MPO Policy Board discuss Virginia’s master road plan, Hollymead commuter trail

By Sean Tubbs & Connie Chang
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, September 30, 2009

The MPO Policy Board dealt with an unusual number of items at their meeting on September 22, 2009, including an initial discussion of the U.S. 29 Corridor Study. Earlier this year, the group agreed with the recommendation by the new director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) to hold their meetings on a bi-monthly basis. Other topics included the forthcoming Virginia Surface Transportation Plan, plans for a new commuter bike trail to link Hollymead and downtown and whether legislators should join the MPO.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090923-MPO-FINAL

Locally-desired projects absent from draft Virginia Surface Transportation Plan

Image courtesy MPO/VDOT

Members of the MPO Policy Board were somewhat concerned their priorities might not be reflected in a new statewide transportation document. The Virginia Department of Transportation and the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation are in the process of writing a document called the Virginia Surface Transportation Plan.

This will be a master plan for the state’s primary highways, featuring projects that VDOT officials believe are necessary to meet Virginia’s road capacity in 2035. A version of the plan has been sent to MPOs across the state to get input, including the following eight projects in the MPO’s jurisdiction:

• Widen I-64 to 6 lanes from Keswick to US 29
• Widen Route 250 from I-64 to Free Bridge to 6 lanes
• Widen US 29 from I-64 to Barracks Road to 6 lanes
• Widen US 29 from South Fork Rivanna River to Greene County line to 6 lanes
• Construct dual left turn lanes at I-64 Eastbound Exit at Shadwell
• Improving sections of Route 20 as well as its intersection with Route 250
• Build grade separated interchange at Route 250 and McIntire Road
• Build grade separated interchange at US 29 and Rio Road

TJPDC Executive Director Stephen Williams noted that several projects considered by the MPO are not on Virginia’s list. Most notably, the plan includes no mention of the extension of Berkmar Drive.

“Although Berkmar Drive is not itself a part of the primary highway system, this improvement will help US 29, an important link in the primary system, to continue to provide acceptable levels of service in the future,” Williams wrote in a letter back to VDOT.  Jim Utterback, VDOT’s Culpeper District Administrator, said any comments about Berkmar were likely be ignored given that it is not a primary road.

Williams also noted that Virginia’s proposed plan includes no references to transit or pedestrian improvements.

Another project absent from the list is the creation of a second ramp near the Best Buy from U.S. 29 to the 29/250 Bypass. That project is called for in the Places29 Master Plan. The City of Charlottesville has applied for VDOT revenue sharing funds to help pay for it.

Albemarle County Supervisor and MPO Chair David Slutzky said he was concerned that VDOT wanted to convert Route 20 into a “throughway”, something he said was inconsistent with the County’s comprehensive plan. He wanted language in the response letter to make sure that any improvements to Route 20 would be done on a spot-basis as opposed to corridor-wide.

The MPO agreed to not endorse Williams’ letter, but agreed to discuss the contents of the letter via e-mail. VDOT wants feedback delivered by October 9. The MPO Technical Committee has revised a draft letter to VDOT which summarizes their concerns.

Planning under way for commuter trail to connect Hollymead to Downtown

The MPO is assisting the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County with plans for a bicycle and pedestrian trail to connect the Hollymead area with Charlottesville. A steering committee has been formed to shepherd the project from design to completion. There are three potential routes from Hollymead to the city, as well as three potential routes from there to the Downtown Mall.

TJPDC Executive Director Stephen Williams said the route will be designed in such a way to encourage commuting via bicycle. Preliminary design of three potential corridors is expected to be complete within six months. Slutzky encouraged them to make sure that work was complete before the City and the County begin the next budget cycle.

Virginia’s top transportation official wants state legislators to join MPO board

Virginia’s Secretary of Transportation, Pierce Homer, wants the MPO Policy Board to consider adding legislators to its membership in order to better inform state politicians about the needs of local communities. The idea has already happened in the D.C. area, where both Delegate Margaret Vanderhye and state Senator Patricia Ticer serve on that region’s MPO.

In response, Williams drafted a letter to local legislators to assess their interest in joining the body.

City Councilor Satyendra Huja said he did not know how having legislators on a local body would provide any value. In response, Williams said he talked to the staff at the Hampton Roads MPO, who said they benefited from having people at the table who could actually make decisions in Richmond. Huja said he could not support that.

“It would be at least three more people on the policy board who are not local,” Huja said.

Utterback said the intent of adding legislators would be to make them more aware of the constraints placed on localities by declining state transportation revenues.

