2021-01-27 Agenda PacketCHESTERFIELD COUNTY
CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832
AGENDA
January 27, 2021
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
JAMES M. HOLLAND
CHAIR
DALE DISTRICT
CHRISTOPHER M. WINSLOW
VICECHAIR
CLOVER HILL DISTRICT
JIM A. INGLE
BERMUDA DISTRICT
KEVIN P. CARROLL
MATOACA DISTRICT
LESLIE A.T. HALEY
MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT
JOSEPH P. CASEY, Ph.D.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
2:00 p.m. Work Session Public Meeting Room
1.Approval of Minutes
2.Requests to Postpone Agenda Items and Additions, Deletions or Changes in the Order of
Presentation
3.Work Sessions
A.Everyday Excellence Sheriff's Office
B.COVID Update
C.Police Department Update
D.Assessor's Office and Real Property Tax Rate Update
E.Perrymont Update
F.Legislative Liaison Update
4.Reports
A.District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report
5.FifteenMinute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters
6.Recess for Dinner
6:00 p.m. Evening Session Public Meeting Room
7.Invocation
The Honorable Chris Winslow, Clover Hill District Supervisor
Page 1 of 353
Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting
January 27, 2021
8.Pledge of Allegiance
Deputy County Administrator Matt Harris
9.County Administration Update
A.Christmas Mother & CCHASM Update
B.Other County Administration Updates
10.Board Member Reports
11.Resolutions and Special Recognitions
12.New Business
A.Appointments
1.Social Services Board
2.Personnel Appeals Board
B.Consent Items
1.Adoption of Resolutions
a.Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Judith A. McCartney, Police Department, Upon
Her Retirement
b.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Maryln Anderson, Department of Social Services
Upon Her Retirement
c.Resolution Recognizing Ms. LaRonica Jennings, Department of Social
Services Upon Her Retirement
d.Resolution Recognizing Captain Charles Gartman, Sheriff's Office Upon His
Retirement
e.Resolution Supporting Construction of the Glade View Trace Apartments at
Iron Bridge Road, Using Low Income Housing Tax Credits Issued by the
Virginia Housing Development Authority Under Their Revitalization Area
Designation
f.Resolution Supporting Construction of the Old Hundred Trace Apartments at
Old Hundred Road, Using Low Income Housing Tax Credits Issued by the
Virginia Housing Development Authority Under Their Revitalization
Area Designation
2.Real Property Requests
a.Acceptance of Parcels of Land
Page 2 of 353
Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting
January 27, 2021
1.Acceptance of Two Parcels of Land Adjacent to Genito Road and
Moseley Road from Robert T. Lind
2.Acceptance of Eight Parcels of Land Adjacent to Winterfield Road and
Winterfield Lane from TRP Winterfield, LLC
3.Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway
from Trollingwood Land, L.L.C.
4.Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway
from Americana Park, L.L.C.
b.Requests for Permission
1.Request Permission to Install Private Sewer and Water Services
Within Private Easements to Serve Property at 5214 Cogbill Road and
Approve Transfer of Water Capital Cost Recovery Charge Credit
3.Acceptance of State Roads
4.Award Contract and Appropriate BMP Reserve Balance for the Dredging of
Evergreen Lake Stormwater Pond
5.Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of Grant Funds from the Department of
Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the 2020
Emergency Management Performance Supplemental Grant
6.Initiate an Application for a Rezoning From Agricultural (A) to Residential (R12), to
Permit a Single Family Subdivision With Ten (10) Lots on 5.0 Acres Located at 3901
Dupuy Road
7.Set Date for Public Hearing of February 24, 2021
a.To Consider a Lease for the Baseball Facility at James River High School
b.To Amend Section 925 of the County Code to Adjust the County's Tax Relief
Thresholds to Accommodate the CY2020 Social Security Administration Cost
of Living Adjustment
c.To Consider Amendments to Chapter 12 of the County Code Regarding
Setback Requirements for Private Wells
d.To Authorize Advertisement of 2021 Calendar Year Tax Rate and Other
Required Legal Notices and Public Hearings related to the Real Estate Tax
e.To Consider Code Amendment Relative to Written Determinations Affecting
Residential Wells (21PJ0101)
Page 3 of 353
Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting
January 27, 2021
C.Claim of L.T. Services, Inc. Relating to Termination of Service Agreement
#ADMIN18000101 for School Custodial Services
13.FifteenMinute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters
14.Deferred Items
15.Requests for Manufactured Home Permits and Rezoning Placed on the Consent Agenda to be
Heard in the Following Order:
Withdrawals/Deferrals
Cases Where the Applicant Accepts the Recommendation and There is No Opposition
Cases Where the Applicant Does Not Accept the Recommendation and/or There is
Public Opposition Will Be Heard at Section 18
A.21SN0518 Better Housing Coalition Clover Hill District
B.21SN0519 Richmond Affordable Housing Bermuda District
C.21SN0524 Christine and Paul Butts Matoaca District
D.21SN0525 Biringer Builders, Inc. Midlothian District
E.21SN0534 Railey Hill Associates, LLC Midlothian District
F.21SN0542 Chesterfield Planning Commission Bermuda District
16.Public Hearings
A.To Consider Conveyance of Right of Way to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Route
I95 Auxiliary Lanes Project
B.To Consider Leasing of Space at the County Airport for Use by the Virginia State Police
Aviation Unit
C.To Consider Amendment to County Code 951 Regarding Penalty for Failing to File a Tax
Return for Certain Personal Property
17.Remaining Manufactured Home Permits and Zoning Requests
18.FifteenMinute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters
19.Adjournment
A.Adjournment and Notice of Next Scheduled Meeting of the Board of Supervisors
Page 4 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 3.B.
Subject:
COVID Update
Board Action Requested:
Summary of Information:
Dr. Alexander Samuel, Chesterfield Health District Director, will provide an update on COVID-19 and the
status of vaccines for Chesterfield County. In addition, county staff will provide an update on local vaccine
distribution and planning.
Attachments:
1.Coronavirus Vaccination Update_BOS_Jan 27
2.NS Update _ Fire EMS COVID-19 Vaccination Update BOS Final Draft
Preparer:James Worsley, Deputy County Administrator
Approved By:
Page 5 of 353
Coronavirus Vaccination Update
Chesterfield Health District
Update to the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors
January 27th, 2021
Alexander P Samuel MD MPH
Health Director
Page 6 of 353
Vaccine Distribution Basics
Direction of Vaccine Flow:
Production (Federal) States Locality Distributers/Vaccinators
Who Distributes/Vaccinates at the Locality Level?
•Primary Recipients:
o Hospital Systems
o Health Districts – Working with Partners to help vaccinate
How do we determine who receives vaccine?
•Federal Recommendations (ACIP) with State Input
Page 7 of 353
Vaccine Distribution Basics
Direction of Vaccine Flow:
Production (Federal) States Locality Distributers/Vaccinators
Who Distributes/Vaccinates at the Locality Level?
•Primary Recipients:
o Hospital Systems
o Health Districts – Working with Partners to help vaccinate
How do we determine who receives vaccine?
•Federal Recommendations (ACIP) with State Input
Supply Chain:
•Variable
Page 8 of 353
Current Plan
Total weekly vaccine dose total for entire district = 4,625 doses
Rationale and Duration of limited supply
Breakdown of this week’s (week of Jan 25) focus populations:
•20% 1b Senior Population
•40% 1b Essential Workers (top 3 tiers)
•40% 1a Health Care Personnel
Individuals from among the 1b population we are working to vaccinate right now:
•Frontline Essential Workers (Police/Fire/Hazmat, Corrections and Homeless Shelter Workers, and Childcare/PreK-12 teachers/staff)
•People Age 75+
•People Age 65+ with an underlying medical condition Page 9 of 353
Challenges and Improvements
A. Sign-up and Registration for Vaccine
•Challenge: Limitations of Existing State Registration System
•Improvement: New Registration System (PrepMod) coming soon
•Challenge: Health District Sign-Up Modalities Not Ready for Prime Time
•Improvements: Call-center up-staffed and website now has on-line waitlist survey tool
B. Data Management
•Challenges: Data limitations at all levels (state, local) during roll-out
•Improvements: Continuous efforts to Improve data accuracy and availability
Page 10 of 353
Fire & EMS COVID-19 Vaccination Update
Chief Loy Senter
Fire & EMS Chief
Chief Justin Adams
Battalion Chief, EMS Division
Page 11 of 353
‘Three-P’ Process
Planning, Preparation and
Partnerships
•Vaccination planning has been
underway for months prior to
approval
•Project team was assembled in
advance
•Valuable public/private partnerships
were established to ensure success
Page 12 of 353
Employee Vaccination Timeline
Dec 22:
Vaccinations
Begin for
CFEMS Career
and
Volunteer
Staff
Dec 23:
EMC and Jail
Medical Staff
Vaccinations
Begin
Dec 24:
Internal
CFEMS
Vaccinations
Begin
Jan 7:
CPD and CSO
Vaccinations
begin as EMS
Extenders
Begin
Jan 12:
LEO PODS
Established
CDC 1A Classification Employees
Page 13 of 353
Employee
Vaccination
Totals
•Total Vaccinations Administered
•1,238
•First Doses: 1,033
•Second Doses: 205
•County Government
1A/1B vaccinated to date
•1,033 of 3,265 = 31.6%
completed
Page 14 of 353
Employee Forecasted Vision
Virginia
Department of
Health
County Health
District
County/EMC
Vaccinations
Regional Distribution
Local Distribution
Fire and EMS
County Govt
Employees
Vaccinated by Fire
& EMS
CCPS
School Employees
Vaccinated by
School Nursing
Staff
Looking Ahead:
•HR has identified
employees classified as
1B. These include:
•Frontline workers
•Age >= 65
•Individuals w/
underlying health
conditions
•Transition plan for Phase
1C to follow as identified
by VDH
Page 15 of 353
Sharing the Workload for a Successful Outcome
County VDH
1C
1B
1B
1A
Workload
County VDH
1C
1B
1A
Workload
Page 16 of 353
Chesterfield County Vaccine Stats
- 56
2,155
3,710 3,858 3,869
3,080
1,533 1,379
Number of Chesterfield Residents Vaccinated
(data reported as of 1/26/21)
0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
7.4%11.8%11.5%11.5%9.3%9.2%20.9%
Number of Chesterfield Residents Vaccinated Compared to
Projected Population* Age Groups
20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Vaccinated Estimated Balance to be Vaccinated
*Population data based on vaccination goal (70% of population aged 19+, 183k)
Source: Virginia Department of Health, Chesterfield County Planning Department Population Projections
Page 17 of 353
Virginia Locality Overview
10,062
10,162
10,430
11,110
19,640
19,778
20,182
21,590
22,906
68,864
Vaccine Recipients, Top 10 Localities
(data reported as of 1/26/21)
Richmond City
Albemarle
Roanoke
County
Arlington
Chesterfield
Prince William
Virginia Beach
Loudoun
Henrico
Fairfax
80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 -
8.0%
8.5%
8.5%
8.9%
9.9%
10.6%
11.4%
13.2%
17.7%
21.2%
Estimated Percent of Community Vaccination Goal
(70% of population aged 19+)
Prince William
Richmond City
Virginia Beach
Arlington
Loudoun
Chesterfield
Fairfax
Henrico
Albemarle
Roanoke
County
25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0%
In addition to the 19,640, Chesterfield Health District has
administered an additional 2,337, totaling 21,977 for the CHD.
Of the total vaccines administered in the state, 79,607 are unmapped to a locality.
Page 18 of 353
Chesterfield County Vaccine Distribution
Projected Chesterfield County Vaccine Distribution Day Week
U.S. Goal/per day
1,00
0,000 7,000,000
Virginia Share of Goal (2.5%)/per day
2
5,000 175,000
Chesterfield County Equitable Share (4.1%)/per day
1,025 7,175
Estimated # of weeks to reach community vaccination goal
(70% of population aged 19+, 183k)
179 days
26
weeks
Chesterfield County Actual Amount Received (2.2%)/per day
559 3,910
Estimated # of weeks to reach community vaccination goal
(70% of population aged 19+, 183k)
328 days
47
weeks
Estimated Chesterfield Vaccine Shortfall/per day 466 3,265
Page 19 of 353
Questions?
Edward “Loy” Senter Jr.
Fire & EMS Chief
senterl@chesterfield.gov
(804) 748-1912
Page 20 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 3.C.
Subject:
Police Department Update
Board Action Requested:
Summary of Information:
Attachments:
1.2020 Police Department Update for BOS Work Session
Preparer:Tammy Wyrick, Administrative Asst
Approved By:
Page 21 of 353
2020 Year In Review 2020 Year In Review
Police Department Update
Page 22 of 353
2020: A Year of
Challenges
-COVID-19 Pandemic
-Nationwide Civil Unrest
-Political Turmoil
-Rise in Antigovernment
Sentiment from Both
Extremes
-700 Year Flood
(Exclusive to
Chesterfield)
-Complete Revamping of
the Workplace
-Supply Chain
Management
Challenges
-Unprecedented Spike in
Overdoses
-Fear & Uncertainty
Page 23 of 353
Message to department,
April 2, 2020
“Good organizations
survive difficult times.
Great organizations
flourish during difficult
times…” – Col. Jeffrey S. Katz
Page 24 of 353
Operational Support
Bureau
Community Services:
Ø Placed 4th in U.S. for National Night Out event – our
highest ranking ever!
Ø Modified Citizen Academies – 4 Citizen, 1 Teen, and a
Legislative Information Session – emphasis on
contemporary concerns regarding policing
Animal Services:
Ø Emptied the shelter of adoptable pets in December
Ø Featured in People Magazine for adoption efforts
Ø Returned 728 Pets to their families
Ø Achieved an 86% save rate
Page 25 of 353
Operational
Support Bureau
Emergency Management:
Ø Developed a robust departmentwide
plan to mitigate risk and operate within
a COVID environment
Ø Successfully worked with public safety
partners to respond to community needs
in the midst of an impromptu 700-year
flood
School Safety:
Ø Finalized MOU between CCPS and CCPD
Ø Child Safety Personnel created online
content to reach virtual students
Page 26 of 353
Uniform Operations Bureau
Police Service Aide (PSA) Program:
Implemented the PSA program in 2020
PSA’s respond to an average of 150 calls for service each
week – improving response times and freeing officers up
for enforcement and investigations
“Farm Team” Concept paying off – 6 of 16 PSAs accepted
into the 81 BRC (March 2021)
Unmanned Aerial Systems Program:
A culmination of 18 months of planning
Provides for a massive operational, tactical, and officer
safety enhancements
Page 27 of 353
Uniform
Operations Bureau
Bloodhound Program:
Acquired two bloodhounds in 2020
Rudy and Mazie (brother and sister) were acquired by donation from a police dog breeder
Vastly increases our capacity to effectively respond to missing persons including those with dementia, suffering from mental illness, or who are otherwise vulnerable
District Station Enhancements:
In preparation for this year’s new deployment strategy, Hull Street’s District Station was upfitted to facilitate operations as the new Swift Creek Station in April 2021
Square footage doubled to accommodate additional UOB personnel Page 28 of 353
Uniform Operations
Bureau
Special Response Unit:
Ø Provided operation support for the City of Richmond
during the first four days of civil unrest
Ø Former Richmond Chief Will Smith shared with me
that our team “saved RPD’s bacon” when we showed
up that first night – he had personnel cornered by
violent protesters
Ø Our personnel performed honorably and valiantly in
the face of adversity and risk of great personal harm
DUI Enforcement:
Ø In response to our increased emphasis on combating
drugged and drunk driving, our personnel made 1,116
DUI arrests in 2020, an increase over last year’s
record of 1,050 arrests
Page 29 of 353
Administrative Support Bureau
Personnel Division:
Ø On 07.13.2020, the department eclipsed our (then) sworn
allotment of 532 personnel – this is the first time we have been
fully staffed in 25 years
Ø CCPD began attracting and hiring sworn and experienced
personnel from surrounding agencies in the region – while not
losing experienced personnel to those jurisdictions
Ø Transitioned to the use of Assessment Centers for promotional
competency evaluation
Ø Instituted Guardian EDP program to transparently document
employee performance in near real time
Ø Became first Police Department in Virginia to produce a Podcast –
available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube
Ø HR Manager Lisa Scott was awarded our Civilian Employee of the
Year, and Capt. Mike Young was awarded the Chief’s
Commendation for his leadership of this division
Page 30 of 353
Administrative Support Bureau
Training Academy:
Revolutionized the department’s judgmental use of
force training program with an evolution of fluid and
dynamic scenarios designed to increased
competency in decision-making and confidence in
one’s ability to attain compliance in the face of
adversity
Constructed an improved LawFit Obstacle Course –
mandatory participation for sworn members yielded
valuable data to inform the trajectory of our fitness
program
Redesigned the Position Readiness Education
Program into specialty seminars in lieu of stand
alone courses
Completed an exhaustive review of all lesson plans
to ensure each contained an ethical component to
tie each lesson into real world decision-making
Page 31 of 353
Administrative Support Bureau
Information Systems:
Ø Worked in conjunction with County IST to
quickly and effectively implement remote
working capabilities for several hundred
personnel to minimize COVID exposure and
contagion
Ø Crime Analysts were given free-rein to be
creative with their data analysis and provide
less structured, innovative insights to
command personnel on a bi-weekly basis.
Impossible to capture their brilliance in a
presentation – but suffice it to say, we are in
excellent hands analytically
Page 32 of 353
Investigative Bureau
National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children:
Ø Became a certified partner agency with NCMEC
Ø Largest Agency in the United States to attain this
endorsement
Ø 54th Agency in the U.S. (out of 18,000)
Ø First agency in Virginia
Ø ECC became 7th center in Virginia to attain this
certification
Special Victims Section Expansion:
Ø We have doubled our capacity to meet the needs of
our most vulnerable population with specific emphasis
on:
Ø Human Trafficking
Ø Crimes Against the Elderly
Ø Domestic Violence
Ø Internet Crimes Against Children Page 33 of 353
Investigative Bureau
Successful Homicide Investigations for 2020:
Anticipate a 94% clearance rate on homicides committed in Chesterfield in 2020
Partnership with Parabon NanoLabs:
Partnered with a state-of-the-art DNA lab to identify the victim of a 1986 homicide investigation where the victim’s torso was found in a landfill
Used DNA probabilities to develop a composite image of the victim’s likely appearance
Detectives were able to help bring closure to the victim’s family
Improved Technology Upgrades and Integration:
The Bureau has increased its capacity to conduct surveillance on traveling sexual predators and human trafficking operations as well as the ability to conduct high-speed forensic analysis of digital equipment
Page 34 of 353
Agency COVID Response
Uniform Operations:
Responded to calls for service and engaged in thousands of proactive community contacts during this
pandemic
Administrative Support:
Made reasonable modifications to ensure the flow of new hires and trainees have not diminished
during this pandemic
Investigations:
Adapted to new means of collaboration; remained flexible, responsive, reliable, and effective
throughout
Operational Support:
First year Capt. Pete Cimbal’s, Capt. Grohowski, and Capt. Horowitz coordinated our department’s
response
Page 35 of 353
“Good organizations survive
difficult times. Great
organizations flourish during
difficult times…”
– Col. Jeffrey S. Katz
Page 36 of 353
Three Year Suicide Overview
308 298
251
47 57 44
27.9%31.8%
28.1%
3-Year Summary of Attempted and Completed Suicide
Numbers
2018 2019 2020
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Suicide Attempts Suicide Completions Percentage Involving Juveniles (Attempted & Completed)
Total: 355 Total: 355 Total: 295
Page 37 of 353
MHSS Attempted Suicides FY17 – FY21
17
9 9
11
8
15
9
7
5
14
13
6
9
1
7
5
2
3
9
4
9
4
3
2
1 1 1
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
CAST PRS Substance Use
Disorder
Outpatient Services Crisis Service Coordination DD Case
Management
ID Residential
FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21
Fiscal Year Total Attempts
(MHSS)
FY17 60
FY18 47
FY19 35
FY20 38
FY21 (so
far)
10
Page 38 of 353
Negotiation
SWAT &
Barricaded
Consumers
2019
Three
Barricaded/Armed
Suicide Callouts
2020
Five
Barricaded/Armed
Suicide Callouts
Page 39 of 353
MHSS Collaboration with Police and Schools
Evidenced-Based
Prevention
Programming
Chesterfield
Suicide Awareness
and Prevention
Coalition
CCPS & MHSS
Crisis Team
Partnerships
24 Hour Crisis
Hotline
Police Negotiation
Team
Mobile Integrated
Healthcare Team
Opioid Outreach
Coordinator
CIT and Police
Academy Training
Family Assistance
& Planning Teams
(FAPT)
Same Day Access
Outpatient
Treatment and
Support Services
Page 40 of 353
Questions
Page 41 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 3.D.
Subject:
Assessor's Office and Real Property Tax Rate Update
Board Action Requested:
Hold a work session to provide an update on county real estate values, the advertised tax rates for tax year 2021
and a proposed modification to the Tax Relief for Elderly and Disabled program.
Summary of Information:
This combo work session covers a range of topics related to related to taxes and revenue for calendar year
2021. First, the work session will report out on the results of the annual real estate assessment process. Next,
with those values now established, the work session will discuss an item on the consent agenda that authorizes
the advertisement of the tax rates for calendar year 2021, headlined by the recommendation that the real estate
rate be advertised at the existing $0.95 mark. Finally, this work session will preview a public hearing that is
being set for February that endeavors to increase the upper income threshold in the 100% tier of the Tax Relief
for the Elderly and Disabled program in order to keep pace with certain inflation indices.
Attachments:
1.2021 Real Estate Data 1-27-2021 FINAL
Preparer:
Approved By:
Page 42 of 353
2021 Real
Estate Data
JANUARY 27, 2021
Page 43 of 353
Taxable Summary
January 1, 2021 Total Taxable Value $43,866,990,383
Total Change in Taxable Value from 2020 April land book is $2,470,621,556
(5.968% increase)
New Construction and Growth
Residential = $671,309,000
Commercial = $142,624,600
Revaluation
Residential = $1,427,419,756 (4.38% increase)
Commercial = $229,268,200 (2.61% increase)
2
Page 44 of 353
Percent
Change in
Assessed
Value
3
Page 45 of 353
Residential New Construction
4
199
131
249
513
304274
173 167
772
297
225
156
251
830
267272
216 268
932
312296
209
422
817
259
Bermuda Clover Hill Dale Matoaca Midlothian
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Page 46 of 353
Qualified Residential Sales
769
1,203
684
1,325
1,166
1,049
1,326
908
1,734
1,197
1,024
1,405
1,023
1,889
1,283
1,095
1,428
1,069
2,055
1,386
1,268
1,590
1,338
2,164
1,396
Bermuda Clover Hill Dale Matoaca Midlothian
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
5
Page 47 of 353
Median Residential Sales Price
County Median Sales Price 2005-2020
200
5
200
6
200
7
200
8
200
9
201
0
201
1
201
2
201
3
201
4
201
5
201
6
201
7
201
8
201
9
202
0
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
Median Sales Price
$276,500 $269,950 $250,700
$360,000
$325,200
2020 Median Sales Price by District
Bermuda Clover Hill Dale Matoaca Midlothian
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
Median Sales Price
6
Page 48 of 353
Commercial
Revaluation
Increases
Warehouses $73 million
Industrials $48 million
Apartments $27 million
Mini Warehouses $11.5 million
Decreases
Shopping Centers -$22.6 million
Retail Stores -$17 million
Hotels/Motels -$12.9 million
7
Page 49 of 353
Major New Construction Built During 2020
Development Improvement
Value
Scannell Distribution Warehouse $29.4 mil
Boulders Lakeside Apartments $28.9 mil
The Vue Apartments $21.3 mil
James River Logistics Distribution Warehouse $20.9 mil
Anthology of Midlothian Assisted Care & Memory $17.2 mil
Cinema Café 9 $9.9 mil
Publix at Charter Colony $7.6 mil
8
Page 50 of 353
Assessment Information
Assessment Notices were
mailed between 1/21 and
1/25
Additional information can
be found on the county’s
website
9
Page 51 of 353
Proposed Tax Relief Amendment
Consent item to set a PH for 2/24 to consider a current year amendment to Tax Relief
program
Request is increase the 100% relief threshold to keep pace with social security; would
increase from $28,000 to $28,500 (went from $27,200 to $28,000 last year)
Other limits would remain unchanged
Broader review of program included with proposed budget
Also, staff will bring forth a financial policy to make such future (positive) adjustments
automatic
Has no impact on Veteran’s program
10
Page 52 of 353
Tax Rate Advertisements
Request to advertise the CY21 tax
rates at the existing marks; headlined
by the real estate rate at $0.95
Long range forecast relies on +3%
residential reval; 2021 result hits that
mark with some upside
Though, that is offset somewhat by
softness in other categories
Bottom line: revised forecast from the
fall holds; initial school transfer is
intact; and some capacity to handle
high priority needs as identified over
the next 60 days
11
Residential Reval Performance
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Page 53 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 3.E.
Subject:
Perrymont Update
Board Action Requested:
Summary of Information:
An update on the status of the surplus property, known as Perrymont, will be provided. In addition, staff will
provide information on the process to sale the Perrymont property.
Attachments:
1.Perrymont Update 01272021
Preparer:James Worsley, Deputy County Administrator
Approved By:
Page 54 of 353
Perrymont
Update
JANUARY 27, 2021
Page 55 of 353
Property was declared surplus in 2018.
Completed a Request for Proposal (RFP) process and
received one proposal.
Highlights
Page 56 of 353
Declined to move forward with proposal for a
variety of reasons:
We did not support adding a trailer to the
property.
Current structure continues to deteriorate.
Environmental concerns.
Highlights
Page 57 of 353
Human Services will continue to work with the
two nonprofits and Community Enhancement to
find property in Jefferson Davis Corridor.
Recommendation is to pivot to the sale of
Perrymont.
Highlights
Page 58 of 353
Questions?
Page 59 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 3.F.
Subject:
Legislative Liaison Update
Board Action Requested:
Hold a work session to provide an update on the activities of the Virginia General Assembly.
Summary of Information:
This work session will provide an early update on the activities of the General Assembly. Subsequent updates
will be provided for the next several months.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Sara Hall, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Approved By:
Page 60 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 4.A.
Subject:
District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report
Board Action Requested:
Accept the attached District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report.
Summary of Information:
The attached report details approved and proposed uses of DIF for FY2021. Acceptance of the report will serve
as approval for staff to expend DIF funds for the proposed uses as listed.
Attachments:
1.DIF Report - January 27, 2021
Preparer:Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director
Approved By:
Page 61 of 353
1 | Page DIF Report 1/27/2021
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
Monthly Report on District Improvement Funds
Report Date: January 27, 2021
Prepared By: Budget and Management
The County annually budgets $33,500 in discretionary funds, referred to as District Improvement
Funds (DIF), for each of the five magisterial districts that are used to improve the quality of life in each
district. The DIF allocations can be used for public improvements, purchase of county-owned
equipment, public events or programs, public school programs, and other legally allowable expenses.
In addition, if funds remain in DIF accounts at the end of each fiscal year, up to $37,500 may be
reserved per district at year-end to be utilized in a future year. On July 22, 2020, the Board authorized
a one-time waiver of the rollover cap on District Improvement Funds to make available in FY2021
funds that were unable to be spent due to the COVID-19 pandemic. With approval of this report, the
Board consents to the use of available reserve balance, if needed.
This report shows the cumulative use of District Improvement Funds for FY2021 as well as the current
funding available for each district. Requests to use funds for the current month are detailed below and
listed as a proposed use on the summary chart for that district. Upon Board of Supervisors acceptance
of this report each month, staff will execute proposed DIF requests.
There is one DIF use proposed this month. Acceptance of this report by the Board constitutes Board
approval of this request.
January 2021 Request:
Transfer up to $7,180.00 from the Matoaca District Improvement Fund to the Parks and
Recreation Department to assist in funding the purchase and installation of a new scoreboard
on baseball field three at Manchester High School. This request was originally made by
Chesterfield Little League. While the Board is not permitted to donate public funds to the
Chesterfield Little League, the Board can transfer public funds to the Parks and Recreation
Department to purchase and install scoreboards since this is a capital improvement to County
property. The purchase of materials and improvements must be accomplished in accordance
with the Virginia Public Procurement Act and County purchasing policies.
DIF Balances To Date:
Bermuda – Current Balance $54,776.56 (FY21 funding plus available reserves)
Request Date Use Amount
Page 62 of 353
2 | Page DIF Report 1/27/2021
Total FY2021 Bermuda uses $0.00
Clover Hill – Current Balance $29,109.16 (FY21 funding plus available reserves)
Request Date Use Amount
8/26/2020 Communities in Schools mentoring program $2,500.00
10/28/2020 Clover Hill High School new band uniforms $1,000.00
10/28/2020 Courthouse and West Providence Road trees $7,000.00
12/16/2020 Brown’s Bluff at Colony Pointe subdivision streetlights $1,011.66
Total FY2021 Clover Hill uses $11,511.66
Dale – Current Balance $74,654.71 (FY21 funding plus available reserves)
Matoaca – Current Balance $55,472.81 (FY21 funding plus available reserves)
Request Date Use Amount
11/18/2020 River Road streetlights $1,575.00
Proposed Manchester High School scoreboard $7,180.00
Total FY2021 Matoaca uses $8,755.00
Midlothian – Current Balance $91,442.00 (FY21 funding plus available reserves)
Request Date Use Amount
10/28/2020 Lloyd C. Bird High School football field upgrades and improvements $3,000.00
11/18/2020 Cogbill Road at Meadow Oaks Boulevard streetlights $1,575.00
11/18/2020 Airport entrance beautification $10,240.00
Total FY2021 Dale uses $14,815.00
Request Date Use Amount
11/18/2020 Oxford subdivision streetlights $1,575.00
Total FY2021 Midlothian uses $1,575.00
Page 63 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.A.1.
Subject:
Social Services Board
Board Action Requested:
Appoint Juan Santacoloma to the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Social Services Board.
Summary of Information:
The purpose of the Social Services Board is to administer and provide oversight for the services rendered by
the department. In collaboration with individuals, families and the community, our mission is to provide
advocacy and excellent services that encourage self-sufficiency; preserve and restore families; and protect the
well-being of children, the elderly and the disabled.
Request the appointment of Juan Santacoloma (Dale District) to serve as an at-large representative on the
Social Services Board for a partial term which shall be effective immediately and expire on June 30, 2024.
Under the existing Rules of Procedure, appointments to boards and committees are nominated at one meeting
and appointed at the subsequent meeting unless the Rules of Procedure are suspended by a unanimous vote of
the Board members present.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Kiva Rogers, Executive Director
Approved By:
Page 64 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.A.2.
Subject:
Personnel Appeals Board
Board Action Requested:
The Board of Supervisors is requested to appoint a new member to serve on the Personnel Appeals Board.
Summary of Information:
The purpose of the Personnel Appeals Board is to hear employee grievances relating to disciplinary actions or
discriminatory application of county personnel policies. The Personnel Appeals Board has the ability to modify
or reverse disciplinary decisions of department directors. The appointments are for a three-year term and are
not related to residing in a particular magisterial district.
At the January 27, 2021, meeting, the Board will consider one appointment to the Personnel Appeals Board.
The term for this appointment is a three-year term, which would begin on January 28, 2021, and end on
December 31, 2023.
Dr. Robert Turner’s second term on the Personnel Appeals Board expired on December 31, 2020, and he is not
eligible to serve another term. The Board of Supervisors is requested to nominate and appoint Ms. Regina
Derricott, Dale District representative, to serve the next full term, which would begin on January 28, 2021, and
end on December 31, 2023. Ms. Derricott, who retired in 2015 after a long career as Vice President & General
Manager of Macy’s-Chesterfield Towne Center, has indicated her willingness to serve.
Under existing Rules of Procedure, appointments to boards and committees are nominated at one meeting and
appointed at the subsequent meeting, unless the Rules of Procedure are suspended by a unanimous vote of the
Board members present. Nominees are voted on in the order in which they are nominated.
