1999-09-07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1-94 accessible except from the trail along the creek. The proposal is to construct 10-11 single family homes. The land must be exchanged- for comparably valued land because it was acquired with federal funds for use as a park. Mr. Huja said the property exchange has been approved by federal and state officials. Mr. Huja said the property is zoned R-lA, and notedthat it is designated as open space in the Comprehensive Plan, an issue that will need to be addressed. Mr. Huja said he and Mr. Stan Tatum, proposed developer, have met with the neighborhood about the proposal. Mr. Huja said that the developer is requked to meet certain conditions such as minimum square footage and design review. The public hearing was opened: Mr. Brent Nelson, 2!4 South Street, said that there are no measures existing for protection ofparkIand in the City, Mr. Nelson said the land adjacent to Riverview Park should be purchased outright by the City and other vacant and underutilized land should be used for housing. Mr. Nelson said Council appears to circumvent citizen involvement, and sited examples of the Marriott Hotel and Court Square study. Mr. Robert Mitchell, Jr, 1112 Locust Avenue, said the City should not give up parkland for a new housing development. Mr. Robert Mitchell, 1 t 12 Locust Avenue, said traffic has increased on Locust Avenue over the past 30 years and parkland should be increased, not decreased. Mr. Mitchell said additional traffic is not acceptable and he opposed the transaction. Mr. Ronald Wiley, Jr. 911 Locust lane, said that the City should exchange the three acres of inaccessible parkland for the accessible 15+ acres. Mr. Wiley said the three acres are physically isolated from Pen Park and only provide a private benefit to those in the private development adjacent to it. Mr. Wiley said the trails along the creek will not be affected by the development. Mr. John Unsworth, 975 Locust Avenue, said he opposes the exchange because of the principle of developing parkland and because it will increase traffic in the neighborhood. Mr. Tim-Supler, Locust Lane Court, said he empathizes with those who directly abut the proposed development, but feels that the development will bring vitality to the neighborhood. Mr. Supler, also a member of the City's Planning Commission, said that there are disturbing housing trends in the City and he is concerned about the tong-term vitality of the City. Mr. Supler said the three acres are inaccessible to the general public and the proposal will add more parkland. Mr. Richard Brewer, 905 Locust Lane, said the City needs more middle-income housing and there will be a net gain of parkland after the exchange. Mr. Brewer asked Council not to vote on the proposal as a parkland issue and encouraged them to vote in favor of the exchange. Mr. Donald Hanberry, 1129 Locust Avenue, said the City has no protection for parkland and said he feels it is not just a neighborhood or a traffic issue. Mr. Hanberry said the City should determine if the property adjacent to Riverview park is valuable and if so, should buy it. Mrb Hanberry asked Council to reject the proposal and to replace the current R-IAzoning for parks. Ms. Martha Haretaker expressed agreement with Mr. Hanberry, and said she is proud of the land and does not want it takerk Mr. Charles Webber, 60I Locust Avenue, said that when he first moved to the area he had trouble finding housing in the City and had to move to/X~bemarle County. Mr. Webber said he feels development of these houses will help that situation. Mr. Webber said that the trails will not be affected and it looks like a win/~,4n situation for the City.