Loading...
03-26-1986 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVI.~ORS MINUTES March 26, 1986 Supe=visors in Attendance~ Mr. R. Carland Dodd, Chairman Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Vice Chairman Fir. G. ~. Applegate Mrs. Joan Girone Mr. Jesse J. Mayes Mr. Richerd L. Eedrick county Administrator Staff in Attendance: Oir., ~¢en. Develop. Legislativm Coord. Asst. Co. Admin. of Parks & Duildlng 0fficial Dir. of Ce~, Services circuit Court Clerk Asst. CO. Admln. for Dir. of Env. Eng. ~. Jeffrey Muzzy, Asst. Co. Ac]min. of Budge~ ~ Acc=g. Dix. uf Utilities Mr. Pred~riek W. Willls~ Dir. nf H~man of Planning Mr. Dodd called the meeting to o~der et the COurtkouue ut 9:00 a.m. (~$T). 1. INVOCATION Mr. ~edrick introduced Pastor Fred clemens of the First Church God, who gave the invocation. ~. PLEDGE 0P A?.?~GIANCE TO T~ FLA~ OF T~E UNITED STAT~S OF AMERICA The Pledge o~ Allegiance to the Flag cf th~ Unite~ State~ of America was recited. 86-224 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Appl~gate~ the Board approved the minutes of March 12, 1~S6, as amended. Vote: Unanimous 4, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S CO~ENTS Mr. ~e~riok weluom~d th~ s%~d~nt~ participating iD Model County Administrator for Development, had resigned and accepted the tha~ Mr. Mussy has been with th~ County for eight years and bas done an outstanding job and his expertise will be mi~ed. Mr. Applegate stated the capital Region Airport commission mpproved the final feasibility study ~or the additional expansion to ~he current ~yrd Airport ex~an~ion. He s~ated th~ announcement was al~o made of the pending r~tirement of ~thony D~d who had b~n with the Cotillion for 34 ~s. Girone stated ~he MP0 ~t yesterday and forwarded to the Governor's C~is~ion on ~ad$, l~t~ from ~he individual localities of their top priorities. She stated Chesterfield NPO also r¢co~n~ed the C~is~ion eon~ide~ or work toward th~ completion of ~h~ inner and cuter circ~ferential in ~he Ric~und Region and that ~ey investigate a stable funding source for transit for the GRTC as they are experiencing problam~ with federal funding, etc. She ~tated feelingm were also for th~ budget of the ~0 they included ~deTtaking a ~t~dy of the transportation needs in the region which would involve buses, taxis~ rail, utc. 6. F~QUESTS TO POSTPONE AC~ION.~. F24~RGENCY ADDITIONS O~ C~ARG~S IN THE ORDER OF PRESERVATION On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~. Xayes, th~ ~oard deferre. Item ~4 which involv~ th~ introduction of M~. Herr Siegfried Ha~De, Director of B~hindert~n~ntr~ Hannov~r, ~9~ny, ~ntit 2:00 9.m.~ that Item ll.F.2.a., Re,est from Residents of s~onehenge S~divi$ion for ~ublic Sewer ~rvice be deferred uutil ~y 28~ 1986; that Items ll.A,~ Adoption Of th= 1986-87 Budget i~ediately roll,lng Item 9.A.; that It~ ll.L. be added for an ~MK vs. Walsey pursuant to Section 2.1-344 {a} (6) of the Code Virginia, 1~50, as amended; and adopted th~ agenda as amended. 7. R~OLUTION$ OF S~ECIAL R~CO~NITION 7.A." ~R'."~'K. C'LA'RY, U~!LITIE$ DEPARTMENT ~r. Welchons outline~ Mr. Clary'~ dedic~te~ the County. On ~oeion of the B~ard, the following resolution ~EREAS, M~. John K. Cla~ will retire from the Utilities Depar~un:, chesterfield county, on April I, 1986~ and fl6-225 WHEREAS, Mr. Clary has provided 21 year~ of quality eervio~ to the citizens of Chesterfield County; aad will miss Mr. Clary's diliqent service. NOW, THEPd~FOP~, B~ IT R~$OL~D that this Board of Supervisors publicly recoqni~em Mr. Clary and extends om behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for his service to the County. AND BE IT ~URT~R RESOLVED~ that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mr. Clary and that this =ese!u~ien be permanentl' ~eeorde~ a~aong the pap~Cs of thim Boar~ of Supervisors of Chesterfield Cowry, Virginia. ~. Dodd presented Mr. clary with the ex~cutud resolution and appreciation for this ~soognition. 7.B, MS, LOIS T. C~ODE, SHERIFF'S DEPArTMeNT Mr. Willis introduced Sheriif Wingo'. Sheriff ~inge was present and outlined Ms. Goode'z dedicated and loyal service to ~he County and indicated she could not be present at this time. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: W~/$REA$, ~s. Lois T. Goode will retire from th~ Sheriff's Department~ Chesterfield County~ on April 1, I986; and ~ER~AS, M~. Goode has provided 24 years of quality ~ervice to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and =he Board of Supervisors will miss MS. Goode's diligent service. NOW~ THEREFORE~ BE IT RESOLVED that this Board of supervisors publicly recognizes MS. Goode and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreoiation for her service to the County. A/~D BE IT FURTHER RE$OLVED~ that a copy of this resolution be presented to Ms. Goode and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. ~. Vote: Unanimous Ma. Dedd presented sheriff wingo with the exesuted resolution on behalf of Mrs. Goode. ?,C. MS. FI~KNCES ~. WRIGHT, CIP4tUIT COURT ~ir. Willis introduced Mr. Livingston. Mr. Livingston outlined M~. ~right's d~dicated and loyal service tO the CO,Dry. On motion of ~he Boasd, the following resolution was adopted: WSER~A~, ~s. ~rances $. Wright will retire from the Circuit Court~ Chesterfield County, on April 1~ 1986; and WHEREAS, Ms. Wright has provided 23 years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and W~R~AS, Ms. Wright has se~ed under four Clerks which represents one-third cf ihs elected Ci=~k~ of Circuit Court since chesterfield county's begi~ing in 1749; and 86-226 fm--k WHEREAS, Che~terfiel~ County and ~he Board of Supervisors will miss MS. WrigDt's diligent service. NOW, THEREFO/~E, BE IT RESOLVED that this Board of Snpervlsorm publicly recognizes M~. Wright and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield COunty their appreciation for her service to th~ COunty. AND ~ IT FURTMBR BE$0LV~Dr that a copy of thla resolution be presented to Ms. Wright and that this resolution b~ permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of sup~visor~ of Chesterfiel~ County~ Virginia. ~ir. DO~ p~eSen~ed MS. W~ight wi~h the executed resolution ~d recognized~. Wright who was also present. MS. Wright expressed appreciation ior this recognition. Mr. Stith stated that Rpril 30, 19~6 had be=n designated as Model County Government Day but prior to that date, there are a series of training sessions. Me ~tated ~oday is one of those sessions officials, etc. He introduced Ms. Leiqh Chase, Supervisor of Social gtudi~s for the School System, and MS. Anne Thweatt, Senior Administrative Intern from Virginia ~tate university, who had orqanized this activity. On motion of the Boafd~ the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Students in the eleventh and twelfth grades in Chesterfield County Schools have been s=u~yinq local gover~ent; re, resent their schools in portraying the r01e~ of County ofii¢ials on the 30th day of April, 1986~ and W~ER~AS, The Chesterfield County Board of recoqniz~s the importance of young people having opportunities to lear~ about their government, in order for them to become resDonsible citizens. NOW, TME~FORE, BE IT ~SOL~D by ~he Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, that the 30th day of ~pril, 1986, be declared as ~del Co,dy Government Day 1986 and that this observance be called To ~he a%~en=ion of all citizeas. County Government Day act{vit~es. She stated that this iza joint sponsorship of the school system and th~ local ~hieh allow~ the ~t~dene~ the opport~ity to look at local governmen~ first hand and to get a b~tter under,tending of what =he officials do. She sta~ed that past participants have of the activities that the students would be involved in. Hedrick $tate~ this was a ~ine opportunity %o have the young people learn about their gover~ent and how it operates and ~y lead to some students becoming f=buze County employees but it the operation of the local gover~ent. The students introduced 86-227 DEFERRED ITEMS ~lr. Applegate disclosed to the Board that he i~ a trustes and part ewne~ of property that could be served by the Spring Run trunk sewer, declared a possible conflict of i~terest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interezt Act and excused himself from the meetin9. 