CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Members November 16, 2020 Nikuyah Walker, Mayor Sena Magill, Vice Mayor Heather D. Hill Michael K. Payne J. Lloyd Snook, III 5:30 p.m. Closed session pursuant to Sections 2.2-3711 and 2.2-3712 of the Virginia Code (Legal consultation; personnel) Virtual/electronic meeting 6:30 p.m. Regular Meeting Virtual/electronic meeting in accordance with the local ordinance approved July 27, 2020 to ensure continuity of government and prevent the spread of disease. Register at www.charlottesville.gov/zoom. NOTE: Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in the public meeting may call the ADA Coordinator at (434) 970-3182 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. CALL TO ORDER MOMENT OF SILENCE ROLL CALL AGENDA APPROVAL ANNOUNCEMENTS CONSENT AGENDA* 1. Appropriation: Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program Child and Adult Care Food Program - $30,000 (2nd reading) 2. Appropriation: Virginia Outdoors Foundation Grant - Ragged Mountain Land Acquisition - $65,000 (2nd reading) 3. Appropriation: Runaway Emergency Shelter Program Grant - $209,444 (2nd reading) 4. Appropriation: Local Emergency Management Performance Grant (L.E.M.P.G.) - $7,500 (2nd reading) 5. Ordinance: Amendment to the text of Chapter 34 (Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended, to provide updates to family day home uses (2nd reading) 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. 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.org/zoom. ACTION ITEMS 6. Allocation*: Employee Assistance Proposal GENERAL BUSINESS 7. Report: Traffic safety report 8. Report: City logo discussion OTHER BUSINESS MATTERS BY THE PUBLIC Page 1 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 2, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Riaan Anthony, Park and Recreation Management Specialist Staff Contacts: Riaan Anthony, Park and Recreation Management Specialist II Vic Garber, Deputy Director, Parks and Recreation Title: Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program Child and Adult Care Food Program - $30,000 Background: The City of Charlottesville, through Parks and Recreation, has received approval for a reimbursement of up to $30,000 from the Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program to provide free dinner to children 18 and under attending our drop-in afterschool programs through their Child and Adult Care Food Program. Discussion: Charlottesville Parks and Recreation will operate an afterschool meals program for 36 weeks, during the course of the regular school year. There are currently 5 locations, Friendship Court, Greenstone on 5th, South First Street, Westhaven Community Centers, and Crow Recreation Center that serve children 18 years and under. This year we will be sponsoring the Girls and Boys Club. The reimbursement will cover the costs of a nutritious dinner at these locations, which also have an educational/enrichment component. Dinner will be served from 4-8 pm at the various community centers. Most of the children served receive free or reduced meals during the school year. Over 400 children will be served each week during the school year. The dinners are purchased through the City of Charlottesville School Food Service. The Parks and Recreation Department pays the bills to the City of Charlottesville Food Service and is then reimbursed by the Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Programs. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Approval of this agenda item aligns directly with Council’s vision for Charlottesville to be America’s Healthiest City and it contributes to Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan - Healthy and Safe Page 2 of 44 City. Children will receive a nutritious dinner, hopefully replacing a meal that did not exist or providing a healthier balanced option for them. Community Engagement: N/A Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund. The funds will be appropriated, expensed and reimbursed to a Grants Fund. There is no required local match for this program. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds, Alternatives: If money is not appropriated, the free dinner program will not be offered to youth, most of whom receive free or reduced meals during the school year. Attachments: N/A Page 3 of 44 APPROPRIATION Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program Child and Adult Care Food Program $30,000 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through Parks and Recreation, has received approval for reimbursement up to $30,000 from the Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program to provide free dinner to children attending select drop-in afterschool centers; and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from period October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2021; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that the sum of $30,000, received from the Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $ 30,000 Fund: 209 Internal Order: 1900342 G/L Account: 430120 Expenditures - $30,000 Fund: 209 Internal Order: 1900342 G/L Account: 530670 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $30,000 from the Virginia Department of Education Special Nutrition Program. Page 4 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 2, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Chris Gensic, Parks and Recreation Staff Contacts: Chris Gensic, Parks and Recreation Ryan Davidson, Office of Budget and Performance Management Title: Virginia Outdoors Foundation Grant - Ragged Mountain Land Acquisition - $65,000 Background: The City of Charlottesville, through Parks and Recreation, has received a grant from the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) to assist with the acquisition of five additional acres of forested land adjacent to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir property. The match for this project comes in the form of funds remaining from the previous US Department of Agriculture (USDA) grant through the Community Forest Program used to acquire the 144 acres adjacent to this five acres. Discussion: The City of Charlottesville became aware of property for sale adjacent to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir a few years ago. With assistance from the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC) the landowner agreed to sell the property if the City is awarded the VOF grant. The USDA grant program is intended to preserve forest properties to be used for recreation and education. The forest management plan already developed for the previous acquisition will be amended slightly to include this land, and it will be developed to primarily include trail system layout and plans for how to provide access and interpretation for environmental education. Community Engagement: The master plan for Ragged Mountain has a primary element related to preservation of forest and water resources. This acquisition opportunity will further the preservation goal and expand recreation opportunities. This will also provide for environment education opportunities for City and County elementary, secondary, and college students due to the property’s proximity to so many schools. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: Preservation of the property will further the council vision statement of being a Green City with an extensive natural trail system, along with healthy rivers and streams, and further Strategic Plan objective Page 5 of 44 3.4 “Be responsible stewards of natural resources”. Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund. Funds will be received and expensed in the Capital Improvement Fund. The match is provided from remainder funds from a UDSA Community Forest grant and does not include local dollars. Local donors have contributed to cover the legal fees (survey/appraisal, etc.) and the grants provide the funding for purchase. Long term maintenance will be limited to trail maintenance performed by City staff that already manages the adjacent trail systems. The City paid only for the title report ($350.00) from the existing trial and land acquisition CIP fund. Recommendation: Staff recommends appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: If grant funds are not appropriated, the property will not be acquired. Attachments: Grant award letter from VOF Property owner letter Map of property to be acquired. Page 6 of 44 APPROPRIATION Virginia Outdoors Foundation Grant – Ragged Mountain Land Acquisition $65,000 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville, through Parks and Recreation, has been awarded $65,000 from the Virginia Outdoors Foundation to acquire 5 acres of undeveloped forested land adjacent to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir Property; and WHEREAS, the match for this grant will come from the remainder of a previous USDA grant award; and WHEREAS, the grant funding will be passed through the parkland acquisition account and paid to the property owner; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $65,000 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue $65,000 Fund: 426 WBS: P-00534 G/L Account: 431110 Expenditures $65,000 Fund: 426 WBS: P-00534 G/L Account: 599999 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $65,000 from the Virginia Outdoors Foundation. Page 7 of 44 Page 8 of 44 78°33'30"W 78°33'0"W IR O ERV RES 38°1'30"N 38°1'30"N ILS RA LS T AI AY TR LID Y DA HO LI HO LS R AI T AY D LI HO Legend TMP75-47A Interstate Primary Road Secondary Road Local Road Streams - NHDflowline FType Stream/River Connector; Underground Conduit Virginia Geographic Information Network (VGIN) 78°33'30"W 78°33'0"W Aerial Map ± Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic GCS North America 1983 Datum: D North America 1983 Feet Map created MM/DD/YYYY by YOUR NAME HERE. Source data provided by LIST DATA SOURCES HERE. Aerial imagery acquired MM/DD/YYYY Landowner ~ Acres 0 350 700 Aerial imagery © Commonwealth of Virginia. This map is for general reference and display purposes only. County or Control # 1:5,625 Site Visit Date: Page 9 of 44 Page 10 of 44 Page 11 of 44 Page 12 of 44 Page 13 of 44 Page 14 of 44 Page 15 of 44 Page 16 of 44 Page 17 of 44 Page 18 of 44 Page 19 of 44 Page 20 of 44 Page 21 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 2, 2020 Action Requested: Appropriation Presenter: Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Staff Contacts: Shayla Givens, Department of Human Services Kaki Dimock, Director, Department of Human Services Title: Runaway Emergency Shelter Program Grant - $209,444 Background: In FY2020 the Human Services Department, in partnership with ReadyKids, applied for and received a 3 year grant from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families in the amount of $200,000 in federal funds and $22,222 in local matching funds. In FY2021, the first year of the grant, the local match will be met with a transfer of $9,444 from the Human Services Department for a total appropriation of $209,444. An in-kind match of $12,778 from ReadyKids, to provide Runaway Emergency Shelter Program (R.E.S.P.) services, will be applied to the grant as well. Discussion: The funds support services that provide emergency shelter, counseling and after care services for youth in crisis for the purpose of keeping them safe and off the streets, with a goal of reunification with family. Funded services will include: emergency shelter available 24 hours per day, 7days a week; individual and family counseling to help resolve conflict and develop new communication skills to facilitate reunification with the family; and additional support services that help youth build meaningful connections with their community and encourage positive youth development. This collaborative initiative anticipates serving 36 youth through the shelter program, 360 youth through the counseling program, and 525 youth through the hotline over the course of the three year grant period. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: The Runaway Emergency Services Program grant aligns with the City of Charlottesville’s Strategic Plan – Goal 2: A Healthy and Safe City; Objective 2.3: Improve community health and safety outcomes by connecting residents with effective resources. Page 22 of 44 Community Engagement: In order to increase prevention services, R.E.S.P. staff conduct extensive outreach efforts, particularly in area schools reaching out to youth through a variety of activities including presentations to health classes and at tables during lunch. Budgetary Impact: There is no impact to the General Fund. The grant will be appropriated and expensed from the grants fund. There is a local match of $22,222, that the Human Service’s Department will provide in cash ($9,444) and that ReadyKids will provide as an in-kind match ($12,778). The cash match of $9,444 will come from funding that was previously appropriated as part of the FY21 Human Services budget. