Council allocates Downtown Mall savings to other streetscape projects; Holds balance in reserve

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, July 21, 2009

The Charlottesville City Council has reallocated some of the cost savings from the $7.5 million Downtown Mall renovation project which was completed under budget. Council voted to spend $800,000 on work to improve 2nd Street SE next to the stalled Landmark Hotel as well as improvements near the University Corner. However, Council opted not to approve a staff recommendation to use $300,000 to brick part of 6th Street SE between the Market Street Parking Garage and City Hall.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090720-CC-Mall-Savings

Jim Tolbert, the City’s Director of Neighborhood Development Services, said while the City expects approximately $1.5 million in savings from the Mall, he could only confirm $1.1 million at the time he appeared before Council on July 20, 2009. He offered three projects for Council to consider:

• 2nd Street East: The uncompleted Landmark Hotel project left this street in a state of disrepair. This project, estimated by Barton Malow to cost $800,000,  would install bricks as well as place utilities underground. Tolbert said the project would be done in such a way that the improved sidewalk would be protected if and when the hotel project resumes. The City has previously allocated $208,000 to this project, and Tolbert asked for $600,000 more.
• Corner streetscape projects: An existing project to repair curbs and sidewalks in the Corner district was budgeted at $300,000, but Tolbert told Council the work is actually going to cost $500,000. He asked for an additional $200,000 to make the sure the project can be completed. Missing bricks are being replaced, trip hazards are being minimized, and basements are being water-proofed.
• 6th Street East: The alleyway between City Hall and the Market Street Parking garage currently only has one narrow sidewalk. This plan would add bricks to a third of the street leading up from the Mall, widen the sidewalk, and add landscaping near Market Street to improve the street’s appearance. Tolbert asked for $300,000.

NDS Director Jim Tolbert had argued that 6th Street NE could use wider sidewalks to  improve pedestrian safety

Council did not feel that the 6th Street project was a high priority at this time. Councilor Satyendra Huja said he felt that improvements should be made first to 2nd Street Northwest between McGuffey Park and the Mall, 5th Street East between the Mall and Court Square, and 2nd Street North between the Mall and Lee Park. He asked for designs to be conducted for each project. Tolbert said those designs could be done.  However, rather than allocate the $300,000 to those projects, Council opted to place that money in reserve to carry over into the Capital Improvement Budget for fiscal year 2011.

“I’m not sure this is a time where we can justify improvements that are purely cosmetic in nature,” said Mayor Dave Norris.

Councilor Julian Taliaferro questioned why curbs are being replaced on Elliewood Avenue, given that delivery trucks will likely wear them back down again. Tolbert said the existing curbs were installed over 25 years ago, and needed replacement.

2nd Street SE is currently in a state of disrepair

Councilors also questioned whether improvements to 2nd Street East would be premature. Tolbert said the hotel developer, who must contribute $200,000 to the project by 2014, would be responsible for any damage done when construction resumes. Tolbert said that the design would allow for scaffolding to be placed on the building, and added that the project will no longer need heavy cranes given that the hotel’s structure is already in place.

Councilor Holly Edwards asked if the savings could be use to reduce the fees paid by vendors. Tolbert said he would look into it as his department reevaluates the fee structure this fall.

Councilor Huja also questioned the estimates for the other projects and asked his fellow Councilors if they would support reducing the amount for each project by $50,000 each. However, Tolbert said he would have to alter the Corner streetscape project dramatically if the budget was reduced.

“I promise you that we won’t spend a dime more than we have to,” Tolbert said.

Council unanimously voted in favor of reallocating $800,000 towards two of the projects recommended by Tolbert. The rest will be kept in reserve. 

Charlottesville Democrats hold forum for three City Council candidates

By Sean Tubbs & Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, May 7, 2009

The three Democratic candidates seeking their party’s nomination for the two open seats on the Charlottesville City Council have held their final debate before an open primary on Saturday, May 9, 2009. Incumbents Dave Norris and Julian Taliaferro along with challenger Kristin Szakos spent an hour answering questions at the party’s candidates’ forum on May 6, 2009.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090506-Dems-Candidates-Forum

Watch the video: Video: City Council Candidate Forum #2

Mayor Dave Norris said that if he is re-elected, he looks forward to the revitalization of the City’s public housing sites. He says redevelopment will be the community’s “best opportunity” to increase the amount of affordable housing units. Norris also said he would like Council to have more authority over the hiring and firing  of City department heads.