9.A. CONDEMNATION OF S~W~ ~AsEFiENT FOR SPRING RUN TRUNK SEW~ TO SERVE DEER RUN SUBDIVISIO~ ~. Welchons stated that the County staff had mat with Dr. and Nr~. Charles Henry and of£ere~ them ~2,524.00 far the aequisltlon of the offsite sewer easement for Deer Run subdivislon. He stated since that time, a verbal counteroffer from the Henry's had teen received in the amount Of $]5,000. H~ stated staff r~co~uends that the counteroffer be denied, that condemnatioD proceedings be instituted and that ~egetiations will continue. F~. Mayas inquired how the $25,00~ figure was determined an~ if that had anything to dc with the County going onto the property and claarin~ land without permission. ~r. Welch~na state~ the County was not involved in this Gleaning, i~ was the developer the adjacent subdivision and they did sc without ~he County's knowledge or permission. ~r. welchons s~ated that any l~gal action would be against the developer and not the County and that if neqotiatlonS are ec~ reached, t-kc Courts could take all of these matters into consideration. Mr. Niayes statsd this mat~er had been 4eferrad to allow time for the staff to discuss the ~att~r with the ~enry's and inquired what the result was. We!chess s~atsd the counteroffer was made at that time. Mr. Welchons stated for the Board's information that if the ~enry's property were develope~, the sewer line would have to be installed in about th~ same location aa well. Mr. Mayas ~tated this was understood bet he was concerned with the procedures followed. Mrs. Henry stated the $2~,000 wa~ suggestmd and they did with the staff on Monday. She ~tated that since the easement in 1400 feet there could be ~4 building lots and it will increase the value of each by $2~000, it would be approximately Sh~ stated staff did indicat0 it was the developer and not the County who had done the clearing of the land, She stated they are still opposed to the easement and inquired why one citizen would be penalized for the benefit of another. Mr. ~ayes stated th~ ~ew~r line would inereas~ the value o~ their property. Mrs. Henry stated that would probably be th~ case if they had plans for development which they do ~ot. ~4r. Mayas stated it appear~ there is an impasse~ damages to the property ara beyond the ~uthority of this Soard, and hs could ~ee no alternative but to let the Courts decide th~ issue. On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board re%used the counteroffer in the amount cf $25,0~0 from Dr. an~ Mrs. Charles W. Henry and authori=e~ the County A~torney to institute condemnation proceedings against th~ following property owners if the amount as set opposite their na~%ss is not accepted. And be it further resolved that the Ccunt~ Administrator ~otify said property owners by reglmters~ mail on ~4arch 27, I986 of the County's intention to enter upon and take the property which to be the subject of said condemnation proceedings. This action is on an emergency basis and the County intand~ tO oxen=isa immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.t-238.1 of the Code of Virginia. Dr. and Mrs. Charles W. Eenry Spring RUb Trunk Sewer $2,524 Ayes: Mr. Dodd, ~r. Daniel, Mrs. ~i~one and ~ir. Absent: ~r. Applegata. ~Irs. Gixene inquired i~ anything could be ~one to hide the manhol~s that will be coustructed. Mr. WeIchons s%a~e~ the manholes are usually constructed above the flood plain elevation so when there are floods they are protected from infiltrati0n but g6-22S he wonld ch~ck into the matter and work with the Henry's in this Mr, Applegate returned to the meeting. 11. N~W BUSINESS ll.A. CONSIDEt{ATION OF TBE 198~6--87 BUDGET ~[r. ~edrick stated per the Board'~ discussion last ni~ht, staff had prepared a paper which in~i=ates a way to include the the ~eard was interested in addin~ to the proposed budqet and at the ~ame time bring the cost close to the figure that was intended in the proposed budget f~om the administration. Mr. R~m~=y stated additionz =o =he budget r~oo~ended by the Board a~ it~ work session last night totalled $3,476,~00 wi~ the d~le=ions from ~he budget totalling $1,766,S0~. He stated it i~ basically a difference of $1,670,800 and staff re~uctlons through the exce~s a~ou~t turned bask by the Schools ~ranting the 3% increase in salaries for employees within ~xistiu9 funds, reducing ~he suhoui increase ~rom $1,875,000 to $500,000 assuming higher growth will provide n~ded funds in 1987-88. ~r. Daniel ~tated he understo~ the $48~000 for the ~ymphony had b~en added ~aek, ~. ~msey stated the= was correct. ~. Daniel inquired what th= different% was between t~ County's p~oposed budge= and the request from the schools. talking with bis School Fuard representative, ~t wa~ indicated ~he first thing that would be cut would be the purchase of schoo next year the same buses will Co~t mor~. He inquired if board transfsrred the $400,000 and funded everythin~ but that, whac would the tax rat~ be. ~r. ~msey stated it would b~ ann:her $.01 on the tax rate and would be approximately $100,000 short. ~. Applugatu stated %hat the Board started o~ with a tax rate of $1.03 last ~igh= a= ~h~ work session which was the County A~inistrator's proposed budge=. ~e stated d~ring th~ course of thm work s~ions, the ~o~rd r~que~ted a 98¢ tax budget. stata~ after each supervisor included their additions and s~traction~ (while he ~orked off of ~he 98¢ tax rate and everyone ~lse off of $1,03) the ~oar~ did not address items in th~ 98¢ budge~ whioh were actually suqgested as potential $1.03 and adjusted it aocordingly at which time the $1.05 rate discuss but retained items such as a ~p study, f~ds for the building inspeotions office, additional parks an~ recreational acti~iticu~ ~uduction to polic=~ the legislative coordinator, fire department, etc. He ~%atad he felt the Board had a responsibility to identify the "wants" and the "needs" and he would support tie "needs" but he felt the "wants" could wait. stated he wa~ concerned with th~ $1.03 and the $t.0~ tax $1.03 and that Could not be reduced and the compromise would be ~i,S4 with the additioD$ for a pro~e~ when alt agreed the County need~ mo~ funds. He stat~ the disagreement is how we spen~ those funds and th~ me~hods ~o raise the.money. He ~ta~ed ~he~e ar~ a lot of "wants" in the the approach 0n ho~ to raise the ~On=y. He stated he d~d not 86-229 feel it fair to put the entire burden on the single family property owners of the Connty of a rate of $1.03+ when there are alternatives such as a utility tax which would spread %he tax evenly to all. Me stated with a $1.00 tax rate and a utility tax' the same things could be accomplished but there seems to be a reluctance by the Board to consider a utility tax. He stated there =~e 63 other counties in the Skate who do this and it woul~ generate $2,300,000. Be stated another alternative would be to h~ll taxes quarterly which would generate revenues o~ $400,000-$5D0,000. Ee stated he had problems when a business license ~er a service ~tati0n was $2~800 and for a branch bank wa~ only $50. ~e stated meme of these =hingm need to be distributed evenly. He stated he would not support $1+03+ ~$ tax rate on real p~opsrty. Mr. Mayas ~tated he was unaware of the utility tax alternative. Mr. Daniel inquired why this wa~ not brought up a~ the time of the bond referendum. Ee stated the public hearings were no~ set in place for the establishment of a utility tax and the timing will no= allow i= ~o be accomplished for this budget. Mr. Ramse~ explained that the difference between & utility ra~e and tax in~icatin~ that a ut~Iity rate would not recognize inflation as it would be a set rate per month and the growth in =hat revenue larger utilify rate to offset the growth than if there were an increase in the real estate rate. Be stated a utility tax would have to ~ $1.00-$1~25 per month. ~e stated witk the real tax rate that is included. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, it is hereby resolved that the 1986-87 Budget ~e a~opted as follows: FUND General Fund School fund R~venue Sharin~ Vehicle and Communication~ Maintenance Airport Nursing Hcme Utilities TOTAL TOTAL $156,821,80~ 1~X,4~,700 30~800 ~,565,900 1~097~50~ 4,512,500 37~i59,60~ $265~028,500 It i~ noted that the County Administrator's Proposed Budget is =mended as follows. Add Expenditures: o Roads $ 500,000 o Schools 1,300,000 o Peli~e 300,00~ O School Guardg o So~ial Services 85~000 o Libraries 6~,000 c Leaf pick-up 165,000 Q Lake ChesOin 56,000 o Clerk to the Board 56,000 o Donations {Camp Dater $10,000 & Quarterback League $4,000) 14,000 Funding Sources: o Ad~itlona! revenue from additional 1¢ real estate tax $ 835,000 o Reduce Insurance Reserve 750,000 o Capital Tmpr0v~nent$ 572,000 86-230 Reduce Capital Region Afrport Commission 4~000 Reduc~ Contingency 400,000 R~duoe Debt Reserve 410,800 From P~nd B~lance 590r000 TOTAL $3~561,800 considered last night hut that he felt the staff should betin at thi~ point to begin a plan for a 2 y~ar budget so that all can see where we stand financially for next year. ~e ~tat~d that the County Administrator has indicated that if the ~osrd did not raise taxes this year, it could he a $1.1i or $1.12 next year. H~ stated no one wants a tax increase hut everyone knew when we went with the bond referendu~ for the capital program that taxes would have to be increased between 7-11¢. He stated the quality of life has b%en established. ~rs. Girone inquired what would he cut ~he~ld the $~00,000 not funded for the schools. ~. F~/~sey stated the staff has not had a chance to talk with th¢ School AdministratiOn regarding thi~ hut he felt they would have to go back to the school Board to decide what the cuts would 5irs. Girone stated that she did not know if the $1.03 or the $1.05 was rlqht but she knows that the 95¢, which was what she wanted origlnally, is not sufficient. She stated that wo~id mea~ the schools, the police, the ~rsing ho~=~ thu social services, libraries, Camp Raker, et~. would not be funded to the lev~I at which they are accustomed, she stated the fault is with the with the school age children a~d the "needs" and "wants" that ~tated she does not have a problem wit5 attrlbut~nq the increase to where it belonqs which she f~lt i~ the Single family homes as they are the ones who are spending the money. She stated she could support $1.04. She stated that as to the utilit~ tax, she lives n=ar fha City and the people are v~ry enh~ppy with it. ~r. Daniel stated he felt the problem with the utility tax is implementing it, because it has not been presented tc the public and there is no way that it can be included for this year's hu~get. Ee stated it ~ not that he could not support it but etc., and that opportunity im not available. Re stated ~he opportunity to discuss this matter. Mr. Mamas stated the ~ajority cf the School budget is teachers' salaries and the legislature imposed tha~ upon the Board without somewhere and the increase in enrollment and facilities ~s a family ~eSponsibility. Hu stated the children gclng to school is what testa and therefore the parents should pay for it which basically what th~ Beard i~ doing, di~t=ibuting the cost wh~re if belongs. give the teachers an increase of 10% in ~alaries this year and and three ne~t year, there are anticipated 1,!00 ~ew students more kids than the !,100 anticipated and be faced with a request the past several years in the fall and there will be no money 86-231 $t.03 and if that happens, the budgets of the County departments will have to be cut and bear the brunt for the additional students that have not been planned for. Mr. Applegate seated that he felt the Board is conside=ing reinstating the $40,000 for %he ~ichI~ond Syraphcny and relates hack to his concern for "wa~t$" and "needs". Ha stated he realizes this is a small figure but it is a "want" and no% a "nee~" when there are real need~ in ~{ental Health/Mental Retardation Services who requested $300,000 in critical needs, needs that have not beep addressed. He stated the b~dg~ as proposed makes donations An the ~/nount o~ $1,224,000 and does not address the "n~eds". ~e stated that the School budget for mandates i~ only ~8,100,000 and their budget totals $16,000,000. He reviswed other items such a~ 10% Salary increase to instructional psrsonnel, 8% salary increase to all other employe~s, a ~un~er school deficit of $100,000, o~ertlme in su~er emplo~nt in maintenanc~ transportation additional buses ~nd drivers, etc. ~e stated i~ i$ not the stat, man,ares that are eau~in~ ~he problem a~ that only i~ 50% but are asking the general side of the County gover~n= ~o tighten up bo= y~t we are giving ~he money away and are not addressing the needs. Mr. Mayen indicated he ~1~o f~lt the ~oard was n~t facing its responsibility in dealing with Mental ~ealth/Mental Servio~$. Mx. Daniel called for the question. On motion of ~. Daniel, seconded by Mr. ~ye~, it is hereby resolved that the 1986-87 Budget be adopted as follows* ~neral Fund $156,~21,800 School fund 141,442,700 Revenue Sharing 308,000 Vehicle and Co~unication~ Maintenance 2,565,900 N~r~ing ~ome 4,512,50~ Utilitie~ 37,159,600 Less Int~rfund Transfers [78,~79,500) TOTAL It i~ noted that th~ County Administrator's Propos~ Budget amended as follows. Add Expenditures: o Roads $ 5~0,000 s Schools 2,300,000 o ~olice ~0O,000 O School Guards 23,800 o Libraries 68~000 O Leaf pick-up ~ Lake Chesdin 50,000 o Donations {Camp Baker $10,000 & Quarterback League ~4t000) 14,000 TOTAL F~nding So,roes: o kdditional revenue Erom additional 1¢ real estate tax $ 835,000 86-232 c Capital Improvements 572f0~ o Reduce Capital Region Airport Commission 4,000 TOTAL Mrs. Girone - Aye Mr. Applegate - Nay Mr. Applegate clarified h~s vote stating that he supported the he did net feel the board ha~ addressed the "ne~d~" and h~ ll.B. ADOPTION OF TAX RATES FOR on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~r, ~ayes, the Beard adopt~¢ the followin~ o~dinanC~: AN ORDINA~CE TO ESTABLISH THE ANNUAL TAX L~VY ~e I~ Ordained by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield that fo~ the ~ear beginning on the firs~ day of January, 1986, and ending on ~he thirty-first day of De~ember, 1986, the taxes on proper~y in all th~ Kagisterial Districts cf the County of Chesterfield shall be us follows: Sec. 1. Real Pro~ert~ and Mobile Homes. value thereof. Sec, 2, Personal ProFert¥. (a) On automobiles, trailers, boats, boat trailers, other motor vehicles and on all tangible p~rsonal property use~ or hel~ in connection with any mining, manufacturing or other business, trade, occupation or profession, including furnishings, furniture and appliances in rental units, the tax shall be $5.60 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. {b) On a~rcraft as defined by ~58-829.5 of the Code of ~irqinia, ~950, as amended, the tax ~hall be $1,I00n'-~r~ $100 of the assessed value theroo~. Sec. 3. Public Service Corporation P~opert~. (a) On that portion of r~al estate and tangible personal : property o~ public service eorpora~ion~ which has been egualiz~d~ aS p~ovided in Section 5S-512.