Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board authorizes development performance agreement for Vint Hill lot; one supervisor recuses
Summary
The Board of Supervisors authorized county staff to draft and execute a developer performance-guarantee agreement to permit conveyance of a phase-1 lot at Vint Hill pending a performance bond for the larger project; one supervisor recused citing an investment conflict and the motion passed with a 4-0 vote and one recusal.
Fauquier County supervisors voted Feb. 13 to authorize the county administrator, community development director and county attorney to negotiate and execute a developer performance-guarantee agreement to permit conveyance of a phase-1 lot at the Vint Hill development while ensuring a performance guarantee (in lieu of an immediate performance bond) will be posted for the overall project.
County staff said the agreement would allow the developer to take steps toward conveyance of a lot identified as PSV-4 while working with the county to file a performance bond covering the entire project. The action was taken under authority cited as "section 801 of the Fauquier County zoning ordinance" (staff cited the zoning section in the meeting) and staff said the performance agreement mechanism is a temporary measure to allow progress between meetings when timing is constrained.
Supervisor Baradas stated early in the session that he would recuse himself from any discussion or vote on the item because of investments that could create the appearance of a personal benefit; he repeated the recusal at the time of the motion and left the dais for the item. The motion to authorize drafting and execution of the agreement was then moved, seconded and approved. The board recorded the outcome as approved with one recusal.
County staff said they would return with the drafted agreement and any proposed terms and that the county attorney would execute the agreed language consistent with the authority granted by the board. The decision was procedural in nature: it authorized staff to negotiate and finalize an agreement rather than approving specific bond amounts or developer performance language on the record.
The board did not vote on a specific bond amount or final agreement language at the Feb. 13 meeting; staff said the county attorney and county administration are authorized to complete the agreement and file the necessary bond documents before conveyance.