“Maybe that’s the problem. They don’t realize that the transportation nightmare we’re having is their fault,” Slutzky quipped. He said Delegate Rob Bell might have changed his mind on certain issues if he routinely attended meetings.

The MPO Policy Board agreed to send a letter to area legislators asking if any would be interested in becoming more involved. Huja called the letter a “waste of time.”

“I don’t think in my mind it will change anything,” Huja said.
 
RTA to be beneficiary of leftover budget money

Williams said that the MPO had around $15,000 in unspent transit planning funds. The MPO Policy Board voted to put that money towards planning for the Regional Transit Authority, even though they are not sure of the specifics of how it will be used.

Williams reminded the MPO that the previous consultant, Frank Spielberg, had said his time to continue assisting with the implementation of the RTA would be at least $40,000. A decision on how to proceed will be made at the MPO’s next meeting in November.

OTHER NEWS:

• VDOT has completed a new model that can help predict traffic movements in the Charlottesville area. The MPO will now be responsible for maintaining and updating the system, which will be used to guide future transportation decisions.
• The MPO’s two subcommittees will follow the MPO Policy Board’s lead and will meet bimonthly. Additionally, the MPO Technical Committee and the Community Mobility Committee will hold joint meetings with an eye towards possibly merging
• UVA has signed a contract with a “nationally recognized” car-sharing service, but representative Julia Monteith was not willing to share which one. The service will begin with six cars and will be open to the general public. Last year, UVA entered into an agreement with Zipcar, but the deal fell through. Monteith said the vehicles will be stored throughout the University’s Grounds.
• The MPO has rescheduled its next meeting to Monday, November 23. Previously the meeting was scheduled for the day before Thanksgiving
• Albemarle County Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) will continue to serve as chair of the MPO Policy Board for the remainder of the calendar year. The MPO will amend its bylaws to move officer elections to January.

Botanical garden supporters see future in McIntire Park

By Sean Tubbs

Charlottesville Tomorrow
Saturday, August 29, 2009

A local landscape architect who has worked on several high-profile projects in Charlottesville says botanical gardens remind people of the connections between plants and humans.

“[Botanical gardens] become more and more important as people become detached from the land,” said Warren Byrd of the firm Nelson, Byrd & Woltz. He is currently working on a landscape plan for Montalto for the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090828-Botanical-Garden 

Warren Byrd (left) and Helen Flamini (right)

Helen Flamini, executive director of the non-profit McIntire Botanical Garden, invited Byrd to speak about the benefits of such facilities in order to boost her project’s chances of being considered as part of the future of McIntire Park. A master plan for the eastern side of the park will be developed when the full design of the Meadowcreek Parkway and its interchange with U.S. Route 250 is complete.

The controversial roadway is planned to be built along the eastern edge of the park, though the exact date for construction remains to be determined as the project goes through the federal regulatory process. Flamini said of the 68 acres on the east side of the park, 25 will be used for the parkway, leaving 40 acres for a botanical garden to occupy.

Flamini said the west side of the park is already programmed for recreational activities, leaving an opening for a more passive experience. Referring to the many “Save McIntire Park” signs that are posted around Charlottesville, Flamini said the botanical garden would preserve and enhance the area’s natural beauty.

“We want it to be for future generations who will come time and time again to be awed by the beauty and experience of the breath-taking garden that will be open to everyone,” Flamini said.  

One of the people who attended Byrd’s talk was Jim Moore of the Save McIntire Golf Committee, a citizen group supporting the existing McIntire Park Municipal Golf Course. He said he is not against botanical gardens, but feels McIntire Park is an inappropriate location. Moore also wants more specifics on what Flamini wants to build.

“It’s difficult to really comment on the garden when they haven’t presented a plan,” Moore said.  He said his group would continue to advocate for the preservation of the golf course, which he said makes a profit for the city.

In his presentation, Byrd said he wished the garden could co-exist with the golf course, but said such a design would be an “enormous challenge.” Though he told the audience he was neutral about the future of the course, he said McIntire Park would be a good location for a botanical garden. For example, replacing the course’s grassy fairways with wildflowers and other plans would create habitats for wildlife.

Byrd said the ultimate goal is to educate people about the relationships between plants and humans. For instance, an on-site café could use ingredients harvested from the garden.

In general, Byrd said the garden would help improve the park systems of Charlottesville and Albemarle County.

“The best of our great cities have these connected park systems that include public gardens,” Byrd said. The park is only one mile away from Charlottesville’s downtown mall.

