2007-07-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6 Ms. Hamilton asked what would give Mr. Lynch’s the assurance he needs. Mr. Lynch said having articles or organization and assurances that the property will be treated as a public or quasi pubic property rather than just being under the control of 12 individuals. Dr. Brown said that Council was told in the beginning of the process that they had to give up control. He said we have 12 great individuals on the Partnership. PUBLIC HEARING/REPORT : MCINTIRE ROAD EXTENDED PROJECT: 1) CONVEYANCE OF TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT; 2) APPROVAL OF STORM WATER MANAGEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CONCEPT Mr. Tolbert said that the following items from Council’s letter to VDOT have been addressed: design speed; two lane road; right of way for two lanes; grade separated interchange; bike/pedestrian path; recreational pool (to be discussed later); replacement parkland; cell tower restriction; limited access; progress on the Eastern and Southern Connectors; design committee. Mr. Tolbert said VDOT has determined that they can build the road with a temporary construction easement. He said the pond design is in interagency review. He said federal laws have changed since the original proposal and the pond cannot be built in the original location proposed. He said Council’s approval of the alternative design for the pond is needed before proceeding. He said staff feel the new location is a better alternative from an environmental standpoint. He said the road is fully funded in the six-year plan. Mr. Norris said that one of the conditions is in regard to the Eastern Connector. He said he has heard that the County does not envision getting funding for the Connector in the indefinite future. Mr. Tolbert said that future funding on any new projects is problematic. Mr. Norris said he fears there will be an increase in through traffic in residential neighborhoods. He said traffic studies were done early on, and asked if any consideration was given in those studies to future development south of the City (i.e. Biscuit Run). Mr. Tolbert said that development is anticipated in traffic studies based on the Land Use Plan. He said a certain level of development would have been anticipated in the study. The public hearing was opened. Ms. Colette Hall, 101 Robertson Lane, said that the North Downtown neighborhood and the Living Education Center are concerned about the impact of the road on Schenk’s Branch Creek and have asked DEQ to hold a public hearing on that, which they plan to do in October. She said it sounds as thought DEQ and VDOT are not talking to each other. She said she went to the Eastern Connector public hearing and a County official said there is no such thing as a Southern Connector when asked. Mr. Peter Kleeman, 407 Hedge Street, said he is surprised Council is being asked to consider granting the easement. He said the traffic flows are totally inadequate with the road being an independent project separate from the interchange. He said they should be considered together. He expressed concern that Council is prepared to give the right of way for a failing road and an infeasible project. He said the materials provided show no benefit to the public. He said the City should identify what the benefits are and who they benefit. Mr. Ernie Reed, 610 Farish Street, Director of the Living Education Center, said that the school adopted Schenk’s Branch as a restoration project. He said the report says that the majority of road run off is not addressed. He asked about the storm retention and said the design details are important and they should improve the quality of the water.