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of funds. Alternatives: If the funds are not appropriated, the grant would not be received and the Runaway Emergency Shelter Program services would not be provided. Attachments: Appropriation Page 23 of 44 APPROPRIATION Runaway Emergency Shelter Program $209,444 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has been awarded $200,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families with cash match of $9,444 provided by the Human Services Fund and in-kind match of $12,778 provided by ReadyKids; WHEREAS, the funds will be used to operate the Runaway Emergency Shelter Program through a partnership between the Human Services Department and ReadyKids. The grant award covers the period from September 30, 2020 through September 29, 2021; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $209,444 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $209,444 $200,000 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900391 G/L Account: 431110 $ 9,444 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900391 G/L Account: 498010 Expenditures - $209,444 $ 69,948 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900391 G/L Account: 519999 $125,000 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900391 G/L Account: 530010 $ 14,496 Fund: 211 Internal Order: 1900391 G/L Account: 599999 Transfer - $9,444 $ 9,444 Fund: 213 Cost Center: 3413003000 G/L Account: 561211 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $200,000 from the Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families. Page 24 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 2, 2020 Action Required: Appropriation Presenter: Maribel Street, Emergency Management Coordinator Staff Contacts: Symia Tabron, Accountant Title: Local Emergency Management Performance Grant (L.E.M.P.G.) - $7,500 Background: The Virginia Department of Emergency Management has allocated $7,500 in 2019 Emergency Management Performance Management Grant (L.E.M.P.G.) funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the City of Charlottesville. The locality share is $7,500, for a total project of $15,000. Discussion: The City of Charlottesville is the grant administrator for this grant, which will be passed to the Office of Emergency Management at the Charlottesville-U.V.A.-Albemarle County Emergency Communications Center. The grant award period is July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020. The objective of the L.E.M.P.G. is to support local efforts to develop and maintain a Comprehensive Emergency Management Program. The 2019 L.E.M.P.G. funds will be used by the Office of Emergency Management to enhance local capabilities in the areas of planning, training and exercises, and capabilities building for emergency personnel and the whole community. Alignment with City Council’s Vision and Strategic Plan: This emergency management program supports City Council’s America’s Healthiest City vision, specifically, “Our emergency response system is among the nation’s best, ” as well as Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan, specifically sub-elements 2.1 (Provide an effective and equitable public safety system) and 2.4 (Ensure families and individuals are safe and stable). Maintaining our response and recovery capability is an on-going process that requires regular planning discussions and well as training and exercising with community response partners. Citizen preparedness, including awareness of local hazards and actions they can take to survive and recover from an emergency is a critical part of the local response system. Page 25 of 44 Community Engagement: The L.E.M.P.G. engages the community through public outreach efforts led by the Office of Emergency Management. Increasing citizen awareness of hazards and promoting steps individuals can take to prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergency situations is a critical priority for the Office of Emergency Management. Community outreach efforts include presenting on preparedness to community groups and designing and implementing targeted messaging through various media. This funding allows the Assistant Emergency Manager to dedicate additional time in support of this mission. Budgetary Impact: This has no impact on the General Fund. The funds will be expended and reimbursed to a Grants fund. The locality match of $7,500 will be covered with an in-kind match from the Office of Emergency Management budget. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval and appropriation of grant funds. Alternatives: If grants funds are not appropriated, the Office of Emergency Management will not be able to completely fund the full-time salary for the Assistant Emergency Management Coordinator. A reduction in time for this position will negatively impact the quantity and quality of public outreach on emergency preparedness to community members. Attachments: Appropriation Page 26 of 44 APPROPRIATION 2019 Local Emergency Management Performance Grant (LEMPG) $7,500 WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has received funds from the Virginia Department of Emergency Management in the amount of $7,500 in federal pass through funds and $7,500 in local in-kind match, provided by the Charlottesville-UVA-Albemarle Emergency Communications Center Office of Emergency Management; and WHEREAS, the funds will be used to support programs provided by the Office of Emergency Management; and WHEREAS, the grant award covers the period from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, that the sum of $7,500 is hereby appropriated in the following manner: Revenue – $7,500 $7,500 Fund: 209 I/O: 1900380 G/L: 430120 State/Fed pass thru Expenditures - $7,500 $7,500 Fund: 209 I/O: 1900380 G/L: 510010 Salaries BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation is conditioned upon the receipt of $7,500 from the Virginia Department of Emergency Management, and the matching in-kind funds from the Charlottesville-UVA-Albemarle Emergency Communications