Byrd said he is not connected to McIntire Botanical Garden in any way, but did admit his firm would like to win the contract to design and build the facility. He estimated a design would cost as much as $250,000 but said actual construction could cost many millions of dollars.  

Lonnie Murray

Another group is also working to build a botanical garden in Charlottesville. Lonnie Murray of the non-profit Charlottesville Botanical Garden told Flamini that he would be willing to merge with Flamini’s group.  He said his group is primarily interested in preserving the area’s rare species before they are lost.

“We’re facing a real crisis situation,” Murray said. He added that he would want a botanical garden to have a research component as well.

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

• 01:00 - Introduction from Helen Flamini, President of McIntire Botanical Garden
• 11:15 - Presentation by landscape architect Warren Byrd
• 36:00 - Comments from Lonnie Murray of Charlottesville Botanical Garden
• 41:15 - Comments from Rich Collins of Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park
• 43:30 - Comments from a local entomologist
• 48:30 - Flamini discusses her upbringing near Brooklyn Botanical Garden
• 50:30 - Question about what wildlife Byrd would like to see attracted to the park if not deer
• 52:30 - Question about role volunteers will play in botanical garden
• 59:20 - Flamini discusses how education will be targeted at children
• 1:00:30 - Comments from Sallie Brown
• 1:02:30 - Question about what the next step is for Flamini and her group

City’s Hillcrest Road residents updated on Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange impact

By Julia Glendening
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Owen Peery (right) from RK&K and Angela Tucker (left) of the Charlottesville's Neighborhood Development services presented neighborhood access options to the residents of Hillcrest Road.

On August 11, 2009, the residents in the area of Hillcrest Road gathered at the Covenant School on the Route 250 Bypass to hear updates on how the entrance to their neighborhood will be impacted by the planned Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange. This project will connect Charlottesville’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway (known as McIntire Road Extended) to Route 250 with a grade-separated interchange.

The meeting was a way for the citizens to voice concerns about how traffic patterns in their neighborhood will be affected by the interchange. Common concerns were circulation within the neighborhood, vehicular speeds, effects from the Covenant School located in the neighborhood, and vehicular and pedestrian access.

Residents last met on September 30, 2008 to discuss access issues. After listening to their previous concerns, staff from consultants RK&K compiled two new options, which were presented to the residents at the meeting. Owen Peery from RK&K and Angela Tucker of the City’s Department of Neighborhood Development Services answered many questions from the citizens. Numerous citizens thanked them for their work on the project and said they could tell their previous concerns had influenced the new designs.

 “We are trying to make this as painless as possible and also improve your safety in getting out to the bypass,” said Peery.

Option 1: a cul-de-sac would be built at the end of Birdwood Road. Hillcrest Road would be the sole entrance and exit to the neighborhood. Source: RK&K

Currently Birdwood Road and Hillcrest Road, the two neighborhood access points, are both being used as entrances and exits onto Route 250. Peery said Birdwood Road could not be kept as an exit because of the lack of sufficient sight distance to see oncoming traffic. Additionally, there would be danger from increased traffic flow, and signage to warn drivers of entering vehicles would be too confusing.

The first design option would include the construction of a cul-de-sac at the intersection of Birdwood Road and Route 250, which would require all neighborhood traffic to use Hillcrest Road as the sole entrance and exit. Drivers headed towards Hillcrest Road would use the new Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange exit ramp and turn onto Hillcrest Road in a separate lane before the McIntire Road traffic signal. Drivers leaving Hillcrest Road would have to merge onto the exit ramp going east and could change direction at McIntire Road.

The second option had the same entrance and exit at Hillcrest Road, but did included an entrance only option at Birdwood Road (i.e. right turns from Route 250 East onto Birdwood Road only). Peery said this would give Birdwood Road residents another option to reach their houses more quickly, as well as an access point for fire trucks.

Option 2: the same as Option 1 with an additional entrance at Birdwood Road. Source: RK&K

One issue was the effects of traffic from the Covenant School located on Birdwood Road. Citizens commented on the importance of examining the width of Hillcrest Road in order to accommodate an increase in traffic. They said parked cars on both sides of Hillcrest Road create a one lane road, which could pose problems for school buses and other drivers.

Residents expressed concern about the possibility of an increase in posted speed on the highway, but Peery said the interchange is designed for speeds of 40 mph and roads are usually designed 5 mph higher than the speed limit that is ultimately posted. He also said RK&K has no jurisdiction over the speed limit, which will be set by City Council. He did acknowledge a concern regarding the speed of cars on the exit ramp and that turning onto Birdwood Road could be difficult.

