Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA198900005 Correspondence 1989-05-02/ /ZZ Xe An� MAY 3 1989 pLpN\tCjC. D+V'S'Q� �WJ I co > M 0 :2 Z �Io 71. < a o m z 1 co r o: C.D , z _ �..�-A I ICJ wt to" �� 02e.�,U(A 2`�32 MAY R 1989 U.' NING DIV'-'ON V 7 r ^� MAY 3 1989 PLANNING DIVISION `�'�' MAY 1989 PLANNING' DIVISION vryl MAY g 1989 DIVIon;ON k0- P CCI� _Q)OLj el-\o MAY 1989 P '% i T e2J,Vll 10iN MAY .4 1989 PLANNING DIVISION i • V V V -vim (� rk MA y 1989 PL.�'�'.i,";.,� /V /S/OM J` 7f .T63±vQ6% ; s Concur; n5 `fie F,(b �.n a^- a;\6- a. a un��;eC` c�..�c�,.o� oan �1� ucat, � 4L as concn,.r) mntnQ �c� do a� cam 4z %,L��VC� sue, %, V�GoAk-o mot.-3,- MAY 3 1989 PLANNING DIVISION Y- 4v, JA MAY 17 1989 PL:-,I:i',.IING DIVISION - Z-rf s -,;2 IVI MAY 17 1989 May 16, 1989 Dear Mrs. Patterson, I'Lf�{�, NNING DIVISION This letter is as clear, honest, and specific a statement as possible on the inadvisability of the rezoning of lot 46A on Jarman Gap Road from residential to commercial. Knowing that no one ever possesses the omniscience necessary to make the perfect judgment (if we all did, there would probably be no conflict) it is with reservation that we present our perspective on the situation, realizing that we may look back on whatever the outcome is and think "if we had only known, we would have acted or felt differently." In that light, we present the following as our current perspective: Ann Horner would like her land to be rezoned commercial. Clearly, her interest is monetary, and her concern is with her single plot of land. She does not reside locally, and has no personal interest in the welfare of the particular neighborhood which she is trying to impact so heavily by the change in zoning. She has owned a 2.8 acre piece of land for five years, which she kept for herself when her childhood house and property was subdivided. At that time we bought the house with 2 acres. We were looking for a good place to settle and raise our new family, which Mrs. Horner's brother sincerely claimed this to be. We were told that she was keeping the 2.8 acres because she wanted to build a home on it. About a year ago we saw the first sign of activity on the land. A large stretch of the sewer was put through it, for which Mrs. Horner must have received a goodly amount of money, since we received $200 for a very insignificant effect on our own land. A short time later, a for -sale sign was placed on the lot. She was asking $32,000 for this property, which if assessed at the same rate as our adjacent and far superior land would have been assessed in the low $20,000's. Obviously she wanted top dollar. The land did not sell, probably because it has serious drawbacks. Much of it is very wet, is in the flood plain, and has the main sewer line running through it. In all likelyhood, it simply isn't worth as much as she is trying to get for it. Recently, Mrs. Horner has embarked on a different approach, which, if successful, she hopes will yield her even more money. She hopes to sell this land for $55,000 as commercially zoned, and thus sell a vacant, wet lot for the same price that five years ago we paid for our adjacent lot, which although 30% smaller, contains a large house on much better land. We understand that as far as her rights are concerned, her motive is of no consequence, but the effects of her actions are not. And when an action is so self-serving, as is Mrs. Horner's request for rezoning, common sense demands an, especially careful scrutiny of the consequences of said action. We see the rezoning as against the interest of the community, and are therefore opposed to it. Let's look at why the community sees the rezoning as inappropriate. The hazards and pitfalls that commercial rezoning would pose are as follows: 1. This is a residential neighborhood. The lot in question is surrounded by homes. There are no other businesses on the street, other than a gas station on the corner of Main Street and a doctor's office down the road. To put a business on this lot would create an abrupt shift from surrounding land use. A business in this spot would not make sense and would be an incongruity in the middle of so many homes. 2. Many residents feel that the roads are not suitable for handling increased traffic. The turns from Carter Street and Blue Ridge Avenue are particularly dangerous due to the incline of Jarman Gap Road. Also, any line of cars approaching from Main Street and waiting to turn into lot 46A would be at a very high risk of being hit from behind, since the crest of the hill on Jarman Gap Road completely blocks visibility of the road ahead. 3. Many residents have expressed concern about how a business might affect the safety of children in the neighborhood. There are many local families who, like ourselves, moved here specifically to raise children in a safe and desirable environment. A business brings increased cars, activity, and people which could be a threat to our children. Children playing in yards so close to an area of heavy traffic and loitering of a large number and wide range of characters are at increased risk of becoming victims of crime. 4. Commercial development in our neighborhood would devalue our homes. In effect, we would all loose a total of many, many thousands of dollars on our properties if an objectionable business were placed in such close proximity to us. We strongly object to our paying such a high dollar price for one individual to have the monetary benefit of letting any Cl classified business come in and make our homes less desirable to stay in and less marketable for resale. 