12-10-1986 Minutes BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
December 10, 1986
Supervisors in Attendance: Staff in Attendance:
Mr. R. Garland Dodd, Chairman
Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Vice Chairman
Mr. S. H. Applegate
Mrs. Joan Girone
Mr. Jesse J. Mayes
Mr. Richard L. Hedrick
County Administrator
Mr. Stanley Baldereon,
Dir., Econ. Develop.
Mrs. Doris DeHart,
Legislative Coord.
Chief Robert Manes,
Fire Depar~men~
Mr. Bradford $. Hammer
A~st. Co. Admin.
Mr. Robert Modder,
Building official
Mr. William Howell,
Dir., Gen. Services
Mr. Thomas Jacobsen,
Dir. of Plarhning
Mr. Robert ~as~on,
Asst. CO. Admin. for
Mr. Richard McElfish,
Dir. of ~nv. ~ng.
Mr. R. J. McCracken,
Transp. Director
Mr. Steve Micas, Co.
Attorney
Mrs. Pauline Mitchell,
Dir. of News/Info.
services
Col. Joseph Pittman,
Chief of Police
Mr. william D. Peele,
Chief, Dev. Review
Mr. Lane Ramsey, Dir.
of Budget & Acctg.
Mr. Richard ~ale, Asst.
Co. Admin. for
Development
Mr. Russell Sink,
Airport Manager
Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr,,
Dir. of Park~ & Rec.
Mr. Robert Wagenknecht,
Dir. of Libraries
Mr. David Welchons,
Dir. of utilities
Mr. Frederick Willis,
Dir. of Human
Sheriff E.L. Wingo,
Sheriff's Department
Mr. Dodd called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. (EST).
1 · INVOCATION
~r. Hedrick introduced Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Director of
and Recreation, who gave the invocation.
Parks
2. Pr-~nGE O~ ALleGIaNCE TO 'r~ FLAG OF 'r~u~ ON1T~U STATES OF
AMERICA
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the
America was recited.
United States
86-921
3. R~OL~RSTSFORMOBILE HOME P~IITS
$6SR170
In Bermuda Magisterial District, THOMAS AND BLAIR HALLETT
requested renewal e~ Mobile Home Permit 815142 to park a mobile
home on property fronting the north line of East Hundred Road at
its intersection with Inge Road, and better known as 210 East
Hundred Road. Tax MaD 117-12 (4) Westcver Farms, Lot 22 (sheet
33). The first permit was issued November 1981.
Mr. Peele stated staff recommended approval of this request,
subject to certain conditions.
Mr. Hallett came forward to present the request.
There was no opposition present.
On motion of Mr. Dodd~ seconded by Mr2 Applegate, the Board
approved this request for a five (5) year period, subjec~ to the
fellowing standard conditions:
1. The applicant shall be the owner and occupant of the mobile
home.
2. No lot or parcel may be rented or leased for use as a
mobile home si:e, nor shall any mobile home be used for
rental property. Only one (1) mobile home shall be
permitted to be parked on an individual lot or parcel.
3. The minimum lot size, yard setbacks, required front yard,
and other zoning requirements o~ the applicable zoning
district shall be complied with, except that no mobile home
shall be located closer than 20 feet to any existing
residence.
4. No additional permanent-type living ~paoe may be added onto
a mobile home. All mobile homes shall be skirted but shall
not be placed on a permanent foundation.
5. Where public (County) water and/or sewer are available,
they shall be used.
6. Upon being granted a Mobile Home Permit, the applicant
shall then ebtain the necessary permits from the Office of
the Building Official. This shall be done prior to the
installation or relocation of the mobile home.
Any violation of the above conditions shall be grounds for
revocation of the Mobile Home Permit.
Vote:
Unanimous
865171
In Bermuda Magisterial District, MARION K. BIBB requested a
Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property fronting
the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, approximately 150 feet
north of Galena Avenue, and better known as 9518 Jefferson Davis
Highway. Tax Map 81-12 (3) Quail Oaks, Section 2, Block 5, Lot
3 (sheet 23).
Mr. Peele stated ~taff recommended denial of this request, as it
appears to be out cf character with the neighborheed at the
present time and is located in an area designated by the CENTRAL
PLANNING AREA LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN for qeneral
commercial use.
Mr. Jerry Wood voiced his opposition and requested that the
Board deny this case. He stated the property is an unsightly
junkyard and a health hazard to the community. Be pre~ented
86-922
photographs of the subject property showing its presen~
appearance.
Mr. Donald Moore, representing ~he Chester Moose Lodge,
supported Mr. Wood's cerements and stated he did not feel the
request should be approved. He stated too many difficulties
have been encountered with enforcement of the zoning regulations
on the current use and approval of this ease would only
aggravate the situation.
~r. Joseph Miller stated him home is located directly behind the
subject property. He stated he does not feel Mr. Bibb should be
permitted to park a mobile home on the subject property as the
property is unsightly, congested and infested with rodents.
Mr. Peele stated Mr. Bibb does not have a permit to operate a
junkyard; however, he has been located at the subject sits for
approximately 8-10 years. He stated staff has worked with him
on a continuous basis in an effort to have him comply with the
Ordinance. He stated Mr. Bibb is currently in violation of the
Ordinance and, if he is not willing to olean up the site
voluntarily, staff has the ability to require him to comply
through legal channels.
Mr. Bibb explained that he intends to reside in the mobile home
because he has been experiencing personal and financial
difficulties. Ms ~tated that if he were permitted to reside on
the property some of the problems could be alleviated. Be
stated he is working with staff to clean up his property, bring
it into compliance with the Zoning 0rdinanee and intends to
maintain compliance under staff supervision. Me stated that he
wished to be permitted to continue his business and provide th~
necessary protection for his investment £rom theft, fire, etc.,
by residing on the property.
Mr. Micas stated if the Beard were to deny this case the
applicant would not be able to reapply within one year; however,
the Board could consider deferral of the case for a specified
period to allow the applicant an opportunity to bring the
current uses into compliance wi~h ~he Zoning Ordinance.
In response to a question by Mr. Applegate, Mr. Bibb indicated
that Mr. Jerry Wood has offered to purchase the subject
property; however, the offer is u~aeceptable at the present
time. Mr. Bibb indicated that if he were to sell the subject
property the mobile home permit would notthsn bs needed.
Mr. Dodd stated he has received numerous complaints from area
residents regarding the disarray and unsightliness o~ this site
and that the property needs to be cleaned up and a marked
improvement made prior to consideration of the mobile home
permit request.
On motion of Mr. Dedd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
deferred consideration Of this request u~til January 28, 1987,
at 2:00 p.m., at which time the Board would take into
consideration two issues: (1) whether or not the property has
been sold, and (2) unless there is a marked improvement of the
operation denial of the request would be recommended by the
District Supervisor.
Vote: Unanimous
REQUES~ ~O POSTPONE ACTION~ ]~ERC~.~"? ADDITIONS OB. CHANmRm
IN TNE ORDER OF P~ESENTATIO~
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board added
Item 14.J., Executive Session tc consult with legal counsel
concerning Cullather versus the County, and to discuss the
condition, use and acquisition of real proper~y for public
purposes, pursuant to Sections 2.1-344 (a) (6) and (2),
86-923
respectively, of the Code of Virginia,
adopted the agenda, as amended.
Vote: Unanimous
1950, as amended; and
4~ ~EQD~$T$ FOR REZC~ING
86S120
In Midlothian Magisteiial District, IZAAK WALTON PARK, INC.
requested rezoning from Agricultural (Ap to Residential (R-9) of
228.1 acres and Residential (R-12) of 18.7 acres on a 246.8 acre
parcel lying at the northern terminus of Ashbrook Landing Road,
the northwestern terminus of Gordon School Road, and the western
terminus of Yucca Drive, and lying approximately 500 feet off
the north line of Lucks Lane. Tax Map 26-14 (1) Parcel 1
(Sheets 7 and 13).
Mr. ~oole stated the applicants have requested deferral to allow
for further deliberations on the development of this property.
He noted the residents of the Walton Park, Smcketree and
Evergreen communities have expressed concerns relative to the
proposed development plan and opposition to approval of the
rezoning.
No one came forward in opposition to the request for deferral.
On motion cf Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
deferred consideration of this case for sixty (60) days.
Vote: Unanimous
86S103
In Bermuda Magisterial District, J.T. SHOOSMITH requested
rezoning from Agricultural (Ap to Office Business (o) of 3.52
acres with a Conditional Use PlaD-ned Development to permit use
exceptions plus amendments to a Conditional Use Planned
Development (Case $4s030) on a 7.6 acre Office Business
tract. This request fronts approximately 1,200 feet on the south
line of Iron ~ridge Road, also fronts approximately 620 feet on
the east line of Branders Bridge Road, and is located in the
southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map
114-12 (1) Parcels 4, 8, and 35 (Sheet 31).
Mr. Poole stated the Planning Con~ission recommended approval of
this case, subject to certain conditions.
Mr. C. F. Coffin, Jr. stated the conditions as recommended by
the Planning Commission were acceptable.
There was no opposition present.
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by ~lr. Mayes, the Board approved
this request, subject to the following conditions:
1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared
by Austin Brockenbrough and Associates, dated May 8, 1986,
shall be considered the Master Plan.
2. The uses permitted shall be limited to Office Business (o)
uses plus 30% of the overall gross floor area may be
occupied by Convenience Business (B-l) uses and a health
club. The Convenience Business (B-l) uses and health club
shall be restricted to those structures which are generally
loeate~ in the central portion of the site and shall be
generally surrounded to the east, west, and south by Office
Business (0) uses. A bank may be located in the northwest
corner of the property, however, the square footage Of the
86-924
bank shall be included in the 30% gross floor area which
may be used for Convenience Business (B-l) uses and a
health club. (CPC)
At such time that public sewer is within 500 feet of the
property, the owner/developer shall be required to extend
the sewer line to serve the entire 11.13 acre parcel. (U)
Prier to the issuance of a building permit, forty-five (45)
feet from the centerline of Branders Bridge Road and 100
feet from the centerline of Iron Bridge Road shall be
dedicated to and for the County of chesterfield, ~ree and
unrestricted. (T)
Additional lane of pavement and curb and gutter shall be
constructed along Branders Bridge Road and Iron Bridge Road
for the en~i~e property frontage. At the time of echematie
plan review, a phasing plan of these improvements may be
submitted to and approved by the Transportation Department.
(T)
Access to Iron Bridge Road shall be limited to two (2) en-
trances/exits. · he easternmost entrance/exit shall be
located near the eastern property line and shall be
signed and constructed to be shared with the adjacent
parcel. If VDH&T approves a new crossover at this
access location, the developer shall be responsible for
construction of the crossover, including left-turN
lanes in both east- and westbound directions. (T)
Yard and Height Requirements.
(a) Yard~. The following yard requirement shall apply:
(1) Setback8 along major arterials. All buildings
and drives shall have a minimum seventy-five foot
setback from the proposed rights-of-way of major
arterials ae indicated on the Chesterfield
General Plan, as amended. Parking areas shall
have a minimum one hundred foot setback from pro-
posed rights-of-way of major arterials. The
parking area setback may be red,ced to
seventy-five feet when parking areas are located
to the side or rear of buildings. Within these
setbacks, landscaping shall be provided in
accordance with Condition 14.
The following yard requirements shall apply to any
lot or parcel, except any lot or parcel located in
an M-2 or M-3 District, in which case, the yard
requirements of the underlying zoning district
will apply.
(2) Front yard. The front yard setback for build-
ings, drives, and parking areas shall be a
minimum of forty feet from public rights-of~way
other than major artezlals.
(3) Side y~rds. The side yard setbacks £or build-
ings, drives, and parking areas shall be a
minimum of thirty feet. The minimum corner side
yard shall be forty feet. One foot shall be
added to each side yard for each three feet ~hat
the building height adjacent thereto exceeds
forty-five feet or three stories, whichever is
less, subject, however, to the provisions of
Section 21-27.
(4) Rear yard. The minimum rear yard setback for
buildings, drives, and pa~king areas ~hall be
forty feet. One foot shall be added to each
86-9~5
rear yard for each three feet that the build-
ing height adjacent thereto exceeds
forty-five feet or three stories, whichever
is less, subject, however, to the provisions
of Section 21-27.
(b) ~eight requirements.
The maximum height of all buildings as permitted by
Section 21-38 and the underlying zoning district(s).
~pecial height restrictions apply because of Airport
height restrictions.