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, a~ amended, th8 tax shall b~ $1.04 on every $100 of the assessed {b) On that portion of the real estate and tangible per- serial property of public service corporations which has not beeni =qualize~ ~$ provided iB section 5~-512,1 of the Cod~ of V~r- linla, 195~, as amended, the tax shall be $3.20 on every $100 of assessed value ~hereef determined by tho State Corporation Con~uiusion. ) I¢) The foregoing subsections to the contrary notwith- standing, on automobiles and truck~ ~eloogi~g to such public service corporations the tax shall be $3.60 on every $500 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 4. Machinmr~ and Tools. On machinery and %eels used in a manufacturing or mining business the tax shall be $1.00 on every $100 assessed val~e thereof. The Board being polled: Mr. MaTes - Aye Mr. Daniel - Mrs. Girone - Aye Mr. Appleg~te - Nay Mr. Dcdd - Nay ~r. Applegate clarified his vote by stating that the tax rate supported a budget for which he voted against. Mr. Rams~y reminds4 the Bosrd that prior ~o any of the money being spent~ the Board would have to vote on an appropriations rs~elu%ion which wou!d be presented in the upcoming months. The work compiled during this process. It was generally agreed the Board would recess for five Reconvening~ 9.B. ROUTE 36 ~RAD~ SE~AP~TIO~ ~ROJ~CT ~r. Dod~ disclosed to the Board that he owns property in the ares of the Route 36 Grade Separation~ declared a conflict of pursuant to the Virgiaia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting, · F~. Mayas stated the Board has been dealing with this issue uinc~ February, !984; this Board pledged to complete the project; it pledged to fund that project and the money was identified in accordance with the Highway Department's estimate. He stated sinc~ that tim~ things have taken place which have prevented it ~rcm prouee~ing ~orwar~. 5e stated ~ preDare~ a resolution for the Board and since all have not had an opportunity to review and comment on it, s~ggested a deferral. On motion cf Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board deferred consideration of the Route 36 Grade Separation project until April 23, 1986 in orde~ to allow the Board time to respond Ayes: Mr. F~yes, Mr. Applegate, ~Lr. Daniel and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Dodd, Mr. Meye~ stated he would also be appealinq to the elected officials and the citizens who will have to pay for it for some assistance. Mr. Hedrick reemghasized that the Highway Departmen- ts delaying the project until the Board makes a determination. ~[r. Dodd returned to the m~tlng. ~I.C. CO~dUNIT¥ DEV~LOP~NT IT,S I1.C.1. MAINTENANC~ OF S~NATE Om motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board appropriated $~,060 from the Bermuda District ~¢ Road Funds for 86-234 Vote: Unanimous 11.C.2. STERM~AT~R MANAGEMENT SYSTRM FOK SOUTNPARK On motion of Mr. Appl~g~te~ ~econded by Mrs. Girome, thB Board approved an~ anthorized the County Administrator to execute a Storm Water ~aintenance Agreemen~ with the developer of southpar~ as approved by the County Attorney. ll.g.3. S~OP44 WATt, MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PER JOHNSTON ~ILLIS CEN~E~ On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girono, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a storm water maintenanc~ aqreement with the developer of Johnston Willis Center as approved by the County Attorney's office. 11.C.4. ADDITIONAL E~GZNEERINQ WORK FOR WHITEPINE ROAD E~TENSIO5 On ~otio~ of Mr. Daniel, seconded b~ ~lr$. ~iron~ the Board: t. Appropriated an additional $12,137 from the Airport Industrial ~sserve Account for additional services in designing Whitepine Road Extension, Phase III. Authorized a change order to Austin Brockembreugh & A~seciates in the amount of $t2,137 for additional enqineerinq, Mr. Dodd rec£~ested that ~t~ff review the price of new property at the Industrial Park as he felt it might be selling under market value. 11.C.5. 1986-87 PRIMARY PREALLOCATION HEARING ~£. Medsick presented th~ Board with a proposed 1986-87 Primary Praallocation hearing statement to be presented at the Highway Department on April 3, 1986. Mr. Dodd stated he and ~lr. Daniel would ~e eat of the County during that time, requested the Hoard members attend and requested Mrs. Girone present the Board's statement. ~. Daniel rec/uastsd that the deleqatas be invited a~tand by formal communications. ~e inquired if the llst of roa~ projects which are outlined were ~omplatad, what would the cost be. Mr. EcCracken stated it WaD estimated at $250,000,000 exoluding Powhite and Route 288. Mrs. Girone suggested two changes to be included in th~ statement. It was generally agree~' the statement was acceptable as amended. Mr. MoCracken stated that the Governor's Commission On the 21st Century will be ~eetin~ oD April I, 1986 ~t the Richmond District. ~e stated if tha~ sa~e priority list is acceptable, that could be presented in statement form. Mr. Dodd requested that M~. Applegate present the Board's ~tat¢~ant ut this I' On motion of ~r. Dodd, seconded by Mr. ~ayes, the Hoard appointa~ Ms. Jean Copeland to the ~ohn Tyler Community College Local Boar~ whose term is effective £mmadiata!~ and will e~pi~e in June, 1988. 86-235 ll.E. CONSENT IT~ iI~E.1. ~TAT~ ROAD ACCEPTANCE This day the County ~nvironmentat ~ngineer~ in accordance with direction~ f~om this Board, made report in writing upon his ~xamination of KelthwQod Parkway and KeithwOed Court in Keithwood, Clov~r Hill Distrlc~ Upon consideration whereof, and On me,ion of ~. Applegate, sacond~ hy Mr. Daniel, it is resolved that Keithwood Parkway an~ ~eithwood Court in Kelthwood, Clov~r Hi11 District, be and they hereby are established as public roads. A~d be it furthur resolv=d~ that the Virginia Department of ~ighways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to taka into the Secondary System, Keithwood Parkway, beginning where State ~a~ntanance ends, Keithwood Parkway, State Route 1792, and going 0.01 mile northeasterly to the intersection with Keithwoed Court, then continuing 0.17 mile northeasterly to a temporary turnaround; and Ks±thwood Court, beginning at the intersection with Keithwood Parkway and going 0.14 mite northwesterly to a cul-de-sac. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site distance and ~esigna=ed Virginia Department of Highways drainage These road~ ~erve 3~ lot~. guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 66' right-of-way for KeithwDod Parkway and a 5o~ right-of-way ~or Kuithwood Court. Keithwood is rccordud us follows: Plat Book 38, Page 58, April 17, 1981. Vote: Unani~us 11.~.2. R~QuEST$ FOR DtN~O/F4~PLE On motion of Mr. ADplegate, seconded by Mr. Da~ial, ~he Board approved the requests for bingo and/or ra~Ie permit~ for the following organizations fo~ calend~r y~a~ 1986: ~on Air Rc~ary Club Greenfield Elementary S~hool P.T.A. Virginia Stat~ University Athletic Booster Club Vot~: Unanimous ll.F. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT ITEMS ll.F.I. PUBLIC EEARING TO VACATE EASEMENT IN EXBURY, SECTION 1 Mr. Welchonm staeed this dace and tlm~ had been a~ver~ised for a public hearing to consider the vacation of a 16 ft. drainage easement ~ithin ~xbury, Section 1. Thcr~ was ~o one presen~ to dimc~ms the matter. On motion of Mr. Apple~ate~ seconded by ~r. Daniel, the Board adopted th~ following ordinance: ~ @~Di~A/~CE to vacate a portlou ola 16 foot ~rainnq~ easement adjacent to Lots 33 and 34, ~lock Ar E×bury, Section I, Clover Hill ~agisterial District, Chester£ield County, Virginia~ as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded ~6-236 in the Clerk's office cf the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 51, at page 72. W~REAS, Wineton Development Company ha~ petitioned the soard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate portion Of a 16 foot drainage easement adjacent tc Lots 33~34 Block A~ Er~b~y~ Section 1, Clover gill N~qisterial District, Chesterfield County, virginia more particularly shown sn a plat of record in the Clerk's Offic~ of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat BOoR 5I, page 72, made by J. K. Tint, one and Associates, Incorporated, da=ed 0etcher lQ, 19~5. The drainage follows~ A 16 ~eot drainage easement adjacent to Lets 33 and 34~ fully shown, shaded in red on a pint made by J, K. Tigons and Associate~, Incorporated, dated January 7, 1986, a copy of which iS at~ached hereto and made a part of this of ~he Code of virginia, 1950, a~ amendeS, by advertising; and accordanc~ witk ~ection 15.1-482(b) uf =he Code of V~rqinia, 1950~ as amended~ and a certified copy 0f t~is Ordinance, together with the plat attached h~reto shall be recorded Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section TA~ effect of this Ord~nanc~ pursuant to Section 15.1-483 =o destroy the foroe an~ effect of the ~ecordinq o9 the ~rtion of the plat v~c~ted. Thi~ ordinance shall vest fee ~impl~ Development Company free and clear of any rlgh~s of ~lic use. li.F.2. SEWER ITEMS ll.F.2.b. CONDEMNATION OF SEWER EASEMENT FOR PRIfND AV~Uf On ~otiOn of ~. Dodd, seconded by Mr, Danipl, the authorized the County Attorney to institute condemnation proceedings against the following property owners if the amount a~ set opposite their names is not accepted. And be it further resolve~ that the County Administrator notify ~aid property owners by regimented mail on M~ch 27, 1986 of the County's intention to enter upon and take the property which is to b~ the subject of said condenmation proceedings. Thi~ action i~ on an emergency basis and the County intends to exercis~ immediate right of entry pursuant to section 15.1-238,1 cf the Code of Virginia. Robert A. Reynolds and Dennis H. Walters 86-~37 Friend Aveeue Vote: Unanimous ll.F.3.a. WATEr CO~T~ACT FOR FA%RPI~/~S, SECTION 5 On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Appleqater the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator ko e~eoute any necessary dccument~ for the following water contract: Total Contract Cost: Estimated County Cost: ~stima=ed Developer Cos=: Number of Connections: 38 code: 5E-2511-997 $46,775.00 12,328.54 $34,44~.46 (Cash Refund & ~efund through connection And further the soard appropriated $7,~00.00 from 5D surplus to ll.F.3.b. SEWER CONTRACT FOR WQUDLAKE TRUNK S~WER~ PHASE I O~ ~otion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Bourd approved and authorized :he County A~ministrator to eKecute any neceSSary documents for the following Sewer contract: Sewer Contract Number S86-35CD/7 (8}635M; Woodlak~ Trunk Sewer, Phase III Developer: Investors Woodlake D~velopment Corporation Cuatractor: RMC Contractors, I~eorporate~ Total Contract COSt: $173,029.00 Total Estimated County Cost: I7~002.$4 (Refun~ through Connection Fees) Estimated Developer Cost: $156,026.65 W~mber of Connections: 8 Code~ 5N-2511-997 Vote: Unanim0u~ ~I.F.3.¢. CONTR~CT POE UPGRADING ROCKW00~ PUMPING 8TAT%0N On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by ~r. Applegate, the soard approved a~d ~thorized ~he C0unt~ Administrator to e×~cute any necessary documents for Contract W~6-12R, installation of an additional pkl~p in tke Rockwocd Water Pumping Station to WACO~ IncerDorat~d ~aaed on their low b~d in the amount n~ $99,849.00 and further the Board transferred $110,0~O.00 from 5H-58~5-59~R te 5H-~3~-~12R, which is being done fO~ accounting p~rposes. It iS noted that funding of this project was included in the $1,SDO,0O0.00 approved in the 1985-86 Capital Improvement Program. BAILEY'S BRIDGE PUMPING STATION t~PROVEM~NTS~ SS5-97C O~ motion Of Mr, Daniel~ seconded by ~r. Applegatc~ the Board approved and authorlz~d the County A~ministrator to e~ecute any necessary documcnt~ for Nhitman~ Req~ardt and A~sociatcs to perform engineering services on the Bailey's Bridge Pumping Station Improvements, S85-97C and further th~ Board authorized 5P-~lT-597R. ~t is noted that funding fo~ this project in the amount of $40~000 is included in the existing Capital Improvement Budget, ll.F.3.e. DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN PROPOSED C~I~CN~$~ SUBDIVISION approved and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator to execute a quit claim 4eed to VaCate a portion of a 16~ drainage easement within proposed Chipchas~ ~ubdlvlsion. i1.F.4. REPORTS Mr. W~lchons prese~ed ~he Board wi~k a list of developer water and sewer oontracte e×eeutad by the Counby Administrator. Hedrick ~rmsented the Board with a etatne report on the General Fund Contingency, the General Fund Balance, the and Street Light Fnnd~ and t~e Road P~serve Funds. %l.L. EXECUTIVE On motion of Mr. bahia1, s~¢on~ed by ~r, Apple~ate, the ~oard went into Executive session to discuss with counsel legal regarding HMK vs. Walsey as permitte~ ~y Section of the Code of Virginia, 1950, a~ ~ended. Vote: Unanimou~ 11.~. INTERVIEW WITH ~ODEL COUNTY GO%~ERNMENT STUDENTS The Board met i~formally witm ~4od~t County ~oVeXDI~ent Pay Mr. Daniel excused n~self from tau m~uting. 1i. I. L~C~ The Board recessed for lunch at the Albert Crosswind Rent,rant. ReCO~veni~g: ~. Dodd stated that Mrs, Giron~ would be cz~airing the zoning mesmlon this afternoon wnlcn is in accordance with rules and procedures of the B~ard. ll.J. P~QU~STS FOR MOBILE HOME PERMITS 85g172 In ~ermuda Maqisteria! District, Carl D. Adenauer requested a Mobile Ho~e Pef~it to park a mobile nome on property fronting the west line of Jefferson Davis aignway, approximately 600 feet south of Forest Lake Road, end better known as 13900 Jefferson 8G-239 Davis Highway. Tax Map 133-7 (2) Mid City Farms, ~lock A, LOt 12 that an 8tn condition b~ ad~pd which i~ agreeable to the applicazlt wnic~ addresses tn~ ~ubdivision o~ the proper~y requests. ~. Adenauer was presen~ and ~a~d ~ney nave the request fe~ a mobile nome per. it for a period subject to tho following conditions: Board approved of five years i. Tz~e applicant snell be the owner and occupant of the mobile property. Only one (I) mobil~ ~o~e snell ~e permitted to be parked on an individual lot or parcel. and o=ner zoning requirements of the applicabl~ zoning district ~nall be eo~pli=d witn~ except rna% no mobile snell be located closer t~an 20 f~et tu a~y r%sidenc~. 4. No additional permanent-type living spac~ may b~ added a mobile nome. All mobile n~s or,all be skirted but snell not be placed on a ps.anent foundation. 5. W~=e~e public (COunty) water and/or mower are avail~te, 6. Upon being granted a Mobile Home Pe~it, the applicant snail tn~n obtain the necessary pe~i~ item the 0friGo of tne Building Official. Tnim shall be d~ne prior to installation or ~elo=ation of the ~bil~ 7. ~y violation of ~e above conditions s~mtI be grounds fo~ revocation of the Mobile HOmo Pe~mit. A deed and ~I~t ~bdividin~ tni~ ~opurty will ~e recorded within seven (7) days of ~ne date 0f this ~sent: ~. Daniel. S6S060 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Henry Adenauer requested a Mobil Home Permit to park a mobile nome on property fronting %ne we~t line of Jefferson Davis Eignway~ appzoxi~ately 68~ ~eet south of Forss~ Lake Road, an~ be~ter known as 13900 Jeffersun Davi~ ~ignway. Tax Map 133-7 (2~ ~4id City Farms, Block A, Park Of Lot 12 (Sheet 41). Mr. Adenauer was present. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Dodd~ ~¢ond~d by Mr. M~yus~ the Doard approved this roqu6s~ s~bjec% to tn0 following o0nditions.' 1. The applicant snell be the ~wn~r and o~cupan~ of the mobile No lot or parcel may be rented or leased for us~ as a mobfle nome site, nor snell any mobile nome be used for rental property. Only one (1) mobile nome s~aI1 be permitted to be parked ca an indlvi~ual lot or parcel. d~strict ~nall b~ co~li~d wispA, except t*~ut no mobile snell b~ located closer tnaD 20 feet to any existi~ 4. No additional permanent-type living ~Faee ~y be added onto a mobile nome. All ~bile names sz~all be skirted but shall 5. Wner~ public (County) water and/or ~ewer are available, 6. Upon being granted a Mobile Home Permit~ the applicant snell r~voc~tion of tr~e Mobile Hone Pe~it. 8. A deed an0 plat subdividinq t~is property will be fUCord=d wire,in sev~n (7) days of t~e date of =~is 9. ~rior ~o occupancy of ~:~e s~ect mobile nome, ~ne Department snalI approve, and tt~u applicant ~nall install, wlt~in sixty (60) days or prior to occupancy of the Ayes: Mr. Dodd, ~r. AppleqaLte, Mrs. G~ron~ and Mr. Mayes. ~sent ~ Mr. Daniel. REQUESTS FOR REZOHING ~5S155 Ia Clover Eill Magistsrial District, RICHAgD =. COLLIER requested rezoning from AgEieulfu~al (A) and Rauidential (R-15) to Office Business (O) with a conditional U~e Planned Devglopmen= to permit bulk (setback) exceptions on a 4.24 acre parcel fronting approximately 460 f~t on t~,~ suutn llne o~ Hull Street Road, also frontinq approxi~t~ly 425 fee% on %ne west line of ~ndolpn Lyncnester Road. The parce] i~ located between the intersection o~ tnes~ roa~s. Tax Ma9 50-5 (1) P~rc~ls 3, 4, and 5 and {4) 14) . Mr. Peele stated that %ne Planning Co~ission nad reco~nded approval of rezoning to Office Businems (0) with a Conditio~al Us Planned Develo~ent for the pa~tels fronting Route 360 and Randolph Road and that the parcel fronting ~ndolpn Road exclusively r~ain zoned R-15, but be incorporated into the Condi%ionaI USe Planed Dew=lopmen~ and remain as a buffsr all of deferrmd tnim at last month's m~e=ing to allow the applicant time and distributed an addendum in line with those discussions. ~r. ~ruoe ~ulcner was present representing the applicant. He Co~issi0n with the addition[ of fo~r changes dealing primarily wit~ installation of p~lic sew~r. E~ stated there w~re language $8-24~ clarifications which ne would like maria fox conditions #5 and %1I. ~ ntated %1 on the addendum was acceptable. ~Lr. Applegat~ agreed %o additional verbiage in proposed Condition ~r. C. B. C~tdwe%l, a~ adjacent property o~er, stated if Lot 6 I obj~ot~on to a m~d~ai facility wit~ reqard to ~ngre~ and ~le discussion re~ardlng t~ e traffic flow in the area and now could aff~ tni~ road an~ its access. ~r. Ap~l~gate s~at~d ne J development and would no~ permit a s~gnificant portion ~o be medical. approved r~zouing to Office susiness (O) wlt~ a Conditional Use Randolph Road (T~ Map 50=5 (t) Parcels 3, 4 and 5 and (4) parcel fronting Lyncnestar Drive e~cl~ively {Tax Map 50-5 {4) R-15, b~t that =n~ Conditional Use Pieced Development also t~e followinq conditions: 9srimeter of all driveways and parking ar~as. Drainage traffic. 3. Tnu arcnlt=ctural style and quality of buildings shall be (2) stories. T~e soutz~ern building walls snail incorpora=e addition~, s;~ed roofs, etc.). Building faoadas adjacent to offioes, Meo]~anical e~ipment s]~all not be visible from Kou=e ~0 or lots in Falling Creek Farms. aenderings de- Planning Co~ission for apDroval in eonjun=tlon with schematic plan review. (CPC) interior landscapin~ per parking space. EaCh re,ired land~caped area shall contain a minimum of one nuDdred (100) square feet and s[~all nave a minimum dimension of at lea~t t~ {1~) f~t. Tn~ primary landscaping material used in capable of providing sz~ade a~ maturity. Eac~ trunk of at leas~ five (5} feet. T~e total nu~er of trees fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. The vsgeta=ive material to complement the ~ree landscaping. 86-242 Time area desiynated as required setbacks snail not b8 calculated a~ required landscaped area. within tne fifty (50) ~oot setback along Bull street Road and the fifteen (15) foot setback areas along ~ndolpn Road and Lyncnestmr Drive, landscaping snell be One (1) tree sz~all be planted for ~ao~, fif=y (~O) linear A conceptual landscaping plan depicting tn~se reqnire~n%s (30) day~ of rougn clearing and grading, the Department snell be contacted to inspect the setback areas. If remaining vegetation is not ~nfficient to co~ly wit~ tni~ cOndieion~ a detailed landscaping plan shall be s~mittsd ~0 the Planning Depar~ent for approval within thirty (30) days of the inspection. A fifty (50) foot buffsr snell b~ ~intained adjacent to Lot 5, Block D, of Falling Creak Fa~s, Section A on Ta~ 50-5; a thirty-five (35} fooe buffer ~n=ll be maintained adjacen= to =ne "well lot" in Ealling Creek Farms, Section A Section C snell remain Boned R-15 and inoorporat~ into the Conditional Use Plannsd Developmen~ as a buffer. Otn~r fenced, or a co~i~atio~ of tn~ three {3) to screen development from view of adjac=nt single family develop~nt to t~a south. At u minim~, a ~en (10] foot wide berm, landscaped wi=n wni~e pines, having an i~i~'fal n%ig~t of six (6) feet ~nd placed on five (5) foot enall be installed alen~ the sOUthern boundary adjacent to Lot ~, Block D of Falling Creek Farms, Sect~'~n A On 'Tax Map 50-5. A conceptual landscaping plan enall be e~bmi%t~ to the Pla~i~g Co~iz~io~ fo~ appkoval in conjunction with scn~atic plan review. AS mUen mKis~ing vegetation possible ~z~all be maintained wi%nin tnim buffer. Prior any clearing or grading, the buffer snail be flagged and tne Planning Department ccntacte~ to in~pe=t ~nese areas. Within thirty (38) days o~ rough clearin~ and grading, ning Depar~nt for approval. Tz~is buffer may ba installed ia conjunction wi~n tne phasing of tn~ d~velopmen~. All exterior lighting snell be concealed source lighting, not to exceed a :~eignt of fifteen (15} feat, and positioned so as not to illuminate adjacent propur=ieu. Only lighting required for uucurity purpos~ snell be allowed after Iigntin~ plan unall bu submitted %o %ne Planning Staff for Except ~or temporary real estate and construction aign~, one (1) freestanding sign visible tO Route 360 snell be pe~itted. This sign snell not exceed an aggregate a~ea of fifty (58) s~are f~et aud a ~.