and the University of Virginia. 2) Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements Cost Estimate $5 million Plan/Estimate Status Concept Application Project Manager Brennan Duncan Scope –Ridge Street would be reconfigured to include a continuous bicycle lane in both directions from Cherry/Elliot Avenue to Monticello Avenue through the elimination of on-street parking on the west side of Ridge Street. a study team assessed parking availability and found that only one residence lacked either off-street or side-street parking, and that one residence was on the east side of the street. For pedestrians, the project would include curb extensions on the east side of the intersections with Oak Street and Dice Street. Curb extensions reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians and improve their visibility to motorists. Current Plan Development Status and Public Engagement – 5TH/Ridge/McIntire Multimodal Corridor Study was conducted with community meetings to develop concepts along the corridor. Additional Details– This project would help expand the benefits of 2 adjacent projects – the redesign of Cherry Avenue/Ridge Street/Elliott Avenue/Fifth Street intersection through SmartScale funding and redesign of the Ridge Street/Monticello Avenue intersection through Highway Safety Improvement funding. 3) Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements Cost Estimate $6.1 million Plan/Estimate Status Concept Application Project Manager Kyle Kling Scope – Multi-modal transportation improvements to increase safety and enhance operations for all users at the intersection of Preston Avenue, Grady Avenue, and 10th Street to create "complete streets" consistent with the City’s Streets that Work Plan. The project will consist of intersection improvements that focus on improving roadway operations, vehicular movements, bicycle & pedestrian safety and multimodal connectivity. Current Plan Development Status and Public Engagement – In 2018 an existing conditions Page 84 of 255 analysis and traffic study was performed by RK&K in preparation for the 2018 SmartScale cycle. The study included the development of three conceptual designs and cost estimates to support each concept. The concept developed includes simplifying roadway configuration to improve safety of all users, creating pedestrian and bicyclist facilities, lighting and landscaping. A public meeting was held on Cville 360 on June 30, 2020 to provide additional information and respond to community questions/comments. Additional Details– In 2018, the project was submitted for SmartScale and was fully funded. The city deferred the funding to the 5th St Corridor. VDOT has recommended the City apply for Preston/Grady in 2020, as they feel it will score well enough to receive funding. The intersection has been identified in the City’s Streets that Work Plan as the #1 priority intersection for needed improvements. 4) Emmet Street MultiModal Phase Two Cost Estimate $4.5 million Plan/Estimate Status Concept Application Project Manager Amanda Poncy Scope – The proposed project provides bicycle and pedestrian accommodations along Emmet Street between Arlington Boulevard and Barracks Road. Proposed improvements include widened sidewalks/shared use paths and on road bicycle facilities along with aesthetic treatments that create a human scale, pedestrian oriented corridor (including pedestrian scale lighting, plantings and street furniture). Current Plan Development Status and Public Engagement – A feasibility study was completed this year to evaluate bicycle and pedestrian accommodations along this corridor and connecting up to the Hydraulic/250 interchange via the Meadowcreek Trail through Meadow Creek Gardens. Results of the study were shown at the September Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting and Barracks/Emmet Public Workshop on Oct. 2, 2019. The concept plan was generally supported by meeting participants. Additional Details– Emmet Street is a Corridor of Statewide Significance. This project would fill a gap in the network and continue the improvements between the Round 1 funded Emmet Streetscape SmartScale project and Round 2 funded Barracks/Emmet Improvement S,artScale project while supporting UVA’s redevelopment initiatives along this corridor (UVA Athletics Master Plan and master planning the east side of Emmet between Massie and Carruthers Hall). Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Approval of this agenda item upholds the City’s commitment to create “a connected community” by improving upon our existing transportation infrastructure. In addition, it would contribute to Goal 3 of the Strategic Plan, to be “A Beautiful and Sustainable Natural and Built Environment” by meeting Objective 3.1 Engage in robust and context sensitive urban planning and implementation; Objective 3.2. Provide reliable and high quality infrastructure; and Objective 3.3. Provide a variety of transportation and mobility options. Page 85 of 255 Community Engagement: In addition to the public involvement activities listed above related to each project, the Metropolitan Planning Organization coordinated a public, online meeting to discuss the area’s proposed SmartScale applications on May 13 & 14, 2020 (comments/questions attached). In response, an additional public meeting was scheduled to further discuss the Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements on June 30, 2020. If funding is award for any/all applications, a public involvement process will be developed for each project during its preliminary engineering (design) phase which includes a formal Design Public Hearing. Budgetary Impact: West Main Streetscape Phase 3, Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements and Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements applications have no impact on the General Fund. 100% federal and state funding is being sought. Emmet Street MultiModal Phase Two is also seeking 100% federal and state funding for eligible, transportation improvements. Utility relocation, which is not eligible, may be required and local funding will be sought over the next six years within the Capital Improvement Program if grant funding is awarded. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution of Support for the 4 projects: x West Main Streetscape Phase Three x Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements x Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements x Emmet Street MultiModal Phase Two Alternatives: Remove one or all of the projects from the Resolution of Support so a grant application can not be submitted for federal or state funding. Attachments: 1) Resolution of Support 2) Public Comments Received from May 14th public meeting 3) Project Concept Sketches Page 86 of 255 A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FROM THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE FOR PROJECTS TO BE SUBMITTED FOR EVALUATION UNDER THE SMART SCALE PRIORITIZATION PROCESS At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Charlottesville City Council held on July 20, 2020, on a motion by [name of Council member], seconded by [name of Council member], the following resolution was adopted by a vote of [#] to [#]: WHEREAS, House Bill 2 (HB2), signed into law in 2014, directed the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) to develop and use a prioritization process to select transportation projects and that the CTB approved the HB2 prioritization process on June 17, 2015; WHEREAS, the HB2 process, now named SMART SCALE, specifies eligible applicants for four project types – Corridors of Statewide Significance, Regional Networks, Urban Development Area and Transportation Safety Needs; WHEREAS, Local Governments submitting projects require a resolution of support approved in a public forum with adequate public notice at the time of application; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Charlottesville City Council hereby supports the following to be submitted for evaluation under the SMART SCALE Prioritization Process: x West Main Streetscape Phase Three x Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements x Preston Avenue/Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements x Emmet Street MultiModal Phase Two BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager is authorized to execute all agreements and/or addendums for any approved projects with the Virginia Department of Transportation. ADOPTED this 20th day of July 2020. A COPY ATTEST Kyna Thomas, Council Clerk Page 87 of 255 West Main Streetscape Phase 3 Citizen Question/Comment Answer Peter Ohlms Got it, thanks! Here are some comments for the record: Thanks for your comments Peter. -I am in support of this project. There is no proposed midblock crossing between 8th and 9th Streets. About 875’ between the two streets with a -It was unclear from the image whether a marked midblock crosswalk exists between 8th and 9th Streets (as is currently the case). I 200’ long bridge included. I see we have a midblock crossing between the Standard and the flats now. We’ll keep would support having one or two in that stretch. that under consideration. -When responding to concerns about parking removal related to this project, the City should seek to implement modern active parking management solutions rather than just purchasing or constructing additional free parking along the corridor. Parking meters were considered as a measure. This has been turned over to the Parking Manager at the City to pursue. Peter Ohlms Jeanette Janiczek Mike Stoneking Would you reconsider retaining the right turn slip-lane from West Main onto Ridge/McIntire? live answered. No, the right turn slip-lane from West Main onto Ridge/McIntire is being removed in Phase 1 to simplify traffic operations, create additional public space and improve pedestrian/bicyclist experiences as well as safety. Peter Ohlms Hi Jeanette, what are the extents and funding status of the previous W Main phases? Phase 1 is between Ridge and 6th. Phase 2 is between 6th and 8th. Both phases are shown as funded by combining City's Capital Improvement Program, State Revenue Sharing program and a previous SmartScale application. Michael Fraser How has the construction phase been handled for existing businesses to ensure access by customers? live answered. A Maintenance of Traffic plan will be developed to ensure circulation for both vehicles and pedestrians is maintained through corridor as well as to businesses/destinations. Valerie Long Is the intent with the plan to shift more trips down Grady instead of down Preston toward Barrack's road? No. There is a fairly even distribution already. Nancy O'Brien what kind of trees are you planning? A combination/mixture of the following: Red Maple, American Hornbeam, Kentucky Coffeetree, Sweetgum, Black Gum, London Planetree, Swamp White Oak, Willow Oak and American Elm has been proposed for the corridor. Beth Kuhn With re-allocation of parking, will additional parking facilities be provided? live answered. On-street parking was studied previously with this project and various alternatives were explored (shared parking agreements, parking garages, meter parking). The City's Parking Manager has been tasked with reviewing possible alternatives/strategies. No funding has been identified or project established to build a parking garage in this area. Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements Citizen Question/Comment Answer Peter Krebs That east side parking is going to be important because of the Earling Learning Center there... live answered Dan Heuchert Anything to help traffic flow through that area? live answered Rory Is the buffer solely protected by paint? live answered Kent Schlussel No parking on the street? live answered Peter Ohlms You mentioned the possibility of a shared-use path on Ridge - is it the case that the bike lanes would go away in that option? live answered Preston Ave/Grady Ave Intersection Improvements Citizen Question/Comment Answer Nancy OBrien our neighborhood has been overrun during the hospisal / roosevelt brown contwruction making it difficult for the residents live answered Valerie Long Also for Preston/Grady: would you be willing to start with a community engagement process first before taking this project further? live answered Paul Josey Does this cost include the future "green/park" space? If so, what is that? live answered Page 88 of 255 Valerie Long For Preston/Grady: other concept plans for this area have been shared with the City that many of the area neighbors feel are much live answered better. Why was this plan which seems more impactful pursued instead of these other plans? Chris Henry Has a traffic study been conducted on this intersection? live answered Mike Stoneking Hi I am the Chair of PLACE Design Task Force. In June of last year we took on the subject of the Preston Grady intersection. We reviewed the several Schemes the City had prepared and found each falling far short of being successful proposals. I attach three schemes we offered as alternatives. Our suggestions at the time included items that seemed un addressed by the City’s consultant’s schemes. 1.Value the nature of street edge as an important aspect to commerce- that all properties should have decent frontage. 2.Seek pedestrian friendly solutions. 3.Look for opportunities to create good spaces. 4.Find development opportunities that fit into a strong urban fabric. 5.Examine whether the Preston median might be abandoned- offering a chance for wider sidewalks, street trees along the edges, bike lanes etc. 6.Develop a strategy that could be applied to the entire eastern length of Preston- to McIntire. 7.Consider how new connections can be made into adjacent neighborhoods, reestablishing a system of streets and blocks. I don’t see any of that reflected in the exhibit attached to this meeting. Seems no changes have occurred since last year. Sincerely, Lloyd Snook How many trips now go on Preston from downtown past Washington Park to the west, and vice versa? They are all going to be put live answered into a sharp right or left turn at the light instead of just moving through. Reid Also, how does east-bound traffic exit Sticks / Mona Lisa Pasta / etc.? Traffic would have to exit onto 10th St NW and travel through the intersection to head back downtown. We will continue to look into access management for those businesses and explore additional options. Chris Henry How was RKK selected as the design consultant? Were other consultants considered? live answered. RK&K was selected to complete a feasibility study as one of the City's On-Call Contracts for a previous SmartScale application round. If the project was selected for funding, a Request for Proposal would be drafted and advertised for design, right of way and construction services. Roger Schickedantz I am trying to understand why it would be proposed that traffic on Preston, a major through-street to Rt. 29, would be disrupted so Roger, severely in favor of traffic coming from Grady. Maybe this is due to the new development in the Dairy building? Is there really Thank you for taking the time to reach out and provide comments on the Preston Avenue & Grady Avenue sufficient traffic to and from UVA on Grady to give it precedence? Admittedly the shopping center parking access is currently Intersection Smartscale application. I will be sure to pass these along with the project team as we work through the challenged, but this solution will just relocate the bottlenecks, not resolve them. Is there a way that an elongated roundabout could application phase. The project is currently in a very preliminary phase and we will be holding a more robust public work here? That would provide for more contiguous green space in the center, simplifying access for pedestrians and bicyclists. outreach phase to solicit more detailed feedback from community members. In 2018, a traffic study was performed at the intersection which considered constructing a standard and elongated roundabout at the intersection. Our initial findings showed that while roundabouts help alleviate traffic congestion at the intersection they create challenges for pedestrians and cyclist traveling through the corridor. Additionally, roundabouts are more invasive to neighboring properties and will require the acquisition of additionally right of way. With that being said, we will most certainly continue to look at all alternatives as we move through the public process. Please do not hesitate to contact me with additional questions or concerns. Best Regards, Kyle Kling Peggy Van Yahres I may be reading this plan incorrectly. How does one go from Martin Hardware back to the downtown? There would still be an entrance/exit on 10th St NW that would allow for traffic to exit the site and head back to the Peggy Van Yahres west downtown Page 89 of 255 Mike Stoneking Jeanette and Kyle, Thanks for the update and info re Preston Grady tonight on the webinar. I think you’ve seen the attached sketches before but I wanted to share again. In addition to the project goals you described tonight, please consider the following: 1.Value the nature of street edge as an important aspect to commerce- that all properties should have decent frontage. 2.Seek pedestrian friendly solutions. Not just safety- but good experiences. 3.Look for opportunities to create good spaces. 4.Find development opportunities that fit into a strong urban fabric. 5.Examine whether the Preston median might be abandoned- offering a chance for wider sidewalks, street trees along the edges, bike lanes etc. 6.Develop a strategy that could be applied to the entire eastern length of Preston- to McIntire. 7.Consider how new connections can be made into adjacent neighborhoods, reestablishing a system of streets and blocks. These are meaningful objectives and were the foundation of the ideas attached and discussions at PLACE. It is important to achieve these along with the engineering, safety and access goals you’ve identified. But the two sets of values are not mutually exclusive. I’d go as far to say the City would be better off if the Smart Scale application did not use the plan advertised tonight as it might prove to confine the project in ways undesirable. Peter Krebs Mr. Kling: Good Afternoon Peter, The Piedmont Environmental Council does not support the Preston & Grady Avenues SmartScale project currently under I appreciate you taking the time to attend the webinar earlier this month and to provide detailed comments related consideration. While we recognize that it seeks to address a legitimate problem (a confusing swirl of intersections) it misses some key to the Smartscale application. I will be sure to share these with those working on the application. underlying issues and could exacerbate them. The other SmartScale projects the City is considering all result from long-standing dialog about their respective corridors. West Main, Additionally, as we relayed during the initial webinar with the MPO, the visual concept that was shown is simply a Fifth/Ridge/McIntire and Emmet have been studied holistically and the resulting projects emerged from robust public discussion and placeholder for the application. The main thing I want to stress is that the rendering shown is simply a possible advance multiple goals simultaneously. The Preston project, on the other hand, addresses a tactical problem but is not situated within concept and not a finalized design. Ultimately the only thing that has to be constructed are those elements that we a larger strategic plan. call out in the application such as signal upgrades, multimodal improvements, lighting, transit upgrades, etc. We are Preston Avenue is built like a suburban arterial that emphasizes through traffic, auto-centric land use, a past industrial legacy and intending to leave the application as open ended as possible to give us maximum flexibility during the design phase. social divisions that need healing. The Preston Avenue of today is situated within the very heart of Charlottesville and is surrounded by dense residential and commercial neighborhoods. It ought to be a lively streetscape but instead it is a barrier that sunders Furthermore, the City is in the midst of setting up a virtual public meeting for late June to discuss the project in communities and discourages street life. greater detail and solicit additional feedback from community members ahead of the August submission deadline. I The proposed project ignores this pattern and actually perpetuates the corridor’s worst characteristics: high vehicle speeds, a median will be sure to follow up with additional information on this when it becomes available. without purpose, too many lanes with too few pedestrian crossings and frontages that are difficult to develop. Best Regards, There is tremendous opportunity to imagine a better Preston Avenue, if viewed holistically as you have successfully done on the other Kyle Kling corridors under improvement. Why not Preston? The current project would make such visioning moot before its conception and represent a tremendous missed opportunity. Therefore this project should be shelved until there has been proper consideration of the wider context and opportunities throughout the corridor. Thank you, Peter Krebs Albemarle/Charlottesville Community Organizer The Piedmont Environmental Council Peter Olms Good morning Kyle, Peter – I appreciate you taking the time to attend the webinar yesterday evening and providing us with the detailed comments below. I would agree that this project does need to go through a more rigorous public process, which we Some comments: certainly intend to do. The conceptual design shown last night is preliminary and certainly open to change as design -I tentatively support this project. From the discussion during the meeting and my experience in the community, and compared to the progresses. Two issues that certainly need to be refined a bit more are access management for the many businesses other city proposals, it seems like community engagement for this one has been lacking and that the conceptual design is half-baked. in the project limits and taking a more detailed look into the bike/ped accommodations along the corridor. Once -Speaking of design, add (preferably separated or buffered) bike lanes to 10th and Grady/Preston within the extents where they’re again I appreciate the feedback and look forward to sharing more information with you and the community as we missing, in accordance with Streets that Work and the adopted bike/ped plan. Ensure safe, comfortable, and connected bike facilities move through this process. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any additional questions or concerns. are shown for every path of movement within the project's scope. -It was unclear whether the western driveway to Preston Plaza will be retained or closed. Closing it would improve access management and bike/ped conditions. Peter Ohlms Page 90 of 255 Chris Henry Please accept the attached comment letter as the official response from Dairy Holdings, LLC to the short public forum that was held Definitely. on the Preston/Grady SmartScale Application on May 14th. If not too late, I would appreciate if this letter of concern could be I am copying Ann and our staff to make sure. included in the official packet for the MPO Policy Board Meeting this evening. I noticed that several Albemarle County SmartScale Chip Submissions have included comment letters from neighboring property owners on those projects. I look forward to your response and hope to craft a productive working relationship as this important infrastructure project is considered for funding. Sincerely, Christopher A. Henry President See Appendix Reid What is the purpose and use of the large area inside the new sidewalk? Who uses it? Who maintains it? This is a detail yet to be worked out. Nancy OBrien while construction is on-going how will you protect parking in the adjacent neighborhoods live answered Peter Ohlms Why aren't the bike facilities continuous in the concept image? Why don't they match the city's adopted Streets that Work or The plan shown is still a conceptual image. We would ensure that a final plan would have bike facilities that match bike/ped plan? what is shown in STW/ Bike Ped Plab. Mike Stoneking Will you entertain a workshop involving PLACE Design Task Force, area property owners and other constituents to perhaps re-imagine live answered this? DŝŬĞ^ƚŽŶĞŬŝŶŐ Brennen Next week I'm open every day from 9-10am if you want to pick one. Could I come see you and talk one-on-one about the Preston-Grady intersection project? I’d like to do so before the next PLACE Brennen Duncan, PE meeting. I figured it would be better for a preview talk rather than the typical PLACE burst of comments. -Mike Stoneking 434-981- City Traffic Engineer 4382 CALL SETUP with Kling : Mornings are usually better for me. I figure you’re busy so I thought you might list a few good times and I’ll maneuver.- Mike Brennen, thanks for sending this over. Have you all officially applied for VDOT funding at this point or are you getting ready to (I was TWO REPLIES TO CRAIG-KLYLE KLING AND BRENNAN DUNCAN: thinking those applications are due in the Fall). If you’ve applied already, could you share the application with us? Preliminary applications were due in April. Those are basically just place holders with very basic information letting VDOT know our intention to apply. We'll continue to refine our application in conjunction with VDOT review Thanks, especially as it regards to the budgeting. The main thing I want to stress is that this is only a concept and not a Craig design. Ultimately the only thing that has to be constructed are those elements that we call out in the application such as Signal upgrades, multimodal improvements, lighting, transit upgrades, etc. If we put those words in the application, then we're held to that by the grant, but I don't believe the exact layout is something that we're held to. I'm looping in Kyle as he's actually the project manager for this one and would have access to the preliminary application if you still want that passed along. Brennen Craig – Brennen did a great job summarizing where we currently stand with the project. I’ll just add that for the pre- application we simply imported all data from the 2018 submission and tweaked the cost estimate to update it to 2020 figures. I have attached our final application for the 2018 submission for review. Page 22 of the attachment has a list of attachments that were submitted with the application. If you see anything on there you would like to see in more detail I would be happy to send that over to you. As Brennen indicated, for our April application we just wanted to ensure we got some information into the portal prior to the deadline. We intend to take a deeper dive into refining the application ahead of the August 2020 final submission date. One thing we will be certain of is to leave the project description as open ended as possible to allow for flexibility in the design. Let me know If you would like to see anything additional. Thanks, Craig Kotarski Kyle Kling Emmet Street Multimodal Phase Two Citizen Question/Comment Answer Chris Henry If the project is designed and funded before a public engagement process is conducted, how can that engagement have a meaningful A valid question for all this projects, not just this one. The project is not designed. What is shown is a concept in impact on said design and funding? order for the city to figure out preliminary costs to improve multimodal access and safety concerns. The only thing that will have to be constructed would be those elements strictly stated in the grant's purpose and need statement. Beth Kuhn Will there be improvements for pedestrian crossing of Emmet St.? There will be pedestrian crossings at the signalized intersections. Page 91 of 255 Nancy OBrien Are there any trees along Emmet? Trees would be incorporated in the 6' buffer on the east side. In addition, the Barracks Road side of the street (west side) has a nice existing tree canopy and we were trying avoid impacts to those trees with the project. If we hold the curb line on the west side (Barracks Shopping Center side) of Emmet, we can avoid tree impacts. Peggy Van Yahres Did you consider having 10’on both sides for bikes and people and then having trees on both sides? Why 15’ on one side and 10’ on The feasibility study looked at creating seamless bike/ped connections from Arlington to the 250 bypass while the other? connecting the improvements currently under design with the two previously funded smart scale. The west side of Peggy Van Yahres Emmet has a number of conflict points due to Barracks Road shopping Center, as well as limited right of way. In addition, the primary connection north of Barracks Road is is Meadowbrook Road, so continuing the shared use path on the east side was preferred. Helen Wilson How are pedestrians protected from cyclists? This is a design detail, but the sidewalk-level bike lanes will be a great opportunity to try out raised tactile guidance strips between the bike lane and sidewalk/path. Several versions of these have been applied in similar situations. Paul Josey Thanks, Amanda - with overhead power located on the west side of Emmet, could you consider the 6' median located on the east side The planted buffer is proposed on the east side. to avoid those? Secondly, would it be possible to consider a shared 5' and 5' sidewalk on both sides to allow a planted buffer on both The feasibility study looked at creating seamless bike/ped connections from Arlington to the 250 bypass while sides? connecting the improvements currently under design with the two previously funded smart scale. The west side of Emmet has a number of conflict points due to Barracks Road shopping Center, as well as limited right of way. In addition, the primary connection north of Barracks Road is is Meadowbrook Road, so continuing the shared use path on the east side was preferred. Paul Josey Were overhead utilities factored into the design to allow for canopy trees? Overhead or underground utilities have not been evaluated at this stage. Our focus was evaluating how we could create a continuous connection between the two previously funded projects. Our hope is that the 6' median will allow for canopy trees. Page 92 of 255 West Main Phase Three Page 93 of 255 Ridge Street Multimodal Improvements Page 94 of 255 Preston Avenue & Grady Avenue Intersection Improvements Page 95 of 255 Emmet Street Multimodal Phase Two Typical Section: Emmet Street between Arlington & Barracks Page 96 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Public Hearing; Adoption of Ordinance (Waive Second Reading) Presenter: John Blair, City Attorney Staff Contacts: Lisa Robertson; Lauren Hildebrand, Director of Utilities Title: Lochlyn Hill Subdivision: Vacation of Utility Easements and ROW Background: Pursuant to Virginia Code §15.2-2265, when a locality approves a subdivision plat and the plat is recorded within the Circuit Court’s land records, recordation of the plat operates to transfer legal title to all rights-of-way, easements or other interest of the City in the land identified on the plat as being dedicated for public use. (But note: the City is not required to accept ownership or maintenance responsibility for any improvements installed within the dedicated areas, for example: water, sewer or storm sewer mains, unless and until the City verifies that the improvements have been constructed within the public easements AND have been constructed in accordance with City standards). Once a Developer records a plat and legal title to dedicated right-of-way (ROW) passes to the City, a Developer may not subsequently “take back” [abandon, vacate, etc.] that easement except in accordance with applicable state laws. As a general rule, City Council is required to take action in order to dispose of any public interest in real property. Thus, in most instances— particularly after a developer begins to sell off lots within a subdivision—a developer cannot simply record new subdivision plats to “erase” public easements created by a prior subdivision plat, see Va. Code §15.2-2272. If a developer tries to do this, it can create problems in the chain of title to the City’s interests in real estate, as well as private property. Discussion: It has come to the attention of the City Attorney’s Office that there are a number of corrections that must be made with respect to matters depicted within the various subdivision plats recorded within the Lochlyn Hill Subdivision. First, in a number of places new utilities have been constructed outside the boundaries of recorded easements. In those cases the easement locations must be adjusted to correlate with the actual location of utility lines. Second, boundaries of utility or stormwater easements have been platted and re-platted, on occasion; in some of the re-plats, the Developer referenced an easement as being “hereby vacated” without first having obtained the approval of City Council. For these issues, in order for the property rights to be clarified, Council would need to take action to vacate the Page 97 of 255 areas labeled as “vacated”. Third, Lochlyn Hill Drive, although not yet completed, was constructed in a location different than the dedicated public ROW depicted on recorded plats. To partially address this, the Developer has dedicated additional ROW for the portion of the street constructed outside the platted ROW [this has already been done and accepted by the City Attorney on behalf of the City, as he is authorized to do]. Now, the Developer is requesting the City Council to vacate ROW that was previously platted and dedicated, but that is no longer necessary to achieve the required width for the “relocated” Lochlyn Hill Drive. Just in the way of a status report: the following issues related to utilities and public street improvements remain outstanding throughout the Development: (1) Developer has not yet submitted notice(s) of completion, accompanied by final as-built plans and inspection reports for (i) all utility facilities and (ii) public street improvements; (2) For utility mains (water, sewer and storm sewer lines) that have been constructed within Phase 3, the Developer has confirmed location of utility mains but has not yet provided final verification that the depth of cover required for the new utility lines has been achieved; (3) The City’s zoning administrator and Housing Specialist will need to verify that the proffered development conditions (affordable housing) throughout the Development have been satisfied. This involves checking location and ownership of units, and checking on the status of a Fund referenced within the proffers. (4) The City’s stormwater administrator will need to verify that the requirements of the stormwater management plan for the Lochlyn Hill development (all phases) have been satisfied to the extent that state permit coverage can be terminated; this closeout process is not anticipated for quite some time, and will involve an application and closeout information per state law and regulations, and the City’s water protection ordinance. Resolution of these outstanding issues will take place over a course of time in accordance with City ordinances and applicable state laws. Taking action at this time to correct subdivision plat errors will not adversely impact [either the City or the Developer] as they work through the completion process, and will clear title to some land/lots which have already been sold. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: N/A Community Engagement: A public hearing is required to be held by City Council on this request, pursuant to Va. Code §15.2-2272. Budgetary Impact: N/A Recommendation: Staff and the City Attorney’s Office recommend approval of the attached Ordinance. (Note: on the last page of the Ordinance, there is a provision that waives the requirement for a second reading of the Ordinance). Page 98 of 255 Alternatives: City Council may decline to approve the Ordinance, or may edit the terms of the proposed Ordinance prior to adopting it. Attachments: • Proposed Ordinance • Copies of plats referenced in the Ordinance Page 99 of 255 ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING CERTAIN UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN THE LOCHLYN HILL SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, the developers of the Lochlyn Hill subdivision (“Developers”) have recorded one or more subdivision plat(s) within the land records of the Charlottesville Circuit Court for the Lochlyn Hill Subdivision (“Subdivision”); and WHEREAS, within the various plat(s) the Developers have created certain public rights of way and easements for public utilities, and have dedicated the areas of land within those easements for public use (“Subject Rights-of-Way”), but the Developers have also attempted to vacate certain of those easements by recordation, or re-recordation, of the plat(s); and WHEREAS, once the Developers began selling lots within the Subdivision, the City of Charlottesville’s right, title and interest in and to utility easements created by recordation of subdivision plat(s), and the boundary(ies) of those easements, may be extinguished or altered only in accordance with the provisions of Virginia Code §15.2-2265 and §15.2-2272; and WHEREAS, the Developers have made application to the City Council, requesting Council to vacate or relocate certain easements the Subdivision and to vacate a portion of right- of-way previously dedicated to the City for Lochlyn Hill Drive; and, WHEREAS, landowners who own property adjacent to the Subject Rights-of-Way have been duly notified of the Petition, in accordance with Virginia Code §15.2-2272, and within each of the subdivision plats recorded by the Developers, the Developers, by notes on such plats, reserved the right to vacate or revise any easement depicted on the plats, and by such notes the lot owners purchasing from the Developers have also been put on notice that the easements may be vacated or revised; and, WHEREAS, following notice to the public given in accordance with Virginia Code §15.2- 2272 and 15.2-2204, and a public hearing by the City Council was held on July 20, 2020; and, WHEREAS, this Council finds and determines that the Developer’s application should be conditionally granted; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia as follows: (1) Within the Subdivision Plat titled “SUBDIVISION PLAT LOCHLYN HILL, PHASE II AND FUTURE PHASE III, BEING A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT OF TMP48A-39 AND 48A-40 AND VACATING A PORTION OF AN EXISTING CITY 20’ SANITARY EASEMENT AND A STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AND ACCESS EASEMENT AS SHOWN HEREON CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA DECEMBER 20, 2015, MARCH 16, 2016 (REVISED) JULY 6, 2016 (REVISED) AUGUST 31, 2016 (REVISED)”, recorded within the land records of the Charlottesville 1 Page 100 of 255 Circuit Court as Instrument Number 2016-00003811, City Council hereby vacates the following easements: Sheet 3 of 22: “Portion of Ex. Stormwater Maintenance and Access Easement Instrument #201400921 (City) (HEREBY VACATED”)” and “Portion of Ex. City 20’ Sanitary Sewer Easement D.B. 773, Pg. 503, 509 (PLAT)(HEREBY VACATED)”; Sheet 4 of 22: “Portion of Ex. Stormwater Maintenance and Access Easement Instrument #201400921 (CITY) (HEREBY VACATED)”; (2) And within the Subdivision Plat titled “PLAT SHOWING REVISED 20’ SANITARY SEWER EASEMENTS AND NEW 20’ STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED ACROSS LOCHLYN HILL, PHASE II, CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, FEBRUARY 1, 2019, JUNE 21, 2019 (REVISED), NOVEMBER 6, 2019 (REVISED)” recorded within the land records of the Charlottesville Circuit Court as Instrument Number 2019-00004144, City Council hereby vacates the following easements: Sheet 3 of 13: Drainage Easements (or portions thereof) labeled as “A” on Sheet 3 of 13 on the above-referenced Plat, such easements having been dedicated to the public on the 2016 subdivision plat recorded as Instrument 2016-00003811; and Drainage Easements (or portions thereof) labeled as “D” on Sheet 3 of 13 on the above-referenced Plat, such easements having been dedicated to the public on the 2016 subdivision plat recorded as Instrument 2016- 00003811; (3) And within the Subdivision Plat titled “LOCHLYN HILL, PHASE III, CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA JANUARY 11, 2019, APRIL 19, 2019 (REVISED), JUNE 3, 2019 (REVISED)” recorded within the land records of the Charlottesville Circuit Court as Instrument Number 2019-00002201, City Council hereby vacates the following easements: Sheet 4 of 14: Drainage Easements (or portions thereof) labeled as “A, B, C, and D” on Sheet 4 of 13 on the above-referenced Plat; and a Waterline Easement (or portion thereof) labeled as “G” on Sheet 4 of 13 of the above-referenced Plat; and a Sanitary Sewer Easement (or portion thereof) labeled as “H” on the above-referenced Plat, such easements having been dedicated to the public on the 2016 subdivision plat recorded as Instrument 2016-00003811; (4) And within a plat titled “Survey Showing Lots 61-A and 61-B being a division of Lot 61 and Lots 90-A, 90-B, 90-C, being a division of Lot 90 (Revised) and Lots 91 (Revised) through Lot 99 (Revised) being a boundary line adjustment of Lots 91 through 99 and New Access Easement across Lot 61-A Lochlyn Hill, Phase III,” prepared by Kirk Hughes and Associates and dated February 10, 2020, recorded within the land records of the Charlottesville Circuit Court as Exhibit A to Instrument Number 2020-00001078, City Council hereby vacates the following easement: Sheet 4 of 6 (titled “Plat Showing Lochlyn Hill, Phase III, Public Drainage Easement to be Vacated”: the existing drainage easement (or portions thereof) depicted as a cross-hatched 2 Page 101 of 255 area and labeled “Portion of Ex. D/E to be Vacated” (5) And with respect to a PROPOSED plat titled “Boundary line adjustment, Lots 101-107 and Lochlyn Hill Drive, Lochlyn Hill, Phase III, as shown hereon” prepared by Kirk Hughes and Associates and dated February 10, 2020 (not yet recorded within the land records of the Charlottesville Circuit Court, but attached to Council’s agenda materials for July 20, 2020), City Council hereby agrees to and approves a vacation of the following portions of the public right-of-way for Lochlyn Hill Drive and City Council further authorizes the City’s Subdivision Agent to execute a final boundary line adjustment plat having the same details and information as set forth within the aforementioned PROPOSED plat: Sheet 2 of 3: portions of the variable width right-of-way for Lochlyn Hill Drive adjacent to Lots 101-107, more specifically, those portions labeled (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F) and (G) on said plat, each labeled portion having the area stated within the tables provided on Sheet 3 of 3 of said boundary line adjustment plat. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that this Ordinance shall not be or become effective until (i) a period of 30 calendar days from July 20, 2020 has expired, and no appeal has been taken by any person from Council’s adoption of this Ordinance pursuant to Virginia Code §15.2-2272(2), and (ii) a certified copy of this Ordinance is recorded in the land records of the Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesvile, along with a Deed of Vacation approved as to form by the City Attorney. In the event that this Ordinance and the related Deed of Vacation have not been recorded in the City’s land records within one (1) year after the date of approval of this Ordinance by City Council, then this Ordinance shall be void. AND BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY CITY COUNCIL THAT the requirement within City Code Section 2-97 (for a two readings of an ordinance) is hereby WAIVED by a four- fifths vote and this Ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption by Council without any requirement for a second reading. Approved by Council ________________, 2020 __________________________________ Clerk of Council 3 Page 102 of 255 Page 103 of 255 Page 104 of 255 Page 105 of 255 Page 106 of 255 Page 107 of 255 Page 108 of 255 Page 109 of 255 Page 110 of 255 Page 111 of 255 Page 112 of 255 Page 113 of 255 Page 114 of 255 Page 115 of 255 Page 116 of 255 &,7<2)&+$5/277(69,//(9,5*,1,$ &,7<&281&,/$*(1'$ $JHQGD'DWH -XO\ $FWLRQ5HTXHVWHG &RQVLGHUDWLRQRID5H]RQLQJ$SSOLFDWLRQ&ULWLFDO6ORSH:DLYHUDQG 52:UHDOLJQPHQW 3UHVHQWHU 0DWW$OIHOH$,&3&LW\3ODQQHU 6WDII&RQWDFWV 0DWW$OIHOH$,&3&LW\3ODQQHU 7LWOH )OLQW+LOO38'  =03 3 Background: Šƒ”Ž‹‡ ”•–”‘‰ ȋ‘ˆ ‡Ž‘– –ƒ–‹‘ǡ ǡ Žƒ†‘™‡”Ȍ Šƒ• •—„‹––‡† ƒ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ’—”•—ƒ––‘‹–›‘†‡͵ͶǦͶͻͲ‡–•‡“Ǥǡ•‡‡‹‰ƒœ‘‹‰ƒ’ƒ‡†‡––‘ Šƒ‰‡–Š‡œ‘‹‰ †‹•–”‹ – Žƒ••‹ˆ‹ ƒ–‹‘•‘ˆ–Š‡ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰–Š‹”–‡‡ȋͳ͵Ȍ’ƒ” ‡Ž•‘ˆŽƒ†ǣ ͳͲͲȂͳͲͻ‡‡‡–Ǥǡ͵ͲͶ Ȃ ͵Ͳ͸ Ž‹– ”Ǥǡ ƒ† ƒ ’‘”–‹‘ ‘ˆ ͵Ͳ͸ ƒ‡ŽŽ‹ƒ ”Ǥ ȋƒš ƒ’ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͳͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵Ͳͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹͻͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹͺͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹ͹Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹ͸Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵͹Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͺͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͷͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͶͲǡʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵͵ͲǡʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ʹͲǡƒ†ƒ’‘”–‹‘‘ˆʹͲͲͳͻ͸ͲͲͲȌȋ–‘‰‡–Š‡”ǡ–Š‡Dz—„Œ‡ – ”‘’‡”–›dz–‘–ƒŽ‹‰ͻǤͺͳƒ ”‡•ȌǤ Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘’”‘’‘•‡•–‘ Šƒ‰‡–Š‡œ‘‹‰ Žƒ••‹ˆ‹ ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ –Š‡ —„Œ‡ – ”‘’‡”–› ˆ”‘ DzǦͳdz ȋ‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽ ƒŽŽ ‘–•Ȍ –‘ Dzdz ȋŽƒ‡† ‹– ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Ȍ •—„Œ‡ – –‘ ’”‘ˆˆ‡”‡† †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‘†‹–‹‘•Ǥ  ƒ††‹–‹‘ǡ –Š‡ ’”‘’‘•‡† ‹’”‘˜‡‡–•ƒ••‘ ‹ƒ–‡†™‹–Š–Š‡”‡œ‘‹‰™‹ŽŽ‹’ƒ – ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡•‘Ǧ•‹–‡ƒ•†‡ˆ‹‡†„› ‡ –‹‘͵ͶǦͳͳʹͲȋ„ȌȋʹȌǤ Š‡”‡ˆ‡””‡†–‘ƒ•Dz Ž‹– ‹ŽŽdz™‘—Ž†ƒŽŽ‘™—’–‘•‹š–›—‹–• •’Ž‹–„‡–™‡‡•‡˜‡”‘™•–‘™Š‘—•‡•ƒ†–™‘—Ž–‹ˆƒ‹Ž›—‹–•ƒ–ƒƒ’’”‘š‹ƒ–‡†‡•‹–› ‘ˆ•‹š†™‡ŽŽ‹‰—‹–•’‡”ƒ ”‡ȋȌƒ†–Š‡ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰’”‘ˆˆ‡”‡† ‘†‹–‹‘•ǣ (i) Density: Š‡”‡•ŠƒŽŽ„‡ƒƒš‹—‘ˆ͸Ͳ”‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽ—‹–•™‹–Š‹–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒ‘ˆ–Š‡ —„Œ‡ –”‘’‡”–›Ǣ (ii) Affordable dwelling units: (a): Š‡ ƒ†‘™‡” •ŠƒŽŽ ƒ—•‡ ƒ ‹‹— ͳͷΨ ‘ˆ –Š‡ ”‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽ —‹–• ‘•–”— –‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡ƒ”‡ƒ‘ˆ–Š‡—„Œ‡ –”‘’‡”–›–‘„‡ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡–‘Š‘—•‡Š‘Ž†• Šƒ˜‹‰‹ ‘‡„‡–™‡‡ʹͷΨƒ†͸ͲΨ‘ˆƒ”‡ƒ‡†‹ƒ‹ ‘‡ȋƒ•†‡ˆ‹‡†‹‹–› ‘†‡͵ͶǦͳʹȋ Ȍƒ†͵ͶǦͳʹȋ‰ȌȌǡ™‹–Š•— Šƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„‹Ž‹–›‰—ƒ”ƒ–‡‡†ˆ‘”ƒ’‡”‹‘†‘ˆƒ– Ž‡ƒ•––Š‹”–›ȋ͵ͲȌ›‡ƒ”•„›†‡‡†”‡•–”‹ –‹‘•”‡ ‘”†‡†„›–Š‡ƒ†‘™‡”™‹–Š‹–Š‡ Žƒ† ”‡ ‘”†• ‘ˆ –Š‡ Šƒ”Ž‘––‡•˜‹ŽŽ‡ ‹” —‹– ‘—”–ǡ ™Š‹ Š †‡‡† ”‡•–”‹ –‹‘• •ŠƒŽŽ ‹ Ž—†‡ǡƒ–ƒ‹‹—ǡƒˆ‹”•–”‹‰Š–‘ˆ”‡ˆ—•ƒŽˆ‘”–Š‡ƒ†‘™‡”–‘”‡’—” Šƒ•‡–Š‡ ’”‘’‡”–›ǡ ƒ’’”‡ ‹ƒ–‹‘Ǧ•Šƒ”‹‰ ’”‘˜‹•‹‘•ǡ ƒ† ˆ‘”‰‹˜ƒ„Ž‡ ƒ†Ȁ‘” ‘Ǧ‹–‡”‡•– ‘”–‰ƒ‰‡• ˆ”‘ –Š‡ ƒ†‘™‡” ‘” ƒ†‘™‡”ǯ• †‡•‹‰‡‡ –‘ ƒ “—ƒŽ‹ˆ‹‡† Š‘‡ „—›‡”ȋDzˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡™‡ŽŽ‹‰‹–•ǡ‘”Dz•dzȌǤ  Page 117 of 255 (b): —”‹‰ Š‘‡ ‘•–”— –‹‘ ™‹–Š‹ –Š‡ ”‘Œ‡ –ǡ –Š‡ • •ŠƒŽŽ „‡ ’”‘˜‹†‡† ‹ ”‡‡–ƒŽŽ›•— Š–Šƒ–ƒ–Ž‡ƒ•–ͳ•ŠƒŽŽ„‡—†‡” ‘•–”— –‹‘’”‹‘”–‘–Š‡ ‹••—ƒ ‡‘ˆ‡˜‡”›ͳͲ–Š‡”–‹ˆ‹ ƒ–‡‘ˆ —’ƒ ›Ǥ ––Š‡ƒ†‘™‡”ǯ•‘’–‹‘ǡ‹ˆ–Š‡ ƒ†‘™‡” ‘˜‡›•–‘ ”‡ƒ–‡”Šƒ”Ž‘––‡•˜‹ŽŽ‡ ƒ„‹–ƒ–ˆ‘” —ƒ‹–›ȋDz ƒ„‹–ƒ–dzȌǡ „›”‡ ‘”†‡††‡‡†ǡƒ›Ž‘–ȋ•Ȍ™‹–Š‹–Š‡—„Œ‡ –”‘’‡”–›ǡ–Š‡ǣ (i) –Š‡ ‘˜‡›‡†Ž‘–ȋ•Ȍ•ŠƒŽŽ„‡†‡‡‡†•–Šƒ–ƒ”‡Dz—†‡” ‘•–”— –‹‘dzƒ• ‘ˆ –Š‡ †ƒ–‡ ‘ˆ ”‡ ‘”†ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ –Š‡ †‡‡† ‘ˆ ‘˜‡›ƒ ‡ ˆ”‘ ƒ†‘™‡” –‘ ƒ„‹–ƒ– ‘–ƒ‹‹‰–Š‡†‡‡†”‡•–”‹ –‹‘•”‡ˆ‡”‡ ‡†‹’ƒ”ƒ‰”ƒ’ŠʹǤƒǤǡƒ„‘˜‡Ǣ ƒ† (ii) –Š‡†‡‡†”‡•–”‹ –‹‘••ŠƒŽŽ‹ Ž—†‡ƒ ‘˜‡ƒ–”‡“—‹”‹‰–Šƒ–ǡ‹ˆƒ›‘ˆ–Š‡ ‹‹–‹ƒŽŠ‘‡‘™‡”•‘ˆ–Š‡••‡ŽŽ‘”‘–Š‡”™‹•‡–”ƒ•ˆ‡”‘™‡”•Š‹’‘ˆ–Š‡ –‘ƒ’‡”•‘‘–Š‡”–Šƒ ƒ„‹–ƒ–‘”ƒ“—ƒŽ‹ˆ›‹‰Š‡‹”ǡ™‹–Š‹–Š‡ˆ‹”•––Š‹”–› ȋ͵ͲȌ›‡ƒ”•ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰‹••—ƒ ‡‘ˆƒ ‡”–‹ˆ‹ ƒ–‡‘ˆ‘ —’ƒ ›ˆ‘”–Š‡—‹–•‘Ž†‘” –”ƒ•ˆ‡””‡†ǡ–Š‡ ƒ„‹–ƒ–™‹ŽŽ—•‡ƒ›ƒ’’”‡ ‹ƒ–‹‘Ǧ•Šƒ”‹‰’”‘ ‡‡†•ˆ”‘–Š‡ •ƒŽ‡ ‘” –”ƒ•ˆ‡” ‘ˆ –Šƒ–  ˆ‘” ‘•–”— –‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒ ”‡’Žƒ ‡‡– ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡ †™‡ŽŽ‹‰—‹–™‹–Š‹–Š‡‹–›‘ˆŠƒ”Ž‘––‡•˜‹ŽŽ‡ƒ†•ŠƒŽŽ†‘ —‡–•— Š—•‡‘ˆ –Š‡ ƒ’’”‡ ‹ƒ–‹‘Ǧ•Šƒ”‹‰ ’”‘ ‡‡†•ǡ ƒ† •ŠƒŽŽ ƒ‡ •— Š †‘ —‡–ƒ–‹‘ ƒ˜ƒ‹Žƒ„Ž‡–‘–Š‡‹–›ǯ•œ‘‹‰ƒ†‹‹•–”ƒ–‘”—’‘”‡“—‡•–Ǥ Key Features and Material Representations ƒ„‘—– –Š‡ ’‡ ‹ˆ‹ • ‘ˆ –Š‡ ”‘’‘•‡†  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ǣ Š‡  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– Žƒ ˆ‘” –Š‹• ’”‘’‘•‡† †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‹ Ž—†‡• –Š‡ ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰‡› ‘’‘‡–•ƒ†–Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–ǯ•”‡’”‡•‡–ƒ–‹‘•ƒ•–‘–Š‡‡Ž‡‡–•–Šƒ–™‹ŽŽ „‡‹ Ž—†‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ǣ x ͹”‘™•‘ˆ–‘™Š‘—•‡•ǡ‹–Š‡‰‡‡”ƒŽ‘”ƒ’’”‘š‹ƒ–‡Ž‘ ƒ–‹‘•†‡’‹ –‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– Žƒǡ ™‹–Š ƒ” Š‹–‡ –—”ƒŽ ‡Ž‡‡–• ƒ• ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™•ǣ –Š”‡‡ •–‘”› –‘™Š‘—•‡•™‹–Š–”ƒ†‹–‹‘ƒŽƒ†‘†‡”ˆƒ ƒ†‡•‹ŽŽ—•–”ƒ–‡†‹–Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ƒ–‡”‹ƒŽ•ȋ—’’Ž‡‡–ƒŽ ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘ƒ ‡–†ƒ–‡†ƒ›ͳǡʹͲʹͲȌǤ x ʹ—Ž–‹ˆƒ‹Ž›†™‡ŽŽ‹‰•ǡ‹–Š‡‰‡‡”ƒŽ‘”ƒ’’”‘š‹ƒ–‡Ž‘ ƒ–‹‘•†‡’‹ –‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– Žƒǡ ™‹–Š ‘ ƒ” Š‹–‡ –—”ƒŽ ‡Ž‡‡–• ‘–Š‡” –Šƒ ƒ Š‡‹‰Š– ‘ˆ –™‘ •–‘”‹‡•Ǥ x —•‡ƒ–”‹š–Šƒ–ƒŽŽ‘™•”‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽƒ†”‡Žƒ–‡†—•‡••— Šƒ••‹‰Ž‡Ǧˆƒ‹Ž›ƒ––ƒ Š‡†ǡ –‘™Š‘—•‡•ǡˆƒ‹Ž›†ƒ›Š‘‡ǡƒ†”‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽ–”‡ƒ–‡–ˆƒ ‹Ž‹–‹‡•—’–‘ͺ”‡•‹†‡–•Ǣ ‘Ǧ”‡•‹†‡–‹ƒŽ—•‡••— Šƒ•Š‘—•‡‘ˆ™‘”•Š‹’ǡ„ƒŽŽˆ‹‡Ž†•ǡƒ†•™‹‹‰’‘‘Ž• x Š‡ ’”‘’‘•‡†  •‡ ƒ–”‹š ƒŽŽ‘™•  ǡ  ǡ  ǡ   ƒ† —’Ž‡š‡• „›Ǧ”‹‰Š–Ǥ ‡’ƒ”ƒ–‡Ž›ǡ–Š‡ƒ””ƒ–‹˜‡•–ƒ–‡•–Šƒ–Dz–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–™‹ŽŽ’”‘˜‹†‡„‘–Š•‹‰Ž‡ ˆƒ‹Ž›ƒ––ƒ Š‡†ȋ Ȍƒ†‡‹‰Š„‘”Š‘‘†Ǧ• ƒŽ‡ ‘†‘‹‹—Š‘—•‹‰–›’‡•ȋ ȌǤ ‘‰ –Š‘•‡ Š‘—•‹‰ –›’‡• ™‹ŽŽ „‡ •‡˜‡”ƒŽ •—„–›’‡• ‘ˆ ˜ƒ”‹‘—• •“—ƒ”‡ ˆ‘‘–ƒ‰‡•ǡ ™‹†–Š•ǡ•–›Ž‡•ƒ†’”‹ ‡’‘‹–•Ǣ”‡ƒ”ǦƒŽŽ‡›ǦŽ‘ƒ†‡†‰ƒ”ƒ‰‡–‘™Š‘‡•ǡƒ†’”‘ˆˆ‡”‡† •–‘‰—ƒ”ƒ–‡‡ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„‹Ž‹–›ƒ†˜ƒ”‹‡–›Ǥdzȋ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Žƒ†ƒ–‡†ƒ›ͳǡ ʹͲʹͲ’ƒ‰‡͹Ȍ x Š‡ƒ””ƒ–‹˜‡•–ƒ–‡•ƒ” Š‹–‡ –—”ƒŽ‡˜‹‡™‘ƒ”†™‹ŽŽ„‡‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡†„›–Š‡ Š‘‡‘™‡”ƒ••‘ ‹ƒ–‹‘–‘ ”‡ƒ–‡ƒ ‘‘”†‹ƒ–‡†ƒ” Š‹–‡ –—”ƒŽ•–›Ž‡Ǥ x ’”‹˜ƒ–‡”‘ƒ†–‘ƒ ‡••–‘™Š‘—•‡•–‘–Š‡‘”–Š‡ƒ•–‘ˆ Ž‹–”‹˜‡Ǥ Š‡•‡Ž‘–•™‹ŽŽ „‡Žƒ†Ž‘ ‡†ƒ•–Š‡›™‹ŽŽ‘–Šƒ˜‡ˆ”‘–ƒ‰‡‘ƒ‹–›ƒ‹–ƒ‹‡†”‘ƒ†Ǥ x ’’”‘š‹ƒ–‡Ž› ͷ ƒ ”‡• ‘ˆ ‘’‡ •’ƒ ‡ǡ ‹ –Š‡ ‰‡‡”ƒŽ ‘” ƒ’’”‘š‹ƒ–‡ Ž‘ ƒ–‹‘ȋ•Ȍ †‡’‹ –‡† ™‹–Š –Š‡  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ŽƒǤ ‘‰ ‘–Š‡” •’‡ ‹ˆ‹  ’”‘‹•‡•ǡ –Š‡  Page 118 of 255 ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ– ‹• ’”‘‹•‹‰ –‘ ’”‡•‡”˜‡ ”‘—‰ŠŽ› ŠƒŽˆ ‘ˆ ‡š‹•–‹‰ –”‡‡•ǡ •–”‡ƒ•ǡ ƒ† •‡•‹–‹˜‡–‘’‘‰”ƒ’Š›‘•‹–‡Ǥ x Š‡Ž–‡”‡† ͷǯ •‹†‡™ƒŽ• Ž‘ ƒ–‡† ƒŽ‘‰ ‡‡‡ ‘—”– ƒ† Ž‹– ”‹˜‡Ǣ ƒ–—”ƒŽ –”ƒ‹Ž• †‡†‹ ƒ–‡†ˆ‘”’—„Ž‹ —•‡™‹–Š‹–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–•‹–‡–‘’”‘˜‹†‡ƒ ‡••–‘‘’‡•’ƒ ‡Ǥ x Ǧ•–”‡‡–’ƒ”‹‰‰‡‡”ƒŽŽ›Ž‘ ƒ–‡†ƒ• †‡’‹ –‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ŽƒǤ  Ž—†‹‰’ƒ”‹‰ƒ––Š‡‡†‘ˆ‡‡‡‘—”––Šƒ–™‹ŽŽ„‡ƒ‹–ƒ‹‡†„›–Š‡‹–›Ǥ x ‡ƒ”Ž‘ƒ†‡†’ƒ”‹‰„‡Š‹†–‘™Š‘—•‡• ‘•–”— –‡†‘ Ž‹–”‹˜‡Ǥ x ‘‘Ǧ•‹–‡’ƒ”‹‰ˆ‘”–Š‡–™‘ȋʹȌ ƒ––Š‡‡†‘ˆ‡‡‡‘—”–ǤŽŽ’ƒ”‹‰™‹ŽŽ„‡ ’”‘˜‹†‡†‘–Š‡•–”‡‡–ƒ†ƒ‹–ƒ‹‡†„›–Š‡‹–›Ǥ x –‡ƒ”†”‘’Žƒ›‘—–‘ˆ‡‡‡‘—”–Ǥ x  ’”‡Ž‹‹ƒ”› Žƒ†• ƒ’‡ ’Žƒ ȋ™‹–Š‹ –Š‡ —’’Ž‡‡–ƒŽ ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘ ƒ ‡– †ƒ–‡† ƒ›ͳǡʹͲʹͲȌ™‹–Š• ”‡‡‹‰–‘–Š‡‡ƒ•–ƒ†™‡•–‘ˆ–Š‡•‹–‡ƒ†‰‡‡”ƒŽŽ‘ ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ •–”‡‡––”‡‡•Ǥ x ‘’Šƒ•‹‰ǤŠ‡‹•’”‘’‘•‡†–‘„‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡†ƒŽŽƒ–‘ ‡Ǥ ‘†‡˜‡Ž‘’–Š‡ƒ•’”‘’‘•‡†ǡ‡Ž‘––ƒ–‹‘ǡ‹•”‡“—‡•–‹‰ƒ™ƒ‹˜‡”ˆ”‘‡ –‹‘ ͵ͶǦͳͳʹͲȋ„Ȍ ‘ˆ –Š‡ ‹–› ‘†‡ ȋ”‹–‹ ƒŽ Ž‘’‡ ”†‹ƒ ‡ȌǤ ’”‘˜‡‡–• •’‡ ‹ˆ‹  –‘ ƒ”‡ƒ• ™Š‡”‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡•™‘—Ž†„‡‹’ƒ –‡†•Š‘—Ž†–Š‡™ƒ‹˜‡”„‡ƒ’’”‘˜‡†‹ Ž—†‡’‘”–‹‘•‘ˆ Ž‘–•ͳͷǤͳ͸ǡͳͻ–Š”‘—‰Šʹ͹ǡŽ‘–•ƒ†ǡ‘’‡•’ƒ ‡ǡƒ†’ƒ”‹‰‘ Ž‹–”‹˜‡Ǥ š‹•–‹‰ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡•ƒ”‡ƒ•Ž‘ ƒ–‡†‘–Š‹•”‘’‡”–›‹ Ž—†‡ʹǤ͸ͷƒ ”‡•‘”ʹ͹’‡” ‡–‘ˆ–Š‡•‹–‡ǤŠ‡ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ„Ž‡†‡ˆ‹‹–‹‘‘ˆDz ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡dz‹•ƒ•ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™•ǣ › •Ž‘’‡ ™Š‘•‡ ‰”ƒ†‡ ‹• ʹͷΨ ‘” ‰”‡ƒ–‡”ǡ and ȋƒȌ ƒ ’‘”–‹‘ ‘ˆ –Š‡ •Ž‘’‡ Šƒ• ƒ Š‘”‹œ‘–ƒŽ”—‘ˆ‰”‡ƒ–‡”–ŠƒʹͲˆ‡‡–ǡƒ†‹–•–‘–ƒŽƒ”‡ƒ‹•͸ǡͲͲͲ ‘”‰”‡ƒ–‡”ǡand ȋ„Ȍ ƒ ’‘”–‹‘ ‘ˆ –Š‡ •Ž‘’‡ ‹• ™‹–Š‹ ʹͲͲ ˆ‡‡– ‘ˆ ƒ ™ƒ–‡”™ƒ›Ǥ See ‹–› ‘†‡ ‡ Ǥ ͵ͶǦ ͳͳʹͲȋ„ȌȋʹȌǤ ƒ††‹–‹‘ǡ‡Ž‘––ƒ–‹‘ǡ‹•”‡“—‡•–‹‰‹–›‘— ‹Ž˜ƒ ƒ–‡–Š‡ˆ‘” Ž‹–”‹˜‡ ƒ† ‡‡‡ ‘—”–Ǥ Š‹• ˜ƒ ƒ–‹‘ ‹• ”‡“—‡•–‡† –‘ ˆƒ ‹Ž‹–ƒ–‡ –Š‡ ”‡’Žƒ–‹‰ ‘ˆ Ž‹– ”‹˜‡ ƒ† ‡‡‡ ‘—”– –‘ ƒ– Š –Š‡ Žƒ›‘—– ™‹–Š‹ –Š‡  ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ŽƒǤ Š‡ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ˆ‘” ˜ƒ ƒ–‹‰–Š‡ ƒ„‡ˆ‘—†ƒ•ƒ––ƒ Š‡–Ǥ †‡”–Š‡‡™’”‘ ‡†—”‡ˆ‘” ‘•‹†‡”ƒ–‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ˆ‘” •–”‡‡– ‘” ƒŽŽ‡› Ž‘•‹‰•ǡ •–ƒˆˆ ”‡˜‹‡™‡† –Š‡ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ƒ• ’ƒ”– ‘ˆ –Š‡ ”‡œ‘‹‰’”‘ ‡••ƒ†’”‘ˆˆ‡”‡††‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–„ƒ•‡†‘–Š‡ǦͳǤͷ’‘‹–•‘–Š‡• ‘”‹‰”—„”‹  ƒ†‘—–Ž‹‡†‹–Š‡’‘Ž‹ ›ƒ”–ȋ‡ȌȋͶȌȋƒȌǤ ††‹–‹‘ƒŽƒƒŽ›•‹•„ƒ•‡†‘ƒ”–ȋŠ”‡‡ȌȋȌǣ i. Willvacating the streetor alley impede any person’s accessto his property, or otherwise cause irreparable damage to the owner of any lot shown on the original subdivision plat? –ƒˆˆˆ‹†•–Šƒ–ƒ ‡••™‹ŽŽ‘–„‡‹’ƒ –‡†ƒ•–Š‡‡™ •–”‡‡–•™‹ŽŽ„‡’Žƒ–‡†‹–Š‡‰‡‡”ƒŽŽ‘ ƒ–‹‘ƒ•–Š‡‡š‹•–‹‰’ƒ’‡”•–”‡‡–•Ǥ ii. Are there any public utilities currently located in the area proposed to be vacated? If so, is the applicant offering to allow the City to reserve a public utility easement? ‘—–‹Ž‹–‹‡•ƒ”‡ —””‡–Ž›‹–Š‡‡š‹•–‹‰’ƒ’‡”•–”‡‡–•Ǥ iii. Will vacation of the street or alley result in an adverse impact on traffic on nearby public streets, or result in undesirable circulation conditions for vehicular movements in and through the subdivision? –ƒˆˆˆ‹†•˜ƒ ƒ–‹‰ƒ† ”‡’Žƒ–‹‰–Š‡•–”‡‡–•‹–Š‡‰‡‡”ƒŽŽ‘ ƒ–‹‘™‹ŽŽŠƒ˜‡‘ƒ†˜‡”•‡‹’ƒ –•Ǥ  Page 119 of 255 Discussion: Š‡ Žƒ‹‰‘‹••‹‘ Š‡Ž†ƒ ˜‹”–—ƒŽŒ‘‹– —„Ž‹  ‡ƒ”‹‰™‹–Š‹–›‘— ‹Ž ‘ —‡ ͻǡ ʹͲʹͲ ‘ –Š‹• ƒ––‡”Ǥ —”‹‰ –Š‡ †‹• —••‹‘ǡ Žƒ‹‰ ‘‹••‹‘ ‰ƒ˜‡ ƒ ˆƒ˜‘”ƒ„Ž‡ ‹’”‡••‹‘‘ˆ–Š‡’”‘’‘•‡††‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ƒ•ƒ™Š‘Ž‡™‹–Š•’‡ ‹ˆ‹ •—’’‘”–‘ˆ–Š‡ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡ Š‘—•‹‰ ’”‘ˆˆ‡”Ǥ Š‡› ƒŽ•‘ ”ƒ‹•‡† ‘ ‡”• ™‹–Š ƒ•’‡ –• ‘ˆ –Š‡ ’”‘’‘•‡† †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Ǥ Š‡•‡ ‘ ‡”•”‡Žƒ–‡†–‘ǣ x  ƒ†” Š‹–‡ –—”ƒŽ‡˜‹‡™‘ƒ”†ˆ‘”–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡––Šƒ– ‘—Ž†‹’ƒ ––Š‡ ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡—‹–•Ǥ x Š‡’‡’ƒ ‡‹•‘–—•ƒ„Ž‡ˆ‘”ƒ –‹˜‡”‡ ”‡ƒ–‹‘ƒ†–Š‡ ‡–‡”‘ˆ‡‡‡‘—”–™‹ŽŽ „‡ƒ•–‘”™ƒ–‡”†‡–‡–‹‘ˆƒ ‹Ž‹–›Ǥ x Š›–Š‡ƒŒ‘”‹–›‘ˆ–Š‡’‡’ƒ ‡™ƒ•‘Ž‘‰‡”„‡‹‰’”‘ˆˆ‡”‡†ƒ•ƒ‹–›ƒ”ȋ–Š‹• ™ƒ•ƒ’”‘ˆˆ‡”ˆ”‘–Š‡ʹͲͳͻƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ȌǤ x Š‡ ƒ–—”‡ ‘ˆ –Š‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ Ž‘’‡ ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ ’”‘ ‡•• ƒ• ‹– ”‡Žƒ–‡• –‘ †‡–ƒ‹Ž‡† ‡‰‹‡‡”‹‰Ǥ Š‡”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘‹•”‡“—‹”‡†–‘„‡Š‡ƒ”†ƒ––Š‡•ƒ‡–‹‡ ƒ•–Š‡”‡œ‘‹‰”‡“—‡•–ƒ†–Šƒ–’”‘ ‡••†‘‡•‘–ƒŽŽ‘™ˆ‘”‘”‡†‡–ƒ‹Ž‡†‡‰‹‡‡”‹‰ †‘ —‡–•–‘„‡ ”‡ƒ–‡†Ǥ Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: ˆ ‹–› ‘— ‹Ž ƒ’’”‘˜‡• –Š‡ ”‡œ‘‹‰ ”‡“—‡•–ǡ –Š‡ ’”‘Œ‡ – ‘—Ž† ‘–”‹„—–‡ –‘ Goal 3: A Beautiful and Sustainable Natural and Built Environment, 3.1 Engage in robust and context sensitive urban planning and implementation, ƒ†–Š‡‹–›‘— ‹Ž‹•‹‘‘ˆQuality Housing Opportunities for All. Community Engagement:  ƒ—ƒ”›ʹʹǡʹͲʹͲ–Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–Š‡Ž†ƒ ‘—‹–›‡‡–‹‰ƒ–Š‡””›˜‡—‡Š”‹•–‹ƒ Š—” Šƒ•’ƒ”–‘ˆ–Š‡ ‘–ŠŽ›‡‡–‹‰Ǥ Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‰ƒ˜‡ƒ‘˜‡”˜‹‡™‘ˆ–Š‡’”‘Œ‡ – ƒ•‹–”‡Žƒ–‡†–‘–Š‡‡‡†ˆ‘”ƒ”‡œ‘‹‰Ǥ Š‡‡‡–‹‰™ƒ•™‡ŽŽƒ––‡†‡†ǡ„—–ƒƒŒ‘”‹–›†‹† ‘– ‘‡–‘–Š‡’”‘Œ‡ –Ǥ‡Ž‘™ƒ”‡–Š‡ ‘ ‡”•–Šƒ–™‡”‡”ƒ‹•‡†ǣ x Š‡†‡•‹–›‹•–‘‘Š‹‰ŠǤ Š‡‹–›†‘‡•‘–Šƒ˜‡–Š‡‹ˆ”ƒ•–”— –—”‡–‘•—’’‘”–‘”‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ȋ”‘ƒ†•ǡ•‹†‡™ƒŽ•ǥȌ x ”ƒˆˆ‹ ™‹ŽŽ„‡ƒ’”‘„Ž‡Ǥ x ƒ”‹‰™‹ŽŽ„‡ƒ’”‘„Ž‡ƒ†™‹ŽŽ‹’ƒ ––Š‡•—””‘—†‹‰‡‹‰Š„‘”Š‘‘†Ǥ x Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– ‘—Ž† Šƒ‰‡–Š‡ Šƒ”ƒ –‡”‘ˆ–Š‡‡‹‰Š„‘”Š‘‘†Ǥ x Š‡—„‡”‘ˆ—‹–•ƒ†–›’‡‘ˆ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‹–Š‹•ƒ”‡ƒ‹•‘–ƒ’’”‘’”‹ƒ–‡Ǥ Š‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–•Š‘—Ž†‹ Ž—†‡ƒ‹š‘ˆ•‹‰Ž‡ˆƒ‹Ž›Š‘‡•ǡ†—’Ž‡š‡•ƒ†–‘™Š‘—•‡•Ǥ x ‘ ‡”‡†ƒ„‘—– ‘•–”— –‹‘‘‹•‡ƒ†‡˜‹”‘‡–ƒŽ†ƒƒ‰‡Ǥ  —‡ ͻǡ ʹͲʹͲ –Š‡ Žƒ‹‰ ‘‹••‹‘ Š‡Ž† ƒ ˜‹”–—ƒŽ Œ‘‹– —„Ž‹  ‡ƒ”‹‰ ™‹–Š ‹–› ‘— ‹ŽǤ–‡ȋͳͲȌ‡„‡”•‘ˆ–Š‡’—„Ž‹ •’‘‡ƒ†‡š’”‡••‡†–Š‡ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰ǣ x —’’‘”–ˆ‘”–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ƒ•‹–™‹ŽŽ ”‡ƒ–‡ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡—‹–•ˆ‘”ƒŽ‘‰’‡”‹‘†‘ˆ–‹‡Ǥ x —’’‘”–ˆ‘”–Š‡ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡ƒ•’‡ –ƒ––Š‡ʹͷΨƒ†͸ͲΨ Ǥ x Š‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– •Š‘—Ž† Šƒ˜‡ ‘”‡ —‹–• ™‹–Š ƒ Š‹‰Š‡” †‡•‹–› –‘ ”‡ƒ–‡ ‘”‡ ƒˆˆ‘”†ƒ„Ž‡—‹–•Ǥ  Page 120 of 255 x —’’‘”–•ˆ‘”–Š‡’ƒ”–‡”•Š‹’™‹–Š ƒ„‹–ƒ–ˆ‘” —ƒ‹–›ƒ•ƒ’ƒ–Š–‘Š‘‡‘™‡”•Š‹’ ™‹–Š‹–Š‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Ǥ x ”ƒˆˆ‹  ƒ† ’ƒ”‹‰ ™‹ŽŽ „‡ ƒ ’”‘„Ž‡ ƒ† –Š‡ †‡˜‡Ž‘’‡– •Š‘—Ž† ‘– „‡ ƒ– –Š‹• †‡•‹–›Ǥ –ƒˆˆ”‡ ‡‹˜‡†ƒ—„‡”‘ˆ‡ƒ‹Ž•”‡‰ƒ”†‹‰–Š‹•’”‘Œ‡ –ƒ†–Š‡›Šƒ˜‡„‡‡ˆ‘”™ƒ”†‡†–‘ Žƒ‹‰‘‹••‹‘ƒ†‹–›‘— ‹ŽǤ Budgetary Impact: Š‹•Šƒ•‘‹’ƒ –‘–Š‡ ‡‡”ƒŽ —†Ǥ Recommendations: Š‡Žƒ‹‰‘‹••‹‘–‘‘–Š‡ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰ƒ –‹‘ǣ ”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ȋʹͲǦͲͲͲͺȌ ”Ǥ‘ŽŽƒǦƒ–‡•‘˜‡†–‘ ”‡ ‘‡†ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡™ƒ‹˜‡”ˆ‘”ƒšƒ’ƒ† ƒ” ‡Ž ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͳͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵Ͳͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹͻͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹͺͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹ͹Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻʹ͸Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵͹Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͺͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͷͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ͶͲǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵͵Ͳǡ ʹͲͲʹͷͻ͵ʹͲǡ ƒ† ʹͲͲͳͻ͸ͲͲͲǡƒ•”‡“—‡•–‡†ǡ™‹–Š–Š‡ˆ‘ŽŽ‘™‹‰ ‘†‹–‹‘•ǣ ͳǤDzŠ‡ ’’Ž‹ ƒ– •ŠƒŽŽ †‡•‹‰  ‡ƒ•—”‡• –‘ ’”‘˜‹†‡ ƒ• — Š ™ƒ–‡” “—ƒŽ‹–› –”‡ƒ–‡–‘•‹–‡ƒ•–Š‡’’Ž‹ ƒ–†‡‡•’”ƒ –‹ ƒŽ‰‹˜‡–Š‡ ‘•–”ƒ‹–•‘ˆ–Š‡•‹–‡ǡ ™‹–Šƒ‹‹—‘ˆ͹ͷΨ‘ˆ–Š‡”‡“—‹”‡†–”‡ƒ–‡–‘ —””‹‰‘•‹–‡Ǥdz ʹǤDzŠ‡ ’’Ž‹ ƒ– •ŠƒŽŽ ’”‘˜‹†‡ Šƒ‹ Ž‹ •—’’‘”–‡† •‹Ž– ˆ‡ ‡ ƒ„‘˜‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ •Ž‘’‡ ƒ”‡ƒ•ˆ‘”‡Šƒ ‡†’”‘–‡ –‹‘‘ˆ•Ž‘’‡•†—”‹‰ ‘•–”— –‹‘Ǥdz ͵ǤDz –Š‡‘•‹–‡„‹‘ˆ‹Ž–‡”–Š‡’’Ž‹ ƒ–•ŠƒŽŽ’”‘˜‹†‡ƒƒ††‹–‹‘ƒŽ‘‡ˆ‘‘–†‡’–Š‘ˆ ‰”ƒ˜‡Ž•—’ƒ ”‘••–Š‡„‘––‘‘ˆ–Š‡„‹‘ˆ‹Ž–‡”ǡƒ„‘˜‡ƒ†„‡›‘†™Šƒ–‹•”‡“—‹”‡†‹ •–ƒ†ƒ”††‡•‹‰ǡ–‘’”‘˜‹†‡–Š‡‘’’‘”–—‹–›ˆ‘”ƒ††‹–‹‘ƒŽ•–‘”™ƒ–‡”•–‘”ƒ‰‡ƒ† ’‘–‡–‹ƒŽˆ‘”ƒ††‹–‹‘ƒŽ‹ˆ‹Ž–”ƒ–‹‘ƒ†‰”‘—†™ƒ–‡””‡ Šƒ”‰‡Ǥdz •Ǥ ”‡‡•‡ ‘†‡†–Š‡‘–‹‘ •Ǥ‘™‡ŽŽǡ‡• ”ǤƒŠ‡†”‘ǡ‡• ”Ǥ‘ŽŽƒǦƒ–‡•ǡ‡• ”Ǥ–‘Žœ‡„‡”‰ǡ‡• ”Ǥ ‡ƒ–‘ǡ‡• ”Ǥ‹– Š‡ŽŽǡ‡• •Ǥ ”‡‡ǡ‡• Š‡‘–‹‘’ƒ••‡†͹Ǧ Ͳ–‘”‡ ‘‡†ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ•Ž‘’‡™ƒ‹˜‡”ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘–‘ ‹–›‘— ‹ŽǤ ‡œ‘‹‰’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ȋǦʹͲǦͲͲͲͲͳȌ  Page 121 of 255 ”Ǥ ‘ŽŽƒǦƒ–‡• ‘˜‡† –‘ ”‡ ‘‡† –Šƒ– ‹–› ‘— ‹Ž •Š‘—Ž† ƒ’’”‘˜‡ ʹͲǦͲͲͲͲͳǡ ‹ Ž—†‹‰ –Š‡ ”‹–‹ ƒŽ •Ž‘’‡ ™ƒ‹˜‡” ”‡“—‡•–‡† ‹ ʹͲǦͲͲͲͳͳǡ ‘ –Š‡ „ƒ•‹• –Šƒ– –Š‡ •–”‡‡–• ’”‘’‘•‡†™‹–Š‹–Š‡‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–ƒ”‡Žƒ‹†‘—–‹ƒƒ‡”•—„•–ƒ–‹ƒŽŽ›‹ƒ ‘”†™‹–Š –Š‡‘’”‡Š‡•‹˜‡Žƒǡƒ†ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡’”‘’‘•‡†‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–‹• ‘•‹•–‡–™‹–Š –Š‡‘’”‡Š‡•‹˜‡Žƒƒ†™‹ŽŽ•‡”˜‡–Š‡’—„Ž‹ ‡ ‡••‹–›ǡ ‘˜‡‹‡ ‡ǡ‰‡‡”ƒŽ™‡Žˆƒ”‡ ƒ†‰‘‘†œ‘‹‰’”ƒ –‹ ‡Ǥ •Ǥ‘™‡ŽŽ•‡ ‘†‡†–Š‡‘–‹‘ •Ǥ‘™‡ŽŽǡ‡• ”ǤƒŠ‡†”‘ǡ‡• ”Ǥ‘ŽŽƒǦƒ–‡•ǡ‡• ”Ǥ–‘Žœ‡„‡”‰ǡ‡• ”Ǥ ‡ƒ–‘ǡ‡• ”Ǥ‹– Š‡ŽŽǡ‡• •Ǥ ”‡‡ǡ‡• Š‡‘–‹‘’ƒ••‡†͹Ǧ Ͳ–‘”‡ ‘‡†ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ‘ˆ–Š‡”‡œ‘‹‰ƒ’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘–‘‹–›‘— ‹ŽǤ Alternativesǣ ‹–› ‘— ‹Ž Šƒ• •‡˜‡”ƒŽ ƒŽ–‡”ƒ–‹˜‡• ƒˆ–‡” Š‘Ž†‹‰ ƒ —„Ž‹  ‡ƒ”‹‰ ˆ‘” –Š‡ ”‘ƒ† Ž‘•—”‡ ”‡“—‡•–ǣ ȋͳȌ„›‘–‹‘•ǡ’”‘˜‹†‡ƒ’’”‘˜ƒŽ•ƒ•‘—–Ž‹‡†‹–Š‡ƒ––ƒ Š‡†”‘ ‡†—”ƒŽ‡‘ˆ”‘–Š‡‹–› ––‘”‡›ǯ•ˆˆ‹ ‡Ǣ ȋʹȌ „› ‘–‹‘ǡ –ƒ‡ ƒ –‹‘ –‘ †‡› –Š‡ ƒ––ƒ Š‡† ‘”†‹ƒ ‡ ‰”ƒ–‹‰ –Š‡ ‡œ‘‹‰ǡ –”‡‡– ƒ ƒ–‹‘ƒ†”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡ƒ‹˜‡”Ǣ ȋ͵Ȍ„›‘–‹‘ǡ”‡“—‡•– Šƒ‰‡•–‘–Š‡ƒ––ƒ Š‡†‘”†‹ƒ ‡•ǡƒ†–Š‡ƒ’’”‘˜‡–Š‡‡œ‘‹‰ –”‡‡–ƒ ƒ–‹‘ǡƒ†”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡ƒ‹˜‡”Ǣ‘” ȋͶȌ„›‘–‹‘ǡ†‡ˆ‡”ƒ –‹‘‘–Š‡‡œ‘‹‰ǡ–”‡‡–ƒ ƒ–‹‘ǡƒ†”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡ƒ‹˜‡”Ǥ Attachmentsǣ Ǥ ‡œ‘‹‰”†‹ƒ ‡ Ǥ–”‡‡–Ž‘•‹‰‡•‘Ž—–‹‘ Ǥ”‹–‹ ƒŽŽ‘’‡ƒ‹˜‡”‡•‘Ž—–‹‘ Ǥ –”‡‡–Ž‘•—”‡’’Ž‹ ƒ–‹‘ƒ† ‘”‹‰—„”‹ ȋʹͲǦͲͲͳͳȌ Ǥ ‡˜‡Ž‘’‡–Žƒƒ–‡†ƒ›ͳǡʹͲʹͲƒ†—’’Ž‡‡–ƒŽƒ–‡”‹ƒŽ•ƒ–‡†ƒ›ͳǡʹͲʹͲ Ǥ‹‰‡†”‘ˆˆ‡”–ƒ–‡‡–ƒ–‡† —‡ʹ͸ǡʹͲʹͲ ‹ –‘ –Š‡ –ƒˆˆ ‡’‘”–ȋ•Ȍ ƒ† „ƒ ‰”‘—† ‹ˆ‘”ƒ–‹‘ ˆ”‘ –Š‡ —‡ ͻǡ ʹͲʹͲ Žƒ‹‰ ‘‹••‹‘‡‡–‹‰•ǣKWWSVZZZFKDUORWWHVYLOOHJRY$JHQGDV0LQXWHV  Page 122 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW$ =0 25',1$1&( 72$0(1'$1'5((1$&77+(=21,1*0$3)257+(&,7<2)&+$5/277(69,//( 725(&/$66,)<&(57$,13523(57<)52056723/$11('81,7'(9(/230(17 ³)/,17+,//38'´  :+(5($6%HOPRQW6WDWLRQ//& ³/DQGRZQHU´ E\LWVPHPEHU&KDUOLH$UPVWURQJKDV UH]RQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQ=0 ³$SSOLFDWLRQ´ VHHNLQJDFKDQJHLQWKH]RQLQJGLVWULFWFODVVLILFDWLRQ IRUFHUWDLQODQGLGHQWLILHGRQWKH&LW\RI&KDUORWWHVYLOOH¶V7D[0DSDV3DUFHOV  DQGDSRUWLRQRI3DUFHOKDYLQJIURQWDJHRQWKH XQLPSURYHGSRUWLRQVRI)OLQW'ULYHDQG.HHQH&RXUWDQGKDYLQJLQWKHDJJUHJDWHDQDUHDRI DSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVVTXDUHIHHW FROOHFWLYHO\WKHYDULRXVSDUFHOVRIODQGDUHUHIHUUHGWR KHUHLQDVWKH³6XEMHFW3URSHUW\´ ZLWKVXFKUH]RQLQJWREHVXEMHFWWRFHUWDLQSURIIHUHGGHYHORSPHQW FRQGLWLRQVGDWHG -XQH ³3URIIHUV´ DQGVXEPLWWHGDVSDUWRIWKH$SSOLFDWLRQDQG :+(5($6WKHSXUSRVHRIWKHUH]RQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQLVWRDOORZDVSHFLILFGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFW LGHQWLILHGZLWKLQDZULWWHQ38''HYHORSPHQW3ODQGDWHG0D\WKH3URIIHUVDQGVXSSOHPHQWDO DSSOLFDWLRQPDWHULDOVGDWHG0D\GHVFULELQJGHWDLOVRIDSODQQHGUHVLGHQWLDOGHYHORSPHQWQDPHG ³)OLQW+LOO38'´²WKLVGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWZLOOSURYLGHWRZQKRXVHGZHOOLQJDQGPXOWLIDPLO\XQLWVZLWK DFFHVVRU\GZHOOLQJXQLWVDOORZHGXSWRDWRWDORIQRWPRUHWKDQGZHOOLQJXQLWVZLWKLQWKH38'LQWKH DJJUHJDWH²RIERWKVLQJOHIDPLO\DWWDFKHG 6$) DQGQHLJKERUKRRGVFDOHFRQGRPLQLXPKRXVLQJW\SHV 0)' $PRQJWKRVHKRXVLQJW\SHVZLOOEHVHYHUDOVXEW\SHVRIYDULRXVVTXDUHIRRWDJHVZLGWKVVW\OHV DQGSULFHSRLQWVUHDUDOOH\ORDGHGJDUDJHWRZQKRPHVDQGSURIIHUHG$'8VWRJXDUDQWHHDIIRUGDELOLW\DQG YDULHW\DFUHVRIRSHQVSDFHHIIHFWLYHO\SUHVHUYLQJVL[W\SHUFHQW  RIH[LVWLQJWUHHVVWUHDPVDQG VHQVLWLYHWRSRJUDSK\ZLWKLQWKH38'LQFOXGLQJSUHVHUYDWLRQRIZHWODQGVDQGVWUHDPEXIIHUDUHDVDORQJ 0RRUH¶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³3URMHFW´ DQG :+(5($6DMRLQWSXEOLFKHDULQJRQWKHSURSRVHGUH]RQLQJRIWKH6XEMHFW3URSHUW\ZDVKHOG EHIRUHWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQDQG&LW\&RXQFLORQ-XQHIROORZLQJQRWLFHWRWKHSXEOLFDQGWR DGMDFHQWSURSHUW\RZQHUVDVUHTXLUHGE\ODZDQG :+(5($6RQ-XQHIROORZLQJWKHMRLQWSXEOLFKHDULQJWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQYRWHG WRUHFRPPHQGWKDW&LW\&RXQFLOVKRXOGDSSURYHWKHSURSRVHGUH]RQLQJIRUWKH3URMHFWDQG :+(5($6&LW\&RXQFLOKDVFRQVLGHUHGWKHGHWDLOVRIWKHVSHFLILF3URMHFWUHSUHVHQWHGZLWKLQ WKH/DQGRZQHU¶VYDULRXVDSSOLFDWLRQPDWHULDOVWKH6WDII5HSRUWVUHODWLQJWRWKHDSSOLFDWLRQPDWHULDOV FRPPHQWVUHFHLYHGIURPWKHSXEOLFDQGWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ¶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age 123 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW$ =0 6HFWLRQRIWKH=RQLQJ2UGLQDQFHRIWKH&RGHRIWKH&LW\RI&KDUORWWHVYLOOHDVDPHQGHGVKDOO EHDQGKHUHE\LVDPHQGHGDQGUHHQDFWHGDVIROORZV 6HFWLRQ=RQLQJ'LVWULFW0DS5H]RQLQJIURP56WR38'ODQGLGHQWLILHGRQWKH&LW\ RI &KDUORWWHVYLOOH¶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¶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¶V GHVLJQHHWRDTXDOLILHGKRPHEX\HU ³$IIRUGDEOH'ZHOOLQJ8QLWVRU³$'8V´  E 'XULQJ KRPH FRQVWUXFWLRQ ZLWKLQ WKH 3URMHFW WKH $'8V VKDOO EH SURYLGHG LQFUHPHQWDOO\VXFKWKDWDWOHDVW$'8VKDOOEHXQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQSULRUWRWKHLVVXDQFH RIHYHU\WK&HUWLILFDWHRI2FFXSDQF\ $WWKH/DQGRZQHU¶VRSWLRQLIWKH/DQGRZQHU FRQYH\VWR*UHDWHU&KDUORWWHVYLOOH+DELWDWIRU+XPDQLW\ ³+DELWDW´ E\UHFRUGHGGHHG DQ\ORW V ZLWKLQWKH6XEMHFW3URSHUW\WKHQ L WKHFRQYH\HGORW V VKDOOEHGHHPHG$'8VWKDWDUH³XQGHUFRQVWUXFWLRQ´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¶V]RQLQJDGPLQLVWUDWRUXSRQUHTXHVW %(,7)857+(525'$,1('7+$7LQWKHHYHQWWKHOD\RXWRIWKHVWUHHWVZLWKLQWKH)OLQW+LOO 38'LQFOXGLQJZLWKRXWOLPLWDWLRQWKH³WHDUGURS´GHVLJQRI.HHQH&RXUW DVGHSLFWHGZLWKLQWKH FRQFHSW SODQ FRPSRQHQW RI WKH )OLQW +LOO 38' 'HYHORSPHQW 3ODQ  FDQQRW EH GHVLJQHG DQG FRQVWUXFWHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKSURYLVLRQVRIDSSOLFDEOH&LW\RUGLQDQFHVDQGWKH&LW\¶V6WDQGDUGV DQG'HVLJQ0DQXDOWKHQWKH/DQGRZQHUVKDOOEHUHTXLUHGWRREWDLQ&LW\&RXQFLO¶VDSSURYDORIDQ 3DJHRI Page 124 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW$ =0 DPHQGHG 38' 'HYHORSPHQW 3ODQ VKRZLQJ D GLIIHUHQW VWUHHW OD\RXW SULRU WR REWDLQLQJ DQ\ SUHOLPLQDU\RUILQDOVLWHSODQRUVXEGLYLVLRQDSSURYDOIRUWKH3URMHFW 3DJHRI Page 125 of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³6XEMHFW5LJKWVRI:D\´ DQG :+(5($6IROORZLQJQRWLFHWRWKHSXEOLFSXUVXDQWWR9LUJLQLD&RGH†DSXEOLF KHDULQJE\WKH&LW\&RXQFLOZDVKHOGRQ-XO\DQG :+(5($6 WKLV &RXQFLO ILQGV DQG GHWHUPLQHV WKDW $SSOLFDWLRQ 3 VKRXOG EH FRQGLWLRQDOO\JUDQWHGLQRUGHUWRDOORZIRUGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHSURSRVHG)OLQW+LOO38' 12:7+(5()25(%(,725'$,1('E\WKH&RXQFLORIWKH&LW\RI&KDUORWWHVYLOOH 9LUJLQLDWKDWWKH&LW\KHUHE\DXWKRUL]HVWKHYDFDWLRQRIWKHIROORZLQJSRUWLRQVRI)OLQW'ULYHDQG .HHQH&RXUWGHVFULEHGWRZLW  7KH SRUWLRQ RI )OLQW 'ULYH KDYLQJ IURQWDJH DORQJ WKH ODQG UHIHUHQFHG DV &LW\ WD[ SDUFHO LGHQWLILFDWLRQQXPEHUVDQGDQG  .HHQH&RXUWIURPLWVLQWHUVHFWLRQZLWK0RVHOH\'ULYHWRLWVWHUPLQXVDWWKHFXOGHVDFWKDW FXUUHQWO\ IRUPV WKH IURQWDJH RI ODQG UHIHUHQFHG DV &LW\ WD[ SDUFHO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ QXPEHUV DQG 3529,'(' +2:(9(5 WKDW WKH YDFDWLRQ RI WKH 6XEMHFW 5LJKWVRI:D\ LV KHUHE\ H[SUHVVO\ FRQGLWLRQHG XSRQ DSSURYDO RI WKH )OLQW +LOO 3ODQQHG 8QLW 'HYHORSPHQW ³38'´  DV SURSRVHGZLWKLQUH]RQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQ=0DQGXSRQFRPPHQFHPHQWRIGHYHORSPHQWRI WKH)OLQW+LOO38'DVHYLGHQFHGE\LVVXDQFHRIDEXLOGLQJSHUPLWIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQRIUHVLGHQWLDO GZHOOLQJVZLWKLQWKHGHYHORSPHQWZLWKLQWKLUW\VL[  PRQWKVIURPWKHGDWHWKLV2UGLQDQFHLV DSSURYHGE\&LW\&RXQFLO7KHODQGRZQHU¶VIDLOXUHWRFRPPHQFHGHYHORSPHQWRIWKH)OLQW+LOO 38'ZLWKLQWKLVVSHFLILHGSHULRGRIWLPHVKDOOUHQGHUYDFDWLRQRIWKH6XEMHFW5LJKWVRI:D\DW WKHRSWLRQRI&LW\&RXQFLOYRLG  Page 126 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW& 3 5(62/87,21 *5$17,1* $&5,7,&$/ 6/23( :$,9(5 )25 $ '(9(/230(17 352-(&7 '(6&5,%(' ,1 5(=21,1* $33/,&$7,21 =0  ³)/,17 +,// 3/$11(' 81,7 '(9(/230(17´  :+(5($6%HOPRQW6WDWLRQ//& ³/DQGRZQHU´ E\LWVPHPEHU&KDUOLH$UPVWURQJ KDVILOHGWKUHHUHODWHGDSSOLFDWLRQV ³$SSOLFDWLRQV´ RQHVHHNLQJDUH]RQLQJ $SSOLFDWLRQ=0  LQRUGHUWRFKDQJHWKH]RQLQJGLVWULFWFODVVLILFDWLRQIRUSURSHUW\LGHQWLILHGRQWKH&LW\RI &KDUORWWHVYLOOH¶V7D[0DSDV3DUFHOV  DQGDSRUWLRQRI3DUFHO FROOHFWLYHO\WKHYDULRXVSDUFHOVDUHUHIHUUHGWR KHUHLQDVWKH³6XEMHFW3URSHUW\´ WKHVHFRQGDUHTXHVWIRUDFULWLFDOVORSHZDLYHU $SSOLFDWLRQ 3 WRDOORZIRUWKHVSHFLILFGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWGHVFULEHGLQWKHUH]RQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQ ³3URMHFW´ DQGWKHWKLUG $SSOLFDWLRQ3 WRUHTXHVWYDFDWLRQRI.HHQH&RXUWDQG)OLQW 'ULYHWRDFFRPPRGDWHWKH3URMHFWDQG :+(5($6WKHSXUSRVHRIWKHUH]RQLQJDSSOLFDWLRQLVWRDOORZFRQVWUXFWLRQRIDVSHFLILF SODQQHGUHVLGHQWLDOGHYHORSPHQWZLWKLQWKH6XEMHFW3URSHUW\GHVFULEHGDQGUHIHUUHGWRZLWKLQDQ 2UGLQDQFHRI&LW\&RXQFLODSSURYLQJ$SSOLFDWLRQ=0DQGWKLVVSHFLILF3URMHFWFDQQRW EHGHYHORSHGZLWKRXW&LW\&RXQFLO¶VDSSURYDORIWKHUHTXHVWHG&ULWLFDO6ORSHV:DLYHUDQG :+(5($6RQ-XQHWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQFRQVLGHUHGWKHUHTXHVWHG&ULWLFDO 6ORSHZDLYHUDQGYRWHGWRUHFRPPHQGWKDWWKH&ULWLFDO6ORSHV:DLYHUEHJUDQWHGDQG :+(5($6 EDVHG RQWKHUHSUHVHQWDWLRQVLQIRUPDWLRQDQGPDWHULDOV LQFOXGHGZLWKLQ WKHPDWHULDOVVXEPLWWHGE\WKH/DQGRZQHUZLWKLWVYDULRXV$SSOLFDWLRQVLQFOXGLQJLWV $SSOLFDWLRQIRUD&ULWLFDO6ORSHV:DLYHUDQGXSRQFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQDQGDQDO\VLV VHWIRUWKZLWKLQWKH6WDII5HSRUW V WKHIDFWRUVVHWIRUWKLQ&LW\&RGH† E WKLV&LW\ &RXQFLOILQGVDQGGHWHUPLQHVSXUVXDQWWR&LW\&RGH6HF E  G L WKDWWKHEHQHILWVRI DOORZLQJGLVWXUEDQFHRIFULWLFDOVORSHVLQFRQQHFWLRQZLWKWKH3URMHFWRXWZHLJKWKHSXEOLF EHQHILWVRIWKHXQGLVWXUEHGVORSHV 12:  7 + ( 5( )2 5 (  %( ,7 5(62/9('E\WKH&RXQFLORIWKH&LW\RI &KDUORWWHVYLOOH7+$7WKHUHTXHVWE\WKH/DQGRZQHUIRUDZDLYHURIWKHFULWLFDOVORSHV UHTXLUHPHQWV $SSOLFDWLRQ3 LV*5$17('IRUDQGLQFRQQHFWLRQZLWKWKHDERYH UHIHUHQFHG3URMHFWVXEMHFWWRWKH/DQGRZQHU¶VFRPSOLDQFHZLWKWKHIROORZLQJFRQGLWLRQVLQ LWVXVHDQGGHYHORSPHQWRIWKH/DQGIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQRIWKH3URMHFW &ULWLFDO6ORSH:DLYHU&RQGLWLRQV  