|
~w,mber ~1.1q77
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS~ the application for same has been determined by the Planning Commission to
<br />have met the requirements of said Section 3-26; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed such application and the site plan submit
<br />ted therewith and has recommended approval of said application; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the developer has been informed that approval of a group housing project
<br />pursuant to said Section 3-26 grants only an exemption from certain dimensional requirements~
<br />for residences as stated in the appropriate section of Article 5 and does not constitute
<br />a waiver of any other requirements embodied in the Subdivision Ordinance, the Zoning OrdinanCe,
<br />the Code of the City of Portsmouth and any other applicable state or federal laws; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the developer is aware that building permits and/or any other required permits
<br />will be issued only upon compliance with ordinances or laws applicable thereto.
<br />
<br /> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia,
<br />that that certain group housing project known as Pleasant Woods Apartments and designated
<br />as GHP-72-5 and more specifically shown on a plat entitled "Pleasant Woods Apartments",
<br />dated No--v~ber 21~ ~972, prepared by E. E. Paine, Inc., and attached hereto and made a part
<br />hereof, is hereby granted approval."
<br />
<br />Ayes: Early. Holley. Johnson. King. smith. Wentz. Barnes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Early, the following resolution was adopted,
<br />and by the following ~ote:
<br />
<br />"A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A GROUP HOUSING PROJECT PURSUANT TO SECTION
<br />5-26 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SUCH PROJECT BEING KNOWN AS SYCamORE HILL AND DE-
<br />SIGNATED AS GHP-T2-4.
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, James V. Bickford, III and its agent, J. Ereziotti, Jr., have made applica-
<br />tion Pursuant to Section 3-26 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Portsmouth, 1961,
<br />for the granting of approval for a group housing project known as Sycamore Hill (GHP-72-4);
<br />and
<br />
<br /> PaiEREAS, the application for same has been determined by the Planning Commission to
<br />have met the requirements of said Section 3-26; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed such application and the site plan sub-'
<br />mitted therewith and has recommended approval of said application; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the developer has been informed that approval of a group housing project
<br />pursuant to said Section 3-26 grants only an exemption from certai~ dimensional requirements
<br />for residences as stated in the appropriate section of Article S and does not constitute
<br />a waiver of any other requirements embodied in the Subdivision Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance,
<br />the Code of the City of Portsmouth and any other applicable state or federal laws; and
<br />
<br /> WHEREAS, the developer is aware that building permits and/or any other required permits
<br />will be issued only upon compliance with ordinances or laws applicable thereto.
<br />
<br />prepared by Baldwin and Gregg, and attached hereto and made a part
<br />approval."
<br />
<br /> NOW, THBREFORB, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia,
<br />that that certain group housing project known as Sycamore Hill and designated as GHP-?2-4
<br />and more specifically shown on a plat entitled "Sycamore Hill", dated October 31, 1972,
<br /> hereof, is hereby granted
<br />
<br /> 72-49S -
<br />was read:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Early, Hotley, Johnson, King, Smith, Wentz, Barnes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />The following letter received from W. T~ Goode, Chairman of City Planning,
<br />
<br /> "The City Planning Commission has received and discussed your question of concern over
<br />applying high density Residential R-60 to additional areas in our municipality. Today we
<br />have receivedffrom our staff and endorsed the following report which we trust clearly ex-
<br />presses our position and provides the answer to Four question.
<br />
<br />"AN R-60 ZONING DISTRICT MORATORIUM? The staff finds nothing to be gained in
<br />any such self~imposed restriction upon our local zoning process. First, it is
<br />inconceivable that R-60 zoning districts could be repealed -- it is simply the
<br />heart of zoning in the pre=1960 area of our city. Second, there are occasions
<br />when an extension of an existing R-60 zoning district is both reasonable and
<br />desirable. Third, there are occasions when the R-60 zoning district tool pro-
<br />vides the only answer to a problem of proper and defensible zoning patterns.
<br />Fourth, the law allows owners of private property to apply for ordinance changes,
<br />and the City of Portsmouth can say "NO" on merits of the case presented. How-
<br />ever, on the other hand, R-60 in suburban areas of the city annexed since
<br />19S9 has gmn~rated questions. In the Collinswood area, the Planning Commission
<br />has studied the difference between apartment house projects erected under R-60
<br />and R-TS and ~ound a benefit to the municipality in holding the line with the
<br />slightly more restrictive zoning district. With the advent of the PUD, there
<br />remains no reason for zoning large tracts of outlaying virgin land high density
<br />residential."
<br />
<br />Motion of Mr. Johnson and seconded by ~r. Smith that a moratorium be declared on any
<br />
<br />
<br />
|