Laserfiche WebLink
166 <br /> <br /> Mr. Richard Brewer, 105 Locust Lane, speaking on behalf of his neighbors, asked <br />that Council defer action because many residents are out of town and not aware of the <br />public -hearing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kevin Lynch, 609 Locust Avenue, said he has never heard of this proposal <br />and asked why neighborhoods are not notified in advance. <br /> <br /> Ms. Jilt Lerner, 945 Locust Avenue, an adjacent property owner to the property in <br />question, said she only heard of the proposal last Friday. Ms. Lerner expressed concern <br />about the increased traffic and location of a street next to her house which she thought <br />was only to be a residential tot. Ms. Lerner asked that Council not approve the land <br />swap, <br /> <br /> Ms. Melinda Bowman; 947 Locust Lane, said she only heard of the proposal <br />Friday night and objected to the proposed development as it wilt affect her quality of life <br />and will produce more traffic. <br /> <br /> Mr. David Holtorr, t043 Locust Avenue; asked Council to put offa vote un~ the <br />community is better informed about the proposal. Mr. Ho!ton asked that the City better <br />notify and involve citizens in such proposals. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mark Kavit, 403 Altamont Street, said that he too was only notified days <br />before the Planning Commission considered an alley closing in his neighborhood, and <br />asked~that Council re-examine how neighborhoods are notifiex[ <br /> <br /> Mr. Start Tatum, proposed developer of the_proper, said he did not lmow until last <br />Monday that the issue was ready to go on Cotmcil's agendaand he then personally <br />contacted neighbors. Mr. Tatum said that his intentions were clear to Locust Lane <br />residents two years ago, though a plan was only developed recently. Ms. Tatum said that <br />the proposal wilt further Councit's~goal of increased owner-occupied middle income <br />housing. <br /> <br />As there were no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question fi-om Mr. Toscano~ Mr. Tatum saidthat federal law <br />stipulates that property purchased with federal funds, for parkland must meet state and <br />federal guidelines if exchanged for replacement parkland. Mr. Tatum said receiving <br />approval has been a very tong process and it did not seem appropriate lo talk about it <br />until recently. Mr. Tatum said his option on the 18 acres ends the middle of August. <br /> <br /> Ms. Daugherty asked if Mr. Tatum could arrange tomeet with neighbors in the <br />next two weeks to discuss the proposal and he indicated that he could. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards asked if Mr. Tatum had given any thought to reconfiguring his plan <br />to relocate the entrance road, but Mr. Tatum said it is not feasible to relocate the road due <br />to the topography of the property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked if Mr. Tatum was going to pursue a PUD development, and Mr. <br />Tatum said that he does not have plans to do so and is not requesting any zoning changes. <br /> <br /> Mr, Cox said that most innovative projects he has seen are done under a PUD <br />with a public participation process and asked why Mr. Tatum does not plan to puts/ac a <br />PUD. Mr. Cox said that a PUD would allow for less street width. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tatum said that going through the PUD rezoning extends the time of the <br />process and'he wants to take advance of the current good economic climate for selling <br />houses. Mr. Tatum noted that ifthe street width isbuitt to less than VDOT requirements <br />then the City does not get money back from VDOT. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he feels there are significant benefits to exploring a PUD and tess <br />street width. Mr. Cox asked if Mr. Tatum had looked at whether the lower part of the site <br />could be extended to River Road for access. Mr, Cox said he is interested in extending a <br /> <br /> <br />