|
332
<br />
<br />December 18, 1979
<br />
<br />that the petitioner in the use permit
<br />ably passable condition for a private
<br />amended, and by unanimous vote;
<br />
<br />be required perioSically to maintain the road in a reason-
<br />road, and ~P. 7~-~$'~pF~ov~d on fi~st-~ead~n~ as
<br />
<br />(h) Use~ Permit 79-18 Petition of Albert Shotmeyer, by Cathy R. Bell, Lessee.
<br />
<br /> Lewis Thomas, 131 Florida Avenue, representing the Port Norfolk Civic League, spoke in
<br />opposition of the use permit.
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Gray and seconded by Mr. Barnes, to concur in the recommendation of the
<br />of the Planning Commission, and UP 79-18 was denied, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Barnes, Beamer, Early, Gray, Holley, Oast, Davis
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />(i) Use Permit 79-20 Petition of Mr. and Mrs. Thomas B. Velasco, Owner.
<br />
<br />William H. Oast, III, Attorney, representing the petitioner, was present.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Gray, to,.concur with the Planning C~mm£ssion,
<br />UP 79-20 ~as-a~rove~ on f~r$~ reading, and by unanimous vote.
<br />
<br />(j) DOWNTOWN D-1 ZON[NG DISTRICT INSOFAR AS OFF-STREET PARKING IS CONCERNED,
<br /> ORDINANCE No. 1979-82.
<br />
<br />Section 40-121
<br />
<br />Downtown D-1 District dimensional requirements and off-street parkin
<br />and loading requirements.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Gray and seconded by Mr. Beamer, the ordinance to be approved on first
<br />reading, and wes adopted by,unanimous vote.
<br />
<br />(k) WATERFRONT W-t OFF-STREET PARKING.
<br />
<br />Section 40~139, Waterfron W-1 Revision.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Gray, the ordinance to be approved on £irst
<br />,reading, and was adopted by unanimous vote.
<br />
<br />(1) ~UD-72-1, PEACHTREE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SECTION ~3.
<br />
<br />Ben J. Levy, Attorney , spoke in favor of the PUD recommendation. (See following letter)
<br />
<br />Following letter received from Planning Commission:
<br />
<br /> mAt its regular monthly meeting on November 6, 1979, the Planning Commission took up a
<br />long-standing request from Attorney Benjamin J. Levy as agent for the Peachtree Planned Unit
<br />Development. Mr. Levy asserts that lots platted in Section 3 (recorded May 12, 1978) are
<br />proving too large for development andsale. He requested permission to resubdivide the thirty
<br />(30)vacant lots into 51 lots. This action would not affect platted streets, nor would it
<br />alter lands officially, by recorded plat, set aside for the Peachtree Homeowners Community
<br />Rssociation.
<br />
<br /> The Planning Commission considered the overall decrease in density which had seen the
<br />Peachtree PUD decline from an approved 632 housing units in 1972 to a current authorized level
<br />of 384 housing units. This is 60% of the authorized housing density Commission resolved
<br />(S-0-1) to accept and recommend resubdivision of these 30 Section 3 lots to not more than 51
<br />lots, provided lot width average no less than 45 feet. Subsequently, Land Surveyor John D.
<br />Clark, Jr. of Baldwin g Gregg, LTD, has submitted to the staff a plat that meets these condi-
<br />tions.
<br />
<br /> If City Council sees fit to accept this PUD recommendation, City Engineer Ralph Hest~er, ~
<br />City Attorney Gordon Tayloe and I will proceed to execute a new plat of Section 3 for recordation.
<br />The effect of this action w~ll increase the total number of housing units to 402 which is 63% ~f
<br />the original authorization.' ~
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Barnes and seconded by Mr. Oast, to concur in the recommendation of the
<br />Planning Commission, and was adopted by 6-0-1 (Early-abstaining) vote.
<br />
<br />79-443 - The following report on STATUS, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS was presented:
<br />
<br /> "At its regular monthly meeting on December 4, 1979, the Planning Commission conducted an
<br />overview of the situation involving planned unit developments (PUD), Zoning, City Code, Chapter
<br />40, Article VII, pp.298g.4-2995). Records show that four were approved bM City Council:
<br />BALLARD, LONG POINT, PEACHTREE and SOUTHAMPTON. Ballard was recinded when the Virginia Depart-
<br />ment of Highways and Transportation acquired this property for its Twin Pines Road borrow pit.
<br />
<br /> PEACHTREE (PUD-72-1) is approaching its final stages of construction. On several occasion
<br />City Council has reacted to plan change requests as overall project density declined appreciabl
<br />This PUD represents the only firsthand local experience we have had with application of the
<br /> concept and as such offers invaluable lessons in suburban land development control.
<br />
<br /> LONG POINT (PUD-72-2) has been inactive, save for its participation with Peachtree in the
<br />matter of joint action on segment of Hofflers Creek Parkway common to these two developments.
<br />Our staff reviewed the basic PUD plan and concludes that it remains sound and implementatable.
<br />The Planning Commission concludes at this time that the LONG POINT PUD remains acceptable in
<br />its present form and that its status should change during 1980 only if there is a finding that
<br />it is incompatible with our updated Comprehensive Plan.~
<br />
<br />
<br />
|