Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 09, 2004 Regular Meeting 552 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 7:15 P.M., in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, County Administration Building, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA. PRESENT Chairman Richard C. Shickle; Vice Chairman Barbara E. Van Osten; Gary W. Dove; Bill M. Ewing; Gina A. Forrester; W. Harrington Smith, Jr.; and Lynda J. Tyler. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Shickle called the meeting to order. INVOCATION Pastor Ruth Crum Stotler, from the Church of the Good Shepherd, delivered the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Supervisor Smith led the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPTION OF AGENDA - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised that he had no additional items for the agenda. Upon a motion made by Supervisor Smith, seconded by Vice-Chairman Van Osten, the Board adopted the agenda by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye CONSENT AGENDA - APPROVED Administrator Riley suggested the following tab for approval under the Consent Agenda: 1. Road Resolution for Autumn Glen, Section I - Tab M. Upon a motion made by Supervisor Forrester, seconded by Supervisor Ewing, the Consent Agenda was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye CITIZEN COMMENTS Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 553 Tim Stafford, Red Bud District and owner of V alley Mill Farm, appeared before the Board to speak about the Fieldstone Master Development Plan. He reviewed the approval history ofthis proj ect. He then stated that he was concerned about the traffic impact ofthis proposed development, citing the inadequacy of Valley Mill Road to handle current traffic let alone the additional traffic from this proposed development. He advised that he did not believe the Planning Commission adequately addressed this issue when it approved the plan. He cited two possible traffic options for the Board's consideration, which might address these concerns: 1. He would donate an 80-footright-of-way for anew road, to be located on the edge of his property, ifthe State would vacate the existing 40- foot right-of-way that runs through his farm. 2. He has spoken with VDOT about prohibiting right turns on to Valley Mill Road and prohibiting left turns on to Channing Drive. He concluded by asking the Board to preserve his way oflife. Nancy Johnson, Gainesboro District, appeared before the Board to speak about the WWW properties and WMC II Master Development Plans. She advised that her property was sandwiched between the proposed developments. She felt that the best use of her property would be commercial; however, she believed that the proposed closure of Echo Lane would impact the commercial value of her property. She asked the Board to require the proposed master development plan to keep the Echo Lane connection to Route 50 opened or allow her property to have commercial access to Botanical Drive. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS There were no Board of Supervisor comments. MINUTES-APPROVED The minutes from the May 26, 2004 Regular Meeting were presented. It was noted that under the Finance Committee Report Supervisor Forrester's and Supervisor Tyler's votes regarding the Public Works Department's request to purchase a vehicle had been reversed. This correction was made and upon a motion by Supervisor Tyler, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the minutes were approved as corrected by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 554 Lynda J. Tyler - Aye The minutes from the June 1,2004 Worksession with the School Board were presented. It was noted that an amendment to the minutes had been reviewed by the Board prior to the meeting and upon a motion by Supervisor Tyler, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the minutes were approved as amended by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye COUNTY OFFICIALS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS REAPPOINTMENT OF BASSAM T. SABBAGH AS A PRIVATE PROVIDER MEMBER AND APPOINTMENT OF O. DOUGLAS CUMBIA. II AS PARENT REPRESENTATIVE. TO FILL THE VACANT SEAT VACATED BY SUSAN LOCKRIDGE. TO THE COMMUNITY POLICY AND MANAGEMENT - APPROVED Upon a motion by Supervisor Forrester, seconded by Supervisor Smith, the Board reappointed Bassam T. Sabbagh, as a private provider, and appointed O. Douglas Cumbia, II, as a parent representative, to the Community Policy and Management Team. These are two year appointments, said terms to expire June 30, 2006. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye SCHEDULE DATE FOR JOINT WORKSESSION BETWEEN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE The Board scheduled a joint work session with the Board, the Planning Commission, and the Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee for Monday, July 12, 2004 at 12:00 P.M. REOUEST FROM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR FOR PURCHASE OF NEW TRUCK - APPROVED Supervisor Ewing advised that he would like to see this request returned to the Department Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 555 Head and then be sent through the proper channels, beginning with the Finance Committee. Administrator Riley advised that this request came forward last month as part ofthe Finance Committee report with a recommendation of approval; however, the Board denied the request as the proposed funds were to come from stormwater improvements. The Department has found that revenues in land disturbance permits have exceeded estimates; therefore, these monies would be used to fund the request. Upon a motion by Supervisor Tyler, seconded by Supervisor Forrester, the Board approved the request for a supplemental appropriation in the amount of$22,000 to be made to Public Works' Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Budget for the purchase of a new 4 x 4 extended cab pickup to replace the 1995 Chevrolet S-lO. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Nay Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS FOR V ACO'S 2005 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Administrator Riley advised that this was an information item, which was being presented to give the Board an opportunity to think about proposals for the 2005 V ACo Legislative Program. He asked that the Board submit items to him for consideration at the July 14, 2004 meeting. Supervisor Tyler advised that she would prefer to have individual board member priorities circulated prior to the Board meeting. Chairman Shickle asked the Board to submit their legislative priority lists to Administrator Riley by July 6, 2004 for inclusion in the July 14,2004 meeting agenda packet. PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING - TAX EXEMPT STATUS REQUEST FROM YOUNG LIFE- NORTHERN SHENANDOAH VALLEY. A NON-PROFIT. NON- DENOMINATIONAL CHRISTIAN VIRGINIA ORGANIZATION. TO BE DESIGNATED AS A CHARITABLE AND BENEVOLENT ORGANIZATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF & 6 (A) OF ARTICLE X OF THE CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA - (RESOLUTION #067-04) - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised that this was a request pursuant to Virginia Code section 58.1- 3650 et. seq. for tax exempt status for Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley. He advised that Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 after discussions with the Commissioner of Revenue, it was determined that this was the most appropriate course of action. He concluded by saying that it was appropriate for the Board to take up this request. Paul Burkholder appeared before the Board on behalf ofY oung Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley. Chairman Shickle asked Mr. Burkholder if his organization owned any real or personal property or intended to acquire such in the future. Mr. Burkholder responded no and advised that the organization had no intention of acquiring any real or personal property in the future. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Vice-Chairman Van Osten, seconded by Supervisor Smith, the Board approved the Resolution Granting Tax Exempt Status Pursuant to Article X, Section 6(A)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley: WHEREAS, Young Life is a national non-profit organization and a recognized 501(c)(3) organization; and WHEREAS, Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley, a part of the parent non-profit organization, has requested the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick to grant a tax exemption pursuant to Article X, Section 6(A)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia ; and WHEREAS, neither Young Life nor Young Life-Shenandoah Valley own real and/or personal property within the County of Frederick; and WHEREAS, Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley has requested a license exemption to sell fireworks at a stand in the County as a fund-raiser, which said license has a value of$500; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors examined and considered the provisions of Section 58.1-3651(B) of the Code of Virginia, 1950. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors ofthe County of Frederick, Virginia, hereby grant to Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley, a real estate and personal property tax exemption, pursuant to Article X, Section 6(A)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia provided: 1. Any property acquired by the organization and used in accordance with the purpose for which the organization is classified and designated pursuant to the Code of Virginia, 1950, Section 58.1-3651 (A). 2. That the organization currently, and continuously, satisfactorily meets the provisions of Section 58.1-3651 (B). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors ofthe County of Frederick, Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06109/04 557 Virginia, that Young Life-Northern Shenandoah Valley's request for a license exemption is hereby granted. The foregoing was approved this ~ day of June, 2004 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye PUBLIC HEARING - PURSUANT TO SECTION 33.1-62 ET. SEO. OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA. 1950. PUBLIC INPUT WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE PROPOSED NOMINATION OF REDBUD ROAD (STATE ROUTE 661). FROM ROUTE 11 RUNNING SOUTHEASTERLY TO WOODS MILL ROAD (STATE ROUTE 660). FOR DESIGNATION AS A VIRGINIA BYWAY - (RESOLUTION #061-04) _ APPROVED Administrator Riley advised that the resolution before the Board was pursuant to Virginia Code section 33.1 and tonight's public hearing was to receive public input regarding the proposed designation of Red Bud Road as a Virginia Byway. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Supervisor Tyler, seconded by Vice-Chairman Van Osten, the Board approved the Resolution Nominating Redbud Road for Virginia Byway Designation: WHEREAS, The Commonwealth Transportation Board is empowered to designate an existing road within the Commonwealth as a "Virginia Byway"; and WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors has examined the Red Bud Road (State Route 661) from Route 11 running southeasterly to Woods Mill Road (State Route 660); and WHEREAS, upon consideration of the scenic landscape, historic civil war battlefields and environmentally significant nature of the area which Redbud Road traverses, providing an opportunity for recreational and cultural enrichment. IT IS, ACCORDINGLY, RESOLVED, that the Frederick County Board of Supervisors does hereby request the Virginia Department of Transportation take all necessary actions to effect a designation of Redbud Road as a Virginia Byway. Supervisor Dove asked about the benefits ofthis proposed designation. Supervisor Tyler responded that the designation offers us an opportunity to access federal grant money for walking trails, safety improvements, etc. She reminded the Board that there was a Civil War battlefield along this route as well. Supervisor Dove stated that he still had concerns and he would like to hear any concerns the Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 558 residents of this road might have. Supervisor Tyler stated that she would dare say that there are few areas in the County that are as historic, cultural, etc. as this area. Supervisor Ewing asked ifthis proposed designation would affect the ability to improve this road, should conditions merit widening, etc. Supervisor Tyler responded that the road could be improved at any time. VDOT Resident Engineer Jerry Copp introduced VDOT representative Phil Baker and Department of Conservation and Recreation representative Lynn Crump, who were present to answer questions regarding this proposal. Mr. Baker advised that once a route is designated as a byway, this designation carries no restrictions. He stated that the road could be improved for safety reasons and it could also be widened. Ms. Crump stated that the only restrictions would occur through county planning and zoning regulations. Supervisor Dove asked if this designation would result in more traffic. Mr. Baker responded that he has found the designation increases traffic by 0 to 2%. He then reviewed the possible grant opportunities afforded to the County should this designation be approved. Supervisor Dove asked ifthere were any negatives to the byways designation. Mr. Baker responded no. He went on to say that the byways program is set up for recognizing roads for certain qualities. Ms. Crump stated that the road would be included in the Virginia Outdoor Plan. She went on to say that DCR would review every impact to the road and comment on each and make a recommendation. Supervisor Dove advised that the County was interested in pursuing an eastern bypass, which would enter this proposed area. He asked if the Department of Conservation and Recreation would have to review the plans for the proposed bypass. Ms. Crump responded that the plans would be reviewed through the regular process, but not as part of the byway program. Supervisor Ewing asked if the designation could be removed once it was approved. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 559 Mr. Baker responded yes, but removal would have to go through the Commonwealth Transportation Board. Chairman Shickle asked why federal grant funds would be appropriated for this program if a community could do anything to or around the road, after its designation. Mr. Baker responded that the funds were for eligible projects, which would help enhance the road. Ms. Crump advised that the roads must be reviewed periodically to see ifthey still meet the scenic byways criteria. There being no further discussion, the motion to approve the Resolution Nominating Red Bud Road for Virginia Byway Designation was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Nay Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Nay Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Ir. - Aye Lynda 1. Tyler - Aye PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2004-2005 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET - PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.2-2507 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA. 1950. AS AMENDED. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET TO REFLECT: SCHOOL OPERATING FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $2.188.846. THESE FUNDS REPRESENT ADDITIONAL STATE FUNDS RECEIVED AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET - (RESOLUTION #066-04) - APPROVED Administrator Riley advised that the Board is required to hold a public hearing to amend the Fiscal Year 2005 budget to reflect additional funds received from the State. He stated that Dr. William Dean, Superintendent of Frederick County Public Schools, was present and would like to address the Board regarding this matter. Superintendent Dean began by advising that this had been a long budget year. He then summarized the School Board's request. He stated that this was a request to help the School Board cope with growth and the additional monies were needed to restore programs that were cut from the upcoming budget. The cuts included: - $145,000 for 25 positions. - $50,000 for after school programs. - $100,00 for technology programs. - $21,000 for special education programs. - $100,000 for supplies. - $711,000 for Gainesboro Elementary School. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 560 The additional $1 million would be used as follows: - $220,000 for maintenance and grounds. - $242,300 for 5 high school teacher positions. - $175,000 for 2 administrative assistant and additional maintenance positions. - $290,000 for six teachers needed for the No Child Left Behind mandates. - $130,000 for two replacement buses. He stated that he felt the School Board had a commitment from the Board of Supervisors to fund all local funds and state funds as well. He went on to say that growth was an inconvenience for adults, but "we learn to cope and to be patient"; however, for five, ten, and fifteen year olds growth means larger classes, longer waits for teacher help, overcrowded halls, and long bus rides. He asked the Board to take the long view and protect and ensure the future ofthe kids by supporting this request. Chairman Shickle advised the he had not heard any information on extended contract cuts in any of the School Board's previous presentations. Superintendent Dean advised that the $145,000 for 25 positions would go to funding those extended contracts. Supervisor Tyler stated that programs like FF A were helping students learn skills, etc. She asked Superintendent Dean to elaborate on the extended contracts. Superintendent Dean responded that the schools have a lot of dedicated staff who work with students 10 'li to 11 months out ofthe year. Supervisor Tyler asked where would the children be without these types of pro grams. She advised that she did not want to see those opportunities eliminated. Supervisor Ewing, in response to Superintendent Dean's statement regarding the need for new school buses, asked if it was true that three good buses had been pulled from service to be used as activity buses. Superintendent Dean advised that he was not aware of that, but he would check into it. Chairman Shickle asked Superintendent Dean to explain the rationale behind cutting the extended contracts. Superintendent Dean responded that the School Board had less money and they needed to balance their budget. They looked at either cutting programs or staff as well as the closure of an elementary school. He advised that by cutting the extended contracts, the programs would still exist and positions would not have to be eliminated; however, some staff would lose one month's salary. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 561 He concluded by saying that the School Board looked at areas to cut where safety would not be jeopardized and programs would not be cut. There being no further questions for Superintendent Dean, Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Dixie Boyd, Opequon District, advised that she was Vice-President of the Sherando High School Chapter of FF A. She informed the Board that she had the opportunity to host Deputy Secretary of Agriculture James Moseley this year, who came to Frederick County because of its successful program. She stated that, as a result of FF A, she received $5,000 in scholarships for college. She advised that her teachers had given her a lot of support and effort and their dedication has been a help to her. She concluded by saying that without her Agriculture teachers and the opportunities they gave her, her resume would be empty. She thanked the Board for their support and hoped they would approve the School Board's request. Pat Grosso, Red Bud District and President ofthe Frederick County Education Association, asked the Board to honor the intent of the General Assembly to fund bench marking of education standards of quality. She concluded by urging the Board to pass the request. Jeff Stout, Back Creek District, advised the he was an FF A alumni and thanked the Board for its past support. He asked the Board to fund these programs, which are vital to the community. Jeffrey Wilt, James Wood High School Agriculture Instructor, talked about the need for extended contracts. He advised that Frederick County students are employed by over 50 Frederick County businesses. He distributed copies ofthe purpose statements for organizations such as FF A, FBLA, etc. He advised the he understands the importance of extended contracts because of his time as a student and he asked the Board to grant the School Board's request. Cora Hadley, Back Creek District, advised that she was proud to be an FF A member. She stated that the lack of extended contracts would impact the organizations ability to attend state conferences in June. She cited various camps that she had the opportunity to attend as well as summer employment opportunities through FF A. She went on to say that FF A has given a lot to her that she knows she can never give back. She concluded by saying that if contracts are eliminated future students will not have the same opportunities and she asked the Board to vote in favor ofthe request. Kelly Wilkins, Shawnee District, advised the she was a concerned parent of a rising Senior. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 562 She felt she was privileged to work with dedicated teachers and advisors. She went on to say that many of the school programs are not limited only to the school year. She concluded by urging the Board to invest in Frederick County's future by approving the appropriation of these funds. Gary Lofton, Back Creek District and a member ofthe County Finance Committee, advised that this was an exceptionally challenging year and that a number of cuts were made to stave off a larger tax increase. He stated that all departments shared in these cuts. He went on to say that the Board of Supervisors decided that additional revenue from the reassessment would be used to balance the budget so there would be no tax increase; however, the County must withdraw $5 million from reserve funds to cover costs. He advised that the Board must decide whether to appropriate these funds or hold them back. He urged the Board to consider using these funds to replenish the County's reserves. Dick Crane, Red Bud District, advised the he did not see how anyone could disagree with any of the speakers, but he felt the Board needed to be careful about deciding what to do with this money. He asked the Board for due diligence with this decision tonight. Derek Short, Opequon District, reviewed the opportunities FF A provided to him and advised that he had received a job through FF A. C. William Orndoff, Stonewall District and County Treasurer, commended the student and alumni support this evening. He advised that he believed fiscal restraint had to be practiced in the budget process as the County would be setting itself up for a large tax increase, which would make it an unaffordable place to live. He challenged the County to live within its budget and within its means. He went on to say that the request before the Board was the equivalent of a $0.05 tax mcrease. Martie Mackenzie, Gainesboro District and a member of the Frederick County Education Association, advised that she tried to teach her students responsibility and if they want/need something to stand up for it. She advised that she actively lobbied in Richmond for more educational funding by sending letters to conferees, delegates, and senators, urging them to pass a budget. She went on to say that the children are the most important part of the future. She asked the Board to remember the people who worked get the funding to them and urged them make to right decision. Stephen Gregory, Back Creek District, thanked the FFA members and advisors. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 563 There being no further public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Supervisor Forrester made the following statement: "Our commitment to fund education is a commitment to the future prosperity of our community. Quality employers look for an educated workforce when deciding whether to locate a business in Frederick County. Our school system is and should remain the "crown jewel" of our community. 2 Yz years ago when I came to this Board, I had hoped to slow residential growth because of my concern on how we would be able to fund the needs of a growing school system. But, I haven't been able to affect policy to slow the rate of children coming into our system - so I've fallen to Plan B - which is my goal to at least provide support to keep our school system from taking a step backwards, or falling behind. Last year the school system took a step backwards when they cut the middle school planning period. I don't want to put them in a position where they will go farther backwards this year. The State came through with additional dollars we weren't counting on. Good for us. To borrow a School Board member - Dr. Lamanna's analogy: '...at present, our school system is an un- iced cake with slices missing...cut out. The additional state funding will allow us to restore the pieces of the cake the School Board had to cut. We're not providing icing for the cake....just trying to restore all the pieces.' Our commitment to the future ofthe children of Frederick County is reflected by this Board's funding. But not only that, our commitment to education is actually a commitment to ourselves: the people, the families of Frederick County - to ensure we will have a quality community to live in for years to come. Therefore, I move to: Amend the 2004-2005 FY Budget to reflect the additional school operating funds in the amount of$2,188,846." The motion was seconded by Vice-Chairman Van Osten. Supervisor Ewing read the following statement: "Mr. Chairman: I cannot sit here and not make comments regarding this request of funding by the School Board. I want to state that I know that there is not a Supervisor sitting here that does not want to make sure the children within Frederick County are provided a quality education. I realize they are the future of our County, our State, and our Nation; however, I must ask a question of how much the taxpayers of the County can afford. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 564 We do not need to review statistical information regarding the high quality ofthe education our children are receiving. The SOL scores answer this for us. Dr. Dean informed this Board at our joint meeting with the School Board last week that, and I quote, "the Board of Supervisors have been most generous in providing school funding." This generosity is also reflected by the fact that this board provided funding of 142% in excess of that mandated by the State last year and I stress, in excess. With the funding provided to the Schools, (which is in excess of the mandated amounts), I do have a problem understanding how the average cost spent per student is less than the State average. I also do not understand, since all State and Federal mandates are funded, why such large local funding increases are necessary. One thing that might help me understand this would be the financial information I had been promised from the School Administration, but to date have not received. I have had e-mails, phone calls, and personal contacts requesting that we hold expenses at their current funding levels, others have requested funding certain items such as the Vocational Agricultural program, keeping Gainesboro School open, and others, all good requests. I must remind the citizens and taxpayers that we, the Board of Supervisors, have no control of how the School Board allocates the funding provided by the Board. For answers for those questions, you need to contact your School Board Member. Ifwe were to provide your additional funding requests, we are not assured it will be used where we request it be spent. I feel that this Board has fulfilled it's responsibility of providing the necessary funding for the education of the students of Frederick County for fiscal year 2004/05. It is the School Board's responsibility for the appropriation ofthese funds to provide quality and necessary education services for the students. To the taxpayers of Frederick County, I need to provide you with additional information to support why I cannot support this additional appropriation to the Schools. First of all, the additional funding of2.2 M (rounded) is identified by the State Legislation as the funding of mandated school programs (which, by the way, are already funded in the budget) and real estate tax relief. This is intended to relieve the local tax amounts that were necessary for the funding of the schools programs. These funds