7KH$SSOLFDQWVKDOOGHVLJQ6:0PHDVXUHVWRSURYLGHDVPXFKZDWHUTXDOLW\WUHDWPHQW RQVLWHDVWKH$SSOLFDQWGHHPVSUDFWLFDOJLYHQWKHFRQVWUDLQWVRIWKHVLWHZLWKDPLQLPXP RIRIWKHUHTXLUHGWUHDWPHQWRFFXUULQJRQVLWH 3DJHRI Page 127 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW& 3  7KH$SSOLFDQWVKDOOSURYLGHFKDLQOLQNVXSSRUWHGVLOWIHQFHDERYHFULWLFDOVORSHDUHDVIRU HQKDQFHGSURWHFWLRQRIVORSHVGXULQJFRQVWUXFWLRQ  ,QWKHRQVLWHELRILOWHUWKH$SSOLFDQWVKDOOSURYLGHDQDGGLWLRQDORQHIRRWGHSWKRIJUDYHO VXPSDFURVVWKHERWWRPRIWKHELRILOWHUDERYHDQGEH\RQGZKDWLVUHTXLUHGLQVWDQGDUG GHVLJQWRSURYLGHWKHRSSRUWXQLW\IRUDGGLWLRQDOVWRUPZDWHUVWRUDJHDQGSRWHQWLDOIRU DGGLWLRQDOLQILOWUDWLRQDQGJURXQGZDWHUUHFKDUJH 3DJHRI Page 128 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 129 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 130 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 131 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 132 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 133 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 134 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 135 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 136 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 137 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 138 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 139 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' Page 140 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW' ŝƚLJŽĨŚĂƌůŽƚƚĞƐǀŝůůĞͲ ůůĞLJ͕WĂƉĞƌ^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ĂŶĚZKt^ĐŽƌŝŶŐZƵďƌŝĐ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age 141 of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´ZDWHUPDLQLQ)OLQW'ULYHRIIRI/RQJZRRG'ULYHDQGDQ´ ZDWHUPDLQLQ)OLQW'ULYHRIIRI0RVHOH\'ULYH6DQLWDU\VHZHULVDYDLODEOHYLDDQ´VHZHUOLQHEHKLQGORWVDORQJ/RQJZRRG'ULYH  D  $VWDWHPHQWIURPWKHILUHPDUVKDOYHULI\LQJZKHWKHUDGHTXDWHILUHIORZVHUYLFHGRHVRUGRHVQRWH[LVWIRUWKHSURSRVHGODQG XVH V  7KHILUHIORZWHVWVKDYHEHHQSURYLGHGDQGDSSURYHGE\WKHILUHPDUVKDO Page 142 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 143 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 144 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 145 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 146 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 147 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 148 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 149 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 150 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 151 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 152 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 153 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 154 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 155 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 156 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 157 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 158 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 159 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 160 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( %$&.,1 $1*/( 3$5.,1* 21/< Page 161 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( 3('(675,$1$&&(66)520$=$/($'5,9($1'6855281',1*1(,*+%25+22' 7+(&211(&7,212)026(/(<'5$1'/21*:22''5:,//'(&5($6(7+($02817 2)7,0(7+$70$1<678'(176:,//63(1'21+$55,652$':+,/(:$/.,1*72 -$&.6219,$(/(0(17$5<6&+22/7+(5($5($3352;,0$7(/<+286(67+$7 5(6,'(,17+(6+$'('$5($3529,'('217+,66+((7 7+(&/26(67%866723,6$77+(,17(56(&7,212)/21*:22''5,9($1'+$55,6 52$'&765287(,6$3352;,0$7(/<)7$:$<)5207+,63/$11('81,7 '(9(/230(17 %866723 3('(675,$1 6,'(:$/. Page 162 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 163 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 164 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 165 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 166 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 167 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 168 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW( Page 169 of 255 $WWDFKPHQW) Page 170 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Vote on Resolution Staff Presenters: Timothy Motsch, Transportation Project Manager Staff Contacts: Alex Ikefuna, NDS Director Martin Silman, Public Works Director Tony Edwards, Development Services Manager Timothy Motsch, Transportation Project Title: Emmet Streetscape – Resolution Approving Design Public Hearing Background: The Design Public Hearing for the Emmet Streetscape project was held on Tuesday, December 3 2019 at Walker Upper Elementary School. The meeting was advertised using the following methods: 1) Daily Progress Advertisement – Sunday, November 3 through Saturday November 9, and Sunday November 10 through Tuesday November 19. 2) Direct Mailing - 17 “Current Residents” + 13 “Owners” (Three University of Virginia entities own over 90% of the frontage on the project). 3) Certified Mailing to Impacted Property Owners (as well as Invitation to Meet) 4) Emailed Citywide mailing list as well as Project mailing list 5) UVA Housing and Residence Life emailed affected student population 6) Updated Project Website’s Main Page 7) Installed signage on Project Corridor 8) Variable Message Sign used on Project Corridor for one week before meeting 9) Posted Notices in Neighborhood Development Services’ lobby Fifteen persons attended the hearing. Project plans, detailed displays, environmental documents and other required project materials were available for public review and discussion from 5:00pm until 7:00pm. The Public Hearing was from 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM. The displays are included as electronic links to this memorandum (Attachment E). From 7:00pm until shortly after 7:25pm public speakers shared comments that were captured by a court reporter (Attachment C). Two citizens spoke during the hearing, two provided comment forms and five written comments via e-mail. All public comments received between December 3 and December 31, 2019 have been provided with project team responses (Attachment D). Comments have been addressed by the project team and these responses have been posted to the project website, including the original comment forms that were submitted. Page 171 of 255 Discussion: After an extensive public involvement process, City Council approved a Preferred Conceptual Design for the Emmet Streetscape project on February 4, 2019 and authorized commencement of final design. As a result, the project team has refined the Preferred Conceptual Design in preparation of the Design Public Hearing. The hearing was held to solicit public comment on the major design features (bicycle and pedestrian facilities, roadway configuration, landscaping) as well as anticipated temporary and permanent impacts on adjacent property owners and the completed environmental document. No comments were received regarding the environmental document which is not surprising given the existing built environment and that this project is proposing modifications to the existing streetscape. No additional environment impacts are expected with this project and the project team will be producing construction documents to ensure the contractor follows current requirements for proper environmental compliance and maintains proper site controls (ex. erosion and sediment protections). As for major design features, a review of highlights from the comments collected is provided: 1) The desire for a shared-use path under the railroad on the east side of Emmet Street was noted by meeting participants based on observations of pedestrian traffic and general origins and destinations for users on the east side of the road. Two people provided written comments regarding this concern. Funding for the project limits the project to the construction of only one tunnel under the railroad in keeping with the approved scope of work in the VDOT SmartScale funding application. A detailed study for determining the best location of the shared-use path tunnel was conducted early in the project design including a public input process. As a result of this study, the west side of Emmet Street was determined to be the optimal location of a shared-use path. In addition to unfavorable conditions on the east side of Emmet Street such as the existing hotel site directly on the south side of the railroad, public safety personnel that have served on the Technical Committee for the project expressed significant concerns about public safety for an east side location. 2) The desire for improved safety at the intersections on the project was expressed by participants and are noted in comments. Improvements at the Emmet/Ivy/University intersection was noted to be a key concern with the volume of vehicles and pedestrians that converge at this key intersection. The proposed improvements at the Emmet/Ivy/University intersection includes the installation of new traffic and pedestrian signalization. A pedestrian safety countermeasure that is being employed on the project signals entails the use of leading pedestrian intervals on the signal timing which gives pedestrians the opportunity to enter an intersection 3-7 seconds before vehicles are given a green indication. With this head start, pedestrians can better establish their presence in the crosswalk before vehicles have priority to turn. Ultimately, vehicles turning right are always expected to yield to pedestrians and non-vehicular traffic. 3) Comments were made regarding the benefits that the project will bring for bike safety and how the separation of bike lanes from the vehicular travel lanes will provide that. The project team evaluated suggestions from comments and has implemented design changes to further enhance the safety features of the project design. 4) A concern was expressed regarding erosion of soil during and after the project construction. Runoff from the project is being collected and treated via a modular, underground bioretention system along the project that utilizes the capacity of soils for stormwater management and integrated into the landscaping. An erosion and sediment Page 172 of 255 control plan that meets all current environmental requirements is included the design and will be implemented during construction. The project team appreciates all of the comments offered by the public and has responded to each comment in Attachment D. Several comments complimented the public process, overall project and expressed the feeling that participants were heard during the process. As a result of the comments received, the project team is suggesting the following changes: 1) The location of the bike lanes on western side of Emmet Street have been revised to be adjacent to the shared-use path in order to increase the separation of the raised bike lanes from vehicular travel lanes to provide improved safety for bicyclists on the corridor. The shared-use path and bike lanes will be clearly identified with pavement markings and signs and will be separated by a directional tactile strip that provides a height, texture and color contrast that instantly warn users if they stray from the proper path. 2) Incorporating the change to the bike lane location has also entailed improving safety at intersections and entrances in which the bike lane and pedestrian paths are set back from the intersection to provide better visibility and give bicyclists and pedestrians more time to notice and react to turning vehicles. Alignment with City Council’s Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: Advancing Emmet Streetscape project upholds the City’s commitment to create “a connected community” by improving upon our existing transportation infrastructure. In addition, it would contribute to Goal 3 of the Strategic Plan, Beautiful Environment; 3.1 Engage in robust and context sensitive urban planning and implementation; 3.2 Provide reliable and high quality infrastructure and 3.3 Provide a variety of transportation and mobility options. Community Engagement: This agenda item is approving the results of the latest public meeting held for the Emmet Streetscape project. Going forward, bi-monthly reports will be issue to update the public on project status as final construction documents are produced, right of way secured and construction commences. To help guide the project, the City Council appointed a project Steering Committee composed of: • Gregg Bleam, Lewis Mountain Neighborhood Association • Thomas Funari, Federal Realty, Barracks Road Shopping Center • Lisa Green, Planning Commission • Alex Ikefuna, Neighborhood Development Services • Brian Menard, Tree Commission • Hamilton Lombard, Venable Neighborhood Association • Mary Hughes, University of Virginia • Beth Meyer, Lewis Mountain Neighborhood Association • Claude Morris, Buckingham Branch Railroad Company • Peter Ohlms, Bike & Pedestrian Advisory Committee • Abigail Palko, The Meadows Neighborhood Association • Vipul Patel, Gallery Court Hotel • Nat Perkins, P.E., UVA Foundation • Rebecca White, University of Virginia Page 173 of 255 • Peter Russell, Tree Commission • Jess Wenger, Fry’s Spring Neighborhood Association • Bobbie Williams, Jefferson Park Avenue Neighborhood Association The process also involved coordination with the following City Council appointed stakeholder groups: • Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee • PLACE Design Task Force • ADA Advisory Committee • Planning Commission • Tree Commission • Technical Committee Coordination with the following stake holders also took place during the development of the project design: • Office of the Architect for UVA • The UVA Foundation • Barracks Road Shopping Center • Buckingham Branch Railroad The City of Charlottesville has provided multiple opportunities for the public to provide input into the plan development process. A project website with an on-line surveys, two community events (Community Information Meetings) as well as three stakeholder meetings occurred between April 18, 2018 and December 3, 2019. Information presented and gathered at the meetings can be found at https://www.easthighstreetscape.org/, however a summary of each event is below: Project Website: The Project website (https://www.emmetstreetscape.org/) contains information that has been presented to date as part of the process. Information presented includes: • Project background • Project schedule • A “resource” page that provides access to the traffic analysis and information presented and gathered from community events, and information presented at the stakeholder meetings • A contact e-mail • A “get involved” page Community Event 1: Community Information Meeting, May 12, 2018 The first community meeting for the Emmet Streetscape project occurred on May 12, 2018 at the Cavalier Inn in Charlottesville. A total of 21 people signed into the meeting. The purpose of the meeting was to gather ideas to help the design team develop concepts for the future of the street. The meeting yielded information on common destinations for Emmet Street users, issues Page 174 of 255 related to walking and bicycling, needs that the design could address, and preferences for various improvements that could be implemented through the project. Following a brief presentation, the meeting followed an open house format, with six activity stations where people shared their ideas and preferences including the following aspects of the project: • Activity 1 – How Do You Use Emmet Street? • Activity 2 – Now and Then (Opinion on key attributes that Emmet Street should achieve with the project) • Activity 3 – How is Emmet Street Working for You? • Activity 4 – Design Principles • Activity 5 – Visual Preference Survey • Activity 6 - West Side / East Side Shared Use Path • Activity 7 – Walking Tour Summary The public outreach and engagement from this community meeting yielded the flowing feedback highlights: • Understanding use and perceptions of the corridor o Auto-centric, congested, unsafe • Understanding vision for future use o Safe, walkable, bike and pedestrian friendly • East or West Side Tunnel location o 11 of 14 prefer West side Display materials and information used during this community meeting are provided on the project website (www.emmetstreetscape.org/resources/) page. The meeting also featured a facilitated walking tour as Activity 7 from Ivy Road to the Goodwin Bridge and back. Participants recorded their observations on the existing conditions during the tour. This activity was highly productive in generating input from the participants by directly experiencing existing conditions on the corridor. Valuable input and comments were received on the comfort, safety, behaviors and overall impressions of this segment of Emmet Street. A summary document provided on the resources page (www.emmetstreetscape.org/resources/) summarizes the community input data collected at the event and offers stakeholders and community members the opportunity to see the thoughts of others in the community. On-Line Survey: The online Emmet Streetscape Needs and Preferences Survey became active on May 12, 2018 and is currently still open. A total of 69 participants provided 2,067 data points and 67 written comments. The goal of the survey was to educate the public about the project and collect feedback on project priorities, tradeoffs to help direct design, and design preferences related to function and aesthetics. The survey was designed to mirror the activities of the in-person activities at the Streetscape Community Meeting, and included questions on the following topics: Page 175 of 255 • Trips and mode of travel o The 69 respondents reported on a typical week making 636 drive trips, 44 bike trips, 160 walking trips, and 113 transit trips on Emmet Street in the study area. • Priority ranking of potential improvement strategies o The three highest rated improvements were accessible and safe crosswalks, coordinated traffic signals, and shade trees. • Vehicular speeds o 51% of respondents selected that reducing the speed limit in the study corridor is “very important” or “moderately important” and 49% selected that it’s “not important.” • Physical separation of bicycles and pedestrians from vehicles o 94% of respondents selected that it’s “very important” or “moderately important” to provide separate dedicated spaces for pedestrian and bicycles. • Protection of bicycles and pedestrians with design features o 81% of respondents selected that it’s “very important” or “moderately important” to protect pedestrians and bicycles from vehicle traffic through features such as a curb, plantings, or bollards. • The preferred location of the shared-use path (east of west side of the street) o 60% selected a preference for the west side (JPJ Arena side). The project website has served as an excellent tool for public outreach and awareness for the project. Over the last 12 months, the website has seen an average of 69 visits per day and 2,065 visits per month. Community Event 2: UVA Student Information Meeting, September 17, 2018 The Emmet Streetscape project team held an open house for the UVA community on September 17, 2018 from at the Lambeth Commons. A total of 17 people signed into the meeting. The Lambeth Field Apartments are in the heart of the study area, and Lambeth Commons is a central gathering place for the 174 UVA apartment complex. The students that live in the apartments frequently use Emmet Street, and are a key stakeholder representing the UVA community and future generations of students. The purpose of the meeting was to gather input from residents, other students, staff, and faculty at UVA who depend on Emmet Street for access to Central Grounds, North Grounds, and shopping and entertainment destinations in the city. The meeting yielded information on common routes people use in this area, issues related to walking and bicycling, needs that the design could address, and preferences for various improvements under consideration in the concept development phase of the project. Displays were provided with questions about how students use the Emmet Street corridor, destinations around the campus that they frequently travel to, how they cross Emmet Street and comments on the conceptual design. Information summarizing input received at this meeting is summarized and provided on the project website https://www.emmetstreetscape.org/. The overview points out common themes and takeaways from the feedback received during the Page 176 of 255 event, as well as noting the written comments received on the worksheets. Highlights of the feedback from this meeting includes the following: • Understanding student use o Improve bike/ped facilities, safety at Emmet/Ivy/ University is important, Central & North Grounds, Barracks Road Shopping Center are major destinations • Vision for future use o Protected and raised bicycle lanes, better bike and pedestrian accommodations at Emmet/Ivy/University • East or West Tunnel location o East side preferred by some because it’s convenient for Lambeth residents, west side preferred by some because of major destinations, east side deviation from the street would be a safety concern Steering Committee and Stakeholder Meetings Throughout the process, the design team collaborated with the Steering Committee and various other boards, committees and agencies to receive input and feedback during the design process. Steering committee meetings were open to the public. The following groups were met with on the following dates: • Steering Committee Meetings: April 18, 2018, August 9, 2018 and December 19, 2018 • Buckingham Branch Railroad Field Meeting: May 30, 2018 • City Council: August 6, 2018 • CAT and UTS Coordination Meetings: June 18, 2018 and September 13, 2018 • PLACE Committee Meeting: December 13, 2018 • Planning Commission Work Session: December 18, 2018 • Planning Commission: January 8, 2019 Meeting agendas and summaries can be found under the resources tab on the project website https://www.emmetstreetscape.org/. Additionally, a Technical committee was formed which is comprised of representatives from appropriate City departments. The technical committee held meetings on the project on April 18, 2018 and August 9, 2018. The technical committee meetings confirmed input received from the public and stakeholder groups could be technically attained and then maintained. As the University of Virginia (UVA) is a key stakeholder for the project and owner of the majority property directly adjacent to the project that is also in the process of being redeveloped or planned for redevelopment, regular coordination meetings were held with UVA and their design team engaged in the Ivy Corridor development project. The meetings have been held on approximately a quarterly basis to review an exchange information and updates on project developments. Coordination meetings with UVA were held on February 7, March 23, April 17, July 26, September 17, and October 30, 2018; March 13, May 28, August 13, September 12, October 16, and December 12, 2019; and January 22 and March 3, 2020. Page 177 of 255 Budgetary Impact: The preferred Conceptual Design Concept is above the established budget comprised of a combination of City, State and Federal funding sources. The cost estimates for construction elements needed for the project including a retaining wall, traffic signalization and roadway construction are higher than the cost estimate completing during the scoping of the project. The design team is working to identify opportunities to reduce construction costs. The current draft of the City of Charlottesville FY 2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program…. . Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the major design features as shown at the Design Public Hearing with 2 changes as a result of public hearing comments: 1) The configuration of the bike lane to be located adjacent to the shared-use path (with separation strip) and offset further away from the vehicular travel lanes on two segments of the project. Segments in which this change was made are on the west side of Emmet Street from the railroad to Arlington Boulevard and on the east side of Emmet Street from Massie Road to Copeley Road. 2) Reconfigure the pedestrian and bike lane crossings at entrances and intersections to provide an increased offset from the Emmet Street travel lanes to improve visibility and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Alternatives: None. Attachments: (A) Proposed Design Resolution Approving Major Design Features (B) Preferred Conceptual Design (C) Design Public Hearing Transcript (D) Design Public Hearing Comments (E) Design Public Hearing Displays Page 178 of 255 Attachment A EMMET STREETSCAPE PROJECT DESIGN PUBLIC HEARING APPROVAL RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a Design Public Hearing was conducted on December 3, 2019 in the City of Charlottesville by representatives of the City of Charlottesville and the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation after due and proper notice for the purpose of considering the proposed design of the Emmet Streetscape project under State project number of U000-104- 297, P101, R201, C501 and Federal project number of BR-5104 (159) in the City of Charlottesville, at which hearing aerial photographs, drawings, environmental documentation and other pertinent information were made available for public inspection in accordance with state and federal requirements; and WHEREAS, all persons and parties in attendance were afforded full opportunity to participate in said public hearing; and WHEREAS, representatives of the City of Charlottesville were present and participated in said hearing; and WHEREAS, the Council had previously requested the Virginia Department of Transportation to program this project; and WHEREAS, the Council fully deliberated and considered all such matters; now THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Charlottesville hereby approves the major design features of the proposed project as presented at the Public Hearing with the following changes: 1) The configuration of the bike lane to be located adjacent to the shared-use path (with separation strip) and offset further away from the vehicular travel lanes on two segments of the project. Segments in which this change was made are on the west side of Emmet Street from the railroad to Arlington Boulevard and on the east side of Emmet Street from Massie Road to Copeley Road. 2) Reconfigure the pedestrian and bike lane crossings at entrances and intersections to provide an increased offset from the Emmet Street travel lanes to improve visibility and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Charlottesville will acquire and/or furnish all right-of-way necessary for this project and certify the same to the Virginia Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration at the appropriate time. Page 179 of 255 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the City of Charlottesville, all necessary agreements required in conjunction with acquiring such rights of way, as well as all other associated standard agreements for construction activities. Adopted this _______ day of April , 2020. City of Charlottesville, Virginia ATTEST: _____________________ BY:_________________________ CLERK OF COUNCIL MAYOR Page 180 of 255 Attachment E - Design Public Hearing Displays All of the below materials are linked to the project website, https://www.emmetstreetscape.org/, and are available under the Resources tab in an accessible format using the following links: o Notice  Design Public Hearing Notice November 3, 2019 (PDF) o Meeting Material  Meeting Transcript  Meeting Comment Sheets with Responses  Meeting Sign-In Sheet  Emmet Streetscape Plan View  Emmet Streetscape Typical Sections  Emmet Streetscape Project Furnishings  Emmet Streetscape Project Landscape Palate  Emmet Streetscape Level of Service  Emmet Streetscape Multi-Modal Existing Conditions Board  Emmet Streetscape Welcome  Emmet Streetscape Brochure and Comment Form  Emmet Streetscape Design Plans  NEPA Document Page 181 of 255 City of Charlottesville City Council July 20, 2020 Tonight’s Agenda • Resolution to proceed with Right-of-Way Acquisition Page 182 of 255 Process/Schedule Smart Scale Project Description Objective: A complete street that works for all users Features: • Bike lanes on both sides • 10-ft asphalt multi-use path • Audible pedestrian signals & ADA standard curb ramps • 5-ft grassy buffer planted with street trees between the multi-use path and Emmet • Landscaped center median extended to the ped. bridge • Bus shelters and optimize/consolidate bus stops • Traffic signal coordination Page 183 of 255 Emmet Street Corridor Process/Schedule We are here! August, 2021 Page 184 of 255 Public Engagement Overview Steering Committee • Gregg Bleam, Lewis Mountain • Peter Ohlms, Bike & Pedestrian Advisory Neighborhood Assoc. Committee • Thomas Funari, Federal Realty, • Abigail Palko, The Meadows Barracks Road Shopping Center Neighborhood Assoc. • Lisa Green, Planning Commission • Vipul Patel, Gallery Court Hotel • Alex Ikefuna, Neighborhood Development Services • Nat Perkins, P.E., UVA Foundation • Laura Knott, Tree Commission • Rebecca White, University of Virginia • Hamilton Lombard, Venable • Peter Russell, Tree Commission Neighborhood Assoc. • Jess Wenger, Fry’s Spring Neighborhood • Mary Hughes, University of Virginia Assoc. • Beth Meyer, Lewis Mountain • Bobbie Williams, Jefferson Park Ave Neighborhood Assoc. Neighborhood Assoc. • Claude Morris, Buckingham Branch Railroad Company Page 185 of 255 Website - http://www.emmetstreetscape.com/ Public Outreach & Engagement • 4/18/18: Steering Committee Meeting • 5/12/18: Community Info. Mtg. 1 • 8/9/18: Steering Committee Meeting • 9/13/18: CAT/UTS Meeting • 9/17/18: UVA Student Info. Meeting • 12/3/19: Design Public Hearing Page 186 of 255 Public Outreach & Engagement Key Feedback: Community Info. Meeting 1 • Understanding use and perceptions • Autocentric, congested, unsafe…. • Understanding vision for future use • Safe, walkable, bike and pedestrian friendly • East or West Tunnel location • 11 of 14 prefer West • Walking Tour (Valuable Feedback!) • Not accommodating for pedestrians or bikes. Public Outreach & Engagement Key Feedback: UVA Student Info. Mtg. • Understanding student use • Improve bike/ped facilities, safety at Emmet/Ivy/ University is important, Central & North Grounds, Barracks Road Shopping Center are major destinations • Vision for future use • Protected and raised bicycle lanes, better bike and pedestrian accommodations at Emmet/Ivy/University • East or West Tunnel location • East side preferred by some because it’s convenient for Lambeth residents, west side preferred by some because of major destinations, east side deviation from the street would be a safety concern Page 187 of 255 Public Outreach & Engagement Key Feedback: Website Survey • Understanding current use and perceptions • Concerns about traffic, lack of bike/ped accommodations, traffic signal coordination • Understanding vision for future use • Accessible and safe crosswalks, coordinated traffic signals, and separate & dedicated spaces for bikes and peds identified as top priorities • East or West Tunnel location • 60/40 preference for west side Conceptual Design Review Page 188 of 255 Study Options • SUP Path Location • Bike Lane Configuration • Mid-block crossing at Goodwin Bridge • Width configurations • Transit Emmet/Ivy to RR Concepts Page 189 of 255 RR to Massie Concepts Massie to Arlington Concepts Page 190 of 255 Design Design Features • Public and Stakeholder Engagement Input • Bike lane • Shared-Use Path • Transit • Traffic operations Page 191 of 255 Typical Section – Emmet St. at Ivy Rd. Typical Section – Emmet St. RR Underpass Page 192 of 255 Typical Section – RR Underpass to Pedestrian Bridge Typical Section – Pedestrian Bridge to Arlington Blvd. Page 193 of 255 Design Emmet/Ivy to RR Page 194 of 255 RR to Massie Massie to Arlington Page 195 of 255 Shared-Use Path Tunnel Emmet Street RR Bridge Bridge #: 1834 Type: I-Beam 48’-91/4” Clearance: 19’ – 7” B/R to Ground Built: 1934 E70 Loading Ballast Deck south approach north approach Page 196 of 255 Concept Design Liner Plate Underpass Page 197 of 255 Next Steps • Council Approval for ROW • April 6, 2020 • ROW Acquisition Complete • April 2021 • Advertise Construction • August 2021 Thank you! Questions? Page 198 of 255 &,7<2)&+$5/277(69,//(9,5*,1,$ &,7<&281&,/$*(1'$ Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Approval Presenter: Carrie Rainey, City Planner, Neighborhood Development Services Staff Contacts: Carrie Rainey, City Planner, Neighborhood Development Services Jerry Allen, Assistant Traffic Engineer, Public Works Jack Dawson, City Engineer, Public Works Amanda Poncy, Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, Public Works 7LWOH 6LGHZDON:DLYHU5HTXHVW9LFLQLW\RI/DQGRQLD&LUFOH %DFNJURXQG  Previously, it was the practice for the Planning Commission to approve sidewalk waiver requests, as referenced within Section 29-182(j) of the subdivision ordinance; however, in 2013 the Virginia Supreme Court decided that only City Council may grant this type of waiver. This is one of many updates that are necessary to the City’s various development ordinances. The current practice for sidewalk waiver requests presented by developers pursuant to Section 29-182 is for the approval of the requested waivers to be presented to City Council for review and decision. Mike Myers of 30 Scale, LLC, on behalf of Landonia, LLC, requests a waiver from the requirement of Section 29-182(j)(2) of the City Code for construction of sidewalks to approved City standards on both sides of every new street. Landonia, LLC has submitted a final site plan for the construction of four (4) single family attached homes and the extension of a public street (Landonia Circle) and related public facilities. 'LVFXVVLRQ Per Section 29-182(j)(5), the authority granting the waiver shall consider the factors set forth within Section 29-36, which state that due to the unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions (excluding the proprietary interests of the subdivider) the requirement that is proposed to be varied or excepted would result in substantial injustice or hardship and would not forward the purposes of this chapter or serve the public interest. Per Section 29-182(j)(5), the authority shall also consider: 1 Page 199 of 255 (i) whether a surface other than concrete is more appropriate for the subdivision because of the character of the proposed subdivision and the surrounding neighborhood; (ii) whether sidewalks on only one (1) side of the street may be appropriate due to environmental constraints such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, floodplain, tree cover, or wetlands, or because lots are provided on only one (1) side of the street; (iii) whether the sidewalks reasonably can connect into an existing or future pedestrian system in the area; (iv) whether the length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide a public benefit; (v) whether an alternate pedestrian system including an alternative pavement could provide more appropriate access throughout the subdivision and to adjoining lands, based on a proposed alternative profile submitted by the subdivider; (vi) whether the sidewalks would be publicly or privately maintained; (vii) whether the waiver promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, including the applicable neighborhood plan; and (viii) whether waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood plan to be more fully achieved. The applicant’s analysis of these factors in included in the Application Materials, Attachment B. Staff Analysis  The Engineering Department has provided the following analysis. City engineering staff examined the subject lots and found no topographic challenges that would lead to any undue cost to the applicant. No undue maintenance burden on future cost to the City was found. Engineering staff did find a minor impact to two proposed tree plantings on the south side of the street. (There is no impact to tree planting on the north side of the street; there are no trees proposed to be planted in the right-of-way in that location.)  The Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator has provided the following analysis. The 250 Bypass between Locust and Free Bridge is considered a Bicycle Arterial in the 2015 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Given the high volume of traffic, number of commercial properties and corresponding driveway entrances on 250 there is a need to study parallel routes that could provide an alternate connection. Landonia Circle and the connection to Otter Street is the logical parallel route. While there may not be an immediate public benefit, this roadway could over the longer term serve bicycles and pedestrians wishing to travel between residential neighborhoods surrounding Locust Avenue and the commercial areas near Pantops. In addition, staff has recently received an inquiry from the owner of the All-American Car Wash to rezone the property at 1315 Long Street, which would include a sidewalk along Landonia Circle from the Long St. to Coleman St. Should this project move forward, the two projects could make progress toward a connected pedestrian route in the nearer term.  The Assistant Traffic Engineer has provided the following analysis. The applicant’s argument is italicized and the analysis is in standard font. 2 Page 200 of 255 1. Z.O. 29-36, due to the unusual location and topography of the property, the sidewalk requirement would result in a substantial hardship and would not serve the public interest at this time. The installation of a sidewalk at this location will not result in “substantial hardship” and it would serve the public. Pedestrians should not be made to use the roadway as a means of travel. The city is already allowing the developer to make Landonia Circle a through road by connecting to Long St, instead of designing what would otherwise have been a street with an appropriate turn-around for emergency vehicles. This improves pedestrian accessibility in the area if the applicant is required to comply with the Code requirement for sidewalk installation in connection with its proposed development. The only hardship that would be incurred, is the funding for the sidewalk, which is required [2008 SADM, Section 205, par B (1 & 2)] and (2019 SADM, Section 4.10) and developers are aware that these costs must be addressed for street improvements related to developments. 2. Landonia Circle is characterized by up to a 14 percent road grade, which exceeds the current maximum of 10 percent. Sidewalks should generally conform to the vertical alignment of the adjacent roadway [2008 SADM, Section 209, par A (1)]. The 2019 SADM, Section 4.10.3 references the PROWAG. “…the running grade of the pedestrian access route may be as steep as the running grade of the roadway.” (PROWAG, X02.1.5.1). The area in which the developer is requesting a sidewalk waiver does not exceed 5 percent slope. The only location that does exceed the 5 percent slope, and up to 14 percent slope, is a future connection from Long St to the project site. Existing topography relative to a future connection to a sidewalk should not be considered as part of this application. 3. The provision of a sidewalk across from 1200 Landonia Circle, in addition to not serving any public interest, will serve as both a nuisance and a hardship on an elderly City resident. The requirement to construct sidewalks on both sides of a new road is to provide accessibility to pedestrians, namely elderly and disabled. The installation of a sidewalk at this location will serve the public, especially when a connection is made to it from Long St. We can all agree that construction is oftentimes a necessary “nuisance” that we put up with for the betterment of our community. While the sidewalk construction may temporarily seem a nuisance, its construction will serve the community for many years to come. The hardship that the elderly City resident may experience is not specified within the waiver request. The developer spoke to the daughter of the elderly resident and stated that her father would “likely be impacted” by the construction of a sidewalk. People in neighborhoods are typically “impacted” by construction within the area. Longer term, residents would be impacted more, as would the local businesses, if the sidewalk waiver is approved. 4. Analysis of item (iv) listed under 29-182 (j)(5), which states: (iv) whether the length of the street is so short and the density of the development so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide a public benefit. Landonia Circle is approximately 1000 feet long and there are 9 residents that have driveways on 3 Page 201 of 255 the maintained portion of Landonia Circle. There is no existing sidewalk on this portion of Landonia Circle. The provision of an adjacent sidewalk at the site would not serve a public benefit since there are no existing sidewalk connections within 250 feet to the south and 525 feet to the north. Landonia Circle is the distance of over two city blocks (City Code, Section 15-202). The benefit of installing a sidewalk on both sides of the project frontage with connection to Long Street and the existing neighborhood sidewalks, would be greater safety for pedestrian’s accessibility to businesses, religious services, recreation facilities, and neighboring homes. Sidewalk would also alleviate the need for residents to walk in the roadway to access the above-mentioned areas. Furthermore, there are 219 residences or businesses within a 1000 foot radius of the project site. As previously noted, per Section 29-182(j)(5), the authority granting the waiver shall consider the factors set forth within Section 29-36, which state that due to the unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions (excluding the proprietary interests of the subdivider) the requirement that is proposed to be varied or excepted would result in substantial injustice or hardship and would not forward the purposes of this chapter or serve the public interest. The Engineering and Traffic Departments have confirmed that no hardships due to the physical site exist. Per Section 29-182(j)(5), the authority shall also consider: (i) Whether a surface other than concrete is more appropriate for the subdivision because of the character of the proposed subdivision and the surrounding neighborhood: No alternative material is proposed. (ii) Whether sidewalks on only one (1) side of the street may be appropriate due to environmental constraints such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, floodplain, tree cover, or wetlands, or because lots are provided on only one (1) side of the street: There are no environmental constraints preventing the installation of sidewalk on both sides of the street. The applicant is constructing houses on only one side of the street, but the lots on the opposite side are already developed. (iii) Whether the sidewalks reasonably can connect into an existing or future pedestrian system in the area: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator has noted above the need to investigate parallel routes to Long Street (250 Bypass) for pedestrians. Landonia Circle may serve as a parallel route and connect northern residential areas to the commercial areas on Long Street (250 Bypass). (iv) Whether the length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide 4 Page 202 of 255 a public benefit: While the section of Landonia Circle required to be improved and accepted as public right-of-way through this development project is approximately 120 feet, the entire Landonia Circle public right-of-way has some level of physical improvement and connects the Locust Grove neighborhood with Long Street (250 Bypass). (v) Whether an alternate pedestrian system including an alternative pavement could provide more appropriate access throughout the subdivision and to adjoining lands, based on a proposed alternative profile submitted by the subdivider: No alternative profile is proposed. (vi) Whether the sidewalks would be publicly or privately maintained: Section 29-182(j)(2) states sidewalks shall be constructed to approved city standards on both sides of every new street, and the dedicated right-of-way for a public street shall be sufficient to permit installation of the sidewalk within the right-of-way on both sides of such street. Therefore, sidewalks would be constructed in the public right-of-way and, after approved and accepted by the City, the sidewalk improvements would be maintained by the City. (vii) Whether the waiver promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, including the applicable neighborhood plan; and (viii) whether waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood plan to be more fully achieved: The 2013 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Goal 1.3 states: Provide design features on roadways, such as street trees within buffers, street furniture and sidewalk widths that improve the safety and comfort level of all users and contribute to the City’s environmental goals. The 2013 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Goal 1.5 states: Continue to include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations in conjunction with the planning and design of all major road projects, all new development and road paving projects. The 2013 Comprehensive Transportation Goal 2.1 states: Provide convenient and safe bicycle and pedestrian connections between new and existing residential developments, employment areas and other activity centers to promote the option of walking and biking. The 2015 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan identifies Landonia Circle as a lower demand corridor for bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Demand Analysis map.  $OLJQPHQWZLWK&RXQFLO6WUDWHJLF3ODQ Sidewalk construction contributes to Goal 3 of the Strategic Plan,A Beautiful and Sustainable 5 Page 203 of 255 Natural and Built Environment, and objective 3.2, to provide reliable and high quality infrastructure, and objective 3.3, to provide a variety of transportation and mobility options.   &RPPXQLW\(QJDJHPHQW  Property owners within 500-feet of the subject properties were notified of the public site plan conference held on May 15, 2019 for the associated final site plan. Five (5) members of the public attended the meeting. Discussions focused on the deteriorated pavement and potential improvement within the unaccepted Landonia Circle public right-of-way, traffic impacts, and the proposed architectural style of the houses.   %XGJHWDU\,PSDFW If City Council grants a sidewalk waiver to an applicant in connection with the proposed development of a new subdivision/ city street, then if the City later wishes to establish a sidewalk adjacent to the developed street, the City will be required to pay for and complete that construction in accordance with its approved CIP. If City Council does not grant this waiver, and a new sidewalk is established on both sides of the new city street, then the City’s long-term maintenance costs will be slightly higher than if no sidewalk is constructed.   5HFRPPHQGDWLRQ The Engineering and Traffic Engineering Departments have confirmed there are no hardships per Section 29-36 preventing the installation of new sidewalks. The Traffic Engineering Department has provided analysis that supports installation of the sidewalks. $OWHUQDWLYHV: City Council has several alternatives: (1)by motion, take action to deny the sidewalk waiver; (2)by motion, take action to approve the attached Resolution granting the requested sidewalk waiver; (3)by motion, defer action on the sidewalk waiver. $WWDFKPHQWV: A. Provided Resolution B. The full package of Application Materials, received February 11, 2020 C. Sheet 4 of the proposed Final Site Plan, dated February 10, 2020 6 Page 204 of 255 5(62/87,21 6LGHZDON:DLYHU5HTXHVWDW/DQGRQLD&LUFOH   :+(5($6, Landonia, LLC (“Applicant/Developer”), through its agent 30 Scale, LLC (Mike Myers) has submitted an application seeking a waiver of the requirement of City Code Section 29-182(j)(2) for construction of sidewalks to approved City standards on both sides of every new street. This application is submitted in connection with the Applicant/ Developer’s proposed development of a vacant lot identified within the City’s Real Estate tax records (2020) as Parcel Identification No. 490073000, which fronts on the north edge of the public right-of- way for Landonia Circle. The proposed development is located across from property described as 1200 and 1202 Landonia Circle, as shown in the diagram set forth below within this Resolution; and :+(5($6, City staff has submitted to City Council a staff report providing information and staff’s recommendations regarding the sidewalk waiver request, and City Council has reviewed the application and the staff report and has considered the factors set forth within the City’s Subdivision Ordinance, Sections 29-36 and 29-182(j)(5); 12:7+(5()25(%(,75(62/9(' by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sidewalk waiver request presented to this Council by the Applicant/Developer is hereby approved along the frontage of the City lot currently identified as Real Estate Parcel Identification Number 490073000, on both sides of Landonia Circle, for the general or approximate length depicted below. Page 205 of 255 Page 206 of 255 Page 207 of 255 Page 208 of 255  Page 209 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Ordinance Amendment Staff Contacts: John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: John Blair, City Attorney Title: Ordinance Prohibiting Firearms and Ammunition in Public Spaces (1st of 2 readings) Background: In 2020, the Virginia General Assembly amended Virginia Code Section 15.2-915. This amendment provides localities with the authority to enact prohibition on the possession, carrying, or transportation of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations in certain public spaces. Discussion: The proposed ordinance prohibits the possession, carrying or transportation of firearms, ammunition, or components or combinations thereof in City buildings, City parks, in City recreational or community centers, and in any public street, road, alley, or sidewalk or public right-of-way or space open to the public that is being used by or is adjacent to a permitted event by the City or an event that would otherwise require a City permit. The proposed ordinance permits the City to implement security measures designed to prevent the unauthorized access of the aforementioned public places such as metal detectors. The proposed ordinance includes several exemptions from its provisions including exceptions for sworn law enforcement officers as well as the activities of Senior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps program. A violation of the ordinance is a Class 1 misdemeanor. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Page 210 of 255 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 33-10 TO CHAPTER 33 (WEAPONS) BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that: Chapter 33 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville (1990) is amended as follows: Sec. 33-10. – Prohibition of firearms on city property. (a.) The possession, carrying or transportation of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof (1) in any buildings, or parts thereof, owned or used, by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city, for governmental purposes; or (2) in parks owned or operated by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city; or (c) in any recreational or community center facility operated by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city; or (d) in any public street, road, alley, or sidewalk or public right-of-way or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public and is being used by or is adjacent to a permitted event or event that would otherwise require a permit, is prohibited. (b.) The possession, carrying, storage or transportation of firearms by city employees, agents or volunteers in workplaces owned, operated or managed by the city is prohibited. (c.) Pursuant to this section, the city may implement security measures that are designed to reasonably prevent the unauthorized access of such buildings, parks, recreation or community center facilities, or public streets, roads, alleys, or sidewalks or public rights-of-way or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public and is being used by or is adjacent to a permitted event or an event that would otherwise require a permit by a person with any firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, such as the use of metal detectors and increased use of security personnel. (d.) This section shall not apply to (1) military personnel when acting within the scope of their official duties; or (2.) sworn law enforcement offices; or (3.) a Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program operated at a public or private institution of higher education in accordance with the provisions of 10 U.S.C. § 2101 et seq.; or (4.) any intercollegiate athletics program operated by a public or private institution of higher education and governed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association or any club sports team recognized by a public or private institution of higher education where the sport engaged in by such program or team involves the use of a firearm. Such activities shall follow strict guidelines developed by such institutions for these activities and shall be conducted under the supervision of staff officials of such institutions. Page 211 of 255 (e.) Notice of the restrictions imposed by this ordinance shall be posted (1) at all entrances of any building, or part thereof, owned or used by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city, for governmental purposes; (2) at all entrances of any public park owned or operated by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city; (3) at all entrances of any recreation or community center facilities operated by the city, or by any authority or local governmental entity created or controlled by the city; and (4) at all entrances or other appropriate places of ingress and egress to any public street, road, alley, or sidewalk or public right-of-way or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public and is being used by or is adjacent to a permitted event or an event that would otherwise require a permit. (f.) Any violation of section 33-10 is unlawful and shall be punished as a Class 1 misdemeanor. Page 212 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Ordinance Amendment Staff Contacts: John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: Mayor Nikuyah Walker John Blair, City Attorney Title: Amend Section 2-6 of the Charlottesville City Code Background: On January 4, 1971, the Charlottesville City Council enacted City Code Section 2-189.1 codifying the legal holidays observed by the City of Charlottesville. The City Council establishes the legal holidays observed by the City of Charlottesville in Charlottesville City Code Section 2-6. A legal holiday results in the closure of the City of Charlottesville’s offices for business on the designated day. The City Council last amended the City’s official holiday schedule on July 1, 2019, by adding March 3, Liberation and Freedom Day, as a holiday and removed April 13, the observance of Thomas Jefferson’s birthday, as a holiday. Discussion: On January 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation to free enslaved people in states that were in rebellion against the United States. Due to the rebellion, many enslaved individuals did not experience freedom upon the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. United States Major General Gordon Granger arrived in Galveston, Texas on June 18, 1865. On June 19, 1865, General Granger read aloud General Order 3 which stated, “The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free…” Formerly enslaved individuals immediately celebrated their freedom. On June 19, 1866, formerly enslaved individuals gathered in Galveston, Texas to celebrate the first anniversary of their freedom. This celebration became an annual tradition, and it is now celebrated as Juneteenth. Juneteenth celebrates Black freedom and achievement. It is a day to celebrate formerly enslaved individuals, subjected to inhumane and evil conditions, gaining their freedom and to honor their contributions to this nation. The celebration of Juneteenth as an official government holiday began in Texas in 1980. Page 213 of 255 Governor Northam recently stated that he intends to introduce legislation to make Juneteenth an official state holiday in Virginia in 2021. Budgetary Impact: An additional city holiday would have a budgetary impact of approximately $62,500 in Fiscal Year 2021 if the Council adopts the proposal to make June 19 an official City holiday. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Adding June 19 as an Official City Holiday Page 214 of 255 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-6 OF CHAPTER 2 (ADMINISTRATION) WHEREAS, on January 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued Proclamation 95, known as the “Emancipation Proclamation” which freed enslaved people in states “in rebellion against the United States”; and WHEREAS, the Emancipation Proclamation was not enforced in many areas of the United States then in rebellion; and WHEREAS, on June 19, 1865, United States Major General Gordon Granger read General Order Number 3 to the residents of Galveston, Texas; and WHEREAS, General Order Number 3 stated, “The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free” and formerly enslaved people celebrated upon General Granger’s statement; and WHEREAS, on June 19, 1866, formerly enslaved individuals celebrated the first anniversary of General Granger’s statement by establishing the holiday now known as Juneteenth; and WHEREAS, Juneteenth is a celebration of Black freedom and achievement that the Charlottesville City Council desires to celebrate on an annual basis. NOWE, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that: Section 2-6 of Chapter 2 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville (1990) is amended as follows: Sec. 2-6. - Legal holidays. In each year, the first day of January (New Year's Day), the third Monday in January (Martin Luther King, Jr. Day), the third Monday in February (George Washington Day), the third day of March (Freedom and Liberation Day), the last Monday in May (Memorial Day), the nineteenth day of June (Juneteenth), the fourth day of July (Independence Day), the first Monday in September (Labor Day), the eleventh day of November (Veterans Day), the fourth Thursday in November (Thanksgiving Day), the Friday after the fourth Thursday in November, the twenty- fifth day of December (Christmas Day) or, whenever any of such days shall fall on Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be a legal holiday, and whenever such days shall fall on Sunday, the Monday next following such day shall be a legal holiday. Page 215 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Approve Allocation Resolution Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Ryan Davidson, Senior Budget and Management Analyst Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Ryan Davidson, Senior Budget and Management Analyst Gretchen Ellis, Human Services Planner Shayla Givens, Human Services Planner Title: Allocation of Vibrant Community Fund Dollars for the F.Y. 21 Adopted Budget - $2,259,129 Background: The funding review process for all outside nonprofit human service focused agencies, formerly referred to as the Agency Budget Review Team Process (A.B.R.T.), underwent significant changes for the F.Y. 21 review cycle. That new process, now known as the Vibrant Community Fund process, was the result of a year-long review led by City Council members, community members, and staff. The Vibrant Community Fund adopted 5 broad funding priority areas: Education and Youth; Jobs and Wages; Community and Public Safety; Affordable Housing; and Health. The process allowed for three ways of requesting City support: operational grants under $25,000 (with an abbreviated application), operational grants over $25,000, and capacity building grants of up to $10,000. All funding was zero-based and not predicated on any previous allocations from the City. Applications were reviewed by a panel of local residents with lived experience and individuals with human service and/or grantmaking experience, using objective criteria. The initial F.Y. 21 funding recommendations resulted in numerous shifts in both the number of agencies and programs to be funded, as well as the amounts of funding for those agencies recommended for funding through the Vibrant Community Fund. However, due to the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, the circumstances under which City Council initially considered the Vibrant Community Fund requests are substantially different – projected revenues and expenses have changed in many cases, the way nonprofits deliver service and communicate with each other has changed, the way we think about next year and the future has changed. As Charlottesville City Council worked on budget decisions in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, they asked staff to request updates from organizations that applied for funding through the Vibrant Community Fund, so that specific funding allocations could be made after the additional information was received and reviewed. Therefore, the F.Y. 21 Adopted budget contained 2 unallocated lump sums for outside nonprofit agencies totaling $2,259,129 (approximately $2.1 million for Vibrant Community Fund agencies and $154,00 for Arts and Culture agencies). Page 216 of 255 Discussion: As part of the revised budget adoption process for F.Y. 21, City Council requested additional information from the agencies in order to make more informed decisions on the specific funding allocations for those outside nonprofit agencies. Staff created a simple on-line document asking applicants to report changes in revenues, expenses, and beneficiaries. Applicants were also asked to describe changes in current service delivery, additional services provided related to COVID, plans for recovery, and any changes to proposed strategies for F.Y. 21. Staff also requested brief updates from the Arts and Cultural Organizations and Festivals, which were not initially required to submit applications for F.Y. 21, and updates from organizations that had requested Vibrant Community Fund Capacity Building grants. On June 12th, staff provided Council with a report containing the new information along with the initial review information and recommendations. City Council held a work session on June 30th to discuss the agency updates and funding allocations. City Council added several agencies/programs to be considered for funding to the initial funding recommendations and directed staff to reduce the allocations evenly and equitably to accommodate these changes. In order to accommodate the new requests the allocations for those agencies rated as Exemplary/Essential were reduced from 97% of request to 90% of request, Solid/Essential rated agencies were adjusted from 66% of request to 60%, Exemplary/Important rated agencies we adjusted from 55% of request to 50% of request, and Arts and Culture Agencies were adjusted to 75% of their F.Y. 20 allocations. The below chart provides a summary of those allocations and the attached agency allocations spreadsheet contains the revised allocations for each agency and/or program. FY21 Vibrant Community Fund Allocations All Applicants Essential Important Helpful No direct connection Exemplary Quality 22 programs at 90% 11 programs at 50% $1,365,894 $277,340 Solid Quality 11 programs at 60% $410,100 Fair Quality Poor Quality Arts and Culture 11 Programs at 75% of FY20 118,779 Allocations Capacity Building Grants 10,000 Reduced Contractual Funding (7,500) TOTAL SUM Emergency Assistance Program 84,516 $2,259,129 Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The allocation of funding to outside human service nonprofit agencies supports several of City Council’s vision areas, including “A Center for Lifelong Learning”, “Quality Housing Opportunities for All”, C’ville Arts and Culture”, and “Community of Mutual Respect”. It contributes to Goal 1 of the Strategic Plan, to be an inclusive community of self-sufficient residents, and objectives 1.1 through 1.5. Page 217 of 255 Community Engagement: The agency review process includes city residents and community members in the initial review of the applications. In addition, City Council held two work sessions specifically on community agencies (March 12, 2020 and June 30, 2020) with public comment session at each work session. There were also several other opportunities for the public to engage and provide feedback throughout the budget process in the form of other City Council work sessions, a Community Budget Forum, and two Public Hearings on the proposed budget – March 16, 2020 and May 18, 2020. Budgetary Impact: This reallocation resolution has no impact on the General Fund. The funds being allocated to the community agencies were previously appropriated as part of the F.Y. 2020 – 2021 Adopted Budget. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of resolution and allocation of funding to the outside nonprofit agencies. Alternatives: Council could not accept the changes to the agency allocations and continue to revise some or all of the allocations, which may result in further delay of payment to the outside agencies. Attachments: Allocation Resolution Revised Agency Allocation Spreadsheet Page 218 of 255 RESOLUTION Allocation of Vibrant Community Fund Dollars for the FY21 Adopted Budget $2,259,129 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville FY 2020 – 2021 Adopted Budget contained $2,104,683 in unallocated agency funding and $154,446 in unallocated arts and culture funding; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council has determined the specific allocation amounts for each community nonprofit agency; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the funding for the Vibrant Community Fund outside nonprofit agencies is hereby transferred in the following manner: Transfer From; $2,104,683 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743028000 G/L Account: 540100 $154,446 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753019000 G/L Account: 540100 $7,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9733001000 G/L Account: 540100 Transfer To: $293,392 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9713007000 G/L Account: 540100 $97,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9713008000 G/L Account: 540100 $9,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9713011000 G/L Account: 540100 $84,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9733004000 G/L Account: 540100 $40,800 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9733010000 G/L Account: 540100 $10,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9733013000 G/L Account: 540100 $26,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743003000 G/L Account: 540100 $202,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743004000 G/L Account: 540100 $77,141 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743007000 G/L Account: 540100 $21,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743009000 G/L Account: 540100 $13,025 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743012000 G/L Account: 540100 $13,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743013000 G/L Account: 540100 $63,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743015000 G/L Account: 540100 $40,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743020000 G/L Account: 540100 $52,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743022000 G/L Account: 540100 $354,842 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743023000 G/L Account: 540100 Page 219 of 255 $45,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743026000 G/L Account: 540100 $163,770 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743027000 G/L Account: 540100 $84,516 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743028000 G/L Account: 540100 $12,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743029000 G/L Account: 540100 $24,300 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743031000 G/L Account: 540100 $22,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743032000 G/L Account: 540100 $5,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743034000 G/L Account: 540100 $33,534 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743035000 G/L Account: 540100 $34,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9743037000 G/L Account: 540100 $21,079 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753002000 G/L Account: 540100 $1,824 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753003000 G/L Account: 540100 $37,068 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753005000 G/L Account: 540100 $4,346 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753006000 G/L Account: 540100 $15,353 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753016000 