8. Permitted Variations in Yard Requirements.
The required minimum yards may be reduced with the pro-
vision of additional landscaping:
(1) Setbacks along ~ajor arterials. Ths required setback
for buildings and drives along major arterials may be
reduced to fifty (50) feet with the provision of
landscaping in accordance with Condition 14, "Perime-
ter Landscaping C." The required setback ~or parking
areas may be reduced to fifty (50) feet With the
provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition
14, "Perimeter Landscaping C," and whe~ such ps:king
areas are located to the side and rear of buildings.
(2) Front yard. The required front yard setback along
public rights-of-way other than major arterials may be
reduced to twenty-five (25) feet with the provision of
landscaping in accordance with Condition 14,
"Perimeter Landscaping C."
(3) side a~y~. The required side yard may be reduced to
ten (10) feet wi~h the provision o~ landscaping in
accordance with Condition 14, "Perimeter Landscaping
B" (except when adjacent to any "A", "R", "R-TM" or
"R~MF'' District).
(4) Rear a~. The required rear yard may be reduced to
twenty (20) feet with the provision of landscaping in
accordance with Condition 14, "Perimeter Landscaping
B" (except when adjacent to any "A", "R", "R-TN" or
"R-MP" District).
9. Utility lines underground. All utility lines such as
electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be
installed underground. This requirement shall apply to
lines serving i~dividual sites as well as to utility lines
necessary within the project. Ail junction and access
boxes shall bc screened with appropriate landscaping. All
utility pad fixtures ar~l meters should be shown on the site
plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes,
etc., should be recognized and integrated with the
architectural elements of the site plan.
10. Loading areas, sites shall be designed and buildings shall
be oriented so that loading areas are not visible from any
of the project perimeters adjoining any "A", "R", "R~TH'' or
"R-~IF" District Or any public right-of-way.
11. Architectural treatment. The exterior wall surfaces
(front, rear and sides) of each individual building visible
from a public street shall be similar in architectural
treatment and materials. No block or metal buildings shall
publi~ right-of-way. All rooftop equipment shall
shielded and screened from public view.
12. ~×terior lighting. All exterior lights shall ~e arranged
and installed so that no direct light projects into adja-
86-926
13.
14.
cent parcels or public rights-of-way, Lighting standards
shall not exceed twenty feet in height and shall be of a
directional type capable of shielding the liqht source from
direct view.
Driveways and parkin~ areas. Driveways and parking srea~
Shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or other
similar material. Surface treated parking areas and drives
shall be prohibited. Concrete curb and guttsr ~hall be
installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking
areas. Drainage shall be designed ~o as not to interfere
with pedestrian traffic.
Landscaping Requirements.
(a) Purpose and Intent.
Landscaping shall be provided for the visual enhance-
ment of the Corridor; and to protect and promote the
appearance, character, and economic values of land
along the corridor and surrounding neighborhoods. The
purpose and intent of such landscaping requirements is
also to reduce the visibility of paved areas from
adjacent properties and' streets, moderate climatic e~-
feots, minimize noise and glarer and enhance p~blic
safety by defining spaces to influence traffic
movement. Landscaping will reduce the amount o4 storm
water runoff and provide transition between neigh-
boring properties.
(b) Landscapinq Plan and Planting Requirements.
(1) A landscaping plan shall be submitted in con-
junction with site plan review.
(2) Such landscaping plan shall be drawn to scale,
including dimensions and distances, and clearly
delineate all existing and proposed parking
spaces or other vehicle areas, access aisles,
driveways, and the location, size and description
of all landscaping materials.
(c) Plant Materials Specifications.
[1) Quality.
All plant materials shall be living and in
healthy condition. Plant materials used in
conformance with the provision of these
~peeifications shall conform to the standards
of the most recent edition of the "American
Standard for ~ursery Stock," published by the
American Association of Nurserymen.
(2) Size and Type.
(a) Small Deciduous Tr~es. Small deciduous
trees shall be of a species having an
average minimum mature crow~ spread
greater than twelve (12) feet. A mini-
mum caliper of at least two and one-half
(2 1/2) inches at the time of planting
shall be required.
(b) Large Deciduous Trees. Large deciduou~
trees shall be of a species having an
average minimum mature crown spread of
greater than thirty (30) feet. A mini-
mum caliper of at least three and
one-half (3 1/2) inches at the time of
planting shall be required.
86-927
(C) Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shell have
a minim~ height o£ five (5) fee= at the
time cf planting.
(d) Medium shrubs. Shrubs and hedge forms shall
have a minimum height of two (2) feet at the
time of planting.
(3) Landscapinq Design.
(a) Generally, planting required by this section
should he in an irregular line and spaced at
random.
(b) Clustering of plant and tree species shall
be required to provide a pleasing composi-
tion and mix of vegetation.
(c) Decorative walls and fences may be inte-
grated into any landscaping program. The
use of such walls or fences, when having a
minimum height of three (3) feet, may reduce
the a~ount of required plant materials et
the discretion of the Director.
(4) Tree Preservation.
(a) Preservation of existing trees is encouraged
to provide continuity, improved buffering
ability, pleasing scale and image along the
Corridor.
(b) Any healthy existing tree may be included
for credit towards the requirements of this
Condition.
Maintenance.
(1) The owner, or his agent, shall be responsible for
the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all
landscaping materials as may be required.
(2) Ail plant material shall be tended and maintained
in a healthy growing condition and free from
refuse and debris, at all times. Ail unhealthy,
dyinq or dead plant materials shall be replaced
during the next planting season.
(3) Ail landscaped areas shall be provided with a
readily available water supply. The utilization
of underground storage eha~lbe~s tc collect runoff
to be later used to irrigate plant ~terials is
encouraged.
Installation and Bonding Requirements.
(1) All landscaping shall be installed in a sound,
workmanship-like manner and according to accept-
ed, good planting practices and procedures.
Landscaped areas shall require protection from
vehicular encroachment by such means as, but not
limited to, wheel stops or concrete or bituminous
(2) Where landscaping is required, no certificate of
occupancy shall be issued until the required
landscaping is completed in accordance with the
approved landscape plan. When the occupancy of a
structure is desired prior to the completion of
the required landscaping, a certificate of
occupancy may be issued only if the owner or
developer provides to the County a form of surety
86-928
(g)
satisfactory to the Planning Department in an
amount egual to the costs of the remaining plant
materials, related materials and installation
costs.
(3) All required landscaping shall be installed and
approved by the first planting season following
issuance of a certificate of occupancy or the
bond shall be ~orfeited to the County.
Arterial Frontage Landscaping.
Landscaping shall be required along Route 10 within
the required setback of any lot or parcel and shall be
provided except where driveways or other openings may
be necessary. The minimum required landscaping for
this setback shall be provided as per "Perimeter
Landscaping B" below.
Perimeter LandscaDin~.
Landscaping shall be required at the outer boundaries
or in the required yards of a lot or parcel and shall
be provided except where driveways or other openings
may be required. The minimum required landscaping ior
all outer boundaries of any lot or parcel shall be
provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping A" below.
There shall be different landscaping requirements as
identified herein, which shall be provided as follows;
(1) Perimeter Landsca~n~ A.
(a) At least one small deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen
for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted
within the setback area.
(b) At least one medium shrub for each twenty
lineal feet shall be planted within the
setback area.
(c) Lew shrubs and ground cover shall be rea-
sonably dispersed throughout.
{21 Perimeter LandscaDi%~,B.
(a) At least One large deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen
for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted
within the setback area.
(b) At least one small deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet shall be planted within
the setback area.
(c) At least one medium shrub for each fifteen
lineal feet shall be planted within the
setback area.
Id) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea-
sonably dispersed throughout.
OR:
(a) A minimum three (31 foot
berm, and
(b) Perimeter Landscaping A.
high undulating
86-929
(hl
(~)
Perimeter Landscapinq c.
(a) At least one large deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen
tree ~or each thirty lineal feet shall be
planted within the setback area.
(b) At least one small deciduous tree ~or each
thirty lineal feet shall be planted within
the setback area.
(c) At least one medium sbrk%b for each ten
lineal feet shall be planted within the
setback area.
(d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea-
sonably dispersed throughout.
OR:
(a) A minimum four (4) foot high undulating
berm, and
(b) Perimeter Landscaping B.
Landscaping Standards for Parking Areas.
(1) Interior parkinq arp~..land$¢apinq,
(a) Any parking area shall have at least twenty
(20) square feet of interior landscaping for
each space. Each required landscaped area
shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet
and have a minimum dimension of at least ten
feet. With the provision of this landscap-
ing, parking space size may be reduced to
9.5 X 20 or 190 square feet.
(b) The primary landscaping material used in
parking areas shall be trees which provide
shade or are capable of providing shade at
maturity. Each landscaped area shall
include at least one small tree, as outlined
in this Section. The total number of trees
shall not be lems than one for each 200
square ~eet, or fraction thereof, of
required interior landscaped area. The
remaining area shall be landscaped with
shrubs and other vegetative material to
complement the tree landscaping.
(c) Landscaping areas shall be reasonably
dispersed throughout, located so as to
divide and break up the expanse of
paving. The area designated as required
setbacks shall not be calculated
required landscaped area.
12) Peripheral parking area landscaping.
(a) Peripheral landscaping shall be required
along any side of a parking area that abuts
land not in the right of way of a street
such that:
A landscaped strip at least ten £ee~ in
width shall be located between the parking
area and the abutting property lines, except
where driveways or other openings may be
required. Continuous hedge forms or at
least one small tree, as outlined in this
86-930
15.
16.
Section, shall be planted in the landscaped
strip for each fifty lineal feet.
Signs shall be regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for
Special Sign Districts. Landscaping shall be provided
around freestanding signs. A landscaping plan
depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval. (P)
A seventy-five (75) foot buffer shall be maintained along
the southern property line. Where parking is adjacent to
the southern boundary, this buffer width shall be increased
to 100 feet. At the time of schematic plan review, the
buffer widths may be reduced by the Planning Commission to
fifty (50) feet. ~h¢sc ~uffers shall be landscaped, bermed
and/or ~enced so as to minimize the view of the project
from adjacent Agricultural (A) properties to the south. A
conceptual landscaping plan depictin~ this requirement
shall be submitted to the Planning Co~issicn for approval
in conjunction with schematic plan review. A detailed
landscaping plan shall be submitted to the ~lanning
Department ~or approval in conjunction with final site
plan review. Other than utilities which run generally
perpendicular through the ~uffer and drainfields, there
shall be no other facilities permitted in this buffer.
(P&CPC)
Vote: Unanimous
86S122 (A~endcd)
In Midlothian Magisterial District, MURRAY OLDSMOBILE, INC,
requested a~end~ents to a Conditional Use Planned Development
(Case 84E079). This request lies in a Comr~unity Business
District on a 15.4 acre parcel fronting approximately 1,120 feet
on the south line of Midlothian Turnpike, also fronting
approximately 620 feet on both sides of Murray Olds Drive,
across from Alverser Drive. Tax Map 16-12 (1) Parcel 8 (Sheet
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of
this request, subject to certain conditions.
Mr. John Henson stated the conditions as recommended by the
Planning Commission were acceptable.
Mrs. Girone requested that Mr. Peele review and explain the
Planning Commission's recommendations. Mr. Peele stated the
current request proposes amendments to the original Conditional
Use Planned Development to permit exceptions to the paving, curb
and gutter, signs and permitted uses. Me briefly explained the
amendments a~d exceptions as outlined in the Request Analysis,
He stated the applicants and area residents ~et to discuss the
proposed modifications and that he understood a~ acceptable
compromise had been reached.
There was ~o opposition present.
With respect to the applicants' request for schematic approval
of an outdoor speaker system, Mr. Peele stated the Planning
Commission had approved the system, provided it does not create
a nuisance to the neigl%borhood and, if the syste~ were to become
a nuisance, the issue would be brought back to consider removal
of said system.
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved: deletion of the curb and gutter and paving
requirements On Parcel B and the 1.21 acre parcel; increased the
number, height, and size Of freestanding signs along Route 60
for the dealurship; signs of dissimilar color, design and
lighting; translucent sign~ields; exceptions to directional sign
86-931
the
~ze; a~d the outside storage of automobiles, subject to
following conditions:
In conjunction with the granting of this request, an
e×eeption to the requirement that parking areas be paved
and that curb and gutter be installed shall bo granted
uses on Parcel B and the 1.21 acre parcel depicted On the
approved Master Plan. This exception shall be granted for
a period not to exceed two 12) years from date of approval
of this request. At the end of the two (2) year period,
all driveways and parking a~eas shall be paved, and curb
and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all
paved driveways and pa~king areas. (CPC)
(Note: This condition is in addition to Condition 6 of
Conditional Qae Planned Development, Case 84S079, for
Parcel B and the 1.21 acre parcel.)