Center Office of Emergency Management. Page 27 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 2, 2020 Action Required: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment Presenter: Missy Creasy, Assistant Director, NDS Staff Contacts: Read Brodhead, Zoning Administrator, NDS Craig A. Fabio, Asst. Zoning Administrator, NDS Lisa Robertson, Acting City Attorney Title: ZT20-10-02– Family Day Home Background: At the July 2020 Planning Commission meeting, the following Zoning Text Amendment request was initiated: A Zoning Text Initiation to make family day homes for up to 12 children by right uses in all zoning districts and exempt them from off street parking requirements, and to also ask staff to develop standard drop off and pick up code to ensure safety given this change. In addition, make all efforts to administratively speed up childcare applications. Staff took two different routes for review of this item including state and local actions. Ms. Robertson contacted the City Council’s legislative subcommittee about this matter and worked to develop more specific recommendations for Delegate Hudson and Senator Deeds, as to which of the state regulations the City contemplates might be most easily [and safely] relaxed during COVID. Legislative items must come from Council directly. In addition, Ms. Robertson put together an informational/ background memo for the PC and council subcommittee on this issue which was sent on July 22, 2020. The request for changes required at the state level has been submitted and feedback is forthcoming. In addition to state level consideration, staff reviewed the city code provisions and state code updates and drafted language for consideration that would bring our local ordinance up to date and provide for additional allowances for larger family day homes. Please note that any state 1 Page 28 of 44 code requirement currently in place is allowable regardless of the outdated language we have in the current city code. Staff provided draft ordinance language for discussion at the September 9, 2020 Planning Commission meeting and held a joint public hearing on October 13, 2020 on the request as updated from September discussion. The Planning Commission recommended approval on October 13, 2020. Proposed Zoning Text Changes Revise §34-420, 34-480, and 34-796 Use Matrixes as follows: • Amend to allow Family day home (1-4 children) as a by-right use in all zoning districts which allow residential use. • Amend to allow Family day home (5-12 children) as a provisional use in all districts which allow for residential use. Revise §34 Article IX. Generally Applicable Regulations, Division 9. Standards for Provisional Use as follows: • Provide regulations for family day home (5-12 children) by provisional use. Revise §34-1200. Definitions. as follows: • Amend the definition for “Family day home” to confirm a lawfully established residential use prior to implementing a family day home. • Amend the definition for “Occupancy, residential” to clarify that the family day home (1-4 children) use is considered residential occupancy. Discussion: Overview of Staff Analysis Staff recommended approval of the proposed zoning text amendment. • Staff reviewed the city code provisions and state code updates and drafted language for consideration that would bring our local ordinance up to date and provide for additional allowances for larger family day homes. Please note that any state code requirement currently in place is allowable regardless of the outdated language we have in the current city code. This would also broaden the locations where this use can be considered. In 2 Page 29 of 44 addition, larger family day homes must currently go through a special use permit process which is long and costly and a provisional use permit process would streamline that yet provide for similar oversight and public engagement requirements. • The 2013 Comprehensive Plan provides provisions for updating regulations to support uses that provide for economic vitality. • Staff believes the proposed regulations are in line with the goals of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission At the September 9th Work session, the Planning Commission discussion focused on hours of operation for the provisional use permit and providing as much flexibility as possible. At the public hearing on October 13, 2020, Commissioners asked for background on the hours of operation proposal. Staff noted that the proposal was in line with providing flexibility and noted that if conditions in the future change that it could be reviewed at that time. There was also a question concerning provisional use verses by right in some districts for Family Day Home (5-12 children) and it was noted that with the change in number of children requirements due to updates in state legislation that this was an ideal opportunity to streamline the requirements. Alignment with City Council’s Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: The proposed zoning text amendment aligns with the City Council Vision of Economic Sustainability, as it will provide for additional options for in home entrepreneurship. The proposed changes align with Strategic Plan, Goal 1.4 and Goal 4.3 as it can increase opportunities for new family day homes as well as opportunities to expand existing family day home opportunities. Community Engagement: No public comment was provided at the public hearing. Budgetary Impact: No budgetary impact. Recommendation: The Commission took the following action: 3 Page 30 of 44 Commissioner Solla-Yates moved to recommend approval of this zoning text amendment to the text of Chapter 34 (Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Charlottesville, 1990, as amended, to provide updates to family day home uses to include Section 34-420, 34-480, and 34-796 Use Matrixes to allow family day home (1-4 children) as a by-right use in all zoning districts which allow residential use, to allow family day home (5-12 children) as a provisional use in all districts which allow for residential use, to update Section 34-1200: Definitions under “Family day home” to confirm a lawfully established residential use prior to implementing a family day home and under “Occupancy, residential” to clarify that the family day home (1-4 children) use is considered residential occupancy, and to add a Section