~ignt o~ ten (lO} feet. This sign may be externally ill~inaced, but ~y 0nly be internally illuminate~ i~ ~ne siqnfield is opaque translucent letter~ or sy~ols. The architectural style this sign snatl blend with that of tn~ structures t0 erected on rna parcel. Other 9rees~ding sign~, for directional and id~tificati0n poseurs, may be not permit visibility from Fei!lag Creek Fa~s subdivision. All 0tne~ ~ign~ ~naI1 be o9 rcgulat=d by the Zoning Ordinance for Office ~usiness (o) Districts, exuep~ signu may b~ ~xternally ill~inated~ but may only be internally illuminated if =n~ signfi~ld is opaque translucent le%%er~ or s~ols. Prior to erection of an~ signs, a sign package Shall be submittad to tn~ Planning Department for approval. g. Prior to the release of a building permit, tnirty {30) feet of rigz~t of way, ~a~ured from ~ne centerlin~ of ~ndolpn Road and Lyncnas%er Drive, ~all be dedica:ed ~o and for County of Cl~esterfiel~ frae and unrestricted. (~) 9. A~dit~onal pavement an~ cuxb and ~tter shall b~ along ~ute 56~, Randolph Road, an~ Lyncne~ter Drive, as deemed necessary bI ~&T and t~e Transportation standards. The developer shall in, tall dry s~r~ in accord~ee with t~e Utilities Depar~ent'$ d~$ign standards. At mUCh time t~t p~%io sewer is located within 500 f~t of the property p~lic s~wer lines at his ~xpen~. exception the fifty (50} fo~h setback requirement along Route In Dermuda Magis%erlat District, RAYMOND O. J~KINS requested razoning from Co--unity Busine~ (B-2) to General Business (B-3) on a 0.3? acre parcel fronting approximately 80 feet on the line of Jefferson D~vis Hiqnway, ~lSO f~Qnting approximately feet on ~lokomin Avenue approxi~teiy 450 feet north of Wonderview Drive. Tax Map ~2-~3 (4) ~alfway ~ouse ~eignts, Block 1, Lots 1, 2, and 22 {Sn~et ~r. Pool~ staeed the Planning Co~i~ion nad reco~ended of the request ~ubjee% fo =ertain conditions. ~e ad4~d applicant nad called and could not be present at the ~etlng. Mr. Dodd stated tni~ i~ ~ ~ttemp~ to ~prov~ the a~pearan~e on Jefferson Davis Highway and th~ applicant nas s~mitted a letter this request ~ubject to the following condition: A thirty (38) foot b~ffer shall be ~intai~ed along board f~nCe having a minimum neig~t o~ six (6) feet, shall be installed within tnls buffer. Other t~a~ ~tilitiez which cross the buffer generally p~rpendicularly, u~ere sz~all no facilities located in tni$ buffer. In conjunction with final site plan review, a detailed landscaping/femclng plan depictin~ tni~ require~nt snail be ~ubmitt~d to the Plan- ning Depar~ent for approval. conditions: 1. We are installing ~oden slats in the existing fence and plating shrubs in front, to imgrove the appearance of the property. 2. There s~atl be no outdoor advertising $i9~$ located §6-244 Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Fir. Applegate, Mrs. Giron~ and Mr. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 86,5002 In Clover Hill ~agisterial District, ~ C@P~ORAT~O~ r~goested Conditional Use Planned Development to permit bulk (setbacks for perking, gas pump canopy, and sign) except£o~u in a General Busine~ (B=3) District on a 1.Q acre parcel fronting approxi~t~ly 210 f~et on ~n~ sout~ llnu of ~idlotnian Turnpike, stated tn% conditions were acceptabl~ e~cept for condition %5. ~e in~roduoed other officials/representatives of E~on ~lfe stated they would accept condition %3 re~iring right of by ~xxon Co, any, U.S.A., ~ated 1/15/S6, s~all be considered perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage 3. ~rior to t~e lelease ufa building pe~it, thirty-five C~estmrfield, free and unre~trlcted. pike/Nor~r~ ~cn Road intersection, (T and time of final site plan review.) g~anted. In addition, a twenty-two (22) foot along Midlotnlan Turnpike shall be grated. 86-245 Landscaping sz~all be located in a manner wniuz~ does not obstruct sight distance. D~tai~ed plans depicting this requirement snell be submitted ko trLe Planning Departmsnt for approval in conjunction wit£~ final site plan review. (P) In conjun~tio~ with the approval oi this request, Planning Cormmission shall grant ~cnematic plan approval tz~e Master Plan, subject to the conditions herein. Ayes: ~ir. Dodd, Mr. Applegat~, Mrs. Giro~e and F~. Absent: ~r. Daniel. 86S006 In Clover ~ill Magisterial District, A~AC-VIRGINIA, INC. requested a~endmen~ to a previously granted Conditional USe (Case 80S044) to p~smit expansion of processing plant and ~tockpile area in an Agricult~at (A) District on a 15.7 ~cr~ parcel lying approximately 750 feet off ~ne west line o~ Warbro Road~ ~rom a point approximately 3~150 feet north of ~ull ~re~ Subject %o c~rtain Conditions. Mr. Pnillp Rome was present inquired if this would suggest t~at tner~ could be additional blasting. ~. Peele stated that was not ~ne ~ase a~ co~ditio~ an~ 5 restrict tn~ blazting ~re $o than currently uxistu. On motion of Mr. Appleqat~, ~econded by Mr. Dodd, the Board 1. T~e following co~dition~ nQtwltnstanding, tn~ plan by J.K. Ti~ons and Associate~, r~vised February 3, 19S6, snell b~ considered tn~ ~t~r Plan. 2. A 1~0 ioof buffer snell bm maintain~ ~etw~n tn~ Virginia Power eas~ent and the western limits ui tn~ area to cleared %o acco~da=e =~e s~ockDile a~ea and construction of the sewer line, Aluo~ tz~u urea west Of tn~ Virginia P~er easement s~all b~ main=ai~ed as a buffer. A ~eventy {70) foot buffer snal! be maintained along the northwestern maintained in %n~ir natural state and supplemented, w~ere n~uessary, to ad~guately screen the area from adjaoen% property or Proposed Route 288, U~ilitie~ and drainage a buffer, but may be cleared and graded upon s~m~ssion of the plans, if it is determined tna~ ]andmeaplng i~ propertie~, planting sna!l be required. (P) Prior to any clearing or ~/adlng, an erosion control plan ul~all be submitted to und approved by ~nviro~ntal saturdays or Sunday~. powder o~ less. 86-246 (Note: ~xcept where stated herein, all eonditlon~ of Condl- tionaI Use 80~044 remain appllo~ble.) Ayes~ Mr, Dodd, Mr. ~ppleg~e, Mrs. Qirone and Mr. ~ayes. Absent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. Applegate disclosed to tz~e Board that ni~ company is involved in the sale of the property in t~e next cas~, d~ctared a eo~flic~ of interest Dursuant %o the virginia Comprehensive Conflict Tntmrmst Act and e~cu~ed himself from tn~ ~e~ing. requested re~oning from ~sidential To~nnou~ (R~TH) ~0 Industrial (~-1) with Conditional U~ Planned D~v~lop~nt to permit u~ and bulk exceptions on a 25.0 acr~ p~rcel lying approxima=ely 800 fee~ off ~ne nor~n line of Midlotnian Turnpike, opposite Otturdale Road. Tax Map 15 (1] Part of Parcel 2 7). ~r. Peele stated the Planning Co~ission nad r=co~e~ded of the request subject to certain conditions. ~. J~ff agreement with the conditions except for Condlticn ~8 as residential properties. ~+ Peele ~xplalned the ~taff's reasoning for tnm reco~n~ation of the b~ffer oondi=ion, mention the outside storage, and tz~e ~illty to cnang~ ~n~ b~ff~r w~d~n durin~ ~cnemati~ plan. There wa~ no opposition present, On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr~ Ma~e$~ t~e Board approved understanding that durinq ~cne~tic plan review~ t~e 50 b~ffer will ~ allowed and r~view~d closely for proper landscaping: 1. The following conditions no~wit~standinq, tn~ plan by J.K. Tigons and Associat~, P.C., dated October 18, 1985, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) In conjunction with ~onematic plan ~ubmiusion ~or each site, the ~ev~lo~er/owner s~all submit the anticipated fI~ calculations and the acc~ulative total flows r~lative for approval. Schematic plan5 s~ll not be approved ~til such time a~ the Utilitie~ Depart~nt nas reviewed and sewer 0apaoity is li~ted and future use of t~e property may Utilities DeDar~en%. A copy of ~ne duc~en= shall to their recordation. 4. Driveway~ and parking areas shall be pave~. Concrete c~rb driveways ~d Darking areas. Drainage s~alI be designed so 5. Tn~ nor%~j~o~tn collector road w~.icn aligns wi~n 0tterdale This road shall nava a minimum t~ical s~ctlon of forty- eight (49) feet, face of curb to face of curb. (T) way of sixty (60) fee~. T~i$ road shall nave a minim~ 86~247 typical sestion c~ forty (48) feet, face of curb to face of curb. 7. 