HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 26, 1981 Regular Meeting337
A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of
Supervisors was held on August 26, 1981, at 7:00 P.M., in the
Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester,
Virginia.
PRESENT S. Roger Koontz, Chairman; Will L. Owings, Vice -
Chairman; William H. Baker; Rhoda W. Maddox; R. Thomas Malcolm
and Kenneth Y. Stiles.
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to order.
INVOCATION
The invocation was delivered by the Reverend James Guthrie
of the Burnt Presbyterian Church.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Mr. Owings stated that one of his constituents, Mrs. JoAnn
Lantz, would like to address the Board prior to the School Boar
appointment from Opequon District.
Mr. Stiles stated that he had three items he would like fo
the Finance Committee to consider at their next meeting.
Mr. White noted that he had received correspondence from
attorney David Andre' with regard to the court case of Oak Hill
Subdivision, which he had given to the Board, and that he was
pleased to report that the Court found in favor of the County.
Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm, seconded by Kenneth
Y. Stiles and passed unanimously, the agenda was adopted with
the above amendments.
LEWIS M. COSTELLO APPOINTED TO SCHOOL BOARD FROM OPEQUON
DISTRICT - APPROVED
Mr. Owings stated that he felt the five member committee,
that he had chosen to select a nominee for the position on the
School Board from Opequon District, had made the right decision
when they unanimously selected Lewis M. Costello as their choice
for this appointment. He further stated that he felt, as did
the people of Opequon District, that they have the right to pick
the person they feel should represent them on the School Board.
Mr. Owings further stated that he felt Mr. Costello was very
qualified for this position and that at no time had anyone
questioned his qualifications.
Mr. Costello appeared before the Board at this time.
Mr. Koontz asked Mr. Costello what his feelings were
concerning the quality of education in the Frederick County
Schools.
Mr. Costello stated that his children attend the Frederick
County Schools and as far as he was concerned the quality of
eduction was excellent. He stated that his main concern is the
creditability gap that he thought might exist at this time
between the spending arm and the raising arm.
Mr. Koontz asked Mr. Costello if he had any problem in
supporting the mandated programs within the School system.
Mr. Costello stated that if it is mandated to be done then
it will have to be done.
Mr. Koontz asked Mr. Costello what his feelings were
concerning teachers serving on public Boards.
Mr. Costello stated that a teacher is a voter and is
entitled to the same rights as anyone else. If these activities
interfere with their jobs, or if in anyway they are in danger of
voting their own funds or ingratiating themselves, their
superiors or inferiors because of the position, then it should
be attacked. On the other hand anything they would do with
their own time is their own business and serving on public
bodies is their own business.
Mrs. Rhoda Maddox made the following statement:
Two weeks ago Mr. Costello's name was again placed in
nomination. In these two weeks I have been pressured through
the media by a group of citizens and some former Frederick
County Officials to compromise what I believe to be some of the
basic tenets in being a public servant.
I believe that in order to serve as the representative of a
district of more than 6000 people one must meet several
qualifications, not the least of which is attendance. When a
voting member of a Board is absent from a meeting the citizens
of his district have lost their vote and they are not being
represented at that meeting.
I believe that in order to serve as the representative of a
district of more than 6000 people one must be available and
389
accessible to the public, the residents of his own district and
the County as a whole. The attendance, availability and
accessibility are of great concern to me in this nomination.
Two months past when this Board voted on the same nominee
for the same position, I stated that it was a difficult vote to
make. I recognize Mr. Costello's abilities, he is probably one
of the brightest of people I know, but I felt then and I feel
now that the other qualification factors must be taken into
consideration in this vote.
I will share with you the results of the pressure campaign.
I have been accused of not answering my phone. There may be
times when the caller does not let the phone ring long enough
for someone to get to it, but I never intentionally let my phone
ring without trying to get to it to answer it. We have a large
family and especially during the summer there is almost always
someone here and each person knows how to take messages for me
to return calls. If you feel it necessary I can account to you
later for this past week. Through Monday night a total of 18
people had contacted me. Eleven wanted me to consider changing
my vote, six wanted me to vote the same way I had before and one
said he wanted me to know that he did not have much information
about the matter but that he trusted my judgement. Tuesday
morning was the first time I heard the paid ad so instead of
going to my mother's to garden I stayed home to answer the
phone. I received one call regarding this matter the whole day
and evening. That was a call urging me not to change my vote.