Challenger Kristin Szakos called for holding City Council meetings outside of Council Chambers, meetings where dinner and childcare would be made available to attendees. Szakos also said she supported a dedicated City fund for affordable housing, called for the upgrading of the Charlottesville Transit System to a “more urban” system, and said she would be a careful watchdog of City staff.

Incumbent Julian Taliaferro said he wanted to complete the community’s 50-year water supply plan, defended his unwillingness to support a dedicated affordable housing fund, and said he has the experience to help the City through the next few years of economic turmoil. Taliaferro also said he is capable of standing up to City Manager Gary O’Connell. 

Moderator Sean McCord had the opportunity to ask questions on current issues facing the City. None of the candidates felt the City had the responsibility to help complete the abandoned Landmark Hotel project on the Downtown Mall. 

On the topic of the Hillsdale Drive/Regal Cinema 4 expansion issue, Norris said a “communications breakdown” between City staff and the developers has lead to a misunderstanding that he said could be solved by moving the road’s alignment. Szakos said the City did not do a good job of bringing all the stakeholders together to explain the road’s purpose. Taliaferro did not directly answer this question, but did explain why he continued to be a supporter of the Meadowcreek Parkway.

Saturday’s unassembled caucus will be held from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM at Burley Middle School on Rose Hill Drive in Charlottesville. Registered City voters can participate as long as they are willing to sign a loyalty pledge that says they will not support another party’s candidate or an independent candidate in the general election.

See Charlottesville Tomorrow's Election Watch page for complete coverage of the City's 2009 elections.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 – Introduction of forum from moderator Sean McCord
• 02:40 – Opening statement from Mayor Dave Norris
• 04:10 – Opening statement from challenger Kristin Szakos
• 05:10 – Opening statement from incumbent Julian Taliaferro
• 07:00 – Question #1: “If you are elected or re-elected to the City Council and you return to a public forum like this a year from now, what would you like to say you accomplished after this year?”
• 11:30 – Question #2: “What distinguishes you as a Democratic candidate and what are the advantages of electing Democrats to City Council?”
• 17:00 – Question #3: “Do you think the City and the City taxpayers have a responsibility to help finish the Landmark Hotel project, and what would you like to see done with it?”
• 19:30 – Question #4: “Regal Cinema 4 has announced plans to rebuild their cinema behind K-Mart with additional screens and stadium seating. Many area residents are excited that they won’t have to drive to Short Pump in order to have a modern movie-going experience. Unfortunately, that theater sits directly in the path of the $30 million proposed road construction project to extend Hillsdale Drive to Hydraulic Road. At the same time, a group of concerned citizens have gone to court to prevent the construction of the Meadowcreek Parkway through McIntire Park. What do you propose, both short term and long term, as a solution to our traffic problems and to citizen opposition to building new roads?”
• 27:30 – Audience question #1: “We have a city manager form of government, and over the years I’ve come to believe that the city manager wields more power than anyone else for setting priorities and making decisions. My question to all three of you is, what system do you have in place to watchdog the city manager?”
• 33:30 – Audience question #2: (directed at Taliaferro) “You mentioned affordable housing in your opening statement. On several occasions, you have publicly endorsed the creation of a dedicated fund for affordable housing, but when it came time to vote for it, you were the deciding vote against it. How do you reconcile your public statements against it with your [previous] campaign promises?”
• 39:00 – Audience question #3: “I hear each Council member speak for affordable housing. The last time I heard someone talk about affordable housing they  built 12 houses in the 10th and Page neighborhood, and they were all $300,000 homes. Can someone define affordable housing and who are they going to build these affordable housing units for when a large majority of people in this town are not doctors and lawyers and only have incomes [between] $30,000 or $35,000? What kind of affordable housing are we offering those citizens?”
• 42:35 – Audience question #4: “You are supposed to be voting the will of the people. You’re up there representing me and other people in this room and other people not in this room. I don’t want you to vote what you think is best. I want you to vote what I think is best and what your constituents say is the best. Would you comment on that, please?”
• 48:00 – Norris asks Szakos: “What is it about community organizing that has helped to shape the way you would serve this community as a City Councilor?”
• 50:00 – Szakos asks Norris: “What is one thing that you were not able to  achieve during your first term that you’re running for reelection so that you can accomplish?”
• 52:00: Taliaferro asks Norris: “How do you think we can bring more pressure to bear to move [the 50 year community water supply] forward?”
• 53:45 – Closing statement from Taliaferro
• 54:45 – Closing statement from Szakos
• 55:55 – Closing statement from Norris
• 57:45 – Comments from City Democratic Co-Chair Jonathan Blank

Planning Commission skeptical of plan to increase parking downtown

By Daniel Nairn
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Thursday, April 16, 2009

At their joint public hearing on April 14, 2009, the Charlottesville Planning Commission reacted to a staff proposal to reinstate minimum parking requirements for all new downtown developments. Most commissioners wanted to explore other means of meeting demands of mobility before assenting to a dramatic increase in downtown parking spots. The Commission unanimously voted to request from City Council another 150 days to study the issue further.