“This plan is a starter and we will press forward and make it better any way we can,” promised Peery.

A citizen also commented on the importance of having a bicycle path from Hillcrest Road to McIntire Road and Peery responded the project always intended to have a path at that location. He said a bicycle path from Hillcrest Road would connect to the Schenk’s Greenway bicycle path, which will be transferred to the western side of McIntire Road. Peery said the design was intended to allow bicycles and pedestrians to safely and easily access trails in McIntire Park.

Tucker said a design public hearing for the interchange is currently pending for September and if approved by City Council, construction is planned to begin in the fall of 2010. The interchange is estimated to be completed within two years; however, the entire Meadowcreek Parkway cannot open until the City’s portion, the County’s portion, and the interchange are all completed. More information is located on the project’s website www.250interchange.org.

Army Corps of Engineers wants new map for City’s portion of Meadowcreek Parkway; Say their letter to VDOT is routine request for information

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Monday, July 20, 2009

A federal environmental review of the City’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway is on hold until the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) can submit additional material. An official with the Army Corps of Engineers has sent a letter to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requesting a new map for McIntire Road Extended. 

“We have concluded that the project plans we are currently reviewing do not show a terminus at the southern end of McIntire Road [Extended],” reads a July 16, 2009 letter from J. Robert Hume III, the Chief of the Regulatory Branch for the Corps’ Norfolk District. “In order for us to continue our evaluation of the proposed McIntire Road Extension, the work must be a single and complete project with logical termini.”

The Corps has jurisdiction over construction projects that affect the nation’s watershed. VDOT had asked the Army Corps of Engineers for permission for an unnamed tributary of Schenk’s Branch to be re-routed through a box culvert. The letter states that the Corps’ review cannot proceed unless engineers can see the full scope of the work.

“Please submit additional plans, including quantifications of any additional impacts to waters of the United States, necessary to complete the project to a logical ending point,” the letter reads.

The drawings submitted to the Corps assume that the McIntire Road Extended ends at the northern end of the Parkway’s grade-separated interchange with the 250 Bypass. Both the road and the interchange are considered by VDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to be two separate projects. The County’s portion, which is well under construction, is considered to be a third.  Each has a separate funding source. The County’s portion has been funded through Albemarle’s share of state secondary road funds and the City’s portion has been paid for through urban funds from the state. The proposed interchange is funded by a federal earmark from former Senator John Warner.

Parkway opponents have long alleged that the parkway was segmented into three portions in order to avoid a full environmental review from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). In February, an attorney for the Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park sent a letter to the FHWA that argued this case.

“In my opinion, the FHWA has unlawfully constrained the scope of the [Environmental Assessment] and Section 4(f) evaluation by failing to evaluate McIntire Road Extended and the Interchange as part of a single, federalized project,” wrote attorney Andrea Ferster.  Section 4(f) refers to a portion of the Department of Transportation Act that requires environmental assessments for road constructions projects that use public parkland.

Download Ferster's letter to the Federal Highway Administration

Former City Council Candidate Peter Kleeman has consistently appeared before Council to point out the project’s drawings are clear evidence that none of the projects can exist independently.  He said the letter from the Corps could issue in a new era of federal scrutiny.

“This position will change the way the parkway/interchange projects move forward and may in fact re-federalize the entire project,” wrote Kleeman in an e-mail to Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Mark Haviland, Chief of Public Affairs for the Corps’ Norfolk District, said the letter has been taken out of context by opponents. He said the Corps’ routinely asks for more information from applicants. 

“Sometimes when applications are sent, we require additional information so we can do an accurate evaluation,” Haviland said in an interview. He said opponents of the parkway should not read too much into the Corps’ letter. “Nowhere in [the letter] do we talk about where the terminus needs to terminate. All along VDOT has said there are one or two possibilities. It either ends at a proposed interchange being handled by FHWA, or it would end at Route 250. From the Corp’s perspective, what we have to do is find out where the road is going to end.”

The Army Corps of Engineers is also involved with a review of what steps will be required to mitigate the effects the parkway will have on McIntire Park, which has been determined as a historic resource. This process is required in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Corps will issue a memorandum of understanding as soon as one is ready.  The FHWA is the lead federal agency for the Section 106 process required for the interchange project.

Lou Hatter, a spokesman for VDOT’s Culpeper District, said the agency is still formulating a response to the letter. He said while the Corps has raised a valid question, he is confident the project will not be halted as a result.

