Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates

Minutes from RNA Meeting on February 8, 2012 Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building EOC Conference Room (Room 159) at 5:30 p.m. Committee Members in Attendance Ron McCorkle, Chair Scott Tate, Secretary Valeria Alphin Jim Crawford Rena Cromer Braxton Naff Johnny Williams Brian Harris Dustin Akers Braxton Naff Committee Members Absent Bob Caudle Dallas Powell Guests Carol Tuning, City of Roanoke, Homeless Assistance Team Marie Muddiman, Ex Director Interfaith Hospitality Network Tom Cain, Lick Run Watershed Association Joel Richard, citizen Brad Stephens, citizen Steve Buschor, City of Roanoke, Director of Parks and Recreation Court Rosen, City Council member David Hill, Hill Studios Welcome to Members Chair McCorkle called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. He recognized and asked the guests to introduce themselves. Reading and Approval of Minutes Copies of the January 2012 meeting minutes were distributed for review. Ms. Cromer pointed out a correction in minutes on page 2. Mr. Akers moved to approve the Minutes with corrections noted and the motion was seconded by Mr. Crawford. Hearing no further discussion, the minutes were unanimously approved by consensus. Guest Presentations Chair McCorkle introduced the three presentations scheduled on the agenda: Elmwood Park redesign, homelessness in Roanoke, and watershed-based planning. He invited David Hill to begin with the Elmwood Park Improvement Plan. RNA February 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 5 Elmwood Park David Hill of Hill Studios delivered a presentation on the improvement plan for Elmwood Park, an update to the master plan. Mr. Hill stated that the process was intended to be very public. The city, in conjunction with Hill Studios, held a multi-day open workshop session at the Roanoke Main Library. In total, he stated there were more than 1500 comments from that workshop session, from interviews with Park users, and from an on-line form. Hill Studios compiled the comments into a notebook which is available for public viewing. Mr. Hill described a number of recurring themes including: the importance of memories, having a park with a performance venue, not just a venue; making the library an integrated part of the park; focusing on a festival park; and better ventilating the park. Mr. Hill also shared that there were a number of features that people identified as wanting to keep. These included: the elms, the flagpole, the Perry magnolia, the saucer magnolia alley, the birch grove, the library plaza, the rocks, the various memorials, and the library in the park. He shared that citizens expressed concern as to how to make the park work better as Roanoke’s Festival Park. He also said the planners had discussed issues of ventilating the park better, in other words, rethinking how people move into and circulate through the park. According to Mr. Hill, the Elmwood Park Improvement Plan recommends improvements in four areas: • Saucer Magnolia Alley – remove benches, make spots for vendors, fix drainage • Arts Walk – pull up paving and put in recessed areas with plants, include podiums with sculptures, include gateways, retain vehicle accessibility • Elm Avenue Front Lawn – put playground around rocks and clusters of green spaces • Performance Venue – add seating and terraces, install daily use restrooms, include an interactive fountain Mr. Hill said that construction is expected to begin this summer with a second phase scheduled in spring of 2013. Mr. Tate asked if library parking spots would be lost. Mr. Hill responded that street parking on the Williamson Road side of the park will be added, with no net loss of parking. Chair McCorkle commented that the planning process had been very accessible for neighborhoods. Mr. Naff asked for more information about the vehicles traveling on Bullitt. Mr. Hill responded by describing how vehicle traffic might work on Bullitt Avenue and mentioning that the street could now be easily closed off, as needed. Mr. Akers commented on the signage and suggested that more attention be given to the streetscape signage in order to make the connection between Elmwood Park and the city market area more visible. Mr. Buschor remarked that enhancing this connectivity is a key issue, particularly in terms of signage and greenway connectivity. Mr. Tate asked about the benches that were being removed. Mr. Buschor explained that moveable seating would be installed that would enable more mixed uses and better flexibility. Ms. Cromer said that vehicles using Bullitt Avenue seemed like a problem. She suggested this might cause damage to the planned art installations and the new