1976-10-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7162 Consideration re: Rezoning Property at Preston Avenue & 10th Street from R-2 to B-3 Consideration re: Ordinance re: Regarding Board of Equalization Hearings The petition to rezone from R-2 to B-3 land in the vicinity of Grady Avenue, 10th Street, N.W. ~ was considered. Mr. Huja addressed the Council and reviewed the petition and stated that the recommendation of the staff is not to grant B-3 zoning on any of the parcels because allowed uses in B-3 would have adverse impact on the residential area, it will not be in harmony with the 1990 Land Use Plan, and three of the properties in question are presently being used as residential properties. Rezoning to B-3 would encourage there demolition and/or conversion to business uses. The staff also recommended that parcel 4-44 owned by Mr. Bruton be zoned B-1 for the following reasons: This will provide parking for Mr. Bruton's business which previously had parking on the street; that the appropriate signing, this could also alleviate the problem of access to his business, because a sign could direct people to the parking lot 'from there they could walk to Mr. Bruton's business; and site plan ~would control development of the parking lot so as not~ to have significan~t adverse impact on neighboring residential properties. A communication was presented from the Planning Commission stating that the commission could not agree on a recommendation, but noted the following areas of consensus: 1. That the commission was opposed to B-3 zoning in this situation. 2. That the neighborhoods interest be preserved. 3. That Mr. Bruton's business had been greived by actions not of his making, but the planning commission could not agree on any solution to his problem. The City Manager stated that the Traffic Department has been working with Mr. Bruton to help alleviate the parking problem and has several suggestions to make. A motion by Mr. Barbour, seconded ~by Mr. Fife that the petition be denied since B-3 zoning would have an adverse affect on the neighborhood and would also be contrary to the City's 1990 Land Use Plan, was unanimously adopted. After a proposed amendment by Mr. Gatewood to rezone lot 44 to B-1 in accordance with the staff recommendation, died for lack of a second. On motion by Mr. Fife, seconded by Mr. Brunton the Cit~y ~ianager and staff were requested to make recommendations to help solve the parking problem in that area. An ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN SECTION 10-17 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, 1976 RELATING TO HEARINGS ON REAL ESTATE~ TAX ASSESSMENTS," was offered by Mr. Fife, seconded by Mr. Barbour and carried over to the next meeting for consideration.