Wednesday - Today I have received two calls, one being one of
the former supervisors who instigated the pressure campaign (anc
whose wife was among the eleven I cited earlier) and one from a
family member of one of the aforementioned former supervisors,
and as I was leaving the house, one call urging me not to
change.
According to Mr. Costello's previous record as a School
Board Member and by his own admission of the enormous amount of
time which he must spend out of town in the normal pursuit of
his profession, and feeling the way I do about the obligations
of a voting Board member, I cannot support this nomination.
390
Mr. Costello stated that deliberately since the last Board
meeting he had not had any contact with Mr. Owings with the
exception of the past Sunday evening when he contacted him and
suggested that he be present at this meeting. He further stated
that he had talked to noone about contacting any of the
Supervisors or about talking to anyone.
Mrs. JoAnne Lantz appeared before the Board and made the
following statement:
My name is JoAnne Lantz and my family and I reside in
Opequon District. Our four children have been and are being
educated by the Frederick County School System, however Jim and
I now have what we consider a major problem, and you and you
alone can solve it. Since June of this year we have been
without a representative on the School Board and this upsets us
since our district is the most populated one in Frederick
County. Our children are having all of the policy decisions
made for them for this full school year without us having so
much as a single voice in the proceedings. We have been cheated
by a couple of you. Our district voted Mr. Owings into office
and we put our trust in him and his decisions and to think we
are being told by two individuals that his judgement is not to
be trusted. We the people of Opequon District have talked
extensively amongest ourselves and to Mr. Owings with regard to
Mr. Costello's nomination and appointment. I was ecstatic when
I heard Mr. Owings was going to nominate Lou, and I knew beyond
a shadow of a doubt that he would be perfect for the job. Words
cannot adequately express my shock and dismay when I learned
that his appointment was defeated on the flimsey excuse that he
might not attend meetings. Lewis Costello is not a lier. He is
one of the finest individuals that I know. He attends the
Stephens City United Methodist Church and is extremely active,
he sings in the choir, teaches study classes and fills both our
pulpit and others in the area when called upon to do so as a lay
preacher. These are just a few of the areas in which he is
active. He is an individual whose word I would believe without
question. When he makes a committment he fullfills it and Lou
has given his word that he will be able to attend the meetings
391
of the School Board. His application to Mr. Owings has also
affirmed his intentions in writing. As far as we are concerned
this should be the end of the pettiness involving whether or no{
he will attend to his duties as a School Board member. These
men are not prevaricators and should not be treated as such.
Maybe, we the public took for granted that Lewis would receive
the appointment when nominated the first time, and we were all
pathetic in our reactions. However, since then the Bypartisan
Committee for Better Schools has come into being and Mr.
Costello's appointment to the School Board has received top
priority. This group is made up of citizens from the entire
county and encompasses all age groups and political background.
We have canvassed hundreds of people and have been told by the
vast majority that we want Lewis Costello as the Opequon
District representative on the School Board. Over five hundred
of these individuals have fixed their names to petitions
witnessing to their feelings. The public has spoken, in mass,
for all over the County. We are appealing to you in one voice.
Give us this fine upstanding parent, lawyer to represent us on
the School Board so we can have what the constitution guarantee
us, full representation, the rest is up to you.
Mr. Stiles stated that he had taken it upon himself during
the last few days to contact as many as possible former
colleagues of Mr. Costello's on the Winchester School Board
on which he served from 1968 to 1972. He further stated that h
had also contacted some of the City Council Members that were
associated with the School Board at that time as well as admini
strative staff that he had worked with, and everyone of them
stated that there were times that they did not always agree wit
his decisions, but they were consistent to the person in their
opinion that Lewis Costello was one of the most dedicated, hard
working members of the School Board. Mr. Stiles stated that it
is very difficult to find qualified, capable and competent
people who are willing to sacrifice their time to serve on
public positions, and to deny this nomination would only make
this more difficult.
