Laserfiche WebLink
13 <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Cox, Mr. Scala said that the property is close <br />to but is not in a design control district. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said there is no mechanism for design control even though the <br />development will have a visual impact on the district. He said he would like to consider <br />having the development under the Board of Architectural Review's design cont rol <br />acknowledging that it will have a visual impact on the design control district. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch made a motion to have BAR design control. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he is not sure that can be done without an amendment to the <br />historic district. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brown said t hat there is specific criteria establishing design control districts <br />and he does not think Council can require BAR review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked if the applicant could agree to having a review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said the cost for the property could be waived if the ap plicant agrees to <br />go through the design review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked under what criteria would you review the development. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch asked how we can ensure we have a good quality design. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said as laudable as she thinks the purpose is she c annot support the <br />proposal because it is totally ad hoc. She said we cannot just arbitrarily require design <br />review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said higher density developments have an aggressive impact. He said <br />the viewshed is as valuable as having an address on the desi gn corridors. He said this <br />piece is effectively in the corridor. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said there is no clear mechanism to achieve design review. He said the <br />area could be identified and studied. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked the contract purchaser, Mr. Wade Tremblay, what he w ould think <br />about design review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tremblay said he already has a presence on Wertland Avenue and he assured <br />Council that he intends to do a high quality project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if the closing could be subject to the current contract. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brown cautioned against tying a rezoning to an owner. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch made a motion to approve the closing at the fair market value of <br />$13,729, Mr. Schilling seconded the motion, and the ordinance entitled "AN <br />ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF AN <br />ALLEY LOCATED OFF WERTLAND STREET ADJACENT TO PARCELS 296 AND <br />301 ON CITY TAX MAP 4" was offered and carried over to the next meeting for <br />consideration. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said there is nothing consistent about why this and other properties are <br />included in de sign control districts. He said we need to preserve the integrity of what <br />Charlottesville looks like. He said we need to have some mechanism for review of these <br />areas. <br /> <br />APPEAL <br />: BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW DECISION RE: DOOR AT 909 <br />W. MAIN STREET <br /> <br /> Ms. Scala said the decision to deny a door by the Board of Architectural Review <br />th <br />at its November 18 meeting is being appealed. She said the William Jeffries house is <br />