Attachments:
1.2020-12 Derricott, Regina (Dale)
Preparer:Mary Martin Selby, Director
Page 65 of 353
Approved By:
Page 66 of 353
COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA
APPLICATION FOR COUNTY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS,
COMMITTEES AND AUTHORITIES
Please complete the application, save it as a Word or PDF document, and email it to the Clerk to Board of Supervisors
at wilsonsu@chesterfield.gov. The application can also be faxed to (804)717-6297, or mailed to Deputy Clerk to
Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box 40, Chesterfield, VA 23832. For additional information regarding this application,
contact Susan Wilson at (804)796-7099.
All appointments to County Boards and Commissions are made by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors.
Please complete this application in its entirety. See the drop-down list of the boards/committees below.
Please indicate which board/committee you are interested in being appointed to and complete the information
below. A separate application must be submitted (no more than 3) for each board/committee that you are
interested in serving on.
Current Date 12/17/2020
Magisterial District Dale
First Name Regina
Last Name Derricott
Address 11210 Woodland Pond Parkway
City, State, Zip Chesterfield, VA, 23838
Preferred Phone 804-381-2984
Alternate Phone 804-777-8183
E-Mail Address regilex54@aol.com
BOARD/COMMITTEE: Personnel Appeals Board
EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts: Fashion Design with minor in Business
EMPLOYMENT AND/OR VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Retail Buyer: Boston Store : 1976-1986, DVP General
Manager for Hecht's-Macys: 1986-2015. Volunteered with Friends Association for Children, Salvation Army Boys &
Girls Club, and The Saint Paul's Baptist Church.In my job and volunteer experiences I had dealt with a variety of
Human Resources responsiblities.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: I was on the Board of Friends Assocation for Children. I am involved with various
Outreach activities focused on Food Programs thru Feedmore, working with Caritas and the homeless population,
and organizations that support our Seniors.
SPECIAL SKILLS: (Please note skills not covered in this application-bilingual, multicultural interaction, youth outreach, etc.)
Click here to enter text.
PLEASE SHARE YOUR INTEREST AND COMMITMENT IN SERVING ON THIS COMMITTEE:
Based on my various levels of experience with opening and managing large retail stores; where I dealt with personnel
issues on every level. My volunteer experiences which included a skill set needed to properly execute disciplinary
actions. I feel I have the background to be a great addition to this team.
Page 67 of 353
COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA
APPLICATION FOR COUNTY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS,
COMMITTEES AND AUTHORITIES
Please complete the application, save it as a Word or PDF document, and email it to the Clerk to Board of Supervisors
at wilsonsu@chesterfield.gov. The application can also be faxed to (804)717-6297, or mailed to Deputy Clerk to
Board of Supervisors, P.O. Box 40, Chesterfield, VA 23832. For additional information regarding this application,
contact Susan Wilson at (804)796-7099.Page 68 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.a.
Subject:
Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Judith A. McCartney, Police Department, Upon Her Retirement
Board Action Requested:
The adoption of the attached resolution.
Summary of Information:
Mrs. Judith A. McCartney will retire from the Police Department after provided nearly 29 years of service to
the residents of Chesterfield County.
Attachments:
1.McCartney, J.
Preparer:Jeffrey Katz, Chief of Police
Approved By:
Page 69 of 353
RECOGNIZING JUDITH A. MCCARTNEY UPON HER RETIREMENT
WHEREAS, Judith A. McCartney will retire from the Chesterfield County
Police Department on February 1, 2021 after providing nearly 29 years of
outstanding quality service to the residents of Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney began her association with the Police
Department at the age of 15 when she became a member of Law Enforcement
Explorer Post 609. She continued to support the program by serving as an
advisor and has mentored several Chesterfield County youths; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney has faithfully served the county in the
positions of Police Dispatcher, Instructional Assistant for Special
Education with Chesterfield County Public Schools, Emergency Communications
Officer and Forensic Investigator, where she has achieved career
development progressions to the positions of Senior, Master and Career
Forensic Investigator; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney is a graduate of the 88th session of the
Virginia Forensic Science Academy;
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney has served as a General Instructor, an
advisory committee member of the Peer Support team, and is trained in
Crisis Intervention; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney had an integral role over many years on the Peer
Support Team, providing assistance to others who were faced with emotional
trauma and hardships. She received a Chief's Commendation for the arduous
work involved in achieving accreditation of the team as a Critical Incident
Stress Management Program by the Virginia Department of Emergency Medical
Services; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney received the Meritorious Service Award for her
leadership and contributions on the Centennial Committee which was tasked
with developing a plan to research, document and celebrate the Chesterfield
County Police Department's 100-year anniversary; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney was awarded a Chief's Commendation for her
investigative excellence during several trips to North Carolina to assist
with executing search warrants in a Chesterfield homicide case, which
resulted in the apprehension and confessions from suspects; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney was recognized with a Chief's Commendation for
her tireless forensic efforts and teamwork in a murder investigation that
covered three days and required gathering evidence from seven crime scenes
and two vehicles. Due to the multiple lab submission of evidence and court
testimony, the suspect was subsequently found guilty on all charges;
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney is recognized for her strong work ethic, her
teamwork, and her excellent human relations skills which she has utilized
in working effectively with all areas within the Police Department and in
serving the residents of Chesterfield County; and
Page 70 of 353
WHEREAS, Mrs. McCartney has provided the Chesterfield County Police
Department with many years of loyal and dedicated service; and
WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss
Mrs. McCartney's diligent service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of
Supervisors publicly recognizes Judith A. McCartney, and extends on behalf
of its members and the residents of Chesterfield County, appreciation for
her service to the county, congratulations upon her retirement, and best
wishes for a long and happy retirement.
Page 71 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.b.
Subject:
Resolution Recognizing Ms. Maryln Anderson, Department of Social Services Upon Her Retirement
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of the attached resolution.
Summary of Information:
Ms. Maryln Anderson retired from the Department of Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Social Services after
providing 30 years of service.
Attachments:
1.Maryln Anderson DSS
Preparer:Kiva Rogers, Executive Director
Approved By:
Page 72 of 353
RECOGNIZING MS. MARYLN ANDERSON UPON HER RETIREMENT
WHEREAS, Ms. Maryln Anderson began her tenure of public
service with Chesterfield County as a Food Stamp Employment and
Training worker with the Chesterfield - Colonial Heights
Department of Social Services on June 4, 1990 and later worked
on the Employment Services Team; and
WHEREAS, in her role as Employment Services Family Services
Specialist, Ms. Anderson coordinated training and employment
services for customers in the Virginia Initiative for Education
and Work(VIEW)program providing advocacy and excellent services
that encourage self-sufficiency; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Anderson established a reputation of being a
team player, collaborating with other units and county
departments whether she was working in the agency food pantry,
transporting customers to the clothes closet, or organizing
resource fairs; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Anderson was acknowledged for the creative
ways she ensured her customers’ needs were met never letting
program spending limits impede her ability to address a need;
and
WHEREAS, Ms. Anderson was described as an encourager,
cheerleader and mentor to her customers and co-workers,
instilling hope in all she encountered until they could hold
that hope for themselves; and
WHEREAS, throughout her career Ms. Anderson has been
steadfast in her commitment to the families of Chesterfield
County and the City of Colonial Heights often receiving letters
from her customers about the impact she had on their lives.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Maryln Anderson and extends
on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield
County, appreciation for her service to the county,
congratulations upon her retirement, and best wishes for a long
and happy retirement.
Page 73 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.c.
Subject:
Resolution Recognizing Ms. LaRonica Jennings, Department of Social Services Upon Her Retirement
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of the attached resolution.
Summary of Information:
Ms. LaRonica Jennings retired from the Department of Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Social Services after
providing 19 years of service.
Attachments:
1.LaRonica Jennings DSS
Preparer:Kiva Rogers, Executive Director
Approved By:
Page 74 of 353
RECOGNIZING MS. LARONICA JENNINGS UPON HER RETIREMENT
WHEREAS, Ms. LaRonica Jennings began her career in public service
with the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services
19 years ago when she served in Family Services on the Assessment and
Resource Team (formerly FAAST and Integrated Intake)and most recently
as the Family Services Specialist intake worker for Adult Services;
and
WHEREAS, in her role as Family Services Specialist with the
Assessment and Resource Team, Ms. Jennings interviewed and assessed
the needs of and provided resources to customers who came to the
agency and those who called requesting emergency services; and
WHEREAS, in her role as a Family Services Specialist with the
Assessment and Resource Team, Ms. Jennings was part of a team that
developed the concept and process to integrate benefits and services
to provide front-end resources to citizens; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Jennings was one of three SS/SSDI Outreach, Access,
and Recovery (SOAR) certified workers in the agency which has an
extensive certification process that requires exceptional writing
skills; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Jennings served as the Family Services Specialist
intake worker for Adult Services where she provided information and
referrals, completed intakes for long-term care screenings for
children and adults, and received reports of abuse, neglect and
exploitation of persons 60 and over and persons with disabilities age
18 and over; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Jennings, was embraced and accepted by peers as a
knowledgeable member of the social work profession and supported the
transformation of citizens by providing exceptional customer service
to citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board
of Supervisors recognizes Ms. LaRonica Jennings and extends on behalf
of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation
for her service to the county, congratulations upon her retirement,
and best wishes for a long a happy retirement.
Page 75 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.d.
Subject:
Resolution Recognizing Captain Charles Gartman, Sheriff's Office Upon His Retirement
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of the attached resolution.
Summary of Information:
Captain Charles Gartman retired from the Sheriff's Office after providing over 20 years of service.
Attachments:
1.Resolution-Gartman2
Preparer:Anna Denton, HR Manager
Approved By:
Page 76 of 353
RECOGNIZING CAPTAIN CHARLES F. GARTMAN, JR.
UPON HIS RETIREMENT
WHEREAS, Captain Charles F. Gartman, Jr. has faithfully
served Chesterfield County for over 20 years; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman was hired on January 22, 2001, and
was assigned to the Correctional Services Bureau after graduating
the 10th Basic Sheriff’s Academy as the Class President; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman joined the Chesterfield County
Sheriff’s Office as a Deputy under Sheriff Clarence G. Williams,
Jr., Dennis S. Proffitt, and current Sheriff Karl S. Leonard; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman served as a Deputy in the Jail
Security Division from January 2001 through March 2004; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman served as a Sergeant in the Jail
Security Division from March 2004 to October 2006 earning
certifications as a Virginia Department of Criminal Justice
Services General and Driving Instructor; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman served as the Chesterfield Sheriff’s
Office’s primary instructor for the Field Training Officer Program
along with Suicide Awareness and Prevention matters; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman served as the Sheriff’s Office Human
Resources Unit Commander from October 2006 until his promotion to
Lieutenant in 2007; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman was promoted and served as a
Lieutenant in all areas within the Correctional Services Bureau as
well as the Courts Services Division from July 2007 until May 2019;
and
WHEREAS, during this time, Captain Gartman led many Process
Action Teams including facets of opening of the new jail facility,
Personal Qualification Standards for newly promoted Sergeants and
Lieutenants, serving as a team lead during a perfect Virginia Board
of Correction Jail Certification in February 2014 as well leading
the creation of the Chesterfield County Sheriff’s Office Peer
Support Team which was recognized with Accreditation from the
Commonwealth of Virginia marking the first time in the Commonwealth
that a Police Department and Sheriff’s Office in the same locality
achieved this milestone; and
Page 77 of 353
WHEREAS, as Support Services Division Commander, Captain
Gartman oversaw the transition of issued weapon from the Glock 23
to the Glock 17 and managed the Correctional Service Bureau’s
supply of personal protective equipment through the onset of the
Coronavirus pandemic; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman trained, mentored and developed
countless subordinates in all operational areas of the Sheriff’s
Office, and his knowledge and experiences were sought throughout
his career; and
WHEREAS, Captain Gartman has earned several letters of
appreciation throughout his career along with several awards
including the Board of Corrections and Virginia Law Enforcement
Accreditation, Outstanding Attendance, Good Conduct, Pistol and
Rifle, Specialized Service, Community Service and Unit Citation
awards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding contributions of
Captain Charles F. Gartman, Jr., expresses the appreciation of all
residents for his service to Chesterfield County and extends
appreciation for his dedicated service to the county and
congratulations upon his retirement, as well as best wishes for a
long and happy retirement.
Page 78 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.e.
Subject:
Resolution Supporting Construction of the Glade View Trace Apartments at Iron Bridge Road, Using Low
Income Housing Tax Credits Issued by the Virginia Housing Development Authority Under Their
Revitalization Area Designation
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of the attached resolution that will allow financing through the VHDA revitalization area designation.
Summary of Information:
Glade View Trace Apartments at Iron Bridge Road is a proposed multifamily apartment complex located along
Iron Bridge Road, east of S. Chalkley Road. The developer for the apartments, Surber Development and
Consulting, LLC, has applied for low-income housing tax credit financing through VHDA. To qualify for
revitalization area application points, state law requires that the Board of Supervisors pass a resolution
supporting the site for the apartments as a revitalization area. The benefit of this program to Chesterfield
County is to provide high quality affordable housing at locations that need such housing to support economic
development. The addition of these apartments will make a more sustainable and attractive mixed-use area by
adding a mix of households. The high-quality apartments also provide a more stable (i.e., not cost-
burdened) and desirable economic mix of residents in the area. For the developer to have the opportunity to
compete favorably for this type of financing, the Chesterfield County Board of
Supervisors shall by resolution make a determination that providing residential housing serving low to
moderate income households supports the revitalization and economic development of this area.
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution.
Attachments:
1.Glade View Trace Resolution
2.Glad View Trace Apartments Project Map
Preparer:Daniel Cohen, Director
Approved By:
Page 79 of 353
Page 80 of 353
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING
THE GLADE VIEW TRACE APARTMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO Section 36-55.30:2.A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as
amended, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, desires to designate
the area described on Exhibit A attached hereto as a revitalization area:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY DETERMINED as follows:
The above-referenced development is located on an area in need of revitalization in the County
of Chesterfield, Virginia. The revitalization area is blighted, deteriorated, deteriorating or, if not
rehabilitated, likely to deteriorate by reason that the buildings, improvements or other facilities in such
area are subject to one or more of the following conditions: dilapidation; obsolescence; overcrowding;
inadequate ventilation, light or sanitation; excessive land coverage; deleterious land use; or faulty or
inadequate design, quality or condition; and private enterprise and investment are not reasonably
expected, without assistance, to produce the construction or rehabilitation of decent, safe and sanitary
housing and supporting facilities that will meet the needs of low and moderate income persons and
families in such area and will induce other persons and families to live within such area and thereby
create a desirable economic mix of residents in such area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 36-55.30:2.A
of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, the area is hereby designated as a revitalization area.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, on the 27th
day of January 2021.
Page 81 of 353
Exhibit A
GPINs 7796528746, 7796528969, 7806520565, 7806521448, 7806521556, as shown on
the attached map.
Page 82 of 353
IRON BRIDGE RD
CARVER HEIGHTS DR
S C H A L K L E Y R D
N
E
N
A
G
R
O
V
E
L
N
C H A L K L E Y R D
C H E S T E R G R O V E D R
W B O O K E R B L V D
E B O O K E R B L V D
L
I
F
E
T
R
L
IRON BRIDGE PLZ
BL
O S S O M P O I NT R D
M A G N O LI A C O V E C I R
M
A
G
N
O
LI
A S
H
O
R
E L
N
BRANDERS CREEK DR
GREAT SWAN LN
R
U
B
Y
S
T
O
N
E
D
R
Q U I E T P
IN
E D R
B R A N D E R S B R I D G E R D
E S T O N EPAT H G A R D E N D R
A V A C L A I R E D R
IRON BRIDGE RD
μ 00.10.2
Miles This is an ArcGIS map prepared by Chesterfield County Department of Community Enhancement.
This information is only for representation purpose.
Glade View Trace Apartments
Legend
Project Site
Parcel
Streets
Names > 3600
1/13/21
Page 83 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.1.f.
Subject:
Resolution Supporting Construction of the Old Hundred Trace Apartments at Old Hundred Road, Using Low
Income Housing Tax Credits Issued by the Virginia Housing Development Authority Under Their
Revitalization Area Designation
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of the attached resolution that will allow financing through the VHDA revitalization area designation.
Summary of Information:
Old Hundred Trace Apartments is a proposed multifamily apartment complex located along Old Hundred
Road, west of Center Pointe Parkway. The developer for the apartments, Taft Mills Group, has applied for low-
income housing tax credit financing through VHDA. To qualify for revitalization area application points, state
law requires that the Board of Supervisors pass a resolution supporting the site for the apartments as a
revitalization area. The benefit of this program to Chesterfield County is to provide high quality affordable
housing at locations that need such housing to support economic development. The addition of these
apartments will make a more sustainable and attractive mixed-use area by adding a mix of households. The
high-quality apartments also provide a more stable (i.e., not cost-burdened)
and desirable economic mix of residents in the area. For the developer to have the opportunity to compete
favorably for this type of financing, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors shall by resolution make a
determination that providing residential housing serving low to moderate income households supports the
revitalization and economic development of this area.
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution.
Attachments:
1.Old Hundred Trace Resolution
2.Old Hundred Trace Apartments Project Map
Preparer:Daniel Cohen, Director
Approved By:
Page 84 of 353
Page 85 of 353
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING
THE OLD HUNDRED TRACE APARTMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO Section 36-55.30:2.A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as
amended, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, desires to designate
the area described on Exhibit A attached hereto as a revitalization area:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY DETERMINED as follows:
The above-referenced development is located on an area in need of revitalization in the County
of Chesterfield, Virginia. The revitalization area is blighted, deteriorated, deteriorating or, if not
rehabilitated, likely to deteriorate by reason that the buildings, improvements or other facilities in such
area are subject to one or more of the following conditions: dilapidation; obsolescence; overcrowding;
inadequate ventilation, light or sanitation; excessive land coverage; deleterious land use; or faulty or
inadequate design, quality or condition; and private enterprise and investment are not reasonably
expected, without assistance, to produce the construction or rehabilitation of decent, safe and sanitary
housing and supporting facilities that will meet the needs of low and moderate income persons and
families in such area and will induce other persons and families to live within such area and thereby
create a desirable economic mix of residents in such area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 36-55.30:2.A
of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, the area is hereby designated as a revitalization area.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, on the 27th
day of January 2021.
Page 86 of 353
Exhibit A
GPIN 7206945193, as shown on the attached map.
Page 87 of 353
OLD HUNDRED RD
W O O L R I D G E R D
CENTER POINTE PKWY
S
W
IF
T L
N
W
A
T
E
R
M
IL
L P
K
W
Y
W I N D M I L L R I D G E D R
W A T E R M I L L L A K E T R L
T O M A H A W K C R E E K R D
H
O
L
D
I
N
G
P
O
N
D
L
N
S E D B E R R Y L N
W A T E R B E E C H R D
ROSE MILL CIR
CREEKPOINTE CIR
REDBORNE CT
R O S E F A M I L Y D R
C
R
E
E
K
G
L
E
N
L
N
TOMAHAWK RIDGE DR
S T O N E M I L L L A K E C T
H A L L F O R D C T
CA
M
E
L
I
A
C
I
R
S T O N E M I L L L A K E T E R
CENTER POINTE PKWY
μ 00.10.2
Miles This is an ArcGIS map prepared by Chesterfield County Department of Community Enhancement.
This information is only for representation purpose.
Old Hundred Trace Apartments
Legend
Project Site
Parcel
Streets
Names > 3600
1/13/21
Page 88 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.2.a.1.
Subject:
Acceptance of Two Parcels of Land Adjacent to Genito Road and Moseley Road from Robert T. Lind
Board Action Requested:
Accept the conveyance of two parcels of land containing a total of 0.288 acres adjacent to Genito Road and
Moseley Road from Robert T. Lind
and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed.
Summary of Information:
Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of two parcels of land containing a total of
0.288 acres adjacent to Genito Road and Moseley Road from Robert T. Lind. This conveyance is for the
ultimate right of way for the development of Lind Pond and has been reviewed by the site plan team.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Robert L Lind Dedication Sketch
2.Robert L Lind Dedication Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 89 of 353
G
E
N
I
T
O
R
D
M
O
S
E
L
E
Y
R
D
AHERN RD
M O S E L E Y R D
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Acceptance of Two Parcels of Land Adjacent to Genito Road and Moseley Road from Robert T. Lind
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 500 feet
µ
0.079 Acre Quitclaim
0.209 Acre Dedication
Page 90 of 353
Bruce Robertson Land Surveying, P.C.
Page 91 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.2.a.2.
Subject:
Acceptance of Eight Parcels of Land Adjacent to Winterfield Road and Winterfield Lane from TRP
Winterfield, LLC
Board Action Requested:
Accept the conveyance of eight parcels of land containing a total of 0.860 acres adjacent to Winterfield Road
and Winterfield Lane from TRP Winterfield, LLC and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed.
Summary of Information:
Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of eight parcels of land containing a total of
0.860 acres adjacent to Winterfield Road and Winterfield Lane from TRP Winterfield, LLC. This conveyance
is for the development of Promenade At Winterfield and has been reviewed by the subdivision and site plan
teams.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.TRP Winterfield LLC Dedication Sketch
2.TRP Winterfield LLC Dedication Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 92 of 353
MIDLOTHIAN TPKE
WESTFIELD RD
W
I
N
T
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
R
D
L E G O R D O N D R
WINTERFIELD LN
WINTERVIEW PKWY
MARTINET XING
T O W E R L I G H T R D
W I N T E R F I E L D P L
MIDLOTHIAN WOOD BLVD
W I N T E R B R E E Z E D R
C H A R T E R C O L O N Y P K W Y
MICHAUX SPRINGS DR
M I C H A U X V I L L A G E D R
VILLAGE MILL DR
W
I
N
F
R
E
E
B
R
A
N
C
H
A
L
W
I
N
T
E
R
L
A
K
E
D
R
W
I
N
T
E
R
L
A
K
E
C
T
MIDLOTHIAN TPKE
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Acceptance of Eight Parcels of Land Adjacent to Winterfield Road and Winterfield Lane from TRP Winterfield, LLC
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 400 feet
µ
0.564 Acre Dedication
0.018 Acre Dedication
0.129 Acre to be Quitclaimed
0.066 Acre Dedication
0.002 Acre Dedication 0.030 Acre to be Quitclaimed
0.007 Acre Dedication
0.044 Acre Dedication
Page 93 of 353
Page 94 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.2.a.3.
Subject:
Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Trollingwood Land, L.L.C.
Board Action Requested:
Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.002 acres adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from
Trollingwood Land, L.L.C. and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed.
Summary of Information:
Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.002 acres
adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Trollingwood Land, L.L.C. This conveyance is for the ultimate right
of way of Moores Lake Road for the development of Bon Secours Chester FSED and has been reviewed by the
site plan team.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Trollingwood Land LLC Dedication Sketch
2.Trollingwood Land LLC Dedication Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 95 of 353
W HUNDRED RD
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
D
A
V
I
S
H
W
Y
R
O
C
K
H
I
L
L
R
D
M
O
O
R
E
S
L
A
K
E
R
D
M
O
U
N
T
C
L
AI
R R
D
SO U T H L A N D D R
P E R D U E S P R I N G S D R
B
E
R
M
U
D
A
C
R
O
S
S
R
O
A
D
L
N
F S 1 4
WOODSIDE RD
REDWATER RIDGE RD
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
D
A
V
I
S
H
W
Y
W HUNDRED RD
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Trollingwood Land, L.L.C.
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 450 feet
µ0.002 Acre Dedication
Page 96 of 353
Page 97 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.2.a.4.
Subject:
Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Americana Park, L.L.C.
Board Action Requested:
Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.008 acres adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from
Americana Park, L.L.C. and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed.
Summary of Information:
Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.008 acres
adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Americana Park, L.L.C. This conveyance is for the ultimate right of
way of Moores Lake Road for the development of Bon Secours Chester FSED and has been reviewed by the
site plan team.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Americana Park LLC Dedication Sketch
2.Americana Park LLC Dedication Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 98 of 353
W HUNDRED RD
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
D
A
V
I
S
H
W
Y
R
O
C
K
H
I
L
L
R
D
M
O
O
R
E
S
L
A
K
E
R
D
M
O
U
N
T
C
L
AI
R R
D
SO U T H L A N D D R
P E R D U E S P R I N G S D R
B
E
R
M
U
D
A
C
R
O
S
S
R
O
A
D
L
N
F S 1 4
WOODSIDE RD
REDWATER RIDGE RD
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
D
A
V
I
S
H
W
Y
W HUNDRED RD
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from Americana Park, L.L.C.
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 450 feet
µ0.008 Acre Dedication
Page 99 of 353
Page 100 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.2.b.1.
Subject:
Request Permission to Install Private Sewer and Water Services Within Private Easements to Serve Property at
5214 Cogbill Road and Approve Transfer of Water Capital Cost Recovery Charge Credit
Board Action Requested:
Grant Maria Josefa Ramos permission to install private sewer and water services within private easements to
serve property at 5214 Cogbill Road and approve transfer of water capital cost recovery charge credit and
authorize the County Administrator to execute the sewer and water connection agreement and the transfer of
water capital cost recovery charge credit agreement.
Summary of Information:
Maria Josefa Ramos has requested permission to install private sewer and water services within private
easements to serve property at 5214 Cogbill Road and use the water capital cost recovery charge credit from
5232 Cogbill Road for 5214 Cogbill Road. This request has been reviewed by the Utilities Department.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Maria Ramos Sewer and Water Exception Request Sketch
2.Maria Ramos Sewer and Water Exception Request Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 101 of 353
C O G B I L L R D
I R O N B R I D G E R D
H
O
W
E
L
L
D
R
LAKEMERE DR
LITTLE CREEK LN
G I L L I N G R D
MICHAEL MOODY JR DR
FS 11
COUNTRY MANOR LN VILLAGE LAKE CT P O R T R A I T P L
I R O N B R I D G E R D
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Request Permission to Install Private Sewer and Water Services Within Private Easements to Serve Property at 5214 Cogbill Roadand Approve Transfer of Water Capital Cost Recovery Charge Credit
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 400 feet
µ
Proposed Sewer and Water Exceptionand Transfer of Water Capital Cost Recovery Charge Credit
5214
5232
Page 102 of 353
G
P a c e l R e q u e s t i n g
S e w e r a n d W a t e r E x c e p t i o n
Proposed Private Sewer and Water Easement (encumbers Entire Parcel)
x v
Proposed 10' x 10' Public Water Easement
xv
x v
36526001
87486000
62155400
95835920
19925233
60625128
38755925
35116100
62595940
28875911
12306015
22245214
07886101
56226101
00638956124
00437026120
01043796136
00841876130
49865909
14746111
23755921
32335208
11165232
26426003
00566106119
77726116
7586593082795924
01245726200
32395200
00971986131
55955903
I R O N B R I D G E R D 1 0
C O G B I L L R D 6 3 8 H
O
W
E
L
L
D
R
6
3
9
I R O N B R I D G E R D 1 0
C O G B I L L R D 6 3 8
Chesterfield County Department of UtilitiesReal Property Office
CHESTERFIELD COUNTYDEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES
1 inch = 100 feet´
Page 103 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.3.
Subject:
Acceptance of State Roads
Board Action Requested:
Adoption of resolutions for the referenced state roads acceptances.
Summary of Information:
Dale District:
Silverleaf Section C2
Silverleaf Section C3
Silverleaf Section E
Silverleaf Section H1
Midlothian District:
Hartford Hill Townes Section 1 - Walmart Way Extension - Portion
Attachments:
1.2021-01-27 Dale - Silverleaf Section C2
2.2021-01-27 Dale - Silverleaf Section C3
3.2021-01-27 Dale - Silverleaf Section E
4.2021-01-27 Dale - Silverleaf Section H1
5.2021-01-27 Midlothian - Hartford Hill Townes Section 1 - Walmart Way Extension - Portion
Preparer:Scott Smedley, Director of Environmental Engineering
Approved By:
Page 104 of 353
Page 105 of 353
Page 106 of 353
Page 107 of 353
Page 108 of 353
Page 109 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.4.
Subject:
Award Contract and Appropriate BMP Reserve Balance for the Dredging of Evergreen Lake Stormwater Pond
Board Action Requested:
The Board of Supervisors is requested to appropriate $200,000 of BMP reserves and award the contract to
Merrell Bros, Inc. in the amount of $323,651.80 and authorize the Director of Procurement to execute the
necessary documents.
Summary of Information:
The Evergreen Lake stormwater pond is one of the first residential stormwater ponds the county accepted
responsibility for maintenance, approximately 20 years ago. Depending on the size, drainage area and age,
stormwater ponds require dredging to maintain the design volume and functionality. This project will dredge
the stormwater pond and restore the functionality of the pond for removing stormwater pollutants. The Board
is requested to appropriate $200,000 of BMP reserves to fund a portion of the project with the balance funded
from the major maintenance stormwater infrastructure account. Staff recommends approval.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Scott Smedley, Director of Environmental Engineering
Approved By:
Page 110 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.5.
Subject:
Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of Grant Funds from the Department of Homeland Security and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency for the 2020 Emergency Management Performance Supplemental
Grant
Board Action Requested:
Authorize the receipt and appropriation of additional grant funding in the amount of $74,804 for the 2020
Emergency Management Performance Supplemental Grant to enhance the planning, response and recovery
efforts to public health emergencies including COVID-19 in Chesterfield County.
Summary of Information:
This request is for authorization to accept and appropriate the additional funding of $74,804. A 50% in-kind
match is required and will be met through expenses associated with CARES funded emergency management
technology upgrades. The total project cost, including the in-kind match, is $149,608. The grant award will be
utilized to enhance emergency management’s preparedness, response and recovery capabilities to the COVID-
19 pandemic and other public health emergencies in Chesterfield County.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Loy Senter, Fire Chief
Approved By:
Page 111 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.6.
Subject:
Initiate an Application for a Rezoning From Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) and Conditional Use
Planned Development to Permit Exceptions to Ordinance Requirements and Development Standards to Permit
a Single Family Subdivision With Ten (10) Lots on 5.0 Acres Located at 3901 Dupuy Road
Board Action Requested:
Initiate an application for Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) and conditional use planned
development to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements and development standards to permit a single
family subdivision on 5.0 acres, identified as Tax ID 793-617-9609; appoint Andrew G. Gillies, Director of
Planning, as the agent for the Board; and waive the disclosure requirements. (Attachment 1)
Summary of Information:
Mr. Carroll is requesting the Board initiate a rezoning request from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12)
and conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements and development
standards to permit a single family subdivision.
Virginia law permits the Board of Supervisors to initiate a rezoning application on the principles of good
zoning practice and general welfare to consider land uses that are not permitted under current zoning
regulations. Consideration of this request will provide for a public process to review and determine if any
adverse impacts would be generated on the property(s), on adjacent property owners, or the County in general
and, if so, to determine what conditions might alleviate any adverse impacts and enhance land use
compatibility.
Attachments:
1.3901 Dupuy Rd
Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning
Approved By:
Page 112 of 353
W A L K E R A V E
R O S E W O O D L N
T H E L M A A V E
BOLLINGER DR
N E W R D
PEACHTREE ST
T
E
M
P
L
E C
T
S T A R R C T
D
U
P
U
Y
R
D
W O O D P E C K E R R D
V A R A N D A L N
T
E
M
P
L
E
P
L
J
U
L
E
P
D
R
T E M P L E A V E
R-7 A
R-7
R-7
A
A
A
R-9
500 0 500250FeetMap 1: Subject Property
Acreage: 5.0Address: 3901 DUPUY ROADGPIN: 793-617-9609
/
Streams
Resource Protection Area
Page 113 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.7.a.
Subject:
To Consider a Lease for the Baseball Facility at James River High School
Board Action Requested:
Staff requests the Board set a public hearing for February 24, 2021 to consider a lease for the baseball facility
at James River High School to Rapids Baseball, Inc.
Summary of Information:
The county has proposed a lease for the baseball facility at James River High School, located at 3700 James
River Road, Midlothian, Virginia 23113, to Rapids Baseball, Incorporated (RBI). The facility was constructed
by RBI and has been maintained by RBI for over a decade. It consists of a varsity baseball field with field
lights, a junior varsity baseball field, and a restroom/concession and locker room facility.
The initial term of this lease shall be Five (5) years, commencing March 1, 2021. RBI will pay a fixed annual
rental during the initial term of this lease of One and 00/100 Dollar ($1.00).
Staff requests a public hearing be set for February 24, 2021, for the purposes of considering a lease of James
River High School baseball facility.