Current PEZ zones from Downtown Parking Study

Parking Exempt Zones (PEZ) were created in the 1970’s as a way to discourage the use of downtown land for surface parking. A 2008 parking study evaluated the current use of PEZ as part of a comprehensive review of downtown parking. While the zones have not been very effectual, because developers typically opted to supply parking anyway, the study concluded that the PEZ were not causing any problems. Planning staff, with guidance from a stakeholder group, decided nevertheless that PEZ ought to be eliminated.

The proposed change, entitled “Urban Parking Zone,” would require a developer to provide 1 space per residential unit and about 1 space per 500 sq. ft. for restaurants and retail. Parking must be provided within 1000 ft. of the site. Alternatively, the developer could contribute to a fund specifically earmarked for the construction of another parking garage. Conspicuously absent from the proposal was any option for developers funding alternative transportation or Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies. Mayor Norris asked Jim Tolbert why staff had not followed City Council’s recommendation to include these elements, and Tolbert responded that it was simply an “oversight.”

The commissioners agreed that some provision for TDM ought to be allowed as an option for developers. Commissioner Cheri Lewis asked, “Can we do something to encourage alternative means of transportation? This is just throwing us back into a requirement that was the reason why we adopted a parking exempt zone.” Commissioner Michael Farruggio was the only commissioner to defend the push for more parking to relieve parking problems in residential neighborhoods, yet he also wants to consider other ways to resolve this problem that do not require more parking lots.

Many commissioners carried the discussion further by asking why the City has been giving away parking for free.  Councilor David Brown even interjected to thank the Commission for raising the issue of charging for parking. He was the only Councilor to support the idea when City Council received the parking study in February. The parking study recommended a $1 an hour parking fee for on-street parking, which would generate between $500,000 and $600,000 a year in revenue.

Commissioner Mike Osteen first raised the possibility of pricing city parking, saying “I think we provide cheap on-street parking at the most convenient locations. I think we need to be more aggressive about the price structure of these places.” Commissioner Lewis added, “This is a short term fix but I don’t think its meeting our long term goals.” She agrees with the idea of installing meters and discouraging the notion that the public is entitled to have a free spot available exactly where they want it.

Because of the importance of the discussion, the Planning Commission decided to request a deferral from Council in order to have more time to study the issue. The 2008 Parking study that is the linchpin of this discussion is available online for public review.

MMM Design selected to oversee new Belmont Bridge design work

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, April 8, 2009

An artist's rendering depicting the span of the Belmont Bridge through downtown Charlottesville (Source: MMM Design)

Charlottesville City Council received a very brief update on the replacement plans for Belmont Bridge at their meeting on April 6, 2009. The project has a current cost estimate of $9 million, according to Neighborhood Development Services Director Jim Tolbert. Construction will not begin until at least 2014 when the City is expected to have received enough funding for the project.  It has accumulated state funding and federal commitments to allow for preliminary engineering work by MMM Design. MMM is the company that oversaw the design of the downtown mall renovations.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090407-CC-Belmont-Bridge

“From an engineering standpoint, any engineers could design a bridge,” Tolbert said. “But because of this bridge and because of where it’s located… the aesthetic pieces of this and the functionality are really the important things.” Tolbert added that MMM Design has proven their understanding of the need to make the bridge more than just about cars. They will now begin a design process that Tolbert said would last at least two years. He said a special effort would be made to reach out to the Belmont neighborhood.

Council modifies downtown parking; keeps 2 hour spots

In the early spring of 2008, Neighborhood Development Services for the City of Charlottesville hired consultants to conduct a study of downtown parking.  They examined whether there are currently enough parking spaces to meet today’s needs as well as the demand for the future, whether the parking in the core of the city is meeting community needs, if the parking exempt zone is still useful and how improved public transit may affect parking demand. The results of this study were first presented to Council on November 3, 2008.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download Parking Resolution

At their meeting on February 2, 2009, the City Council heard the staff’s recommendations (Download Parking Resolution )  for addressing these parking issues.  The study found that the way spaces are currently utilized in the downtown area presents problems for the loading and delivery that is necessary for downtown businesses to operate. They also concluded that the parking exempt zone is no longer appropriate.  (The parking exempt zone was established to encourage downtown redevelopment by waiving minimum parking requirements for new developments.)  Furthermore, the study suggested that parking should be managed and coordinated with a planned system for how on-street spaces could be designated.

