The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:03 P.M.

1. Adoption of Agenda: The agenda was approved as published for the September 28 meeting.

2. Approval of Minutes: The summary of the August 24 meeting was approved.

3. Community Comments:

1. Mr. Bean raised his concern over the parking restrictions on School Street. He had previously commented on the inability to park on Saturdays. This was raised with Fairfax, but there wasn’t an answer or follow-up. The Board will follow-up with the City regarding permitting parking on Saturdays. GMU c

2. ontinues to move forward with an overpass across Route 123 that will connect with Braddock Road. At question is whether there will be a merge of southbound Route 123 traffic—GMU doesn’t favor that approach. Also at question is whether in spite of GMU’s promises, traffic from University Drive will be permitted to ‘cut through’ to Braddock Road also. This will be discussed at the Community Forum on October 26 at the City Hall. The Board continues to work with the City and Mr. Cook to protect our interests.

3. The PA system at the GMU soccer field is louder than ever. The community is encouraged to call the GMU Athletic Director to complain

4. Hearings:

1. Mr. and Mrs. James Bean, 4332 Delegate. Two items have been completed. The owner says that the deck will be cleaned and stained as soon as weather permits. Mr. Bean also said they had left a voice message for David Crone, but hadn’t received a call back.

2. Mr. and Mrs. Singh, 10600 Regent Park Ct. The Singhs said that the driveway has been sealed and the fence was stained last year. The painting and trim repair has been contracted and is pending weather that will permit the work to be done. Mr. Singh said that he had been working on weed removal and growing grass. The Board noted that this has been an on-going problem for several years and suggested the Singhs need to consider a yard service since their efforts aren’t correcting the problem. The Singhs also asked about funds owed and letters received from the HOA’s legal counsel for previous violations—they felt they were relieved of paying the assessment. The Board and Cardinal will research records for what was actually approved.

3. Mr. Fines, 10621 Regent Park Ct. (Case 5017). Mr. Fines also expressed frustration on contacting Cardinal and receiving a timely call-back regarding their violations. An application was submitted and received today for a wooden play set. Removal of mildew on the north side was contracted for and paid, however, the mildew remains. They will have the contractor try a second time and if that doesn’t work, they will paint the side. Randy mentioned a good mildew cleaner sold by Costco that the Fines may choose to try.

4. Mr. Palmieri, 4336 Chancery Park Dr. (Case 2031) The bay window wood has been replaced, but the job hasn’t been finished due to the weather. The grass seeding will be done within 30 days. An application isn’t on file for the patio and Mr. Palmieri was asked to provide the CC a copy for their files.

5. Community Liaison Update:

1. Gail said that the Association of Community Associations will meet on October 26.

6. Landscape & Grounds Committee Report:

1. Shenandoah has recommended the shrubs in the School Street park be trimmed three times per year vice two. A proposal will be forth-coming.

2. A weed treatment and power seeding proposal of the common areas hasn’t been received. At this point in time, it’s questionable as to whether the grass will have a chance to grow prior to cold weather setting in. The work should have been done at least a month ago.

3. The drainage at the homes at University Drive and Chancery Park Drive has improved. Much of the mulch has washed away due to the recent rain. Drainage will continue to be monitored.

4. At the August meeting, Cardinal provided copies of the two sprinkler proposals—PSI Property Services for $1,650 and Shenandoah for $1815. Both companies’ labor rates are similar and both have access to parts for the Hunter system in Chancery Park. Because they are in the community on a weekly basis, the Board approved award of the contract to Shenandoah so long as they match the PSI price of $1650. Shenandoah agreed to meet the price and the Board approved the contract by email vote earlier in September.

7. Covenants Committee Report:

1. The CC met and approved an Amnesty Place deck application.

2. An after-the-fact application for an exterior light placed high on the side of 10605 was returned for being incomplete. However, the CC anticipates referring the application to the Board since the Guidelines don’t cover the situation. It was noted that a permit for the light had been received from the City.

3. Zoysia grass letters were sent to one of the neighbors impacted, but Cardinal was going to resend the letters to insure all 4332 Amnesty Place (Case 1003) neighbors are notified regarding potential invasion of the illegal grass.