Attachments:
1.RBI County Lease 1.2021
Preparer:Scott Zaremba, Deputy County Administrator
Approved By:
Page 114 of 353
Page 115 of 353
Page 116 of 353
Page 117 of 353
Page 118 of 353
Page 119 of 353
Page 120 of 353
Page 121 of 353
Page 122 of 353
Page 123 of 353
Page 124 of 353
Page 125 of 353
Page 126 of 353
Page 127 of 353
Page 128 of 353
Page 129 of 353
Page 130 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.7.b.
Subject:
To Amend Section 9-25 of the County Code to Adjust the County's Tax Relief Thresholds to Accommodate the
CY2020 Social Security Administration Cost of Living Adjustment
Board Action Requested:
Set a Public Hearing to Amend Section 9-25 of the County Code to Adjust the County's Tax Relief Thresholds to Accommodate the CY2020 Social
Security Administration Cost of Living Adjustment
Summary of Information:
In accordance with Section 58.1- 3210 of the Code of Virginia, Chesterfield County has exercised the option to provide real estate tax relief to
seniors aged 65 and over and citizens who are deemed permanently and totally disabled as defined by Section 58.1-3217 of the Code of Virginia.
The real estate tax relief program is administered by the Commissioner of the Revenue. The Board of Supervisors has the authority to set eligibility
requirements for income and assets to quality for tax relief. These are set out in County Code Sections 9-24 to 9-27.
The proposed amendment to the Tax Relief Program would adjust the 100 percent tax relief threshold in an amount equal to the CY2020 cost of
living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security benefit and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits approved by the Social Security
Administration (SSA).
Program eligibility requirements for the Tax Relief program are such that all participants are also eligible for the SSA benefits to which the SSA
COLA applies. As such, tying the income threshold for the 100 percent relief bracket to any increases in SSA benefits will prevent participants who
currently qualify for 100 percent relief from being made ineligible due to an increase in SSA COLAs. Additionally, as this amendment adjusts the
income limit at an amount equal to participants' income levels, this change it not anticipated to result in an additional cost to the County.
In March 2020, the Board of Supervisors voted to amend the upper limit of the 100% relief bracket to accommodate prior year SSA COLA
increases. This action would continue the effort to adjust the 100% tax relief bracket to accommodate the most recent SSA COLA of 1.60% (applied
to CY2020 income.)
Specifically, this action will amend income thresholds for the County's Elderly and Disabled Tax Relief Program as follows:
Current Income Level Proposed Income
Level
Tax Relief %
Up to $28,000 Up to $28,500 100%
$28,001-$39,000 $28,501-$39,000 60%
$39,001-$52,000 $39,001-$52,000 35%
Attachments:
1.Ordinance amending 9-25
Page 131 of 353
Preparer:
Approved By:
Page 132 of 353
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING
AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 9-25 RELATING TO
SCHEDULE OF EXEMPTIONS PERMITTED
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County:
(1)That Section 9-25 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended
and re-enacted to read as follows:
Sec. 9-25 – Schedule of Exemptions Permitted
The amount of exemption from real estate taxation under this section shall be determined in
accordance with the following schedule:
Income Categories Percentage of Exemption
(i) $0.00 through $27,200.00 28,500.00 100
(ii) $27,201.00 through $39,000.00 28,501.00 through $39,000.00 60
(iii) $39,001.00 through $52,000.00 39,001.00 through $52,000.00 35
(2)That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
0637:118813.1
Page 133 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.7.c.
Subject:
To Consider Amendments to Chapter 12 of the County Code Regarding Setback Requirements for Private
Wells
Board Action Requested:
Set a public hearing to consider amendments to Chapter 12 of the County Code regarding setback requirements
for private wells.
Summary of Information:
Chapter 12 of the County Code contains setback requirements for private wells and certain features located on
the same property or other nearby properties. Many of the County’s setback requirements mirror the
requirements found in state regulations, but in several instances the County Code goes further than what is
required by state law.
In consultation with the Health Department, staff has determined that certain of the County’s requirements that
go beyond state law are not necessary and can impose undue restrictions on citizens’ ability to install wells or
accessory features on their property. Specifically, staff is recommending that the Board amend the County
Code to mirror the setback requirements found in state law with respect to accessory structures and building
foundations. Staff also recommends eliminating the setback requirement for pools, which the Health
Department believes does not pose any health risk. For the few remaining County requirements that exceed the
state law requirements, the County Code would continue to allow for case-by-case exceptions based upon the
unique circumstances of the property at issue.
The proposed amendments would take effect immediately upon adoption after a public hearing.
Attachments:
1.Ordinance - Chap. 12 Private Wells
Preparer:Andrew Fulwider, Assistant County Attorney
Approved By:
Page 134 of 353
Page 135 of 353
1
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY
AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 12-53
RELATING TO PRIVATE WELLS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County:
(1) That Section 12-53 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is
amended and re-enacted to read as follows:
CHAPTER 12 - HEALTH AND SANITATION
o o o
ARTICLE IV. PRIVATE WELLS
o o o
Sec. 12-53. Private well regulations.
1. Residential subdivision. If required by the health department, a hydrologic study for a
proposed residential subdivision shall be conducted which provides a scientific determination
of the quality and quantity of potable water in the underlying aquifer under both normal and
drought conditions.
2. Building permit. For lots to be developed with private wells, developed springs, or cisterns,
the building official shall not issue a building permit until after the health department has
approved the location, facility and water completion report. The building permit shall state
any restrictions or qualifications of the health department approval.
3. No portion of a private well or water line serving a private well shall be located on another lot
or parcel of property unless such portion is located within a recorded easement.
4. Setbacks. Wells installed after June 22, 2016 shall be set back from features located both
onsite and offsite as outlined in table 1. Further, any feature shown in Table 1 constructed
after June 22, 2016 shall be set back from wells the distances as outlined in table 1. However,
a replacement well may encroach into the setbacks shown in table 1 provided the
encroachment is no further into the required setbacks than the existing well. The health
department may grant exceptions to these setback requirements based upon unique
circumstances such as, but not limited to, environmental constraints, topography, or other
physical features, provided that such exceptions shall not result in noncompliance with state
regulations.
Page 136 of 353
2
Table 1. Minimum Setback Requirements
Feature
Setback (feet)
Class III C or IV
Private Well
Class III A or B
Private Well
Accessory structure with soil based termite treatment 50 50
Accessory structure without soil based termite treatment 10 10
Building foundation with soil based termite treatment 50 50
Building foundation without soil based termite treatment 10 10
Drainfield or reserve area 100 50
Onsite sewage system
(except drainfield or disposal area) 50 50
Pool 10 10
Property line 50 25
Utility lines, in ground 10 10
Other Contaminant sources* 100 50
* The term "other contaminant sources" includes, but is not limited to, underground storage
tanks, animal containment areas and hog lots.
o o o
(2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
Page 137 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.7.d.
Subject:
To Authorize Advertisement of 2021 Calendar Year Tax Rate and Other Required Legal Notices and Public
Hearings related to the Real Estate Tax
Board Action Requested:
Authorize Advertisement of 2021 Calendar Year Tax Rate and Other Required Legal Notices and Public
Hearings related to the Real Estate Tax.
Summary of Information:
This item is intended to authorize staff to proceed with the required notices for advertising the calendar year
2021 tax rate as well as the public hearings related to the Real Estate Tax.
Approval for this advertisement ensures that legal notices are advertised in a timely and prescribed manner.
This item requests authorization to advertise the necessary public hearing in accordance with the state code.
Real Estate Tax Rate:
The real estate tax rate required to offset the changes in assessed value as prescribed by the Code of Virginia
(excluding new construction) is $0.91 per $100 in assessed value.
The Board must advertise a real estate tax rate for the 2021 tax year. The advertised rate leaves the Board the
flexibility to adopt any rate up to, but not higher than the one advertised. The County's existing tax rate of
$0.95 has been in place since 2018. The existing tax rate is shown below.
Category Rate
Real Estate (January 2018) $0.95
Staff recommends that the current real estate tax rate of $0.95 remains unchanged.
To accommodate the Board's meeting schedule as well as state code requirements, approval to advertise is
sought at the January 27, 2021 Board meeting.
Advertisement and Other Required Legal Notices and Public Hearings related to separate tax classifications
Page 138 of 353
will be introduced at the FY2022 Revenue and CIP Work Session scheduled for February 24, 2021.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director
Approved By:
Page 139 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.B.7.e.
Subject:
To Consider Code Amendment Relative to Written Determinations Affecting Residential Wells (21PJ0101)
Board Action Requested:
Set February 24, 2021 for public hearing on attached code amendment.
Summary of Information:
The proposed amendment is a result of a change to state code. The change requires that a locality provide a
copy of a written decision or determination to adjacent property owners where such decision or determination
affects the ability of the adjacent owner to meet state requirements for residential drinking water well storage
capacity and yield.
Attachments:
1.Ordinance Amendment 19.1-5 re Written Determinations Affecting Residential Wells
Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning
Approved By:
Page 140 of 353
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTION 19.1-5 OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO WRITTEN DETERMINATIONS AFFECTING
RESIDENTIAL WELLS BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County:
(1) That Section 19.1-5 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended
and re-enacted, to read as follows:
Sec. 19.1-5. Administrative Written Decisions, Determinations, and Orders. Administrative Appeals.
A. Written Decision, Determination and Order.
The director of planning shall provide a written response to a person who has filed a request in writing for a decision or determination on zoning matters within the scope of his authority. The response shall be provided within 90 days of the date of the request, unless the requestor agrees to a longer time period. In addition, where the written decision or
determination could impair the ability of an adjacent property owner to satisfy minimum
storage capacity and yield requirements for a residential drinking well under the Code of Virginia Sec. 32.1-176.4 or other regulation thereunder, a copy of the written response shall also be provided to the affected adjacent property owner. When the applicant is not the owner or the property owner’s agent subject to the written decision or determination, the
planning department shall provide written notice within 10 days of the receipt of the request
to the owner of the property at the owner’s last known address as shown by the department of real estate assessments. A written decision, determination or order shall include: a statement informing the recipient
of the right to appeal the decision, determination or order within 30 days to the board of
zoning appeals in accordance with this chapter; the appeal fee; location of information regarding the filing of an appeal; and a statement that the decision, determination or order is unappealable if not appealed within 30 days after the date of the written decision, determination, or order. The appeal period shall not commence until this statement is given.
In addition, for a written order only, the appeal period shall not commence until the order is sent by registered mail or certified to, or posted at the usual place of abode of, either the property owner at the address shown by the department of real estate assessments, or the address of the registered agent shown in the records of the Clerk of the State Corporation
Commission.
(2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. 1928: 117731.1
Page 141 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 12.C.
Subject:
Claim of L.T. Services, Inc. Relating to Termination of Service Agreement #ADMIN18000101 for School
Custodial Services
Board Action Requested:
Staff recommends that the Board deny the claim of L.T. Services, Inc.
Summary of Information:
In April 2018, the County entered into a contract with L.T. Services, Inc. to provide custodial services for the
Chesterfield Public Schools. A number of deficiencies in L.T.’s performance were documented and on June
10,2020 the County notified L.T. of the pending contract deficiencies and, in accordance with the contract,
allowed L.T. an opportunity to provide a corrective action plan to cure the deficiencies. L.T. did not provide the
action plan requested and, by letter dated August 18, 2020, the County terminated the contract.
L.T. has now submitted a claim contending that the County wrongfully terminated the contract and that L.T. is
due $778,927.30 in damages for “lost profits”, non-payment of two invoices, “estimated profit loss”, legal fees
and miscellaneous other costs. A copy of the claim is attached. Under state law, the claim must be presented to
the Board at a public meeting in order for L.T. to pursue litigation against the County. Staff has reviewed the
claim and determined that it is legally deficient and not supported by the terms of the contract. Accordingly,
staff recommends that the Board deny the claim.
Attachments:
1.L.T. Claim
Preparer:Jeff Mincks, County Attorney
Approved By:
Page 142 of 353
1
L.T. Services, Inc.
2815 Hartland Road, Suite 300
Merrifield, VA 22043
Tel: (703) 698-8838
September 25, 2020
Via Email and FedEx Delivery
Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors
Attn: Sara Hall, Clerk
10001 Iron Bridge Road
Chesterfield, VA 23831
Email: hallsj@chesterfield.gov
Stephanie S. Brown
Acting Procurement Director
9901 Lori Road
Chesterfield, VA 23832
Email: brownst@chesterfield.gov
Chesterfield County Public Schools
9800 Krause Road
Chesterfield, VA 23832
ATTN: Darron Lane, Manager Custodial Services
Email: darron_lane@ccpsnet.net
Re: Service Agreement #ADMN18000101 for Custodial Services for CCPS
Claim Submission
Dear Ms. Hall, Ms. Brown, and Mr. Lane,
L.T. Services, Inc. (“LT”) hereby submits the following Claim relative to Chesterfield
County’s (the “County”) unjustified and improper augmentation and termination of the above-
referenced Service Agreement. As discussed below, LT requests a formal reversal of the
County’s improper August 19, 2020 termination of the Service Agreement for default. LT also
requests its associated damages totaling at least $778,927.30. LT requests that this Claim be
appropriately considered by the County and its Board of Supervisors. LT reserves the right to
supplement or revise this claim in the event additional information and/or damages become
Page 143 of 353
2
known. Should the County and/or the Board of Supervisors fail to appropriately respond to and
grant this Claim, LT will pursue appropriate legal remedies before the Circuit Court for
Chesterfield County.
I. Introduction
In April 2018, the County and LT entered into a Service Agreement for LT to provide
janitorial services at thirteen (13) Chesterfield County Public Schools (“CCPS”). These services
included routine cleaning as well as certain non-routine “annual” summer cleaning consisting of
stripping and cleaning school floors. This summer cleaning was to be completed before teachers
returned to school in late August of each summer. To evaluate the sufficiency of LT’s
performance, the agreement provided for the County to assess LT’s work based on certain
Association of Physical Plant Administrators (“APPA”) cleanliness levels. While the Service
Agreement required LT to meet an “average” and “rounded” APPA level of 2 (“Ordinary
Tidiness”), it also acknowledged that lower levels were not necessarily unacceptable and that,
where a “rounded” Level 2 score was not met, the County’s recourse was a 5% invoice “charge
back” to LT. Only “repeated” failures to achieve Service Agreement requirements justified the
termination or augmentation of LT’s work, and only then after LT was provided advance written
notice and an opportunity to cure. Further limiting the application and consequences of APPA
assessments, in March 2019, the County and LT entered Amendment 1 to the Service Agreement
expressly agreeing that “APPA assessments will not be applicable during times when school is
not in session at the individual location.”
As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, CCPS schools were closed in March 2020 and
will remain closed throughout the remainder of 2020. The pandemic further resulted in the
County’s suspension of LT’s Services during the months of April and May 2020. At that time,
LT advised the County that the suspension and pandemic may negatively impact LT’s ability to
Page 144 of 353
3
staff the schools and perform its work following the suspension. For its part, the County assured
LT that it would be “flexible” and “do everything we can” to accommodate LT’s eventual return.
LT was not permitted to resume its Services in full until June 1, 2020. After that date,
and despite the County’s prior assurances, the County embarked on an escalating campaign
intended to cause the termination of LT’s contract. First, on June 10, 2020 (just ten (10) days
after Services resumed in full), the County provided LT a “Notice of Contract Deficiency and
Required Action” alleging, among other things, that LT’s work was not meeting “the required
APPA standards.” This vague assertion was offered without support and despite the fact that
CCPS schools were then closed and, therefore, “APPA assessments [were not] applicable.”
Next, on July 23, 2020, the County abruptly informed LT that it was “augmenting” LT’s
services through the removal of five (5) schools from LT’s scope of work due to alleged summer
cleaning delays. Again, this action by the County ignored Service Agreement terms requiring
that LT be provided advance written notice and an opportunity to cure, as well as terms allowing
LT at least an additional month to complete its summer cleaning work. The County’s action also
disregarded certain impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the County’s direction that
LT perform the detailed disinfecting of schools before proceeding with annual summer cleaning.
In response to this improper augmentation, LT promptly objected, provided the County
notice of its claim, and requested the reversal of the County’s action. Rather than respond to this
request, however, the County elected to retaliate by terminating the Service Agreement
altogether. Specifically, on August 19, 2020, LT was informed that the Service Agreement was
terminated for default due to (1) LT’s alleged failure to meet APPA standards as vaguely
mentioned in the June 10 letter and (2) because the summer cleaning of the schools previously
“augmented” on July 23 “remain[ed]” insufficiently complete. As further discussed below, these
stated bases for termination contradict the terms of the Service Agreement, defy reason, and
Page 145 of 353
4
improperly “double down” on the County’s previously improper June 10 and July 23
communications. Accordingly, the County’s termination of the Service Agreement for default
was unjustified and improper. LT is therefore entitled to a reversal of this decision, as well as
the significant and on-going damages incurred by LT as a result of the County’s action.
II. Background
A. The Services Agreement and Amendment
1. On April 12, 2018, LT and the County entered into Service Agreement
#ADMN18000101 For Custodial Services for CCPS.
2. Pursuant to the Service Agreement, LT agreed to perform certain custodial
services at identified CCPS schools in accordance with the County’s Request for Proposals (the
“RFP”) and LT’s February 28, 2018 Proposal (the “Proposal”), both of which were incorporated
into the Service Agreement by Section 1 and elsewhere.
3. More specifically, LT agreed to provide janitorial services at CCPS’s “Zone 3”
schools consisting of Lloyd Bird High School, Chesterfield Technical Center (CTC) Court
House, Meadowbrook High School, Falling Creek Middle School, Salem Church Middle School,
Bensley Elementary School, Salem Church Elementary School, Beulah Elementary School,
Bellwood Elementary School, Hening Elementary School, O.B. Gates Elementary School,
Hopkins Elementary School, and Falling Creek Elementary School.
4. The initial term of the Service Agreement was from June 1, 2018 through May 31,
2019, with the option to be renewed for four (4) successive one-year periods. See Service
Agreement, Sec. 5.
5. For the initial one-year term, the County agreed to pay LT the amount of
$2,729,400.47. See Service Agreement, Sec. 6. This compensation amount was further divided
Page 146 of 353
5
into a monthly price allocated between each of the thirteen (13) Zone 3 schools. See Service
Agreement pricing table.
i. Association of Physical Plant Administrators Scoring
6. As originally drafted, the Service Agreement required LT to generally meet an
average level of cleanliness equivalent to Association of Physical Plant Administrators
(“APPA”) Level 2. Level 2 is further defined in Attachment C to the RFP as “Ordinary
Tidiness.” This level provides for some ordinary amount of dirt, dust, and other limited build-
up. For example, Attachment C states that, under Level 2, “[f]loors and base moldings shine
and/or are bright and clean. There is no buildup in corners or along walls, but there can be up to
two days worth of dirt, dust, stains, or streaks.” (emphasis added). Similarly, Level 2 is
described as “[a]ll vertical and horizontal surfaces are clean, but marks, dust, smudges, and
fingerprints are noticeable with close observation.” (emphasis added).
7. Attachment C further provided that, while LT should attempt to maintain Level 2
cleanliness, lower level scores (i.e., scores of 3 or 4) may still be acceptable in certain
circumstances. Specifically, Attachment C defined Level 3, “Casual Inattention,” as a level that,
“[w]hile not totally acceptable, it has yet to reach an unacceptable level of cleanliness.”
(emphasis added). Similarly, Level 4, “Moderate Dinginess,” is defined as a level at which
“[a]reas are becoming unacceptable.” (emphasis added).
8. In order to ensure compliance with these APPA standards, the RFP imposed
certain inspection and reporting duties on the County, and permitted a “charge back” in the event
APPA Level 2 standards were not met on average.
9. Specifically, RFP Section III(X)(1) provided that:
CCPS will complete inspections at all locations on a daily basis, if determined
to be required. Such inspections will be completed after the contractor
completes their services but before schools commences for the day. Such
Page 147 of 353
6
inspections are intended to ensure services are being performed at an
acceptable level as required herein (within APPA standards and all
Attachments contained herein). CCPS will share inspection results with the
contractor. CCPS shall notify vendor of any issues via email. The contractor
shall be required to provide a response and complete request by next business
day. Failure to comply may result in charge back.
(emphasis added).
10. This “charge back” was further detailed at RFP Section III(X)(8), which provided
that:
Contractor confirms understanding that a reduction of 5% of the total
monthly cost of a school location will be initiated for failure to meet the
APPA 2 cleaning requirements at each school location. For purposes of
charge backs, APPA 2 is defined as an APPA score when rounded to zero
decimal places equals 2.
(emphasis added).
11. The RFP further provided at Section III(X)(4) that only a “[r]epeated failure to
meet standards as noted during inspections or from complaints may result in cancellation of the
contract or reassignment of awarded schools to other CCPS contractors.” (emphasis added).
12. The RFP also acknowledged that a failure to achieve APPA 2 standards was not
an impediment to the renewal of the Service Agreement. Specifically, Section III(X)(17)
provided that:
As a condition for contract renewal each year, 90% of all CCPS contracted
schools should achieve and maintain an APPA 2 average inspection by
November 30th of each contract year. For purposes of renewal, APPA 2 is
defined as an APPA score when rounded to zero decimal places equals 2.
(emphasis added).
i. Scheduling
13. Section 4 of the Service Agreement provided that all of LT’s Services shall be
performed pursuant to a schedule to be agreed upon by the County and LT. However, the RFP
contained the contours and limitations of this schedule.
Page 148 of 353
7
14. Specifically, the RFP distinguished between routine and non-routine cleaning.
RFP Attachment D defined “Non-routine cleaning” as all “activities that occur at a frequency
greater than weekly, for example, monthly, annually, or semi annually.”
15. With respect to annual services, Attachment D provided that “[a]nnual services
are to begin immediately following the end of each school year and be completed no later
than one week prior to teachers returning – typically the last week in August.” (emphasis in
original).
16. These annual services included summer cleaning. Among other annual summer
cleaning activities contemplated by the RFP, Attachment D required LT to “[c]ompletely strip or
scrub tile and refinish composition floors applying a minimum of two (2) coats of sealer four (4)
coats of finish on all hallways, cafeterias, and high traffic areas and a minimum of two (2) coats
sealer and three (3) coats of finish in all classrooms.”
ii. Billing and Payment
17. As stated above, LT’s yearly compensation amount was divided among the
thirteen (13) Zone 3 schools and billed monthly. Pursuant to Section 7 of the Service
Agreement, the County’s payment of LT’s monthly invoices was due within thirty (30) days of
LT’s submission of an invoice.
18. In addition, the RFP included certain General Terms and Conditions (“GTC”)
imposing additional payment obligations on the County. GTC Section T, titled “Payment,”
stated that the Service Agreement payment terms “shall be consistent with the provisions of
Section 2.2-4352 and 2.2-4354 of the Code of Virginia.” (emphasis in original). Significantly,
Section 2.2-4352 requires in part that “[w]ithin twenty days after the receipt of the invoice or
goods or services, the agency shall notify the supplier of any defect or impropriety that would
prevent payment by the payment date.”
Page 149 of 353
8
iii. Notice of Defects and Opportunity to Cure
19. As stated above, the RFP imposed on the County the duty to notify LT in writing
of alleged failures to meet APPA cleanliness requirements and to share inspection reports. In
addition to these requirements, the GTCs imposed on the County certain obligations to provide
LT written notice of alleged defects in LT’s work and an opportunity to cure such defects.
20. GTC Section I, titled “Default,” provided in part that “[i]n case of failure to
deliver goods or services in accordance with the contract terms and conditions, the County may,
without prejudice to any other right or remedy, and after giving the Contractor seven (7) calendar
days written notice, terminate the employment of the Contractor and procure such goods or
services from other sources.” (emphasis added).
21. GTC Section CC, titled “Termination for Breach or Non-Performance,” provided
in part that:
If the Contractor fails to perform the work promptly and diligently, or if the
Contractor breaches the Contract in any other way, the County may:
1. after providing the Contractor with 15 days written notice, supply any
workmen, equipment or materials necessary to ensure that the work is
performed promptly and diligently. The County may deduct the cost of
supplying additional workmen, equipment or materials from payments due to
the Contractor….
(emphasis added).
iv. Service Agreement Renewal and Amendments
22. During the course of the initial term of the Service Agreement, LT questioned the
training and experience of County personnel assigned to assess LT’s Services for APPA
compliance, and the fairness and accuracy of such assessments. Among other communications,
on November 26, 2018, LT submitted correspondence to CCPS’s Facilities Manager, Darron
Page 150 of 353
9
Lane, requesting documentation regarding the qualifications of the County’s APPA inspectors
and the specific scoring applied to Zone 3 and other CCPS zones. See Exhibit 1 hereto.
23. In response to this letter and other communications between LT and the County,
the County assured LT that CCPS personnel tasked with assessing LT’s performance would
receive APPA inspection training in May 2019. See Exhibit 2 hereto.
24. In addition, the parties executed Amendment 1 to the Service Agreement on or
about March 20, 2019. See Exhibit 3 hereto. Among other revisions to the Service Agreement,
Amendment 1 limited the application of APPA assessments to only when schools were in
session. Specifically, Amendment 1 deleted the above-quoted Section III(X)(8) of the RFP and
replaced it with the following.
Contractor confirms understanding that a reduction of 5% of the total
monthly cost of a school location will be initiated for failure to meet the
APPA 2 cleaning requirements at each school location. For purposes of
charge backs. APPA 2 is defined as an APPA score when rounded to zero
decimal places equals 2. CCPS will conduct inspections only during
calendar school days and summer school; therefore, APPA assessments
will not be applicable during times when school is not in session at the
individual location.
(emphasis in original).
25. In addition, Amendment 1 revised Article W of the RFP, titled “Responsibilities
of CCPS,” to require that CCPS provide LT a sixty (60) day transition period in the event a
school was reassigned from one CCPS contractor to another. Specifically, RFP Section
III(W)(5) was revised in relevant part to require that:
Should CCPS elect to reassign school(s) from one Contractor to another,
CCPS shall allow the Contractor sixty (60) days to complete its transition
for the additional school(s). During this transition phase CCPS may waive
charge-backs for APPA rating and/or hours for the affected school(s)….
Page 151 of 353
10
26. Amendment 1 also revised the Service Agreement price for the initial contract
term to $2,726,923.40, and provided a revised price schedule with the compensation amount
divided annually and monthly among the thirteen (13) Zone 3 schools.
27. On April 29, 2019, the County renewed the Service Agreement for an additional
one-year term from June 1, 2019 through May 31, 2020.
28. On April 8, 2020, the County renewed the Service Agreement for an additional
one-year term from June 1, 2020 through May 31, 2021. As part of the April 2020 renewal, the
yearly compensation amount was increased to $2,776,008.02, and a new pricing schedule was
established dividing the compensation among the Zone 3 schools and into monthly payments.
B. COVID-19 Pandemic, School Shutdown, and Improper Augmentation and
Termination of LT’s Services
29. During the winter and early spring of 2020, the Commonwealth of Virginia and
Chesterfield County were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. On March 13, 2020, Virginia
Governor Ralph Northam ordered the closure of all K-12 schools in Virginia for two weeks.
This closure was subsequently extended, including through the Second Amendment to Executive
Order 53, dated May 4, 2020, which ordered the cessation of in-person instruction at K-12
schools for the remainder of the 2019-2020 school year.
30. As a result of this closure of CCPS schools, on March 31, 2020, LT was directed
by the County to suspend its Services through April 30, 2020. In that March 31, 2020
correspondence, the County acknowledged the impacts of the pandemic and shutdown, and
assured LT that the County “will try to be flexible in the return to work of your employees and
will do everything we can to make it as seamless as possible.” See Exhibit 4 hereto. On April 30,
2020, LT was provided notice that the suspension of LT’s Services would continue through May
31, 2020.
Page 152 of 353
11
31. In response to this suspension, LT repeatedly advised the County that the
suspension and COVID-19 pandemic would adversely effect LT’s ability to staff the Zone 3
schools once the suspension was lifted. Among other communications, on April 10, 2020, LT
advised the County that LT “predict[ed] that less [than] 50% of the laid off employees will return
to work” and that “it will take much longer to recruit and rebuil[d] the labor workforce.” See
Exhibit 5 hereto. LT expressly advised that this issue may result in a potential lack of manpower
and reduction in quality. LT further advised that this labor issue may be exacerbated by the
County’s requirement that LT’s employees undergo background checks and fingerprinting prior
to commencing work. Based on LT’s experience prior to the pandemic, this process could take
up to four (4) weeks. See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven Duong).
32. LT was permitted to resume its Services on June 1, 2020.
33. During late May and early June 2020, LT and the County discussed a possible
summer cleaning schedule with certain “target” goals for the completion of LT’s summer
Services. The parties did not formally adopt a binding schedule, nor did they amend the Service
Agreement to alter its scheduling terms. See Exhibit 6 hereto. Most significantly, LT and the
County did not agree to alter the RFP Attachment D requirement that “Annual services [such as
summer cleaning] are to begin immediately following the end of each school year and be
completed no later than one week prior to teachers returning – typically the last week in
August.” (emphasis in original).
34. Subsequent to LT and CCPS’s discussions regarding a possible summer cleaning
schedule, in early June 2020, CCPS’s Custodial Supervisor Tony Meyers directed LT to perform
a disinfecting of all Zone 3 schools before proceeding with summer cleaning. See Exhibit 6
hereto. This disinfecting work was directed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and was
Page 153 of 353
12
intended to ensure the safety of County, CCPS, and LT staff, and other potential visitors to
CCPS schools.
35. Despite this requirement and while CCPS schools remained closed, on June 10,
2020, the County issued LT a Notice of Contract Deficiency and Required Action. See Exhibit 7
hereto. In that letter, the County raised four alleged deficiencies in LT’s work, including an
allegation that “[c]leaning [p]erformance [was] not meeting the required APPA standards of the
contract at Beulah Elementary and Salem Elementary.”1 The June 10 Notice – issued just 10
days after LT was permitted to resume its Services in full - did not identify which specific areas
of Beulah and Salem Elementary Schools did not meet APPA standards, nor did the Notice
identify when such APPA assessment occurred or the APPA scores applied.
36. On July 15, 2020, LT submitted to the County its invoice for Services rendered
during the month of June 2020 in the amount of $231,334. This June 2020 invoice was paid in-
full by the County on July 31, 2020, without any charge backs for alleged failures to meet APPA
standards. See Exhibit 8 hereto.
37. On July 20, 2020, the County School Board determined that CCPS schools will
not re-open for in-person education this fall.
38. On July 22, 2020, LT CEO Michael Nguyen, CCPS Assistant Director Facilities
Darron Lane2, and County Senior Contract Officer April Cone participated in a phone
conversation in which the County alleged that LT was behind schedule in its work relative to
annual summer cleaning, including floor stripping and cleaning. The County therefore advised
that it may reduce the scope of LT’s Services by removing just two schools – Salem Church and
Beulah Elementary. Mr. Nguyen disputed the County’s claim, requested back-up
1 As discussed below, the County has acknowledged that LT properly addressed the remaining three alleged
deficiencies.
2 Mr. Lane was promoted to Assistant Director of Facilities in September 2019.
Page 154 of 353
13
documentation, and requested the parties participate in another phone conversation. See Exhibit 9
hereto (Affidavit of Michael Nguyen).
39. The following day, Thursday, July 23, 2020, Ms. Cone issued to Mr. Nguyen an
email titled “Official Notification of augmentation services” at 5:19 p.m. See Exhibit 10. In that
email, the County alleged that LT “was provided a summer schedule” and that “CCPS was not
notified of any deviations of [sic] these predetermined dates.” The County further vaguely
alleged that LT was “either at or below 30% completion [at] Salem Middle, Falling Creek
Middle, Bensley Elementary, Hopkins Elementary, and Salem Elementary.”
40. Ms. Cone’s July 23 email therefore advised that, pursuant to RFP Section
III(X)(2)3, “[a]ugmentation of Salem Middle, Falling Creek Middle, Bensley Elementary,
Hopkins Elementary, and Salem Elementary will begin on Monday, July 27, 2020.” LT was
therefore directed to reassign its staff working at these schools.
41. Ms. Cone’s July 23 email conceded that no prior written notice had been provided
of this alleged delay and alleged only that LT’s alleged non-performance was “discussed during
the phone conversation on July 22, 2020.”