Assistant City Traffic Engineer Donovan Branche addresses the City Council

City staff suggested making changes to on-street parking that include:

• Restricting tractor trailer delivery times at the mall crossing to before 11 A.M.
• Creating delivery placards that would be sold to businesses that could be used on side streets.
• Converting 15-minute, 30-minute and two-hour spaces in the core zone between Market and Water Streets to one hour parking  (not adopted by City Council)
• Converting Garret Street between Gleason and 2nd St. to one way, in the west bound direction, and creating angled parking on one side
• Creating 12 all day Vespa or Motorcycle spaces
• Initiating a change to zoning that would eliminate the parking exempt zone therefore requiring downtown developers to include parking or pay a fee into a fund to pay for the next public garage (amended to include the option of utilizing the fund to support a Park & Ride program)

Several community members spoke at the public hearing in support of the parking study and its recommendations. Todd Toms, owner of Moxie Hair Lounge, said that he thinks improved parking will help the warehouse district to continue to grow and develop.  “Great construction and development are happening here which will make the area a viable part of the city,” Toms said.

“Parking is vital to our survival, we need it and we want it,” said Sharon Manning, owner of Quince, urging the Council to move forward with improving parking around Garrett Street.

Peter Kleeman, who lives on Hedge Street, questioned the accuracy of the study saying that the parking garage being constructed on 4th street northeast for the Juvenile and Domestic Court project was not included in the study, making it less accurate than it otherwise might have been. “It is not in the interest of our community to build parking garages in the core downtown area,” Kleeman said.

Collette Hall, President of the North Downtown Residents Association, told Council that her group’s main concern is overflow commuter parking in neighborhoods.  She recommended development of a Park and Ride system for City and County employees to relieve some downtown parking spaces.

One of the recommendations of City staff was to explore ways in which parking enforcement can be made more efficient, citing a decrease in citations.  Police Chief Tim Longo was asked to respond to this suggestion.

“We do our very best to use the resources we have in a way that’s smart for both enforcement but also helping to manage the greater parking issue that takes place downtown and in our communities,” Longo said.  He explained that there are vacant positions for parking enforcers.

“I’d like to think that people are changing their habits and seeking out other transportation options when they come downtown,” Chief Longo also told council.

City Councilor Holly Edwards said that she would like to hear more from the police department about how efficiency could be measured.  She said she would like to see it become efficient within the department where it exists rather than move the responsibility to a new department.     Additionally, Councilor Edwards suggested that the zoning specify that funds be used for transit improvements or establishment of a park and ride system in addition to a new parking garage. “The remote parking that UVA has established at U-Hall is a good example of how that can be successful,” Edwards said. 

Parking on Market Street

City Councilor Satyendra Huja expressed concern that limiting parking in the core to one hour was too restrictive. “I wonder whether one hour is sufficient time for somebody coming downtown for lunch or something,” Huja said.

Mayor Dave Norris also challenged staff’s recommendation to convert the core zone to all one hour parking. Saying that as a step to deal with the “two hour shufflers” this does not address where those people will park instead. “I’m not convinced that moving to one hour parking is the best way to go,” Norris said.

Mayor Norris also suggested providing incentives to developers and employers to create transportation demand management programs in addition to parking.  “We should be encouraging developers to contribute toward transit itself,” Norris said.

The parking study also included discussions with the owner of Friendship Court and nearby businesses.  Currently, parking on the south side of Garrett is restricted after 9 P.M. “The current owners of Friendship Court have told me that they no longer feel [the parking restriction] is necessary to maintain public safety,” Mayor Norris said.  However, Norris said there is still the need to talk to the people who live in Friendship Court to see if they are favorable to lifting those restrictions. 

“More bodies, cars and pedestrians on side streets would improve public safety,” said Mayor Norris.  The Council voted to adopt a resolution incorporating some of the recommendations, as well as their various amendments.

Fania Gordon

 

Top-10 Growth & Development Stories of 2008

In my weekly appearance today on WINA AM 1070 on the Charlottesville Right Now program, host Coy Barefoot and I will count down Charlottesville Tomorrow's top-10 growth and development stories of 2008.

