|
16I
<br />
<br />February 27~ 1979
<br />
<br />funds left over after the above improvements ~are made will be held for the homeowner's
<br />association to be used for additional recreation facil~t±es as they see fit. Following this
<br />process, the tennis courts discussed at the February'public hearing will not be built by the
<br />developer, but may be built by the association at a later date.
<br />
<br /> Some comments were also made at the public hearing relative to seeking concurrence with
<br />the existing homeowners. While we will certainly seek their~imput into any final changes
<br />in the proposed PUD, I can not recommend any greater role in this provess because of the
<br />small number of families involved. Peachtree is designed for approximately four hundred
<br />familie~ an'd less than sixty are now residing in Peachtree~ Under state law the developer
<br />still contr~i~ the Association's vote. ~herefore, the staff's position is that we proceed
<br />with what is ~quired by law and also that which is required to develop a satisfactorily plan
<br />ned community for those present and those yet to come.
<br />
<br /> In view of all the aforementioned, it is my recommendation that you again consider the
<br />proposed change in section seven of the Peachtree PUD with the understanding that mutual con-
<br />currence between the City and the developer will be obtained prior to the bonding of this
<br />section and the issuance of any subsequent building permits."
<br />
<br /> Motion of Mr. Holley and seconded by Mr. Oast, to concur in the matter before us~and
<br />was adopted by the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Elliott, Gray, Nolley, Oast, Davis
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 79-.38 - The following ordinance approved on first reading at the regular meeting of
<br />February 13, 1979, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $20,000 FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR
<br />ENGINEERING AND DESIGN COST OF A BOAT RAMP IN WEST NORFOLK."
<br />
<br /> Harrill H. Young, 441 Chautauqua Avenue, spoke in support of the ordinance, requesting
<br />that the boat ramp not to be built as the one in City Park and that he would be availabe for
<br />any information that may be of help toward the construction of the ramp.
<br />
<br /> O~ ~o'tioh~of Mr. Gray and seconded by Mr. Elliott, the ordinance was adopted, and by
<br />the following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Elliott, Gray, Holley, Oast, Davis
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 79-39 - The following ordinance approved on first reading at the regularcmeeting of
<br />February 13,~t9F9, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $76,000 FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR
<br />RETRO-FITTING OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS FOR THE PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED."
<br />
<br /> ' On motionoof Mr. Gray and seconded by Mr. Oast, the ordinance was adopted, and by the
<br />following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Elliott, Gray, Holley, Oast, Davis
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 79~40 The following ~rdinance approved on frost reading at the regular meeting of
<br />February 15, 1979, was taken up and read:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $14,000 FROM TH~ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR
<br />ENGINEERING AND DESIGN COSTS FOR THE SECOND PHASE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE CITY'S
<br />WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - SOUTHEASTERN INDUSTRIAL AREA."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Oast and seconded by Mr. Holley, the ordinance was adopted, and by the
<br />follpwing ~ote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Elliott, Gray, Holley, Oast, Davis
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br /> 79-54 - The following report from the City Manager was presented:
<br />
<br /> "In accordance with your request at the City Council meeting of February 13, 1979, I
<br />have met twice with the employees' committee representing the Police Department under the
<br />Meet and Discuss procedure. A copy of the transcript from the City Council meeting of
<br />February 13 was distributed to the members of the committee in order that they may more fully
<br />understand the purpose of the meeting under our Meet and Discuss procedure.
<br />
<br /> During our Meet and Discuss session, the committee indicatedkthat they did not feel
<br />their working a the Newport News Shipyard as security type personnel during off-duty hours
<br />is a conflict of interest; nor, do they consider it strikebreaking. The committee stated
<br />that the~officers who are working their off-duty hours consider it as "purely economics".
<br />
<br /> The committee stated it had met with most of the officers currently ~orking at the New-
<br />port News Shipyard during their off-duty hours. At this meeting, these officers indicated
<br />that if the courts' decision was in favor of the USW and if the Yard failed to abide by
<br />said ruling, they, (~he officers) would terminate their employment voluntaril~~.
<br />
<br /> I have re-reviewe~ the Personnel policy permitting police officers to work during
<br />their off-duty hours and wish to reaffirm again that the policy was~net~changed in order to
<br />
<br />
<br />
|