Market Building Renovation: Now is the time!

Well once again decisions that council makes- important ones involving vital amenities used by most citizens- gets caught up in controversy. While I stated it was a tough decision, let me explain how I came to my vote this Monday to proceed to design drawings and true budgets tied to the design.

If I were the only vote on council, I would have voted to head directly to develop construction documents involving plans for this vital building that would include: 8 food vendor areas that can have the fronts individually locked to encourage the opportunity to open for dinner or breakfast and possibly include ABC; a mezzanine that is renovated with outside balconies on the roof on each side for perhaps one larger restaurant; a second floor that is renovated for event use including a full kitchen and appropriate bathrooms (this space should be priced separately as there has been an interest on the part of several businesses to run an event space like this and possibly pay for up-fits as part of their contract); complete HVAC and electrical upgrades; improved restaurant venting; a contained health department approved trash area; appropriate lighting and cosmetic upgrades; increased openings and lighting on the perimeter of the building to show more vitality; improved attractiveness and signage on the Salem Avenue side of the building to encourage visitation from the Hotel Roanoke/ Art Museum area; closing Wall and Market streets with temporary bollards for street seating and usage on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. And perhaps most importantly: management by an outside organization that through leasing structures can encourage more 24 hour usage and higher usage of currently wasted square footage. We would also need to give appropriate consideration to the current vendors who want to stay for their inconvenience (which we should give every effort to make minimal)- perhaps in lower initial leases for larger and improved spaces. All of this is taken from the previous studies, public input sessions, surveys and a tour of the building with construction professionals.

But I am only one vote and it does not sound like the majority of council is in agreement about a design for the building. The biggest reason for this, I believe, is we are missing two vital bits of information: what design can really occur based on a true structural and engineering assessment of the building (never done in any earlier study) and what will be the cost of a particular design that can actually be done (again never done). Given our financial crisis and what I believe is a commitment on the part of council that this renovation is a high priority- having three designs and three budgets will help us make the most informed and fiscally responsible decision in as timely a fashion as possible. As a council member, I have heard many comments for and against each of the two studies presented over the last 3 years or so. None are a slam dunk and one potentially removes the food vendors that are enormously liked by visitors and citizens alike. None included structural analysis and none included a true budget tied to the design. There were a lot of “possible”, “tweaks” and “ifs”. But there were also a lot of fantastic ideas in each study.

The option the majority went with last Monday was NOT at all to pursue another ”consultant study” in my mind. It was the next logical step to finally proceed to renovation: gives us three drawings, based on historic and current public and consultant information we have, each tied to a structural and engineering analysis of the building and each tied to a budget. The next step with this firm would be to pick a design and a budget and develop Construction Documents. The next step would then be to put out an RFP for construction and as they say: get it done.

The other option is to vote this down and re-debate what the process should be and whether this is a project we should do. For the record, our local paper today indicated that several previous councils have declared the Market Building renovation a priority. That is simply not true. Prior to my coming on council the priority was the Market Garage, awnings, clean-up and the Spanish Step/Plaza concept coming off the Hotel Roanoke bridge. That council viewed the Market Building as important but a priority. The council that was seated two and a half years ago returned to the subject and eventually reprioritized that the Market Building should be a high priority (as I have stated the highest priority for capital improvement projects in my mind) and not the Stepped Plaza. This did waste some time but I think we made a decision and got the ball rolling. The first RFP perhaps wasted some time as well- few responses due to specific requirments put in the RFP, how it was written and the one response having some great ideas but missing some details.

So yes it has taken too long in my opinion. The process has been flawed again- but we knew that months ago and set this process out to get to a point as quickly as possible to start renovation. If this is a priority and we are making current food vendors suffer under the inquisition of month to month leases and not knowing the future- we need to keep the ball rolling and get useable information, quickly make the next informed decision and get the building renovated in a cost effective manner but a manner that will bring it well into the future and as soon as possible.

That is why I voted the way I did. Your thoughts are certainly appreciated- looks like we have to take a second vote anyway in two weeks- so give me your ideas!

-Dave

Dear Shanna……….

One of my hopes with this blog is, as much as possible, to use the site for media interviews and responses to reporting. So here itgoes with Shanna Flowers (shanna.flowers@roanoke.com) and her commentary in today’s Roanoke Times. I have emailed her requesting a response.