G/L Account: 540100 $22,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753017000 G/L Account: 540100 $1,688 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753018000 G/L Account: 540100 $13,500 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9753021000 G/L Account: 540100 $128,201 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9773001000 G/L Account: 540100 $150,000 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9773002000 G/L Account: 540100 $47,250 Fund: 105 Cost Center: 9773004000 G/L Account: 540100 Page 220 of 255 Vibrant Community Fund Allocations (Revised 6/30/2020) Essential/Exemplary (90% of request) Agency Program FY21 Proposed Bridgeline Residential 27,000 Women's Initiative Mental Health Counseling 45,000 OAR Local Probation 29,676 Reentry Services 83,348 Therapeutic docket 54,450 Adult Drug Treatment Court 68,352 Pretrial Services 47,741 Criminal Justice Planner 9,825 TJACH System Planner 9,270 Shelter for Help in Emergency Outreach 119,475 Residential 83,025 TJACH ‐ Haven Vital Housing Services 130,500 Habitat for Humanity 47,250 Piedmont Housing Alliance Housing Opportunity 96,150 Management & Development 32,051 PHAR Resident‐ Involved Redevelopment 31,500 CASA Volunteers 9,000 Child Health Partnership Home Visiting Collaborative 310,847 Foothills MDT/Forensic 27,000 Child Health Access 13,500 ReadyKids Counseling and Family Support 57,400 Local Food Hub Fresh Farmacy 33,534 TOTAL 1,365,894 Page 221 of 255 Essential/Solid (60% of request) Agency Program FY21 Proposed Bridgeline Case Management 13,800 Free Clinic Free Dental 63,000 Medical Clinic and Pharmacy 21,000 On Our Own General Operations 12,000 Legal Aid Civil Legal Services 60,000 Sexual Assault Resource Agency Survivor Services 21,000 TJACH ‐ PACEM Shelter Operations 24,000 AHIP Housing Rehab & Repair 150,000 City School Yard Garden Plant, Grow, Harvest 13,200 Urban Agriculture 11,100 PHAR Internship Program 21,000 TOTAL 410,100 Important/Exemplary (50% of request) Agency Program FY21 Proposed Literacy Volunteers Adult Workforce Tutoring 21,079 Boys and Girls Club Afterschool Youth Development 14,985 Summer Youth Development 48,015 Abundant Life K‐4 Afterschool Tutoring 13,000 Computers 4 Kids C4K 13,025 MACAA Head Start 26,500 Piedmont YMCA Early Learning Center 34,000 Ready Kids Home Visiting Collaborative 43,995 Early Learning 19,741 Legal Aid Community Advocacy on Racial Equity 37,500 Sin Barreras Growing to Maturity 5,500 TOTAL 277,340 Page 222 of 255 Capacity Building Applications FY21 Proposed Birth Sisters 10,000 Health Department* ‐7,500 TOTAL 2,500 *$7,500 was already included in Health Department allocation that was approved in June, but not part of the $2.1M to be allocated to agencies, reallocation of those dollars increases the pot to be allocated by $7,500. Arts and Culture Funding (75% of request) FY21 Proposed Virginia Film Festival 11,400 Virginia Festival of the Book 12,413 Charlottesville Opera 1,824 Paramount Theater 15,353 Jefferson School African American Heritage Center 22,500 Charlottesville Festival of Cultures 2,813 Stu Comm Inc. (WNRN) 1,688 New City Arts Initiative 13,500 Virginia Discovery Museum 4,346 Lighthouse Studios ‐ Vinegar Hill Theater Program 22,500 City Supported Events 10,442 TOTAL 118,779 Emergency Assistance Program 84,516 TOTAL ALLOCATIONS 2,259,129 Page 223 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Adoption Staff Contacts: John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: John Blair, City Attorney Title: Police Civilian Review Board Resolution Background: Virginia Governor, Ralph S. Northam, is expected to convent a special session of the General Assembly in August 2020 pursuant to Article IV, Section 6 of the Constitution of Virginia. One of the topics that the special session is expected to address is law enforcement. Discussion: In anticipation of the special session, the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus (VLBC) released a set of its legislative priorities on June 24, 2020. One of the VLBC’s priorities is creating police civilian review boards with subpoena powers. The attached Resolution requests the City of Charlottesville’s legislative delegation to support legislation to establish the duties, powers, and authorities of police civilian review boards in Virginia including the establishment of a subpoena power for these boards. Budgetary Impact: None. Attachments: Proposed Resolution Page 224 of 255 RESOLUTION REQUESTING LEGISLATORS SUPPORT POLICE CIVILIAN REVIEW BOARDS WHEREAS, Virginia Governor, Ralph S. Northam, is expected to call a special session of the Virginia General Assembly in August 2020; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus (hereinafter “VLBC”) released a set of priorities it plans to pursue during the special session; and WHEREAS, one of the VLBC’s priorities for the special session is to enact legislation creating police civilian review boards with subpoena powers; and WHEREAS, the current Code of Virginia does not establish the duties, powers, or authorities of police civilian review boards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that it requests that Delegate Sally L. Hudson and Senator R. Creigh Deeds support legislation at the special session that establishes the duties, powers, and authority of police civilian review boards including subpoena powers. Page 225 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Discussion/Direction Staff Contacts: Alex Ikefuna, Director of Neighborhood Development Services John Blair, City Attorney Presenters: Alex Ikefuna, Director of Neighborhood Development Services John Blair, City Attorney Title: Honorary Street Naming Requests Background: The City of Charlottesville adopted an Honorary Street Name Policy on September 19, 2011. The policy limits honorary street name designations to individuals or events that have made an important and lasting contribution to the City of Charlottesville or represent a key part of its history. There have been approximately nine honorary street naming designations pursuant to the 2011 Policy. Those honored include: George Ferguson, Franklin Delano Gibson, Preston Coiner, the Reverend R.A. Johnson, the Reverend Rufus Hayes, Heather Heyer, Rue De Besançon, Winneba Way, and Asalie Preston. Discussion: In the month of June 2020, the Council received two applications for Honorary Street Name Designations pursuant to its 2011 Policy. It also received an Honorary Street Name request via email. All three requests are attached to this Council Memorandum. Two of the requests are very similar. Don Gathers requests that the portion of Market Street between 1st Street NE and 9th Street NE received the honorary street name designation, “Black Lives Matter Boulevard.” Myra Anderson is requesting that 7th Street between Market Street and 7th Street receive the honorary street name designation “Black Lives Matter Avenue.” Tanesha Hudson’s email requests that the portion of Main Street between the Ridge and McIntire intersection and the 10th Street/Roosevelt Brown Boulevard intersection received the honorary street name designation, “Black Excellence Way.” Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) staff members have reviewed the requests, and their recommendation is that the Council combine Mr. Gathers’ and Ms. Anderson’s requests and approve one honorary street naming. Both of their requests are located in the same area and their requests also ask the streets to be named for the same organization of individuals: Black Lives Page 226 of 255 Matter. The 2011 Policy prohibits duplicative honorary street naming designations. Ms. Hudson has not presented an application to the Clerk of Council. Additionally, her request does not conform with the 2011 Policy’s requirement that the honorary street name designation be for an individual or event. While Ms. Hudson’s request is not for an individual or event, Charlottesville City Code Section 28-4 provides that the City Council has the ultimate authority to name City streets. If Council wishes to grant Ms. Hudson’s request, a resolution can be prepared that notes the Council is making an exception to its policy. The purpose of this item is for Council to discuss the three requests and provide their feedback to staff. Staff will present the appropriate resolution(s) at the Council’s August 3, 2020 meeting. Budgetary Impact: If Council approves this request, the cost estimates are: $374.30 for the 7th Street request between Market and 7th; $748.60 for Market Street, from 1st Street, North to 9th Street, NE.; and $748.60 for Main Street, from Ridge/McIntire to 10th Street/Roosevelt Brown. Attachments: 2011 Honorary Street Name Policy Gathers Request Anderson Request Hudson Request Page 227 of 255 Honorary Street Name Policy 1. The following restrictions and process for honorary street name designations shall apply. a. Honorary street name designations should be limited to individuals, or events that have made an important and lasting contribution to the City of Charlottesville or represent a key part of its histo1·y. •The street to be designated should have a connection to the individual/event and his/its contribution. •This designation should not be used for an individual or event already recognized in some significant manner. b. The application form (see Attachment 1) should be submitted directly to the Clerk of City Council. c. The application can be completed and submitted by any individual or group in Charlottesville. d. The completed application will be circulated to Council before formal Council action is taken. e. A Council Resolution will be prepared, outlining the proposed designation and providing an estimate of cost impacts including sign manufacture and installation and any other costs that might be incurred. NDS will prepare the appropriate staff memo. f. Upon approval, the Public Works Depa1tment will implement the honorary street name designation. 2. Application Form. Attachment 1 is a proposed application form for requesting honorary street name designation. The forms will be made available at City Hall and can be downloaded from the City's website. The forms require submission directly to the Clerk of City Council. 3. Proposed Process. The proposed procedure includes the following steps. a. Individuals or groups wishing to propose honorary street name designation will complete application form and submit it to the Clerk of City Council. b. The Clerk will determine if there is sufficient support on Council for the request to be considered by Council. c. NDS will prepare a brief memo to Council that identifies any cost impacts associated with the request and background on the individual nominated for the honor. d. A Council .Resolution will be prepared. e. Upon final approval by City Council, the Public Works Depattment will install the sign. f. Upon approval, NDS staff will send notice to all impacted propetties and to public safety agencies. Approved by Council September 19, 2011 Clerk of Council Page 228 of 255 Page 229 of 255 Page 230 of 255 Page 231 of 255 Page 232 of 255 Page 233 of 255 Page 234 of 255 My reason for proposing an honorary street name "Black Lives Matter" is greatly influenced by recent local and national events. The past several months has exposed racial disparities and inequalities (once again), inspiring people all across the county to condemn acts of racism, discrimination and senseless violence, particularly against African Americans. This includes numerous protest and rallies right here in Charlottesville; a city that has its own dark history of racism and discrimination dating all the way back from slavery, to Jim crow, to Robert E statue debate, to August 12 th -the Summer of Hate, to Black Lives Matter protest the past several weeks. I believe the most recent protest in the city are part of the biggest collective demonstration of civil unrest around police violence that my generation has.witness across the whole entire country. The unifying theme, for the first time in our country's long, ugly and dark history, is BLACK LIVES MATTER. This is extremely important, because currently there are still institutions and systems right here in Charlottesville that act as if black lives don't matter. The city made 4 th street and honorary street named after one woman (Heather Heyer) to honor her fallen life. It's in that same spirt that I submit this proposal to you to honor the over 10, 000 Black lives in Charlottesville, who remain disproportionately impacted by structural and racism (overt and covert) and still live under an entire social structure centered around white privilege and disproportionate minority contact with the police. Due to the latter, I also propose the honorary street be one closest to the Charlottesville Police Department (or another area that is impactful the African American community) Naming an honorary street of "Black Lives Matter" is NOT saying that other lives don't matter, but rather affirming that Black lives should matter as much as all (other) lives. Furthermore, a Black Lives Matter honorary street naming has already occurred in our nation's capital, so Charlottesville would not be the first. However, it would be the first time our city names to street to serve as acknowledgment of the historical racism, racial terror and trauma, and racial injustices Africans Americans have endured past and present. Finally and most importantly, an honorary street would send strong, resounding, powerful, validating message to African Americans city-wide who have been disproportionately impacted by police violence and systematic racism .... that we see you, we hear you, and we are committed to ensuring our city becomes more fair and more just. Submitted by-Myra N Anderson Page 235 of 255 Page 236 of 255 The Starr Hill area was a prominent and thriving community for black people during the 1900's. In 1977 there was a Starr Hill Neighborhood association made up of mostly blacks at the time. Former Mayor Huja at the time was a city planner back then and was part responsible for applying for a federal grant that was supposed to be intended to help the Starr Hill neighborhood association get more black businesses but it didn't work that way due to bank discriminating in lending. The Starr Hill Grant in 1977 was for Minority Economic development in Starr Hill. They were not successful getting more black businesses there because of lack of capital/ money problems. Blacks didn't have any money to use for collateral. So Banks didn't take a risk on black businesses at the time because of that. The Banking discrimination then played a vital role in how Starr Hill area was taken from Black people and it's no different today in how neighborhoods become gentrified or blacks are priced / bought out. With Blacks having no capital and no power at the time to fight these kinds of issues from the inside because no one black was on city council at the time. The first Black to run for City Council was Dr. Bernard Coles then after him came George Harding and Charles Johnson but they did not win the election. Then we had our first elected black council member named Charles Barbour. Ray Bell was the first black elected to the School Board in 1963. The Ridge/ McIntire intersection of Main on down to 10th Street Intersection of Main was a vibrant and often frequented route for people of color to grocery shop, get to work, go to the doctor or to simply go home. It also surrounds many of the historical black businesses from the past to present. Then: Inge's Store Bell Funeral Home, Dr. Jackson's Office (The corner of 4 th and Commerce) Mt. Zion Baptist Church (The Original Church) Now: Mel's Cafe The Drewary Brown memorial Bridge. First Baptist Church Ebenezer Church Far too often we don't hear and we're definitely not taught the Black history or Black excellence that we once had and still have in our community. I would like Main Street from the Ridge and McIntire Intersection corner up until the 10th Street/ Roosevelt Brown intersection named Black Excellence Way. Each street that intersects on Main Street between these 2 intersections lead to a deep and telling story. I would hope that Charlottesville would honor those often left behind and make this happen. Acknowledging the Black Excellence Way is a small step in acknowledging the role we've played in making this city what it is. Thank you for your time, Tanesha Hudson (434) 806-8952 Page 237 of 255 Page 238 of 255 Page 239 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Sign Charter Presenter: Ben Allen, Executive Director, The Equity Center, University of Virginia Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director, Human Services Title: Frontline Worker’s Fair Treatment Charter Background: The Frontline Workers Fair Treatment Charter was developed as a collaboration between The Equity Center, Network2Work at Piedmont Virginia Community College, and the University of Virginia’s President’s Council. The purpose of the charter is to identify regional support for the rebuilding of a healthy community as localities move forward with recovery efforts. The charter’s authors recognize that the gradual reopening of the economy will depend on the healthy, well- being and labor of frontline workers. In Charlottesville, and surrounding counties, these low wage and essential workers are disproportionately African American and Latinx and, because of historic and current disparities and the compounded effects of complex trauma, are at higher risk for COVID-19 disease complications and death. Discussion: The Equity Center, Network2Work, and the President’s Council seek support for the Frontline Workers Fair Treatment Charter from the Charlottesville City Council and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This request is aligned with the City Council’s vision, which includes serving as a leader of innovation, environmental sustainability, and social and economic justice and healthy race relations; being flexible and progressive in anticipating and responding to the needs of our citizens; and supporting self-sufficiency of residents Community Engagement: The Frontline Workers Fair Treatment Charter is the product of a multi-jurisdictional, multi- organizational, public-private collaboration and represents the interests, investment and knowledge of a wide variety of constituents. Page 240 of 255 Budgetary Impact: There are no general funds required or being requested. Recommendation: Staff recommends support for the Frontline Worker’s Fair Treatment Charter. Alternatives: Council may decline to sign on to the proposed regional Frontline Worker’s Fair Treatment Charter. Attachments: Frontline Workers Fair Treatment Charter Page 241 of 255 Page 242 of 255 + Ablemarle/Charlottesville Region Fair Treatment Charter for Frontline Workers The novel coronavirus highlights conditions that are, sadly, not novel at all: low-income individuals, especially individuals of color, are suffering disproportionately, both physically and financially. These health and income inequities—which were pre-existing conditions long before COVID-19—will persist long after the pandemic subsides unless we are as intentional in addressing inequities as we were in creating and sustaining them. As the Commonwealth of Virginia enters a new phase of COVID response, we should focus our recovery efforts not on restoring the old economy but on rebuilding an equitable economy—a healthy economy—intentionally constructed on a foundation of racial justice. The gradual reopening of this economy will depend on front line workers. In Charlottesville and the surrounding counties these low wage and essential workers are disproportionately African American and Latinx.1 To achieve an equitable economy, public and private employers must recognize, fairly compensate, and protect the health of employees who risk losing their lives to pursue their livelihoods.. A healthy economy, which values the well-being of all of its workers, is both more just and more robust than an economy that compels workers to accept below subsistence wages in order to survive. We have an opportunity for our region to emerge from COVID-19 recovery with an economy that is more just and equitable than it was before the Commonwealth shut down. This means ensuring safe and equitable conditions for frontline workers and it means making sure that the voices of frontline workers infuse every plan. Community-based advocates from the Equity Center Local Steering Committee and UVA President’s Council on Community-University Partnerships helped build the list of just employment practices below, and Network2Work@PVCC is working to animate these as a set of just employment standards for which local employers could get certified. Just Employment Practices 1. Health and Safety Protections:  Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is made available to all at no cost to employees and is permitted to be worn.  COVID-19 testing is free and easily accessible.  Stress reduction/Mental health support is readily available. Ideally, these services will be community-based, easily accessible, and delivered in a way to minimize stigma. 1 For more on who constitutes our regional frontline workforce, see: https://virginiaequitycenter.github.io/cvilleequity_covid/frontline/ Page 243 of 255 + 2. COVID training to protect essential workers: Workers and managers are educated on risks and safety measures, and managers are educated on how to consider equity in making and enforcing policies that protect their workers. 3. Robust Premium Compensation: During a pandemic, workers at risk deserve more than a living wage. Essential workers receive compensation that acknowledges the critical contribution they make to our collective health and the economy. Essential workers need hazard pay; this means extra pay for performing extra dangerous duties. 4. Paid Sick Leave for Essential Workers: Frontline workers are provided paid sick leave. These essential workers not only contract the virus at higher rates, but are more likely to infect others because they feel like they cannot miss a day of work. They come to work sick and go home sick. 5. Flexible Work Schedules and Arrangements: Employers are flexible with work schedules, and other work arrangements as we attempt to reopen the economy, understanding that things cannot go back to “normal.” 6. Open Hiring Practices: Employers rebuilding their workforce use open hiring practices, which speeds the hiring process, improves retention and avoids the threat of implicit or explicit bias by hiring qualified workers on a first-come, first served basis. Those who want the job get the job. 7. Pipeline Support for Former Frontline Workers: Workers who are not willing to risk returning to a frontline position should be provided fair compensation and support by allowing them to continue collecting unemployment benefits, while also connecting them to training/resources on other jobs within employer networks. Just Community Commitments: Government, quasi-governmental and social service institutions must also acknowledge the collective imperative to support our frontline workers through the provision of: 8. Wrap Around Services During Illness: When workers get sick, they must be able to recover safely without infecting others. Infected workers will have access to housing and other essentials that allow them to more easily self-isolate while they recover. 