This is the third year we have counted down the top-10 growth and development stories in Charlottesville-Albemarle.  This wouldn’t be possible without the support of WINA for the Charlottesville Right Now program, host Coy Barefoot for having me on the show each week, Charlottesville Tomorrow’s donors, and the excellent reporting by my colleague Sean Tubbs and our interns and fellows.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Brian Wheeler's Top 10 Stories

Charlottesville Tomorrow's Top-10 Growth and Development Stories of 2008

1. Approved 50-year Community Water Supply Plan comes under scrutiny as proposed Ragged Mountain Dam cost estimates rise and citizen group demands look at project alternatives and dredging options. [Review all our water supply news].
2. Major new housing and retail developments held up by market forces and lack of adequate public infrastructure (e.g. sewer capacity impacting North Pointe and Albemarle Place developments). National economic recession impacts local government budgets, housing market, and new home construction.  New County residential building permits total 360 through September 2008, on track to be the lowest annual total in over a decade.
3. Supervisor Ann Mallek’s first year representing the White Hall District on the six member Albemarle County Board of Supervisors results in several significant 4-2 votes breaking the 3-3 stalemate that had existed on issues like property taxes and rural area protection strategies.
4. City and County agree to seek legislation to support formation of Charlottesville Albemarle Regional Transit Authority (CARTA), a jointly run public transit authority that would take over and expand the bus operations of the Charlottesville Transit Service (CTS). Separate legislation is being recommended by a work group of Supervisors and City Councilors to seek authority to raise funds for transportation projects (including transit operations) via a local sales tax increase, if approved in a voter referendum in each locality.
5. Meadowcreek Parkway construction contract (for the County’s portion) awarded to Faulconer Construction with work scheduled to begin in early 2009. City Council opts for grade-separated “signalized diamond” interchange for the Parkway’s intersection with the Route 250. The Steering Committee had recommended a design with an overpass above an oval roundabout. City Planning Commission ends their work in 2008 with a recommendation to withdraw funding for City’s portion of project which is scheduled to go to bid in early 2009. 
6. Albemarle County approves several rural area protection strategies. Three rural area ordinance changes were approved related to holding periods on family sub-divisions, stream buffers, and driveways across steep slopes. A new land use taxation revalidation program is also approved by a unanimous vote of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. 
7. County continues review of economic development policy update in comprehensive plan and eyes light industrial zoning needs. As part of a lengthy (and frequently delayed) review of the Economic Development chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, Supervisors overturn a Planning Commission decision and opt to continue review of Yancey Mills Business Park, a proposal for a light industrial business park in Crozet near the I-64 and Route 250 interchange. Review of the economic development goals began in November 2007 and is once again on the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for their meeting on January 7, 2009.
8. Charlottesville City Council holds retreat in Staunton, VA.  Charlottesville Tomorrow attends as only observer from public or media. 
9. Albemarle County improves citizen and media access to important planning information by providing Internet access to complete staff reports provided to the County Planning Commission and by releasing the County View web application which allows detailed tracking of planning and building applications. Combined with the County’s GISWEB application and complete access to Board of Supervisor meeting materials and podcasts, the County has an impressive collection of material available online.
10. Charlottesville Tomorrow’s Pie Day 2008.  No other topic generated as much positive feedback and listener calls as Coy and Brian’s ongoing radio dialogue about homemade pies.

Brian’s predictions for the top stories of 2009

• 50-year Community Water Supply Plan
• Results of government efficiency reviews released by City and County.  What changes will be implemented?
• Local elections will be held for City Council and Board of Supervisors (see Election Watch 2009)
• General Assembly will block local sales tax increase for transportation funding and continue to shrink VDOT funding allocations to Charlottesville-Albemarle
• Downtown Mall renovations will be completed.  Will it be under budget and on schedule? Monitor the progress here.
• Local governments will face budget challenges as recession continues.  Revenue sharing from County to City will increase by $4 million to around $18 million a year.
• Places29 Master Plan will be unveiled.  Will it be approved?
• Crozet Master Plan’s first 5-year review gets underway
• Meadowcreek Parkway construction gets underway. Will a lawsuit stall City’s portion?
• Community will review of ASAP’s optimal population study findings

The best way to keep track of these and other stories about growth and development is to subscribe to our free weekly e-mail updates.  Thanks for listening, reading, and commenting in 2008!