Mr. Baker made the following statement:
392
Before casting my vote I do wish to have the opportunity to
express myself to the members of the Board and the citizens of
Frederick County, particularly those of Back Creek District.
Certain news media articles have commented that in June, I
voted as "I was told to vote by the Chairman of the Frederick
County Democratic Party ". In addition I have been asked if the
superintendent of Schools had talked to me concerning my vote.
I wish to clarify both of these points, I emphatically state,
neither of these is true. My vote was cast based on my own
personal convictions relating to the concern which I addressed.
I trust the news media will attempt to provide equal attention
to this statement, particularly in light of the fact that it is
true and not conjecture on my part.
One further Point, out of what some have seen fit to term
as being "An injustice to the people of Opequon District' and
"The County had been cheated, badly ", apparently some good has
come to the citizens of Frederick County as whole, the
establishment of the "Bi- Partisian Committee for Better
Education ". I sincerely trust that their interest in the
children and educational system of Frederick County will
continue. Certainly it has been a long time in coming. We are
now entering a new School year and to prolong the situation of
being shy one School Board member would gain nothing. I still
have my personal convictions, however after listening to some of
my constituents, none of whom addressed the subject pro or con
between June 11th (date of original nomination) and June 24th
(date of original vote), I am willing to pass the responsibility
of the Opequon School Board appointment directly to Mr. Owings.
I will therefore vote "Aye" for Mr. Costello.
Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Kenneth
Y. Stiles,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County
of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the appointment of
Lewis M. Costello, from Opequon District, to the Frederick
County School Board for a four year term, said term to commence
September 1, 1981 and terminate on September 1, 1985.
393
The above resolution was passed by the following recorded
vote: Aye - Will L. Owings, William H. Baker and Kenneth Y.
Stiles. Nay - Rhoda W. Maddox. Abstaining - S. Roger Koontz
and R. Thomas Malcolm.
Mr. Costello stated that when the Judge of the Court tells
him to be there he plans on doing just that but that, he will do
his best to do this job right.
Mrs. Maddox stated that she would like to congratulate Mr.
Costello and she looked forward to working with him and that she
sincerely hoped that her concerns were unfounded.
Mr. Owings stated that he would like to thank the Board fore
their support as well as the people of Opequon District and the
entire County.
RECESS
REQUEST BY MR. STILES FOR CERTAIN ITEMS TO BE BROUGHT
BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE
Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to know the status of
the BPOL Tax that was discussed during budget preparation.
Mr. White stated that this is on the agenda to be discussed
with the Finance Committee meeting scheduled for September 1,
1981.
Mr. Stiles stated that according to the press there had
been several changes in the School budget since the adoption of
the budget. He further stated that he would like for the
Finance Committee to get an orderly statement of where the
School budget is at this time.
Mr. White stated that this too was included on the agenda
for the meeting on September 1.
Mr. Stiles stated that he thought it would be a good idea
if at the beginning of the budget preparations for next year,
if the Board of Supervisors would request the School Board to
submitt the cost associated with the requirements mandated by
the standards of quality and, in conjunction with that an
assessment of where the County was as far as meeting these
standards. Mr. Stiles stated that he had a citizen mention to
him, and in turn he was passing it on to the Board, that the
Board consider having real estate and personal property taxes
394
collected twice a year instead of once a year as it is currently
done.
PUBLIC HEARING
CUP #012 -81 - BENJAMIN P. AND ROSEMARY C. CONNOR -
CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - DENIED
Mr. Horne presented this request stating that the Planning
Commission unanimously recommended that this application be
denied.
Mr. Baker inquired as to the property owners on adjoining
sides of this property and if there would be any problems with
them coming into the South Agricultural District.
Mr. White stated that this does not have to be adjacent, it
can be within a linear mile.
Mr. Malcolm stated that in the conditions, the firing of
guns creates a question and he could not see where this question
had been answered.
Mr. Stiles stated that there would be adverse impact
because of the outdoor firing of guns.
Mr. Malcolm stated that he was concerned about the staff
recommendations and what their concerns are with regard to the j -
adverse impact on the Agricultural District.