4. Copies of the hearing letters for tonight were not received from Cardinal as the process calls for.

8. Social Committee Report:

1. The community yard sale was held on September 24.

9. Treasurer's Report:

1. Irene said Administration cost was over by $682 for the month, but that the budget remains under target for the year by about $16,000.

2. Rollover or replacement of two CPOA CDs is due, but the paperwork remains to be signed.

3. The draft 2012 budget wasn’t received from Cardinal although limited coordination was conducted.

10. Old Business:

1. Traffic Control. The City hasn’t gotten back to Randy regarding the traffic calming options.

2. Status of School Street development. An architectural review of the proposal is anticipated for October. Gail will again bring attention to the entry feature and the community’s desire that it complement the feature for the townhomes across Route 123.

3. Update on GMU expansion plans. A GMU/City/County meeting is planned for October 26. Randy requested attendees mention the soccer field loud speakers and traffic flow options that favor Chancery Park.

4. Simon prepared a Policy Resolution per discussion at the July meeting to address limiting the privileges of residents who aren’t in good standing. In addition to not being able to vote at the annual meeting, they will not be able to submit applications to the CC. The Board concurred with the resolution and requested Cardinal submit the resolution for legal review prior to the Board approving it. A legal review was conducted and the Board agreed with the recommended edits. A finalized version will be provided for signature at or before the October meeting.

5. The City Council Chamber in the City Hall Annex has been reserved for the annual Chancery Park meeting on November 9 at 7 PM.

11. New Business:

1. Irene raised a suggestion to replace the double mailboxes on the posts in Phase II. There was interest in the idea, but the Board wanted to get an opinion from Cardinal regarding precedent and any rules that may need to be worked through the Post Office. Since new holes would need to be cut in the concrete sidewalks, there would be additional cost for the project versus simply replacing the existing boxes.

2. Eli said that he had been contacted by Mason Oaks regarding teaming up to deal with GMU. The Board asked that Eli get back to the contact and explain the current forums for dealing with GMU. Chancery Park welcomes their involvement in encouraging GMU behavior that supports the neighboring communities.

3. Randy proposed preparation of a resolution for Chancery Park that would limit homes to one family in spite of the City’s position of allowing non-family rentals. Cardinal was requested to see if they have similar rules or precedent guidelines at other communities they represent.

12. Date of Next Meeting: The open session ended at 8:00 PM. The next board meeting will be October 19 vice 26 due to conflicts.

13. Executive Session:

Cardinal is requested to provide a copy of each hearing or violation letter to the Covenants Committee so that they may maintain a complete file of all correspondence regarding the resident.

1. Case 2013 is to be referred to legal for collection since it is more than 90 days overdue.

2. Case 5002 is to be referred to legal for collection since it is more than 90 days overdue.

3. Case 1001, The owner will be advised to correct each of four violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

4. Case 2005, The owner will be advised to correct each of six violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

5. Case 2018, The owner will be advised to correct each of two violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

6. Case 2031, The owner will be advised to correct each of three violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first. An approved application isn’t on file with the CC. The owner shall provide a copy of an approved application within 30 days of receipt of the letter. If no application is available, the owner shall be assessed $50 for the rear patio and submit an application for approval after the fact.

7. Case 3006, The owner will be advised to replace the front lamp post crossbar within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for the violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

8. Case 4008, The owner will be advised to correct each of seven violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

9. Case 4013, The owner will be advised to correct each of eight violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

10. Case 5001, The owner will be advised to correct each of five violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

11. Case 5005, The owner will be advised to correct each of two violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first. The owner is to be assessed $50 for installing the outside light without having an approved application on file.

12. Case 5017, The owner will be assessed $50 for failure to have an approved application prior to installing a swing set. The application was provided to Cardinal and the CC on September 28.

13. Case 5021, The owner will be advised to correct each of six violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

14. Case 6003, The owner will be advised to correct each of six violations within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied for each violation until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first. The owner is to be assessed $50 for not having an application on file for the brick retaining wall installed in the front yard. The owner shall submit an application for approval or remove the wall within 30 days of receipt of the letter.

15. Case 7007, The owner will be advised to correct their violation within 30 days of receipt of the notification letter. If not corrected, an assessment of $10/day will be applied until the violation is corrected or 90 days, whichever occurs first.

14. Adjournment: The executive session was adjourned at 8:25 PM.