to Article IX. Generally Applicable Regulations, Division 9. Standards for Provisional Use to provide regulations for family day home (5-12 children) by provisional use on the basis that the changes would serve the interests of public necessity, convenience, general public welfare and good zoning practice. Seconded by Commissioner Dowell. Motion is Approved 7-0. Alternatives: City Council has several alternatives: (1) by motion, take action to approve the attached ordinance (granting the ZTA); (2) by motion, request changes to the attached ordinance, and then approve the ZTA in accordance with the amended ordinance; (3) by motion, deny the requested ZTA (as recommended by the Planning Commission). Attachment: (1) Proposed Ordinance Approving a Zoning Text Amendment (2) Planning Commission Staff Report with Attachments, October 13, 2020 (https://www.charlottesville.gov/1077/Agendas-Minutes Page 4) 4 Page 31 of 44 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, CHAPTER 34 (ZONING) TO ESTABLISH UPDATED REGULATIONS FOR FAMILY DAY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission initiated a zoning text amendment proposing amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance, provisions regulating family day homes (“Proposed Zoning Text Amendment”); and WHEREAS, a joint public hearing on the Proposed Zoning Text Amendment was held by the Planning Commission and City Council on October 13, 2020, after notice to the public as required by law, and, following conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Proposed Zoning Text Amendment for the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice; and WHEREAS, after consideration of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the City staff report and recommendations therein given, and the public comment received, this Council is of the opinion that that the Proposed Zoning Text Amendment, as recommended by the Planning Commission, has been designed to give reasonable consideration to the purposes listed in Sec. 15.2-2283 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, and this Council hereby finds and determines that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice require the Proposed Zoning Text Amendment; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia that Chapter 34 of the Code of the City of Charlottesville (1990), as amended, is hereby amended and re- enacted as follows: 1. Amend the provisions of §34-420 (Use matrix—Residential zoning districts), as follows: 5 Page 32 of 44 2. Amend the provisions of §34-480 (Use matrix—Commercial districts), as follows: Commercial Zoning Districts Family day B-1 B-2 B-3 M-I ES IC home 1-4 1—5 B B B B B children 5-12 6—12 BP BP BP P P children 3. Amend the provisions of §34-796 (Use matrix—Mixed use corridor districts), as follows: Mixed Use Zoning Districts Family day D DE DN WME WMW CH HS NCC HW WSD URB SS CD CC home 1-4 1—5 B B B B B B B B B B B B B B children 5-12 6—12 P P P P P P P P P P P P P P children 4. Amend §34-1200, the definitions of “family day home” and “residential occupancy”, as follows: Family day home means a child care program serving one (1) to twelve (12) children under the age of thirteen (13) (exclusive of the provider's own children and any children who reside in the home), where such program is offered in the lawfully established residence of the provider or the lawfully established residence of any of the children in care. Any program serving more than twelve (12) children shall be considered a child daycare facility. Occupancy, residential for purposes of this zoning ordinance, this term refers to the number of persons who may reside together within one (1) dwelling unit, as a single housekeeping unit. Each of the following shall be deemed a single housekeeping unit: (i) one (1) person; (ii) two (2) or more persons related by blood or marriage, together with any number of their children (including biological children, stepchildren, foster children, or adopted children); (iii) two (2) persons unrelated by blood or marriage, together with any number of the children of either of them (including biological children, stepchildren, foster children, or adopted children); (iv) 6 Page 33 of 44 within certain designated university residential zoning districts: up to three (3) persons unrelated by blood or marriage; (v) within all other residential zoning districts: up to four (4) persons unrelated by blood or marriage; (vi) group homes, residential facilities and assisted living facilities, as defined in the Code of Virginia, § 15.2-2291, which are licensed by the department of social services or the department of behavioral health and developmental services and which are occupied by no more than eight (8) mentally ill, mentally retarded, developmentally disabled, aged, infirm, or disabled persons together with one (1) or more resident counselors; (vii) a group of persons required by law to be treated as a single housekeeping unit, in accordance with the Federal Fair Housing Act, or a similar state law. A family day home that serves one (1) to (4) four children shall be considered part of a residential occupancy by a single family. 5. Add a new §34-1176, as follows: §34-1176.—Family day home (5-12 children). A provisional use permit that authorizes a family day home serving five (5) to twelve (12) children shall be subject to the following regulations: 1. Each provisional use permit for a family day home will be valid from January 1 (or such other date during a calendar year on which such permit is issued) through December 31 of the calendar year in which the permit is issued. 2. The operator of the family day home must reside at the property as his/her primary residence, or must be caring for children who reside within the residence. 3. No clients or employees shall be allowed to visit the property on which a family day home is conducted earlier than 6:00 a.m. or later than 11 p.m. The family day home may operate up to 12 hours within each 24 hour period. 4. Applicants for a family day home provisional use permit must obtain, and provide to the zoning administrator: a. A copy of a valid city business license (or a statement from the commissioner of revenue that no city business license is required) b. A copy of a valid state license. Following initial issuance of the provisional use permit, the operator shall keep the zoning administrator supplied with a valid state license at all times while the provisional use permit is valid. c. A traffic safety plan that addresses drop-off and pick-up procedures related to automotive traffic. 