42. LT promptly responded to the County’s augmentation notice, including through a
letter and email sent on Monday, July 27, 2020. See Exhibit 11 hereto. In that correspondence,
LT advised the County that its augmentation was unjustified and improper, including because LT
had been directed to perform disinfecting work prior to proceeding with summer cleaning. LT
further advised that the County had failed to provide fifteen (15) days written notice prior to
augmenting LT’s work in accordance with GTC Section CC. LT therefore requested that the
3 RFP Section III(X)(2) provided that “[s]hould the contractor not perform required duties in a complete and
thorough manner as determined by CCPS, the contractor will be notified in writing. CCPS will notify the contractor
of issues of noncompliance and reserves the right to have the duties completed by other means. CCPS will reduce
the contractor’s invoice relative to the period of non-compliance commensurate with the actual cost incurred by
CCPS.” Ms. Cone failed to consider or discuss GTC Section CC.
Page 155 of 353
14
County reverse its decision to augment LT’s Services, and LT provided the County notice of
LT’s intent to pursue a claim should the County not comply.
43. Ms. Cone responded to LT’s July 27 letter on July 28, 2020, and advised that the
County was reviewing LT’s position. See Exhibit 10 hereto.
44. On August 3, 2020, having received no further response from the County, LT’s
outside counsel elevated the augmentation issue to the County Attorney’s office through the
submission of additional correspondence.
45. Assistant County Attorney Christopher Midgley responded to LT’s counsel with a
letter dated August 7, 2020. In that correspondence, the County advised that it was “in the
process of investigating [LT’s] allegations.” See Exhibit 12 hereto.
46. No further formal correspondence was received from the County regarding the
Service Agreement until August 19, 2020. On that date, LT received a letter from Acting
Procurement Director Lorie Newton dated August 18, 2020 and titled “Notice of Default and
Contract Termination.” See Exhibit 13 hereto. In that correspondence, the County terminated the
Service Agreement “[e]ffective immediately” and provided two vague bases for termination.
47. First, the County alleged that LT had “failed to perform the services to correct
performance deficiencies for Beulah Elementary and Salem Church Elementary while continuing
to maintain APPA standards and full compliance with the contract at other assigned schools as
specified in the Notice of Contract Deficiency and Required Action issued by the County on
June 10, 2020.”
48. Second, the County alleged that LT “failed to maintain APPA standards and full
compliance with the contract for Salem Church Middle, and Falling Creek Middle, Bensley
Elementary, and Hopkins Elementary. These schools along with Salem Church Elementary
Page 156 of 353
15
remain at or below thirty per cent (30%) completion as specified in the Official Notification of
Augmentation Services email issued on July 23, 2020.”
49. LT promptly responded to the County’s letter just hours later on August 19, 2020.
See Exhibit 14 hereto. In that responsive letter and email, LT requested confirmation that the
County was terminating the Service Agreement and provided the County notice of its intent to
submit a claim relative to the County’s actions. LT further requested the opportunity to return to
the Zone 3 schools and retrieve its equipment and materials.
50. Ms. Newton responded to LT’s August 19 letter on August 20, 2020. See Exhibit
15 hereto. In that August 20 letter, the County confirmed that the Service Agreement was
terminated. The County also confirmed that its termination of the agreement arose from LT’s
alleged failure to meet APPA requirements and from the County’s prior July 23 augmentation of
LT’s Services. Specifically, the Count stated that:
Although L.T. Services corrected most of the items on the Notice of Contract
Deficiency by July 10, 2020, Deficiency #2 states “cleaning performance not
meeting the required APPA standards of the contract at Beulah Elementary
School and Salem Church Elementary School” was not completed as well as
continuing to maintain APPA standards at other assigned schools. As a result,
Chesterfield County Public Schools was forced to augment services to
complete the summer cleaning for Salem Middle, Falling Creek Middle,
Bensley Elementary, Hopkins Elementary and Salem Elementary because
they were at or below 30% completion.
The County also confirmed that it would later allow LT to return to the schools and retrieve its
equipment and materials.
51. Following coordination with County staff, LT was eventually permitted to return
to the Zone 3 schools on August 26, 2020, to retrieve its materials and equipment. LT
discovered, however, that certain materials and equipment previously stored at the CCPS schools
on August 19, 2020, were no longer present. See Exhibit 6 hereto. The specific missing
Page 157 of 353
16
equipment is further discussed below. As of the date of this Claim, this missing equipment has
not been located.
III. Argument
On August 19, 2020, the County terminated the Service Agreement due to LT’s alleged
default. Specifically, and as clarified in the County’s August 20, 2020 correspondence, the
County has vaguely alleged that termination was justified because: (1) LT allegedly failed to
achieve APPA standards at Beulah Elementary and Salem Church Elementary; and (2) LT
allegedly failed to progress the summer cleaning schedule at certain schools which were
augmented by the County on July 23, 2020. As more fully discussed below, the County’s
purported termination contradicts the express terms of the Service Agreement, contradicts the
County’s prior directions and actions, and defies reason.
As an initial matter, however, it should be noted that the County’s abrupt August 19
termination of the Service Agreement failed to comply with GTC Section I, which required that
LT be provided “seven (7) calendar days written notice” prior to the County’s intended
termination. The County failed to provide this written notice. Instead, the County’s August 19
termination letter improperly attempted to “boot strap” the June 10 Notice letter (issued over two
months prior to termination) and July 23 augmentation email. Both of these communications
were themselves improper, as discussed below, and do not constitute proper seven (7) day
advance written notice of termination. In contravention of the Service Agreement, the County
therefore deprived LT of any opportunity to cure its alleged defaults prior to termination. For
this reason alone, the County’s termination of the Service Agreement is unjustified, and LT is
Page 158 of 353
17
entitled to damages and other relief. Nevertheless, LT addresses the specific alleged bases for
the County’s termination of the Service Agreement below.4
A. APPA Assessments are Inapplicable and, in any Event, the County Failed to Provide
Appropriate Notice and Opportunity to Cure
The County terminated the Service Agreement for default due to LT’s alleged failure to
achieve APPA standards at Beulah and Salem Church Elementary Schools. This purported basis
for termination fails for multiple reasons. First, and most obviously, the County ignores
Amendment 1 to the Service Agreement and its express requirement that APPA assessments
shall not apply when schools are not in session. As stated above, in late 2018, LT raised
concerns regarding the accuracy and fairness of APPA assessments performed by the County. In
response to this and other communications, in March 2019, LT and the County executed
Amendment 1 agreeing that “CCPS will conduct inspections only during calendar schools
days and summer school; therefore, APPA assessments will not be applicable during times
when schools is not in session at the individual location.” (emphasis in original).
All CCPS schools were closed beginning no later than March 13, 2020, and remained
closed through August 2020. Indeed, all CCPS school locations will remain closed through the
remainder of 2020, with education instead occurring virtually. Accordingly, APPA assessments
were not applicable at either the time of the County’s June 10 Notice letter or its August 19
termination of the Service Agreement. The County’s termination of the Service Agreement due
to LT’s alleged failure to comply with APPA requirements is therefore improper.
4 LT also notes that the County’s abrupt termination of the Service Agreement occurred only after LT objected to the
County’s improper augmentation of LT’s Services, provided notice of a potential claim, and elevated the parties’
dispute to the County Attorneys’ office. The timing of the County’s termination of the Service Agreement therefore
implies a retaliatory motive, particularly when it is considered that CCPS schools were not reopening for in-person
education.
Page 159 of 353
18
In any event, even if it is assumed that APPA assessments were applicable to LT’s
Services during the summer of 2020, the County did not provide adequate notice to LT of the
alleged deficient performance. Section III(X)(1) of the RFP states that, when APPA assessments
are permitted to occur, “CCPS will share the inspection results with the contractor.” Despite this
requirement, the County’s June 10 Notice only vaguely alleges that LT’s performance is “not
meeting APPA standards of the contract at Beulah Elementary and Salem Elementary.” The
County did not share (and has not shared) the APPA inspections results, including what areas
allegedly failed to meet APPA standards and what APPA scores were applied. See Exhibit 6
hereto (Affidavit of Steven Duong). Absent this information, LT could not reasonably respond to
or cure the alleged deficiencies.5
The County’s failure to provide support for its claim that LT failed to achieve APPA
standards is particularly troubling where, as here, (1) the mere failure to meet an APPA Level 2
degree of cleanliness does not warrant termination and (2) the Service Agreement instead
provides for a “charge back” where a rounded score of Level 2 is not met. The Service
Agreement required LT to work towards achieving an average, rounded APPA 2 level of
cleanliness, or “Ordinary Tidiness.” However, the Service Agreement repeatedly acknowledged
that a limited failure to achieve Level 2 cleanliness was not grounds for termination. For
example, Attachment C to the RFP defines Level 3 (“Casual Inattention”) and Level 4
(“Moderate Dinginess”) as levels at which work “has yet to reach an unacceptable level of
cleanliness” or where “[a]reas are becoming unacceptable.” (emphasis added).6 Further, Section
III(X)(17) of the RFP acknowledged that LT need only achieve and maintain an APPA Level 2
5 In fact, as discussed below, the County’s July 23 Official Notification of Augmentation of Services prevented LT
from curing alleged deficiencies at Salem Church Elementary by directing that LT remove its personnel from this
school.
6 It should further be noted that Level 2 does not require spotlessness. Rather, as stated in Attachment C, dirt, dust,
stains, smudges, and streaks may be present.
Page 160 of 353
19
“average” at 90% of its Zone 3 schools in order to be eligible for contract renewal. In further
recognition that the failure to achieve an APPA Level 2 average did not immediately justify
termination, RFP Section III(X)(8) permitted the County to direct a 5% reduction, or “charge
back,” to monthly invoices for each school that failed to achieve a rounded APPA score equal to
2. Indeed, as stated in Section III(X)(4), only “repeated” failures to meet inspection standards
could potentially result in the cancellation of the Service Agreement.
Despite these terms, the County’s June Notice letter and August termination letter
broadly treat any failure to “meet[] the required APPA standards” as grounds for termination for
default. This vague claim cannot be reconciled with the Service Agreement.
Further, the County’s allegation that LT failed to achieve APPA standards cannot be
reconciled with the County’s payment of LT’s June 2020 invoice. As discussed above, on July
15, 2020, LT submitted its June 2020 invoice with monthly charges broken down by school.
LT’s form invoice includes an area for “5% Chargeback APPA Score” for each of the identified
Zone 3 schools. Despite this invoice area, and the County’s present allegations, the June 2020
invoice was paid in the full amount of $231,334.00 without any APPA charge backs. The
County’s present vague allegation that LT failed to achieve APPA standards at Beulah and
Salem Church Elementary Schools is therefore clearly inconsistent with the County’s acceptance
and payment of LT’s June 2020 invoice.
Simply put, APPA assessments were not applicable to LT’s work at either the time of the
June Notice letter or the August termination. The stated basis for the County’s termination is
therefore without merit. Moreover, even if such APPA assessments were applicable, the
County’s June letter failed to articulate how LT allegedly failed to meet APPA standards or to
provide LT a meaningful opportunity to cure, and ignored that an alleged failure to meet APPA
standards is not alone a sufficient basis for termination of the Service Agreement.
Page 161 of 353
20
B. The County’s Allegation of Schedule Delay Defies the Service Agreement and Reason
The second vague basis for the County’s August 19 termination of the Service
Agreement was that Salem Church Middle School, Falling Creek Middle School, Bensley
Elementary, Hopkins Elementary, and Salem Church Elementary allegedly “remain[ed] at or
below thirty per cent (30%) completion as specified in the Official Notification of Augmentation
Services email issued on July 23, 2020.” Again, this basis for termination is without merit and is
premised on an improper prior communication by the County.
First, the County’s August 19 termination ignores that its July 23 email directed LT to
remove its personnel from the listed Zone 3 schools. The County cannot rightfully complain that
LT’s work “remain[ed]” insufficiently complete on August 19 where LT was previously directed
to discontinue its work five weeks earlier.
In any event, the County’s July 23 email ignored Service Agreement terms defining LT’s
schedule responsibilities. Likewise, the County’s abrupt July 23 augmentation of LT’s work
ignored Service Agreement terms permitting LT written notice and an opportunity to cure before
replacement labor is supplied. First, with respect to the schedule, Attachment D to the RFP
clearly provides that “[a]nnual services are to begin immediately following the end of each
school year and be completed no later than one week prior to teachers returning – typically
the last week in August.” (emphasis in original). Among those “annual services” is summer
cleaning, including the stripping, scrubbing, and coating of floors. Although the County’s July
23 Official Notification is impermissibly vague, it is believed that this summer floor cleaning
work is the subject of the County’s claimed delay. The Service Agreement, however, does not
establish any interim deadlines for the completion of this annual summer work.
As initially scheduled, CCPS teachers were scheduled to return to school by August 24,
2020. Accordingly, LT was required to complete its annual summer cleaning by August 17,
Page 162 of 353
21
2020, at the earliest. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant CCPS shutdown delayed
this date further, with schools now remaining closed for the remainder of 2020. The date by
which LT was required to complete its summer cleaning was therefore also necessarily extended.
Nevertheless, approximately a month before the earliest possible required completion
date, the County accused LT of delay and directed LT’s removal from five (5) of its thirteen (13)
Zone 3 schools. Again, this action was improper and premature in light of the fact that: (i) no
interim summer cleaning completion dates were established by the Service Agreement; and (ii)
at least a month remained for LT to complete its annual work.
The County’s claim of delay is likewise improper due to the County’s direction regarding
necessary disinfecting work caused by COVID-19. As stated above, before being permitted to
proceed with summer cleaning work, LT was directed by the County to disinfect each of its
assigned schools to ensure the safety of staff and visitors. LT complied with this direction and
was therefore prevented from proceeding with summer cleaning work until July 6, 2020. Even
then, authorization to proceed with floor refinishing was only provided for one of the thirteen
(13) Zone 3 schools (Lloyd Bird High School). See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven
Duong). Accordingly, to the extent LT’s summer cleaning work was delayed, such delay was
the result of the COVID-19 pandemic and directions received from the County, and cannot
support either augmentation or termination.
Finally, even if LT’s summer cleaning work was “at or below thirty per cent (30%)
complet[e]” as alleged by the County, the County’s sudden augmentation of LT’s work ignored
contract terms permitting LT notice and an opportunity to cure. GTC Section CC, titled
“Termination for Breach of Non-Performance,” expressly requires that the County provide LT
“15 days written notice” before supplying “any workmen, equipment or materials necessary to
ensure that the work is performed promptly and diligently.” Nevertheless, the County’s July 23
Page 163 of 353
22
augmentation email concedes that the County’s allegations were only discussed during a phone
conversation on July 22. Indeed, during that July 22 conversation only the possible
augmentation of two schools was discussed. The County therefore provided LT only a partial
verbal warning of its intent to replace LT’s services just one (1) day prior to the official notice of
augmentation. Again, the County has simply ignored the Service Agreement terms requiring that
LT be provided notice and an opportunity to cure. The July 23 augmentation was therefore
improper, as is any claim that the augmentation justified the termination of the Service
Agreement on August 19, 2020.
C. To the Extent LT’s Work was Delayed or Otherwise Deficient, Such Alleged Issues Were
Caused by COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Suspension of Services
The stated bases for the County’s termination of the Services Agreement (failure to meet
APPA standards and the summer cleaning schedule) are without merit. Further, the County
failed to provide LT adequate notice and opportunity to cure these alleged deficiencies, as
required by the Service Agreement.
In any event, to the extent issues arose regarding the quality or timeliness of LT’s work,
such issues were caused by events beyond LT’s control, including the COVID-19 pandemic and
the County’s direction that LT suspend its Services throughout April and May 2020. As
predicted by LT in its April 10, 2020 email to the County, many of LT’s employees that were
laid off as a result of the suspension did not return to work and were not available to resume
Services on June 1, 2020. See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven Duong). Moreover, new
employees were required to undergo County background checks and finger printing prior to
commencing work. Prior to the pandemic, this process was completed within two to four weeks.
However, as a result of the pandemic, the process extended up to eight weeks during June, July,
and August 2020. For example, six (6) potential LT employees were fingerprinted in June or
Page 164 of 353
23
early July 2020, of which only one (1) was informed that they had passed. The fingerprint
results of the remaining five (5) potential employees were still being processed by the County as
of August 14, 2020. See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven Duong). These issues, along with
the County’s direction that LT perform disinfecting work prior to summer cleaning, had an
obvious impact on LT’s ability to complete its Services.
Nevertheless, despite the County’s assurance that it would “be flexible in the return of
your employees and will do everything we can to make it as seamless as possible,” the County
issued its June 10 Notice letter just ten days after LT was permitted to resume its cleaning
Services. The County therefore ignored the obvious need for LT and other contractors to
transition and “ramp up” their Services following the prolonged suspension of work.7
IV. Damages
The County’s abrupt and improper actions have caused damages to LT. In addition, the
County has failed to pay LT for either its July 2020 Services or those August 2020 Services
performed before the County’s improper termination of the contract. These specific damage
items and other necessary relief are discussed below, and are summarized in sub-section H.
A. Reversal of the County’s Improper Termination for Default
For the reasons set forth above, LT requests the County formally retract and revoke its
termination of the Service Agreement for default, and that the County ensure that any reference
to the termination for default is removed from contracting websites, databases, and other records.
Notably, the County’s improper termination of the Service Agreement for default has already
potentially hindered LT’s ability to obtain replacement work. In response to a recent bid by LT
7 The Service Agreement itself acknowledges this obvious need. Specifically, Amendment 1 revised RFP Section
III(W)(5) to provide contractors a sixty (60) day “transition phase” in the event additional schools were assigned.
During this period, Section III(W)(5) acknowledged that the County “may waive charge-backs for APPA rating
and/or hours for the affected school(s).”
Page 165 of 353
24
to perform custodial services for a Virginia public entity, LT was presented with an inquiry
regarding the basis for the County’s improper termination of the Services Agreement. While the
relevant public entity has yet to inform LT whether it will be awarded the subject work, this
inquiry is representative of the on-going harm incurred by LT as a result of the County’s
improper actions, and LT reserves the right to supplement this Claim to reflect lost business
opportunities.
B. July 2020 and Prorated August 2020 Invoices
On August 17, 2020, LT submitted its monthly invoice for Services performed during the
month of July 2020. See Exhibit 16 hereto. This invoice was for the amount of $231,334 with
payment due within thirty (30) days. Pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-4352, the County
was required to notify LT within twenty days after the receipt of the invoice of any defect or
impropriety that would prevent payment by the payment date. The County has not paid this
invoice, nor has the County identified any defect or impropriety preventing payment.
In addition, on August 25, 2020, LT submitted an invoice for the month of August 2020
which was prorated to reflect the County’s improper termination of the Service Agreement. See
Exhibit 17 hereto. The prorated invoice was in the amount of $154,222.67 and did not include
LT’s monthly fee. To date, the County has not paid LT’s August 2020 invoice, nor has the
County advised LT of any defect or impropriety preventing payment as required by Virginia
Code Section 2.2-4352.
Accordingly, LT is owed for outstanding invoices totaling $385,556.67.
C. Moving Expenses
The County’s abrupt termination of the Service Agreement and direction that LT
immediately cease its operations deprived LT of any opportunity to sell its on-site equipment and
materials to the replacement contractor – a practice common in the custodial industry. Instead,
Page 166 of 353
25
LT was required to spend its time and resources over multiple days moving its equipment from
the CCPS schools to a new storage location in Falls Church, Virginia, as further discussed below.
Specifically, the removal and storage of LT’s equipment and materials caused LT to incur
$3,473.84 in labor costs, as summarized in the table attached as Exhibit 19.8 In addition, LT was
required to rent two moving trucks at a combined cost of $1,705.58, as well as to pay for fuel for
these two vehicles and a company van totaling $470.38. See Exhibit 20.
D. Missing Equipment
LT was prevented from accessing the Zone 3 schools beginning on August 19, 2020. On
that date, LT requested that the County provide guidance regarding how and when LT would be
permitted to retrieve its equipment and materials from the CCPS schools. However, LT was not
permitted to re-enter the CCPS schools and retrieve its equipment and materials until August 26.
On that date, LT discovered that certain cleaning equipment previously stored at the
CCPS schools was no longer present. LT is unaware of whether this equipment was moved by
the County or other contractors9; however, it was the County’s responsibility to ensure this
equipment was properly secured following the County’s decision to bar LT from entering the
Zone 3 schools. As detailed in the table attached as Exhibit 21, the value of this missing
equipment is reasonably estimated as $9,823.56. See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven
Duong).
E. Storage Costs
In order to manage LT’s Services and store equipment and materials that could not
otherwise be stored at the Zone 3 schools, LT entered a Commercial Lease (the “Chesterfield
8 The information contained in Exhibit 19 is derived directly from LT’s accounting records. See Exhibit 9 (Affidavit
of Michael Nguyen).
9 LT has previously observed other County contractors improperly using County equipment without authorization.
See Exhibit 6 hereto (Affidavit of Steven Duong).
Page 167 of 353
26
Lease”) on June 2, 2020 renting a 400 square foot office space in North Chesterfield, Virginia.
Exhibit 22. The Chesterfield Lease required monthly payments of $400, and permitted LT to
terminate the lease upon two (2) weeks’ notice. The County’s August 19 termination letter was
provided with less than two weeks remaining during the month of August 2020. As a result, LT
was unable to provide timely notice terminating the Chesterfield Lease and was required to pay
an additional monthly payment of $400.
In addition, and as discussed above, the termination of the Service Agreement required
LT to remove a significant quantity of equipment and materials that LT was previously permitted
to store at the Zone 3 schools. In order to store this equipment and materials, on August 20,
2020, LT was required to enter a Lease Agreement for additional storage space within LT’s
office building in Falls Church, Virginia (the “Falls Church Lease”). Exhibit 23. The Falls
Church Lease term will extend until May 31, 2021 (the date the Service Agreement term would
have expired) and will require LT’s payment of $24,046.67 in rent.
F. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
As a result of the County’s improper augmentation and termination of the Service
Agreement, LT was required to retain legal counsel to address the County’s allegations.
Through September 21, 2020, LT has incurred $26,590.00 in attorneys’ fees and costs due to the
County’s actions. See Exhibit 24 hereto; Exhibit 9 (Affidavit of Michael Nguyen).
G. Lost Profits and Business Impacts
As a result of the County’s improper termination of the Service Agreement, LT has been
deprived of the ability to complete the contract term through May 2021 and to receive its
associated profits from August 2020 through May 2021. LT estimates these lost profits through
two measurements. First, as detailed in Exhibit 18, LT estimates the lost profits for the period of
September 2020 through May 2021 to be in the amount of $294,174.54. This figure is derived
Page 168 of 353
27
from a calculation of the profit earned during the months of September 2018 through May 2019,
and represents a reasonable profit margin of 14.40%.10
Second, applying this same profit margin, LT reasonably estimates its lost profits for the
month of August 2020 to be in the amount of $32,686.06. Again, LT’s unpaid August 2020
invoice does not reflect any fee or profit.
Accordingly, as a result of the County’s improper termination of the Service Agreement,
LT has suffered lost profits totaling $326,860.60. It should also be noted that the County’s abrupt
termination of the Service Agreement prevented LT from securing replacement work and, as
discussed above, LT has already faced inquires from a prospective client regarding the County’s
improper termination for default. This inquiry is indicative of the struggles LT will face in
securing new work after being incorrectly terminated for default. The County’s actions therefore
have effectively prevented LT from mitigating its lost profit damages.
H. Summary of Claimed Relief and Damages
LT requests the County’s formal reversal of its decision to terminate the Service
Agreement for default, and that the County take appropriate action to ensure that any record of
the termination is removed from databases, websites, and other sources. LT further requests the
damages discussed above and summarized as follows:
10 The information contained in Exhibit 18 is derived directly from LT’s accounting records. See Exhibit 9
(Affidavit of Michael Nguyen). LT does not utilize the profits earned from September 2019 to May 2020 as this
period includes the months of April and May 2020, during which LT was directed to discontinue its services.
Page 169 of 353
28
Summary of Claimed Relief and Damages
Description Amount Note
1
Total profit lost for remainder of year 3 (9
months) $ 294,174.54 Sept/2020 to May 2021
2 Unpaid invoice for July/20 Services $ 231,334.00 Fixed monthly amount invoice
3 Unpaid invoice for August/20 Service $ 154,222.67 Pro-rate from 8/1/ to 8/20
4 Estimate profit loss for August/20 $ 32,686.06
Based on average profit of
14.40%
6 Chesterfield Office lease (September) $ 400.00
Landlord required 14 days
notice to terminate
7 Retrieving Equipment Expense $ 5,649.80
8 Temp Storage $ 24,046.67
9 Missing Equipment $ 9,823.56
10 Legal fees and Costs $ 26,590.00
Total Claim Amount $ 778,927.30
LT reserves the right to amend or supplement these damages, including to reflect
additional attorneys’ fees and costs incurred.
V. Conclusion and Claim for Relief
For the reasons set forth above, the County’s augmentation and termination of the Service
Agreement was unjustified and improper. LT therefore requests the reversal of the County’s
termination of the Service Agreement for default and that the County remove and/or correct any
records reflecting such termination. LT further requests damages in an amount not less than
$778,927.30.
Should you have any questions regarding this Claim, please contact me at
michael.lts@gmail.com.
Page 170 of 353
Page 171 of 353
Rezoning from Commercial Business (C‐2) and Neighborhood
Office (O‐1) to Multifamily Residential (R‐MF) on 3.5 acres
with conditional use planned development to permit
exceptions to ordinance requirements and development
standards.
Better Housing Coalition
21SN0518 – Clover Hill
This case is in the Clover Hill District, and the applicant, Better Housing Coalition is
requesting rezoning from Commercial Business (C‐2) and Neighborhood Office (O‐1) to
Multi‐Family Residential District (R‐MF) with Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD)
to permit multi‐family uses plus exceptions to ordinance requirements.
1Page 172 of 353
21SN0518 – Zoning Map
The subject property is located south of Hull Street, along the west side of Genito Road, at
Stigall Drive and Way, and outlined in red on the map above. Properties to the north, east,
and west are zoned C‐3, and to the south, O‐2 and R‐9.
2Page 173 of 353
21SN0518 – Aerial & Land Use Map
The property is currently undeveloped, and properties on the north, east, and west are
developed as commercial and retail, and properties to the south as office and single‐family
residential. The Land Use Plan designates the site as Corporate Office.
3Page 174 of 353
21SN0518 – Rendering of Conceptual Layout
This is the proposed conceptual plan. A multi‐family building with 49 units is proposed.
The development consists of two access points from Stigall Way, a single building that
is 3 stories, and associated surface parking. Sidewalks and pedestrian trails are
proposed along frontages of the site as well as through the site as illustrated above.
Per the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors policy, the traffic impact of the
development could be addressed at $5,640 per unit. The resulting traffic impact could
be valued at $276,360 ($5,640 x 49). The applicant has proffered to pay $5,640 per
dwelling unit.
Exceptions are requested to ordinance requirements, including the following seven (7)
items:
1) Total project size:
3.54 acres proposed, minimum 20 acres required per zoning ordinance
2) Density:
14 units per acre proposed, 10 units per acre is the maximum per zoning ordinance
3) Width of access drives:
24 feet proposed, minimum 30 feet is required per zoning ordinance
4Page 175 of 353
4) Recreational Area:
0.80 acre proposed, minimum of 10% of project acreage, but not less than 1.5 acres
required. 750 square feet of interior community/amenity area to be provided
5) Dwelling Units per Floor:
The maximum number of dwelling units shall be fifteen (15) on the first floor, and
seventeen (17) on the second and third floors, maximum of ten (10) per zoning
ordinance
6) Parking:
1.75 per dwelling unit, minimum of 2 per dwelling unit per zoning ordinance
7) Building Setbacks:
25’ setback from roadways is requested, 50’ is required per zoning ordinance
15’ setback from interior pavement is requested, 25’ is required per zoning ordinance
5’ setback from parking is requested, 15’ is required per zoning ordinance
Staff is supportive of these ordinance exceptions to allow the developer flexibility in overall
design based on the nature of the use, layout, design, and size of the site.
4Page 176 of 353
21SN0518 – Conceptual Elevation
These are proffered building elevations. The building is 3‐stories, and contains a variety of
building materials, 85% of which shall be brick or stone masonry, with hardiplank, and
varying façade materials to add depth to the structure. Screening of ground‐mounted
mechanical units is also proposed, and HVAC units located on the roof shall be screened
from view from the adjacent public right‐of‐way. HVAC units located on the ground shall be
screened from view by landscaping or low maintenance material. Site lighting is limited to
20’ in height and pedestrian lighting is also proposed, to be approved at the time of site
plan.
5Page 177 of 353
21SN0518 – Recommendation(s)
Approval
•Proposed multifamily residential uses comply with Plan, providing opportunity
for integration of higher density residential uses with existing commercial and
office uses as part of the larger community.
•Quality design and architecture offered by the applicant provide for a
convenient, attractive and harmonious community that will complement the
surrounding development.
•The development’s traffic impact will be addressed by providing cash
payments.
The Planning Commission and Staff recommend approval with the applicant’s proffered
conditions detailed in the report.
•Proposed multifamily residential uses comply with Plan, providing opportunity
for integration of higher density residential uses with existing commercial and
office uses as part of the larger community.
•Quality design and architecture offered by the applicant provide for a
convenient, attractive and harmonious community that will complement the
surrounding development.
•The traffic impact will be addressed by providing cash payments.
6Page 178 of 353
21SN0518 – Zoning Map
7Page 179 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 1 of 22
21SN0518 – Better Housing Coalition
Magisterial District - Clover Hill
Agent – Andrew M. Scherzer (804-794-0571)
BOS Public Hearing - January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager
Harold Ellis
(804-768-7592)
Request
Rezoning &
Conditional Use Planned Development
A three (3) story, forty-nine (49) unit multifamily
development is planned.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
Property Location
3901 Stigall Drive
Site Size
3.5 Acres
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Corporate Office
Plan Area
County Wide Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area (VGIN 2016) – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
Rezoning from Neighborhood Business (C-2) and Neighborhood Office (O-1) Districts to Multifamily Residential (R-MF)
District with Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD) to permit multifamily uses plus exceptions to ordinance
requirements. Specifically, these exceptions pertain to (1) project size, (2) density, (3) width of access drives, (4)
recreational areas, (5) number of dwelling units per floor, (6) parking and (7) building setbacks.
• A multifamily residential development is proposed on property fronting Genito Road, Stigall Drive, and Stigall
Way. Density will be limited to fourteen (14) dwelling units per acre, yielding a maximum of forty-nine (49)
dwelling units.
Subsequent to the Commission’s consideration of this request, Staff received Proffered Condition 14 on January 20,
2021. The proffer provides for a minimum of eight (8) of the proposed units, (six (6) one-bedroom units and two (2)
two-bedroom units), to be available at all times for the Chesterfield Community Services Board (CSB) to lease for the
use of CSB and its clients.
Summary of Proposal
Page 180 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 2 of 22
PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVAL
STAFF - APPROVAL
PLANNING
• The Comprehensive Plan recommends Corporate Office uses, however a multi-family product could be
acceptable in this location as long as adequate open spaces/amenities are provided, connections to surrounding
streets & properties including pedestrian connection(s) across Genito Road are provided, and the building is
designed to reduce impacts on the nearby single-family uses.
• Quality design and architecture offered by the applicant provide for a convenient, attractive and harmonious
community that will complement the surrounding development.
• Exceptions to ordinance requirements detailed above are requested to provide flexibility in overall development
design, and supported by staff.
TRANSPORTATION
• The development’s traffic impact will be addressed by providing cash payments.
NOTES FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions.
