Laserfiche WebLink
11 <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: REZON1NG JOHN STREET PROPERTY FROM 4-2U TO PUD (2nd <br />reading) <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati made a motion to call the question and Ms. Hamilton seconded the <br />motion. <br /> <br /> The motion to call the question was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Dr. <br />Brown, Mr. Caravati, Ms. Hamilton, Mr. Lynch. Noes: Mr. Schilling. <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING <br />THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP INCORPORATED IN SECTION 34-1 OF THE <br />ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, <br />1990, AS AMENDED, BY THE REZONING OF PARCEL 277.1 (LOTS E, F, G & H), <br />CITY TAX MAP 4 (1200 BLOCK OF JOHN STREET) FROM R-2U TO PUD," which <br />was offered at the May 2nd meeting, was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Dr. <br />Brown, Mr. Caravati, Ms. Hamilton. Noes: Mr. Schilling. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said that the information recently provided by our current assessor <br />indicated that these lots are valued at $69,000, but a previous memorandum issued in <br />2002 by the previous assessor said they were valued at $75,000. He said rarely does <br />property value decrease in the City. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS <br /> <br /> Mr. Tolbert said that a public hearing was held on the Zoning Ordinance <br />amendment in April. He said that the changes recommended at this time are primarily to <br />clean up the ordinance. He said that the Planning Commission recommended that other <br />amendments be studied further. Mr. Tolbert said that the issues raised by Keith Woodard <br />regarding the impact on his downtown building regarding pertinences are addressed in <br />the proposed amendments. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said that the amendments provide that only the Director of <br />Neighborhood Development Services can appeal a BAR decision, but he thinks Council, <br />by a majority vote, should be able to as well. He said he does not see the harm to leave <br />this as it currently is. <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch agreed. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Tolbert said that the intent is to <br />require any changes to be approved by the BAR, not only those visible from the street. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he would like the ordinance to apply to 6" trees as he thinks <br />they are just as significant as 8" trees. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Dr. Brown, Mr. Brown said that the current BAR <br />ordinance does not include Council having an appeal. <br /> <br />It was consensus of Council to provide for an appeal by Council. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he does not have enough information about changing the tree <br />size to 6". <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch made a motion to approve the Zoning Ordinance amendments as <br />recommended by Mr. Tolbert, to include tree size of 6", appeal allowed by Council, and <br />pertinences. Ms. Hamilton seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING <br />CHAPTER 34 (ZONING) OF THE CITY CODE, 1990, AS AMENDED, RELATING <br />TO VARIOUS ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS" was offered and carried over <br />to the next meeting for consideration. <br /> <br />APPROPRIATION: $500,000 - TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION (STATE <br />FUNDS (2nd reading) <br /> <br /> <br />