7 Page 34 of 44 5. In addition to the resident(s) of the dwelling, not more than one (1) other individual may be engaged in the activities of the family day home on the property at any given time. 6. One (1) exterior sign, of dimensions no greater than two (2) square feet, may be placed on the exterior of the dwelling or an accessory structure to indicate the presence of the family day home. The sign shall not be lighted. 7. A provisional use permit for a family day home may be revoked by the zoning administrator should a permit holder fail to maintain compliance with any of the regulations set forward in this section. An operator whose provisional use permit has been revoked pursuant to this paragraph shall not be permitted to apply for a new permit for any location for one calendar year after the end of the permit term. 8. Once an application requesting a provisional use permit is received by the zoning administrator, notification shall be sent by registered or certified letter to the last known address of each adjacent property owner. If the zoning administrator receives no written objection from a person so notified within 30 days of the date of sending the letter and determines that the family day home otherwise complies with the provisions of the ordinance and all other applicable local ordinances, the zoning administrator shall issue the permit. If the zoning administrator receives a written objection from a person so notified within 30 days of the date of sending the letter and determines that the family day home otherwise complies with the provisions of the ordinance, the zoning administrator shall consider such objection and may (i) issue or deny the permit or (ii) refer the permit to the local governing body for consideration. 8 Page 35 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 16, 2020 Action: Approval Presenter: Chris Cullinan, Director of Finance Staff Contacts: Kaki Dimock, Director of Human Services Chris Cullinan, Director of Finance Title: Allocation of $100,000 of CARES Contingency Reserve to Provide Assistance to Employees Laid Off During Pandemic Background: During its regularly scheduled meeting on October 5, 2020, City Council established a CARES Contingency Reserve of $625,000. On October 19, 2020, City Council allocated a significant amount of this reserve to specific COVID-related expenses, in accordance with staff recommendations relating to requests received from various entities. On November 2, 2020, City Council allocated an additional $54,750 to The Bridge Ministry. $155,000 remains in the CARES Round 2 Contingency Reserve. Due to a difficult and necessary reduction in force required by the COVID-19 pandemic, 228 staff were laid off for lack of work activities. City Council and City leadership have expressed concerns for these employees in several council meetings. Staff request approval to use $100,000 of the remaining CARES Contingency Reserve funds to support these former employees. Discussion: At the city manager’s request, staff have developed a model for financial assistance for employees laid off by the city’s reduction in force due to COVID-19. Eligibility and amount of financial assistance will be determined as follows:  Human Resources sends notice of potential eligibility for financial assistance to designated 228 staff members 1 Page 36 of 44  Employee seeking assistance contacts designated Human Services staff person for screening  Employee is identified as one of the 228 staff laid off due to COVID-19 by the Human Resources department  Employee annual income information is collected and determines amount of assistance: o Employees with household income below 50% Area Median Income may receive up to $750 o Employees with household income below 30% Area Median Income may receive up to $1000  A list of approved assistance payments is provided to Finance Department to process As always, current and former employees that qualify are welcome to seek emergency financial assistance through the Pathways fund or Virginia’s Rent and Mortgage Relief Program. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: This action aligns with the Council’s Vision of Economic Stability and as a Great Place to Live for All of Our Citizens. It also aligns with the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goals. Budgetary Impact: There is no direct impact on the City’s budget. A second round of CARES funds in the amount of $4,123,776 has been received from the Commonwealth, of which City Council appropriated $625,000 for a Contingency Reserve (approximately 15%). Sufficient funds remain in the Contingency Reserve. All funds are subject to conditions established by the U.S. Treasury and the Commonwealth and must be expended for eligible expenditures incurred between March 1, 2020 and December 30, 2020. Any unused funds must be returned. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval to use remaining CARES Contingency Reserve Funds in the amount of $100,000 to provide financial assistance to city employees laid off due to the reduction in force made necessary by the COVID-19 pandemic. 2 Page 37 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 16, 2020 Action Required: No Action Required (Report Only) Presenter: Brennen Duncan, City Traffic Engineer Staff Contacts: Brennen Duncan, City Traffic Engineer Title: Traffic Safety Report Background Over the past few months, several traffic calming/safety issues have been sent to City Council. This report will discuss those issues, steps that staff has already taken to address, and some longer term possible solutions that would need council support in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). History/Discussion • The first issue was a petition sent to City Council on July 24th for traffic calming along Cherry Avenue. The city had already planned on performing a traffic study along Cherry Avenue as part of the Small Area Plan that was completed. Due to COVID-19, that study had been postponed as traffic patterns had not yet returned to normal. Traffic has still not fully returned to normal, but Traffic Engineering had counts taken the week of November 2nd and will be preparing a report about the state of Cherry Avenue and what recommendations might be appropriate for both the commercial area east of Roosevelt Brown and also the residential area to the west. • The second issue that was brought up on September 14th was traffic calming issues on Willard Drive in the Fry Spring neighborhood. These issues were regarding the noise generated by the speed bumps along the roadway, truck traffic, vegetation blocking signage, and poor placement of speed limit signs. In 2008, the residents in the area started the traffic calming process as outlined in the City’s Traffic Calming handbook. At that time, it was determined that there was not a speeding issue, but there was a cut-through issue, and as such, speed bumps were installed. 