One of the more difficult parts of council life and media relations is I often completely agree with a reporter’s comments but they twist it so the perception is I am somehow forever on a different side. Shanna should know that I have visited the market building over the last week, attended the public input session and played a major role last year in getting council to reverse itself on the rankings of downtown capital priorities such that the Spanish Steps concept was pushed aside and the Market Building was put on top of the list. Since then work has been underway to secure a major renovation while at the same time performing some long over-due cosmetic improvements. And then we all know what happened nine days ago.

So- for the record, I completely agree with Shanna’s observations about the Market Building and what a jewel it is- absolutely an incredible and very important city asset. I am glad the city owns it and I am glad it is getting broad attention to bring it and it’s historic flair up to standards and with usage that will lead us many many years down the road.  All week, several council members and myself have been weighing next steps and how to quickly and efficiently do the building right, define the renovations, work and be fair with the vendors and utilize the input we have gotten from citizens as well as businesses and DRI in regards to usage. We all plan to have an open discussion on this subject Tuesday morning. I have been quoted many times that this building is the capital priority facing council well before this unfortunate emergency.

But Shanna and presumably others at the Times have decided to connect this issue to me and the amphitheatre? Does everyone at the Roanoke Times have “amphitheatre on the brain”- everything, every issue and anything I do seems to be always connected to the amphitheatre. The Roanoke Times continued for years to fuel the flames of the Victory Stadium debate and successfully helped drag it out over a decade so as to still (including today) discuss it and help promote a continued black eye for the city (I had thought this Victory Stadium debate was well over, but not according to the Roanoke Times).

For the record, the Market Building is a bigger and more urgent priority for the city than an amphitheatre. That much is clear and obvious. The Market Building- all three floors- is awesome, is authentic and has much opportunity and potential. It has not been maintained or managed well, its “usage” needs some revisions and all floors need to be utilized. It has an enormous quality of life vibe.

But that is about all the Market Building and Amphitheatre have in common. The amphitheatre is an entirely different project, on a different and slower track. This project has been in process well before my arrival at council and at each decision point has had at least four votes from council members in support of it.  I, like most council members, are active on many projects and are on many committees. There are many acute and chronic issues I have spent considerable hours on such as passenger rail service, storm water management, marketing and tourism just to name a few. One of the pleasures of being on council is the ability to work with many great and caring groups around many “pet projects”.

Over the last 10 years the city has focused on capital projects mostly involving infrastructure, parking, fire/ems, police and other “municipal” issues. Two years ago, council supported a plan to finally focus on Park and Rec initiatives and quality of life amenities. This often includes healthy and green initiatives. We approved two staggered bond packages each at $15 million for a total of $30 million over several years to follow some of the Park and Rec Master Plan. This plan can or may include important assets like: greenways, athletic fields, an amphitheatre, recreation center, an aquatic center, and a “bigger” William Fleming football field and track and field complex. This money cannot be used on other things such as libraries or the Market Building. Each of these amenities have a clear economic impact for our city.

Today the Roanoke Times mixed two important issues together in order to create false perceptions. They are two very different issues, with two different funding streams and need to be dealt with differently. Yes these are incredibly difficult financial times and city council with the professional advice from our finance department needs to navigate the next few months and years very carefully. Due to the two biggest capital projects in the history of Roanoke coming on line over these last few years (the two new high schools) we knew 2009 and 2010 would be difficult years. Now you add the current economy to the mix and it is even tougher. Some projects may need to be stopped, delayed or reconfigured. The article today implied that council should shelf many projects especially entertainment projects in order to focus on the Market Building. The city does this shelving all too often. I intend to take a broader and longer term view- we need to keep our city vital, competitive with similarly sized cities and grow our population. One building or asset doesn’t do that, it is the thought out synergy of several assets that will.

While I take my broad look, I do know one thing and I think Shanna agrees- the Market Building is first and should be tended to now.

A Strange Council Meeting

A lot of emails, calls and comments on this blog about the city council meeting last week (9-15-08). It was an interesting day to say the least! I recommend anyone that can, to get a tape of this meeting and watch it- watch a true tug of war between trying to make progress and trying to stop progress. Really an example of government inaction- fortunately though the end result continues to keep projects alive (more on this coming in a new post soon).

Now I know there are many definitions of progress, and I certainly understand there are many who disagree with me on my definition and my stance on some of the big issues facing our city. However, as mentioned all over this blog, my main stand and my main reason for running for council is to stop the trend of debating issues to death, where either no action occurs, or if action occurs, it is over-turned at the next election, or perhaps even worse, if action occurs the end product is significantly whittled down due to a prolonged debate such that the result has nothing to do with the original intent and ultimately the project is doomed for failure.