2. The following signs shall be permitted:
a. All dealership signs shall be as depicted in the
elevations, plan, and Textual Statement submitted with
this application relative to color, design, lighting,
and location.
b. Three (3) freestanding signs shall be permitted along
Route 60: two (2) identifyinq the dealership and one
(1) identifying Parcel A (2.2 acres). The dealership
signs shall not exceed an aggregate area of 243 square
feet and the Parcel A sign shall not exceed an
aggregate area of fifty (50) square feet. With the
exception of one (1) freestanding sign having a
Maximum heiqHt of thirty-one (31) feet, all other
freestanding signs shall not exceed a height of thirty
(30) feet.
c. Two (2) directional sigma shall be permitted in excess
of the ten (10) square foot size limitation. These
directional signs shall not exceed an area of 17.11
square feet and shall be located as shown on the plan
submitted with the application.
d. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the
Planning Commission shall grant schematic plan ap-
proval of the sign package.
(Note: This condition supersedes Condition 8 of
Case 84S079.)
3. The use permitted on Parcel B shall be limited to the
o~tside storage of motor vehicles for sale, service, and
repair in conjunction with the operation of an automobile
dealership. No other business Or accessory uses shall be
permitted. (P)
(Note: This condition supersedes Condition 10 of Case
845079.)
4. A minimum fifty (50) foot buffer shall be maintained along
the southwest property line adjacent to Residential (R-15)
zoning. With the exception of utilities, which run
generally p~rpendicular through the buffer, and a fence,
there shall be no other facilities or oth~r improvements
permitted within this buffer area. Where this buffer is
less than 100 feet in width, a six (6) foot High solid
board fence shall be installe~ along the northeast edge of
this buffer. Between this fence and the adjacent resi-
dences, white pines with an initial height of three (3) to
~our (4) feet shall be planted on eight (8) foot centers.
A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be sub-
mitted to the Planning Department for approval in con-
junotion with final site plan review. (CPC)
86-932
(Note: This
84S079.)
Vo~e: Unanimous
condition supersedes Condition 4 of Case
86S131
In Midlothian Magisterial District, CARDINAL PARK ASSOCIATES re-
quested re~oning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-9) on a
14.09 acre parcel fronting approximately 47 feet on the
southeast line of North Pinetta Drive, approximately 350 feet
northeast ci Ewell Road. Tax Map 28-2 (1) Part of Parcel 2
(Sheet 8).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning CoF~fssion recor~mended approval of
Residential (R-12) zoning and acceptance of the applicant's
proffered conditions. He ztated subssquent to the Commission's
recommendation, the applicant submitted a revision to proffered
condition ~1 defining liveable space, as requested by the
neighborhood.
Mr. Otis Brown stated the reeon%mendation for approval of
Residential (R-12) zoning and acceptance of the proffered
conditions ia acceptable to the applicant. Ke stated the
amendment of proffered condition ~l, as indicated in the
addendum, is intended to clarify the definition of liveable
space, as requested by area residents.
Ms. Linda Werner expreamed concern relative to the 1450 square
footage for a one-story home and requested assurance that this
condition would exclude a finished recreation room in a
basement, etc., from the total square footage of the home and
that the condition be enforceable.
Mr. Peele stated that a typical basement, with the bulk of the
wall underground, would no~ be counted as a story; however, an
English basement, with more than half the wall above ~round,
would be considered a separate, distinct floor.
Mrs. Girone stated area residents are concerned that the slope
of the ground is such that a ranch-type home basement would be
visible above ground and therefore constitute a two-story home.
Mr. Brown stated, for this reason, proffered condition 01 is
worded so that if any space on more than one ~loer is ~ounted
then the minimum space requirement is increased.
Ms. Werner stated the condition, as revised, was acceptable.
M~. Philip ~urkhalter stated area residents wish to maintain the
quality of the neighborhood and desire tha~ =h~ homes be
compatible and consistent with existing residences. ~e noted
exizting houses in the area are approximately 2,000 square ~eet
and above and in the range in value to between $90-100,000.
On motion cf Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
denied the request for Residential (R-9) zoning and approved the
request for Residential (R-12) zoning and accepted the following
proffered conditions:
1. Each dwelling shall contain at least 1,450 square feet of
liveable space if one story and 1,800 square feet if
liveable space is counted on more than one story. Liveable
space is defined to include finished space that is beth
lighted and heated and shall exclude garages, screened
porches, decks a~d carports. The number of one story
dwellings ~hall not exceed seven (7).
2. Natural growth shall be retained to the extent possible
except for usual and cuztomary removal necessary to
86-933
accommodate construction of dwellings and land
improvements.
3. The development shall contain no preconstructed modular
dwelling units.
Vote: Unanimous
86S145
In Matsaca Magisterial District, JO~l~ E. HAMILTON, JR. requested
amendment to Conditional Use (Case 78S204) relative to the
transfer of landfill operation rights and extension of time
period of operation. This request lies in an Agricultural (A)
District on a 40 acre parcel fronting approximately 800 feet on
the west line of Taylor Road, approximately 1,600 feet south of
Hembriok Road. Tax Map 123 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheets 35, 36, and
37).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of
this request, subject to certain conditions.
Mr. John Hamilton stated the conditions as recommended by staff
were acceptable.
Mr. Robert Staples stated the area is undergoing residential
development and he opposes any escalation of the landfill
activity. He stated that he feels the operation will not be
effectively monitored relative to content, drainage, etc.; will
impact the area traffic pattern; damage the road surface; and
adversely impact the value of area properties.
Mr. Horace Hines stated he is the owner of record of the subject
property and expressed opposition to approval of the request aa
the property is the subject of litigation.
Mr. John Hair, an adjacent property owner, opposed the request
as the use may adversely impact his property and expressed
concerns relative to traffic.
Mr. Micas stated that, in the past, when confronted with zoning
requests that involve land dlspu~es, title disputes or o~her
legal disputes, the Board has confined their deliberations to
the zoning and land use decisions.
There was discussion regarding the on-going litigation involved
in this case and Mr. Micas explained the Board's options.
Mr. Hamilton requested the matter be deferred for approximately
sixty (60) days to resolve the legal aspects of the case.
In response to a question by Mr- Mayes, Mr. Peele stated staff
recommended approval of this request for a period of ten (10)
years.
Mr. Applegate questioned if the landfill is a sanitary or debris
landfill. Mr. Ea~ilton stated the site is a landfill operation
which accepts demolition debris, including stumps, construction
material, etc., and is not a sanitary landfill. Mr. P~ole
stated the site is a landfill as defined by the Zoning
Ordinance, but is restricted as to the types of material that
can be deposited. He stated the site has been inspected by the
County Health Department and the State Bureau of Solid Waste
Management and has been found to be in compliance with the
criteria set forth by those respective agencies.
~Lr. Hamilton stated Mr. Hines does own and operate the landfill
at the present time and the contract stipulates that Mr. ~ines
would continue to operate the landfill until such time as
transfer of the title and other appropriate permits occurred.
86-934
Mr. Mayes stated that, in view of the fact that Mr. Bines owns
the subject property, is presently operating the facility and is
requesting denial o£ the rezoning, he would recommend deferral
for ninety (90) days.
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
deferred consideration of this case until March 25, 1987.
Vote: Unanimous
86S146
In ~atoaoa Magisterial District, WILBUR L. AND DELORES W. JOYNER
requested a Conditional Use Planned Development to pelmit a
two-family dwelling and bulk exceptions in a Residential (R-7)
District on a 0.6 acre parcel fronting approximately 155 feet on
the south line of Johnston Street, approximately 149 feet east
of Lee Street. Tax Map 186-3 (1) Parcel 18 (Sheet 52).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of
this request.
Mr. and Mrs. Wilbur Jo!mcr stated they have made significant
improvaments to the structure and do net feel the proposed use
would be detrimental to adjacent or area properties. Mr. Joyner
stated area residents were contacted and do not object to the
improvements or the proposed use. ge submitted photographs of
the rehabilitated structure.
There was no opposition present.
On motion cf Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved the request.
Vote: Unanimous
$6S147
In Clover ~ill Magisterial District, S & B DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
OF VIRGINIA requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to
Residential (R-9) on a 32 acre parcel fronting approximately 98
feet on the west line of Sunset Hills Drive, 1,100 feet north of
Sunset Hills Terrace, and lying approximately 200 feet off the
south line of West Providence Road. Tax. ~ap 38-14 (1) Part of
Parcel 1 (Sheet 14).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission recommended denial of
the request for rszoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential
(R-9) and the proffered condition and approval of Residential
(R-12). He stated subsequent to the Planning Co~ission's
action the developer submitted a revised proffered condition for
an average lot size of 16,000 square feet with no more than 68
lots for the subject project. ~e stated staff is of the opinion
that the revised proffered condition minimizes oonoern~ relative
to density and lot sizes and, therefore, recommends approval of
Residential IR-9) zoning and acceptance of the revised proffered
condition.
~Lr. Pat Bows stated the recorm~endation is acceptable.
There was no Opposition present.
Mr. APDlegate stated he felt the revised proffered condition
adequately mitigates concerns relative to density and lot sizes
and will make the new development compatible with existing
adjacent and area subdivisions.
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr- Daniel, the Board
approved Residential (R-9) zoning and acceptance of the
following proffered condition:
86-935
An average lot size of 16,000 square feet with no more than 68
lots. This is an overall density of 2.1 units per acre.
vote: Unanimous
86s150
In clover Hill Magisterial District, EAST COAST OIL CORPORATION
requested rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General
Business (B-3) on a 0.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 185
feet on the north line of Mull Street Road, approximately 640
feet west of Courthouse Road. Tax Map 49-7 (1) Parcel 35 (Sheet
14).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of
this request, subject to a single condition and acceptance of
the applicant's proffered condition.
Mr. Brian Conran stated the recommended condition is acceptable.
Ther~ was no opposition present.
In response to a question by Mr. Applegate, Mr. Conran stated he
and the adjacent property owner to the north had net had any
further contact relative to the fence. Mr. Applegate stated he
had not been contacted relative to the matter either.
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved this request, subject to the following recommended
condition and acceptance of the proffered condition:
CONDITION
A fifteen (15) foot buffer shall be maintained along Route 360.
This buffer shall be landscaped so as to minimize the view of
driveways and parking areas from Route 360. Other than util-
itiem and two entrance/exits, there shall be no facilities
permitted in this buffer. One entrance/exit shall be located
toward the eastern property line and the second entrance/exit
shall be located so as to be shared with the adjacen~ property
to the west. (P)
PROFFERED CONDITION
A fence shall be installed along the north side of the proposed
car wash. This fence shall be required for one (1) year from
the da~e of appreval of this request or until such time as
adjacent property to the north of our property is transferred
from Frank R. and Nellie T. Dowd to someone else; whichever
occurs first.
Vote: Unanimous
86S151
In Bermuda Magisterial District, THOMAS F. BECK requested
amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases $65057
and 86S094) relative to buffer requirements in a ~eneral
Business (B-3) District on a 3.55 acre parcel fronting approxi-
mately 280 feet on the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, als,
fronting approximately 365 feet on the south line of Drewrys
Bluff Road, and located in the southwest quadrant of the inter-
section of these roads. Tax Map 67-3 (1) Parcel 51 (Sheet 23).
~r. Peele stated the Plar~ing Commission reco~ended denial of
this request.
Mr. Leslie Saunders stated that, should the Board see fit to
approve this request, the condition recommended by staff is
acceptable.
86-936
Mr. John Moeeley stated that he felt the Board should consider
requiring the applicant to install the fence first and plant the
buffer. He stated the applicant has historically not complied
with conditions of zoning and if he were to agree to such
action it would be an indication of good faith.
Mr. Saunde~s stated the applicant would be agreeable to a thirt
(30) day deferral se that the fence can be installed.
On motion of Mr. Dodd, aeconded by Mr. Daniel, the Boar
deferred consideration of this recPles% until January 28, 1986,
with the understanding that the eight (8) foot high solid board
fence and plants along the southern p:operty line be installed
within this period of time.
