Laserfiche WebLink
3-64 <br /> <br />Resolution re: <br />Authorizing the <br />Mayor to sign <br />contract for the <br />sale of Lane High <br />School to Albemarle <br />County <br /> <br /> BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of <br />Charlottesville that there is hereby appropriated from the <br />unencumbered balance of the General Fund to expenditure <br />account~01-92010 the sum of $30,000 to be paid as the City's <br />share of the cost of Charlottesville-Albemarle Joint <br />Transportation Study. <br /> <br /> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the resolution adopted <br />March 6, 1978 appropriating money for such purpose is hereby <br />repealed. <br /> <br /> A proposed agreement for the sale of the Lane High School <br />Building to the County of Albemarle was presented and discussed. <br />Mr. W. R. Bingler, Jr., Mr. Jimmy Miller and Mr. Lawson Davis <br />addressed the Council in opposition to the sale of the property. <br />Mr. Brunton stated that he does not feel the City is getting <br />a high enough price for this property and can not support this <br />action, On motion by Mr. Gatewood, seconded by Mr. Fife, the <br />resolution hereinafter set forth was adopted by the following <br />vote. Ayes: Mr. Barbour, Mr, Fife, Mr. Gatewood and Mrs. O'Brien. <br /> <br />Adoption of 1979 <br />Criminal Justice <br />Plan <br /> <br />Ordinance re: <br />Amending Community <br />Attention Home <br />Ordinance <br /> <br />Consideration re: <br />Ordinance - Permit <br />Parking Zones on <br />Edgewood Lane <br /> <br />Consideration re: <br />Ordinance - Rezoning- <br />at 1018 Holmes <br />Avenue - Denied <br /> <br />Noes: Mr. Brunton.. <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, a joint committee of representatives of <br />this Council, the City School Board and the Board of <br />Supervisors of Albemarle County has concluded its negotiations <br />and recommended approval of an agreement for the sale of the <br />property for the sum of $800,000 cash, and other consideration <br />set forth in such agreement; and <br /> <br /> WHEREAS, such agreement of sale has been unanimously <br />approved by the City School Board and the Board of Supervisors <br />of Albemarle County, now, therefore, be it <br /> <br /> RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Charlottes- <br />ville that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute on behalf <br />of the City that certain document, consisting of six pages, <br />constituting an agreement for the sale of the Lane High School <br />property presented to Council at the meeting at which this <br />resolution is adopted, a copy of which shall be kept on file <br />with the minutes of such meeting, and be it further <br /> <br /> RESOLVED, that the City Attorney and City Manager <br /> are directed to undertake all actions necessary for fulfill <br /> the City's obligations under Such agreement. <br /> <br /> The 1979 Criminal-Justice Plan as adopted by the Thomas <br /> Jefferson Planning District Commission was presented and <br /> discussed. On motion by Mr. Brunton, seconded by Mr. Fife <br /> the foregoing Criminal Justice Plan was unanimously approved. <br /> <br /> An ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN <br /> SECTION 30-15 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, 19.76, <br /> AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COFR~UNITY ATTENTION HOME," which <br /> was offered at the meeting of the Council on April 3, 1978, <br /> was adoPted by the following recorded vote. Ayes: Mr. Barbour, <br /> Mr. Brunton, Mr'. Fife, Mr.Gatewood and Mrs. O'Brien. Noes: None. <br /> An ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN <br /> SECTION 16-56 OF THE'CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, <br /> 1976, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PERMIT'.PARKING ZONES, TO <br /> ESTABLISH A NEW PERMIT ZONE ON EDGEWOOD LANE," was offered by <br /> Mr. Fife, seconded by Mr. Gatewood and carried over no-the next <br /> for consideration. <br /> <br /> A cot~r~unication was presented from the Planning Commission <br /> recommending that the petition to rezone from R-1 to R-2 <br /> property located at 1018 Holmes Avenue be denied for the <br /> following reasons: 1. This would constitute spot zoning; <br /> 2. This could set a bad precedent for the street which is <br /> primarily single fnmily; 3. The applicant understood the <br /> <br />restrictions of the R-1 zone when he obtained the building <br /> <br /> <br />