9. Child and Family Care: This is crucial as public schools and daycare centers remain closed. Child care needs to be affordable, provide high-quality early educational experiences and might require creative solutions—i.e. using schools as safe places for cooperative or small business owned childcare to operate and subsidizing employment, Page 244 of 255 + rather than just unemployment, for jobs that society values but the economy does not, such as child care. 10. Provide Accessible, Safe, Reliable Transit: CAT and JAUNT have demonstrated best practices in providing safe, free transit to frontline workers during the shelter-in-place, but as the economy re-opens frontline workers must continue to have access to safe, reliable, free transit options. 11. Affordable health care is available to all frontline workers and their families during the crisis. 12. Create a Regional Frontline Worker Rights Commission: In order to ensure that essential workers voices are centered in the expression of their needs during the pandemic, a regional commission (populated by frontline workers themselves) should be created as a place for dialogue and ongoing advocacy for workers’ rights. Page 245 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: July 20, 2020 Action Required: Resolution Presenter: Missy Creasy, Assistant Director of Neighborhood Development Services Alex Ikefuna, Director of Neighborhood Development Services John C. Blair II, City Attorney Staff Contacts: Missy Creasy, Assistant Director of Neighborhood Development Services Alex Ikefuna, Director of Neighborhood Development Services John C. Blair II, City Attorney Title: Community Engagement Meeting Requirements during COVID 19 Background: On March 12, 2020, the City Council authorized City Manager, Dr. Tarron J. Richardson, to issue a Declaration of Emergency due to the potential spread of COVID-19 within the City of Charlottesville. On March 16, 2020, City Council adopted a resolution waiving any mandatory review periods of fewer than 60 days imposed by City ordinances. On March 25, 2020, the City Council adopted an Ordinance concerning the continuity of the City’s governmental operations, in which Council—among other things—deemed all agenda items scheduled or proposed to be considered by council, the planning commission, or any boards to be continued for the duration of the emergency, if not acted upon. As a result of the potential spread of COVID-19 and the Council’s March 25, 2020 ordinance, the Department of Neighborhood Development Services (hereinafter “NDS”) ceased accepting new applications for development review. On June 15th City Council approved an amendment to the March 25, 2020 Ordinance, to authorize NDS to accept and review any development applications which do not require a community meeting or other form of community engagement, such as a public hearing (“administrative review”). In addition, Council approved a motion to direct NDS to accept all new development applications, but to refrain from scheduling any public hearings or community meetings until procedures can be approved to assure adequate public engagement during the extended period of the emergency. Staff was directed to bring procedures establishing guidelines for public hearings and community meetings to City Council for consideration at its July 20, 2020 meeting. Discussion: As the City has adapted to COVID-19, it is implementing new practices and procedures to insure the safety of its workforce and the community. Staff’s community meeting proposal, attached, takes into account providing guidelines that would allow for the level of potential participation pre-COVID, accounting for health and safety considerations. The proposal provides ways to engage through technology as well as by paper/pencil and mailings and where possible, timeframes for feedback Page 246 of 255 have been outlined to allow time for extended time for the community to engage. This level of inclusiveness in our current state of emergency will involve additional costs and resources for mailings, copies of materials and labor to process these items. Council can provide guidance on whether this proposal meets their expectations or provide other direction on how engagement should proceed. Going forward: NDS will accept all applications; however, no development application will be scheduled for a community meeting or for a public hearing agenda, until City Council approves guidelines for how public engagement associated with community meetings and public hearings can be conducted. Alignment with City Council’s Vision: This item aligns with the City Council Vision Statements of: A great Place to Live for All of Our Citizens and a Smart, Citizen Focused Government. Community Engagement: Speakers at the June 15, 2020 Council meeting requested that the City explore methods for providing for the community to engage during the state of emergency. It was noted that other communities have provided for this opportunity and the City has used virtual meetings for City Council, authorized boards and commissions and for meeting opportunities with applicants and the public. Budgetary Impact: There will be increased costs for both the city and the applicants to provide for mailings, copies of materials and the labor to process the materials. The City would have responsibility for mailing packages in the case of site plan reviews and those costs will vary depending on the number of property owners and occupants residing in the 500 foot area surrounding a site. It can be anticipated to cost $500 – $2000 per month depending on the number of submissions. In addition, costs are involved for software for hosting virtual meetings using the outlined method as well as storage of the recorded meetings to allow for viewing per the prescribed period. The City Information Technology department estimates $100 per month for audio/video conferencing service, $150-250 per month for toll free access and $100-200 per month for the storage costs for archived meetings. Recommendation: It is recommended that Council provide guidance on whether this proposal meets their expectations or provide additional direction needed for moving forward with community engagement at this time. Alternatives: The City Council has the following alternative actions: 1. by motion, vote to approve the attached resolution; Page 247 of 255 2. by motion, request changes to the attached resolution, and then approve it in accordance with the amended resolution; 3. by motion, defer action, or 4. by motion, deny the proposed resolution. Attachments: 1. Proposed City Council Resolution 2. Community Engagement Meeting Requirements (during COVID 19 Emergency) Page 248 of 255 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE DURATION OF THE PERIOD OF EMERGENCY DECLARED BY THE CITY MANAGER ON MARCH 12, 2020 WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the City Manager issued a Declaration of Emergency due to the potential spread of COVID-19 within the City of Charlottesville; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2020, the Charlottesville City Council adopted an ordinance pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-1413 to assure continuity in government and the provisions of said ordinance, as amended, remain in effect; and WHEREAS, on June 15, 2020 directed the City’s Department of Neighborhood Development Services to accept all development applications, but to bring City Council a proposal for how adequate public engagement can be promoted for and in connection with “community meetings” required for rezoning and special use permit applications, and “conferences” required for site plans (together, “Community Meetings”); WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020 NDS Staff presented to City Council proposed procedures designed to promote public notice and an opportunity for City residents to comment on development applications regardless of whether they have access to internet or telephone services; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the procedures presented by NDS Staff to City Council on July 20, 2020 are hereby approved and all Community Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with said procedures for the duration of the State of Emergency declared by the City Manager on March 12, 2020. Page 249 of 255 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Community Engagement Meeting Requirements (during COVID 19 Emergency) ______________________________________________________________________________ The following procedures will apply to the following Community Engagement Meetings (“Community Meetings”): 1. Community Meetings required in connection with applications seeking rezonings including Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) per City Code Section 34-41(c)(2), and special use permits (SUP) per City Code Section 34-158(a). 2. Public Site Plan Conferences (also referred to as “Community Meetings”, for purposes of these procedures) per City Code Section 34-821. The purposes of a community meeting are to provide citizens an opportunity to receive information about a proposed project, about applicable zoning processes and procedures, about applicable policies of the comprehensive plan and city ordinances or regulations that may apply to the project, and to give citizens an opportunity to ask questions about the project. The following procedures are designed to ensure adequate community engagement and opportunities for public comment on zoning and development applications, while protecting public health and safety during the continuing state of emergency declared by the City Manager on March 12, 2020 for the COVID-19 pandemic. 1. Responsibility for Hosting and Conducting Electronic Community Meetings A. Rezonings and SUPs It is the responsibility of the landowner(s) who is/are the applicant to schedule, host, set up, advertise and conduct the required Community Meeting. B. Site Plans Neighborhood Development Services (NDS) staff shall be responsible for scheduling, hosting, advertising, and conducting the electronic Community Meetings for Site Plan Conferences. 1 Page 250 of 255 2. Format A. Rezonings and SUPs 1. Due to the potential limitations of members of the public to engage in a virtual meeting format, the applicant must provide both a virtual community meeting and the opportunity for citizens to provide comments by electronic and U.S. mail, first- class, postage pre-paid (“USPS Mail”). 2. The window of opportunity for citizens to mail in comments shall be a minimum of 45 days from the mailing of written notices (see section 4, below). 3. The applicant shall choose an electronic virtual meeting platform that satisfies all of the following criteria: a. Members of the public may participate by video conferencing via the internet, free of charge, and b. Members of the public shall also be given the opportunity to join via telephone, free of charge, instead of via the internet, and c. All members of the public shall be afforded the opportunity to register to attend the meeting, regardless of their location, and d. The platform chosen by the applicant must allow a means by which concept plans, illustrations, building elevations, photographs, etc. may be shared electronically with the public who attend the meeting, and e. The platform chosen by the applicant must allow all participants the ability to present verbal questions and comments, and f. The platform chosen by the applicant must provide a means by which the meeting can be recorded (including all questions and comments provided by persons who use the telephone dial-in option). 4. The applicant as well as the applicant’s design professionals shall attend the virtual community meeting. 5. The basic agenda for each meeting shall be as follows: a. Introduction of Applicant and Design Professional—verbally provide names of legal entities (such as companies or LLC’s) as well as names of the individuals who are the real parties in interest. For example: ABC, LLC, by Joe Smith, its sole member; or ABC Engineering Consultants, by Joe Smith, Project Engineer. b. Project Overview—to be provided verbally, supplemented by concept plans, illustrations, building elevations, maps, photographs, etc. The following information, at a minimum, shall be included: i. Identification of the Subject Property by its classification on the City’s Long Range Land Use Map (Comprehensive Plan) and by its current Zoning District Classification. ii. Identification of the number and types of housing units and other uses within the proposed project, the height and general size(s) of the housing units and other buildings, and an explanation of the reason(s) why the rezoning or SUP 2 Page 251 of 255 is necessary in order for the project to be constructed as proposed by the applicant. iii. If the Subject Property is within an overlay district, such as an Architectural Design Control District or an Entrance Corridor District, the district shall be identified and the applicant shall provide a description of the characteristics of the design control district, based on the description of the district contained in the City’s Historic District Guidelines. iv. Identify any waiver(s) the applicant will be requesting of generally-applicable zoning requirements (critical slope waivers, sidewalk waivers, etc.) v. Identify any amenities that will be part of the project (open space, affordable housing, special parking arrangements, etc.) vi. If affordable housing will be included, state whether the applicant is subject to the requirements of City Code Section 34-12 and if so, identify generally the number of units that would be required based on gross floor area (GFA) of the project if built out as proposed. If Section 34-12 does not apply, or if the applicant proposes to provide more affordable dwelling units than required by Section 34-12, describe the applicant’s specific proposal. c. Question and Answer Period for the public attending the Community Meeting: i. Each person who wishes to speak or ask questions shall be given no less than three (3) minutes, not counting time used by the applicant to respond. ii. Applicant shall arrange for at least one (1) person to “moderate” the question and answer period, by calling upon individuals who wish to speak, keeping track of time, assisting with and resolving technical problems, etc. Before beginning the question and answer period, the moderator shall announce that all questions shall be limited to the proposal being discussed. iii. Questions shall be responded to by applicant, applicant’s design professional, or other person(s) designated to speak as the applicant’s agent. B. Site Plans NDS shall conduct the Site Plan Conference using a format that can be recorded and available for review by members of the public following the date of the conference. Additionally the format of the conference shall satisfy the requirements of 2(A)(3), above. Due to the potential limitations of members of the public to engage in a virtual meeting format, the opportunity for citizens to provide comments by email and by USPS mail shall be provided. The window of opportunity for written comments (email or USPS mail) shall be 30 days from the date on which the site plan conference is conducted by NDS staff (see section 4, below). NDS staff shall choose a virtual meeting platform that is free to participants and allows participants to join via telephone instead of online. All 3 Page 252 of 255 interested parties shall be allowed to register to attend the virtual community meeting, regardless of the party’s location. 3. Scheduling A. Rezonings and SUPs The applicant shall schedule the virtual community meeting outside of regular business hours. Weeknights between 5:30-8:00 p.m. are preferable. Federal or religious holidays shall not be used for virtual community meetings. The applicant shall include a 30 minute minimum “buffer” extension on their reservation on the chosen virtual meeting platform in the event additional time is required to provide participants adequate opportunity to speak. The applicant is responsible for setting up the time, date and any necessary hardware/software needed to host and conduct an electronic/telephone Community Meeting. Applicant shall obtain the approval of the NDS Director, or designee, that the Applicant’s preferred date and time satisfy the requirements of this section prior to conducting the community meeting. B. Site Plans Site plan conferences are routinely held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month, per City Code Section 34-821. However, additional conference dates may be set by NDS adequate notice to affected persons. The applicant or their designated representative, as well as the design professionals involved in the project, shall attend the site plan conference (community meeting) by video conference, and shall be prepared to present verbal information as well as drawings, sketches, illustrations and photos as part of the video conference. NDS staff shall record each conference, and any member of the public who wishes to listen or watch the conference during the 30-day comment period following the conference may do so. 4. Public Advertisement and Written Notices A. Rezonings and SUPs The applicant will mail via USPS, an application packet and notice of the community meeting to a list of addresses provided by the City. The address list will include all landowners and occupants (if different than property owner) within 500 feet of the Subject Property, as well as neighborhood association contacts. The applicant shall also provide a copy of the packet to the NDS planner by email and USPS mail. The mailing of the notice and application packet must be mailed at least 14 calendar days prior to the date of the Community Meeting. The applicant is responsible for the cost of the mailing. 4 Page 253 of 255 The application packet shall include: 1. A cover letter summarizing the application and providing full contact information for the applicant, including mailing address, telephone number, and email address. 2. A copy of the complete rezoning or SUP application, including all site or conceptual plans and supplemental information. Colorized materials (such as conceptual plans or illustrative graphics) shall be provided in a colorized format unless greyscale documents are approved by the NDS planner. City Code Section 34-827 requires site plans to be submitted at a scale of 1:20. However, if this scale results in document sizes which will be difficult to mail, NDS may approve an alternate scale to allow for reduced size mailings. If the applicant desires to provide materials at a reduced scale, the NDS planner and ADA Coordinator must approve the reduced scale prior to mailing. The applicant will need to provide additional reasonable accommodations if requested. 3. Stamped self-addressed envelopes for citizens to provide written comment to the applicant. A minimum of 45 calendar days shall be provided from the date of mailing for citizens to return written comments by email and USPS mail. The notice letter shall identify the deadline for receipt of written comments. 4. The applicant shall have available, at the time of mailing, all materials in PDF format to be provided to the community as requested. The applicant must provide the PDF materials to the NDS planner at the time of the mailing. B. Site Plans In the application packet, the applicant will provide materials for distribution by NDS staff in advance of the Site Plan Conference. The applicant shall confirm with the NDS planner prior to submission the quantity of materials required for distribution. The materials shall include the following documents and shall be submitted in compiled packages, each within an unsealed envelope ready for distribution by staff: 1. A cover letter summarizing the proposed development and providing full contact information for the applicant, including mailing address, telephone number, and email address. 2. A copy of the proposed site plan. City Code Section 34-827 requires site plans to be submitted at a scale of 1:20. However, if this scale results in document sizes which will be difficult to mail, NDS may approve an alternate scale to allow for reduced size mailings. If the applicant desires to provide materials at a reduced scale, the NDS planner and ADA Coordinator must approve the reduced scale prior to submission. The applicant will need to provide additional reasonable accommodations if requested. 3. Stamped self-addressed envelopes for citizens to provide written comment to the applicant. A minimum of 30 calendar days shall be provided from the date of 5 Page 254 of 255 mailing for citizens to return written comments by email and USPS mail. The notice letter shall identify the deadline for receipt of written comments. 4. At the time of submission, the applicant shall provide to the NDS planner all materials in PDF format to be provided to the community as requested. 5. Documentation A. ZMAs and SUPs Community meetings shall be documented by the applicant as follows: 1. At least seven (7) calendar days prior to the meeting, the applicant will provide the city with a sworn affidavit confirming that the mailing was completed in a timely manner and attaching the mailing list. 2. On the date of the meeting, the applicant shall record the meeting. The applicant shall provide the NDS planner with a link to the recording of the meeting and a record of all registered attendees from the meeting platform. The meeting link must remain publicly accessible throughout the review process. 3. At the end of the public comment window, the applicant shall compile all written comments received by email and by USPS Mail, and shall send them (all at once, packaged together) to the NDS planner. If submitted electronically to the planner, all comments shall be compiled into a single electronic document in PDF format. B. Site Plans Virtual community meetings and notification shall be documented by NDS using the following protocols: 1. At least five (5) calendar days prior to the meeting, NDS staff will place an affidavit into the application file, confirming that the mailing was completed in a timely manner. 2. On the date of the meeting, NDS staff shall make records of attendance and shall also document that the meeting occurred through recordation or other evidence. The NDS planner shall maintain a record of all registered attendees. 3. At the end of the 30-day public comment window, the applicant shall send to the NDS planner all written comments which were sent directly to the applicant. If submitted electronically to the planner, all comments shall be compiled into a single electronic document, in PDF format. 6. Completion The Community Meeting requirement for a rezoning or SUP is not completed until the NDS planner has received all documentation required by these procedures. 6 Page 255 of 255