Vote: Unanimous
865152
In Dale Magisterial District, BLANEY BUILDERS reguested rezoning
from Agricultural (A] to Residential (R-9) on a 7.9 acre parcel
lying approximately 200 feet Off the eastern terminus of
Fairpines Road. Tax Map 51-10 (1) Parcel 6 (Sheet 15).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning CoK~%issien recommended approval of
this requesK, subject to a single condition.
Mr. Blaney stated the recommended condition is acceptable.
There was no opposition present.
On motion of WLr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved this request, subject to the following condition:
A thirty-five (35) foot building setback line and buffer exclu-
sive of utility easements shall be p~evided on all lots adjacent
to Fairpines Road. The area within this buffer shall be planted
and/or le~t in its natural state if there is sufficient
vegetation to provide adequate screening. Nc individual lot
access to Fairpines Koud is permitted, within thirty (30) days
of tentative subdivision approval, the developer shall flag this
buffer for inspecKion by the Planning Department. If sufficient
vegetation does not exist, a landscaping plan shall be approved
by the Planning Department and a bond posted to eove~ the cost
of implementing the plan prior to recordation, This building
line and boiler shall be noted em iinai check and record plats.
The Planning Commission may a~end this condition at the time of
tentative subdivision approval. (P)
86S153
In Midlothian Magisterial District, COUNTRY FAP/ES CONVENIENCE
MARTS ASSOCIATES requested rezoning from Agricultural (A} to
Convenience Business (B-l) with Conditional Use Planned
Development on a 0.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 215 ~eet
on the south line of Robious Road, approximately 680 feet west o
Cranbeck Road. Tax Map 9-13 (1) Parcels 2 and 3 (Sheet 3).
Mr. Peele stated the Planning Commission reco~e~ded approval of
this request, subject to certain conditions.
Mr. John Dicks, III stated the recommended conditions were
acceptable.
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
approved this request, subject to the following conditions:
1- The ~ollcwing conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared
86-937
by J.K. Timmons and Assooiate~, P.C., revi~ed November 14,
1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P)
2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the
perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage
shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestri-
an access.
Parking areas and drives shall he set back fifteen (15)
feet from the western property line and buildinqs shall be
set back a minimum of thirty (30) feet from the western
property line. (~)
(Note: At such time as Dum_brook Road is to be constructed
to State Standards and become a public road, the Zoning
Ordinance will require a minimum right of way of sixty (60)
feet. The recommendation assures proper setbacks should
Dunbrook Read ever be taken into the State System.)
4. The exact location and design of the gas pumps and canopy
shall be determined at the time of schematic plan review.
The gas pumps and canopy shall be located a minimum of
twenty-five (25) and twenty-two (22) feet, respectively,
from the western property line.
5. A thirty (30) foot buffer shall be maintained along the
southern boundary of the site. This buffer shall consist
of landscaping, having a sufficient initial height and of a
species which will provide year-round screening. Other
than utilities which run generally perpendicular through
the buffer, there shall be no facilities permitted in the
buffer. A landscaping plan depicting this requirement
shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval
in conjunction with iinal site plan review.
6. All structures shall have an architectural style as de-
picted in the elevations prepared by J.K. Timmens and
Associates, P.C., dated September 19, 1986. The roof~
shall be covered with wood shingles. The front, side,
and rear walls shall be constructed with brick. (P)
7. Landscaping Requiremenhs.
A. Arterial Frontaqe Landscaping.
(1) Landscaping shall be reeD/ired alon~ Robious and
Dunbrook Roads as fcllow~:
(a) At least one large deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen
for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted
within the setback area.
(b) At least one small deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet shall be planted within
the setback area.
(c) At least one medium shrub for each fifteen
lineal feet shall be planted within the
setback area.
(d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea-
~onably dispersed throughout the setback
OR:
(a)
(b)
A minimu~ three (3) foot high undulating
berm, and
At least one small deciduous tree for each
fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen
86-938
for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted
within the setback area.
(c) At least one medium shrub for each twentF
lineal feet shall be planted within the
setback area.
(d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea-
sonably dispersed throughout the setback
area.
(H) Landscapinq Standards ~or Parkinq Areas.
(1) Interior marking area landscaping.
(a) The parking area shall have at least twenty
(20) square feet of interior landscaping for
each space. Each required landscaped area
shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet
and have a minimum dimension of at least ten
feet.
(b) The primary landscaping material in the
parking areas shall be trees which provide
shade or are capable of providing shade at
maturity. Each landscaped area shall
include at least one small tree. The ~o~al
number of trees shall not be less than one
for each 200 square feet, or fraction
thereof, of required interior landscaped
area. The remaining area shall be land-
scared with shrubs and other vegetative
material to complement the tree landscaping.
(c) Landscaped areas shall be reasonably dis-
persed throughout, located so as to divide
and break up the expanse o~ paving. The
area designated as required setbacks shall
net be calculated as required landscaped
(2) Peripheral parking area landscaping.
A landscaped strip at least ten feet in width
shall be located between the parking area and the
eastern property line, except where driveways or
other openings may be required. Continuous hedge
forms or at least one small tree ehall be planted
in the landscaped strip ~or each flfty lineal
feet. (P)
Exterior lighting shall be arranged and ins=ailed ac that
the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5
foot candles above background lighting, measured at the lot
line of any adjoining residential or agricultural parcel or
public right of wa~. Lighting shall be of a directional
type capable of shielding the light source from direct
view. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Department ~or approval in conjunction with final site plan
review. (P)
Except as s~ated herein, signs shall comply with the
requirements of the Special Sign District for shopping
centers in a Convenience Business (B-I) District. The
height of the freestanding sign shall not exceed twenty
(20) feet. The convenience store building-mounted sign
shall not exceed an aggregate area of sixty-six (66)
square feet. Landscaping shall be provided around the
base of the ~reestanding sign. Sign colors and style
shall be compatible with the architectural style of the
buildings. Prier to erection of any signs, a plan
86-939
depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval.
(Note: This condition would permit only one freestanding
sign.)
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, forty-five (45)
feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of
Rcbious Road, shall be dedicated to and for Chesterfield
County, free and %unrestricted.
11. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, left and
right turn lanes along Robious Road shall be installed, as
deemed necessary by the Transportation Department. (T)
12. Access to Robious Road shall be located as reflected on the
Master Plan. (T)
(Note: The exact location and design of access will be
determined at the time of schematic plan review. Prior to
obtaining final site plan approval or obtaining building
permits, schematic plans must be approved by the Planning
Conm~i~ion.)
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Mayes commended Mr. Dicks' diligent efforts with the
involved parties to resolve issues and concerns relative to this
request prior to its being submitted to the Board for a
decision.
With respect to Case 86S120, Mrs. Girone stated the request was
deferred sixty (60) days, at which time there is no zoning
session. She stated she would like to confer with the developer
to determine which timeframe is acceptabl~ with respect to a
January or February meeting. Mr. Dodd ruled that the
redefinition of the deferral timeframe would be clarified at the
7:00 p.m. session.
14.J. EX~CUTIV~ $E$$I~
On me,ion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. ADplegate, the Board
went into Executive Session to consult with legal counsel
concerning Cullather versus the County, and to discuss the
condition, use and acquisition of re&t property ~oD public
purposes, pursuant to Sections 2.1-344 (a) {6) and (2),
respectively, of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended.
Vote: Urk%~imo~s
The Board recesssd at 4:45 p.~. to travel to MaGnolia Grange for
a dinner meeting at 5:00 p.m. with the Chesterfield County
Legislative Delegation to discuss the 1987 Legislative Program.
Reconvening:
5. DINNER~ETINGWIT}~ L~T~LATI~ DELEGATION TO DISCUSS
1987 LEGISLATIVE PReGO/tM
Mr. Dodd welcomed 2he Legislative Delegation who was present to
discuss the 1987 Legislative Program. Mrs. DeHart presented
each item and discussion ensued as to the type of action to be
taken on each proposal, sponsorship, etc. (A copy of the
program is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Extensive discussion ensued regarding legislation to grant a
86-940
charter to the CountT of Chesterfield, which was approved BT
referendum on November 4, 1956. It was the general consensus
that the charter should he submitted as approved hy the
referendum and that the Delegation should unsnimously support
it. There wa~ further discussion relative to the charter with
respect to the following: 1) should it be determined that
amendments to the charter are necessary, said amendments should
be presented to the citizens for vote; 2) if a~e~dments are
necessary, the language of said revisions should be channeled
through Mrs. Doris DeHart to the Board members; 3) if there are
changes in 1987 legislation the charter must reflect those
changes; and 4) the charter must be submitted as approved by
referendum - that the Delegation has no authority to modify the
charter before it is introduced to the General Assembly.
In addition to the proposed program, items relative to the
General Standard~ for Permitting and Operation of
Construction-Demolition-Debris Landfills, Basic School Aid
Formula for Growth Counties, and a request for State Financial
Assistance for an Addition to the County Jail and Additional
Positions for the Sheriff's Department were added.
The Board expressed its appreciation for the attendance,
diligent efforts and cooperation of the Delegation with respect
tO these issues.
The Board recessed at 6:55 p.m. to travel to the Courthouse for
its regularly scheduled meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Hr. Dodd called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at the
Courthouse at 7:10 p.m. (EST).
AS a point of clarification with respect to zoning Case 86S160,
Mrs, Giro~e stated consideration of the request is deferred
until February 25, 1987.
6. APPROVAL OFMINUTES
On motion Of ~S. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applega~e, the Board
approved the minute~ of November 26, 1986, as submitted.
Vote: Unanimous
7. CO~ ADF~INISTRATOR'S COMMENTS
Mr, Masden introduced Ms. Kathy Winchester to whom he presented
the Ecology Award, for her outstanding accomplishments at the
Bermuda Run Apartment Complex, from the Keep America Beautiful
National Awards program conducted in Washington, D.C, The Board
commended Ms. Winchester on her achievement~ and well-deserved
receipt of the award.
Mr. Sale introduced Mr. Thomas Jacobsen, recently employed
Director of Planning, and outlined his educational and
professional experience. The Board welcomed Mr. Jacobsen to the
County.
8. ~OARD C091MI'~-l'~ REPORTS
Mr. Daniel, Mr. Applegate and Mr. MaTes stated they attended the
Fireman's Graduation Exercise which was very impressive and
indicative of the excellent leadership of the County's Fire
Department.
86-941
Mrs. Girone welcomed and introduced members of the Webelof Den
91 of Cub scout Pack 892 from Greenfield Elementary School and
their advisor, Mr. John Easter, who were present observing the
meeting. Mrs. Girone stated she attended a meeting concerning
the location of the Robious Fire Station, the decision cf which
has been deferred for sixty (60) days; attended the Chesterfield
Meadew~ Shopping Center ribbon cutting ceremony; met at the
Midlothian Middle School for her "First Monday" meeting to
discuss the Izaak Walton Park, Inc. zoning request; served on a
Style Magazine committee to select the "Richmonder of the Year",
which will be announced in the January 8, 1987 edition cf Style
Magazine; attended a Richmond Noundtable Planning Committee
meeting, sponsored by the Richmond First Club, whose next
meeting will be held in February, 1987; attended the Firemen's
Graduation Exercise; attended the MaY~ont Board meeting;
attended a Virginia Association of Counties committee meeting in
Roanoke, Virginia, at which the issue of annexation was
discussed; and attended a meeting with Mr. Applegate and
Brandermill committee chairmen regarding the Brandermill sewer.
Mr. Dodd stated he attended the Chesterfield Meadows Shopping
Center ribbon cutting ceremony and met with the Enon Optimist
Club, He stated he has been informed that the City of Ropewell
and Hanover County plan to Join in the James River Port study,
which he feels will be most beneficial to all involved.
9. ~EQ~ESTH TO PO~'£MONE ACTIONr E~ERG~NCY ADDITIONS ON C%qANGES
IN ~ ORDER OF I~KS~NTATION
On motion of the Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the
Board added Item ll.B., Petition from Members of the Circle and
Swing Square Dance Club, and changed Item i1., Mrs- Patricia
Faye Sutton - Claim for Damage to Bicycle to Stem ll.A.~ added
Item 14.E.6., New Positions for Community Development
Depart~ents~ ad~ed Item 14.G.4., Policy for State Reimbursement
for Jail; and noted revised Item 14.C., Request for Additional
Deputies for Jail Security; and adopted the agenda, as amended.