2. Proffered conditions, Textual Statement, and a conceptual plan have been submitted by the applicant.
Recommendations
Page 181 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 3 of 22
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Budget and Management ................................................................................................................................................... 7
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 7
Libraries ............................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Parks & Recreation .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
Schools .............................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Transportation - County Department of Transportation .................................................................................................. 11
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation ................................................................................................. 12
Utilities – Water and Wastewater .................................................................................................................................... 12
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ......................................................................................................................... 12
Proffered Conditions (January 20, 2021) .............................................................................................................................. 13
Textual Statement - Ordinance Exceptions (December 11, 2020)........................................................................................ 15
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A ......................................................................................................................................... 16
Proposed Elevations – Exhibit B ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Rendering of Concept Plan – Exhibit C .................................................................................................................................. 19
Case Contacts ........................................................................................................................................................................ 20
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Budget & Management ..................................................................................................................................................... 21
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................. 21
Schools .............................................................................................................................................................................. 22
Table of Contents
Page 182 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 4 of 22
Zoning History
93SN0180: Approved (6/1993)
Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Neighborhood Office (O-1) of 0.8 acre, Neighborhood Business (C-2) of 7.2 acres and
Community Business (C-3) of 9.5 acres, with Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD) to permit use and bulk
exceptions. A mix of office, general commercial, and community commercial uses were planned. The subject property was
included as part of this larger zoning request.
Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Plan Designation
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Corporate Office, which suggests the Property is appropriate for
uses such as professional and administrative offices, or similar. Under certain circumstances, within larger tracts
developed for office use, integrated supporting retail and services uses may be appropriate.
Proposal
A multifamily residential development with a maximum of forty-nine (49) dwelling units is proposed. The concept for the
proposed multifamily development consists of a single three-story building, with surface parking and open space with
pedestrian connectivity, as detailed in Exhibit C, Rendering of Conceptual Plan. Two (2) points of access to the property are
planned, both from Stigall Way. While the overall site consists of 3.5 acres, development of the multifamily facility is
planned for the 2.8 acres on Stigall Drive, with the adjacent 0.7 acre site remaining undeveloped, as detailed in Exhibit A,
Conceptual Plan.
Subsequent to the Commission’s consideration of this request, Staff received Proffered Condition 14 on January 20,
2021. The proffer provides for a minimum of eight (8) of the proposed units, (six (6) one-bedroom units and two (2)
two-bedroom units), to be available at all times for the Chesterfield Community Services Board (CSB) to lease for the use
of CSB and its clients.
Ordinance Exceptions
Conditional use planned development is requested to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements. Exceptions are
requested for development standards in the Multifamily Residential (R-MF) District, including:
• Project Size:
o 3.54 acres proposed, minimum of 20 acres is required per zoning ordinance
• Density:
o 14 units per acre proposed, 10 units per acre is the maximum per zoning ordinance
• Pavement Width of Access Drives:
o 24 feet proposed, minimum of 30 feet is required per zoning ordinance
• Recreational Area:
o 0.80 acre proposed, minimum of 10% of project acreage, but not less than 1.5 acres required per zoning
ordinance. 750 square feet of interior community/amenity area to be provided.
• Dwelling Units per Floor:
o The maximum number of dwelling units shall be fifteen (15) on the first floor, and seventeen (17) on the
second and third floors, maximum of ten (10) per floor is allowe per zoning ordinance
• Parking:
o 1.75 per dwelling unit proposed, minimum of 2 per dwelling unit required per zoning ordinance
• Building Setbacks:
o 25’ setback from roadways is requested, 50’ is required per zoning ordinance
o 15’ setback from interior pavement is requested, 25’ is required per zoning ordinance
o 5’ setback from parking is requested, 15’ is required per zoning ordinance
Planning
Page 183 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 5 of 22
Design
The following provides an overview of design requirements offered as part of this request:
Community Design
• Concept Plan (Exhibit A), Rendering of Concept Plan (Exhibit C)
• 0.80 acre of recreational and pedestrian scale amenities, such as walking paths, benches, gathering areas, and
community spaces shall be provided
• Indoor recreational provisions
o 750 square feet of community amenity area, to include gathering space and leasing office, and other
uses to serve residents to be provided
Building Design
• Building elevations (Exhibit B)
• Variety of building materials including 85% brick or stone veneer, with hardiplank, and varying façade materials
to add depth to the structure
• Screening of ground-mounted mechanical units; HVAC units located on the roof shall be screened from view
from the adjacent public right-of-way. HVAC units located on the ground shall be screened from view by
landscaping or low maintenance material.
As suggested by the Comprehensive Plan goals and the Zoning Ordinance, the proffered conditions of this request
include design and architectural elements that will complement the overall development.
Page 184 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 6 of 22
Current Zoning Map
Page 185 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 7 of 22
1. The current cash proffer amount is $5,640 per dwelling unit. There are forty-nine (49) units included with this
request. The current total potential value of the approved cash proffer equates to $276,360.
1. Both properties are located within the Lower Swift Creek Watershed
2. Resource Protection Area (RPA) Designation must be submitted to the Department of Environmental
Engineering prior to the submittal of any site plans.
3. Any areas of wetlands shall not be impacted without prior approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and/or the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
4. Properties drain into an existing storm sewer system in the Hunters Landing subdivision.
a. Existing downstream culverts and stormwater conveyance systems in the Hunters Landing subdivision
shall be evaluated to verify that existing private properties will not be negatively impacted with
increased stormwater runoff created by the development.
b. The maximum post-development discharge rate for the 100-year storm shall be limited to the maximum
capacity of the existing facilities downstream, and the recorded 100-year backwater and/or floodplain
shall not be increased.
5. Development is subject to the Part IIB technical criteria of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program
Regulations for water quality and water quantity.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Insurance Service Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC) Class 2
Anticipated Impacts On Fire & EMS
Call Load in Immediate Service Area During Previous Fiscal Year 2192
Projected Calls Generated Yearly by Proposed Development 13
Projected Call Load Increase in Immediate Service Area by Proposed Development < 1%
Drive And Response Times – STATION 24 (Manchester)
Response Zone & Time Urban
7 Minutes
Road Miles from Closest Fire Station .22
Estimated Drive Time from Closest Fire Station1 3:05
minutes
Estimated Response Time for First Unit on Scene2 6:05
minutes
1 Drive-time estimates are exclusive of potential delays due to weather, traffic, or blockage of response routes.
2 Estimates assume response units and personnel are in the station and available to respond at the time of an incident and include 1
min 30 sec for 911 call processing and dispatch, and up to 1 min 30 sec for firefighter turnout.
Planned Capital Facility Improvements
No capital facility improvements are currently planned in the immediate vicinity.
Supplemental Analysis
Budget and Management
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 186 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 8 of 22
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Chesterfield Fire and EMS participates in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification
(PPC) program, which rates a community’s fire protection capabilities in accordance with the Fire Suppression
Rating Schedule (FSRS). Using the FSRS, the ISO performs a comprehensive evaluation of a community’s fire
department, water supply, emergency communications and community risk reduction efforts. The resulting
score establishes a PPC rating from 1 to 10, with Class 1 being the best possible rating. Many insurance
carriers reference a community’s PPC rating in establishing insurance premiums. Generally, communities with
a Class 1 rating enjoy lower insurance premiums than those communities with a Class 10 rating.
The proposed development is located in an area with an ISO Class 2 rating, which indicates a property is
within 5 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Anticipated Impacts on Fire & EMS
The proposed development is within the immediate service area of the Manchester Volunteer Rescue Squad
Fire Station, Company Number 24 which generated 2192 calls for service during FY-2020. Based on a
projected average of .292 calls per dwelling unit, it is estimated this development will generate 13 calls for
service annually, representing a less than 1% increase in call load for the immediate service area.
Response Times
The proposed development is .22 road miles from the Manchester Volunteer Rescue Squad Fire Station,
Company Number 24 and will be located within the urban response zone where CFEMS response time goals
include the arrival of the first unit on the scene of the highest priority incidents (i.e. fire or life-threatening
medical emergency) within 7 minutes of a 911 call, 90% of the time. Consistent with the approved Chesterfield
County Comprehensive Plan, these response time goals include a 4-minute drive-time from the closest fire
station. Current models indicate the proposed development will be within the 7-minute response time goal.
Additional Information
When the property is developed, the number of hydrants, quantity of water needed for fire protection, and
access requirements will be evaluated during the plans review process.
Additional information relative to Fire & Life Safety’s Mission and Service Profile, Community Fire Protection Capabilities
Assessment, and Response Time Goals can be found in the Appendix.
Nearby Facilities
• Clover Hill • LaPrade
1. While all county libraries could be potentially impacted by the proposed development, the Clover Hill is the
closest library facility to the Property.
2. The Public Facilities Plan suggests the Clover Hill Library should be expanded/replaced or a new facility shall be
constructed in the general vicinity at or near current site. Land for expansion of this facility has been acquired.
Libraries
Page 187 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 9 of 22
Nearby Facilities
• Providence Road Park
• Providence Creek Park
• Clarendon Park
• Fernbrook Park
• Manchester Athletic Center
• Warbro Athletic Center
1. The applicant’s proposal should address the Bikeway and Trail along Genito Road as well as opportunities for
pedestrian and bicycle linkages within the proposed development, which it does. The applicant’s plan illustrates
sidewalks throughout the site and there is an exsiting sidewalk along Genito Road.
Parks & Recreation
Page 188 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 10 of 22
This application is for a multi-family residential development containing a maximum of 49 MF dwelling units; total
potential student yield ranges from 16 to 20 students.
Membership and Capacity (2020-21SY) Zoning Case 21SN0518
Current
Enrollment
(09-30-2020) (3)
Program
Capacity (1)
Percent
Program
Capacity
Proposed
Number
of Units
Housing
Type
SGF 2019(2) Anticipated Student Yield
School-
specific
Countywide
Average
School-
specific
Countywide
Average
CRENSHAW
ES
(PK to 5)
620 774 80%
- SF 0.2021 0.2061 - -
49 MF 0.1998 0.1681 9 8
- TH 0.1998 0.1063 - -
49 Total 9 8
BAILEY
BRIDGE MS
(6 to 8)
1,530 1,599 96%
- SF 0.1142 0.1131 - -
49 MF 0.0945 0.0813 4 4
- TH 0.0397 0.0627 - -
49 Total 4 4
MANCHESTER
HS
(9 to 12)
2,147 2,156 100%
- SF 0.1497 0.1540 - -
49 MF 0.1617 0.0948 7 4
- TH 0.1374 0.0936 - -
49 Total 7 4
Note:
(1) Program capacity is the maximum number of students the building can accommodate based on the Virginia Department of Education
Standards of Quality and the current school programming that may adjust the number of rooms used for core or grade-level classrooms
in the overall building design capacity. Program capacity numbers may be higher than previous years due to more spaces being
designated/quantified for capacity uses.
(2) Student Generation Factor (2019) is the actual total number of students by grade level divided by the actual total number of housing
units by housing type. Based upon the average number of students per multi-family dwelling unit for each of the school attendance zones
where the proposal is located. Updated 2019 SGFs provided by County IST.
(3) Current enrollment numbers may be lower than previous years. The reduction is primarily attributed to COVID-19.
School Capacity Analysis
Crenshaw Elementary School: Current capacity at 80%. This school is a Center-Based Gifted (CBG) site and receives
students from Spring Run and Grange Hall Elementary Schools. Based on the 2019 SGF table, there are no existing multi-
family dwelling units in the Crenshaw ES attendance zone; therefore, the SGF for the total students and total housing
units for the attendance zone was used to calculate potential student yield for the proposed forty-nine (49) MF units.
The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on geographical regions, shows that there could be an
increase of approximately forty-two (42) students for the 2024 forecast in a section of the regions that are contained
within the Crenshaw attendance zone.
Bailey Bridge Middle School: Current capacity at 96%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately forty-three (43) students for the 2024
forecast in a section of the regions that are contained within the Bailey Bridge attendance zone. As this school is
approaching 100% of its program capacity, its enrollment and capacity will continue to be closely monitored.
Manchester High School: Current capacity at 100%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately eighty-three (83) students for the 2024
forecast in a section of the regions that are contained within the Manchester High attendance zone. Since this school is
at 100% program capacity, which consequently presents impacts on available seats, student transportation, and safety
and security operations, staff is exploring strategies for addressing capacity - to include redistricting, program relocation
or increasing available capacity.
Additional information on CCPS Mission and Capital Improvements can be found in the Appendix.
Schools
Page 189 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 11 of 22
Based on the applicant’s Master Plan and Textual Statement, the property could be developed for forty-nine (49)
multifamily units (Proffered Condition 1 and Textual Statement 1). Based on those numbers of units and applying trip
generation rates for a multi-family (mid-rise) unit, development could generate approximately 270 average daily trips.
Traffic generated by development of the property will be initially distributed via Stigall Way and Stigall Drive to Genito
Road.
Genito Road between Courthouse Road and Hull Street Road (Route 360) is a major arterial with a recommended right
of way width of ninety (90) feet, as identified on the County’s Thoroughfare Plan. This section of Genito Road is a four-
lane divided road. In 2019, the VDOT traffic count on Genito Road along this section was 12,000 vehicles per day (Level
of Service “B”).
Section 19.1-231 of the County Code outlines the general requirements to meet the needs of the traffic generated by a
proposed development, including acceptable levels of service. This proposed residential development would contribute
to an identifiable need for transportation improvements. The applicant has not offered to provide any mitigating road
improvements.
The property is located within Traffic Shed 7, which encompasses the area of the County bounded by Hull Street Road,
Chippenham Parkway, Route 10, and Route 288. Several roads in this traffic shed or which serve this traffic shed are
substandard, with little or no shoulders, fixed objects (trees) adjacent to the edge of the pavement, and poor vertical
and horizontal alignments. The traffic volume generated from this proposed residential development will contribute to
an identifiable need for transportation facility improvements to these roads in excess of existing transportation facility
capacity. Roads in this shed or which serve this shed need to be improved or widened to address safety and
accommodate increased traffic, including the increased traffic from the proposed development.
An applicant may choose to address the development’s impact on the county’s road transportation network through
dedication of property, construction of road improvements, or a cash proffer. If an applicant elects to offer cash to
address the impact on the county’s road transportation network, Transportation staff has calculated the average impact
of a single-family dwelling unit on the transportation network to be $12,652; however, the Board of Supervisors has
adopted a policy establishing that it would accept a maximum cash proffer of $9,400 per dwelling unit as addressing the
traffic impacts of residential development, with all of the funds to be dedicated towards improvements to the road
network. The Policy allows the county to consider mitigating circumstances about a proposed development. In this case,
the residential development will be limited to multi-family (apartment) dwelling units which generate approximately
60% of the traffic of single-family dwelling unit. The traffic impact of the multi-family unit could be addressed with
$5,640 ($9,400 x 60%) per unit. The traffic impact of the development could be valued at $276,360 (49 units x $5,640).
Recommendation Applicant’s Proposal
Cash Proffer Policy
Per the Department of Community Enhancement, Property is not located within a
revitalization area. Under the Road Cash Proffer Policy, cash proffers will be
accepted for development in these areas, to which the applicant has agreed. The
proffered condition allows, at the option of the Transportation Department, a
reduction in the cash proffer payment based on the cost of transportation
improvements provided by the applicant. Specific road improvement(s) have not
been identified.
The applicant has proffered to
pay $5,640 per residential
dwelling unit (Proffered
Condition 3).
Transportation - County Department of Transportation
Page 190 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 12 of 22
The proposed entrances will be subject to the requirements of VDOT corner clearance.
1. During the site plan review process, VDOT will require trip generations based on the new impacts to traffic, with
turn lane warrants analysis.
2. All proposed sidewalks proposed in VDOT right-of-way shall be designed in accordance with VDOT standards.
1. The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection areas for new
residential development. The applicant has proffered connection to the public water and wastewater systems.
2. A 12” public water line is located in Genito Road, adjacent to the southeast corner of the subject property; an 8”
water line is located at the southwest corner of the subject property. An 8” public wastewater line is located at the
southwest corner of the subject property.
Community Meetings
10/21/2020 – Discussion Topics:
1. Height of proposed building and impact on adjacent properties in terms of privacy.
Planning Commission
11/17/2020: ACTION - DEFERRED TO DECEMBER 15, 2020 ON THE COMMISSION’S OWN MOTION WITH THE
APPLICANT’S CONSENT.
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Commission Discussion: Mrs. Freye thanked the applicant, their representative, and staff for working to
create conditions which ensure a quality development which will provide a good transition from this site
to the Hunders Landing subdivision. Mrs. Freye also believes that citizen comment she received
pertained to development in general for this site, and was not specific to the proposed use and that she
also believes that the applicant worked to make sure an initial concern pertaining to height has been
addressed.
Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH PROFFERED CONDITIONS
Motion: Freye Second: Petroski
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, Petroski
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Page 191 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 13 of 22
Staff Note: Both the Planning Commission and Staff recommend acceptance of Proffered Conditions 1-13 offered by
the applicant. After the advertisement of this request, Proffered Condition 14 was submitted by the applicant and is
included below. Staff recommends approval of Proffered Condition 14.
1. Master Plan. The Master Plan for the Property shall consist of the following:
a. The Textual Statement last revised December 11, 2020.
b. The Conceptual Plan, Exhibit A, last revised October 30, 2020 and prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc.
Development of the Property shall generally conform to the Conceptual Plan, with respect to the general
layout of roads and buildings, and the general location of parking, sidewalks, and open space.
Adjustments to the Conceptual Plan may be approved at the time of site plan review, provided such
adjustments substantially retain the relationship between buildings, parking, roads and open space. If
adjustments are deemed to be significant, the Conceptual Plan shall be presented to the Planning
Commission for final approval.
c. Conceptual Elevations, Exhibit B, last revised September 10, 2020 and prepared by Winks, Snowa.
d. Rendering of Conceptual Plan, Exhibit C, last revised October 16, 2020 and prepared by Balzer and
Associates Inc. (P)
2. Utilities. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. (U)
3. Road Cash Proffer.
a. The applicant, sub-divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $5,640 for each residential dwelling unit to the County
of Chesterfield for road improvements within the service district for the property.
b. Each payment shall be made prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a dwelling unit. Should
Chesterfield County impose impact fees at any time during the life of the development that are
applicable to the property, the amount paid in cash proffers shall be in lieu of or credited toward, but not
in addition to, any impact fees, in a manner determined by the County.
c. At the option of the Transportation Department, cash proffer payments may be reduced for the cost of
transportation improvements provided by the applicant, sub-divider, or assignee(s), as determined by the
Transportation Department. (BM)
4. Access. There shall be no direct vehicular access to Genito Road. (T)
5. Architecture and Building Materials.
a. Unless significant deviations are approved by the Planning Commission during site plan review, the
architectural treatment of the buildings shall generally be compatible in quality to the architectural
standards of the elevations as shown in Exhibit B.
b. Buildings shall be constructed with brick or stone veneer, hardiplank, or a combination thereof. Exterior
façade shall contain at least eighty-five (85) percent brick or stone veneer. The remaining exterior siding
will be cementitious material. Dutch lap, plywood and metal siding are not permitted. Different façade
materials shall be used for building façades to add depth and interest to the structure. Roofing material
shall be standing seam metal, dimensional architectural shingles, or better with a minimum of 30-year
warranty. Thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) roofing shall be permitted as a flat roof material. (P)
6. Landscaping. Landscaping, including foundation plantings, shall be provided and maintained around the
perimeter of all buildings, between buildings and driveways, within medians, and common areas. Landscaping
Proffered Conditions (January 20, 2021)
Page 192 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 14 of 22
shall be designed to minimize the predominance of building mass and paved areas; define private spaces; and
enhance the residential character of the development. Large mature trees shall be provided throughout the
parking lot, adjacent to the building and along the perimeter of the property as shown in Exhibit A. The
landscaping plan shall be approved at the time of plans review with respect to the exact numbers, spacing,
arrangement and species of plantings. (P)
7. Mechanical Unit Screening. Any mechanical units shall be ground mounted or roof mounted. Any mechanical
units that are ground mounted shall be screened with landscaping, a masonry wall to match the masonry on the
buildings, or an opaque fence. Any mechanical units that are roof mounted shall be screened by architectural
features and materials which are compatible with the building façade architecture. Screening shall be designed
to block such mechanical units from view by person on any public streets. The specific method of screening shall
be approved at the time of plan review. (P)
8. Recreational Area and Amenities.
a. A minimum 750 square foot community/amenity area, which shall include interior gathering spaces, a
leasing office, and other uses to primarily serve the residents, shall be provided and generally located
within the residential building as depicted on Exhibit A.
b. Recreational and pedestrian scale amenities, such as walking paths, benches, gathering areas, and
community spaces shall be provided. A minimum of 0.80 acre of open space shall be provided. (P)
9. Sidewalks and Pathways.
a. Sidewalks and walkways shall be provided along internal driveways that provide general circulation and
among parking areas.
b. A five (5) foot walking trail shall be provided within the landscape setback along Stigall Way and a 5-foot
sidewalk shall be provided within the right-of-way of Stigall Drive. Both shall connect to the existing
sidewalk along Genito Road. (P)
10. Unit Types. No more than 25% of the dwelling units constructed shall have three (3) bedrooms. No dwelling
units shall have more than three (3) bedrooms. (P and BI)
11. Lighting.
a. Light poles shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height.
b. Pedestrian lighting for the sidewalks along Genito Road and Stigall Drive shall be provided per a lighting
plan to be approved by the Chesterfield County Planning Department at time of site plan review. (P)
12. Building Height. The maximum building height shall be three (3) stories or 44 feet. (P)
13. Undeveloped Property. Tax ID 745-683-0242 shall remain undeveloped and recorded as open space. (P)
14. CSB Units. A minimum of eight (8) units, six (6) one-bedroom units and two (2) two-bedroom units, shall be
available at all times for the Chesterfield Community Services Board (“CSB”) to lease for the use of CSB and its
clients. If the CSB fails to lease one or more of the units available to the CSB for a period exceeding sixty (60)
days, the vacant unit(s) shall be made available to other lessees. However, at the beginning of each calendar
year, at least eight (8) units shall be offered to CSB on a first right of refusal as long as the CSB has not leased a
total of eight units. (P)
Page 193 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 15 of 22
1. Project Standards.
a. Project Size. The project size shall be 3.54 acres.
b. Density. The maximum density shall not exceed 14 units to the acre.
c. Recreational Area. No active recreational facilities or areas shall be required; however, recreational, and
pedestrian scale amenities shall be provided as set forth in Proffered Condition 8.
d. Access Drives. The minimum width of drives, both access and other, shall be twenty-four (24) feet.
e. Private Pavement. Private pavement along Genito Road shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25)
feet.
2. Building Standards.
a. Individual Building Setbacks.
i. Roads. All buildings shall be located a minimum twenty-five (25) feet from any adjacent roads.
ii. Interior Private Pavement. All buildings shall be located a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from
interior private pavement, excluding parking spaces.
iii. Parking Spaces. All buildings shall be located a minimum of five (5) feet from any parking space.
b. Dwelling Units per Floor. The maximum number of dwelling units shall be fifteen (15) units on the first
floor and seventeen (17) units on the second and third floors.
3. Other Required Standards.
a. Parking. On-site parking shall be provided at a minimum of 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit.
Textual Statement - Ordinance Exceptions (December 11, 2020)
Page 194 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 16 of 22
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A
Page 195 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 17 of 22
Proposed Elevations – Exhibit B
Page 196 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 18 of 22
Page 197 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 19 of 22
Rendering of Concept Plan – Exhibit C
Page 198 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 20 of 22
Applicant
• Applicant’s Agent:
Andrew Scherzer (804-647-4333)
ascherzer@balzer.cc
District Planning Commissioner
• Gloria L. Freye, J.D. (804-768-7381)
freyeg@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager:
Harold Ellis (804-768-7592)
ellish@chesterfield.gov
• Community Enhancement:
Carl Schlaudt (804-318-8674)
schlaudtc@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering:
Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028)
rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services:
Anthony Batten (804-717-6167)
battena@chesterfield.gov
• Libraries:
Jennifer Stevens (804-751-4998)
stevensj@chesterfield.gov
• Parks & Recreation:
Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482)
llewellynJa@chesterfield.gov
• Police:
Steve Grohowski (804-751-4720)
growhowskis@chesterfield.gov
• Schools:
Atonja Allen (804-318-8740)
atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation:
Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsst@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation:
Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities:
Randy Phelps (804-796-7126)
phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 199 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 21 of 22
County finance staff is responsible for managing the finances of the County and making recommendations to the County
Administrator regarding the allocation of available resources for the provision of services and capital facilities to serve
the citizens of the County. Finance staff will advise the County Administrator if changed economic circumstances require
adjustments to the County’s budget or capital improvement program.
Mission & Service Profile
The mission of Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services (CFEMS) is to protect life, property and the
environment. This requires a comprehensive portfolio of services aimed at preventing fires, mitigating the impact of
fires and disasters on the community, and providing a timely and effective response when fires, medical and other
emergencies occur. Community risks, population growth and demographic changes, service demands, and response
times are reviewed annually and the need for additional Fire & EMS operating and capital resources in support of the
department’s mission is evaluated during the county’s annual budget and 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
processes.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Chesterfield Fire and EMS participates in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC)
program, which rates a community’s fire protection capabilities in accordance with the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule
(FSRS). Using the FSRS, the ISO performs a comprehensive evaluation of a community’s fire department, water supply,
emergency communications and community risk reduction efforts. The resulting score establishes a PPC rating from 1 to
10, with Class 1 being the best possible rating. Many insurance carriers reference a community’s PPC rating in
establishing insurance premiums. Generally, communities with a Class 1 rating enjoy lower insurance premiums than
those communities with a Class 10 rating. Chesterfield County has a current community classification of 2/2Y, however
some portions are classified as 10 or 10W based on the parameters indicated below;
Class 2 - within 5 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 2Y – within 5 miles of a fire station but not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10W – within 5-7 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10 – outside of 5 miles of a fire station and not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
A 10, 10W or 2Y rating can be improved with the addition of fire hydrants and/or construction of fire stations within the
defined distance parameters.
Response Time Goals (Urban/Rural Zones)
Urban Zone
➢ Fire and EMS response goal is 7 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 4 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 8 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Rural Zone
➢ Fire and EMS response goal is 12 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 9 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 13 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Map illustrating Urban vs Rural response zones
Appendix
Budget & Management
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 200 of 353
Better Housing Coalition 21SN0518 Page 22 of 22
Mission
High performing, high quality public schools contribute to the quality of life and economic vitality of the County. The
comprehensive plan suggests a greater focus should be placed on linking schools with communities by providing greater
access, flexible designs and locations that better meet the needs of the communities in which they are located.
Capital Improvements
The School Board FY2021 adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) continues to support the 2013 voter approved school
revitalization program that will replace or renovate ten schools and construct one new elementary school to add
capacity in the Midlothian area of the county. The ten existing facilities that are part of the revitalization program are
Beulah Elementary School, Crestwood Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Ettrick Elementary School,
Harrowgate Elementary School, Matoaca Elementary School, Reams Elementary School, Manchester Middle School,
Providence Middle School, and Monacan High School. A replacement Manchester Middle School is under construction
on the existing school site, a replacement Harrowgate Elementary School is under construction on a new site, and a
replacement Matoaca Elementary School is under construction on the site of the former Matoaca Middle School west
campus building. The Beulah Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Old Hundred Elementary School (the new
elementary school in the Midlothian district), Providence Middle School, and Monacan High School projects are
complete. The Matoaca Middle School wing addition at the east campus site, an additional school construction project,
is complete and the school now operates as a single, unified campus. Information on the CIP and School Board
approved construction projects can be found in the financial section of the CCPS Adopted Budget for FY2021.
Schools
Page 201 of 353
Page 202 of 353
Page 203 of 353
Page 204 of 353
Page 205 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 1 of 27
21SN0519 – Richmond Affordable Housing
Magisterial District - Bermuda
Agent – John Bolton (804-644-1057)
BOS Public Hearing - January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager
Josh Gillespie
(804-796-7122)
Request
Rezoning &
Conditional Use Planned Development
A multifamily development, with up to 152 dwelling units,
is planned.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
The Property
13916 and 13920 Jefferson Davis
Highway
Site Size
9.8 Acres
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Neighborhood Business
Plan Area
County Wide Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
Rezoning from Commercial Business (C-5) and Agricultural (A) districts to Multifamily District (R-MF) and conditional
use planned development (CUPD) to permit multifamily uses including a community building with office uses.
Specifically, these exceptions pertain to 1) project size, 2) density, 3) setbacks, 4) width of access drives, 5) recreational
areas, 6) number of dwelling units per floor, and 7) parking standards.
• A multifamily residential development is proposed on properties fronting Jefferson Davis Highway (US 1/301),
with an improved connection to Hillsview Avenue planned. A total of 152 units are planned, yielding a density
of approximately 15.5 dwelling units per acre.
• The Property is located within an area identified for revitalization. Under the Road Cash Proffer Policy, no road
cash proffer will be accepted.
Summary of Proposal
Page 206 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 2 of 27
PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVAL
STAFF - APPROVAL
PLANNING
• Land uses are consistent with Chapter 10 of the Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Plan), which recommends
Neighborhood Business (C-2) uses here and also supports mixed use development and reinvestment in
established communities.
• Quality design and architecture offered by the applicant provide for the redevelopment of vacant properties
consistent with the Land Development Vision for new well-designed communities that are convenient, safe and
accessible with connectivity to adjoining properties.
• Exceptions to ordinance requirements detailed above are requested to provide flexibility in overall development
design, and supported by staff.
NOTES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions.
2. Proffered conditions, Textual Statement, and a conceptual plan have been submitted by the applicant.
3. Both the Planning Commission and Staff recommend acceptance of the following proffered conditions offered by the
applicant.
Recommendations
Page 207 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 3 of 27
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Budget & Management ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
Community Enhancement .................................................................................................................................................. 7
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 7
Libraries ............................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Parks & Recreation .............................................................................................................................................................. 8
Police ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Schools ................................................................................................................................................................................ 9
Transportation - County Department of Transportation .................................................................................................. 10
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation ................................................................................................. 10
Utilities – Water and Wastewater .................................................................................................................................... 10
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ......................................................................................................................... 12
Proffered Conditions (11/23/2020) ...................................................................................................................................... 13
Textual Statement - Ordinance Exceptions (11/9/2020) ...................................................................................................... 15
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A (11/10/2020) ................................................................................................................... 16
Proposed Design Book – Exhibit B (11/10/2020) .................................................................................................................. 17
Site Plan Section – Exhibit C (10/22/2020) ........................................................................................................................... 23
Case Contacts ........................................................................................................................................................................ 24
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Budget & Management ..................................................................................................................................................... 25
Community Facilities and Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................... 25
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................. 25
Schools .............................................................................................................................................................................. 27
Table of Contents
Page 208 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 4 of 27
Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Plan Designation
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Neighborhood Business, which suggests the Property is appropriate
for commercial uses that serve neighborhood-wide trade areas. The Plan also supports mixed use development and
reinvestment in established communities.
Proposal
A new community consisting of a maximum of 16 townhome-type units and 136 multi-family units with a 3,000 square
foot community building permitting office uses is proposed. This development would be zoned Multifamily Residential (R-
MF) and conditional use planned development (CUPD) to permit multifamily and townhouse uses including a community
building and exceptions to ordinance requirements. Specifically, these exceptions pertain to project size, density,
setbacks, width of access drives, recreational areas, number of dwelling units per floor, and parking standards, as listed
in the Textual Statement.
Design
Development is proposed on properties fronting Jefferson Davis Highway (US 1/301), with new connections to an
unimproved segment of Hillsview Avenue to the south and a future connection to the north. The Conceptual Site Plan
(Proposed Layout Plan) illustrates the arrangement of streets and sidewalks, buildings, the historic Colbrook Motel sign
and surrounding active space, park/playground and buffers. The development will be accessed from the new public
street (Colbrook Street) intersecting with US 1/301 with Building 1 and the Community Building flanking the new street
entrance and engaging with the US 1/301 streetscape wall. Colbrook Street will run to a new intersection at the
extension of Hillsview Avenue in the central (interior) portion of the development. Buildings 2 through 7 are planned
around a central park/playground. The two (2) multifamily buildings in this section (2 and 3) with three (3) and four (4)
story heights are located north of the park. The four townhouse buildings (4, 5, 6, and 7) with two (2) story heights are
located south and west of the park, near to the Lake Forest neighborhood.
High quality residential development addresses the Comprehensive Plan goals for strong and sustainable
neighborhoods that are visually attractive, well-planned and well-maintained. Further, the purpose and intent of the
zoning ordinance to promote the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the public includes the creation of
convenient, attractive and harmonious communities, protection against overcrowding of land, and protection of the
natural environment. As such, developments that promote unique, viable and long-lasting places and enhance the
community are encouraged.