1 Page 38 of 44 Staff has addressed all of the signage issues clearing away overgrowth, moving the speed limit sign, and adding “No Truck” signage to the major roadways before they would reach Willard. As previously stated, the installation of the speed bumps were after working through the traffic calming process. Currently there is no process for what to do if a neighborhood wants to remove traffic calming measures. Staff has reviewed this and is recommending that we amend the traffic calming handbook to mimic the process for installation, but to stipulate that the process for removal could not be started until those devices had been installed for at least 10 years. • The third and final issue is regarding the safety along 5th Street, particularly between Harris Road and Cherry/Elliot Avenue. There have been 5 fatal crashes along this stretch of roadway since November of 2016, three of these being since July of this year. Many residents complain about the overall speed along the corridor. The City’s 5th/Ridge/McIntire plan completed in 2017 also showed that the overall incident rate along the corridor was higher than the statewide average. Charlottesville Police Department (CPD) provided traffic engineering with the crash reports for 4 of the 5 (the 5th report has not been finished yet) fatalities that have occurred over the past 4 years. All of the fatal crashes were the result of driver action and not necessarily roadway design. Four of the incidents resulted from a combination of reckless driving and excessive speed, while the 5th was related to impaired driving. CPD has also conducted two separate speed studies along the corridor within the last 18 months. Both of these gave very similar results. The average speed over drivers (50th percentile) was below the posted speed limit of 45mph at between 42-44mph. The 85th percentile was less than 5mph over the posted speed limit. Both of these are within general practice of traffic engineering tolerances. Traffic Engineering looked more closely at the crash data from the 5th/Ridge/McIntire study and found that the vast majority of the incidents occurred at the intersections and not along the segments between. Based on reviewing all of the data available, it is the traffic engineer’s opinion that there is not a speeding problem along the corridor. That being said, with the nature of the fatalities and the speeds that were able to be obtained, we do have a roadway that is designed to allow for higher speeds for those who wish to break the posted speed limit. The majority of all the accidents along the corridor are congestion related. There are nearly 21,000 vehicles per day (vpd) that use 5th Street to come and go from the City and approximately 18,000 vpd on this particular stretch of roadway. There are also developments in various stages of design that could add as many as 5,000 additional vehicle trips to this corridor. 2 Page 39 of 44 Recommendations There are several measures that Traffic Engineering is recommending be done to mitigate issues along the corridor. Immediate Measures • Reduction of the speed limit from 45mph to 40mph. o Even though speeding was not found to be a problem along the corridor, nearly 1/3 of the accidents in the 5th/Ridge/McIntire plan were rear end collisions. Reducing the speed limit will give more reaction time and reduce the severity of any of these types of crashes. • Installation of advanced intersection warning signs o There are currently no warning signs along 5th Street of upcoming intersecting streets. Installing these signs will help alert drivers of possible upcoming conflicts • Signal Improvements o Staff will be installing advanced flashing “Signal Ahead” signs that will activate upon the red signal to help alert drivers in advance of the signal that they are approaching a red light. o Staff will be replacing the traditional green ball for permissive left turns with the flashing yellow arrow. o Staff will be installing high visibility back plates on the signals. • Crosswalk at Old Ridge o Staff recommends removal of the long, unsignalized crosswalk. Mid Term Measures • Staff has already been using the VDOT Smartscale process to apply for funding to implement projects laid out in the 5th/Ridge/McIntire plan. Because of the nature of that funding, those projects are still several years out and any new applications would be 10- 15 years before implementation. If the city wishes to accelerate that process, it will need to be done with the CIP and local funding. • Traffic Engineering is recommending the installation of a Roundabout just north of Bailey Road. Installing this would break up the 1 mile corridor and make it harder to attain the high speeds witnessed in the recent fatalities. This has been discussed with the property owner adjacent to the roadway and they are amenable to donating the land required for this with the stipulation that their proposed development would be able to have ingress/egress off of the roundabout. • Lighting – There are 2 kinds of lighting that could be installed along the corridor. The first is just intersection lighting. Most of the intersections do not have dedicated lighting and this should be looked at to be installed to help mitigate conflicts during nighttime 3 Page 40 of 44 hours. The second is pedestrian scale lighting along the corridor. This would be a benefit to pedestrians and cyclists who wish to use the corridor as well as give a greater sense of “place” which is shown to reduce overall speeds as well. Long Term Measures • As was noted before, the