“We don’t see this as a significant obstacle,” Hatter told Charlottesville Tomorrow.

Council candidate holds forum highlighting opposition to Meadowcreek Parkway; Blames Albemarle for its growth and lack of road building

By Brian Wheeler
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Sunday, July 19, 2009

On July 18, 2009, in front of the First Amendment Monument on Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall, Independent City Council candidate Bob Fenwick held a forum to share his views on the Meadowcreek Parkway project.  Fenwick plans to hold these weekly forums, between now and the general election in November, to engage voters in his campaign and to take questions from local media.

In this first of what the candidate calls, “Fenwick’s Forums,” about six people listened to Fenwick discuss why he is opposed to the construction of the Meadowcreek Parkway, a road he said is already obsolete before it has been built.  Other parkway opponents present at the forum included Rich Collins, Peter Kleeman, and Stratton Salidas. Fenwick illustrated his remarks with drawings on the First Amendment Monument.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090718-Fenwick

“I oppose the Meadowcreek Parkway,” said Fenwick.  “I will join any lawsuit against it, and I demonstrate against it because I believe it is wrong.”  Fenwick said the parkway, which has already begun construction in Albemarle County between Rio Road and Melbourne Road, is a project that reflects 1950s era thinking about cities and transportation.  

“Well we’ve changed a lot since then,” said Fenwick. “The environmental regulations have come along.  People want their cities to be healthful, they want to be able to bring their children and family into the city and enjoy it, and that is the basis, probably, for my opposition to the Meadowcreek Parkway.”

Fenwick holds forum highlighting opposition to Meadowcreek Parkway
from Charlottesville Tomorrow on Vimeo.

Fenwick pointed to decisions in neighboring Albemarle County where he said leaders were forcing the parkway into the “heart of Charlottesville” at McIntire Park, with the tacit approval of the current City Council.

“The County has walked away from their responsibility for their road building. The Western Bypass will never be built, the Eastern Connector will never be built as it stands right now,” said Fenwick.

Fenwick said the County had not improved roads to support new development in the Pantops area and that this traffic was creating a chokepoint on the Route 250 bypass.  He said the funds dedicated for the Meadowcreek Parkway should be redirected to other projects.  

“They don’t have to lose that money, it’s an earmark, it’s political pork.  They can arrange to have that money designated for all the other scores of road improvements that we need in our area,” said Fenwick.

Fenwick was asked by Charlottesville Tomorrow if he supported the Western Bypass and whether he thought the County also had the right to walk away from an “obsolete” road project.

“The route of the Western bypass is no longer feasible,” said Fenwick.  “The Eastern Connector, I don’t think was feasible from the beginning….The County knew very well the opposition the City residents had [to the] Meadowcreek Parkway, and yet they went ahead and tried to force the City’s hand by doing the county portion…”

Fenwick said that if the Board of Supervisors was smart, they would make plans to convert the portion of the parkway being built today into a walkway.

Fenwick was also asked about the 1991 Three Party Agreement between the City, County, and University of Virginia which calls for the construction of the Meadowcreek Parkway before a Western Bypass of Route 29 is built.  Fenwick said, if elected to City Council, he would not be bound by past Council decisions.

“I start from scratch, I would not be bound…I would not say, ‘I have to vote for a bad idea because somebody in the past voted for a bad idea.’”

Fenwick’s position puts him more in line with the views of incumbent City Council candidate Dave Norris (D) who is also opposed to the Meadowcreek Parkway.  Kristin Szakos (D), the other nominee of the Charlottesville Democratic Party, has said that while she is opposed to the Meadowcreek Parkway, she will note vote to stop, it if it comes before Council, unless a court determines it to be illegal.

On her campaign website, Szakos outlines her position as follows:

“Although I do not like the parkway’s route, I will not vote to overturn that approval.  The decision has been made by a duly elected body and should stand unless a court determines that it is illegal.  I plan to work to encourage completion of a bypass that would carry through traffic around the city, rather than onto the Meadowcreek Parkway.”

One audience member asked Fenwick if there could be a public referendum on the Meadowcreek Parkway.  Fenwick said he thought City Council would have to approve that, but that there would be a de facto referendum on the City’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway on election day in November.  

“The city can speak loudly and clearly [on] what they want done about the Meadowcreek Parkway and several other issues that I will be speaking about in the weeks to come,” said Fenwick.  “There will be no doubt in anybody’s mind in City Hall, if I’m elected, what the citizens of Charlottesville want, and that the citizens of Charlottesville reject several of the polices that the current City Council is following.”