Planning
Page 209 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 5 of 27
Quality design in this project includes usable open space, transition to the developing Forest Lake neighborhood, and an
integrated design placing people above cars (parking). Design integrates to properties north and south for the potential
continuation of development patterns. Streets in this development would include on-street parking, pedestrian lighting,
and street trees to shade sidewalks. Buildings with taller elevations are placed closer to the US 1/301 corridor and
central to the site to reduce the impacts of building height and to create an enhanced streetscape with an edge of
buildings. Granting the requested exceptions would enable this high quality design and be of no detriment to the value
of surrounding properties.
As suggested by the Comprehensive Plan goals and the Zoning Ordinance, the proffered conditions of this request
include quality design and architectural elements that are elevated in quality to that of the existing and planned area
development.
Ordinance Exceptions
• Discuss Ordinance requirement first, then exception request 2nd.
• Required front yard setback is 100’; fifty (50) foot setback proposed.
Page 210 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 6 of 27
Current Zoning Map
Page 211 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 7 of 27
No comment on this request.
1. Located in Revitalization Area; Consistent with Cash Proffer Policy Section B.5 as amended in 2017.
2. Proposal represents substantial improvements above current conditions in the area.
1. Both properties are located within the Ashton Creek Watershed.
2. Resource Protection Area (RPA) Designation must be submitted to the Department of Environmental
Engineering prior to the submittal of any site plans.
3. Any areas of wetlands shall not be impacted without prior approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
and/or the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
4. Portions of the properties currently sheet flow into residential lots within the Forest Lake subdivision. No
existing stormwater systems exist along the rear of these lots; therefore, drainage shall be designed so that
runoff from impervious surfaces is directed away from these existing lots.
a. The applicant has offered Proffered Condition 12 to address this concern.
5. Portions of the properties currently drain into an existing storm sewer system in the Forest Lake subdivision
which was not designed to account for the intensity of a multi-family development. Increased runoff from the
proposed development may result in increased flooding within the existing neighborhood; therefore, the
maximum post-development discharge rate for the 100-year storm shall be limited to the maximum capacity of
the existing facilities downstream, and the recorded 100-year backwater and/or floodplain shall not be
increased.
a. The applicant has offered Proffered Condition 13 to address this concern.
6. To protect downstream properties from flooding in the event of a dam failure, any detention facility serving the
development shall be a dry facility constructed below the existing ground, such that no manmade compacted
embankment is required.
a. The applicant has offered Proffered Condition 14 to address this concern.
7. No drainage from the proposed development shall be directed to the north.
8. Development is subject to the Part IIB technical criteria of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program
Regulations for water quality and water quantity.
Service Area
Dutch Gap Fire Station 14
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment*
Insurance Service Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC) Class 2
Anticipated Impacts On Fire & EMS
Call Load in Immediate Service Area During Previous Fiscal Year 1892
Projected Calls Generated Yearly by Proposed Development 56
Projected Call Load Increase in Immediate Service Area by Proposed Development 2.9%
Drive And Response Times
Supplemental Analysis
Budget & Management
Community Enhancement
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 212 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 8 of 27
Response Zone/Response Time Goal* Urban/ 7
Minutes
Road Miles from Closest Fire Station 1.91
Estimated Drive Time from Closest Fire Station1 2:51
minutes
Estimated Response Time for First Unit on Scene2 5:51
minutes
Planned Capital Facility Improvements
N/A
Additional Information
This can be used to state any issues we may have. For example, if a gated access is being
proposed and we believe it will increase response times, we can place that information here.
*Additional information relative to Fire & Life Safety’s Mission and Service Profile, Community
Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment, and Response Time Goals can be found in the Appendix.
1 Drive-time estimates are exclusive of potential delays due to weather, traffic, or blockage of response routes.
2 Estimates assume response units and personnel are in the station and available to respond at the time of an incident and include 1
min 30 sec for 911 call processing and dispatch, and up to 1 min 30 sec for firefighter turnout.
Nearby Facility(s) Chester Library (3.5 miles)
1. While all county libraries could be potentially impacted by the proposed development, the Chester Library is the
closest library facility to the Property.
No comments are provided for this request.
No comments are provided for this request.
Libraries
Parks & Recreation
Police
Page 213 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 9 of 27
This application is for a residential development containing 16 townhome units and 136 multi-family units; total potential
student yield ranges from 51 to 111 students.
Membership and Capacity (2020-21SY) Zoning Case 21SN0519
Current
Enrollment
(09-30-2020) (3)
Program
Capacity (1)
Percent
Program
Capacity
Proposed
Number
of Units
Housing
Type
SGF 2019(2) Anticipated Student Yield
School-
specific
Countywide
Average
School-
specific
Countywide
Average
MARGUERITE
CHRISTIAN ES
(PK to 5)
707 918 77%
- SF 0.1824 0.2061 - -
136 MF 0.5642 0.1681 77 23
16 TH 0.2388 0.1063 4 2
152 Total 81 25
ELIZABETH
DAVIS MS
(6 to 8)
1,218 1,216 100%
- SF 0.1087 0.1131 - -
136 MF 0.0849 0.0813 12 11
16 TH 0.0427 0.0627 1 1
152 Total 13 12
THOMAS
DALE HS
(9 to 12)
2,409 2,965 81%
- SF 0.1650 0.1540 - -
136 MF 0.1179 0.0948 16 13
16 TH 0.0837 0.0936 1 1
152 Total 17 14
Note:
(1) Program capacity is the maximum number of students the building can accommodate based on the Virginia Department of Education
Standards of Quality and the current school programming that may adjust the number of rooms used for core or grade-level classrooms
in the overall building design capacity. Program capacity numbers may be higher than previous years due to more spaces being
designated/quantified for capacity uses.
(2) Student Generation Factor (2019) is the actual total number of students by grade level divided by the actual total number of housing
units by housing type. Based upon the average number of students per multi-family dwelling unit for each of the school attendance zones
where the proposal is located. Updated 2019 SGFs provided by County IST.
(3) Current enrollment numbers may be lower than previous years. The reduction is primarily attributed to COVID-19.
School Capacity Analysis
Marguerite Christian Elementary School: Current capacity at 77%. This school is a Center-Based Gifted (CBG) site and
receives students from eight other elementary schools. Based on the 2019 SGF table, there are no existing townhome
dwelling units in the M. Christian ES attendance zone; therefore, the SGF for the total students and total housing units
for the attendance zone was used to calculate potential student yield for the proposed sixteen (16) town house units.
The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on geographical regions, shows a decrease of one student for
the 2024 forecast in a section of the regions that are contained within the Marguerite Christian attendance zone.
Elizabeth Davis Middle School: Current capacity at 100%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately fifty-four (54) students for the 2024
forecast in a section of the regions that are contained within the Elizabeth Davis attendance zone. Since this school is at
100% program capacity, which consequently presents impacts on available seats, student transportation, and safety and
security operations, staff is exploring strategies for addressing capacity - to include redistricting, program relocation or
increasing available capacity.
Thomas Dale High School: Current capacity at 81%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows a decrease of five students for the 2024 forecast in a section of the regions that are
contained within the Thomas Dale attendance zone. As no significant impact, no additional review at this time.
Additional information on CCPS Mission and Capital Improvements can be found in the Appendix.
Schools
Page 214 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 10 of 27
The Comprehensive Plan, which includes the Thoroughfare Plan, identifies county-wide transportation needs that are
expected to mitigate traffic impacts of future growth. The anticipated traffic impact of the proposal has been evaluated
and recommendations are detailed in the chart below:
Recommendation Applicant’s Proposal
Vehicular Access Control
• Access to Jefferson Davis Highway (Route 1) limited to one (1) entrance/exit. Offered as Recommended.
Proffered Condition 3
Right-of-Way Dedication
• 60 feet of right-of-way along the west side of Route 1. Offered as Recommended.
Proffered Condition 4
Road Improvements
• Extension of north/south local road from Laketree Drive to the Property.
• Additional pavement along Route 1 at the approved access to provide a left
turn lane, if left-in access is permitted into the Property.
• Additional pavement along Route 1 at the approved access to provide a
separate right turn lane.
• Sidewalk along Route 1 for the Property frontage.
Offered as Recommended.
Proffered Condition 5
Road Cash Proffer Policy
According to the Department of Community Enhancement, Property is located
within a revitalization area. Under the Road Cash Proffer Policy, no road cash
proffer will be accepted for development in these areas.
Not Applicable
Proposed road network additions are to be state maintained and added to the secondary system of state highways. All
proposed commercial entrances will be subject to VDOT Access Management minimum spacing criteria and subject to
minimum commercial entrance design standards.
1. This section of Jefferson Davis Highway is classified as an Urban Principal Arterial with a posted speed limit of 45
MPH and an AADT of 16,000 vehicles per day. The minimum commercial entrance spacing along this section of
Jefferson Davis Highway (US Route 1) is 565 feet for a full access commercial entrance and 305 feet for a partial
access.
2. Any proposed access points that do not meet the minimum spacing criteria for VDOT’s Access Management policy
will require an Exception to be approved by VDOT in order to permit and construct the access.
3. During the site plan review process, VDOT will require turn lane warrants analysis and sight distance
demonstrations for all commercial entrances along state maintained roads.
1. The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection areas for new residential
development.
2. The applicant has proffered connection to the public water and wastewater systems.
A 12” public water line is located along Jefferson Davis Highway; an 8” public water line is located at the intersection of
Laketree Drive and Hillsview Avenue. An 8” public wastewater line is located at the intersection of Laketree Drive and
Hillsview Avenue.
Transportation - County Department of Transportation
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Page 215 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 11 of 27
Page 216 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 12 of 27
Community Meetings
10/22/2020 – Discussion Topics:
1. Historical significance of the Colbrook Motel
2. Height of the proposed buildings
3. Maintaining privacy of rear yards in the adjoining
neighborhood, buffers
4. Quality materials and architecture
5. Traffic generation
6. Busy intersection with frequent accidents
7. Construction schedule
Planning Commission
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Commission Discussion: Mrs. Sloan thanked the applicant, community members, and staff for working
to create conditions which ensure a quality development.
Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH PROFFERED CONDITIONS.
Motion: Petroski Second: Owens
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, Petroski
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Page 217 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 13 of 27
The applicant offers the following proffered conditions:
1. Master Plan. The Master Plan for the Property shall consist of the following:
a. The Textual Statement last revised November 9, 2020.
b. The Conceptual Plan (Exhibit A), last revised November 9, 2020 and prepared by Baskervill Architects,
P.C. Development of the Property shall generally conform to the Conceptual Plan, with respect to the
general layout of roads and buildings, and the general location of parking, sidewalks, and open space.
Adjustments to the Conceptual Plan may be approved at the time of site plan review, provided such
adjustments substantially retain the relationship between buildings, parking, roads and open space. If
adjustments are deemed to be significant, the Conceptual Plan shall be presented to the Planning
Commission for final approval.
c. Conceptual Elevations, Exhibit B, last revised November 9, 2020 and prepared by Baskervill Architects.
(P)
2. Utilities. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. (U)
3. Access. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Jefferson Davis Highway (Route 1) shall be limited to one (1)
entrance/exit, generally shown on Exhibit A-Conceptual Site Plan. The exact location of the access shall be
approved by the Transportation Department. (T)
4. Dedication. Prior to any site plan approval or within sixty (60) days from a written request by the Transportation
Department, whichever occurs first, sixty (60) feet of right-of-way along the west side of Route 1, measured
from the centerline of that part of Route 1 immediately adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T)
5. Road Improvements. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, the following road improvements shall be
completed, as determined by the Transportation Department. The exact length and design of the improvements
shall be approved by the Transportation Department.
a. Off-site Improvement: Construction of two lanes of a north/south local road (“Hillview Avenue”), to
VDOT Urban Local Road standards, with modifications approved by the Transportation Department,
from Laketree Drive to the southern Property line (approximately 275 feet).
b. Construction of additional pavement along the northbound lanes of Route 1 at the approved access to
provide an adequate left turn lane if left-in access is permitted into the Property;
c. Construction of additional pavement along the southbound lanes of Route 1 at the approved access to
provide a separate right turn lane;
d. Construction of a VDOT standard sidewalk along the west side of Route 1 for the entire Property
frontage.
e. Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, of any additional right-of-way (or easements)
required for the improvements identified above. (T)
6. Architecture and Building Materials.
Proffered Conditions (11/23/2020)
Page 218 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 14 of 27
a. Unless significant deviations are approved by the Planning Commission during site plan review, the
architectural treatment of the buildings shall generally be compatible in quality to the architectural
standards of the elevations as shown in Exhibit B
b. Buildings shall be constructed with brick or stone veneer, hardiplank, or a combination thereof. Exterior
façade shall contain at least forty (40) percent brick or stone veneer. Dutch lap, plywood and metal
siding are not permitted. Different façade materials shall be used for building façades to add depth and
interest to the structure. Roofing material shall be standing seam metal, dimensional architectural
shingles, or better with a minimum of 30-year warranty. Thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) roofing shall be
permitted as a flat roof material. (P)
7. Landscaping. Landscaping, including foundation plantings, shall be provided and maintained around the
perimeter of all buildings, between buildings and driveways, within medians, and common areas. Landscaping
shall be designed to minimize the predominance of building mass and paved areas; define private spaces; and
enhance the residential character of the development. Trees shall be provided throughout the parking lot,
adjacent to the building and along the perimeter of the property as shown in Exhibit A. The landscaping plan
shall be approved at the time of plans review with respect to the exact numbers, spacing, arrangement and
species of plantings. (P)
8. Mechanical Unit Screening. Any mechanical units shall be ground mounted or roof mounted. Any mechanical
units that are ground mounted shall be screened with landscaping, a masonry wall to match the masonry on the
buildings, or an opaque fence. Any mechanical units that are roof mounted shall be screened by architectural
features and materials which are compatible with the building façade architecture. Screening shall be designed
to block such mechanical units from view by person on any public streets. The specific method of screening shall
be approved at the time of plan review. (P)
9. Recreational Area and Amenities.
a. A community/amenity area, which shall include interior gathering spaces, shall be provided and
generally located as depicted on Exhibit A.
b. Recreational and pedestrian scale amenities, such as walking paths, benches, gathering areas, and
community spaces shall be provided. A minimum of 1.50 acres of open space shall, including buffers, be
provided. (P)
10. Unit Types. No more than 30% of the dwelling units constructed shall have three (3) bedrooms. No dwelling
units shall have more than three (3) bedrooms. (P)
11. Lighting. Light poles shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height. (P)
12. Drainage. No impervious areas shall sheet flow through Forest Lake subdivision. (EE)
13. Post Development Discharge Rates. For the portion of the property which drains to the Forest Lake subdivision,
the maximum post-development discharge rate for the 100-year storm shall be based on the maximum capacity
of the existing downstream facilities and the recorded 100-year backwater and/or floodplain shall not be
increased. On-site detention of the post-development 100-year discharge rate to below the pre-development
100-year discharge rate may be provided to satisfy this requirement. (EE)
14. Dam Failure Analysis. Any detention facility serving the site shall be a dry facility below the existing ground with
no manmade compacted embankment required. If a manmade embankment is necessary and planned, a dam
failure analysis may be required, as determined by the Department of Environmental Engineering at the time of
construction plan review, showing no homes will be detrimentally impacted. The dam embankment design
should include, but not limited to, a clay core or a syphon structure. (EE)
Page 219 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 15 of 27
This is a request to rezone 9.8 acres to Residential Multi-Family (R-MF) with a Conditional Use Planned Development
(CUPD) to permit an office use and ordinance exceptions, as described herein, and as provided in the accompanying
proffers. Uses shall conform to the regulations set forth in the Residential Multi-Family (R-MF) District except as outlined
below.
1. Project Standards.
a. Project Size. The project size shall be 9.8 acres.
b. Density. The maximum density shall not exceed 17 units to the acre.
c. Private Pavement Setbacks. The minimum setback will be ten (10) feet to other roads.
d. Set back from Route 1. The residential building will be set back a minimum of thirty (30) feet from Route 1,
and the Community Building shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from Route 1.
2. Building Standards.
a. Individual Building Setbacks.
i. Roads. All buildings shall be located a minimum three (3) feet from any adjacent roads.
ii. Parking Spaces. All buildings shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any parking space.
iii. Distance between buildings. Distance between two story buildings will be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet.
iv. Distance between buildings. Distance between three story multifamily buildings will be twenty-five (25)
feet.
v. Dwelling Units per Floor. The maximum number of dwelling units per floor shall be twenty-two (22) units.
3. Other Required Standards.
a. Uses. A maximum of 3,000 square feet of the gross square footage of the one story community building shall
be occupied by an office use and community space. Use includes the “Recreational neighborhood facility
primarily serving the surrounding residential community” specifically enumerated in the Chesterfield County
Zoning Ordinance, with related office use and community space.
b. Parking. On-site parking shall be provided at a minimum of 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit and 1 space per 300
square feet of office space.
c. Recreation areas. 1.5 acres inclusive of open space and all buffers around the perimeter will be provided.
d. Buffer. A forty (40) foot buffer will be provided on the western and southern perimeter except where
intersected by Hillsview Avenue.
Textual Statement - Ordinance Exceptions (11/9/2020)
Page 220 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 16 of 27
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A (11/10/2020)
Page 221 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 17 of 27
Proposed Design Book – Exhibit B (11/10/2020)
Page 222 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 18 of 27
Page 223 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 19 of 27
Page 224 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 20 of 27
Page 225 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 21 of 27
Page 226 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 22 of 27
Page 227 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 23 of 27
Site Plan Section – Exhibit C (10/22/2020)
Page 228 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 24 of 27
Applicant
• Applicant’s Agent:
John Bolton (804-644-1057)
j.bolton@betterhousingcoalition.com
• Applicant’s Contact:
NOT APPLICABLE
District Planning Commissioner
• Gib Sloan (804-892-5633)
sloang@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager: Josh Gillespie (804-796-7122) gillespiejo@chesterfield.gov
• Budget & Management: Karen Bailey (804-751-4327) baileykl@chesterfield.gov
• Community Enhancement: Carl Schlaudt (804-318-8674) schlaudtc@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering: Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028) rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov
• Libraries: Jennifer Stevens (804-751-4998) stevensj@chesterfield.gov
• Parks & Recreation: Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482) llewellynJa@chesterfield.gov
• Police: Steve Grohowski (804-751-4720) growhowskis@chesterfield.gov
• Schools: Atonja Allen (804-318-8740) atonja_allen@ccps.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation: Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsst@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities: Randy Phelps (804-796-7126) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 229 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 25 of 27
County finance staff is responsible for managing the finances of the County and making recommendations to the County
Administrator regarding the allocation of available resources for the provision of services and capital facilities to serve
the citizens of the County. Finance staff will advise the County Administrator if changed economic circumstances require
adjustments to the County’s budget or capital improvement program.
• CCPS Student Enrollment Information: Review current and past student enrollment information in the
Chesterfield County School Enrollment and Capacity Report.
Mission & Service Profile
The mission of Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services (CFEMS) is to protect life, property and the environment.
This requires a comprehensive portfolio of services aimed at preventing fires, mitigating the impact of fires and disasters
on the community, and providing a timely and effective response when fires, medical and other emergencies occur.
Community risks, population growth and demographic changes, service demands, and response times are reviewed
annually and the need for additional Fire & EMS operating and capital resources in support of the department’s mission
is evaluated during the county’s annual budget and 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) processes.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Chesterfield Fire and EMS participates in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC) program,
which rates a community’s fire protection capabilities in accordance with the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS).
Using the FSRS, the ISO performs a comprehensive evaluation of a community’s fire department, water supply, emergency
communications and community risk reduction efforts. The resulting score establishes a PPC rating from 1 to 10, with
Class 1 being the best possible rating. Many insurance carriers reference a community’s PPC rating in establishing
insurance premiums. Generally, communities with a Class 1 rating enjoy lower insurance premiums than those
communities with a Class 10 rating. Chesterfield County has a current community classification of 2/2Y, however some
portions are classified as 10 or 10W based on the parameters indicated below;
Class 2 - within 5 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 2Y – within 5 miles of a fire station but not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10W – within 5-7 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10 – outside of 5 miles of a fire station and not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Appendix
Budget & Management
Community Facilities and Infrastructure
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 230 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 26 of 27
Response Time Goals (Urban/Rural Zones)
Urban Zone
Fire and EMS response goal is 7 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 4 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 8 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Rural Zone
Fire and EMS response goal is 12 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to arrival of
first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 9 minutes or less travel time for the
first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 13 minutes or less travel time for deployment of an Effective
Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Page 231 of 353
Richmond Affordable Housing 21SN0519 Page 27 of 27
Mission
High performing, high quality public schools contribute to the quality of life and economic vitality of the County. The
comprehensive plan suggests a greater focus should be placed on linking schools with communities by providing greater
access, flexible designs and locations that better meet the needs of the communities in which they are located.
Capital Improvements
The School Board FY2021 adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) continues to support the 2013 voter approved school
revitalization program that will replace or renovate ten schools and construct one new elementary school to add capacity
in the Midlothian area of the county. The ten existing facilities that are part of the revitalization program are Beulah
Elementary School, Crestwood Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Ettrick Elementary School, Harrowgate
Elementary School, Matoaca Elementary School, Reams Elementary School, Manchester Middle School, Providence
Middle School, and Monacan High School. A replacement Manchester Middle School is under construction on the existing
school site, a replacement Harrowgate Elementary School is under construction on a new site, and a replacement Matoaca
Elementary School is under construction on the site of the former Matoaca Middle School west campus building. The
Beulah Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Old Hundred Elementary School (the new elementary school in the
Midlothian district), Providence Middle School, and Monacan High School projects are complete. The Matoaca Middle
School wing addition at the east campus site, an additional school construction project, is complete and the school now
operates as a single, unified campus. Information on the CIP and School Board approved construction projects can be
found in the financial section of the CCPS Adopted Budget for FY2021.
Schools
Page 232 of 353
Rezoning from General Business (C‐5) and Agricultural (A) to
Multifamily Residential (R‐MF) with conditional use planned
development to permit exceptions to ordinance
requirements and amendment of zoning district map.
Richmond Affordable Housing
21SN0519 – Bermuda
Case 21SN0519 in the Bermuda District is a request for rezoning from General Business
(C‐5) and Agricultural (A) to Multifamily Residential (R‐MF) with conditional use
planned development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and
amendment of zoning district map.
1Page 233 of 353
21SN0519 – Overview
1. C‐5 and A to R‐MF with
CUPD
2. Mixed used development
with quality design
elements and
interconnectivity
3. Planning Commission and
staff recommend approval
1. Rezoning is proposed
2. Mixed use development with quality design elements and interconnectivity
3. Planning Commission and staff recommend approval
2Page 234 of 353
21SN0519 – Zoning Map
Zoning in the area includes community and general commercial (C‐3 and C‐5), residential
manufactured home park (MH‐1), light industrial (I‐1) and residential single‐family (R‐7 and
R‐9)
3Page 235 of 353
21SN0519 – Aerial & Land Use Map
Properties in the area include a residential subdivision under development, neighborhood
business, vacant, a residential manufactured home park, and industrial uses
4Page 236 of 353
21SN0519 – Proffered Conditions
1. Master Plan
2. Utilities
3. Access
4. Dedication of right‐of‐way
5. Road Improvements
6. Architecture and Building Materials
7. Landscaping
8. Mechanical Unit Screening
9. Recreational Area and Amenities
10. Unit Types
11. Lighting
12. Drainage
13. Post Development Discharge Rates
14. Dam Failure Analysis
The applicant proffers conditions for the following items:
1. Master Plan
2. Utilities
3. Access
4. Dedication of right‐of‐way
5. Road Improvements
6. Architecture and Building Materials
7. Landscaping
8. Mechanical Unit Screening
9. Recreational Area and Amenities
10. Unit Types
11. Lighting
5Page 237 of 353
12. Drainage
13. Post Development Discharge Rates
14. Dam Failure Analysis
5Page 238 of 353
21SN0519 – Master Plan
The Conceptual Site Plan
1. Three points of access
2. Road network: two public roads, one private street
1. Hillsview Avenue (public, to be extended from south and stub connection made
to the north)
2. Colbrook Street (public, new street to be built)
3. Colbrook Street (private, new street to be built)
4. Sidewalks along streets
3. Parking areas
4. Setbacks vary from near US 1/301 to engage the street to distant from surrounding
residential, assembly vacant properties
5. Buildings: eight new buildings
1. Three multifamily‐type
2. One community building
3. Four townhouse‐type
6. Stormwater management collection located underground
6Page 239 of 353
21SN0519 – Background and Overview
The Colbrook Motel – located on the subject properties until recent demolition – was an
establishment providing roadside lodging for African‐American travelers during the
segregation era. The motel was listed in the Green Book, a national publication listing such
establishments.
7Page 240 of 353
21SN0519 – Elevations
Multifamily buildings
Townhome style buildings
Varied colors
8Page 241 of 353
21SN0519 – Site Plan Section (Line of Sight)
The line of sight was assessed for a line as shown on this exhibit and in a closer view on the
following slide
9Page 242 of 353
21SN0519 – Site Plan Section (Line of Sight)
The line of sight shown on this exhibit ‐ and in a view of a larger area on the preceding slide
‐ shows relative elevations from Laketree Drive (far left) through houses in Lake Forest, the
vegetative buffer to remain, and planned townhouse‐style and multifamily buildings on the
subject properties
10Page 243 of 353
21SN0519 – Textual Statement (Exceptions)
1. Project Standards
1. Size
2. Density
3. Private Pavement Setback
4. Setback from US 1
2. Building Standards
1. Roads
2. Parking Spaces
3. Distance between Buildings
4. Dwelling Units per Floor
3. Other Required Standards
1. Uses. Office use in the
community buildings
2. Parking. Reduced from standards
3. Recreation areas. Reduced from
standards
4. Buffer. Reduced from standards
The applicant requests exceptions for the following:
1. Project Standards
1. Size
2. Density
3. Private Pavement Setback
4. Setback from US 1
2. Building Standards
11Page 244 of 353
1. Roads
2. Parking Spaces
3. Distance between Buildings
4. Dwelling Units per Floor
1. Other Required Standards
1. Uses. Office use in the community
buildings
2. Parking. Reduced from standards
3. Recreation areas. Reduced from
standards
4. Buffer. Reduced from standards
11Page 245 of 353
21SN0519 – Recommendations
1. Planning Commission recommends Approval
2. Staff recommends Approval
Planning Commission recommends Approval
Staff recommends Approval
12Page 246 of 353
21SN0519 – Zoning Map
13Page 247 of 353
Page 248 of 353
Page 249 of 353
Page 250 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 1 of 9
21SN0524 – Christine and Paul Butts
Magisterial District - Matoaca
Applicant Contact – Christine Butts (804-739-8131)
BOS Public Hearing - January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager Joanne Wieworka
(804-748-1081)
Request
Conditional Use Planned Development
Reduction in side yard setback for a proposed addition.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
Property Location
9301 Orchid Place Site Size
0.3 Acre
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Suburban Residential II
Plan Area
County Wide Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area (VGIN 2016) – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
Conditional use planned development to permit encroachment of a structure (building addition) into a side yard
setback. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to replace an existing screened porch and deck attached to the existing
dwelling.
PLANNING COMMISSION - APPROVAL
STAFF - APPROVAL
• Proposed enclosure would not encroach into the setback any further than the existing footprint of the screened porch
and deck. The request will have minimal impacts on surrounding properties.
NOTES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions.
2. A condition and a “Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A” are provided in this report.
Summary of Proposal
Recommendation
Page 251 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 2 of 9
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendation .................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Community Enhancement .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 5
Schools ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Transportation - County Department of Transportation .................................................................................................... 5
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation ................................................................................................... 5
Utilities – Water and Wastewater ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ........................................................................................................................... 6
Condition ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Case Contacts .......................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Table of Contents
Page 252 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 3 of 9
Zoning History
89SN0149: Approved (4/1989)
Rezoning to Residential (R-12) permitting a single-family subdivision with a maximum of 375 dwelling units.
Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Plan Designation
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Suburban Residential II, which suggests the Property is appropriate
for residential development at a maximum density of 2.0 to 4.0 dwellings per acre.
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to replace an existing screened porch and deck with an enclosed one-story addition near the
side property line. The side yard setback in the Residential (R-12) District is ten (10) feet. The Zoning Ordinance permits a
deck or screened porch open on three (3) sides to encroach a distance of half the required side yard setback (provided
the encroachment is no closer than five (5) feet to the interior side lot line). The existing screen porch and deck are
located 5.5 feet from the side property line, meeting the setback requirements for these types of improvements.
Aerial of Property - Existing Conditions Elevation of Property – Existing Conditions
The applicant’s proposal to replace the existing screened porch and deck with an enclosed addition increases the
required setback to ten (10) feet. Therefore, an exception to the side yard setback is requested to permit the enclosed
addition in the same location as the existing screen porch and deck. As proposed, the enclosed addition would not
project any closer to the side property line than the current screen porch and deck improvements, as shown in Exhibit A.
Staff has provided a condition that would require the enclosed addition to be constructed within the existing footprint of
the screen porch and deck as well as prohibit any further enclosed structures within this setback area.
Planning
Existing Screen Porch
and Deck
Page 253 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 4 of 9
Current Zoning Map
Page 254 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 5 of 9
No comment on this request.
No comment on this request.
Nearby Facility - The Winterpock Fire Station, Company Number 19
1. This request will have minimal impact on Fire and Emergency Medical Services.
This request will have no impact on school facilities.
No comment on this request.
No comment on this request.
1. The subject property is within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new residential
development.
2. The existing residential structure is connected to the public water and wastewater systems.
3. The request will not impact the publc water and wastewater systems.
Supplemental Analysis
Community Enhancement
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Schools
Transportation - County Department of Transportation
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Page 255 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 6 of 9
Community Meetings
10/29/2020 – Discussion Topics:
1. The neighbor immediately adjacent to the subject property stated that the proposed addition will have minimal
impacts on their property based on the existing structure located in the same area today.
Planning Commission
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH CONDITION
Motion: Petroski Second: Owens
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, and Petroski
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Page 256 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 7 of 9
1. Use and Location. The proposed one-story addition, to be constructed in the same location as the screen porch
and deck depicted on Exhibit A, shall be permitted to be constructed within the side yard setback. No additional
enclosed structures shall be permitted within this setback. (P)
Condition
Page 257 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 8 of 9
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A
Page 258 of 353
Christine and Paul Butts 21SN0524 Page 9 of 9
Applicant
• Applicant’s Contact:
Christine Butts (804-555-5555)
jdoe@smith.com
District Planning Commissioner
• Tommy Owens (804-869-2214)
owenstommy@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager:
Joanne Wieworka (804-748-1081)
wieworkaj@chesterfield.gov
• Community Enhancement:
Carl Schlaudt (804-318-8674)
schlaudtc@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering:
Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028)
rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services:
Anthony Batten (804-717-6167)
battena@chesterfield.gov
• Schools:
Atonja Allen (804-318-8740)
atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation:
Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsst@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation:
Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities:
Randy Phelps (804-796-7126)
phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 259 of 353
Conditional use planned development to permit exceptions
to ordinance requirements, including modification to
setbacks for an addition and amendment of zoning district
map in a Residential (R‐12) District.
Christine and Paul Butts
21SN0524 – Matoaca
The applicant is proposing to replace an existing screened porch and deck with an
enclosed one‐story addition near the side property line. The side yard setback in
the Residential (R‐12) District is ten (10) feet. The Zoning Ordinance permits a deck
or screened porch open on three (3) sides to encroach a distance of half the
required side yard setback (provided the encroachment is no closer than five (5)
feet to the interior side lot line). The existing screen porch and deck are located 5.5
feet from the side property line, meeting the setback requirements for these types
of improvements.
1Page 260 of 353
21SN0524 – Overview
1. CUPD – Reduction in side
yard setback for proposed
addition
2. The request will have
minimal impacts on
surrounding properties
3. Staff Recommends Approval
The applicant’s proposal to replace the existing screened porch and deck with an
enclosed addition increases the required setback to ten (10) feet. Therefore, an
exception to the side yard setback is requested to permit the enclosed addition in
the same location as the existing screen porch and deck. As proposed, the enclosed
addition would not project any closer to the side property line than the current
screen porch and deck improvements, as shown in Exhibit A. Staff has provided a
condition that would require the enclosed addition to be constructed within the
existing footprint of the screen porch and deck as well as prohibit any further
enclosed structures within this setback area.
