The Virginian-Pilot reports that the project opposed by residents of the Roland Park/Sunshine Homes neighborhoods will not voted on at this evening’s council meeting.
Mastracco said he will ask the council to refer the project back to the Planning Commission and try to negotiate a compromise with neighborhood groups.
“We’re going to try to redo some substantive things with the project that the neighbors consider important to see if we can get them comfortable with it,” Mastracco said.
In an email I received Monday, the civic leagues expressed gratitude to all and urged citizens to attend the council meeting tonight at 7pm.
We invite you to join us tomorrow evening at 7:00 pm as we respectfully request City Council members to serve us – not to dictate to us. Please come watch your City Council at work – even if you don’t wish to speak.
The entire email is below the fold.
Dear Norfolk Neighbor,
Roland Park and Sunshine Homes would like to thank everyone throughout Norfolk who has acted to support us so strongly as we oppose the attempt of a big developer to rezone in our neighborhoods and as we’ve been preparing for the public hearing tomorrow night.
We need to update you with the current status:
Today, as a direct result of everyone (you) from across Norfolk who emailed, called, and wrote letters to the members of City Council in opposition to this rezoning application, the developer (Bonaventure LLC) and our City Council have decided that it would be best not to hear from the public on this matter tomorrow night. With City Council elections just a few months away we’re not too surprised about this.
City Council intends to motion and vote, without hearing from us first, to refer this back to the Planning Commission (which recommended for the developer anyway – so that’s really a waste of time and energy unless City Council changes the membership of the Commission, which is clearly biased in favor of developers) and so that the developer can “further address concerns of Roland Park residents” (which they’ve ignored for the past 6 months as we’ve met with them in at least 6 meetings – and we’re pretty sure we don’t want ever them as neighbors at this point).
It would appear that this issue, which is really about neighborhoods’ rights of self-determination – to have the final say about what changes will or will not occur within their districts, is not an idea that our public servants want to hear about.
We hoped to be heard publicly – in the public hearing – not swept under the rug until after elections. We’ve been through alot due to this issue that was placed on our doorsteps – and we do intend to be heard.
WE PLAN TO ATTEND & SPEAK TO CITY COUNCIL TOMORROW EVENING — AND WE INVITE YOU TO JOIN US!
While City Council may prevent us from speaking at the “Public Hearing” portion of the agenda — we will register to speak at the “New Business” portion which follows the regular agenda.
The primary issue is the right of the residents of neighborhoods, the citizens/taxpayers/voters of Norfolk, the people who are concerned with the continued stability of the neighborhoods they live in, to have priority over developers who come in seeking rezonings – developers whose concern is making profit for themselves and their shareholders – developers who live in neighborhoods far from where they are placing these high-density apartments.
We invite you to join us tomorrow evening at 7:00 pm as we respectfully request City Council members to serve us – not to dictate to us. Please come watch your City Council at work – even if you don’t wish to speak.
We sincerely thank you,
from the neighborhoods of Roland Park & Sunshine Homes
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
As a resident who lives in Roland Park and also paddles in the water here I have to point out something nobody else has brought up or seems to care about.
First – the location that Lakewood Manor is to be built on is a physical eyesore. When I say the word “eyesore” I mean it is really dirty and ugly. It is especially ugly when you are canoeing in the river and looking at the land. The developer wants to clean that up and make it beautiful again. I can’t say enough about that I really can’t. When you are driving on Tidewater Dr towards Ocean View and come up on Norview Avenue you can see just how ugly the property looks. I say let the developer clean up and beautify the marsh there because it needs it badly.
It isn’t just the marsh that needs cleaning up – Roland Park needs cleaning up because the vast majority of homes here are not so well maintained at least on the outside. The apartments that the developer wants to build will leave Roland Park “prettier” than it was before they got here. In fact a new complex might even raise my property value.
Lastly; the developer can help Norfolk provide civil services with the tax revenue generated from the proposed property. But the developer can’t help our city if he can’t build the complex. I don’t understand why I seem to be the only person advocating the fact that over a ten year period the tax revenue generated for the city is over 3 million dollars. Since the developer has an actual credible provable commitment to his properties it is fair to consider the generated tax revenue over a 30 or 40 year period, not just a 10 year period.
The tax revenues I mentioned above don’t even include the trickle down tax revenues generated by the contractors or the city for the cost of building and construction permits.
