My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1987-10-05
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1987
>
1987-10-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2002 3:25:35 PM
Creation date
8/15/2002 2:10:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
10/5/1987
Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
property, stated that it had been determined that it would <br />cost $70,000 to put in ten parking spaces on lot 96 and <br />therefore only three cars were planned to be parked on lot <br />96. Mr. Pettit stated that the three parking spaces~would <br />allow additional space to be added to the proposed building. <br />Mr. Pettit stated that lot 96 is presently a maintenance <br />problem, provides no tax revenue and that the proposed use <br />was favorable to the neighborhood. Mr. Pettit requested that <br />the City sell lot 96 for $5,000. <br /> Mr. Buck quetioned whether a restrictive covenant could <br />be placed on lot 96 to restrict parking. <br /> Mr. Pettit statedthat his client would not be in favor <br /> of a restrictive covenant because of the possibility of <br /> adding additional parking spaces in the future.' <br /> Mr. Buck asked Mr. Satyendra Huja, Director of Community <br /> Develo9pment, what he felt would be the best use of lot <br /> 96 and Mr. Huja replied that he felt it would be best left as <br /> greenspace and owned by the City. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pettit stated that lot 96 is important to the <br /> project and his client would agree to additional scvreening <br /> and landscaping of the parking area. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck recommended deferring the decision in order to <br /> work out an agreement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pettit stated that delaying the project would <br />adversely affect his client. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck recommended that a condition be added to the <br />sale of the lots that if the project is not completed, the <br />land will return to the City. <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING <br />AND DISCONTINUING A PORTION OF AN ALLEY OFF PRESTON AVENUE" <br />which was offered at the September 21st meeting,, was approved <br />by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Buck, Mrs. Gleason, Dr. <br />Hall, Mr. Towe. oes: None. Abstaining: Mr. Barnes. <br /> The sale of lot 82, contained in the ordinance entitled <br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE SALE OF TWO PARCELS OF CITY <br />PROpERTY, IDENTIFIED ON CITY REAL ESTATE TAX MAP 36 AS <br />PARCELS 82 AND 96, TO DR. MARTIN ALBERT FOR $15,000.00, AND <br />TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR'S SIGNATURE ON THE DEED OF CONVEYANCE" <br />which was offered at the September 21st meeting, was approved <br />by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Buck, Mrs. Gleason, Dr. <br />Hall, Mr. Towe. Noes: None. Abstaining: Mr. Barnes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck made a motion to defer action on the sale of <br /> lot 96. Mrs. Gleason seconded the motion to defer, but noted <br /> that she was in favor of selling the lot. <br /> <br /> Mr. Towe indicated his willingness to sell lot 96. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pettit stated that his client would be unable to <br />plan the size of the proposed building when it was uncertain <br />about available parking. <br /> Mr. Buck stated that he was concerned with the potential <br />for large volumes of traffic into the project. Mr. Buck <br />stated that he would be in favor of selling lot 96 subject to <br />a site plan that provided more than the minimum improvements. <br /> Mr. Buck and Mrs. Gleason withdrew their motion to defer <br />the sale of lot 96. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mrs. Gleason, seconded by Dr. Hall, the <br />ordinance was amended to provide that Council would have <br />approval of the site plan for three parking spaces for lot 96 <br />and that it would be sold for $5,000 by the following vote. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.