Laserfiche WebLink
226 <br /> <br /> Ms. l~dchards said she respects Ms. Daugherty's position and the benefits to be <br />gained from the proposal, but she feels the City needs to develop a policy about what <br />types of land to develop. Ms. Richards said she feels the problem with the choice is that <br />the land is not designated in the Comprehensive Plan for development and designating it <br />now for development changes the rotes in the middle of the game. She said tt~ Housing <br />Strategy should be refined as part of the Comprehensive Plan to designate what is <br />appropriate to develop. She said she has been supportive of selling other public land, <br />such as the CSX property and Meadow Creek treatment site, but she thinks it is an issue <br />of trust and citizens having coincidence ha the City, and she cannot support the exchange, <br />even though she thinks it is a very worthwhile project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he is heexing from the community that they value their parkland, and <br />he feels that figures highly in the marketing plan of the City. Mr. Cox said he feels there <br />are plenty ofdevelo_pable opportunities in the City, ~ it should be made clear that <br />parkland is not for sale. Mr. Cox suggested that a process be put in place to put deed <br />restrictions on all parks so such a proposal will not happen again. Mr. Cox said he will <br />vote against the proposal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said there is value in the proposal that increases the amount of <br />parkland by five times, Mr. Caravati said the issue is whether the proposal significantly <br />deprives or enhances the use of the property, and he thinks it enhances it in the long-term. <br />The proposal will allow greater city-wide access to the. remainder of the parkland and will <br />add land at Riverview Park. Mr. Caravati cautioned Council to he careful ofabsolmism. <br />Mr. Caravati said he does not see this proposal as precedent setting and he ~will vote for <br />the proposal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano noted that the proposal to sell parkland requires four votes to pass <br />and it is clear that it will not pass. Mr. Toscano said this proposal is not an easy call and <br />he prefers to focus on the bigger picture and the need to increase housing. Mr. Toscano <br />referred to the issue of reversion and the future of the City, and the concerns that <br />precipitated its discussion: loss of diversity in the schools; increased numbers of families <br />ha need; and the financial situation of the City. In response to these concerns, Council <br />concluded that three things had to be done: 1) get control of City expenditures; <br />2) increase economic activity to bring in more revenue (both of which have been done); <br />and 3) diversify our housing stock. Mr. Toscano said he feels that has to be done in <br />order for Charlottesville to sur~Ave as a city. The housing stock is not available so it has <br />to be created, and the City has to find a way to create those opportunities on other sites. <br />Mr. Toscano said that he will vote against the proposal because the property is designated <br />in the Comprehensive Plan as parkland. Mr. Toscano commented on the process, part of <br />which he feels was. botched, and expressed concern about statements that have been made <br />throughout it, including comments about the developer and appraisals of the properties <br />which were untrue. Mr. Toscano said he hopes that down the road there will be a <br />c-harette on that lard that will involve citizens cRy-wide, not just the adjacent <br />neighborhoo& Mr. Toscano said he hopes Council will keep their eye on what they are <br />trying to create. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati agreed that the public portbn ofme process was ie,/tially botched, <br />but feels that it has worked for the last four momhs, and many citizens had the <br />opportunity to comment on the proposal <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT <br />FOR THE EXCHANGE OF REAL PROPERTY AND TO AUTHORIZE HE <br />CONVEYANCE OF SUCH PROPERTY LOCATED tN PEN PARK TO STAN AND <br />JUDY TATUM," which was offered at the September 7t~ meeting, was denied by he <br />following vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Ms. Daugherty. Noes: Mr. Cox, Mss. Richards, Mr. <br />Toscano. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox asked ifthere is any interest in buying the 15 acres of land for Riverview <br />Park. Mr. Cox suggested that there be a neighborhood initiated process to make the Pen <br />Park property more accessible, and said he hopes that adjacent residents are all the more <br />motivated to do that. Mr. Cox said he would like the process to begin to reclassify the <br />zoning of ali parkland in the City. <br /> <br /> <br />