Mr. Horne stated it was not the gunshop, but rather the
outdoor firing that is the concern.
Mr. Bernie Schwartzman, of Stonewall District, appeared
before the Board and questioned if the party had the proper
setup for this operation.
Mr. Stiles stated that it had not been pointed out, and he
thought maybe it should have that this shop has been in
operation and it is a fact that the guns being fired does create
a problem, and further that there had been substantial testimony
to back this. Mr. Stiles stated for clarification that if the
Board concurred with the opinion of the Planning Commission, Mr.
Connor would begin to phase out his operation and that it was
felt this would probably take 4 to 5 months to complete.
Upon motion made by William H. Baker and seconded by
Kenneth Y. Stiles,
395
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County!
of Frederick, Virginia, does herein deny the conditional use
permit request #012 -81 of Benjamin P. and Rosemary C. Connor,
Rt. 4, Box 400, Winchester, Virginia, for a home
occupation /accessory structure for a retail gun shop and
gunsmithing service. This property is designated as Parcel 19
and 20 on Tax Map 61 in the Back Creek Magisterial District.
The above resolution was passed by the following recorded
vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Will L. Owings, William H. Baker,
Rhoda W. Maddox, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles.
AN ORDI NANCE TO A MEND T HE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER
21, ZONING, ADOPTED JULY 12, 1978, TO AMEND ARTICLE XIV,
CL+!`TTnM 11- 17/l /el - DL'(-TIT. TTTnWTC VnD T.Tnnn DT3r%rVCCTA1r- VEDnC -
Mr. Horne presented this ordinance amendment request
stating that this is an amendment to Article XIV, Section
21- 120 (a) of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance dealing with
an amendment to the M -1 Industrial Limited Zoning Requirements.
The effect of the ordinance is to allow wood chipping operation
within an M -1 District providing they meet the conditions listed
under the amendment. The original request was for a rezoning
from an M -1 property to M -2. He stated that the Planning
Commission felt that this rezoning was not necessary in that the
appropriate action would be to amend the M -1 Zoning Regulations
to allow this operation in the M -1 Zone because it more
appropriately met the intent of the M -1 regulations.
Mr. Jack Vorbaugh, Forrester with Westvaco, addressed the
Board.
Mr. Stiles stated that approximately 2 years ago this
project was started. He further stated that Westvaco was told
at that time by the County staff that the zoning was as it
should be for this type of industry, but from that time to this
the zoning has been changed and now it is not zoned for this
type of industry which means Westvaco has a piece of property
they cannot use for what they originally purchased it for.
Mr. Donald Cline, of Clearbrook, appeared before the Board
in opposition to this ordinance amendment stating that he felt
39
he would be directly effected inasmuch as he lives across Route
11 from where this project is proposed.
Mr. Charlie Romine, of Stonewall District, appeared before
the Board and stated that he was opposed to this ordinance
amendment and further that he was in agreement with Mr. Kline
and Mrs. Estella A. May in their objections to this project.
Mrs. Estella May was unable to attend the meeting and
requested that her letter be read:
Box 168, Rt. 1
Clearbrook, VA
July 18, 1981
Frederick Co. Planning Commission
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board:
Since Westvaco has withdrawn its application for an M2 zoning of
the land it owns on Route 11 North and is now applying for an
admendment to the M1 zoning of that property, and because I will
be away when their application comes before your Board and the
public on August 19, I would remind the Board of the petition
presented July 15 in behalf of the residents of Route 11, North.
I would also remind the Planning Commission that that petition
bore the signatures of over 60 tax - paying residents of the area
(not 40, as erronously reported).
I was a bit disturbed that from the time we visited the Hampden
plant of Westvaco until the July 15th meeting, the anticipated
number of daily trucks to be used had been raised from the
promised 10 to 20. Although the visit to the Hampden plant
resulted in the noise level having been reported as less
objectionable than anticipated, it is, none the less, a noisy
industry and one which the residents of Route 11 North feel
could be tolerated only if very strict requirements are embodied
in any site plan offered Westvaco.
The residents of Route 11 North trust that the Planning
Commission, at its July 28 work session will give due
consideration to the wishes of the residents of the area and
strive for the protection of there interests.
