Laserfiche WebLink
97 <br /> <br />would be that it would give the provisions the force of <br />State lawo <br /> <br /> Mr. Richard Jones of Management Services Corporation, <br />stated that he had followed the development of the new State <br />Housing Code since 1983 and was concerned with the section <br />which only exempted buildings with occupancy permits from <br />meeting maintenance standards. Mr. Jones stated that his <br />concern centered around the fact that Charlottesville did <br />not issue occupancy permits until 1974. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wiley stated that the issue would need to be dealt <br />with at the State level, but noted that at the local level <br />the concern would be whether the building was built to the <br />Code that existed at the time it was constructed, not the <br />fact that an occupancy permit was issued. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck requested that the City Attorney's office <br />study the issue (to include the issue of the City's <br />liability) and provide a report and recommendations to <br />Council. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: <br /> <br />CODE <br /> <br />REPEALING CITY'S HOUSING CODE AND ADOPTING NEW STATE <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL CHAPTER <br />13, HOUSING, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, <br />VIRGINIA, 1976, AS AMENDED, AND TO AMEND AND REORDAIN <br />ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 5, BUILDINGS, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY <br />OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, 1976, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING <br />SECTIONS 5-1 AND 5-2, AND BY ADDING NEW SECTION NUMBERED <br />5-1.1, TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE CODE, <br />VOLUME II OF THE VIRGINIA UNIFORM STATEWIDE BUILDING CODE, <br />1984 EDITION" was moved by Mrs. Gleason, seconded by Dr. <br />Hall, and carried over to the next meeting for <br />consideration. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING 210 10TH STREET, N.E. FROM R-2 TO B-2 <br /> <br /> Mr. Satyendra Huja, Director of Community Development, <br /> reviewed the rezoning request and listed the following <br /> reasons for the Planning Commission's recommendation to <br /> approve the rezoning: 1) It is in keeping with the <br /> Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use Plan, 2) It would not <br /> have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding <br /> neighborhood, and 3) It would provide for needed additional <br />off-street parking in an area of office development. <br /> <br /> As there was no one to speak the public hearing was <br />~closed. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: REZONING 210 10TH STREET, N.E. FROM R-2 TO B-2 <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND <br />REENACTING THE DISTRICT MAP INCORPORATED IN SECTION 31-4 OF <br />THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF <br />CHARLOTTESVILLE, 1976, AS AMENDED, BY THE REZONING OF <br />PROPERTY LOCATED AT 210 10TH STREET, N.E." was moved by Mr. <br />Barnes, seconded by Dr. Hall, and carried over to the next <br />meeting for consideration. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING PROPERTIES AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH <br />STREET, S.Wo AND HARRIS ROAD FROM R-2 TO B-2 <br /> <br /> Mr. Huja reviewed the rezoning request and stated that <br />the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning <br />because it is in harmony with the Land Use Plan of the <br />Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Fred Heblich, an attorney representing the owners <br />of the property, stated that the property was under contract <br />and he requested that Council waive the second reading of <br />the ordinance in order that closing could occur before the <br /> <br /> <br />