landscaping. She asked if the decision on vehicle access had already been made. Mr. Hill acknowledged her concerns and responded that managing vehicle access represents a necessary and ongoing challenge. Mr. RNA February 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 Buschor reiterated that there were would be better ways to limit vehicle usage through closing the street for events and activities. Ms. Cromer inquired about sidewalk materials and Mr. Hill answered. A guest suggested that the city really needed to better incorporate the park history, such as its origins and early uses. Mr. Hill agreed that this was important and mentioned some steps that were being taken. Homelessness Ms. Tuning, with the City of Roanoke’s Human Services Department, presented on homelessness in the Roanoke Valley. She emphasized that the approach to the problem of homelessness is a regional issue as opposed solely as a city concern. She shared data from the 2011 point-in-time survey that indicated: • the number of homeless increased by 3.5% from 2010 to 2011 • the average nightly totals since 1987 have increased steadily, peaking in 2007 • The majority of homeless have been homeless for 1-2 years • There were 536 homeless last year. Of these, 98% were in shelters with the majority at Rescue Mission. • Primary reasons for homelessness include unemployment and lack of affordable housing. • Right now, there are many first time homeless individuals. • 85 children lived with homeless adults last year. • There were 360 homeless students in public schools in Roanoke City in January 2012. • Last year, there was a 24% increase in the number of homeless veterans. Marie Muddiman, the Executive Director of Roanoke Valley Interfaith Hospitality Network also presented with Ms. Tuning. Ms. Muddiman stressed that the new face of homelessness is families as opposed to single males and that there are very few places in Roanoke where families can stay together. She said that her shelter turns away 60-90 people per month because they are full. Ms. Cromer asked about the availability of employment assistance service. Ms. Muddiman answered that it depends on the shelter but that the Interfaith Hospitality Network offers extensive case management services that includes working with residents to search for and secure jobs. Chair McCorkle asked about how the city funds homelessness services. Ms. Tuning responded that this happens in a number of ways including funding for her position, matching funds for a HUD outreach grant, and funding for agencies to apply for human services and CDBG funds. Mr. Harris asked about concerns of Southeast residents with the Rescue Mission. Ms. Tuning replied that the Homeless Assistance Team goes out Monday through Friday offering services in the form of prescription assistance, transportation, bus passes targeting homeless individuals who were visible in neighborhoods and downtown locations. Mr. McCorkle asked about situation in Southeast and whether she had any suggestions. Ms. Tuning did not offer any suggestions. Mr. Tate asked about public outreach on this issue so that neighborhoods and citizens might be better informed. Ms. Muddiman responded that her organization has someone who can come out and provide presentations to neighborhood and civic groups. Mr. Williams asked how the different groups can work better together and Ms. Alphin asked about the availability of day- time services for retraining and job assistance. Ms. Tuning answered that the city did need more facilities and places with computers and staff similar to a one-stop shop. RNA February 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 Watershed-based Planning Mr. Tom Cain with the Lick Run Watershed Association spoke next to the RNA, beginning with the subject of ecosystems. He stated his concern was getting neighborhoods in a watershed to work together and think of themselves as part of larger ecosystems. He also proposed that city projects being planned also include the project’s impacts on ecosystems. Mr. Cain asked that the RNA support a policy that the city must include such watershed impacts on project and development plans. He argued that work cannot be done on an individual neighborhood level noting that a more holistic approach was needed. He stated that the Lick Run Watershed Association is a non-profit. He wants to see a policy in place that the city will not review plans that don’t show flood plains, topography, and watershed. On every development project, he wants the city to include information on topology, hydrology, and watershed impacts. He also said that the watersheds map needs to be on the city’s web-site. Mr. Cain was thanked and discussion was tabled by the chair. Neighborhood Reports