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST:

01:25 – Bob Fenwick (I) describes his plan to hold weekly public forums.
01:53 – Fenwick says he is opposed to the Meadowcreek Parkway project.
04:23 – Fenwick explains reasons he is opposed to the Meadowcreek Parkway.
05:34 – Fenwick outlines what he views as Albemarle County’s responsibilities for building the Route 29 Western Bypass and the Eastern Connector.
07:07 – Fenwick describes his view of letter from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on their evaluation of McIntire Road Extended, the City’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway.
07:38 – Fenwick describes three areas in City where he thinks road improvements are needed (Free Bridge, McIntire Road at US 250 bypass, and Hydraulic Road at Route 29).
10:59 – Fenwick discusses Chamber of Commerce’s support for the Meadowcreek Parkway.
15:28 – Fenwick describes projects like the Pavilion as a good alternative to roads like the Meadowcreek Parkway, attractions that bring people into Downtown Charlottesville.
18:25 – Fenwick answers questions

VDOT: County’s portion of Meadowcreek Parkway on schedule

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Monday, July 6, 2009

Kenneth Shirley, District Construction Engineer for VDOT’s Culpeper District, appeared before the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on July 1, 2009, to give a detailed status update on the County’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090701-BOS-MCP-Update

Shirley reported that the contractor, Faulconer Construction Company, had completed 12% of the project. Crews have cleared all of the trees and vegetation necessary for construction to begin and grading is underway.  Diggers have excavated 43,000 cubic yards of dirt so far, enough to fill a football field with 20 feet of fill. More than 10,000 linear feet of stormwater pipes are ready to be installed.

Shirley said that very little of the construction is currently visible, except near Rio Road and Melbourne Road, the two end-points for the County’s portion of the parkway. Work on the drainage and stormwater system is proceeding north from the Melbourne Road end. A large hill will soon be excavated, and the earth will be used to support one of the bridges.

One of the bridge piers being constructed for the County's portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway (Source: VDOT)

“We have one the bridge’s piers in, and it looks absolutely beautiful with the stone finish,” Shirley said.  During his testimony, Shirley detailed the entire sequence of how construction of the road will proceed. Next spring, crews will begin to lay down asphalt in some sections. Next summer, the Parkway’s intersection with Rio Road will be constructed, which Shirley said would require a temporary road closure.  During that time, a section of the parkway will open as a detour for the closed portion of Rio Road.

Faulconer was awarded the construction bid for $11.8 million and work is expected to be completed by October 2011. However, the road will not permanently open until the City completes its portion as well as the parkway’s interchange with Route 250 and McIntire Road.

Judge Swett: Supermajority of votes not required for Meadowcreek Parkway easement

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Monday, June 29, 2009

Judge Jay Swett of the Charlottesville Circuit Court has denied a claim made by the Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park that a City Council vote to convey property to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) was unconstitutional. In an opinion dated June 26, 2009, Swett ruled the Virginia Constitution does not require four out of five Councilors to have approved the granting of temporary and permanent easements to VDOT in June 2008.  At that time, Council voted 3-2 to grant nearly 8.6 acres of land the City owns in Albemarle County to VDOT for construction, equipment storage and utility and drainage easements.

Download the presentation

Judge Swett’s ruling also denied an injunction requested by the Coalition to stop work on the Parkway, and also denied a request for the City to pay its legal fees. His ruling first gives a basic overview of Article VII, Section 9 of the 1971 Revised Virginia Constitution. The section contains two paragraphs, the first of which reads:

“No rights of a city or town in and to its waterfronts, wharf property, public landings, wharves, docks, streets, avenues, parks, bridges or other public places…  shall be sold except by an ordinance or resolution passed by an affirmed vote of three-fourths of all members elected to the governing body.”

The Virginia Supreme Court has only addressed this issue once, in Stending Development Corp. v Danville (1974). Swett writes in his opinion that that case is not helpful in shedding light in whether or not Council’s conveyance of land to VDOT is constitutional. Consequently, he says he is required to carefully examine the language used in the state Constitution.

“The framers’ choice of the term ‘sold’ should be given deference and the assumption is that the framers used this term for a specific purpose,” Swett writes. He then refers to the second part of Article VII, Section 9, which is a much longer paragraph which deals with special rights municipalities have to lease public property to other groups. For example, when Council granted a ground lease to the Piedmont Family YMCA in December 2007, this section restricted the terms of the lease to only 40 years.  Something to note is that Swett’s interpretation is that this second paragraph does not require a supermajority for such actions. Swett also writes that these two paragraphs must be taken together to interpret the intent of the Constitution’s framers:

“If the framers meant that any sale also included any lease, easement, or other encumbrance, then the framers would presumably would have chosen to add those words in addition to the reference of a sale,” Swett wrote in his opinion.