5. Anyone truely interested in the future of Crozet must be aware of what so typically is the downfall of an area --failure to maintain buildings and property, thus letting the area become run-down. This harmful way for owners to relate to real estate can spread so pervasively through a community that it can bring a city to its knees. Often a community decides late in the game to do something about this problem, offering incentives to fix up neglected properties. In our immediate neighborhood, there are at least eight homes which suffered neglect for many years. Fortunately, these homes have in recent years been bought by people who have been and are currently applying a great deal of time, effort, and money to restoring and improving these homes. These people deserve consideration, encouragment, and support by local governing bodies for the direction in which they are taking the town --an upward direction. The people, of which we are one family, feel that a business development in their neighborhood is clearly a downward pull, and in opposition to their efforts to have an all-over improving effect on Crozet. A business property is rarely maintained to the high standards that a typical homeowner keeps his property. Commercial development of this particular lot is not in the interest of improving Crozet. 6. A rezoning would open up the likelyhood of all manner of pollution such as noise, light, sign, litter, visual, and gas leaks. The close proximity to so many homes and gardens makes the event of any of these an unacceptable intrusion. Unfortunately, they are intrusions that, once there, may be very difficult or impossible to control. 7. A particularly likely problem posed by certain kinds of businesses would be that of loitering and the negative effect on the general safety of the area. Once a site is established that attracts people to hang out, signs and policing are in reality painfully ineffective methods of dealing with the problem. Crozet does not have a particularly attractive spot for loitering which is open after normal business hours. Fortunately, the community has not had to deal with the obvious hazards of such a spot. But the fact that there has not been one makes it so likely that if one appeared, it would attract a great number of people at off hours, because now anyone wishing to hang out at night currently has to travel to get to an appropriate spot. 8. Much of the land is very wet, being in the flood plain and bordering a creek, making a large percentage of it impossible to build on. With this constraint plus minimum distances from borderlines, it may be difficult to find a suitable and willing business to invest in this property. The general undesirability of the land creates a smaller market to draw upon and necessitates less selectivity in choosing a buyer. If zoned Cl, the lack of interest in this property may make it more likely to wind up as something highly objectionable such as a gas station or convenience store, as opposed to something less offensive like an office. 9. Finally, a business on this single lot would make the surrounding homes less pleasant and suitable to the needs of the people who moved here because it is a pleasant and suitable residential area. Had it been an obvious location for commercial development, near other businesses and with several opened lots which could accomodate businesses, people would not have chosen to make their homes here. One plot, scarcely over one acre of which is developable, so far from other businesses did not pose a threat to us or others in choosing to live here. Aside from the heavy negative impact posed by rezoning, let's look at the feasibility for the commercialization of this particular lot being a benefit to Crozet. How much would it enhance downtown Crozet, anyway? 1. Could it tie in successfully with other Crozet shops? This lot is 2-4 blocks from other businesses and nowhere near being visible from any of them. 2. There is little chance of any other business ever being on Jarman Gap Road since all the lots slated for commercial development are already developed. Any likelyhood of a business on lot 46A making sense in terms of fitting in with surrounding businesses is so far down the road, if ever, that to develope it commercially at this time would be premature. The Harlow lot, which is also adjacent to us, is particularly unsuitable for commercial development. The incline in the street is such that it is totally impossible to ever make a safe turn into the property when approaching from Main Street. The Sheffield lot next to that has the same problem to a lesser degree. �I'11l� - g9-� /rir• }�aY'r� s o��s ProP�v�r dare �v�a �f;' +;',' /Ien��-� n� ' yJ �roPe��'r o�✓�ei^. JUN 2 ��'LANNING DIVISION ���� �s��,��,�. �� � i;eaaoxa�ouc �on�c•Ca G �_GLiLvrCLd� �J ���1�/ L�7GCGt� �a IlKd0�.� jj&t 4(t4Z 4--ol A14 WIL . /Q�i 3 /3,1 4� y 1W z zQ 3 Z ,; 1 l 3 JUN 2 1989 Ms. Amelia Patterson, Senior Planner PLP41NI1";G rMSIT4 County of Albemarle Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 June 1, 1989 RE: ZMA-89-5 Ann Horner Dear Mr. Patterson: My wife and I are writing this letter to oppose the rezoning of 2.836 acres from R-2, Residential to C1, Commercial. We feel that to rezone this land to commercial would defeat the whole concept of zoning. This action would create a indiscriminate use of the land in this area; mixing established residential and speculative commercial. We feel that there should be no need for rezoning until the available commercial land on both sides of the railroad tracks on Route 240 are developed. This would be more in keeping with the present trend of commercial growth. We are very much in favor with the zoning process, but hope that it will not be used in this case to