|
294
<br />
<br /> Ms. Fenton said that she feels the question is where do we go from here as there is
<br />obviously a problem with the process, and suggested that Council appoint a committee
<br />made up of members of the Urban Design Committee, Board of Architectural Review (if
<br />projects are within a design control district), and City staff from Economic Development,
<br />Zoning, City Manager's office, and the Mayor, and they be charged to meet with any ne~v
<br />developer at early stages prior to a project going to the BAR. Ms. Fenton also suggested
<br />that there be an ombudsman for each project.
<br />
<br /> Ms. Fenton said that if Council over-rules the decision of the BAR, she hopes all
<br />can work together to make it a better project, and that the following concerns will be
<br />addressed: revisit mid-block entrance (off 12th Street); detailed look at lighting visible
<br />from the street; tax breaks to help subsidize underground parking; and have the architect
<br />return to the BAR on certain details, including windows and lighting. Ms. Fenton said
<br />that she feels the system needs to be changed~
<br />
<br /> At the request of Ms. Daugherty, Mr. Clyde Gouldman, City Attorney, explained
<br />that Council's consideration of the issue should be considered an evidentiary hearing,
<br />and, as such, should not be considered a public hearing. Mr. Gouldman said that three
<br />categories of persons should be allowed to make presentations: the applicant/owner; the
<br />Board of Architectural Review; and a person who has legal standing to present evidence
<br />and has a direct pecuniary interest in the outcome of the process (such as a next door
<br />neighbor). Mr. Goutdman advised Council, however, that this meeting is not a good
<br />place to determine the legal standing of the speakers and Council should request that each
<br />speak state their interest in the project prior to making comments.
<br />
<br /> Mr. Bob Moorefield, President of Crestar Bank, Vice Chair of the Chamber of
<br />Commerce Economic Development Committee, and former Chairman of the City's
<br />Economic Development Strategy Task Force, noted that the Chamber's mission is to
<br />promote well being, retention, recruitment, and expansion of businesses in
<br />Charlottesville and Albemarle. Mr. Moorefield noted that the Economic Development
<br />Strategy Task Force had highlighted West Main Street as a target for development, and
<br />he feels that the Marriott hotel project more than qualifies as a viable project because it
<br />will increase taxes, increase property values, strengthen tourism, and will provide jobs
<br />within walking distance.
<br />
<br /> Ms. Suzanne Staton, Chair of the Chamber of Commerce, and owner of several
<br />properties in the City, supported the appeal. Ms. Staton said that at the September
<br />Chamber Board meeting, the Tourism Council supported the project, but expressed
<br />concern that the BAR may not approve the project. Ms. Staton said that mechanisms can
<br />help development or can hinder it if it works poorly, and added that the BAR appears to
<br />have opposed the project from the beginning, and was unwilling to allow the demolition
<br />of two dilapidated houses.
<br />
<br /> Ms. Martha Wood, 104 Village Court, a taxpayer and concerned citizen, said that
<br />she favors responsible economic development, but feels that it is important to maintain a
<br />human scale. Ms. Wood said she does not oppose building the hotel, but objects to its
<br />location as she feels it will overpower several old and important properties on West Main
<br />and Wertland. Ms. Wood said that the rendering provided by the architect does not
<br />reflect the sense of crowdedness. Ms. Wood asked that Council postpone approval of the
<br />project, seek a more appropriate site for the hotel, and direct staff to work with the
<br />owners of the houses proposed to be demolished to upgrade their structural integrity.
<br />
<br /> Ms. Ashlin Smith, 620 Park Street, expressed agreement with comments made by
<br />Joan Fenton and Martha Wood. Ms. Smith said she favors economic development and
<br />increasing the tax base, but thinks there is more than one way to do it. Ms. Smith said
<br />she is upset by negative comments made about the BAR, especially ones suggesting that
<br />they are confrontational, and said that she thinks the current board is the best there has
<br />been. Ms. Smith said she feels any finger pointing should be to Council because of what
<br />they have said and done from the beginning, indicating that they wanted the project, and
<br />undermining the work of the BAR. Ms. Smith said that the applicant was not prepared to
<br />make major changes recommended by the BAR. Ms. Smith said that while she knows
<br />many in the business community have endorsed the project, many more people oppose it.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|