Vote: Unanimous
10. I~ESOLUTIONS OF SPECIAL ~ECOGNITION
10.A. MR. R0~ALD E. ELIA$~Kr UPON R~CEIVING RANK OF EAGLE
SCOUT
Mrs. Girone introduced Mr. Ronald Eliasek, 5ir. William Meyer and
Mr. Micky Ziadeh and their respective families and Scout Master
whom she sta~ed were a tremendous influence on the achievements
of these young men.
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, Rcnald E. Eliasek, son of Mr. and Mrs. Ron E.
~liasek of 12129 Wexwood Drive, has attained the rank of Eagle
Scout, which is the highest rank awarded to a young man in the
Boy Scouts of America; and
WHEREAS, Ronnle has been a member of Troop 893 sponsored by
St. Edward's Ca~holic Church in Chesterfield County, Virginia
since August, 1982; and
WHEREAS, Ronnie graduated at the top of his class, had a
perieot attendance record, received the Presidential Academic
Fitness Award, received Science, Math, Engineering and social
Studies Achievement Awards; and
WHEREAS, Growing through his experiences in Scouting,
learning the lessons of responsible citizenship and priding
himself on the great accomplishments of his County, Ronnie is
86~942
indeed a member of a new generation of prepared young citizens
oi whom we can all be very proud.
NOW, THeReFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to
Ronald E. Eliasek and acknowledges the good fortune of the
County to have suoh an outstanding young man as one o~ its
citizens.
Mrs. Girone presented Mr. Elia~ek with the executed re~olution
and congratulated him on his achievement.
10.B. 5. WILLIAM S. MEYER~ UPOH RECEIVING RANK OF EAGLE
SCOUT
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, William S. Meyer~ son of Mr. and Mrs. Albert Meyer
of 2030 Leovey Lane, has a~ained the ~ank of ~agle Scout, which
is the highest rank awarded to a young man in tko Boy Scouts of
America; and
WHEREAS, Willie has been a member of Troop 893 sponsored by
S~, Zdwa~d's Catholic Church in Chesterfield County, Virginia
~inee May, 1982; and
WHEREAS, Willie was awarded the Ad Altare Dei, was recog-
nized for his outstanding work in photography, received the
Honor Patrol Award and was recently chosen to attend the World
Jamboree in Australia in December, 1987~ and
WHEREAS, Growing through his experiences in Scoutingl
learning the lessons of responsible citizenship and pridi~
himsel~ on the ~reat aeeompliehment~ of hi~ County, Willie i~
indeed a member of a new generation of prepared young citizens
of whom we can all be very proud.
NOW, T~Pd~FOR~ ~ I~ RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to
William S. Meyer and acknowledges the good ~ortune o~ the County
to have such an outstanding young man aa one of its citizens.
Vote: Unanimous
Mrs. Girone pre,eared Mr, Meyer with the executed resolution and
congratulated him on his achievement.
10.c. MR. MICKY J. MIAD~ UPO~ R~C~IViNG RANK OF EAGLE
SCOUT
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
W~REAS, Micky J. Ziadeh, son o~ Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Ziadeh
of 2501 Corner Rock Road, has attained the rank of Eagle Scout,
which is the highest rank awarded to a young man in the Boy
scouts of America; and
WHEREAS, Micky has been a member of Troop 893 sponsored by
St. Edward's Catholic Church in Chesterfield County, Virginia
since March, 1983; and
W~EREAS, ~icky was awarded the Ad Altare Dei, was one o~
two soouts in Troop 893 to receive the American Cultures Merit
Badge, was the first to receive the Interpreter Stripe in
Troop 893 and was awarded several academic achievement awards;
and
W/4EREAS, Growing through his experiences in Scouting,
learning lessons of responsible citizenship and priding himself
on the great accomplishments of his County, Micky is indeed a
member of answ generation of prepared young citizens of whom we
can all be very proud.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to Mieky
J. Ziadeh and acknowledge~ the good ~ortune of the County to
have such an outstanding young man as one cf its citizens.
Vote: Unanimou~
Mrs. Girone presented Mr. Ziadeh with the executed resolution
and congratulated him on his achievement.
10.D. CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGHTS CRIME SOLVERS FOR THEIR
SUCCESSFUL PRO~PJ~M
Chief Pittman introduced Hr. Roy Fleming, President of Crime
Solvers, Incorporated, Sergeant Jim ~ourque an~ Inve~tlgator A1
Thompson, co~m~ending them for their diligent efforts and
dedication which have resulted in a highly successful program.
Mr. Daniel cormmended the participants in the Crime Solvers
Program for their enthusiasm, kindred spirit and dedication.
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Police had the
foresight to recognize the potential of a new concept in the
fight against crime and joined with a group o£ citizens and the
media to introduce the concept of Crime Solvers, Inc. into
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Police Department coor-
dinates the program and works closely with the citizens' orga-
nization and the media in this highly successful venture; and
W~EREAS, Crime Solvers, Inc. has significantly contributed
to the successful resolution of over 350 crimes in less than
three years of operation and recovered or removed over $400,000
in stolen property or illegal drugs from the communities of
Chesterfield County and Colonial Beight~; and
WHEREAS, Crime Solvers, Inc. has proven that citizens,
police and media, in a cooperative effort, can significantly
impact crime in Chesterfield County and Colonial Heights.
NOW, THEPdZFOR~ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors hereby expresses its appreciation and
gratitude to the Chesterfield County Police Department, and in
particular, ~o Sergeant Jim Bourgue and Investigator Alan Thomps(
for coordinating the program and to the Board of Directors of
Crime Solvers, in particular, the President, Mr. Ray Fleming and
his officers, Mr. Michael MacNeilly, Mr. Paul Carnes, Mr. Buddy
Fox and all members of the chesterfield/ Colonial Heights Crime
Solvers, Inc. organization and to the media for their efforts
toward a safer community.
AND, FURTI~EH BE IT R~gOLV~D, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors acknowledges its good fortune in having
such an excellent Police Department and organization az
Chesterfield County/Colonial Height~ Crime Solvers, Inc.
supporting the community.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Daniel presented Mr. Fleming with the executed resolution
and congratulated the group on the success of the program.
86-944
10.E. MR. FRANK BRYAI~T FOR HIS ORGANIZATION OF NEIGF~BOP~HOOD
WATCH PROGRAMS IN BEEi~3DA DISTRICT
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, Mr. Frank Bryant is a resident of Chesterfield
County, a former employee of Allied Chemloal Corporation, serves
as vice-President of the Allied Chemical Corporation Retirees
and is the Chairman of the Membership Committee of the Enon
Civic Association; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bryant has exhibited outstanding
organizational and leadership qualities being instrumental in
the establishment of more than thirty Neighborhood Watch
Programs in the Bermuda District of Chesterfield County~ and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bryant is presently serving aE the Chairman of
the Enon Neighborhood Watch Program which was established in
1985; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Bryant has donated his time unselfishly to aid
in making Chesterfield County a safer community in which to
reside, work and engage in recreational activity; and
W~REAS, Mr. Bryant has been recognized by the C~timist
Club for his devotion to the Neighborhood Watch Program and
efforts to protect his community ~rom harm,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors recognizes Mr. Frank Bryant for his
outstanding service to the citizens of the Bermuda District and
Chesterfield County.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Dodd presented Mr. Bryant with the executed resolution and
expressed appreciation for his valuable contributions and
devotion to the Neighborhood Watch Program and his community.
He introduced Mrs. Bryant, who was also present. Fir. Bryant
expressed his appreciation to Mr. David Bauer, Sergeant Jim
Bourque, Sergeant George Fisher and Investigator A1 Thompson for
their support and assistance with the Neighborhood Watch
Program.
10.F. PRESENTATION TO THE CHESTERFIELD HISTORIALBDCIETY BY
T5~ AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR STATE A~D LOCAL HISTORY
On behalf of the American Association for State and Local
~istory, Mr. Dodd presented a certificate for an award of
commendation for rapid development of a local history program
to Mrs. Lucille Moseley and Mrs. Arline McGuire, in recognition
of the Chesterfield County Historical Society for its
demonstration of a high level of professionalism and significant
growth in their mission and goals in promoting history and
preserving iml3ortant historic objects and sites. Mrs. Mc~uire
expressed appreciation not only for the recognition but also the
support of the Board of Supervisors and Administration.
11. HEARINGS OF CTTTZENS ON DNS~u~UI~EDMA~-r~KS OR CLAIMS
ll.A. MS. PATRICIA FAYS SUTTON - CLAIM FOR DAMAGE TO BICYCLE
Er. Micas briefly explained the claim from Ms. Patricia Fays
Sutton relative to damages tO her daughter's bicycle, which
damages were incurred during participation in a Parks and
Recreation Department sponsored event. He stated staff's review
of the matter has not established any negligence by the County
ncr does he feel the County is legally liable for the damage to
the bicycle. He stated, additionally, prior to the sponsored
event, Ms. Sutton signed the County's standard form releasing
86-945
the County from liability for any loss arising out of the trip
and recommended the claim be denied.
No one came forward to address the matter.
on motion of the Board, the claim from Ms. Patricia Fays Sutton
for damages to a bicycle belonging to her daughter, SanDse
Robertson, in the amount of $150, wa~ denied.
PETITION FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM MEMBERS OF THE
CIRCLE AND SWING SQUARE DANCE CLUB
Mr. Carroll Rodgers, representing the Circle and swing Square
Dance Club, pre~ented an appeal to the Board for financial
assistance to alleviate the fees assessed monthly, by the
County, for the Club's use of public school facilities for dance
classes and dances. Me stated as taxpayers the me~er~ are
requesting that the Board consider assistance in the amount of
$1,200 ($100. monthly) for the 1987-88 budget, as the
organization provides entertainment at no cost for citizens of
all ages for various events throughout the County (parks,
nursing homes, Camp Baker, Christmas Mother Program, etc.).
Mr. Applegate skated he felt the use of public facilities should
be available to the citizen~ and the School Board should be made
aware of this group's plight and address the situation as part
of its ongoing progrsJ~s.
Mr. Dodd agre~ and stated he felt it appropriats for Mr.
~edrick or designated staff to meet with tke School
Administration to work out a suitable arrangement to consider
reducing the fee assessments.
Mrs. Givens stated she, too, felt citizens should be able to
utilize the school facilities for such events. Mcr. Mayas stated
he fel~ there should be an established policy to govern such
issues and suggested a meeting be scheduled to discuss the
matter. Mr. Dodd stated he felt Mr. Medriek and Dr. Sullins
should meet to discuss the matter and Mr. Stith would be in
touch with Mr. Rodgers concerning the mud%er.
12. DEFERRED I~
12.A. S~ DATE FOR WORK SESSION ON UTILITIES EXTENSION/
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
It was generally agreed to set December 15, 1986, at 10:00 a.m.,
in the Administration Building, Room ~02, for a work session to
discuss ~he proposed Utilities Extension/Economic Development
policy.
12.B. APPOINTMENTS
PERSONNEL APPEALS BOA~D
on motion o~ Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board
reappointed Mr. Robert Allen to the Personnel Appeals Board,
whose term is effective January 1, 1987 through December 31,
1989.
Vote: Unanimous
12.B.2. NOMINEES TO DRUG ABUSE TASK FORCE
On motion O£ Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. ApDlegate, the Board
nominated the followinq persons to serve on the Drug Abuse Task
86-946
Force, whose formal appointments will be on Sanuary 14, 1987:
Mr. Ralph Jo~es Bermuda District
MS. Brenda Briggs School Administration
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Daniel stated nominations for the Dale District would be
deferred u/ltil December 15, 1986.
13. ]~BLICHF2U~I~GS
o PUBLIC E~ARING TO CONSIDER A~ OP, DINAi~CE TO AMEND THE CODE
OF THE COUNTY OF C~ESTERFIELDr 1978r AS AMENDED~ BY A~DING
SECTION 20-1.30:01~ RKLATI~G TO MA~DATOR~ WATER CONNeC-
TIONS
Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend the Code of the
County relative to mandatory water connections.
No one came forward to address the matter.
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by ~r, Applegate, the Board
adopted the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING SECTION 20-1.30:01
RELATING TO ~A~DATOKY WATER CONNECTIONS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield
County:
(1) That Chapter 20-1 of the Code of the County of Chester1
field, Virginia is amended and reenacted by adding the following
section:
Sec. 20-1.30:01. Mandatory Water Connee~_on.s.in Certain Areas.
(a) All existing structures in the mandatory connection
area, as defined by subseetie~ (c) herein, which obtain their
water supply from wells, whether in actual use or not, shall
connect to the public water system within ninety (90) days of
the effective date of this ordinance.