were not available when the budget was passed so local funds had to be used to pay the bill. When meeting with the School Board last week, they were asked how much additional funding will be needed in their 2005/06 budget. With the schools additional amounts needed for debt service fund ($1,700,000), opening of the new Junior High School (3,500,000) and their general operating expenses increase (8,800,000) along with an additional 3,900,000 for other county programs, this Board will need to set a tax rate requiring a .46 cent real estate tax increase. That is a 63% increase - 63%. I will in no way be a part of that. If this Board is going to fulfill it's fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers and citizens ofthis county, we must start now. Disapproval ofthis request is a big start and equates to approximately a .05 cent tax reduction necessary for the 2005/06 budget. Ifwe do not start cutting expenses and finding additional or new monies, how in the world will we balance the 2005-06 budget or for that part, any future budgets. My last comment. If this Board does not accept the fiscal responsibilities placed upon us, then I would suggest we create a new category in the 2005/06 to support those taxpayers that are driven out of their homes because they can no longer pay the taxes and also to provide support for the young couples that are trying to get their first house but will not be able to afford the taxes on it. One parting comment fellow Board Members that I must ask, 'When will enough taxes be enough?' " Supervisor Dove moved that the Board amend the original motion to amend the School Operating Fund by $1.1 million to reinstate Gainesboro Elementary and fund activity buses technology, and personnel, with the balance ofthe state funding to be ear marked for the Fiscal Year 2005-06 budget for school construction. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Ewing. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 565 Supervisor Tyler stated that this was not in the Board's purview. Vice-Chairman Van Osten agreed with Supervisor Tyler. There being no further discussion the motion to amend the original motion was defeated by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Nay Barbara E. Van Osten - Nay Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Nay W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Nay Lynda J. Tyler - Nay Supervisor Tyler stated that she still sees a lot of holes in the County's education system. She went on to say that the Board is facing a situation where belts must be tightened, but the school board also has needs that must be met. She stated that she would not appropriate mid-year. Vice-Chairman Van Osten believes the Board of Supervisors uses due diligence when discussing tax issues and she felt the budget document was a working document. She did not think the Board should alarm citizens by saying that taxes would increase by $0.46. She concluded by saying that she supported Supervisor Forrester's motion. Supervisor Smith stated that he supported full funding of the schools. He concluded by saying that he would support the school's request. Chairman Shickle stated that he believed next year's budget would be an all-time high and there would be many more unpopular decision to be made next year. There being no further discussion, the following resolution was approved: WHEREAS, the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, meeting in regular session and public hearing held on June 9, 2004, took the following action: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors that the FY 2004- 2005 Budget be Amended to Reflect: School Ooerating Fund, in the Amount of$2, 188,846.00. These funds Represent Additional State Funds Received After the Adoption of the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 Budget. ADOPTED, this 9th day of June, 2004 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Nay Bill M. Ewing - Nay Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 566 PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #07-04 OF ROY R. MESSICK. JR.. FOR RE-EST ABLISHING A NON-CONFORMING USE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 686 MARPLE ROAD AND IS IDENTIFIED WITH PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 41-A-163B IN THE GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT - APPROVED Planner I Mark Cheran appeared before the Board on behalf ofthis item. He advised that this was an application to re-establish a legal non-conforming use. The property is located in the Gainesboro Magisterial District and is zoned RA (Rural Areas). There were no adverse agency comments and the Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. Hog pen shall be fifteen (15) feet from property lines. 3. No more than twenty-five (25) hogs allowed. 4. Any change of use or modification will require a new Conditional Use Permit. Planner I Cheran advised that the applicant was present to answer any questions the Board might have. Mr. Roy Messick, applicant, appeared before the Board on behalf of this application. He advised that the property was purchased in 1975 and that he had raised hogs until the original pen had rotted. He stated that he did not know that the zoning ordinance had changed since that time. He advised that he rebuilt the pen on a concrete slab and that he was now asking for permission to continue to raise hogs. Chairman Shickle convened the public hearing. Laura Stewart, Gainesboro District, advised that she was a neighbor and the hog pen had been constructed within fifty feet of their kitchen. She asked that the Board say no to the location of the pen. She asked why the pen had to be that close to their home and showed the Board photographs of the pen as taken from her home. She went on to say that she was here because the Planning Commission did not listen to her concerns. She advised that she was concerned about the run off from the pen getting onto her property and into her well. She concluded by asking the Board to look closely at this situation before making a decision. Steven Stewart, Gainesboro District, advised that he was a neighbor and he was concerned about the proposed hog pen location. He stated that no one was denying Mr. Messick's right to Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 567 farm. He further stated that there were no hogs on this property from 1994-2001. He was concerned about run-off, which runs down hill and is in line with his drinking water source. He stated that Mr. Messick has 11.3 acres ofland and wondered why he insists on locating the pen within fifty feet of his drinking water system. He urged the Board not to allow Mr. Messick to put the hogs where they could harm his family and property. He concluded by saying that he could not allow the Board "to destroy my property and devalue my home." Mr. Messick advised that the hog pen is in excess ofl00 feet from the Stewart's well and 95 to 97 feet from the comer oftheir house. He went on to say that the closest point from the pen to the Stewart's property is 27 feet. He advised that he does not wash out the pen, but cleans it with a shovel and hauls the waste away. There being no further public comments, Chairman Shickle closed the public hearing. Supervisor Forrester asked why the pen had been moved from its original location. Mr. Messick responded that it was moved to provide closer access to water and electric. Supervisor Forrester asked for an estimated cost for constructing the pen. Mr. Messick responded approximately $2,500.00. Supervisor Dove asked why the pen was rebuilt. Mr. Messick responded that the first pen had rotted. Supervisor Forrester asked what the requirements would have been had Mr. Messick originally applied for a permit. Planner I Cheran advised that there was no set back requirement prior to 1995; therefore, the structure would have been treated as an accessory structure and could be placed 15 feet from the property line. He concluded by saying that this particular structure did not require a building permit. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor Tyler, the Board approved Conditional Use Permit #07-04 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye OTHER PLANNING ITEMS MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #03-04 OF FIELDSTONE SUBDIVISION - Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 568 APPROVED Planner II Jeremy Camp appeared before the Board on behalf ofthis application. He advised that the original master development plan was approved in 1988 and has been revised twice. The proposed plan calls for an increase in density from 150 units to 288 (63 single-family detached and 225 townhouses) units. The property is located in the Red Bud Magisterial District and is zoned RP (Residential Performance). The future Channing Drive will bisect the property and a 6 foot asphalt trail is also proposed. Planner II Camp advised that the Planning Commission had expressed interest in extending Nassau Drive as a possible connector road. The applicant was not amenable to this request. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the master development plan and lot access waiver. He concluded by saying that the applicant was seeking authorization of the preliminary master development plan, which would grant staff with administrative approval authority for the final master development plan. He advised that the applicant was represented by Greenway Engineering who was present to answer any questions. Chairman Shickle asked if the ordinance required a six foot trail, similar to the one being provided by the applicant. Planner II Camp responded that there was not an ordinance requirement. Chairman Shickle asked if the County could get a ten foot trail, since the Parks and Recreation bike trails were ten feet. Planner II Camp responded that staff was working on developing a comprehensive bike trail plan; however, there is currently no ordinance requirement to provide a trail. Supervisor Forrester asked ifthe density of a project changes, could the Board rejectthe plan if they felt the traffic was too much for the existing road infrastructure. Director Lawrence responded that the increased density was a by right use; therefore, no new traffic impact analysis study would be required. Lloyd Engram, VDOT Engineer, advised that VDOT looks at how much the density would be increasing and then looks at the percentage increase in traffic. Supervisor Forrester stated that she had read in the staff report that it was anticipated the level of traffic would double under this new proposal. Engineer Engram advised that a light would be constructed on Valley Mill Road. Vice-Chairman Van Osten asked Engineer Engram ifhe was satisfied that this light would Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meetiug of 06/09104 569 deal with the potential traffic impact. Engineer Engram responded yes. Jerry Copp, VDOT Resident Engineer, advised that the light on Valley Mill Road was a go, but he could not say for sure when it would constructed. He stated that the earliest it would be installed would be sometime in 2005. Evan Wyatt, Greenway Engineering, appeared before the Board on behalf of Arcadia Building Company. He advised that Arcadia came before the Board previously with this issue and the Board removed this item from the agenda and referred it back to the Planning Commission to deal with the issue of density. The Planning Commission recommended approval ofthis plan and approved the necessary waiver request also. Mr. Wyatt explained that the vision for this project is upscale townhouses in a closed community concept, which would be marketed to commuters. He advised that Arcadia desires to be the first in the area with this type of proj ect. Mr. Wyatt went on to say that when Arcadia purchased this property, there was a commitment for the completion of Channing Drive prior to the permitting of the first dwelling unit for this project. Arcadia has completed their portion and has agreed to provide $20,000 as part ofthe signalization improvement as well. Mr. Wyatt concluded by saying that, according to staff, the plan complies with the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision ordinance requirements. Mr. Wyatt then introduced Doug Fleming, legal counsel for Arcadia. Mr. Fleming advised that he has been serving as legal counsel to Arcadia for a number of years. He stated that he appreciated the Planning Commission's vote to recommend approval ofthis master development plan and approval ofthe necessary waiver. Mr. Fleming advised that the plan does comply with the requirements of the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance. He then stated that he felt it was important to make some brief observations regarding the transportation concerns, such as the extension of Nassau Drive. He advised that Arcadia had implemented its portion ofthe eastern road plan and noted that the Comprehensive Plan does not require or include an east/west connector in this area. Mr. Fleming stated that the properties to the east of this project have not been rezoned and are undeveloped; therefore, it would be profoundly unfair to Arcadia to require them to create a road not included in the county's documents. He went on to say that no adjoining landowner has ever called or requested to meet with Arcadia regarding a Nassau Drive connection, but they would not refuse discussions on this issue. He concluded by saying that the Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 570 County Attorney believes that if the plan meets the ordinance requirements then the Board should approve the master development plan. He then thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak. Mr. Wyatt stated that Arcadia's biggest concern about extending Nassau Drive is that it could serve as a substitute route to Route 7, which would disrupt the project and property. He advised that Arcadia had invested money in constructing Channing Drive and now the County was talking about additional road costs. He concluded by saying that this concept would not work through Fieldstone. Mr. Fleming advised that an extension of Nassau Drive would have an adverse impact on the project and would exponentially benefit the property owners to the east. He concluded by saying that Arcadia would not rule out extending Nassau Drive, but they have not been contacted by any of the adjacent property owners. Vice-Chairman Van Osten asked for a