How many of the people reading this post have children in public school, or have ever needed an emergency service vehicle to help a loved one? These civil services are not free and they are only getting more expensive to provide for citizens.
If the developer was a fly by knight operation and didn’t have a proven track record spanning over decades of keeping up his developments than I’d be the first in line to not trust them…but they have been doing this for 40 years in Virginia and they have other complexes here in Hampton Roads.
Before you can second guess the developer’s intentions – at least get off your rear and go see his property at the beach. Don’t just look at the property – talk to residents and managers there and ask the tough questions. It isn’t fair to sling mud without doing your homework first.
I live in Roland Park – and I also paddle my canoe in the waters that surround the neighborhood.
The comment that the neighborhood is not well maintained is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. The neighborhood was developed in the 1950s. Since that time many homes have new additions, new windows, new siding, and other improvements. Most are very well maintained, and the neighborhood is well landscaped throughout with trees, shrubs, and gardens.
The neighborhood is about 85% owner-occupied, which is quite high, and is very stable, with families who have lived here since the 1950s and 1960s. Many families have multiple generations, children having grown up here and purchasing their own homes as adults and now raising their own families. My own family has 4 generations currently living in Roland Park, with 28 extended family members in 7 houses. This is not unusual in Roland Park. Many families have 2 or 3 generations who own multiple homes. The neighborhood is stable and it is a great place to raise children.
A 4-story, high-density apartment complex with 187 units is simply not compatible with this single-family neighborhood. Such a development can only have a negative effect. The General Plan of Norfolk talks about the advantages of Norfolk’s waterways, in that the rivers provide a natural separation between differing, incompatible types of development. Roland Park has remained a stable and desireable neighborhood because it is bordered by, and insulated by, the Lafayette River – upon which we paddle.
Finally, the comment about the condition of this particular piece of property, upon which the developer wishes to build high-density apartments, is very misleading. The property originally contained a single-family home, but a doctor from Richmond obtained a re-zoning a few decades back to medium density, and built a small nursing home, which he operated and maintained. He sold it to a speculator, who closed the facility, and who then sold it to another speculator. The current speculator is not maintaining or securing this vacant property or the house next door – which he also recently purchased. People were living in these buildings until recently, and they were kept well maintained by those previous owners. The point is that the current condition of these properties is the direct fault of absentee land speculators who see property as an object to make a profit – but won’t even maintain and secure the existing structures on the property. It is a false notion to say that we must permit this speculator/developer to build anything else because it will be new and an improvement over what he has allowed to become dilapidated. Rewarding bad behavior is not good policy.
The interest of speculators and developers is making a quick profit from flipping properties. Our interest in Roland Park is in maintaining the stability of our neighborhood for the next 50 years – and beyond.
I am also a resident of Roland Park. I do agree that the properties in question are in pretty bad shape. I also would like to see the owner step up and do the right thing in keeping their property up to code at a minimum. Maybe they will now. They certainly should have the finical resources to do so.
Different people certainly have opinions on what should be done. Since I live adjacent to the property I would like to see the property developed in a manner that would reflect our neighborhood. Not the quick fix proposed by the developer and some of their supporters, but something that is part of Roland Park at might improve our neighborhood.
I have lived here a long time. The current proposal of four story apartment would certainly keep the sun from rising on my place for several hours at day and change the view from my back yard and the properties of my neighborhood. This “new” artificial horizon might be fine for people with no vested interest in our neighborhood, but not for me. But just think of all the many new neighbors I would have and get to see looking down in my yard from their lofty perch. Thanks, but that is not my idea of an improvement or one of the reasons I purchased my property. That is one reason the City has Codes, to keep compatible structures together. It’s not or shouldn’t be changed to satisfy the desire of the developer!
As for tax revenues, I am paying more than I did last year. How about you? The City would sell it soul to anyone bring in “new” money. It seems they might sell us out after the newness of our home’s dim and we have put everything we have into make a place for ourselves in our Roland Park neighbor.
If you think this developer will be any different form others in the operation of this property you should have been at the Civic League meeting the night we asked them how long they would manage the property. Their answer was ten years. Let’s see I have been here for forty-five. Who is pumping and dumping their property. Just as soon as the shine wears off this property it will be sold to a different management company. Then what?
I hope some of the detractors of the current opposition to the proposed development will join with us to improve Roland Park neighborhood. It sounds like they can point out all the perceived bad things with their neighbors.