Laserfiche WebLink
238 <br /> <br />a. APPROPRIATION: Year-End Adjustments (carried over) <br /> <br />b. APPROPRIATION: <br /> <br />$230,000. State Grant for Fire Training Center <br />Repairs (carried over) <br /> <br />c. ORDINANCE: "AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE <br /> ABANDONMENT OF AN EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF A NEW <br /> EASEMENT FOR RELOCATION OF A SANITARY SEWER LINE <br /> ACROSS PROPERTY ON WEST MA1N STREET (MARRIOTT <br /> COURTYARD)" (2nd reading) <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: "AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE <br />CONVEYANCE OF A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT IN PENN PARK <br />LANE TO THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF RICHMOND AND THE <br />ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY" (2nd reading) <br /> <br />e4 <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND <br /> REENACTING THE DISTRICT MAP INCORPORATED IN SECTION 34- <br /> 15 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF <br /> CHARLOTTESVILLE, 1990, AS AMENDED, BY THE REZONING OF <br /> THE REAR 1,730 SQUARE FEET OF 500 LEXINGTON AVENUE FROM <br /> R-lA TO B-I" (2nd reading) <br /> <br />go <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND <br />REORDAINING SECTION 2-6 OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE CITY <br />CODE, 1990, AS AMENDED, RELATED TO HOLIDAYS" (2nd reading) <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: AUTHORIZING SALE OF PROPERTY ON DOUGLAS AVENUE <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman reviewed amendments proposed, including adding a reasonable <br />clause, and a timetable. <br /> <br /> Mr. Satyendra Huja, Dkector of Strategic Planning, said that the following issues <br />were brought up by the neighborhood after the last meeting: density; request that the <br />City do a traffic count and study of traffic and parking and explore alternate access; and <br />questions about the long-term maintenance of the park space and gardens. Mr. Huja said <br />that the density issue is addressed in the contract, and a non-profit corporation may be <br />created, which would include neighborhood representation, to fund maintenance, the bulk <br />of which will be paid for by owners of the condominiums. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Ms. Richards, Mr. Huja said no proposal for a <br />second access has been made, though the developers have indicated that it may be <br />possible to provide some access under the bridge, but that is not under their control. <br /> <br /> Regarding traffic and parking, Mr. Toscano asked what would constitute <br />reasonable withholding of a PUD, for instance, what if a parking study is done and the <br />Planning Commission or Council denied the PUD because of the results of the study. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman said that Council has the option of striking the reasonable clause. <br />From the developers' view, the PUD could be considered by a new Council, and they <br />need some assurance that Council will act in good faith~ <br /> <br /> Mr. Huja said that the PUD ordnance is pretty clear, and a traffic study is not <br />required. <br /> Mr. Toscano said he is worried that ifa traffic study is done, and the numbers <br />come back over a certain level, people will say that is intolerable. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati noted that the neighborhood's traffic standards are different than the <br />national standards. <br /> <br />Mr. Lynch said he is uncomfortable leaving in the reasonable clause. <br /> <br /> <br />