description of Nassau Drive. Mr. Wyatt explained that it was a 50 foot right-of-way connected to Channing Drive, which then enters the property and stubs out. Vice-Chairman Van Osten advised that she understood the applicants objections to a major collector road, but asked why they would object to a smaller road. Deputy Director Mohn advised that staff was looking for a path to Route 7 and this was not an option with Arcadia. He went on to say that staff was looking for compliance with the subdivision ordinance. Mr. Fleming advised that the subdivision ordinance does not require this extension. He advised that there was no plan nor were there existing or platted streets on the Adams' parcel. He concluded by saying that the applicant has complied with the ordinance. Deputy Director Mohn advised that there was probably an error in the staffreport, but staff did note that the subdivision ordinance does look for connections. He went on to say that this was not a new issue. Vice-Chairman Van Osten reviewed the ordinance section in question and stated that it seemed like a question of semantics. Supervisor Tyler advised that she would like to explore Mr. Stafford's suggestion of prohibiting right turns on to Valley Mill Road and left turns on to Channing Drive. Engineer Copp stated that there was a way to do that, but he was not in a position to determine that at the present. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 571 Supervisor Dove asked if signage could be installed on Valley Mill Road. Engineer Copp responded that VDOT must look at other impacts caused by this option. He advised that there was a lot to consider. Supervisor Dove asked if this was a decision the Board could make. Engineer Copp responded that the Board could make a recommendation, but VDOT would make the final decision. He advised that he would work with the Board and staff to address these issues. Supervisor Forrester advised she was not happy about this, but moved to grant staff administrative approval authority contingent upon the applicant providing the necessary extension ofthe local street known as an inter-parcel connector, Nassau Drive, to the eastern property line per 144-17 B (2) of the County Code; the applicant to address all relevant state and local ordinances; and satisfactorily address all review agency, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors comments applicable to this project. The motion was seconded by Vice-Chairman Van Osten. Supervisor Forrester advised that things were getting very complicated in this area and she asked the Board to help her with the transportation issues. Chairman Shickle stated that he had apprehensions about suggesting barricades be put up on these roads. He advised that he would like to keep his options open. Supervisor Forrester stated that she did not believe the road would be used as a collector road and that the extension of Nassau Drive makes for a far better transportation pattern. Director Lawrence advised that staff was looking at a public road. Chairman Shickle stated that he wanted to ensure that the inter-parcel connector would not be a major transportation route. Assistant Administrator Tierney advised that the County has a history of requiring inter- parcel connectors and staff is suggesting that an inter-parcel connector is appropriate in this instance. He advised that it would serve as an alternative means to get in or out of the subdivision. He concluded by saying that the County is simply talking about neighborhood access. Supervisor Forrester asked ifthe Board could put a notation on the master development plan regarding the inter-parcel connector. Supervisor Tyler advised that she was getting uncomfortable with putting conditions on a Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 572 plan because of an adjoining property. Director Lawrence stated that the July 2003 comments stated there needs to be an inter-parcel connector. Chairman Shickle asked about the difference between the previous master development plan and this one. Director Lawrence advised that this was a major change because the applicant was changing the product from single-family dwellings to townhouses. Supervisor Ewing stated that the existing road conditions out there make it difficult to support this application; however, they have met every requirement and "I see no way to vote no." There being no further discussion, Master Development Plan #03-04, Fieldstone Subdivision was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Nay Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Nay Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda 1. Tyler - Nay MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #06-04 OF WINCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER II - APPROVED Planner II Camp appeared before the Board on behalf of this application. He advised that this was an application for a master development plan for the property located to the west of Winchester Medical Center containing approximately 50 acres along Route 50. The property is located in the Gainesboro magisterial district and is zoned commercial B2 (Business General) and MS (medical support). Planner II Camp advised that this plan is being reviewed in conjunction with the Round Hill Crossing Master Development Plan. Proposed uses on the property include restaurant, hotel, and retail; however, there is no guarantee of any of those uses at this time. The project requires a 200 foot no build buffer. The property contains no environmental features. He advised that the applicant is requesting a waiver to require individual lot access, which requires Board approval. Planner II Camp stated that Botanical Road is the only public collector road and private roads would be used to access lots within the development. Planner II Camp advised that all proffered road improvements are accounted for on this plan. He went on to say that the County must approve any development on this site that takes place once the vehicle trips per day exceed Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 573 14,000. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this master development plan at its June meeting. He advised that the plan is in conformance with the ordinance requirements and proffers. Staff and the applicant are working on a notation to clarify the proposed closure of Echo Lane and providing alternate access to the property. Clarification is also needed on the types of landscaping to be placed around the round about. There is also a question of potential access if the adjoining properties along Echo Lane are developed in the future. Vice-Chairman Van Osten asked what access the adjoining property would have to their homes, if Echo Lane is closed. Planner 11 Camp responded that the applicant wanted to close Echo Lane and provide other access. He advised that staff was not going to permit anyone to be land locked; therefore, those residents would have access on to BotaI}ical Drive. Vice-Chairman Van Osten asked if only the access from Echo Lane to Route 50 was being terminated. Planner 11 Camp responded yes. Chuck Maddox, G.W. Clifford and Associates, appeared before the Board on behalf of the applicant. He advised that the reason for