Win or lose on issues, I will not constantly fight to overturn clear decisions made be an informed council with public input and open debate.

I have sat on these comments about the meeting for a week- my first reaction may have been a little extreme and full of frustration.

I really cannot understand the approach of Mayor Bowers and Vice Mayor Lea and cannot answer the question as to why they did what they did.  When you look at any conceivable purpose behind their motions on Countryside and on the Amphitheatre it just makes no sense- other than a clear attempt to be political: to show their strength and a possible new majority on council. That has to be it- the issues didn’t seem to matter to them, the loss of money didn’t seem to matter to them, the fact the people they were listening to on the amphitheatre didn’t even like how they wrote their motion (community vs commercial amphitheatre- everyone wants a commercial amphitheatre- its the location that was at issue- perhaps they should listen better!) didn’t matter to them, the fact that they did not want to hear a soon to be finished and paid for intensive study on the amphitheatre didn’t matter, the fact that council had already decided to keep countryside a golf course and was planning to send out a request for long-term management of am 18 hole golf course didn’t matter, the fact that this came up quickly and was not an agenda item until late the week before didn’t matter, and the fact that they did not talk or return phone calls to many council members didn’t matter.

Yes I have been on a voting majority on council but when a controversial vote was coming, I called and asked to meet or talk with every council member whether or not I thought I had the votes. I felt it worth the time and the courtesy for them to understand my perspective and for me to understand their views on the issue. This happened several times over the last few years and every council member met or spoke with me except councilman Wishneff who never returned calls. The old thought of get to four votes and stop calling just does not sit well with me. I see the attempts on their part last week as “pay back”- “see how it feels, now we are the majority and we can overturn past progress.”

Win or lose, we need to work together, communicate together and hopefully show the world that we can make decisions and move on. As Mayor Bowers has said- “take a deep breath and move on”. Trust is a big issue- a lot of trust was lost at this council meeting. The purpose of our retreat in a week is to work on process, decision making on issues, rfp process, relations with administration, and moving forward for the sake of our citizens and the future of our city.  As seen on My Purpose page above, I plan to remain dedicated to moving this city forward in a progressive and informed manner and hope to work with the entire council over the next few years in order to do so.

My true hope is this was an odd bump in the process encouraged by uninformed back room rhetoric with the last campaign fresh in their minds- but is done, tried and won’t be repeated too soon.

Passenger Rail Service in Roanoke: The Time is Now

I think this is one everybody can agree on: bring back passenger rail service to Roanoke! I and many others have had this desire when throwing our hats into the political scene. Once in that scene, however, the picture gets pretty confusing and daunting. This is not just a simple matter. Many before have tried to conquer this task which includes bringing groups with different goals together and lots of money. The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission has worked on this issue as have various economic partnerships. Many politicians have been involved. The most recent attempts- over the last many years- have resulted in the Trans Dominion Express coalition. There have been many surveys (all remarkably supportive- especially recent ones of potential riders), economic and cost analysis reports.

If there ever was a time to strongly revisit this issue- it is now! With gas prices soaring, inflation and other economic woes, a growing elderly demographic with their own transportation needs- not to mention green initiatives/needs and our little traffic problem on I-81- something must be done.

The City of Lynchburg appears to have had success in this area. They have had passenger rail service to DC but now, mostly due to the efforts of grassroot organizations, appear to be slated for increased schedules. It has been said that the same cost to improve their schedule could get Roanoke a start- an intermittent service to Lynchburg and on to DC. I am in favor of at least getting that start. The Trans Dominion Express is a great concept and probably was ahead of it’s time. However starting grand in this economy and with all the trouble Virginia is having with transportation funding,  small steps may be the wisest move and may help show where the needs are. Given the economy, and not to mention business travel and how they are looking for fiscally responsible alternatives, a link from Roanoke to Lynchburg and beyond may be a fantastic start. The economic models produced by the Trans Dominion Express group and the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission are all mostly positive for rail service out of Roanoke and most do not incorporate business travel into their computations.

In addition to a strong grassroot effort in Lynchburg, another reason they appear to be successful is that passenger rail service has been a high priority of their Chamber of Commerce. I believe Roanoke needs a similar strategy and I challenge our Chamber, the newly developed Economic Partnership and any other new or old re-energized grass roots effort to partner with the City, elected leaders and the Regional Commission to begin a hard lobbying effort for a “start” at passenger rail service in Roanoke.