Brian Wheeler

Tolbert: Preparation for mall renovation “exceeding expectations”

The renovation of the downtown mall is scheduled to begin in earnest just after the New Yeark. City Council received an update on the project at its meeting on December 15, 2008 from Jim Tolbert,  Charlottesville’s Director of Neighborhood Development Services.  Tolbert said the project will be ready to begin next month as most of the major elements have been bid. 

• Brick for the project has been ordered and Tolbert said bids came under budgeted amount
• Masonry, runnel replacement, and demolition have been placed for bid
• Electrical work has been bid and awarded to Design Electric
• Fountain refurbishment work has not been bid yet
• Tolbert said the project appears to be between 10% and 15% under the project’s $7.5 million price tag, but would produce a final report on cost savings by April 2009
• The removed bricks will be taken up and pulverized for use in trail construction

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20081215-CC-Mall

These bricks on 5th Street NE were removed in November as part of a demonstration project

Tolbert also shared the phasing schedule with Council and promised that no stores or restaurants would be closed during construction. He said there will be signage to direct pedestrian traffic while bricks are being removed and replaced. Block captains will meet every two weeks during the project to relay information between business owners and construction crews.  

When Council agreed to the project in July, Councilor Holly Edwards had asked about the possibility of employing local youth as a workforce development project. Tolbert said Barton Malow, the firm managing the construction, is working with the Charlottesville Albemarle Technical Education Center (CATEC) to hire students to serve as assistants for the project.  

“The hope is that those individuals would be helping do a lot of the work that needs to be done, directing citizens as citizens are looking for how to get to the businesses, but they’d also be learning the carpentry trade while they’re there,” Tolbert said. Councilor Satyendra Huja said Tolbert’s effort to create opportunities was a model for future City projects.

Sean Tubbs

Councilors debate results of parking study; Changes could be coming

Source: City of Charlottesville

A study of parking in downtown Charlottesville, conducted by consultants Martin, Alexiou, Bryson and the Renaissance Planning Group, has been released. City Council was briefed on the conclusions at their meeting on November 3, 2008. Jim Tolbert, Director of Neighborhood Development, presented the results of the study, and relayed several recommendations for further action made by a task force that has been overseeing the study. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20081103-CC-Parking

The purpose of the study was to address concerns from business owners that current parking capacity in the core of downtown was not meeting their needs. The consultants were also commissioned to reevaluate the Parking Exempt Zone (PEZ), which was established in 1976 to encourage downtown redevelopment by waiving minimum parking requirements in the zoning ordinance for all new developments. The goal of the PEZ is to give developers incentives to build pedestrian-oriented sites rather than devote valuable land to parking. PEZs are currently used in communities, such as Arlington and Alexandria, that wish to encourage urban density in specific areas. The consultants were also asked to evaluate the role of transit in alleviating parking demand.

The study found that there is more than sufficient downtown parking for current demand. The optimal benchmark for peak parking lot usage is typically set at 85% - that is 85% of the spaces are taken at the busiest time on a business day. During the course of the empirical investigation, which was conducting while the University of Virginia was in session and outdoor events on the downtown mall had begun, only 63% of the total public parking spots were used.

However, if all developments that are planned for the downtown area come to fruition and many of them opt not to provide their own parking, the City could be faced with a deficit of parking at some point in the future.  The primary cause of this concern is a potential Water Street Parking Lot redevelopment, which the City estimates would require 600 additional parking spaces.

Jim Tolbert addresses City Council

Problems were identified with the two hour on-street parking spaces. About 10% of cars parked in two hour parking were abusing the system, either by overstaying the limit or shuffling their car to a new spot every two hours. The use of these spots by commuters defeats their intended purpose of keeping the most convenient spots open for customers and patrons.  Without the major overstayers or shufflers, the study determined that on-street parking would be adequate at about 75% capacity. To meet this challenge, Tolbert recommended shifting enforcement to a new division that would be under the Department of Neighborhood Development Services. Tickets are currently written by City police officers. 

Additionally, the time limits could be set so that closer spots are given shorter limits. The consultants recommended a three-part system, ranging from 1 hour spots in the core to indefinite spots on the periphery.

The study did not find PEZs to be causing any strain on downtown parking, because developers had been choosing to follow the market demands for parking anyway. In fact, on average recent developments within the PEZ have voluntarily included parking at 1 space per residential unit and 1 space per 450 square feet of non-residential, which is comparable to non-PEZ minimum levels.

