PLACE Design Task Force Minutes April 12, 2018 12:00 – 2:00 Neighborhood Development Services Conference Room, 2nd Floor City Hall Members Present: Mike Stoneking, Fred Wolfe, Mark Rylander, Clarence Green, Andrew Mondschein, Rachel Lloyd, Kathy Galvin, Andres Pacheco, Lena Seville, Tim Mohr, Staff Present: Carrie Rainey, Missy Creasy, Carolyn McCray, Craig Fabio , Brennen Duncan, Brian Haluska Call to Order – Chairman Stoneking AGENDA 1. Arrival (5 minutes) 2. Matters by the Public (5 minutes) 3. PLACE Annual Report Discussion (30 minutes) 4. Zero Lot Line, Urban Sidewalks, and Setbacks Discussion (30 minutes) Mark Rylander: regarding the Tree Commission look at streets that works, zoning code, recommendation end the street that work, zones the highest priority street is the curb side buffer zone. The need for public safety, that have a traffic land next to them. Question street that work diagram, we can’t decide to make that kind of adjustment, matching the listed goals Mike: Setback are from property line, judging the space, imagery visible line. Galvin: outside edge of the sidewalk, no always said The majority is private property, from a design prospective, which cares where the property line is. Lena: would like to have a zero setback, an example where you wouldn’t like street trees. Gennie: answered Lena questions. It is a historic form Galvin: precluded street trees, a special design approach. Rylander: Charlottesville is not well laid out. Mike: would result in sidewalk that are way too wide Galvin: the sidewalks get narrower and areas of high intensity and start to explaining conditions that need different sidewalk treatment, because of our existing conditions are going to take different strategy 1 Rylander: said it is easier, wants to do something with the Comprehensive Plan. Dramatically going to affect us. Is there a public safety problem, maybe a perception. 5 foot setback, 12 feet down, more comfortable place to walk. Gennie: Moving the midway deeper sidewalk than Council chose to. Rylander with no parallel parking, greater intensity and traffic is flying pass, can find data to support this. Carlton and Monticello – cars go way to fast. Streets are the problem. Brennen: If you are redevelop and an 18 foot travel lane, we want to narrow it right here. Carrie: update in the standard and design manual, varying degrees, final to the public in May. SUP and rezone‐ the comp plan comes in. 0 Carlton Carlton Avenue and Monticello Road, Mike Stoneking and Chris Henry Rylander: two goals anything relating to safety‐‐ figure how Charlottesville downtown can have large canopy trees. They developed one that was ideal and how to apply and how the nags it back Brennen: you can’t just do the minimum for all of them. You can’t say we are doing a tree buffer and not a sidewalk. Rachel: said they have tried to address a lot of these issues. Rylander: just doesn’t understand it. Brennen: it reverts back to the street the closest. Galvin: were all of the framework streets Henry: when do you go from a Sensitive to the prevailing pattern that exist now. Development got ahead. How to administer zoning Brian: what we have sort of once step fine‐tuning, prevent parking in the front, did they do all that in a vacuum and crated an issue with all of the mentees. In the private realm, after a certain, if you do the setback getting space for xyz. The street trees. Streets that work, existing street that will never match the ideal, higher priority than other. Craig: At the Flats, all of the planting railing is private property 2 Same as the hotel, 80% pavement. A question of what you want Galvin: since 2013 and 2018 and we haven’t been looking at this 2016 where we talked about the comp plan update, giving the charge to do that. Outside resources to invest. We have got to get outside assistance to finish off the comp plan. Mark Schuyler: the crosswalk lighting, 100 people killed in pedestrian crosswalk, not pedestrian fault. Not a pedestrian, the challenge is Va. Tech. The question for worker were why this happening was, copy of year in Austin Texas a different matrix. 5. Crosswalks and Lighting Discussion (20 minutes) Mike Stoneking made a strong statement for the record. Brennen, select location where they are appropriate they are overused in the city, they don’t stop at regular crosswalk, worse application at the Corner. The public cry’s for it. The last two years. They are not going to listen. They do draw attention to someone is there. Two or three blinking crosswalk. Amanda strobbing lights, rapid flashing beckons lights. Painting the whole intersection, thermoplastic for the durability. Changes to concrete, utility to be dug up, should people be killed in crosswalk. Safety of the pedestrian. Austin Texas, Schuyler: Goes into the Streets and Design Manual, cost is an issue. Vdot research council to do the research on this, we try to follow vdot. As a physical, recommended to Council Not for a specific site. For costing the Design Manual, small ticked amend in NDS, scaping the old one, multiple technology, Put in a request to council, do the same thing with this, not one Councilor. We do this in our free, We don’t unilateral for staff to make the decision. 3 Clarence: it is in affective that way. Long Range planning position CLR of the Mall – got funded 3‐D Modeling Not to be that cynical Take on a few more hot things and take them on with more vigor. Assisting the city with urban design and urban form Community Engagement in too many private section and the setback try to keep it in the physical sector issues. Doesn’t measuring building and setback issue. Community Engagement in a separate communicated body, diverse Change the name of the Group. Prefer to stay broad retain in community engagement Just starting it now. Our very first year, background in out very first, one of those things anyway, given the balance and process and people a more behavioral. Brian Wheeler. Lena talked about the Comp Plan focus on the Comp Plan. Gennie expertise represented, architect, focus on the physical Clarence: Henry should have expertise, stay on a high level, community engagement is part of the mention statement. Plannning department should be doing the leg work. Rylander, Mondeshien: an agenda so we don’t get distracted. Stoneking: it is discouraging. Rachel: questioning our value. Stay focus. Rachel is is hard not to feel frustrative. Lena: Follow through and know them well, follow up meeting, broadness, having combining one or two topic areas. 4 Different ideas and thoughts, we don’t have labor to implement anything. This was suppose to be the rebirth of the urban group. May be the evolution of the new position would be able to focus on that because it doesn’t have Great ideas and where does it get done. The city does not have whole department of people to do that. What you need to take actions on. Small measure of certain things. Where do we fit in the tech amendment. Adapt to how the government functions. Lena about Brian Wheeler, and Clarence Keesecker, Solla Yates, work on movement community engagement of the Comp Plan. Look into concrete come into reality. All the others chapters had a draft. Decision was different at their table. Different type of community engagement, Rachel: discussion identify tools for Charlottesville standard process, they had to follow that process. Internally adjust that if we need to. Would it need to be the same for all projects. What a community engagement would look like. 6. Community Engagement Sub‐Committee Update (15 minutes) 7. New Business (10 minutes) 8. Matters by the Public (5 minutes) 5