Mr. Akers updated the RNA on the Huff Lane project indicating that the city’s initial development plan had expanded. He said that the developer proposed some concepts at a neighborhood meeting and that many in the neighborhood are against the proposal and still want their school back. Next, Mr. Crawford reported on Mountain View, stating that a police report indicated that Roanoke’s drug initiative has been highlighted in a Michigan State study. Chair McCorkle briefly reported about Southeast. Mr. Tate briefly reported about Grandin Court and mentioned that the Raleigh Court Library had been discussed. Unfinished Business A. RNA Elections Chair McCorkle stated that the only nomination for chair so far was himself. Mr.Naff was nominated for vice-chair. Mr. Tate was nominated for Secretary. Mr. Crawford motioned that we consider the officers as a group. Mr. Powell seconded. All were in favor. B. Innovative Leadership Workshop Mr. Tate provided an update of the Virginia Cooperative Extension Innovative Leadership Program. Mr. Akers asked for topics. C. Update on Social Media Mr. Akers said that there are about 150-200 followers/hits per week on posts.. D. RNA participation in Festival in the Park Ms. Cromer reminded the RNA of their participation in the upcoming Festival in the Park event on Saturday May 26th. She asked for the RNA to consider ideas for participation in the event and plan to participate. E. Grant Update Mr. Clement noted there were 27 projects applications received from 16 neighborhood organizations. Clement reminded the RNA that $45,000 was being requested to be provided by CDBG funds and $12,500 to be provided by city funds as a budgeted line item in the Office of Neighborhood Services FY1213 budget request. Following a brief discussion, a motion was made by Chair McCorkle for the RNA to empower the RNA Grant Review Committee to make a neighborhood development grant funding. The RNA February 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5  motion was seconded by Ms. Cromer. Hearing no further discussion, the motion was unanimously approved. F. RNA Brand and Marketing Mr. Akers asked for input on the development of a RNA logo. RNA members listed ideas that included a star, mountain, houses, parks, people, lifting people up, bridges, connecting, green space and that an emphasis be on looking at and working as one city. Vice-Chair Naff suggested the 2010 VA Neighborhood Conference logo be used as a possible model. Mr. Clement will check on city visual identity policies. Mr. Akers will check on process next week. RNA members discussed business cards and we agreed to get some before Festival in the Park, Mr. Akers mentioned a possible source and will advise. G. Conflict Resolution Center – Chair McCorkle asked about Conflict Resolution Center as a resource, possibly building an ongoing relationship with them. Ms. Cromer asked how much they charge for their services. Mr. Williams asked how effective they were in Southeast. Chair McCorkle mentioned they use the Circle Process and Non-violent communication. Ms. Cromer asked about whether we could ask the city to provide us funds for mediation and conflict resolution and that she would be in favor. Mr. Harris asked what considerations go into this decision to align ourselves with this group. Ms. Alphin suggested we talk about the overall RNA plan and find a time to invite the Center to develop a proposal and present it at a future RNA session. New Business Ms. Cromer and Vice-Chair Naff, voiced questions and concerns about RNA meeting format and design such as the process for inviting and selecting guest speakers and the sharing of an agenda prior to meeting. Multiple members agreed that a pre-agenda is important and that guest speakers should be vetted in some way in order to better streamline our meetings and allow more time for discussion and action on neighborhood issues and RNA activities. Mr. Clement was asked to mail the agenda out no later than a week in advance to give RNA members an opportunity to collect their thoughts in preparations for the upcoming meeting. Vice-Chair Naff suggested that the RNA consider canceling the March meeting and in its place meeting informally as an opportunity for RNA members to get to know one another and discuss other related RNA personal concerns. Following a brief discussion, Vice-Chair Naff motioned that the RNA hold their next meeting on Wed, March 14 as an informal work session without agenda with a focus to be teambuilding. Mr. Tate seconded. Hearing no further discussion, the motion was unanimously approved. Adjournment Chair McCorkle adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. RNA February 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5