The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transport is starting public hearings on its Statewide Rail Plan this month. They really really need to hear from Roanoke citizens and elected leaders alike. The public hearing in our area is on July 24th at the Salem Civic Center at 6pm. You can contact Jennifer Pickett at 1-804-786-7432 or Jennifer.Pickett@DRPT.Virginia.gov for more information. I would be more than happy in my role on Council and on the Regional Commission to help coordinate the efforts of any groups willing to be active on this issue and I am certainly aware that there are people and groups out there that know more than I - I am willing to learn and listen to those groups to better push this effort.

YOU KNOW HOW TO CONTACT ME!

Check Out Our Forum to Discuss the Issues

As many of you have noticed there has been a lot of dialog going on regarding some of the issues that have been addressed.  I have recently added a forum to this site in hopes that everyone can join in on the discussions and voice their opinions and suggestions.

You can access the forum by selecting the tab at the top of the page or at the bottom of the left column.  You are required to register by selecting a user name and password.  The register link is at the top of the forum page. You will then login after you register. 

You can use the forum to comment on a post or start a new post.  You will notice that there are 3 categories, Municiple Issues, Media Interviews and Hot Topics.  Feel free to add any topic for discussion under these categories. There is also a poll area where we can poll subscribers and you can see the real time results.

I have started a new topic for discussion under the Municple Issues regarding Countryside.  There is also a poll question regarding the purchase by the city.  I encourage you to continue the comments and discussion in our new forum.

If you have any questions or problems regarding the forum please direct them to info@davetrinkle.com.  I hope you find this means of dialog helpful and I look forward to your feedback.

Dave

Countryside- A Great City Purchase or Not?

The purchase of Countryside golf course several years ago and the ensuing discussions about its fate represent a lot of good and bad about Roanoke politics in my mind. The City of Roanoke’s Housing plan and initiatives, strongly led by our city manager, are bold and make a lot of sense to me. Roanoke is attempting to diversify its housing options and wherever possible mix in low income housing with other types of housing. The concept is not to isolate low income housing and not to just increase low income housing as the only growing housing option in our city. This does not mean low income housing is discouraged, quite the contrary- it will continue to be needed, just needs to be approached by developers in a different, more diverse manner.

 

Roanoke is land locked with very little developable land left in our 43 square mile territory. The concept behind the Countryside purchase (before my time on council) was to obtain land that could then be used to increase our housing stock- especially for middle income range housing but to also have diversity of housing options within the development. Request for Proposals (RFPs) were announced. Initially, there was a lot of interest. Then there was only one potential taker but as that developer tried to make the project work financially, the project changed in scope. Additional land purchases were required, it became more commercial with more rental units and really not at all in keeping with the original intent. Ultimately, the project for this developer could not go forward. There has been little to no interest since then. Roanoke has continued to hire the current golf course  management company for one more year.

 

This “additional year” is quickly coming to a close and council has asked the city administration to prepare a briefing on viable near term and long term options for this beautiful piece of property. The briefing has properly been delayed until new council members come on board. The briefing will occur in August- probably at our first meeting of the month on August 4th..

 

There are countless possibilities for this property. In my opinion, we appropriately tested the market for a large housing complex and it didn’t work. Maybe, in hindsight, we shouldn’t have bought the property- though it is a great piece of land and who knows what would happen to it if we didn’t buy it.

 

As you have hopefully read in my other postings- I believe quality of life amenities are key to our economic future. Therefore, I like many of the possible future uses for this property that are consistent with this strategy. Certainly at this point, I support keeping the attractive 18 hole course and would strongly consider management options that may help it be more profitable while providing solid maintenance and upkeep. Perhaps the course can become an incentive for those who live in the city- reduced fees, certain number of free fees, etc. Other short term options may be an athletic field complex. Much of the area could remain green with greenway additions. Some of the land is very suitable for housing projects while keeping the course- perhaps one house at a time in this economy. Some of the land that abuts I-581 and private property is ripe for commercial development especially if the Valley View interchange is improved. Longer term options could include improved indoor tennis facilities and a much needed competitive aquatic center for our region.

