Laserfiche WebLink
126 <br /> <br /> consideration. <br /> <br />APPROPRIATION: $18,500 - SETTLEMENT IN EEOC CLAIM <br /> <br /> Mr. GOuldman explained that the City,s mandatory <br />retirement age of 60 for public.safety officials was found to <br />be in conflict with federal law and~t was_recommende~ that <br />an employee' in the Sheriff's Office who had. been forced to <br />retire be reinstated with back pay. Mr. Gouldman stated that <br />he will review the ordinance~ and will make recommendations <br />regarding necessary amendments. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mr. Vandever, seconded by Mr.-Buck, the <br />$18,500 appropriation of a settlement in a EEOC claim was <br />offered and carried over to the next meeting for <br />consideration ..... <br /> <br />RESOLUTION: ADOPTING PROCESSFOR CSX PROPERTY CONTRACT APPROVAL <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that staff recommended the following <br />process for approval of sale contracts for the CSX property: <br />1) Prospective buyerrsubmits sales contract and supporting <br />plans for development to-Charlottesville Industrial <br />Development (CIDA) staff)-2) Review by CIDA staff and <br />technical review by Planning staff resulting in <br />recommendations for acceptance-or rejection of proposed <br />contract (including comments-on'whether proposedvprojeCt is <br />consistent with Urban~Design guidelines)~ 3)-Contract~ <br />approval by CIDA Board conditioned upon City Council approval <br />(If CIDA rejects contract, process ends at this stage): 4) <br />City Council approval of sales contract (at regular meeting <br />unless majority of Council, by telephone poll conducted by <br />City Manager, requests public hearing). <br /> <br /> Rev. Edwards questioned why the-Urban Design Committee <br />was not involved in the process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that the Urban Design Committee had <br />not been included as Council had not agreed on when they <br />should be involved. <br /> <br /> Rev. Edwards stated that he felt the Committee should <br />review the proposals. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck. an ex-officio member of the Urban Design <br />Committee, stated that the Committee is in the process of <br />developing guidelines which wilt be available to a <br />prospective developer. Mr. Buck recommended that the <br />Committee review the plans after they have been developed <br />following approval of the contract. Mr. Buck also <br />recommended that number 4 in the process be modified to state <br />that the City Council will be given the opportunity to review <br />the sales contract and decide whether formal Council approval <br />at a public meeting is necessary, especially in those cases <br />where the proposed develop is consistent with the plans, <br />meets the guidelines and in'which no subsidy is involved. <br />Mr. Buck stated that this would speed up the process. <br /> <br /> Mr. George Ray, ~Director of Economic Development, stated <br />that he felt the Urban Design Committee should be advisory <br />only and should develop guidelines which are clear enough to <br />be understood by a prospective developer and should be <br />available to assist on an as needed basis. <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck argued that a major reason for establishing the <br />Urban Design Committee was to review the design of projects <br />on the CSX property. Mr. Buck stated that should <br />disagreements arise regarding the design of projects, then <br />the developer could bring the matter before COuncil for a <br />final decision. <br /> <br /> Council agreed that the~process should~be modified as <br />proposed by Mr. Buck and s%aff stated that they would clarify <br /> <br /> <br />