City Council voted 3-2 to grant the easement on June 2, 2008. Councilors Holly Edwards and Dave Norris voted against

The plaintiffs in the case had argued that transfer of land should be considered a sale because a sum of $43,120 was recorded as changing hands when the deed for the property was signed over to VDOT. At the May 2009 trial for the case, a representative from VDOT as well as Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris testified that figure was to reimburse the City and the Charlottesville School Board for landscape-screening and other related damages.

The plaintiffs had also argued that Article VII, Section 9 was designed to protect the public from having property it owns from being transferred for the benefit of private interests. Swett’s ruling details two competing interpretations of Section 9, and its precursor in the 1902 version of the Virginia Constitution. He then relates the work of constitutional scholar A.E. Dick Howard, who wrote in his Commentaries on the Constitution that the framers intended for Section 9 to protect the public from elected officials who sold public land to private interests at lower than market value.

However, Swett said that interpretation did not fit in this case. He said that the City first turned consideration of the matter to a second elected body when it asked the Charlottesville School Board to vote on the easement in May 2008. That body voted 4-1 to grant the easements.  Swett also noted that the City will benefit by having a public road built and paid for by the Commonwealth of Virginia.

“It is difficult to see how this conveyance to VDOT by the City is within the category of evils which the framers of the Virginia Constitution had in mind when Section 9 of Article VII was considered,” Swett wrote.

Swett did rule that at least some of the plaintiffs in the case had legal standing to bring the case to trial in the first place. His ruling cited a Virginia Supreme Court decision to grant standing to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation in a suit against tobacco manufacturer Philip Morris. Swett’s ruling states he could grant standing to those members of the Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park who claimed that the Meadowcreek Parkway would cause them injury by damaging the park. Specifically, that granted Stratton Salidis, Peter Kleeman, City Council candidate Bob Fenwick, John Cruickshank standing in the case. That means they can likely appeal the decision. However, Swett found that the North Downtown Residents Association and Richard Collins did not allege “a sufficiently particularized injury” and thus cannot play a role in an appeal.

Council updated on three Meadowcreek Parkway projects

By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Tuesday, June 16, 2009

The three components that make up the future Meadowcreek Parkway are all at various stages in the development process. While Albemarle County’s portion is under construction, the two elements to be built in Charlottesville are still in the planning process. All are scheduled to be completed by the summer of 2012. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090615-CC-MCP

An October 2008 drawing of the selected interchange design. Click for a larger view.

The City's Urban Construction Initiative Planner, Jeanette Janiczek, gave an update to Council at their meeting on June 15, 2009. She listed the various steps through which both McIntire Road Extended and the Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange must pass before construction can get underway.

Janiczek said the County’s portion of the Meadowcreek Parkway began in January and is on schedule to be completed by October of 2011. Janiczek reminded Council that this portion of the road will not open until the two elements in the City are complete, with the exception of a three-week window where traffic will be routed along the alignment while its connection to East Rio Road is built.

Two items, Janiczek reported, need to be cleared up before the City’s portion of the Parkway, known as McIntire Road Extended, can be advertised for bids. The first is the resolution of the Section 106 process. That is the federally-mandated procedure where a road that will affect historic assets must be evaluated so that steps can be taken to mitigate those impacts.

“The scope of the project has been identified, the historic resources have been identified within that, and it looks like there’s an agreement that McIntire Park is the only affected historic resource,” Janiczek said. The Army Corps of Engineers and other federal agencies are currently working with the City of Charlottesville to develop a draft memorandum of understanding (MOU) which will outline the steps that need to be taken to address the impact on the park.  Janiczek said the MOU would be available “shortly” but if that doesn’t happen, the project could be pushed back.

The second item is the acquisition of a parcel of land that is currently under the control of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. Negotiations are ongoing to coordinate the relocation of a utility easement for the Schenk’s Branch Interceptor with the road’s construction.

Janiczek said it would take a year to build the City’s portion as soon as the project is advertised and bids come back.

The Meadowcreek Parkway Interchange has several steps that must be completed before it can be advertised for bids. In August 2008, Council selected a grade-separated “signalized diamond” interchange as its preferred option, and Janiczek said that design is now 30% complete. That means that the actual locations of the various ramps are being oriented, and the environmental assessment documents are being updated as a result.