We trust the Planning Commission realizes that any site plan
presented at the August 19 meeting must not only protect the
interests of the residents of the area but represent their
wishes as well. I believe you will all agree that a wood
chipper is not an industry to be welcomed into an already
established area of homes.
In my absence, please record any voice this letter at both your
July 28th and August 19th meetings, as my personal sentiments
regarding Westvaco's locating in our midst. I sincerely believe
it speaks for those 60 or more signers of the petition earlier
presented the Planning Commission Board.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
/s/ Estella A. May
Box 168, Rt. 1
Clearbrook, VA
Aug. 23, 1981
397
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
9 Court Square
Winchester, VA
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board:
The recommendation of the Planning Commission for a change in
ordinance in order that Westvaco may locate a wood - chipping
plant on Route 11 North will come before the Board on August
26th as you well know.
This recommendation is the result of what the residents of Route
11 North feel was a betrayal of trust, with little concern for
the wishes of the residents of this area at the July 15th
meeting of the Planning Commission. It is because of this
feeling of betrayal that I feel I must again voice my opposition
to Westvaco's plans and to the recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
I respectfully request that this letter be read at your August
26th meeting and recorded not only as my personal objection to
Westvaco's locating in our midst but also as the opposition of
each of the signers of a petition presented the Planning
Commission at their July 15th meeting. This petition bore the
signature of over sixty (not 40, as erronously reported)
tax - paying residents of the area concerned and represented the
sentiment of a community of people who had chosen this
particular area for their homes because of the beauty and
serenity of the area. We see a change in ordinance as a threat
to our way of life. We know the grave danger that such a change
in ordinance could bring to our area. We know that
industrialization invariably leads to greater pollution,
additional noise, increased heavy traffic and a depreciation of l
property values.
It was my good fortune to be included in the group who visited
the Westvaco plant in Hampden, S.C. a short while ago, a trip
financed by that company in their efforts to locate in our
midst. At the risk of sounding very ungrateful, I feel I must
again voice my opposition to their plan. Though we all, upon
return, agreed the plant was less noisy than we had anticipated,
none the less it was a very noisy operation and it was not
located in a seemingly residential area. When we visited the
plant we were told there would be not more than 10 trucks used
daily in the plant proposed for the Clearbrook area but when
their petition was presented to the Planning Commission on July
15th, the number of trucks had already increased to 20, making a
total of 40 trips on Route 11 daily. We were also told that the
personnel would consist of probably 3 workers and kept at a
maximum of 10; certainly not an industry to be very helpful to
the employment problems of our area.
To change the ordinance for the convenience of this company may
well act as a Pandora's Box for other industries choosing to
enfringe upon the residential character of our well established
neighborhood of homes. We do not welcome Westvaco in our midst.
We trust that you will consider the wishes of the residents of
Route 11 North who will be so adversely effected by the change
in ordinance suggested by the Planning Commission and so voted
at their August 19th meeting.
We trust you will not only give consideration, but preference,
to the wishes of the residents of Route 11 North rather than to
a company which offers so little to the community at the expense
of so many.
Westvaco, without any consideration of the residential character
of the area, in greed sought to satisfy its needs.
Consequently, we feel responsibility for neither their needs not
their investments and do not wish to satisfy their greed by
accepting responsibility for their investments. We do not want
Route 11 North to become Valley Avenue #2.
398
Very respectfully,
/s/ Estella A. May
P. S.
I have just been invited to attend your August 26th meeting but
due to a prior commitment this is very improbable as far as
attendance is concerned, hence my letter to you. At the same
time, I learned that my request for a reading of my earlier
letter at the August 19th meeting of the Planning Commission was
ignored.
Mr. Stiles requested that Mrs. May's letter to the Planning
Commission also be made part of the record.
Mr. Charlie Boyd, of Stonewall District, appeared before
the Board and asked if anyone had considered the noise factor
involved in a plant such as this and how this would effect the
neighbors.
Mr. Vorbaugh stated that he realized there would be an
increase in traffic, but that they were not doing anything
illegal and if Westvaco was turned down something more
undesirable might locate on this property.