divide an existing residential area. We would like for Crozet to have a detailed plan for future commercial growth that is not in conflict with the existing nature of our village. Sincerely, Russell M. Lafferty & Susan H. Secoy Blue Ridge Avenue Route 3 Box 457 Crozet, VA 22932 May 2, 1989 Dear Mrs. Patterson: Here are /> notes from surrounding neighbors that have commented on the request to rezone Parcel 46A on the south side of Jarman Gap Road, across from the intersection with Rt. 1201. If we receive any additional notes on Wednesday, May 3rd, we will drop them off at your office Thursday afternoon. Sincerely, Leonard Tosto and Carol Tosto MAY 3 1989 PLANNING DIVISION May 2, 1989 Dear Mrs. Patterson: We want Parcel 46A on Jarman Gap Road owned by Ann Horner to remain zoned R-2, Residential for the following reasons: 1) Jarman Gap Road is a narrow residential street, and is not capable of safely handling the increase in traffic from commercial development. We along with many other families have small children, and are concerned about their safety. 2) The neighborhood is all residential with no commercial land use nearby. We feel this property is too far from existing businesses to help strengthen the downtown shopping area. We moved to this neighborhood because it is residential, and we want it to remain that way. We feel commercial development would drastically alter the residential makeup of the area. 3) We feel commercial development will decrease the value of our property, and are concerned about additional noise, light, and litter, and the change in aesthetic appearance. 4) More than 1/3 of this property is a low-lying area within the 100 year floodplane, and a major sewer easement closely follows the line of the floodplane. This may cause develop- ment close to the street, and limits the usable area. We do not feel that rezoning is in the best interest of the neighborhood. We are therefore opposed to the rezoning of this property for commercial use, and want it to retain the present R-2, Residential zoning. Sincerely, Leonard Tosto and Carol Tosto Rt. 3, Box 420 Crozet, VA 22932 MAY 1989 PLANNING DIVISION /I I 7 T. MAY cl 1989 DI ta rz:o -I% 3. Is the lot big enough to make a difference to downtown Crozet? Due to the flood plain, sewer line, creek, and borderlines, the developable part of this land is just a little over one acre and could not accomodate a shopping area that would be a substantial boon to the business district. As mentioned earlier, the surrounding lots are already developed and particularly unlikely to go commercial for a very long time. 4. Is it a sensible location businesswise so that it would draw enough customers to survive? Jarman Gap Road is more of a side street than a major feeder road into Crozet. Many local people feel that businesses in Crozet should be kept in what is already the business area and do not understand the logic of turning Jarman Gap Road commercial. If a business were established and failed due to location, or competition, or whatever, the development could turn into a problem for the town. In conclusion we must say that not knowing the real bottom line of where the push to go commercial is coming from and what are the motives involved is a disadvantage in trying to find a solution that is acceptable to everyone. We maintain that a rezoning of this lot is at best of questionable and fringe benefit to the commercial area in Crozet, and of probable and serious damage to the neighborhood. We, Carol and Lenny Tosto, of all people might benefit, being slated to go commercial, too, with the potential of selling at the higher rate that Cl property brings. But we do not want to offend the neighbors, make a large profit, and move out. We want to maintain our neighborhood as a good place to raise a family, which means a residential neighborhood. Even the Comprehensive Plan shows this lot as a marginal contribution to the future commercial area. We feel that since this area is currently zoned residential, it is up to anyone wishing to change the zoning to show why this particular lot is so desirable to the community as commercial property, and assure us we will not regret a change in zoning Perhaps someone can come up with a use for the land that truely would benefit Crozet. Until then, we ask you to hold off on a rezoning because once it is classified Cl, we will be open to all sorts of ills with no going back. As sometimes happens in business dealings, the one who make:the profit from the short-sighted solution will be out of the picture and the effects and solution -finding will be left to those who never benefitted from the action. Please do not give Ann Horner free reior, to do with our neighborhood as she pleases to suit her bank account. We realize that if zoned Cl, there will no longer even be the option of selling the lot to a homeowner, as only a business will be legally permitted to occupy the site. Therefore, we ask that the preceeding points be carefully considered before a decision is made that would give Mrs. Horner the right to make such drastic, undesirable, and irreversable changes in our neighborhood. We are not talking about one or two large land owners who would have a very small percentage of their property affected. We are talking-',ia great many families who could experience a dramatically undesirable effect upon the entire nature and quality of life in their homes. We would be the ones to pay the price of rezoning, and we do not wish to do so if there is any doubt in the merit of such a change. Is it clearly worth the loss to us? Thank you, Sincerely,, Carol Tosto Jarman Gap Road Rt. 3, Box 420 >- Crozet, VA 22932 Leonard Tosto