(b) Ail structures under construction or for which a
building permit is obtained after November 12, 1986, shall
connect to the County water system.
(c) For tho purposes of this section only, the mandatory
connection area shall be described as follows:
Beginning at the southern corner o~ the Chesterfield County
Chester Landfill at its point Of intersection with Bradley's
Bridge Road; ~hence westwardly to the ~outhwest corner of said
land~ill; thence northwardly along the western property line of
said landfill to the northwest COrner of said landfill; thence
eastwardly along the property line of said landfill ~o its
intersection with the 50~ right of way; thence northwardly along
said right of way to its intersection with carver Heights Drive
(Rte. 708); thence eastwardly along Carver ~eights Drive to its
intersection with the western property line of the Carver Home
Sites subdivision; thence northwardly along said subdivision
property line to its intersection with Iron Bridge Road; thence
eastwardly along the southern right of way of Iron Bridge Road
to its intersection with the eastern property line of Tax
114-15 Parcel 4; thence southwardly along the said eastern
boundary to thc southeastern corner of the same property; thence
86-947
westwardly along the se~thern property line of said property to
its intersection with the western property line of Tax Map
114-16 Parcel 1; thence southwardly along said property line of
Tax Wap 114-16 Parcel 1 to its point of intersection with W.
Hundred Road; thence eastwardly along the southern right of way
of W. Nundred Road to its point of intersection with the north-
east corner of Tax Map 114-16 Parcel 7; thence in a southeast
direction along the boundaries of Tax Map 114-16 Parcel 7 to its
terminus at the southeast corner of said property; then centinu-i
ing scuthwardly along the eastern property line of Tax Map
114-16 Parcel 14 and continuing southwardly along the eastern
property line of Tax ~ap 131-4 Parcel 58 to its point of termi-
nus at the southeast boundary of Tax Map 131-4 Parcel 58; thence
westwardly along the southern property line of Tax Map 131-4
Parcel 58 to its intersection with Branders Bridge Road; thence
southwardly along the eastern right of way of Branders Bridge
Road to its point of intersection with the V~PCO Right of Way,
as shown on Tax Maps 131-4 131-8; thence scuthwardly along the
western line of said right of way to its intersection with the
southeast corner of Tax Map 131-8 Parcel 4; thence westwardl¥
along the southern property line of said parcel to its terminus
at the eastern property line of Tax Map 131-7(1) Parcel 21;
thence northwardly along said eastern line to its point of
intersection with Bradley's Bridge Road; thence wsstwardly along
the southern right of way of Bradley's Bridge Road to its point
of intersection with the southern corner of the Chesterfield
County Landfill, the point of begir~ing.
(2) This section shall become effective upon passage.
Vote: Unanimous
14.
14.A. POLICE AVIATION MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT
Chief Pittman stated the Police Department has been negotiating
an arrangement with Henrico County's Division of Police to
create a joint aviation unit which would support the aerial law
enforcement activities of both jurisdictions. He stated the
City of Richmond has also requested to participate in this
activity, with each of the three participating jurisdictions
paying a one-third share of operating eosts~ pursuant to a
~utually agreed upon arrangement. He stated the creation of the
unit will permit Chesterfield to significantly enhance its
aerial law enforcement capabilities at a relatively iow cost and
without the necessity of purchasing and maintaining expensive
equipment. He explained staff assignments to the aviation unit,
utilization of the program on a rotating basis of one out of
every three days for an eight hour shift, the impact on service
levels which will be minimal, the use of overtime which is
intended to offset the staff shortage, and priority response to
incidents, etc. He added further that the cost cf operating
fixed winged aircraft is substantially less than the cost of
operating a helicopter.
Mrs, ~irone stated staff has advised that, although funds are
budgeted for fiscal year 1986-87 for this project, there i~ no
new money available for the next fiscal year and cautioned that
approving this program will affect next year's priorities.
Applegate stated he felt the funding is relatively inexpensive
for the benefits the program will ultimately achieve. Mr. Dodd
commended Chief Pittman for his efforts on obtaining an
agreement to provide this service.
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
86-948
approved and authorized the Chief of Police to execute the
necessary documents to enter into police Mutual Aid AgreeMents
with Henrico County and the City of Richmond to create a joint
aviation unit, the purpose of which woul~ be to support certain
aerial law enforcement activities of both Counties and the City,
which funding in the a~ount cf $46,000 was appropriated for the
fiscal year of 1986-87 during the previous budget process.
Vote: Unanimous
(A copy of said agreement is filed with the papers o~ this
Board.)
DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION OF STATE 20~ZCE HA~GA~
Mr. Howell stated the Virginia State Police have requested that
the County construct a hangar, which they intend to lease for
five (5) years, for their kviation Unit which would provide
housing for their 24 hour-per-day Medivac Operations.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to proceed with
the RFP and to negotiate for the issuance of revenue bonds and
construction of the project.
Mrs. Girone indicated there will be a yearly shortfall and
inquired if the mhortfall amount was inclusive in the motion.
Mr. Daniel stated his motion was to proceed with the
recommendation for the design, building and negotiating of
financing for the facility as written in the Board paper. Mr.
~edrick stated staff felt there will be a $3,900 a year impact
that will be taken from the Airport budget.
Thers was further disoussio~ oh Where the shortfall would
eventually come, the current subsidy of the current operation,
the existing facility utilized by the State Police, the ne~d to
bring the negotiated contract back to the ~card under the
current motion, etc.
Mr. Applegate moved a substitute motion to approve and
authorize the County Administrator to proceed with the RFP and
to negotiate and execute the appropriate documents for the
issuance of revenue bonds and construction of the project and
to authorize staff to move forward, with the understanding there
may be a shortfall of $3,900 annually. He stated the additional
revenue generated by the rent of the old facilities should cover
the shortfall.
Mr. Sink stated the shortfall is short-term, as a hangar cannot
be built and paid for within 5-10 years, primarily because of
financing.
Mr. Daniel stated he felt the issue should ~e tied down as to
shortfalls, etc., before the contract is approved.
Mrs. Girone seconded the substitute motion.
A vote on the substitute motion was as follows:
Vote: U~animous
14.c. REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DEPUTTE$ FOR JA~L SECUI~ITY
Mr, Hammer stated the Board Of Supervisors is requested to
request funding ~rom the State Compensation ~oard and State
Department of Corrections and receive possible grant funding for
construction of an annex to the prssent jail facility, and the
funding of six new Deputy positions for the Sherif~ to provide
additional jail security and handle breathalyzer and bookin~
86-949
functions which will be transferred from the Police Department
to the Sheriff's Office.
Mr. Dodd stated earlier discussions indicated requeet~ for
financial assistance would be presented a~ the state
Compensation Board meeting on December 23, 1986.
Sheriff Wingc explained the study conducted on the present jail
staffing and space status indicates it is unlikely the
overcrowding situation will be relieved in the pre~ent facility
and the requests for additional positions and expansion of the
present facilities are critically needed. He stated if the
Board were to authorize the hiring o~ six additional position~
effective January 1, 1987, and authorize an appropriation of
$67,500 from the General Fund Balance to fund these positions
for the remainder of the current fiscal year, the critical
staffing problem could be alleviated and security and control
would be improved at the facility. He further stated relocating
the Magistrates' office and consolidating booking procedures
will require a 2,200 square foot addition to the present
facility [1,000 square feet for the Magistrates' Office and
1,200 square feet for breathalyzer and booking functions,
expanded waiting areas and administrative space), which cost is
will range from approximately $220,000 to $280,000. He stated
the Department of Corrections may fund up to $100,000 of this
cost; however, if the State does not approve the construction
funding, the County will have to decide how to fund the
Mrs. Sirone stated the Sheriff's Department is not the only
department experiencing manpower and space shortages; however,
ignoring the budget and Capital Improvements Planning Program
processes to ask the Board for funding makes it very difficult
to manage the peoples' money. She stated she supports the
concept of this request; however, ~inding the money to achieve
it will be difficult.
Sheriff Wingo questioned if the transfer of the Magistrate's
Office to the jail and the booking for the Police Department
would be abandoned if the State does not fund the requested
positions.
Mr. Daniel questioned if a resolution were needed to take to the
Compensation Board. Mr. Dcdd stated it would.
Sheriff Wingo expressed concerns relative to a timely submission
of the resolution to the Department of Corrections requesting
funding in the amount of $100,000 toward building the addition
to the jail.
Mr. Applega=e stated his observation, on the tour he took of the
jail, was that bed space is also a critical issue and, based on
staff's projections, the County will need a 400 bed facility
within the next 5-10 years which would cost approximately $30
million.
It was generally agreed discussion of the requests for
additional deputies for jail security and funding for an
addition to the present jail facilities would be deferred to the
December 15, 1986, Board meeting and resolutions would be
prepared for presentation to the appropriate State agencies.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board
deferred this matter until December 15, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
86-950
14.D. APPOINTMENTS
14.D.1. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE METROPOLITAN RICHMOND
CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU
Mrs. Girone mtated she felt appointment to the Board of
Directors of the Metropolitan Richmond Convention and Visitors
Bureau should be an individual who lives in and is actively
involved in the local business area and requested that
nomination be deferred for thirty days to determine the most
qualified candidates.
On motion of Fir. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
deferred nomination to the Board of Directors of the
Metropolitan Richmond Convention and Visitors Bureau until
January 14, 1987.
Vote: Unanimous
14.D.2. COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD
On motion of Mr, Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
nominated the following persons to serve on the Community
Services Board, whose formal appointments will be made on
January 14, 1987:
Ms. Yvette B. Ridley Matoaca District
Reverend Malcolm M. Hutton Dale District
Dr. Ronald J. Jessup Dale District
Mr- Richard A. Nunnally Bermuda District
Vote: Unanimous
14.D.3. CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COM~(ITTEE
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
nominated the following persons to serve on the Citizens
Transportation Advisory Committee, whose formal appointment~
will be made on January 14, 1987; subject to their willingness
to serve:
Mr. Cecil R. Maxson, Jr.
Dr. Neil J. Humphries
Mr. J. Ruffin Apperson
M~. Elaine Rubin
Vote: Unanimous
14.E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS
14.E.1. AGREEMENTS WITH VDH&T AND SOVRAN BANK FOR DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF ALTERNATE ACCESS TO ROUTE 288
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and a~thorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary documents for agreements/contracts with the Virginia
Department of Highways and Transportation and with Sovran Bank
for the deEig~ and construction of an alternate access to Route
288 in the event the zoning for adjacent development is
approved, with approval of said agreements being contingent upon
approval of the final form by the County Attorney's Office. It
is noted that in the event the zoning is not approved the design
and construction contracts will be void.
86-951
14.E.2.
INTEREST EARNED ON MATOACA-BERMUDA ROAD RESERVES
Mr. Mayes stated in 1984 the Board recognized the need for the
grade separation in Ettrick and placed in a Reserve Fund $2.5
million to accomplish the job. He stated this project has not
been accomplished by the Highway Department and the people of
the Matoaca District are undergoing a disadvantage, without any
benefit from the County's attempt to provide them relief. He
requeeted the Board divert the proceeds from the interest on
this money to the Reserve Account to compensate for the Highway
Department's current projected cost of completing the project,
as it is anticipated to be $5 million. He stated the Delegation
to the General A~sembly has been requested to try to obtain
additional money from the State but just in case they are short
in what they are successful in obtaining, the interest on this
money will help facilitate the completion of that project.
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved
the allocation of interest earnings on the Matoaca-Bermuda Road
Reserve to those projects to help offset the increased coots of
the project.
Mr. Daniel state~ he sympathized with Mr. Mayes' frustrations
with the delays on this overpass or grade separation; however,
anytime money is appropriated and has not been used there is a
revenue strea~ that flows from it - that revenue stream is in a
budget year and the projects compete for it just as any other
projects and money is in turn appropriated based on that
competition and the revenue is already planned. Ne stated this
action, if approved, would set a dangerous precedent for
interest from money for other projects.
Mr. Applegate stated he agreed with Mr. Daniel in that when the
Board approved the budget the interest income from all
investments was budgeted to be spent in the ensuing year and was
a source of income just like tax revenue and any other form of
income. He stated to approve this would only mean the taking cf
$200~300,000 away from some other budgeted item.
Mrs. Girone stated she felt the Board made a corm~itment to help
Mr. Mayes achieve this project and that it was appropriate to
assign the interest from that money to thio project. She stated
this situation has existed for 20 or 38 years, this is the
closest the situation has ever been to being resolved, there is
a design and the State has been asked for the balance of the
funding and if the interest is left in =he General Fund, it may
go to another project.
