– Lots of motions and debate in last night’s CCAC meeting.
– Finally a resident from one of the adjacent neighborhoods came and spoke; we need more of that involvement.
– For those at the meeting last night – what were your key takeaways?
– It might not be fair to pull out this one tweet, but I’m going to do it anyway as it’s a critical point made by a CCAC member:
John Savage – reflect on what role of CCAC? We're advisory, not regulatory. Keep Master Plan in mind, listen to community #ccac1407
— Crozet Community (@CrozetCommunity) July 2, 2014
Click through to read the tweet from last night’s meeting.
Update 3 July 2013 –
The CCAC emailed out this morning the CCAC’s List of Issues and Positions Barnes property final (PDF)
First, download and read the draft document they discussed.
Notes from Katrien Vance – starting from the beginning of the meeting:
Some talk about the role of the CCAC. Reminder that the CCAC’s job is not to manage the details of the site. That’s Frank Stoner’s job. Reminder not to get bogged down in details.
Goal is to give FS some feedback to help him create a new proposal.
The Committee worked from a draft list of issues and comments and worked to come to consensus on the draft. We’ll give you a copy of that draft.
Here us what happened between 7:05 and 8:05.
1. There must be a buffer. Do we consider town homes or single family homes a buffer?
This should be the only place with ground floor residential.
2. Park side resident M Simpson would prefer green space first, then single family homes. Not town homes, not parking lot, not trails that allow strangers to walk through.
3. Committee acknowledges vast spectrum of opinion about this. Many committee members don’t want single family at all; neighbors prefer single family.
4. Can committee present something that acknowledges the disagreement, or do we need the CCAC to come out with one voice?
5. 10 committee members (out of 10 voting) voted to strike bullet 1 on their list if issues and comments (this bullet acknowledged the disparate opinions).
6. Added “or town home” to both sentences in bullet 2.
7. 10 committee members voted to strike bullet 3, to stick with bullet 2’s request for a single row of town homes or houses as a buffer.
Ground floor residential allowed in buffer.
What about apartments? CCAC believes Crozet needs this kind of housing, as long as that is not the predominant form. . . We did not get to the end of this topic before David and I escaped from the hottest room ever.
As always, scroll to the bottom and work your way up.