2Page 261 of 353
21SN0524 – Zoning Map
The subject property is zoned R‐12 and is a part of The Woods at Summerford subdivision.
3Page 262 of 353
21SN0524 – Aerial & Land Use Map
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Suburban Residential II, which
suggests the Property is appropriate for residential development at a maximum
density of 2.0 to 4.0 dwellings per acre.
4Page 263 of 353
21SN0524 – Conditions
1. Addition to be constructed in the same location as
existing screen porch and deck (depicted in Exhibit A). No
additional enclosed structures shall be permitted within
the setback
Use and Location. The proposed one‐story addition, to be constructed in the same
location as the screen porch and deck depicted on Exhibit A, shall be permitted to
be constructed within the side yard setback. No additional enclosed structures shall
be permitted within this setback. (P)
5Page 264 of 353
21SN0524 – Exhibit A
Exhibit A shows the footprint of the existing screen porch and deck, where the proposed
enclosed addition would be located.
6Page 265 of 353
21SN0524 – Recommendation
1. CPC Recommends Approval with conditions
2. Staff Recommends Approval with conditions
At their December 15th 2020 meeting the planning commission voted to recommend
approval.
Staff recommends approval with the proposed condition.
7Page 266 of 353
Page 267 of 353
Page 268 of 353
Page 269 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 1 of 19
21SN0525 – Biringer Builders Inc.
Magisterial District - Midlothian
Agent – Andy Scherzer (804-794-0571)
BOS Public Hearing – January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager
Tyler Walter
(804-318-8893)
Request
Amendment
Amend prior case (03SN0124) to reduce cash proffer
payments.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
Property Location
16401 Drumone Road
Site Size
3.3 Acres
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Suburban Residential I
Plan Area
County Wide Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area (VGIN 2016) – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
A single-family residential subdivision (Hallsley) is under development. The original zoning (Case 03SN0124) was
approved with a density of 450 units and the cash proffer amount of $9,000; escalated by the Marshall and Swift
Building Cost Index to the current amount of $16,962. The applicant in this request seeks to amend cash proffers on
four (4) additional units in this development.
Currently, the collective total potential value of the approved cash proffer equates to $67,848, based on the properties
included with this request. The applicant has requested to reduce the cash proffer amount to $9,400 per dwelling on
four (4) units, equating to total potential value of $37,600. (Proffered Condition 1)
Existing zoning conditions of case 03SN0124, and those proffered with this request provide design and architectural
standards (Summarized in the Planning Section) that are comparable in quality to the surrounding community.
Summary of Proposal
Page 270 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 2 of 19
PLANNING COMMISSION – APPROVAL
STAFF – APPROVAL
PLANNING
The quality, design and architecture provide for a convenient, attractive, and harmonious community comparable in
quality to that of the surrounding community.
TRANSPORTATION
The development’s traffic impact will be addressed by providing cash payments.
NOTES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. Proffered conditions are provided in this report.
Recommendations
Page 271 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 3 of 19
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Parcels in Application .......................................................................................................................................................... 6
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 6
Budget & Management ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 6
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 6
Additional Information .................................................................................................................................................... 7
Libraries ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Parks & Recreation .............................................................................................................................................................. 7
Schools ................................................................................................................................................................................ 7
Transportation - County Department of Transportation .................................................................................................... 9
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation ................................................................................................... 9
Utilities – Water and Wastewater ...................................................................................................................................... 9
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ......................................................................................................................... 10
Proffered Conditions (12/14/2020) ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Approved Conditions (03SN0124)......................................................................................................................................... 13
Case Contacts ........................................................................................................................................................................ 17
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Budget & Management ..................................................................................................................................................... 18
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................. 18
Schools .............................................................................................................................................................................. 19
Table of Contents
Page 272 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 4 of 19
Zoning History
03SN0124: Approved (01/2003)
Rezoning to Residential (R-15) permitting a single-family subdivision with a maximum of 450 dwelling units. Conditions of approval
addressed:
1. Standards for lots within the development are consistent with conditions pertaining to lot and dwelling size, foundation
treatment, cash proffer payments, and right of way dedication.
2. The staff report for Case 03SN0124 analyzed the impact of the proposed development on public facilities and the
applicant’s offer to mitigate that impact.
17SN0776: Approved (06/2017)
Amendment of prior zoning (03SN0124 and 15SN0660) to reduce cash proffers on 217 dwelling units. The subject properties in this
proposal were not included in the request.
1. Case 03SN0124 - Reduction of cash proffer payment of $15,552 to $9,400 on 152 units.
2. Case 15SN0660 - Reduction of cash proffer payment of $18,966 to $9,400 on sixty-five (65) units. 3. Standards for lots regarding quality and design were retained.
4. The staff report for Case 17SN0776 analyzed the impact of the proposed development on public facilities and the
applicant’s offer to mitigate that impact.
Comprehensive Plan – Suburban Residential I
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Suburban Residential I, which suggests the Property is appropriate
for residential development at a maximum density of 2.0 dwellings per acre.
Proposal
A single-family residential subdivision (Hallsley) is under development. Previously Case 17SN0776 was approved which
amended in part Case 03SN0124 by reducing cash proffers on 152 units in this development. The applicant in this
request seeks to amend cash proffers on four (4) additional units in this development.
Design
As suggested by Comprehensive Plan goals and the zoning ordinance, the proffered conditions of this current request
along with those approved with Case 03SN0124 include design and architectural elements compatible in quality to the
surrounding community.
The following provides an overview of additional design requirements offered as part of this request (Proffered
Conditions):
• Lot design
o Landscaping in front yards and along
front foundations
o Irrigated and sodded front, side and
corner
o Hardscaped front walks and driveways
o Screening of HVAC equipment
• Dwelling design
o Architectural variety to avoid
monotonous streetscape
o Variety of siding materials
o Foundation, porch and roof treatment
o Upgraded garage doors
Planning
Page 273 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 5 of 19
Current Zoning Map
Page 274 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 6 of 19
GPIN Address
709-698-2063 16536 Massey Hope Street
710-696-8497 16401 Drumone Road
711-694-2086 16124 Old Castle Road
712-697-8727 2112 Farnborough Drive
The current cash proffer amount is $16,962 per dwelling unit. There are four (4) units included with this request. The
current total potential value of the approved cash proffer equates to $67,848.
With this request, the applicant has requested to reduce the cash proffer to $9,400 per dwelling unit; equating to a
total potential value of $37,600.
Additional information relative to Budget & Management’s analysis can be found in the Appendix.
No comment on this request.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Insurance Service Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC) Class 10W
Anticipated Impacts on Fire & EMS
Call Load in Immediate Service Area During Previous Fiscal Year 1877
Projected Calls Generated Yearly by Proposed Development 1
Projected Call Load Increase in Immediate Service Area by Proposed Development <1%
Drive and Response Times – STATION 16 (SWIFT CREEK)
Response Zone & Time Suburban
7 Minutes
Road Miles from Closest Fire Station 5.86
Estimated Drive Time from Closest Fire Station1 8:23
Minutes
Estimated Response Time for First Unit on Scene2 11:23
Minutes
1 Drive-time estimates are exclusive of potential delays due to weather, traffic, or blockage of response routes.
2 Estimates assume response units and personnel are in the station and available to respond at the time of an incident and include 1
min 30 sec for 911 call processing and dispatch, and up to 1 min 30 sec for firefighter turnout.
Additional information relative to Fire & Life Safety’s Mission and Service Profile, Community Fire Protection Capabilities
Assessment, and Response Time Goals can be found in the Appendix.
Parcels in Application
Supplemental Analysis
Budget & Management
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 275 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 7 of 19
Planned Capital Facility Improvements
No capital facility improvements are currently planned in the immediate vicinity.
Additional Information
When the property is developed, the number of hydrants, quantity of water needed for fire protection, and access
requirements will be evaluated during the plans review process.
Nearby Facility - Midlothian Library
1. While all county libraries could be potentially impacted by the proposed development, the Midlothian Library is
the closest library facility to the Property.
2. Public Facilities Plan suggests the Midlothian Library should be expanded/replaced or a new facility at or near
current site. Land for expansion or replacement of this facility or new facility has not been acquired.
No comment on this request.
This is an amendment to previously approved zoning which will impact four single-family lots. This will have minimal
impact on school facilities.
Membership and Capacity (2020-21SY) Zoning Case 21SN0525
Current
Enrollment
(09-30-2020) (3)
Program
Capacity (1)
Percent
Program
Capacity
Proposed
Number
of Units
Housing
Type
SGF 2019(2) Anticipated Student Yield
School-specific Countywide Average School-specific Countywide Average
OLD HUNDRED
ES
(PK to 5)
734 947 78%
4 SF 0.3584 0.2061 1 1
- MF 0.1872 0.1681 - -
- TH 0.0325 0.1063 - -
4 Total 1 1
MIDLOTHIAN
MS
(6 to 8)
1,572 1,315 84%
4 SF 0.1244 0.1131 0 0
- MF 0.0312 0.0813 - -
- TH 0.0541 0.0627 - -
4 Total 0 0
MIDLOTHIAN
HS
(9 to 12)
1,908 1,963 97%
4 SF 0.1812 0.1540 1 1
- MF 0.0793 0.0948 - -
- TH 0.0977 0.0936 - -
4 Total 1 1
Note: (1) Program capacity is the maximum number of students the building can accommodate based on the Virginia Department of Education
Standards of Quality and the current school programming that may adjust the number of rooms used for core or grade-level classrooms
in the overall building design capacity. Program capacity numbers may be higher than previous years due to more spaces being
designated/quantified for capacity uses.
(2) Student Generation Factor (2019) is the actual total number of students by grade level divided by the actual total number of housing
units by housing type. Based upon the average number of students per single-family dwelling unit for each of the school attendance
zones where the proposal is located. Updated 2019 SGFs provided by County IST.
(3) Current enrollment numbers may be lower than previous years. The reduction is primarily attributed to COVID-19.
Libraries
Parks & Recreation
Schools
Page 276 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 8 of 19
School Capacity Analysis
Old Hundred Elementary School: Current capacity at 78%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based
on geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately 146 students for the 2024 forecast in a
section of the regions that are contained within the Old Hundred attendance zone.
Midlothian Middle School: Current capacity at 84%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately 111 students for the 2024 forecast in a
section of the regions that are contained within the Midlothian Middle attendance zone.
Midlothian High School: Current capacity at 97%. The StratIS model, predicting the change in students based on
geographical regions, shows that there could be an increase of approximately 198 students for the 2024 forecast in a
section of the regions that are contained within the Midlothian High attendance zone. As this school is approaching
100% of its program capacity, its enrollment and capacity will continue to be closely monitored.
Additional information on CCPS Mission and Capital Improvements can be found in the Appendix.
Page 277 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 9 of 19
The Comprehensive Plan, which includes the Thoroughfare Plan, identifies county-wide transportation needs that are
expected to mitigate traffic impacts of future growth. The anticipated traffic impact of the proposal has been evaluated
and recommendations are detailed in the chart below:
Recommendation Applicant’s Proposal
Road Cash Proffer Policy
According to the Department of Community Enhancement, Property is not
located within a revitalization area. Under the Road Cash Proffer Policy, road
cash proffers will be accepted for development in these areas. The applicant
has proffered to pay $9,400 per dwelling unit. Staff supports the request.
Offered as Proffered Condition 1
No comment on this request.
1. The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new residential
development.
2. The four (4) undeveloped lots included in this request are located in the Hallsley development, have public water
and wastewater immediately available, and are required to connect by Proffered Condition 3 of Case 03SN0124.
3. The request to amend Case 03SN0124 to address cash proffers will create no further impact on the public water and
wastewater systems.
Transportation - County Department of Transportation
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Page 278 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 10 of 19
Community Meetings
11/4/2020 – Discussion Topics:
1. Virtual community meeting held due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. No citizens attended.
Planning Commission
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Recommendation: APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS
Motion: Petroski Second: Owens
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens and Petroski
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Page 279 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 11 of 19
With the approval of this request, Proffered Condition 9 of Case 03SN0124 shall be amended as outlined below. All
other conditions of Case 03SN0124 shall remain in force and effect.
1. Cash Proffers. The applicant, sub-divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $9,400 for each dwelling unit to Chesterfield
County for road improvements within the service district for the property (“Road Cash Proffer”). Each payment
shall be made prior to the issuance of a building permit for a dwelling unit unless state law modifies the timing
of the payment. Should Chesterfield County impose impact fees at any time during the life of the development
that are applicable to the property, the amount paid in cash proffers shall be in lieu of or credited toward.
(B&M)
The Applicant hereby offers the following proffers for all four (4) parcels:
2. Architectural/Design Elements.
a. Driveways. All private driveways serving residential uses shall be hardscape with stained brush concrete,
stamped concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, or pavers.
b. Front Walks. A minimum of three (3) foot concrete front walk shall be provided to the front entrance of
each dwelling unit, to connect to drives, sidewalks, or street.
c. Landscaping and Yards.
i. Supplemental Trees. Three (3) yard trees shall be planted or retained in the front yard of each
dwelling with a minimum diameter of 2.5 inches measured at breast height (4’10” above the
ground).
ii. Front Yards & Side Yards. Except for the foundation planting bed, all front and side yards shall be
sodded and irrigated.
iii. Front Foundation Planting Beds. Foundation planting is required along the entire front façade of
all dwelling units and shall extend along all sides facing a street. Foundation planting beds shall
be a minimum of 4’ wide from the unit foundation. Planting beds shall include medium shrubs
spaced a maximum of four (4) feet apart. Unit corners shall be visually softened with vertical
accent shrubs (4’-5’) or small evergreen trees (6’-8’) at the time of planting.
d. Architectural and Materials.
i. Style and Form. The architectural styles shall be interpretations of traditional Richmond
architecture, using forms and elements compatible with those in Hallsley subdivision such as
Georgian, Classical Revival Colonial, Greek Revival, Queen Anne, Tudor, and Craftsman Style.
ii. Repetition. Dwellings with the same elevations may not be located adjacent to, directly across
from, or diagonally across from each other on the same street. This requirement does not apply
to units on different streets backing up to each other.
Proffered Conditions (12/14/2020)
Page 280 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 12 of 19
iii. Exterior Facades. Acceptable siding materials include brick, stone, masonry, stucco, synthetic
stucco (E.F.I.S.), and approved horizontal lap siding or architectural shingles. Horizonal lap siding
may be manufactured from cement fiber board. Vinyl material is not permitted except in soffit
and eave locations. Additional siding requirements:
1. Where a dwelling unit borders more than one street, all street-facing facades shall be
finished in the same materials.
2. Cementitious siding is permitted in traditional wide reveal styles only, unless otherwise
approved by the Architectural Board due to special design conditions.
e. Roof Materials. Roof material shall be dimensional architectural shingles or better with a minimum 30-
year warranty.
f. Porches, Stoops and Decks.
i. Front Porches. All front entry stoops and front porches shall be constructed with continuous
masonry foundation wall or on 12”x12” masonry piers. Extended front porches shall be
minimum of six (6) feet deep. Space between piers under porches shall be enclosed with framed
lattice panels. Handrails and railings shall be finished painted wood or metal railing with vertical
pickets or swan balusters. Pickets shall be supported with top and bottom rails that span
between columns.
ii. Front Porch Flooring. Porch flooring may be concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, or a finished
paving material such as stone, tile, brick, finished (stained dark) wood, or properly trimmed
composite decking boards. Unfinished treated wood decking is not acceptable. All front steps
shall be masonry or stained/painted wood.
iii. Rear Porches / Screen Porches. All rear porches shall be constructed with masonry piers to
match either the foundation or façade material.
g. Garages.
i. Front loaded attached garages shall be permitted to extend as far forward from the front line of
the main dwelling as the front line of the front porch provided that the rooflines of the porch
and garage are contiguous. Where the rooflines are not contiguous, garages shall be permitted
to project a maximum of two (2) feet forward of the front line of the main dwelling.
ii. Front loaded and corner side loaded garages shall use an upgraded garage door. An upgraded
garage door is any door with a minimum of two (2) enhanced features. Enhanced features shall
include windows, raised panels, decorative panels, arches, hinge straps or other architectural
features on the exterior that enhance the entry (i.e. decorative lintels, shed roof overhangs,
arches, columns, keystones, eyebrows, etc.). Flat panel garage doors are prohibited.
h. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Units and Whole House Generators. Units shall initially
be screened from view of public roads by landscaping or low maintenance material, as approved by the
Planning Department. (P)
Page 281 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 13 of 19
Approved Conditions (03SN0124)
Page 282 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 14 of 19
Page 283 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 15 of 19
Page 284 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 16 of 19
Page 285 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 17 of 19
Applicants
• Applicant’s Contact:
John Waters (804-897-8343)
jwaters@biringerbuilders.com
• Agent’s Contact:
Andy Scherzer (804-794-0571)
ascherzer@balzer.cc
District Planning Commissioner
• Frank Petroski (804-768-7558)
petroskif@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager:
Tyler Walter (804-318-8893)
waltert@chesterfield.gov
• Budget and Management:
Karen Bailey (804-751-4327)
baileykl@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering:
Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028)
rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services:
Anthony Batten (804-717-6167)
battena@chesterfield.gov
• Libraries:
Jennifer Stevens (804-751-4998)
stevensj@chesterfield.gov
• Parks & Recreation:
Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482)
llewellynJa@chesterfield.gov
• Schools:
Atonja Allen (804-318-8740)
atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation:
Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsSt@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation:
Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities:
Randy Phelps (804-796-7126)
phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 286 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 18 of 19
County finance staff is responsible for managing the finances of the County and making recommendations to the County
Administrator regarding the allocation of available resources for the provision of services and capital facilities to serve
the citizens of the County. Finance staff will advise the County Administrator if changed economic circumstances require
adjustments to the County’s budget or capital improvement program.
Mission & Service Profile
The mission of Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services (CFEMS) is to protect life, property and the
environment. This requires a comprehensive portfolio of services aimed at preventing fires, mitigating the impact of
fires and disasters on the community, and providing a timely and effective response when fires, medical and other
emergencies occur. Community risks, population growth and demographic changes, service demands, and response
times are reviewed annually and the need for additional Fire & EMS operating and capital resources in support of the
department’s mission is evaluated during the county’s annual budget and 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
processes.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Chesterfield Fire and EMS participates in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC)
program, which rates a community’s fire protection capabilities in accordance with the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule
(FSRS). Using the FSRS, the ISO performs a comprehensive evaluation of a community’s fire department, water supply,
emergency communications and community risk reduction efforts. The resulting score establishes a PPC rating from 1 to
10, with Class 1 being the best possible rating. Many insurance carriers reference a community’s PPC rating in
establishing insurance premiums. Generally, communities with a Class 1 rating enjoy lower insurance premiums than
those communities with a Class 10 rating. Chesterfield County has a current community classification of 2/2Y, however
some portions are classified as 10 or 10W based on the parameters indicated below;
Class 2 - within 5 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 2Y – within 5 miles of a fire station but not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10W – within 5-7 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10 – outside of 5 miles of a fire station and not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
A 10, 10W or 2Y rating can be improved with the addition of fire hydrants and/or construction of fire stations within the
defined distance parameters.
Response Time Goals (Urban/Rural Zones)
Urban Zone
Fire and EMS response goal is 7 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 4 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 8 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Rural Zone
Fire and EMS response goal is 12 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 9 minutes or less
Appendix
Budget & Management
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 287 of 353
Biringer Builders, Inc. 21SN0525 Page 19 of 19
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 13 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Map illustrating Urban vs Rural response zones
Mission
High performing, high quality public schools contribute to the quality of life and economic vitality of the County. The
comprehensive plan suggests a greater focus should be placed on linking schools with communities by providing greater
access, flexible designs and locations that better meet the needs of the communities in which they are located.
Capital Improvements
The School Board FY2021 adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) continues to support the 2013 voter approved school
revitalization program that will replace or renovate ten schools and construct one new elementary school to add
capacity in the Midlothian area of the county. The ten existing facilities that are part of the revitalization program are
Beulah Elementary School, Crestwood Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Ettrick Elementary School,
Harrowgate Elementary School, Matoaca Elementary School, Reams Elementary School, Manchester Middle School,
Providence Middle School, and Monacan High School. A replacement Manchester Middle School is under construction
on the existing school site, a replacement Harrowgate Elementary School is under construction on a new site, and a
replacement Matoaca Elementary School is under construction on the site of the former Matoaca Middle School west
campus building. The Beulah Elementary School, Enon Elementary School, Old Hundred Elementary School (the new
elementary school in the Midlothian district), Providence Middle School, and Monacan High School projects are
complete. The Matoaca Middle School wing addition at the east campus site, an additional school construction project,
is complete and the school now operates as a single, unified campus. Information on the CIP and School Board
approved construction projects can be found in the financial section of the CCPS Adopted Budget for FY2021.
Schools
Page 288 of 353
Amendment of zoning approval (Case 03SN0124) and
amendment of zoning district map in a Residential (R‐15)
District.
Biringer Builders Inc.
21SN0525 – Midlothian
Case 21SN0525 is a request in the Midlothian district by Biringer Builders, Inc. for an
amendment of a 2003 zoning approval relative to cash proffers in a Residential (R‐15)
District.
1Page 289 of 353
21SN0525 – Overview
1. Reduce cash proffers
2. Quality architecture/design
maintained, traffic impact
addressed
3. Staff recommends approval
Cash 21SN0525 is an amendment of prior zoning to reduce cash proffers on four lots
located in the Hallsley subdivision. As conditioned, architectural quality and design will
be maintained, and traffic impact will be addressed through cash payments. Staff
recommends approval of this request.
2Page 290 of 353
21SN0525 – Zoning Map
The four (4) subject properties are located throughout the Hallsley Subdivision. They
include 16536 Massey Hope Street, 16401 Drumone Road, 16124 Old Castle Road, and
2112 Farnborough Drive. These properties were omitted from a 2017 zoning case (Case
17SN0776), which reduced cash proffer payments from the 2003 zoning case (Case
03SN0124).
3Page 291 of 353
21SN0525 – Aerial & Land Use Map
This is a view of the aerial imagery and land use plan. The subject properties are located
in a single‐family residential subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan suggest the property is
appropriate for Suburban Residential I use.
4Page 292 of 353
21SN0525 – Development Impact
1. Existing Cash Proffer Payment – $9,000 per dwelling unit
(currently $16,962)
2. Proposed Cash Proffer Payment –$9,400 per dwelling unit
The current cash proffer amount is $16,962 for a single dwelling unit.
In 2017, a zoning amendment was approved which reduced cash proffer payments on
166 units within Hallsley. The applicant indicates these lots were inadvertently omitted
from this 2017 case and is requesting the same amendment for these four (4) lots.
5Page 293 of 353
21SN0525 – Design
•Lot and dwelling size
•Architectural materials
•Foundation treatment
•HVAC screening
•Cash proffer payments
•Right of way dedication
Conditions proffered in this case include lot and dwelling design standards. These design
standards are consistent with those offered in the 2017 zoning amendment.
6Page 294 of 353
21SN0525 – Recommendations
•Staff – Approval
•Conditions ensure that the architectural quality is maintained
•The development’s traffic impact will be addressed by
providing cash payments.
Staff recommends approval. The Conditions ensure that the architectural quality is
maintained, and the development’s traffic impact will be addressed by providing cash
payments.
At the December 15, 2020 Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of this case and acceptance of the proffered
conditions in your staff report.
7Page 295 of 353
21SN0525 – Zoning Map
Thank you.
8Page 296 of 353
Page 297 of 353
Page 298 of 353
Page 299 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 1 of 16
21SN0534 – Railey Hill Associates, LLC
Magisterial District – Midlothian
Agent – Anne Miller (804-794-0571)
BOS Public Hearing – January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager
Tyler Walter
(804-318-8893)
Request
Conditional Use
Conditional Use to permit the operation of a spa,
specifically a beauty/barber shop in a Corporate Office (O-
2) district.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
Property Location
324 Browns Hill Court
Site Size
0.2 Acre
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Corporate Office
Plan Area
Midlothian
Community Special
Area Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area (VGIN 2016) – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
A commercial building within the Railey Hill Business Park is planned. Within the building, a spa use is proposed. The
proposed spa would contain a beauty/barber shop, massage parlor, and a nail salon. (A massage parlor is already
permitted by right and is not the subject of this application.) The beauty/barber shop use is permitted by restriction in
a Corporate Office (O-2) District, provided it meets certain requirements. The proposed use does not meet
requirements partly due to project acreage (less than 25 acres), necessitating the request for Conditional Use.
PLANNING COMMISSION – APPROVAL
STAFF – APPROVAL
As conditioned, the anticipated impact shall be minimal, and the office character of the subject property shall be maintained.
NOTES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions.
2. Proffered conditions, and a concept plan have been submitted by the applicant.
Summary of Proposal
Recommendations
Page 300 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 2 of 16
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 5
Parks & Recreation .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Schools ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Transportation - County Department of Transportation .................................................................................................... 5
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation ................................................................................................... 5
Utilities – Water and Wastewater ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ........................................................................................................................... 6
Proffered Conditions (October 12, 2020) ............................................................................................................................... 7
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A ........................................................................................................................................... 8
Case #87SN0052 - Approved Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 9
Case Contacts ........................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................. 15
Table of Contents
Page 301 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 3 of 16
Zoning History
87SN0052: Approved (11/1987)
Rezoning to Corporate Office (O-2) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit the construction of an office park
development:
1. Connection to public water and wastewater.
2. Construction plan to be submitted to Environmental Engineering.
3. Construction to meet the following development standards:
a. Curb and gutter treatment
b. Limited to two entrances/exits on Midlothian Turnpike
c. Thirty (30) foot right of way dedication from Walton Park Rd, along with single entrance to Walton Park Rd. Turn
lanes and additional pavement along Walton Park Rd.
d. East/west drive provided through development.
e. Parking lot view minimized from Walton Park Rd.
f. East/west drive provided through development.
g. Forty (40) foot buffer along the southern property line.
h. East/west drive provided through development.
4. Architectural treatment to office park development in both the Northern and Southern half of the project:
a. Architectural treatment in northern half of similar design to Sycamore Square Shopping Center
b. Architectural treatment in southern half of as submitted with concept plan.
5. Uses limited to specific zoning in both the Northern and Southern half of the project.
a. Zoning in the northern half limited to Convenience Business (C-1) uses.
b. Zoning in the southern half limited to Corporate Office (O-2) uses.
6. Hours of operation limited to 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, excluding ATM machines.
Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Plan Designation
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Corporate Office, which suggests the Property is appropriate for
professional and administrative offices or similar uses.
Proposal
A spa use is proposed in the Railey Hill Office Park on the site of the proposed Building #4 (Exhibit A). The site was zoned
with Conditional Use Planned Development for office use in 1987, with the southern half of the property being
restricted to specifically Corporate Office (O-2) uses. The proposed spa use contains a beauty/barber shop and a nail
salon and massage parlor. While the massage parlor is a use permitted by right in Corporate Office (O-2) district, a
beauty/barber shop use is permitted in an O-2 zoning district with restrictions and requires Conditional Use approval if
these restrictions cannot be met.
These restrictions include uses that are located in projects of twenty-five (25) acres or more, the uses are located
internally to the project, and are not located along any road, and the uses collectively do not exceed a gross floor area of
thirty (30) percent of the gross floor area of permitted by-right uses, which are under construction or occupied in the
project. The proposed use does not meet the first requirement, as the project is less than twenty-five (25) acres, and
second, the use will be located in a building to be constructed along the periphery of this project, thus necessitating
Conditional Use to permit the beauty/barber shop.
The applicant has proffered limiting the additional uses to just the beauty/barber shop. Staff notes that a massage parlor
is already permitted within this zoning district by right. This application addresses permitting the beauty/barber shop
and nail salon. As conditioned, staff is supportive of the request.
Planning
Page 302 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 4 of 16
Current Zoning Map
Page 303 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 5 of 16
No comment on this request.
Nearby Facility - The Midlothian Fire Station, Company Number 5
This request will have minimal impact on Fire and EMS.
Additional information relative to Fire & Life Safety’s Mission and Service Profile, Community Fire Protection Capabilities
Assessment, and Response Time Goals can be found in the Appendix.
No comment on this request.
This request will have no impact on school facilities.
The Comprehensive Plan, which includes the Thoroughfare Plan, identifies county-wide transportation needs that are
expected to mitigate traffic impacts of future growth. This request is to permit the continued operation of automobile
repair and reconstruction of a canopy structure. The anticipated traffic impact of this request has been evaluated and it
is anticipated to have a similar traffic impact as the existing permitted uses on the property.
VDOT has no comment at this time.
1. The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new non-
residential development.
2. Connection to the public water and wastewater systems was required by Condition #2 of case 87SN0052.
3. The existing commercial development is served by 6” and 8” water lines and an 8” wastewater line.
4. The requested use will be located within the future Building four (4) of the development and will have minimum
impact on the public water and wastewater systems.
Supplemental Analysis
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Parks & Recreation
Schools
Transportation - County Department of Transportation
Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Page 304 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 6 of 16
Community Meetings
12/01/2020 – Discussion Topics:
1. Restrictions on massage parlor use
2. Allowable uses in the spa by right and by restriction
3. Hours of operation
4. Anticipated clientele
Planning Commission
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Commission Discussion: Mrs. Freye asked Mr. Petroski if he had received comments concerning the
case. Mr. Petroski stated that while he had not received any additional comments, he wished to address
the email referred to by Mr. Walter. The email was from Ms. Barbara Roe, who had requested a deferral
because she feels there is not enough clarity and the applicant should shop around for a different
location for the business. Mr. Petroski stated that he has no concerns about the clarity of the case and
reiterated that both Staff and the applicant have done their due diligence.
Recommendation: APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS.
Motion: Freye Second: Petroski
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, Petroski
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Page 305 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 7 of 16
The applicant hereby offers the following conditions:
1. Uses. In addition to the uses outlined in Case 87SN0052 and the Zoning Ordinance for Corporate Office District
(O-2), beauty shop and barber shop uses shall be permitted. (P)
2. Hours of Operation. Business operation shall only be open to the public between the hours of 8 a.m. and 7 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday. (P)
Proffered Conditions (October 12, 2020)
Page 306 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 8 of 16
Proposed Layout Plan – Exhibit A
Page 307 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 9 of 16
Case #87SN0052 - Approved Conditions
Page 308 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 10 of 16
Page 309 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 11 of 16
Page 310 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 12 of 16
Page 311 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 13 of 16
Page 312 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 14 of 16
Applicant
• Applicant’s Contact:
Anne Miller (804-794-0471)
amiller@balzer.cc
District Planning Commissioner
• Frank Petroski (804-768-7558)
petroskif@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager:
Tyler Walter (804-318-8893)
waltert@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering:
Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028)
rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services:
Anthony Batten (804-717-6167)
battena@chesterfield.gov
• Parks & Recreation:
Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482)
llewellynJa@chesterfield.gov
• Schools:
Atonja Allen (804-318-8740)
atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation:
Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsst@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation:
Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities:
Randy Phelps (804-796-7126)
phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 313 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 15 of 16
Mission & Service Profile
The mission of Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services (CFEMS) is to protect life, property and the
environment. This requires a comprehensive portfolio of services aimed at preventing fires, mitigating the impact of
fires and disasters on the community, and providing a timely and effective response when fires, medical and other
emergencies occur. Community risks, population growth and demographic changes, service demands, and response
times are reviewed annually and the need for additional Fire & EMS operating and capital resources in support of the
department’s mission is evaluated during the county’s annual budget and 5-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
processes.
Community Fire Protection Capabilities Assessment
Chesterfield Fire and EMS participates in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) Public Protection Classification (PPC)
program, which rates a community’s fire protection capabilities in accordance with the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule
(FSRS). Using the FSRS, the ISO performs a comprehensive evaluation of a community’s fire department, water supply,
emergency communications and community risk reduction efforts. The resulting score establishes a PPC rating from 1 to
10, with Class 1 being the best possible rating. Many insurance carriers reference a community’s PPC rating in
establishing insurance premiums. Generally, communities with a Class 1 rating enjoy lower insurance premiums than
those communities with a Class 10 rating. Chesterfield County has a current community classification of 2/2Y; however,
some portions are classified as 10 or 10W based on the parameters indicated below;
Class 2 - within 5 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 2Y – within 5 miles of a fire station but not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10W – within 5-7 miles of a fire station and within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
Class 10 – outside of 5 miles of a fire station and not within 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant.
