Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'~ ~'J (~ <br />~ ~ c, <br /> <br />TUESDAY <br /> <br />MAY 27, 1980 <br /> <br />City's present carrier will remain in force until said July 1st (i.e., extended <br /> <br />beyond its policy term date of June 25th to July lst). Meanwhile, at the <br /> <br />request of Councilman Greene, Mr. Fisher agreed to attempt to obtain from the <br /> <br />Virginia Supplemental Retirement System analytical data supporting the increase <br /> <br />in the City's "employer" cost of VSRS retirement costs from the current 3.75% <br /> <br />to 5.79% beginning July I, 1980. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission reported (under date of May 22, 1980) that, having <br /> <br />conducted a duly-advertised public hearing on the City's application for a <br /> <br />Special-Use Permit to allow the City to construct a ground-level water storage <br /> <br />tank (or reservoir) at one of three proposed sites north of Commonwealth <br /> <br />Boulevard, between Fairy Street and Morgan Street, it (the Commission) <br /> <br />recommends that the permit be issued for the site situated adjacent to and <br /> <br />north of the Elks Lodge (BPOE Lodge No. 1752) off Fairy Street Extension. The <br /> <br />Commission further noted that, for whichever of the three sites is selected, a <br /> <br />revision and/or amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Land-Use Map <br /> <br />will be necessary, subject to the required public hearings thereon being <br /> <br />conducted by the Commission and the Council. Mr. J. Randolph Smith, Attorney <br /> <br />at Law and Counsel for Dr. John R. Smith, and Dr. Frederick U. Baublitz <br /> <br />appeared before Council and registered their objections to the site recommended <br /> <br />by the Planning Commission, on the assumption or claim that the use of that <br /> <br />site for the purpose cited would constitute a hindrance to the development of <br /> <br />Fairy Street Extension for professional usage and, further, would result in a <br /> <br />depreciation of property values in the area. Upon motion, duly seconded and <br /> <br />unanimously carried, Council called for a duly-advertised public hearing to be <br />