closing Echo Lane is that he did not want traffic to parallel a major collector. He stated that the plan would be annotated before staff approval. Chairman Shickle asked about the notes on the last page, which reference WWW Property. Mr. Maddox responded that that portion ofthe plan was included as an attempt to show the Route 50 improvements as related to the proffers. Supervisor Dove asked if this proposal would devalue the adjoining properties. Mr. Maddox responded that the proposal would not devalue the adjacent properties. He went on to say that once the new road is built, the property values would increase. Mr. Maddox went on to say that he would add a note to the plan stating that the applicant would not deny access to Botanical Drive if the property is planned. He stated that access would be available once the proffered traffic impact analysis is approved by the County and Winchester Medical Center approves what is on the property. Chairman Shickle asked about the Echo Lane entrance on to Route 50. Engineer Copp stated that VDOT agreed to allow the entrance as a private road, but they have not agreed to a commercial entrance on to Route 50 or Botanical Drive. Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 I 574 Engineer Engram advised that as long as the other properties along Echo Lane remain residential in use then the road would not close. Chairman Shickle asked if the project was as it was required to be. Mr. Maddox responded yes. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor Smith, the Board granted staff administrative approval for Master Development Plan #06-04. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Jr. - Aye Lynda J. Tyler - Aye MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN #07-04 OF WWW PROPERTY - APPROVED Planner IT Camp appeared before the Board on behalf of this application. He advised that this property is located on Route 50 in the Gainesboro District and is zoned B2 (General Business). The property contains 70 acres, 23 acres of which are designated for large retail to be used for a Wal- Mart Supercenter and other commercial uses. Planner II Camp advised that the Board of Supervisors is also being requested to approve a lot access waiver. He further stated that all improvements to the WMC II property will be in place before the property is developed. The applicant has proffered to relocate Round Hill Road to reconnect with the proposed collector road. The cap on the collector road is 15,000 vehicle trips per day. Any increase would require County review. The applicant has also agreed to construct two lanes of Petticoat Gap Lane in Phase 1. Planner II Camp advised that the Planning Commission has expressed no concern over the waiver request, which the Board must act upon. He stated that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the plan. Planner II Camp stated that the plan is in conformance with the zoning ordinance requirements and the applicant is seeking approval for staff authority to administratively approve this plan. He went on to say that staff is working with the applicant on the proffered 10' landscape screen and location. The screen is proposed to be located on the side of the road, but staff would be working with the applicant to finalize its location. Supervisor Forrester asked ifthe staff note stating that "as individual site plans are submitted for WWWProperty, an ADT traffic tabulation shall be required to assess the overall trips generated" Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 575 is stated in the proffer statement. Director Lawrence advised that this issue is already addressed in the proffer statement. Chuck Maddox, G. W. Clifford & Associates, appeared before the Board on behalf of this application. He advised that the applicant was working very closely with WMC II to make this a unified commercial and medical support facility. Chairman Shickle asked about the buffer between the development and the adjoining agriculture land. Mr. Maddox responded that there was 10 feet in addition to the 80 foot right-of-way. With regard to the location of the screening buffer, Mr. Maddox stated that he would prefer to see the screening placed between the buildings and the road. V ice-Chairman Van Osten advised that she would like the buffer to screen the buildings. She then asked what the design standards for the proposed Wal-Mart might be. Mr. Maddox responded that the applicant has established an architectural content committee to make sure all of the architecture is homogenous. He stated "it's going to be the best it can be... big box is big box." He concluded by saying that he did not have any exterior colors or drawings yet. Chairman Shickle asked who would build the backside entrances. Mr. Maddox responded that it would be built by Winchester Medical Center. He went on to say that Phase I would be completed prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. He further stated that the Echo Lane entrance would be built at that same time. Upon a motion by Supervisor Dove, seconded by Supervisor Ewing, the Board granted staff authority to administratively approve Master Development Plan #07-04 and also approved the proposed lot access waiver to allow lots to access private streets. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle - Aye Barbara E. Van Osten - Aye Gary W. Dove - Aye Bill M. Ewing - Aye Gina A. Forrester - Aye W. Harrington Smith, Ir. - Aye Lynda I. Tyler - Aye ROAD RESOLUTION (#068-04) FOR AUTUMN GLEN, SECTION I - APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04 576 WHEREAS, the streets in Autumn Glen Section I, described on the attached Additions Form SR-5A, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.1-229, Code 0 f Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy ofthis resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Adopted this 9th day of June, 2004. BOARD LIAISON REPORTS Supervisor Tyler informed the Board that Parks and Recreation received an award from the Tourism Board recognizing outstanding event of the year for the Holiday Light Show. Supervisor Forrester advised that the Personnel Committee met, but there was no action to forward to the Board. CITIZEN COMMENTS Nick Lauderdale, Gainesboro District, spoke regarding the WMC II and WWW projects. He expressed concerns about traffic on Routes 50 and 522 and hoped they would be adequately addressed in the two projects. He also asked why the applicants were not extending the service road. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMENTS Supervisor Forrester thanked staff for handling the complexity ofthe many proj ects that have been coming forward. ADJOURN UPON A MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR EWING, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR FORRESTER, THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS MEETING IS HEREBY ADJOURNED. (11:00 P.M.) Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09104 577 \L~_S C--6-~~ Richard C. Shickle Chairman, Board of Supervisors o R. Riley, Jr. lerk, Board of Supervisors Minutes Prepared By: ( l. "I E.. '~'fj2.j../ Jay E.~s Deputy Clerk, Board of Supervisors Minute Book Number 29 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 06/09/04