A 10, 10W or 2Y rating can be improved with the addition of fire hydrants and/or construction of fire stations within the
defined distance parameters.
Response Time Goals (Urban/Rural Zones)
Urban Zone
➢ Fire and EMS response goal is 7 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 4 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 8 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Rural Zone
➢ Fire and EMS response goal is 12 minutes from receipt of call in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) to
arrival of first responding unit. Fire and EMS facilities should be strategically located to provide 9 minutes or less
travel time for the first arriving engine company at a suppression incident, and 13 minutes or less travel time for
deployment of an Effective Firefighting Force (first alarm assignment) at a suppression incident.
Appendix
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Page 314 of 353
Railey Hill Associates, LLC 21SN0534 Page 16 of 16
Map illustrating Urban vs Rural response zones
Page 315 of 353
Conditional use to permit a spa (beauty/barber shop) in a
Corporate Office (O‐2) District.
Railey Hill Associates, LLC
21SN0534 – Midlothian
Case 21SN0534 in the Midlothian District is a Conditional Use by Railey Hill Associates,
LLC to permit a spa, specifically a beauty/barber shop in a Corporate Office (O‐2) District.
1Page 316 of 353
21SN0534 – Overview
1. Spa use proposed
2. Contains a beauty/barber
shop, permitted with
restrictions that are not met
3. Staff recommends approval
A spa use is proposed in the southeastern quadrant of the subject property. The spa
would contain a beauty/barber shop, a massage parlor, and a nail salon. While the
massage parlor is permitted by right in O‐2 zoning, a beauty/barber shop is permitted
with restrictions in an O‐2 zoning district. One of the requirements is that the use is on a
project site that is at least twenty‐five (25) acres. As the project site is twenty (20) acres,
the use does not satisfy the restrictions, hence a Conditional Use is requested. Staff
recommends approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions in your staff report. As
conditioned, the anticipated impact should be minimal.
2Page 317 of 353
21SN0534 – Zoning Map
The subject property is located on 0.2 acre within the Railey Hill Business Park in the
Midlothian Village at 324 Browns Hill Court. The property is zoned for Corporate Office
(O‐2), with surrounding uses zoned for Corporate Office (O‐2) uses to the north and west,
and for Agricultural (A) uses to the south and east.
3Page 318 of 353
21SN0534 – Aerial & Land Use Map
This is a view of aerial imagery and land use plan in relation to the subject property. The
property is currently vacant with a proposed office to be constructed. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Corporate Office use.
4Page 319 of 353
21SN0534 – Proffered Conditions
1. Use of a beauty/barber shop shall be permitted.
2. Hours of operation limited to 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday.
The applicant has proffered two (2) conditions, as shown in your staff report. These
proffered conditions allow for a beauty/barber shop to be an additional permitted use
on the subject property, as well as limiting the hours of operation for the spa to be
between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
5Page 320 of 353
21SN0534 – Recommendation
•Approval. As conditioned, anticipated impact should be
minimal, office character maintained.
Staff recommends approval of this request, and acceptance of the two proffered
conditions contained in your addendum accompanying this report. As conditioned, the
anticipated impact should be minimal, while the office character of the business park
should be maintained.
At the December 15, 2020 Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of this case and acceptance of the conditions in
your staff report.
6Page 321 of 353
21SN0534 – Zoning Map
Thank you.
7Page 322 of 353
Page 323 of 353
Page 324 of 353
Page 325 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 1 of 9
21SN0542 – Chesterfield Planning Commission
Magisterial District – Bermuda
Agent – Andy Gillies (804-748-1050)
BOS Public Hearing – January 27, 2021
Time Remaining
365 Days
Case Manager
Tyler Walter
(804-318-8893)
Request
Conditional Use
Construction of a single-family dwelling in a Community
Business (C-3) District.
Planning Commission Recommendation
Approval
Staff Recommendation
Approval
Property Location
4701, 4703 and 4705 Lee Street
Site Size
0.2 Acre
Comprehensive Plan –
Land Use Designation
Office/Residential Mixed Use
Plan Area
The Chester Plan
Figure 1: Aerial of Request Area (VGIN 2016) – Click Image for Link to GIS
Figure 2: Area Map of Request & Land Use Plan Map
Conditional use to permit a single-family dwelling within the Community Business (C-3) District. Construction of one (1)
single-family dwelling is proposed.
A single-family dwelling is a use permitted with restrictions in the C-3 District. The property is located outside of the
Matoaca Special Design District, which requires conditional use approval for this use. Development standards for the
dwelling relative to setbacks, building heights and accessory buildings would be subject to the standards outlined in
the Residential (R-9) District requirements.
Summary of Proposal
Page 326 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 2 of 9
PLANNING COMMISSION – APPROVAL
STAFF – APPROVAL
As conditioned, the use would be compatible with surrounding residential development within the Chester Village Core, as
part of a village center where this use would be appropriate.
NOTES FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
1. One condition is provided in this report.
Summary of Proposal .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Planning................................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Current Zoning Map ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Supplemental Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Environmental Engineering ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Fire & Emergency Medical Services .................................................................................................................................... 5
Parks & Recreation .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Schools ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Transportation – County Department of Transportation ................................................................................................... 5
Transportation – Virginia Department of Transportation .................................................................................................. 5
Utilities – Water and Wastewater ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Community Engagement & Public Hearings ........................................................................................................................... 7
Condition ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Site Survey – Exhibit A ............................................................................................................................................................. 8
Case Contacts .......................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Recommendations
Table of Contents
Page 327 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 3 of 9
Comprehensive Plan – Land Use Plan Designation
The Comprehensive Plan designates the Property for Office/Residential Mixed Use, within the Chester Plan, which
suggests the Property is appropriate for professional and administrative offices, along with residential development of
varying densities.
Proposal
Construction of a new single-family dwelling is proposed. The property is zoned for Community Business (C-3) zoning.
Single-family residential dwellings are permitted with restrictions in C-3 zoning, provided they have a minimum lot area
of 7,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 50 feet, and is located within the Matoaca Special Design District. Although
the subject property meets the lot area and width, it is not located within the Special Design District, thus necessitating
Conditional Use.
The subject property is a corner lot at the southeastern corner of the intersection between Lee Street and De Levial
Street. The property fronts eighty (80) feet along Lee Street, and ninety (90) feet along De Levial Street. As conditioned,
the dwelling shall adhere to a twenty-five (25) foot corner side yard and rear yard setback, as well as a thirty (30) foot
front yard setback. The dwelling shall adhere to a zero (0) foot setback adjacent to the Residential (R-7) parcel to the
west of the subject parcels (GPIN #787-655-1501).
The proposed dwelling is located in the Nunnally’s Addition subdivision, which is primarily residential, with houses of
similar size and setback to the dwelling proposed. As conditioned, the residential community shall be maintained, and
the use aligns with the uses in the Comprehensive Plan.
Planning
Page 328 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 4 of 9
Current Zoning Map
Page 329 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 5 of 9
No comment on this request.
Nearby Facility - The Ettrick Fire Station, Company Number 12
This request will have minimal impact on Fire and EMS.
No comment on this request.
As this application proposes one single-family dwelling unit, this request will have minimal impact on school facilities.
The Comprehensive Plan, which includes the Thoroughfare Plan, identifies county-wide transportation needs that are
expected to mitigate traffic impacts of future growth. The anticipated traffic impact of the proposal is expected to be
minimal.
No comment on this request.
1. The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new residential
development.
2. The property owner seeks to build a single-family dwelling on the subject property and has indicated their intent to
connect to the public water and wastewater systems.
3. A 16” water line is located along De Lavial Street, and an 8” wastewater line is located along Lee Street.
Supplemental Analysis
Environmental Engineering
Fire & Emergency Medical Services
Parks & Recreation
Schools
Transportation – County Department of Transportation
Transportation – Virginia Department of Transportation
Utilities – Water and Wastewater
Page 330 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 6 of 9
Page 331 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 7 of 9
Community Meeting
No community meeting was held for this request.
Planning Commission
12/15/2020: Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request.
Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH PROFFERED CONDITION
Motion: Petroski Second: Owens
AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, Petroski
1. Use & Development Standards. One (1) single-family dwelling shall be permitted on the properties. The
dwelling shall be developed in accordance with the following standards:
a. Principal Building Setbacks.
i. Front Yard (Lee Street). The structure shall adhere to a thirty (30) foot setback along the
northern property line along Lee Street.
ii. Corner Side Yard (De Lavial Street). The structure shall adhere a twenty-five (25) foot
setback along the eastern property line along De Lavial Street.
iii. Side Yard. The structure shall adhere to a zero (0) foot side yard setback abutting GPIN
#787-655-1501.
iv. Rear Yard. The structure shall adhere to twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback abutting
GPIN #787-654-0793.
b. Principal Building Heights. The dwelling shall not exceed the lesser of 3 stories or forty-five (45) feet.
c. Accessory Building Requirements. Any accessory building constructed for the single-family dwelling
use on the property shall conform to the requirements of the Residential (R-9) District. (P)
Community Engagement & Public Hearings
Condition
Page 332 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 8 of 9
Site Survey – Exhibit A
Page 333 of 353
Chesterfield Planning Commission 21SN0542 Page 9 of 9
Applicant
• Applicant’s Contact:
Andy Gillies (804-748-1050)
gilliesa@chesterfield.gov
District Planning Commissioner
• Gib Sloan (804-892-5633)
sloang@chesterfield.gov
Staff
• Planning Department Case Manager:
Tyler Walter (804-318-8893)
waltert@chesterfield.gov
• Environmental Engineering:
Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028)
rochetr@chesterfield.gov
• Fire & Emergency Medical Services:
Anthony Batten (804-717-6167)
battena@chesterfield.gov
• Parks & Recreation:
Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482)
llewellynJa@chesterfield.gov
• Schools:
Atonja Allen (804-318-8740)
atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net
• Transportation - County Department of Transportation:
Steve Adams (804-751-4461)
adamsst@chesterfield.gov
• Transportation - Virginia Department of Transportation:
Willie Gordon (804-674-2907)
willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov
• Utilities:
Randy Phelps (804-796-7126)
phelpsc@chesterfield.gov
Case Contacts
Page 334 of 353
Conditional use to permit a single‐family dwelling in a
Community Business (C‐3) District.
Chesterfield Planning Commission
21SN0542 – Bermuda
Case 21SN0542 in the Bermuda district was initiated by the Chesterfield Planning
Commission for conditional use to permit a single‐family dwelling in a Community
Business (C‐3) District.
1Page 335 of 353
21SN0542 – Overview
1. Single‐family dwelling in
commercial
2. CUPD no longer necessary
3. Residential dwelling to be
built to standards outlined
in conditions
4. Staff recommends approval
This case is located at the intersection of Lee Street and De Lavial Street in the Nunnally’s
Addition subdivision. A single‐family dwelling is proposed on commercially‐zoned
property. The request was also advertised for a Conditional Use Planned Development
(CUPD) to permit ordinance exceptions and development standards in the C‐3 and R‐7
portions of three properties. The CUPD portion of the application is no longer
necessary. The applicant’s agent has withdrawn the CUPD from this request.
Development standards relative to setbacks, building heights, are outlined in the
conditions in the staff report. As conditioned, the use should be compatible with
surrounding residential uses in the Chester Village Core, staff supports the
request.
2Page 336 of 353
21SN0542 – Zoning Map
The subject properties are located to the southwest of the intersection of Lee Street and
De Lavial Street in a Nunnally’s Addition subdivision. The properties are currently zoned
for Community Business (C‐3) use.
3Page 337 of 353
21SN0542 – Aerial & Land Use Map
This is a view of aerial imagery and land use plan in relation to the subject property. The
property is situated in a single‐family residential neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Office/Residential Mixed use.
4Page 338 of 353
21SN0542 – Site Photo
This is a photo of the site taken in December 2020. The subject properties are currently
vacant.
5Page 339 of 353
21SN0542 – Condition
1. Limited to one (1) single family dwelling
•Twenty‐five (25) foot corner side yard and rear yard setbacks
•If property is developed to include GPIN #787‐655‐1501 as a zoning lot, then dwelling
shall have zero (0) foot side yard setback abutting GPIN
•If property is developed not to include GPIN #787‐655‐1501 as a zoning lot, then
dwelling shall have 7.5‐foot side yard setback abutting GPIN
•Thirty (30) foot front yard setback
•Building height shall not exceed lesser of three (3) stories or forty‐five (45) feet
•Accessory buildings constructed for the dwelling shall conform to Residential (R‐9)
building requirements
Staff recommends one (1) condition as shown in your staff report. The use shall be
limited to one (1) single family dwelling. That dwelling shall adhere to a twenty‐five (25)
foot rear yard corner yard setback, and a thirty (30) foot front yard setback. If the
property is developed to include GPIN #787‐655‐1501 as a zoning lot, then the
dwelling shall have a zero‐foot (0) side yard setback abutting GPIN #787‐655‐1501.
If the property is not developed to include GPIN #787‐655‐1501 as a zoning lot,
then the dwelling shall have a 7.5‐foot side yard setback abutting GPIN #787‐655‐
1501.The building height is not to exceed the lesser of three (3) stories or forty‐five (45)
feet. Finally, accessory buildings constructed for the dwelling shall conform to the
Residential (R‐9) building requirements.
6Page 340 of 353
21SN0542 – Recommendation
•Approval
•As conditioned, the use should be compatible with
surrounding residential uses in the Chester Village Core
Staff recommends approval of this request. As conditioned, the use should be
compatible with surrounding residential uses in the Chester Village Core.
At the December 15, 2020 Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended approval of this case subject to the condition in your staff
report.
7Page 341 of 353
21SN0542 – Zoning Map
Thank you.
8Page 342 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 16.A.
Subject:
To Consider Conveyance of Right of Way to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Route I95 Auxiliary Lanes
Project
Board Action Requested:
Approve the conveyance of .105+/- acres of land to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Route I95 Auxiliary
Lanes Project.
Summary of Information:
The Virginia Department of Transportation is requesting that the county convey .105+\- acres of land for the
Route I95 Auxiliary Lanes Project. This request has been reviewed by county staff. A public hearing is
required to convey the right of way.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Route I95 Auxiliary Lanes Project Vicinity Sketch
2.Route I95 Auxiliary Lanes Project Plat
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 343 of 353
OSBORNE RD
S
I
-
9
5
N
I
-
9
5
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Conveyance of Right of Way to the Commonwealth ofVirginia for the Route I95 Auxiliary Lanes Project
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 200 feetSnowD 01-07-2021
µ
Conveyance of .105+/- acres
Page 344 of 353
9
5
7
Station 1002+00 Matchline Sheet 8
Station 995+00 Matchline Sheet 6
7
0
0
9
5
-
0
2
0
-
8
1
8
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
L
i
m
i
t
s
i
n
C
u
t
s
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
L
i
m
i
t
s
i
n
F
i
l
l
s
C
F
0
S
C
A
L
E
2
5
'
5
0
'
B
y
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
t
a
t
e
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
a
n
d
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
a
t
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
m
m
i
s
i
o
n
d
a
t
e
d
O
c
t
.
4
,
1
9
5
6
L
I
M
I
T
E
D
A
C
C
E
S
S
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
.
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
D
e
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
M
i
l
l
i
n
g
&
O
v
e
r
l
a
y
R
W
-
2
0
1
,
C
-
5
0
1
,
B
-
6
6
0
0
0
9
5
-
0
2
0
-
8
1
8
,
See Sheet 3 Utility Owners:
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
(
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
S
,
D
E
T
A
I
L
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
S
,
E
T
C
.
)
Everrick Bruce, PE (804) 371-0229 (Central Office) Accumark, Inc.Cell Revised 12/11/12 David Burch, LS (804) 561-0602 (Richmond District)
V
A
.
S
T
A
T
E
R
O
U
T
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
V
A
.
R
E
V
I
S
E
D
S
T
A
T
E
S
T
A
T
E
R
O
U
T
E
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
.
d
1
1
1
4
6
6
0
0
7
.
d
g
n
P
l
o
t
t
e
d
B
y
:
W
A
P
0
4
1
0
7
$
4:07:10 PM 4/8/2020
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
.
D
E
S
I
G
N
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
R
E
L
A
T
I
N
G
T
O
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
O
R
T
O
R
E
G
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
O
F
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
M
A
Y
B
E
S
U
B
J
E
C
T
T
O
C
H
A
N
G
E
A
S
D
E
E
M
E
D
N
E
C
E
S
S
A
R
Y
B
Y
T
H
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
SURVEYED BY, DATEDESIGN BYSUBSURFACE UTILITY BY, DATE PROJECT MANAGER
(
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
C
I
P
L
I
N
E
)
(
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
)
,
V
i
r
g
i
n
i
a
V
D
O
T
(
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
)
o
r
C
o
.
N
a
m
e
(
T
E
C
H
N
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
C
I
P
L
I
N
E
)
(
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
)
,
V
i
r
g
i
n
i
a
V
D
O
T
(
D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
)
o
r
C
o
.
N
a
m
e
2
E
(
1
)
2
E
7
B
7
A
(
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
)
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
D
e
s
c
r
.
(
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
i
p
e
s
)
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
D
e
s
c
r
.
E
&
S
M
a
i
n
l
i
n
e
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
T
H
E
S
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
R
E
U
N
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
A
N
D
A
R
E
N
O
T
T
O
B
E
U
S
E
D
F
O
R
A
N
Y
T
Y
P
E
O
F
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
.
William Wheeler, PE (804) 609-5280 (Richmond District)
N
o
t
e
:
D
o
t
-
d
a
s
h
e
d
l
i
n
e
s
d
e
n
o
t
e
P
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
N
o
t
e
:
D
o
t
-
d
o
t
-
d
a
s
h
e
d
l
i
n
e
s
d
e
n
o
t
e
T
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
E
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
Conc. Ditch
C
o
n
c
.
B
a
s
e
P
o
n
d
60" RCP
48" RCP
18" CMP
15" RCP
G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l
Guardrail Edge of Pavement Asphalt ShoulderEdge of PavementAsphalt Shoulder AsphaltAsphalt
H
a
r
d
w
o
o
d
s
&
P
i
n
e
s
M
i
x
t
u
r
e
o
f
D
e
n
s
e
W
o
o
d
s
H
a
r
d
w
o
o
d
s
&
P
i
n
e
s
M
i
x
t
u
r
e
o
f
D
e
n
s
e
W
o
o
d
s
C
o
n
c
.
4' Woven Wire Fence
4' W
o
v
e
n
Wir
e
F
e
n
c
e
4' Woven Wire Fence
4
'
W
o
v
e
n
W
i
r
e
F
e
n
c
e
Double Guardrail w/ Asphalt Curb Metal Post w/ Blue Reflector- Historical SignMetal Sign - Exit 61A
Overhead Sign - Exit 61A & 61B
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
o
u
l
d
e
r
E
d
g
e
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
E
d
g
e
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
o
u
l
d
e
r
G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l
Jersey Barrier
J
e
r
s
e
y
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
E
d
g
e
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
o
u
l
d
e
r
E
d
g
e
o
f
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
h
o
u
l
d
e
r
AsphaltOsborne RdSign - Rte 616 #3509
#
3
2
6
3
#
3
5
2
2
#
3
1
7
6
4'
WW
Fence
Redwater CreekDB 11272 PG 671 Utility Easement Variable Width VEPCO DB 1166 PG 30020' Drainage Esmt.
E
x
i
s
t
.
R
/
W
V
D
O
T
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
:
7
0
9
5
-
0
2
0
-
1
0
1
,
R
W
-
2
0
2
R/W Mon
R/W Mon
N
1
9
°
3
1'
5
6
"
W
7
8
.
5
5'
(S68°56'E 165.50')
(
S
1
6
°
2
8
'
W
5
0
7
'
)
E
x
i
s
t
.
R
/
W
R/W Mon
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
L
i
n
e
E
x
i
s
t
.
R
/
W
A
n
d
L
i
m
i
t
e
d
A
c
c
e
s
s
L
i
n
e
E
x
i
s
t
.
R
/
W
V
D
O
T
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
:
7
0
9
5
-
0
2
0
-
1
0
1
,
R
W
-
2
0
2
Exist. R/W And Limited Access Line
8
.
3
3
A
C
.
P
A
R
C
E
L
I
D
#
8
0
1
6
5
9
7
7
6
3
0
0
0
0
0
D
B
1
0
4
7
P
G
6
1
2
(
P
l
a
t
)
D
B
2
1
6
5
P
G
6
4
0
D
B
1
1
3
3
P
G
7
4
S
H
P
B
1
6
P
G
1
1
0
D
B
1
1
6
6
P
G
3
0
0
S
H
P
B
9
P
G
3
6
1
S
H
P
B
9
P
G
8
8
D
B
5
1
5
P
G
3
1
2
D
B
1
6
9
2
P
G
6
5
9
P
A
R
C
E
L
I
D
#
8
0
1
6
5
9
5
9
7
5
0
0
0
0
0
1
.
4
9
2
A
C
.
D
B
5
1
6
P
G
4
D
B
2
9
1
0
P
G
1
7
3
P
A
R
C
E
L
I
D
#
8
0
1
6
5
9
1
6
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
8
.
0
3
A
C
.
D
B
1
4
2
6
P
G
5
8
6
D
B
5
1
6
P
G
4
P
B
9
P
G
1
8
-
2
1
D
B
1
1
2
7
P
G
2
4
7
D
B
1
1
4
3
P
G
1
3
7
D
B
6
6
5
P
G
2
8
6
(
P
l
a
t
)
D
B
9
0
9
1
P
G
2
8
7
C
O
U
N
T
Y
O
F
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
F
I
E
L
D
T
U
R
N
P
I
K
E
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
T
Y
T
H
E
R
I
C
H
M
O
N
D
-
P
E
T
E
R
S
B
U
R
G
L
A
R
R
Y
J
.
M
A
R
T
I
N
995996997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
0
0
5
0
0
4
P
r
o
p
.
R
/
W
&
L
/
A
L
i
n
e
Pro
p
.
R
/
W
&
L
/
A
L
i
n
e
P
r
o
p
.
R
/
W
&
L
/
A
L
i
n
e
for Slopes Prop. Temp. Easement
P
r
o
p
.
L
/
A
L
i
n
e
4
8
"
1
5
"
6
0
"
4
8
"
7-
1
7-
2
7
-
3
7
-
4
7-57-7 7-67-8
E
n
d
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
Remov
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
End
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
Rem
o
v
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
E
n
d
w
a
l
l
R
e
m
o
v
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
1 5"15"
T
o
B
e
C
l
e
a
n
e
d
O
u
t
60" RCP
T
o
B
e
C
l
e
a
n
e
d
O
u
t
To Be Cleaned Out Cast-In-Placeinstalled as Proposed DI-2B Cast-In-Placeinstalled as Proposed DI-2B
7
-
9
7
-
1
0
1
5
"
1
5
"
I
n
v
.
I
n
=
1
0
7
.
8
'
,
I
n
v
.
O
u
t
=
1
0
7
.
3
'
r
e
p
a
i
r
e
d
2
7
.
2
7
'
f
r
o
m
o
u
t
l
e
t
1
5
"
R
C
P
P
i
p
e
7
-
1
0
t
o
b
e
1 8"7-11WatergateStd FE-4 995996997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
P
r
o
p
1
2
'
A
u
x
.
L
a
n
e
R
e
m
o
v
e
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l
S
t
d
.
G
R
-
M
G
S
1
G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l
R
e
q
'
d
.
P
r
o
p
1
2
'
A
u
x
.
L
a
n
e
M
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
C
B
L
E
=
-
3
%
f
r
o
m
S
a
w
c
u
t
L
i
n
e
s
P
T
=
M
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
C
B
L
C
u
r
v
e
1
0
5
0
+
2
2
.
0
3
P
I
=
1
0
1
8
+
1
6
.
1
2
T
=
3
,
7
2
5
.
6
6
'
L
=
6
,
9
3
1
.
5
7
'
R
=
7
,
6
2
9
.
2
5
'
9
8
0
+
9
0
.
4
6
P
C
=
Type 1 Req'd.St'd. GR-FOA-2 W=16'St'd. FE-G Req'd.St'd FE-W2 Fence Req'd.
PSS WETLAND
(R4) STREAM CHANNEL
INTERMITTENT
P
r
o
p
.
F
u
l
l
D
e
p
t
h
S
a
w
c
u
t
R
e
q
'
d
.
P
r
o
p
.
F
u
l
l
D
e
p
t
h
S
a
w
c
u
t
R
e
q
'
d
.
P
r
o
p
1
0
'
P
a
v
e
d
S
h
l
d
r
.
R
e
q
'
d
.
S
t
d
.
G
R
-
M
G
S
1
G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l
R
e
q
'
d
.
P
r
o
p
1
0
'
P
a
v
e
d
S
h
l
d
r
.
R
e
q
'
d
.
Slab Req'd.Conc. Br. Approach Slab Req'd.Conc. Br. Approach
E
p
h
e
m
e
r
a
l
S
t
r
e
a
m
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
Transition Req'd.St'd. GR-MGS4 Height I-95 I-95 SBL I-95 NBL
I
-
9
5
I
-
9
5
S
B
L
I
-
9
5
N
B
L
Osbourne Road
F
C
St'd. MC3B Req'd.
S
t
'
d
.
F
E
-
W
2
F
e
n
c
e
R
e
q
'
d
.
FC
F
C
F St'd. MC3B Req'd.
P
a
g
e
3
4
5
o
f
3
5
3
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 16.B.
Subject:
To Consider Leasing of Space at the County Airport for Use by the Virginia State Police Aviation Unit
Board Action Requested:
Approve the leasing of space at the County Airport to the Commonwealth of Virginia for use by the Virginia
State Police Aviation Unit and authorize the County Administrator to execute the lease agreement.
Summary of Information:
Since 1987 the County has leased space at the County Airport for use by the Virginia State Police Aviation
Unit. The new lease is for an aircraft hangar and office area with approximately 16,250 square feet and 8
parking spaces in the lot adjacent to the building. The initial term is for five years beginning January 1, 2021 at
$97,503.84 per year with two 5-year optional renewal terms. Rent will increase annually based on the
Consumer Price Index. The new lease requires the County to perform major maintenance projects including
roof repairs, replacement hangar floor coating and office flooring for the hangar, but in exchange the County
solidifies a long-term lease for the Airport with a stable tenant that provides valuable public safety services to
the community. A public hearing is required to lease the property.
Approval is recommended.
Attachments:
1.Virginia State Police Hangar Lease Vicinity Sketch
2.VSP Agenda Exhibit
Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager
Approved By:
Page 346 of 353
AIRFIELD DR
I R O N B R I D G E R DW
HITEPINE RD
F S 1 5
QUAIFF LN
WHITEPINE RD
I R O N B R I D G E R D
WHITEPINE RD
Board of Supervisors Meeting - January 27, 2021Leasing of Space at the County Airport for Useby the Virginia State Police Aviation Unit
Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office
1 inch = 500 feet
µ
Virginia State Police Hangar
Page 347 of 353
LEASE AREA
Page 348 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 16.C.
Subject:
To Consider Amendment to County Code 9-51 Regarding Penalty for Failing to File a Tax Return for Certain
Personal Property
Board Action Requested:
Hold a public hearing to consider the attached amendment to County Code 9-51 to eliminate the penalty for
failing to file a personal property tax return for boats, trailers, or aircraft by March 1.
Summary of Information:
This item requests the Board of Supervisors hold a public hearing to consider an amendment to Chapter 9 of
the County Code relating to tangible personal property taxes. The proposed change eliminates the ten percent
penalty for failing to file a personal property return by March 1 when the property subject to taxation is a boat,
trailer, or aircraft. In 2016, ahead of the implementation of the new tax management system, the Code was
amended to eliminate the penalty when the property subject to taxation is a motor vehicle or mobile home. The
proposed change would make consistent the treatment for all these property classifications.
At the start of each calendar year the Commissioner of the Revenue’s office pulls registration information from
state databases regarding personal property owned by County citizens. The Commissioner of the Revenue
reports that citizens may not receive notification of their personal property subject to taxation from the
Commissioner office until early to mid-February. This gives citizens a limited amount of time to file returns by
March 1 notifying the Commissioner’s office of any corrections or updated information.
In 2016, the penalty for failing to file a return with updated information was eliminated for motor vehicles and
mobile homes because it was viewed as overly punitive on citizens. The Commissioner of the Revenue reports
that, in practice, the penalty also has not been imposed on owners of boats, trailers, and aircraft since the tax
management system took effect in 2017. The proposed Code amendments would standardize the treatment of
similar property classifications and align the Code with County practice. Staff has reviewed the proposal and
determined there is no impact to County revenue.
The proposed change would take effect upon adoption and be effective for the 2021 tax year.
Page 349 of 353
Attachments:
1.Ordinance Amendment Section 9-51 Relating to Tangible Personal Pro
Preparer:Jeff Mincks, County Attorney
Approved By:
Page 350 of 353
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD,
1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTION 9-51 RELATING
TO TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County:
(1) That Section 9-51 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is
amended and re-enacted, to read as follows:
Chapter 9. FINANCE AND TAXATION
ARTICLE III. TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
DIVISION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 9-51. - Payment.
(a) The tangible personal property tax levied on personal property, including mobile homes,
and the machinery and tool tax levied on machinery and tools is due and payable on June 5 of
each calendar year; however, any prorated tax levied on motor vehicles shall be due and
payable in accordance with sections 9-52 et seq. Any person failing to pay such taxes on or
before the due date shall incur a penalty of ten percent which shall be added to the amount of
taxes owed from such taxpayer. The treasurer shall account for the penalty collected in his
settlement.
(b) All returns of tangible personal property subject to taxation, including mobile homes,
machinery and tools, shall be filed by every person liable for the tax with the office of the
commissioner of the revenue on forms furnished by it, on or before March 1 of each calendar
year; however, every person liable for any prorated tax shall file a return in accordance with
section 9-53. Any person failing to file such return on or before the due date shall incur a
penalty of ten percent which shall be added to the amount of taxes or levies due from such
taxpayer. The treasurer shall account for the penalty collected in his settlement. There shall
be no penalty for any person liable for a prorated tax who fails to file a return or when the
property subject to taxation is a motor vehicle, or a mobile home, trailer, boat, or aircraft if
the billing date is January 1, 2017 or later.
(c) In addition to the penalties provided herein, any such taxes remaining unpaid on the first
day of the month next following the month in which such taxes become due, shall be
delinquent and shall accrue interest at ten percent per annum.
(d) Upon a written request, the commissioner of the revenue may extend the time for filing
tangible personal property returns. The taxpayer must submit a request for an extension of
time on or before March 1, including the reason for the extension request. Upon receipt of
such request, the commissioner of the revenue may grant or refuse the request, and shall notify
the taxpayer of his decision. Any extension of the filing date shall be for a fixed number of
days, but not more than 60 days.
(e) Motor vehicle, boat or trailer owners are required to file a new personal property tax return
on or before March 1 of any tax year for which there is (i) a change in the name or address of
the person or persons owning the vehicle; (ii) a change in the situs of the vehicle; or (iii) any
Page 351 of 353
other change affecting the assessment of the personal property tax on the vehicle for which a
tax return was previously filed. Unless and until such a new personal property tax return is
filed, the most recent tax return filed prior to January 1, 1996 or any return filed thereafter
shall be the basis for the assessment of a motor vehicle boat or trailer. Motor vehicle, boat or
trailer owners are required to file a return as stated in sections 9-51(b) and 9-53 when acquiring
one or more vehicles for which no personal property tax return has been filed with the county.
o o o
(2) That this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
3328:118400.1
Page 352 of 353
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AGENDA
Meeting Date: January 27, 2021 Item Number: 19.A.
Subject:
Adjournment and Notice of Next Scheduled Meeting of the Board of Supervisors
Board Action Requested:
Summary of Information:
Motion of adjournment and notice of the Board of Supervisors meeting to be held on February 24, 2021 at 1:00
p.m. in the Public Meeting Room.
Attachments:
None
Preparer:Sara Hall, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Approved By:
Page 353 of 353