A table from the study describes parking behavior in downtown Charlottesville

Nevertheless, City staff is concerned that a parking problem may arise in the future and has determined that, according to a staff report, “the parking exempt zone has outlived its usefulness and should be changed.” There was also disagreement between the consultants and City staff over whether the PEZs were giving banks reluctance to finance new developments. Given the concerns expressed by the City, the study recommends the reintroduction of the requirement that developers provide a minimum number of parking spaces for all new developments with the option of paying a fee-in-lieu, which could go toward parking and/or support for alternative modes of travel. City staff has suggested dedicating these fees to a fund for a future public parking garage. According to Tolbert, this could be necessary “maybe four or five years” down the road.

A considerable portion of the study was dedicated to the potential for transit to mitigate some of the parking needs. There is currently a significant amount of room of transit use to grow, with only an estimated 1-2% of downtown workers commuting via bus. If Charlottesville Transit Service were able to double its ridership, this would free up around 300 parking spaces. The study examined the close relationship between transit usage and parking price and convenience, stating that “the supply and price of parking will be the single largest factor in encouraging greater use of transit or other alternative modes for commuting.” Finally, a street-car system, which has been proposed along West Main Street, was determined to alleviate the need for 30 parking spots.

The greatest difference between the consultant’s recommendations and that of the stakeholder’s and planning department’s is over whether a pricing system for parking ought to be introduced. According to the study, charging for parking in the zones closer to the city’s core would have several benefits. It would allow the City to manage the occupancy levels to target the 85% rate and a $1 an hour fee would likely draw between $500,000 and $600,000 a year in revenue for the City. Even a modest price for on-street parking would give an incentive for commuters to use the garages. It would also be likely to increase the number of people who choose to walk, bike, or take the bus. Research shows that financial incentives are the only proven ways to encourage these modes of transportation. On the other hand, stakeholders are reluctant to compromise the convenience to motoring customers, particularly given the current economic conditions.

A view from the City-owned parking lot on Water Street

City Council already shows differences of opinion over the pricing question. Councilor David Brown expressed his approval of installing meters, saying he doesn’t think a modest fee would actually deter drivers from coming downtown. Councilor Satyendra Huja pointed out that the downtown used to have meters installed, and wondered if the meter system would be worth the trouble of the increased revenue. Councilor Julian Taliaferro said that “we need to take a look at the meters,” but Mayor Norris indicated that he was still wary of the idea.

Councilor Edwards asked about Travel Demand Management (TDM) programs, such as ride-sharing, to “decrease the parking by decreasing the number of cars.” Jim Tolbert expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of this approach, responding that “we are a long way away from being substantial enough to have a positive impact on that.” On the other hand, the study does recommend several strategies, such as marketing campaigns, free bus pass programs, more bike racks, and incentives for employers.

All of these recommendations are in the preliminary stages, and no actions will be taken in the near future. There will be a public meeting downtown on November 14th for other members of the community to weigh in on the proposed parking changes. Furthermore, Council will hold a public hearing on the topic at its meeting on December 3, 2008.

Daniel Nairn

Mayor cuts ribbon on Downtown Mall renovation project

Though crews will not begin work on the $7.5 million renovation of the Downtown Mall for another two months, City officials cut the ribbon on the project at a ceremony held on November 6, 2008. Work crews cleared a pile of bricks and showed off the construction fences to preview the scope of the project.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20081106-Mall-Ceremony

Mayor Dave Norris and Councilor Holly Edwards help cut the ribbon

Mary Loose DeViney, owner of Tuel Jewelers at 319 East Main Street, announced she is serving as one of the block captains for the project. The volunteer block captains will serve as a liaison between business owners and officials with Barton Malow, the construction management firm that is overseeing the project. 

“What I will do is go around and tell my individual businesses and residents what’s going on, what’s the construction schedule, when will they be doing certain things,” DeViney said. She said the project would result in a brand new mall, but pointed out that construction will not begin until after the holidays.  

Jim Tolbert, the Director of the City’s Department of Neighborhood Development Services, was on hand to explain how the project would proceed. He pointed to an exposed slab concrete on 5th Street NE where the bricks had been removed and said that in most cases, crews will not be digging more than a few inches.  Tolbert told the crowd of about 40 people that construction would begin around January 15, 2009 and would be mostly wrapped up by May 1, 2009.

“We’re doing the entire Mall at one time so we can get finished by May 1, and we’ll have a lot of people down here, a lot of crews,” Tolbert said. He said the construction fences would only be four feet tall so that pedestrians can see the “rapidly moving project” in action. Tolbert said his department is beginning to award contracts to the various work crews that will be hired.

Mayor Dave Norris said he was confident that this Mall renovation would go smoothly, unlike the recent brick-work installed on 3rd Street NE. Completion of that project was delayed due to unforeseen obstacles involving underground utilities.