A design public hearing for the interchange is scheduled for late summer. Council will need to approve the final design when it is complete, and then right-of-way acquisition can begin. Janiczek said there may be as many as nine parcels of land that must be acquired to accommodate the interchange.

“Of these properties, if we assess the property, make a fair offer, and negotiations don’t reach a successful conclusion, then we may come before you again and request for condemnation proceedings,” Janiczek said.

Janiczek said City staff is also working with residents of Birdwood Road and Hillcrest Road to discuss how to address their concerns. The interchange will likely require the closing of Hillcrest Road. The interchange also must go through the Section 106 process because a historic landscape on the grounds of the former Rock Hill Academy and because McIntire Park will be affected.

If Council approves the final interchange design, purchases the right of way, and completes the Section 106 process for the interchange, Janiczek said construction on the interchange could begin in the summer of 2010. She said it will take two years to complete.

Before Janiczek’s presentation, Neighborhood Development Services Director Jim Tolbert gave a history lesson on the reasons why a grade-separated interchange is to be built. In 1999, the City Council indicated it would support the construction of the Parkway, but only with certain conditions.

“One of the primary reasons for moving forward with [a grade-separated] interchange was the traffic that would be created [without it],” Tolbert said. Council’s initial approval was for a design that would have created an intersection that would have 17-lanes. Tolbert showed a simulation that depicted how vehicles traveling on the bypass would back up while waiting for traffic traveling through the Meadowcreek Parkway.

“Without an interchange, this is an intersection that would be terribly congested,” Tolbert said. Council decided to approve the Meadowcreek Parkway but only with a grade-separated interchange.  Former Senator John Warner was persuaded to secure a federal earmark of around $27 million to pay for the interchange.

One more hurdle that doesn’t affect the setting of advertising dates is the lawsuit filed by the Coalition to Preserve McIntire Park. The community is awaiting a ruling from Judge Jay Swett, who heard six hours of arguments in the case on May 19, 2009. At issue is whether City Council’s conveyance of an easement on land in the County was legal. The Coalition sued the City and claim a supermajority of four votes is required to authorize the transfer of public land.

Another potential federal lawsuit regards the segmentation of the Meadowcreek Parkway into three projects. In that case, the road’s opponents claim that the project was illegally split into three in order to avoid federal regulations. That lawsuit has so far not yet been filed.

McIntire Park activist Bob Fenwick launches independent campaign for City Council

McIntire Park activist Bob Fenwick launches independent campaign for City Council
By Sean Tubbs
Charlottesville Tomorrow
Friday, May 15, 2009

Independent City Council Candidate Bob Fenwick

Bob Fenwick, a member of the McIntire Park Preservation Committee, has launched an independent campaign for the Charlottesville City Council that he promised would be a referendum on the Meadowcreek Parkway. He made his campaign announcement on the steps of his downtown-area home on May 15, 2009. 

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20090515-Fenwick

 “For 40 years, the Meadowcreek Parkway has been an open wound on our community,” Fenwick said. “A political campaign is perfect because you can say things publicly to a lot of people  that you normally wouldn’t be able to say. We’re going to keep this issue up for five and a half months and we’re going to keep pounding it.”

Fenwick is also opposed to the building of the YMCA on the western end of the park, the temporary displacement of the Dogwood Festival, as well as the potential removal of a public wading pool that could be displaced by the Parkway’s interchange with the Route 250 bypass. Fenwick also said he was a supporter of adding dredging into the community water supply plan. 

Another important issue Fenwick said he would promote is economic development. In the coming weeks, he said he will announce specific steps he would like to see the City take in order to create jobs.
In the meantime, Fenwick is trying to collect the 125 signatures he needs to get on the ballot for the November 3, 2009 election. Like fellow independent Andrew Williams, Fenwick acknowledged that it will be a hard campaign to defeat the two Democrats running in the race, but that he was confident he could win.

“A new day is about to dawn in Charlottesville,” Fenwick said. “A day of citizen representation, not citizen rule.”

Fenwick’s policy positions are spread out among a host of websites that he operates. Here’s a list of some of them:

• http://www.SaveMcIntire.com
• http://www.stoptheparkway.com
• http://www.DemandJobs.net
• http://www.RivannaDam.com
• http://www.votebob.net/

Independent candidates interested in running for City Council have until June 9, 2009 to file paperwork with the City registrar.

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

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