Mrs. Maddox inquired as to whether there was an odor
connected with this wood chipping.
Mr. Vorbaugh replied yes, there is. It is an odor of fresh
pine.
Mr. Owings asked how far from the nearest residence would
the building or chipper be located.
Mr. Horne replied over 800 feet.
Mr. Owings asked about the hours of operation.
Mr. Vorbaugh stated that he could not give a definite time
on this.
Mr. Stiles stated that with the way the property is zoned
at this time, anyone could come in and operate 24 hours and
there would be nothing the County could do about it. He further
stated that he was voting in favor of this zoning amendment with
great regret to the neighbors, but Frederick County told these
people the land was zoned for what they wanted to use it for.
Mr. Koontz asked if Westvaco was willing to restrict this
to one building and chipper.
Mr. Vorbaugh replied yes, that in 5 to 10 years we plan on
having the same size operation as we have now.
3991
Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by R.
Thomas Malcolm,
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the Countyl
of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the Ordinance to
amend the Frederick County Code, Chapter 21, Zoning, adopted
July 12, 1978, to amend Article XIV, Section 21- 120(a) -
Regulations for Wood Processing Yards.
The above resolution was passed by the following recorded
vote: Aye - Will L. Owings, William H. Baker, Rhoda W. Maddox,
R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Nay - S. Roger
Koontz.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ACTION OF AUGUST 18, 1981
DISCUSSED IN EXE CUTIVE SESSIO - APPROVED
Mr. Stiles requested that the memo regarding the Board of
Zoning Appeals action of August 18, 1981 be discussed in
Executive Session. The Chair so ruled.
POLICY FOR THE LOCATION OF A RU
IN FREDERIC COUNTY - DISCUSSED
L RE CREATIONAL FACILITIE
Mr. Stiles asked why the Board did not receive the letter
that had been sent from the Parks and Recreation Commission with
reference to a policy for the location of a rural recreational
facility in Frederick County.
Mr. White stated that this was still a working paper and
the fact that it had not been finalized was the reason the Board
had not received it.
JUDICIAL CENTER COMMITTEE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr. Malcolm stated that the Board of Architectural Review
had met this date and was unanimous in their approval. He
further stated that the BAR did request to see the color of the
brick to be used in this project. Mr. Malcolm further stated
that the City reviewing agencies had also given their approval
and with these 2 approvals it was hoped that bid documents will
be ready by the first of the year.
BOARD RETIRES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Upon motion made by William H. Baker, seconded by Kenneth
Y. Stiles and passed unanimously, the Board retired into
Executive Session in accordance with Section 2.1 -344, Subsection
(a)(1) to discuss personnel.
M 4
STATEMENT MADE BY RHODA W. MADDOX CONCERNING EXECUTIVE
SESSIONS
I consider Executive Sessions to be very serious. The
Board of Supervisors is allowed by the Code of Virginia to
discuss certain matters in closed session, and we have a moral
and ethical obligation to keep those matters confidential until
such time that they may be discussed in open session. If I am
going to read in tomorrow's paper a report of tonight's
Executive Session, whether true, false, generalized or implied,
give by quote, "one Supervisor who asked not to be identified ",
unquote, to a reporter who was, to the best of knowledge, not
present at our Board meeting, I would rather sit here and
discuss matters openly than to have the people of Frederick
County wonder which of their elected officials does not abide by
his moral and ethical obligations.
BOARD WITHDRAWS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION
Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm, seconded by Kenenth
Y. Stiles and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from
Executive Session.
BOARD RECONVENES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Upon motion made by Will L. Owings, seconded by Kenneth Y.
Stiles and passed unanimously, the Board reconvened into Regular
Session.
W
ION OF
DECISION OF BOARD OF ZONING
1 n n 1
Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm, seconded by Kenneth
Y. Stiles and passed unanimously, the Board of Supervisors of
the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein refer the
decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals of August 18, 1981 to
Lawrence Ambrogi, Commonwealth Attorney.
UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT
IS ORDERED HAT THE BOARD OF
k
(. A
Ch ax a and o perviso:
,RVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN.
/S7
f
erk, Board of Supervisors