 

The good about all this is the City of Roanoke made a bold decision, stuck with a housing plan, tested the market and now most consider different options- one of which, of course, could be to just sell the property as is without any constraints. We are now faced with a different set of possible uses- some of which may be better than the original intent. The bad in my mind is that this discussion has been going on far too long and has impacted those who live in the area and have lived with uncertainty for many years. One worry, historically based, is that with long discussions and debates the bold option gets whittled to a mediocre option not at all in keeping with original intent and thus doomed for failure. Lets hope this summer and fall, Roanoke City Council can enter into good and meaningful discussions with public input but reach a decision for this property in a timely manner with clear, bold short term and long term plans that will improve the economic vitality for Roanoke for many years to come. We need to develop a strategic plan for the area that takes us many years down the road.

 

The decision is coming, so help out—-What are your thoughts???

 

A Restaurant on Mill Mountain: Our “Natural Amenities”

Since the election, and really for months before, decision making regarding a potential restaurant and event site on Mill Mountain has slowed considerably. Certainly, this was and is a hot issue for our city and one in which several candidates in the recent election certainly took some sides. In my mind, this has been a very healthy debate. There have been meetings, printed commentary and letters to the editor, forums and the dialogue on both sides has been mostly civil.

We can quickly approve fire stations, police academies and civic event centers that cost millionns with little fanfare, but it is the sexy, feel good, fun projects with potential economic and tourism benefits that often get the most attention. There are many understandable reasons for this- we can all envision them, we can all use them, and perhaps they are “extras” that will change our landscape and something we “may not need”, or these issues offer many options of how to get it done and therefore there are many opinions. The market building, the stepped plaza, the amphitheatre all fit this category. The mountain though does offer some differences. Second to perhaps our downtown market area, it is our greatest asset and I believe it is quickly followed in third place by our river.  The city is correctly expanding the use of these natural amenities with greenways, hiking and biking trails and ways to link them together which are getting regional and national media exposure. People take visitors to the mountain, enjoy weekend picnics or gatherings there, or have weddings on the star overlook (turn the starcam on now).

There is also history here: an old inn and theatre was once there, the Mill Mountain Zoo still operates there and offers great family entertainment in an awesome setting. Those who grew up here have fond childhood memories of the mountain. The Discovery Center has become a great addition and offers another place to visit and learn about our local environment and nature and hopefully entices visitors to come on into the city. Parking is spread out with perhaps too much asphalt but it is often full on weekends.

So do we leave well enough alone? For as long as I can remember, about every 7 or so years I have heard people and groups make a major effort to discuss the possibilities of having a restaurant on the mountain- a place to take friends, sit, enjoy the view, listen to accoustic music, have breakfast/coffee, have events/meetings/weddings,  or just take a rest from a hike or bike ride. If done right- evironmentally friendly, small footprint, cool wood and stone architecture, LEED design, consolidate parking and lose some asphalt- it would certainly at first glance make sense to me and a lot of people for that matter. Valley Forward has put together a solid proposal and has been very reasoned in my mind in its approach to this debate. The respondents- the Keep Mill Mountain Green and Natural Read more

Support for the Concept of Regionalism

Another goal of mine and probably for most council members is to strongly support the concept of regionalism. I believe the concept is supported by those in government in the county and in Salem. The rub has always been which project, how and why. A recent article in the times made it appear that the city was not being regionally minded in its decision to review the shared fire and EMS services with the county at Clearbrook. This is a review of need, quality and cost effectiveness that should at any rate be undertaken as Read more

The Amphitheatre is Hanging Around My Neck

While the amphitheatre has moved forward at multiple times with anywhere from 4 to 7 council votes, this one seems to be hanging around my neck! To me the amphitheatre is a micro-issue for our city but obviously has vocal contingents on both sides. We can build a new firehouse or police academy with little comment and much more expense. Perhaps ongoing debate is because this is a visible, feel good project that all will hopefully use. Perhaps it is lingering sentiment from Victory Stadium. As we all should know this Read more

And I thought I could sit this election out!

While I certainly supported Nelson Harris’ bid for re-election based on all the good accomplishments he has participated in for this city over many years and his progressive viewpoints, I am excited to get to work with this new council. One thing that clearly seems positive to me at this point is that there are no camps, no automatic majority and no clear predictability. I feel this is healthy for us on council and for the citizens, though I am very aware of behind the scenes attempts, even by those who lost, to form such camps which is unfortunate.

 

As for myself, I plan to continue as I did when I first got on council though hopefully a little more mature and aware of Read more

« Previous Page