“Bear with us,” Norris said. “There will be a little pain but the gain will be worth it in the end and we’ll all have a brand new Mall that we can enjoy for the next 30, 40, 50 years.”

Sean Tubbs

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 1:00 - Introduction from Bob Stroh of the Downtown Business Association
• 2:00 - Comments from business owner Mary Loose Devinny, who is serving as a block captain
• 4:15 - Comments from Tim Hulbert of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce
• 7:30 - Comments from Jim Tolbert, the City's Director of Neighborhood Development
• 12:50 - Comments from Mayor Dave Norris

Landmark Hotel developer given permission to take down black granite facade

The developer of the new Landmark Hotel on the Downtown Mall has been granted conditional permission to tear down the black granite façade that is the last standing remnant of the former Boxer Learning Building. The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) approved the permit at their meeting on October 21, 2008. However, if Minor Family Hotels does decide to take down the façade, they may be required to build an exact replica. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeoz

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20081021-BAR-Landmark

Mary Jo Scala, the City’s Historic Preservation Planner, said the original permit to demolish the building was granted in January 2004, except for the façade. When the demolition was reapproved in February 2007, Minor was required to keep the first 12’ of the building, which was built in 1966. Currently, the Landmark is under construction and the removal of the building behind the façade has exposed structural problems.

“Apparently, they’re nervous about when they get to the point of removing the existing floor that firms the first floor because that’s kind of holding it all together,” Scala said. She said that the project's construction manager, Cliff Harrison, said to her that Minor wants to try to preserve the façade if at all possible.

In his testimony to the BAR, Harrison said the applicant had believed the floor could be used for the restaurant space that be located at the front of the building. However, the floor may not be able to support the required weight load. Harrison said the hotels’ construction is ahead of schedule, and that the applicant wants the option to demolish the façade if it were deemed necessary by the engineers overseeing the work.

“We don’t want to get to a point and have something bite us in the back end, and we saw this as being as one of those variables out there,” Harrison said. If it is necessary to take the façade down, Harrison said it would be “resurrected” according to the designs approved by the BAR.  

BAR Member Brian Hogg asked if the applicant would later come back with a proposal to change the façade, given that the original designs depicted using the original structure and façade.  Harrison said that was out of his control, but that the intent of the design would remain intact.

“Granite is granite, and I think it’s a matter of what the degree of polish you have on it and what the color tone is,” Harrison said.  “I’m coming here in all honest saying that this is just an issue that we have concern [about] on a construction site that does have some relevance to safety.”

BAR Member Syd Knight said he was the only member of the BAR who was there in January 2004 when the demolition permit for the back of the building was granted.

“There was some discussion at the time of taking of that façade down and whether it was worth saving, and there was fairly strong feeling in both camps,” Knight said. “Some said it was out of character with the rest of the mall and not exactly the most attractive or architecturally worthy….Others felt that whether or not it was considered compatible with the rest of the Mall, it was certainly an example of its time and place.”

Knight then said the owner of the property at the time “short-circuited” the discussion by offering to keep the façade. He said he leaned in favor of granting the applicants the “flexibility they’re looking for” but hoped that they could keep it.  He said the building currently under construction is one of quality.

BAR Member Eryn Brennan, a historic preservationist, said she was not in favor of granting the request because the façade is unique. She said construction was always going to be an issue, and said that a replica would not be as desirable as the original.  

“Although my own personal aesthetic preferences don’t tell me that’s the best façade, nonetheless I think it has a great historical value on the mall and in Charlottesville,” Brennan said. “It gives the new building a very grounded sense of place here on the Mall.”

Hogg said he did not share Knight’s confidence that the developer would be able to come up with a suitable replica. Although he said that a good engineer could find a way to save the façade, he said the BAR should consider letting  the façade go, because it’s only a shred of the original structure.

“I think we’re deluding ourselves when we’re talking about demolition here,” Knight said. “I mean, that building is gone… I think this one has already been killed and maybe we should just put it out of its misery.”

Brennan said she thought the scraps are worth saving, and that the Mall will face this issue again and again and she did not want to set a precedent that would make it easier to take down other facades in the future.

BAR Chair Fred Wolf suggested requiring the applicant to replace the façade as-is in order to create an incentive for them to keep it.  However, Wolf said the compromise would not prevent the applicant from coming back before the BAR in the future with a new façade design. Wolf’s motion passed 5-1 with Brennan voting against.

Sean Tubbs