Mr. Mayes stated the reason why the $4.5 million was set aside
was so the people of Matoaca would vote for the bond issue for
$22 million and the bond issue of Route 288 for $30 million. He
stated he is only asking that the people of Matoaca be given the
benefit of that money.
Mr, Appleg=te stated the total project cost has now gene to $5.5
million and if the Board approved the request, the project would
still be $3 ~ million short. He stated these funds are already
budgeted. Mr. Ramsey stated that was correct.
~r. Ramsey explained in detail the interest income, how all
interest is accounted for, the construction time on projects and
how estimated revenue is budgeted based on those calculations,
Mr. Mayes questioned how the County knew the project would not
begin and funds would not be expended. Mr. Ramsey stated it was
staff's judgment the money could not be spent quickly because
the project could not be designed, bid and constructed so
q~ickly and only as the project proceeds are bills submitted and
County cheeks issued. Be stated the County must ensure that the
money is available but the County has the use of that money for
investment as long as it in in the County treasury. Mr. Mayes
86-952
stated he felt as long as the money is not being used it can be
placed in the reserve fund.
Mr. Daniel stated the appropriate time to bring up such an issue
would be at budget time when all projects stand in competition
for funds for that particular budget year.
Mr. Mayes called for the guestio~, as he felt the issue had been
fully substantiated.
Mr. Dodd questioned the source of the $200-230,000 interest if
the Board were to approve the request. Mr. Bedrick stated the
General Fund Balance. Mr. Dodd stated he understoo~lr. ~ayes'
concerns; however, people in Che~ter and on Route 10 are
suffering and he has to look at what is right for all of
Chesterfield County - not just Chester.
Mr. Hedrick stated to approve this request would actually reduce
the General Fund Balance and increase the reserve for that
projeet and at some point in the future the money would be
expended on that project.
Mr. Mayes stated the resolution, pa~sed at the time the $2.5
million was set aside, indicates that any shortage will come
from the General Fund.
Fir. Dcdd inquired if the Board felt the County ought to put more
money into these projects rather tha~ the State. Mr. Mayes
stated the money should be spent for County purposes and one of
the County purposes is the grade separation, which this Board,
VDH&T and citizens have said should have been done yeais ago.
Mr. Dodd stated he understood but Route 10 has been waiting 10
years for its improvements and this action would place the
iinancial burden on the County. He stated he felt a tax
increase could be imminent, which he did not support.
The vote on the motion was as followm:
Ayes: Mrs. Girone and ~ir. Mayes.
Nays: Mr. Dodd, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Applegate.
14.E.3. STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION COST APPROVAL
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
approved the street light installation sos~ for the intersection
of Courthouse Road and Newbys Bridge Road (Five Forks), in the
amount of $1,545.00, which funds are to be expended from the
County Wide Street Light Fund.
Vote: Unanimous
14.E.4. STREET LIGHT REQUEST
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board
approved the installation of a street light at the intersection
of River Road and Bridle Path Drive, with funds to be expended
from the Matcaca District Street Light Funds.
Vote: Unanimous
14.E.5. REQUEST FOR REDUCED SPEED LIMIT ON CHESTER ROAD
Mr. Daniel supported the resolution for a reduced ~peed limit on
Chester Road; however, requested that it be amended to also
include a reduction in the speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph on
Route 10 from the Courthouse Road area to the Cogbill Road area.
On motion of Fir. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
86-953
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County
has received requests from aitizens to reduce the speed limit on
Chester Road from Route 10 north approximately 3/4 of a mile
near the abandoned Seaboard Coastline Railroad; and
WHEREAS, the Board ham also received requests to reduce the
speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph on Route l0 from approximately
Courthouse Road to approximately Cogbill Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board requests the
Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation to reduce the
speed limit along Chester Road and Route 10.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Applegate excused himself from ~he meeting.
14.E.6. NEW ~OSITION$ FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTS
Mr. Sale explained that due to increases in construction
activity throughout the County and in response to
recommendations in the Planning Management Study, the ~oard is
requested to approve twelve new positions and appropriate
$120,900 in revenue and expenditures.
Mr. Daniel requested that each departmental request be con-
sidered individually.
Mr. Hedrick explained briefly the requests from the Building
Inspections, Planning and Environmental Engineering Departments,
respectively.
Hr. Applegate returned to the meeting.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Appleqate, the Board
approved three new positions for the Building Inspections
Deportment, inorease~ the revenue estimates in the amount of
$32,300 based on the receipts from the Building Inspections
Department based on the current rate structure, amended the
personnel complement for the three positions in Building
Inspections and increased the expenditures portion of the budget
by the corresponding $32,300 for the 1986-87 budget year.
Vote: Unanimous
There was discussion concerning approval of the requested
po~itiens for the Planning and Znvlronmcntal Engineering
Departments, relative to fee str~ct~res, recouping of funds if
the necessary funding were appropriated from the General Fund
Balance, options for repaying the General Fund money if the fee
structures are not approved, etc.
On motion of Mr. Daniel~ seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to advertise
six positions for the Planning Department, with funding of those
six positions to be generated from the result of a revised
structure tha~ will pay for the positions; temporarily
appropriated $67,600, which funding will be derived from
adjustments in the fee structure; and directed ~he County
Administrator to bring back and advertise a fee structure to
offset the appropriated funds, and if ~he fee structure is not
approved, the approval of the six positions is null and void.
Vote: Unanimous
On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to advertise
three positions for the Env±rer~e~tal Engineering Department,
with funding of those thre~ positions to be generated from the
result of a revised £ee structure that will pay for the
positions; temporarily appropriated $34,700, which funding will
be derived from adjustments in the fee structure; and directed
86-954
the County Administrator tc bring back and advertise a fee
structure to offset the appropriated funds, and if the fee
structure is not approved, the approval of the three positions
is null and void.
Vote: Unanimous
14.F. SET DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
14.F.1. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC R~ARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE 0F
PROPERTY AT AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PA~SK TO MR. L.
LUCORD, JR. AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF CONTINGENT
SALES CONTRACT
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
set January 14, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to
consider the conveyance of a 2.8 acre + tract on the east side
of Reycan Road at the Airport I~d~strial Park to Mr. L.
Lucord, Jr., with Berkness Corporation, Richmond, Virginia and
authorized the County Administrator to execute a contingent
sales contra~t.
Vote: Unanimous
SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
TO ENABLE DESIGNATIO~ OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Nr. Applegate, the Board
set January t4, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to
consider an ordinance to enable designation of historic
districts and/or landmarks.
Vote: Unanimous
14.F.3. SBT DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THROUGH TRUCK
TRAFFIC RESTRICTION ON ROBIOUS ROAD
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr- ~ayes, the Board se~
February 11, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to
consider restriction of through ~ruck traffic on Robious Road.
Vote: Unanimous
14.F.4. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING EOB CONSIDERATION OF
WESTERi~ AR~A LAND USE AND TRAI~SPORTATION PLAN
On motion O~ Nr. Mayes, seconded by Nfs. Girone, the Board set
the date of January 14, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing
to consider adoption of the Western Planning Area Land Use and
Transportation-Plan.
Vote: Unanimous
14.G. CON~NT ITENS
14.G.1. REQUESTS FOR BING0/RAFFLg PERMITS
On motion of Mr. Applegat~, seconded by Mr.
approved requests for bingo/raffle permits
organizations for calendar year 1987:
ORGANIZATION
Bensley-Bermuda Volunteer Rescue ~quad
Chesterfield Optimist Club, Inc.
~anehester-Richmond Noose Lodge
Thomas Dale Musie Booster Club
Daniel, the Board
~or the following
TYPE
Bingo/Raffle
Raffle
Bingo/Raffle
Bingo/Raffle
8~-955
South Richmond Rotary Club
Richmond James River Lions Club
Rober~ E. Lee - VFW Post 2239
Mcnacan H.S. Athletic Boosterm
Virginia Belles Softball Club
vote: Unanimous
Raffle
Bingo
Bingo/Raffle
Raffle
Bingo
ACCEPTANCE OF GRANTS FOR SCHOOL SYSTEM
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized acceptance of a State grant for
in-service programm related to services for the handicapped, in
the amount of $12,278, and for a Federal Training Grant, under
Title II, BBSA, for teacher certification to teach math and
science olammes, in the amount of $21,949, and authorized the
necessary accounting entries for said funds.
Vote= Unanimous
14.G.3. STATE ROAD ACCEPTAI~CB
This day the County Environmental Engineer, ~n accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writlng upon his
examination of Glen Oaks Drive, Hamlln Drive, Hamlin Place,
Shamark Drive and Hamlin Court in Glen Oaks, Sections 1 and 2,
Bermuda Dimtriot.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Applegate,
seconded by Mr. Daniel, it im resolved that Glen Oaks Drive,
Hamlin Drive, Hamlin Place, Shumark Drive and Hamlin Court in
Glen Oakm, Sections 1 and 2, Bermuda District, be and they
hereby are established as p~blic roads.
And be it further re~olved, that the Department of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into
the Secondary Symtem, Glen Oaks Drive, beginning at the
intersection with Centralia Road, State Route 717 and
running southerly 0.04 mile to the intersection with Kamlin
Drivs, then continuing southerly 0.01 mile to tie into
proposed Glen Oaks Drive, Glen Oaks, Section 3; Hamlin
Drive, beginning at the intersection with Glen Oaks Drive
and running westerly O.1O mile to the intersection with
Hamlin Place, then continuing westerly 0.05 mile to the
intermeotion with Shumark Drlve, then continuing westerly
0.08 mile to the intermeetion with Hamlin Court, then
continuing westerly 0.02 mile to tie into proposed Hamlin Drive,
Glen Oaks, Section 3; Ha~lin ~lace, beginning at the
intersection with Hamlin Drive and running northerly 0.04
mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Shumark Drive, beginning at the
intersection with ~amlin Drive and running southerly 0.09
mile, then turning and running northerly 0.09 mile to end in
a cul-de-sac; and Hamlin Court, beginning at the
intersection with Hamlin Drive and r~nning westerly 0.03
mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjaoen~ slope, site distance
and demig~ated Department of Tranmportation drainage easements.
These roads serve 51 lot~.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Department ~f Transportation a 50'
right-of-way for all of theme roads except Glen Oaks Drive
which has a variable 50' to 70' right-of-way.
86-956
These sections of Glen Oaks are recorded as follows:
Section ~. Plat Bock 47, Pages 36 & 37, September 24, 1984.
Section ~. Plat Book 49, Page 46, May 23, 1985.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County EnviroD.~ental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from thie Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Wadsworth Drive in Whitestone, Section 2, Clover
Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion o~ Mr. Applegate,
seconded by Mr. Daniel, it is resolved that Wadsworth Drive in
Whitestone, Section 2, Clover Hill District, be and it hereby is
established as a public road.
And be it further re~olved, that the Department of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into
the Secondary System, Wadsworth Drive, beginning at existing
Wadsworth Drive, State Route 2687, and going northeasterly
0.15 mile to tie into existing Wadsworth Drive, State Route
887.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Department of Transportation
drainage easements.
This road serves 19 lots.
And be it fur%her resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Department of Transportation a 60'
right-of-way for this road.
This section of Whitestone is recorded as follows:
Section 2. Plat Book 49, Page 60, June 6, 1985.
vote: Unanimous
This day the County Enviror~ental ~ngineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Ambergate Drive and Ambergate Terrace in
Ambergate, Midlothian District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion cf Mr. Applegate,
seconded by Mr. Daniel, it is resolved that Ambergate Drive and
A~3ergate Terrace in Ambergate, Midlothian District, he and they
hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Depart~ent of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into
the Secondary System, Ambergate Drive, beginning at the
inter~ection witk Robious Crossing Drive, State Route 831,
and going westerly 0.10 mile to ~he intersection with
Ambergate Terrace, then continuing westerly 0.09 mile to end
in a cul-de-sac; and Ambergate Terrace, beginning at the
intersection with Ambergate Drive and going northerly 0.16
mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site distance
and designated Department of Transportation drainage easements.
These roads serve 18 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Department of Transportation a 50'
right-of-way for all cf these roads.