majority of the accidents are related to congestion. The only way to mitigate congestion along this corridor as well as others in the area is to reduce the number of vehicles. As a long term recommendation, traffic engineering is suggesting that park and ride lots/structures should be implemented along the city/county line to encourage bus use. In order for this to be effective, our transit model for the city would need to change. Transit lines would need to focus on our main arterial roadways and get lead times between busses down in the 10-15 minute range. Budgetary Impact Short Term Measures • Using departmental funds – no impact Mid Term Measures • Implementation of 5th/Ridge/McIntire plan ~ $15-20m • Implementation of Roundabout ~$3-4m Long Term Solutions • Costs unknown at this time Council Action No action required at this time 4 Page 41 of 44 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Agenda Date: November 16, 2020 Action Required: None. For Discussion Presenter: John Blair, Acting City Manager Staff Contacts: John Blair Acting City Manager Kyna Thomas, Clerk of Council Lisa Robertson, Acting City Attorney Title: Origins of the City Logo; Process for Changing Background: Recently City Councilors inquired as to how they might initiate a process to change the City’s logo, sometimes casually referred to as the City “seal”. Mr. Blair recommended that a report be provided to Council regarding the nature and history of the logo/seal. Technically, the official City seal (a/k/a “corporate seal”) is a type of stamp that the Clerk of Council uses to authenticate official documents requiring that a formal signature of an authorized official of the City. That stamp creates a raised surface on a paper document, which allows the original signed version of that document to be distinguished from photo or digital copies. The Clerk of Council is the custodian of the corporate seal, pursuant to City Code §2-2, and a number of state statutes require specific documents to contain the corporate seal. The official, corporate seal does not contain any images. Separately, there is a City “logo” (often referred to casually as the City “Seal”), which was originally approved by City Council to serve as an “identifying device” for use other than within official documents. Sometime in 1971, the City Council (“Council”) formed a City Seal Selection Committee (“Committee”) whereby a City Seal Contest was held. At the June 6, 1971 Council meeting, the Chairman of the Committee presented the winning entry of the contest. The winning entry was submitted by Mr. R.W. Vanderberry. The City Manager recommended that Council adopt the winning entry as the identifying logo of the City. A proposed ordinance entitled “An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain Section 1-9 of the Charlottesville City Code to Permit the Use for Other Than Official Documents, of an Identifying Device” was offered and carried over to the July 19, 1971 meeting whereby it was adopted. The image that we now refer to as the City logo is the design approved by Council in that 1971 meeting: Page 42 of 44 The logo has been used over the years on letterhead, forms, painted on the side of City-owned vehicles, etc. We do not know if there exists an original design document depicting the logo. If such a document exists, it has not been found in the Clerk’s office or the City Attorney’s office. Currently, the logo is reproduced primarily digitally. There exists no written policy that we have found, thus far, identifying when and how a City official or employee may utilize the logo; anyone with a computer can copy the logo and insert it into email communications, memos, draft documents, etc. (The General Assembly, by statute, protects the “seal” of the Commonwealth, and regulates official use; also, the legislature allows the Governor to authorize commercial use of the state “seal” under certain circumstances. See, e.g., Va. Code §1-505 and §2-122). Discussion: Within §15.2-1402 of the Virginia Code, the General Assembly provides that “Every locality of this Commonwealth is hereby declared to be a body politic of the Commonwealth and may have a seal and alter the same at its pleasure.” The City Council has established two “seals” within City Code §2-1, one for use as its official “corporate seal” (authenticating official, legal documents) and the second to be used as the City’s seal for purposes other than on official, legal documents. By majority vote to approve an amended ordinance, City Council may amend §2-1 at any time. If Council desires to change/ update the logo, only the provisions relating to the “identifying device” would need to be amended to reflect the date of Council’s approval of a new logo as the official seal of the City for purposes other than official documents. There is no prescribed legal process for designing a new City logo. As noted above, the 1971 Council chose to announce a contest, and appointed a Committee to select a winning design. We recommend that, before going forward, the City Manager’s Office should conduct an inter- departmental survey, asking each department to identify how it actually uses the City logo for official identification purposes, and what costs would be necessary to replace the current logo with an updated one. The costs should be minimal as to internal correspondence (such as City letterhead or business cards), but repainting vehicles, reprinting brochures, etc. may involve additional costs. Alignment with Council Vision Areas and Strategic Plan: N/A at this time Page 43 of 44 Community Engagement: N/A at this time Budgetary Impact: Cannot be determined at this time. Recommendation: At some point in time City Code §2-1 should be updated, as to the corporate seal, to reflect new means of executing official documents where authorized by statute. So, for example, some statutes may authorize digital/electronic “seals”, or may allow a facsimile of the corporate seal to be imprinted on an official document without having to be physically impressed on a paper copy of the document. The authorizing provisions for the corporate seal that can be impressed on paper copies should be retained, but language should be included to authorize other ways to affix the corporate seal, as may be authorized by law. Alternatives: N/A at this time Attachments: N/A at this time Page 44 of 44