Ambergate is recorded as follows:
86-957
Flat Book 46, Page~ 98 and 99, August 8, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H. UTILITY DEPA~I~ENT I~EM$
14.H.1. PUBLIC HEARINGS
14.H.l.a. TO CONSIDER SALE OF 31&1/4 ACRES OF SURPLUS PROPERTY
LOCATED EAST OF IRONBRIDGE ROAD
Mr. Welchons stated this date and time had ~een advertised for a
public hearing to consider the sale of 31&1/4 + acres of a
surplus parcel, lying east of Iron ~ridge Road, t~ Iron Bridge
Development Company.
Mr. Richard Williams inquired as to the amount of the bid and
questioned if he could make a counteroffer. Mr. Micas stated
since this is a public hearing the Board could consider a
counteroffer or could close the matter with the negotiated sale.
Mr. Daniel questioned if all the legal requirements of the
negotiated sale were followed. Mr. Micas stated the negotiated
sale compiled with all legal re~/irements. Mr. Hedrick stated
the County received an offer for the property of $6,000 per
acre; the County recommended a counteroffer in the neighborhood
of $6,500 per acre and that is the issue before the Board.
Mr. Williams stated he was never notified o££iczally that the
property was for sale. He stated he felt adjacent property
ownere, such as himself, should have been notified.
Mr. Applegate stated he did not feel it would be fair to reopen
the issue for a counteroffer at this time.
Mr. Williams stated he was never part of the negotiations for
the property. Mr. Welehons stated the offer of $6,500 per acre
for this property preceded Mr. Williams' offer of $6,000 per
acre and, based on the $6,500 offer, staff requested the Board
set a public hearing to consider sale of the surplus parcel.
Mr. Mayee questioned if the Board must accept the $6,500 offer.
Mr. Micas stated it is up to the Board's discretion as to
whether they feel, in good faith, compelled to accept the offer.
Mr. Williams stated he had bid on the property in 1983 but felt
the price was too high; however, since the land is adjacent to
his property, he would like consideration for purchasing it.
After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Mayes,
seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Beard resolved to approve the sale of
the parcel containing 31&1/4 ~ acres of land lying east of Iron
Bridge Road to Iron Bridge Development Company for $6500.00 per
acre, authorize the County Administrator to sign a contract for
the sale, and authorise the Chairman of the Board and County
Administrator to sign the necessary deed.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.i.b. ORDINANCE TO VACATE TEN FOOT DRAINAGE
WITMIN DALE HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION
Mr. Welchons stated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider an ordinance to vacate a ten foot
drainage easement within Dale Heights Subdivision.
Mo one came forward to address the matter.
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
adopted the iollowing ordinance:
86-958
AN OgDINANCE to vacate a 10 foot drainage easement within
Dale Heights Subdivision, along the common property line of Lots
7 and 8, Block A, Sermu~a Magisterial District, Chesterfield
County, virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in
the Clerk's Oifioe of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County
in Plat Hook 9, at page 112.
WHEREAS, Steven R. Pond ham petitioned the Hoard of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a 10 foot
drainage easement within Dale Heights Subdivision, along the
common property line of Lots 7 and 8, Block A, Bermuda
Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia more
particularly show~ On a plat of record in the Clerk's Office cf
the Circuit Cour~ of said County in Plat Book 9, page 112, made
by Willi~ M. Lewis, dated January 3, 1955. The drainage
easement petitioned to be vacated is more fully described as
follows:
A 10 foot drainage easement within Dale Heights
Subdivision, along the common property line of Lots 7 and 8,
Block A, the location of which is more fully shown, shaded in
red on a plat made by Williem M. Lewis, dated January 3, 1955, a
copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this
ordinance.
WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431
of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and
WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of
the drainage easement sought to be vacated.
NOW T~E~tEFORE, BE IT O~DAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
That pursuant to Section 15.1-482{b) of the Code of
~, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid drainage easement be
and is hereby vacated.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in
accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia,
1950, a~ emended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance,
together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no
sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's O~ice of the
Circuit Court of ChEsterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section
15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended.
The effect of thi~ Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-48~
is to destroy the force and effect o~ the recording of the
portion of the plat vacated. This ordinance ahall vest fee
simple title to the centerline of the drainage easement hereby
vacated in the property owners cf the lots within Dale Heights
free and clear of any rights of p~blic use.
Accordingly, this Ordinance shell be indexed in the names
of the County of Chesterfield, as grantor, and J.T. Weltcn and
Elizabeth B. Welton, husband and wife, or successors in title,
as grantee.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.l.c. ORDINANCE TO VACATE SIXTEEN FOOT DRAINAGE
WITHIN SALISBURY SUEDIVISION
Mr. Welchons ~tated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider an ordinance to vacate a sixteen foot
drainage casement within Salisbury Subdivision.
No one cams forward to address the matter.
On motion of Hrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
adopted the following ordinance:
86-959
AN ORDINANCE to vacate a 16 foot drainage easement within
Lot 1, Block BB, Section B-l, Salisbury Subdivision, Midlothian
Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on
a plat thereof d~ly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 16, at page
49.
WMEREAS, $.K. Timmons & Assoc. has petitioned the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a 16 foot
drainage easement within Lot 1, Block MB, Section B-l, Salisbury
Subdivision, Midlothian Magisterial District, Chesterfield
County, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit court of said County in Plat
Book 16, page 49, made by J. K. Timmons & Assoc. dated May 31,
1968. The drainage easement petitioned to be vacated ie more
fully described as follows:
k 16 foot drainage easement within Lot 1, Block BB, Section
B-i, Salisbury Subdivision, the location of which is more fully
shown, on a plat made by J. K. Timmons, & Assoc., dated November
5, 1986, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of
this ordinance.
WMEREAS, no,ice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431
of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and
WBEREAS, no public necessity existm for the continuance of
the drainage easement sought to be vacated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF CHESTERFIELD COUNT"f, VIRGINIA:
That pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of
Virginia, 1950, a~ a~ended, the aforesaid drainage easement be
and is hereby vacated.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in
accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia,
1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance,
together with the plat attached hereto ehall be recorded no
sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk'm Office of the
Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section
15.1-485 of the ~gde of Virginia, 1950, as amended.
The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to section 15.1-483
ie to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the
portion of the plat vacated. Since the portion of easement
hereby vacated is located within the periphery of the recorded
subdivision plat, this ordinance shall vest fee sit, plo title of
the entire width of the drainage easement hereby vacated in the
property owner o~ the lot within Salisbury free and clear of any
rights of public use.
Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names
of the County of Chesterfield, as grantor, and Frederick L.
Carreras and Roberts M. Carrera~, husband and wife, or their
successor~ in title, as grantee.
Vote: Unanimous
14.~.l.d. ORDINANCE TO VACATE FORTY FOOT RIGP~T OF WAY AND
TWELVE FOOT ALLEYS WITHIN VILLAGE OF BEHSLEY
Mr. Welchons stated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider an ordinance to vacate a forty foot
right-of-way and twelve foot alleys within the Village of
Bensley.
No one came forward to address the matter.
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
86-960
adopted the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE to vacate a 40 right of way and 12' alley
within the village of Bensley, Bermuda Magisterial District,
Cheeterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County in Plat Book 3, at pages 108 and 224.
WHEREAS, Harry L. Hamilton and Elleen W. Ka~ilton has
petitioned the Scard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County,
Virginia to vacate a 40 foot right of way and 12' alley within
the Village of Bensley, Bermuda Midlothian Magisterial District,
Chesterfield County, Virginia more particularly shown On a plat
of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said
County in Plat Book 3, pages 108 and 224, made by W.W. LaPrade &
Bros., dated June 17, 1922 and September 30, 1921, respectively.
The right of way and alley petitioned to be vacated is more full
described as follows:
A 40 foot right Of way and 12' alley within The Village of
Bensley, the location of which is more fully shown, shaded in
red on a plat made by Virginia Surveys, dated September 26,
1985, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this
ordinance.
W~F~REAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431
of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and
WHEREAS, ne public necessity exists for the continuance of
the right of way and alley sought to be vacated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT OP~DAINED BY ~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF C~IESTERFI~LD COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
That pursuant to section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of
Virq~Dia, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid right of way and alley
be and is hereby vacated.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in
accordance with section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virqinia,
1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance,
together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no
sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office cf the
Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pureuant to Section
15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended.
The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483
is to destroy the force and effect of =he recording of the
portion o~ the plat vacated. This ordinance shall vest fee
simple title of tko entire width of the right of way and alley
hereby vacated in the property owner of the abutting lots free
and clear of any rights of public use.
Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names
of the County of Chesterfield, as grantor, and Rarry L. Hamilton
and Elleen W. Hamilton, husband and wife; Donald P. Dawkins and
Margaret P. Dawkins, husband and wife; Charles L. Craig and
Frances A. Craig, husband and wife; and Chesterfield Volunteer
Fire Department, er their successors in title, as grantee.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.2. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR PUBLIC WATER IN EDENSHIPE
On motion of Mr. Hayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved the extension of public water to Edenshire Subdivision,
from the existing water line at the intersection of Route 10 and
Lewis Road, to serve six residences in Eden~hire and one on
Route 10, the estimated cost of ~xtending the water system being
$121,600.00 -- $76,000.00 for the line in Route 10 and
$45,000,00 for the line in Bdenehire Drive, with funding to be
86-961
expended from th~ Ca~ital Budget extensions to existing
subdivisions and authorized the County Administrator to execute
any necessary documents.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.3. CONSENT ITEMS
AGR/~E~IENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR UTILITY RELO-
CATION ON TUKNER ROAD FROM ROUTE 360 TO ROUTE 60
O~ motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute an
agreement between the Virginia Department of Transportation,
Baldwin and Gregg, Ltd. and tho County of Chesterfield to
employ Baldwin and Gregg, Ltd. to design the relocation of the
County water and sewer facilities on project 0650-020-168, C505,
subject to approval of the agreement by the County Attorney. It
is noted the engineering services covered under this agreement
will be 100% State cost.
vote: Unanimous
14.H.3.b. DEED OF DEDICATION AT IIfI~ERSECTION OF HULL STREET
ROAD A/~D DEER RU~ DRIVE FROM WILLIA~ B. AND GENE N.
DUVAL
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute tho
necessary deed, on behalf of the County, accepting the
conveyance of a 4.73 acre parcel of land located at the
southeast corner of the intersection of Hull Street Road and
Deer Hun Drive from William B. and Gene H. Duval, which site has
been proffered for the development of a future library site.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.3.c. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG RAMBLEWOOD ROAD AND PAt~KERS
AVENUE FROM SC~WAN'S SALES ENTERPRISES, INC.
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary ~eed, on behalf of the County, accepting the
conveyance of a 20' and 15' strip of land along Ramblewood Road,
Route 617 and Barkers Avenue from Sshwan's Sales Enterprises,
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.3.d. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY
FROM MR. AND MRS. JAMES W. BLACKBURI~
on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Hr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary deed, on behalf of the County, accepting the
conveyance of a variable width strip of land along Jefferson
Davis Highway, U.S. Route 1 and 301, from Ja~es W. and Diane P.
Blackburn.
Vote: Unanimous
14.H.3.e. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF GIFT OF DALE FIRE STATIO~ SITE
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary d=ed, on behalf of the County, accepting a deed of
gift from w. s. and Martha S. Carnes for a parcel containing
86-962
0.923 acres along Ironbr~dge Road, approximately 1200 feet north
of Cogbill Road, for the new Dale Fire Station.
Vote: Unanimous
14.~.4. REPORTS
Mr. Welchons presented the Board with a report on the developer
water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrate~.
14.I. REPORTS
Mr. Hedrick presented the Board with status reports on the
General Fund Contingency, General Fund ~al&nce, Road Reserve
Funds, District Road and street Light Funds, Schedule of
Capitalized Lease Purchases, Bus Service: Feasibility Study and
Demonstration Project, and Utilities Department Management
Study.
Mr. Mayes discussed issues relative to the Campbell Bridge into
Chesterfield. He stated he felt action should be taken to
enhance the appearance of the entrance in the southern portion
of the County and requested sta~ to bring a paper before the
Board as to what can be done about the situation.
Mr. Daniel stated he did not feel the dues for Richmond Regional
Planning District Commission should be increased and requested
that County representatives tc this organization be instructed
to not exceed the existing 35 cents per oapita designated
15. ADJO~
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board
adjourned at 9:50 p.m. until 10:00 a.m. on December 15, 1986, in
the Conference Room, Room 502, of the Administration Building.
Vote: Unanimous
Ric~{ard L. Hedrick
County Administrator
Chairman
86-963