3% ~tub road, having a minimum rig~t of way of sixty fe~t~ s~all be a~t~nd~d %0 tn~ western proper~y llne. T~is ti~e of sene~tic plan review. (T~ A fifty (50) foot buffer snell be maintained along the pe- riphery of t~e subject property where adjacent to residentially or agriculturally zoned property. NO these buffers. Public roads and utilities ~y be through these buCCers upon approval by the Plannln~ Co~issiOn at the t~e of $cn~mati¢ plan review. At time o~ scz:amatic plan review for each individual lot, a Planning Co~immio~ for approval. T[~is condition may be modilied by the Planning Co~ission a~ ~&=e time of schematic plan review if a~jaoent property z~as been zoned for a lar use or if it is determined ~at ad,quake buffering can be aooomplis~ed in a lesser widtz~. Detailed landmcaplng approval witf~in ninety (9o) days of rough clearing and grading. (~ ~ 9. Approval of tne ~stmr ~tan do~s nc~ im~ly that t~,e County gives final approval cf any particular road section. (P) by ~ns Coup=y, o= ~eveloger, ~n~ica~e a n~ed. by the developer (or nls assignee) at ~im (their) e~ense. If t~ze C~unty agrees tc pay for mtrmet Iignting current~ County' m ~o~itment. 12. All parking areas of tf~irty (30) ~paces or mo~u snalt contain appropriate landscaped area~, as deemed necessary by t~,e Planning Co~ission during sc~ematic plan review. (P) 13. Uses snell be limited to theme pe~itted in the Ligz~t Industrial (H~l) Dist=ict, plus t~e ~ollowing us~ tions: All Convenience Business (B-l} uses Carpenter and cabinet Congractorm~ of f icom and display rooms Electrical, p]~ing and/or n~a~ing sales and service Fraternal, pn~an=nro~ic, and cnari%~le Health Laboratories Printing Repair =e~iu~a, except of automobilem SonooI~ - Co~ercial, t~ade~ music, d~ce, business, vocational and training Tool and equipment Co~unica~ion stu~ios and stations (not E~pomition building or c~nter, stadium, argna veterinary nospital~ or clinics 14. In conjunction wit~ the approval of tnls request, a twenty-five (25) foot exception %o the twenty-five (25) 86-248 interior side yard setback requirement snell be granted. 15. Outside ~torege snell be permitted ~ubject to appreva! by t~e ~Ianni~g cor~r~ission at ~,e time of schematic plan review. (CPC) Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Giroae and ~Lr. Hayes. Absent: Mr. Daniel and blt. Apptegate. Mr. ~pplegate returned to t~e meeting. 86S015 In Clover ~ill ~agi~terial District, SHIV~LY ENTERPRISes, I~C. requested a Conditional Uss Planned De~%lopm%nt to permit use {contractors office ShOp, and storage yard) and bulk [paving) excsp~iom~ in ~n Agricultural {A) District on a t. 0 acre parcel fronting approximately 215 feet on tn~ east line of Warbro ~oad, approximately 1,15~ ~eet ~outn of Geni%o Road. Tax ~p 48-3 (1) Part Of ~aroel$ 4, $, and 6 (Snee~ 13). ~. Pool= ~ta~e~ t~e ~lanning Co~isslon nad reco~en~e~ approval ~ motion cf ~. Apple~ate, seconded by ~r. Dodd, ~n9 aD~rovsd tn~s r~quest ~jec% ~O %ne ~ollowing conditions : 1. Tnt folI~ing conditions notwithstanding, %ne plan by Pott~ and Minter, da~ed Nuv~er 13, 1985, s~all be considered tnt ~ster Plan. 2. A thirty (30) foot buffer snalI be maintained along Warbro tl~ere snail be no other facilities pe~itt~d in tl~is buffer. T~ buffer ~nall b~ landscaped with oraam~n:al trees and of adjacent properties by ~it~er landscaping or ~encing. A landscapinq plan depicting this ~e~iremant snail b~ sub- mitted to ~e ~lanning Depart~nt for approval in con- junction with ~it~ pla~ review. 3. Uses per, fred snell be limited to a contractor's office, or industrial activity permitted un tnt site, 4. One (1) si~, not to exceed ~ignt (8) square feet in area and a ne~gnt of ten (10) feet, shall be permitted identi- fying tni~ U~. Prior to tz~e issuance of an occup~cy pe~it, a~itionnl 6. T~R access drive and adjoining customer parking area s~alt area may either be paved or ~y b~ graveled wlt~ a minimum of six (~) inches of ~21 or 2lA stone. 7, Concret~ curb and gutter snail be installed around tnt means (i.e., ti~er~, railroad ties, etc.) (EESP) 8. P~ior to release of any building pe~its, thirty-five (35} Road, s~,alt be dedicated to and for %ne COunty of Cn~s~grfield, fr~e and aPres=rioted. (T) 86~49 Tns previous conditions notwit~standing, all bulk require- r~e~ts of t~e General Business (~-3) District snell apply. Ayes~ Mr. Dodd, Mr. Applsgate, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 86S017 In Bermuda Magistmriat District, JOHN CARL~0N BOWRY, SR. requested a Conditional Use to permit a turkey s~oot in a Hesvy Industrial (M-3) District on a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 300 feet on tz~a south line o~ Willis Road, ap- proximately 4~0 feet east of Soutnwood Road, Tax Map 82-2 Gravel Pit Farms, Part of Parcels 13 and 14 (Sheet Mr. Psole stated the Planning Comm~sslon nad recommended denial of the request. F~r. Buwry was not present. Mr. Dodd stated z~ad resaived some c~plnin:s previo~sl~ but n~ nad not ~a~d anything lately about the operation. ~e stated %~a~ if ~{r. Bowr OD motion Of Mr. Dodd, ~conded by Mr. Applog~te, the Boar~ ~anie Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mr. Appleqate, Mrs. Giron~ and ~tr. ~bs~nt: ~%r. Daaiel. ~6s619 In Midlofnian Magi~teriai Dief~ict, McDON~tLD'S CORPORATION requeeted rezoning from Community ~usiness (B-2) to General Business (B-3) on a 1.3 acre parcel fronting approxi~tely 190 feet on tnn nort~ line of ~idlo=nian Turnpike, approximately 20~ feet wesf of North Pinetta Drive. Tax Map 18-13 (t) Parcel 9 of the request subject to certain prcf£er$. Mr. ~d Willey was present representing the applicant and aqreed to wire,draw proffer #1 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Tnsxe wa~ no opposition present. On mstion cf Mrs. Girone, ~econded by Mr. DODO, t~o BOa~ approve~ t~i~ request subject to acceptance of the fells'lng proffers: T~ volume O£ any o~tdoor ~peake~ system s~a!l be suc£~ that it does not create a nuisance for nsarby residential properties. 2. Ail outdoor ligntin~ s~atl be positioned so as not to emit light in=o or glare into nearby residential properties, 3. The applicant snell comply with all requirements of the Envlrork~ental E~gineerlng Department. Ayes: Mr. Dodd, ~. Appl~gate, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayas. Absent~ Mr. Daniml~ requested rezoning frc~ Agricultural {A) to Office Business {0) with Conditional Uso Planned Devslopment to permi~ bulk (so,back) exceptions on.e 1.~ acr~ parcel frontln? approximately 300 feet on ~ne east lzne of ~uguenet Road opposx~e Olde Csaen Dr±v~. Map i6-8 (I) Parcel 22 (Sneer 7). 8~-250 ~ir. POOLS stated the Planning Commission nad recommended approval of tnls request gubjaet to certain oonditlens. ~r. David Snea p~esent representing the applicant. Tner~ was nQ opposition 2. All buildings snell bs located a minim~ of t~irty (30} feet sz~all be supplemented with additional landscaping and/er bering between the right of way and ~%~ building. Tn~ Planning ~ission for approval in cQnju~ction with ~cnematic plan review. Within thirty {30 days of rough clearing and grading, detailed landscaping plans snell be s~mi~ted to the Planning Deper~ent for approval. NO buildinq s~:all exceed a height ~f two (2) stories. In approval. i~rovemsn%s Or in accordance wi~ the G~n~ra~ Plan 2000, 5. Prior to issuance of an occupancy p~it, additional Department. (T) 6. This development 's~all be limited to a single access 9oint Drive. The access s~all b~ desired a~d cons=rutted to be ~na~d With tn~ adjacen~ Office Business {o) property to ncr%l~ (zoning Ca~e ~6S0~3). project into adjacent prope~tiuu. A lighting plan snell be submitted to the ~lanning Departmu~t for approval ~n conjunction With final sits plan ~evlew. 8. If the adjacent Offic~ Business (O) property to %~e north nam no freestanding ~ign, a single freestanding sign visible to H~guenct ~ad snell be permitted. Ti/is sign shall not e/teed an aggregate area of fift~ {50) square feet and a height of t~n (10] feet. Tni~ $ign may be ex~ernally lighted, but m=y only be internally lig~ted i~ tne sign fiel~ i$ opaque with translucen~ letters or sy~ols. {0) proper=y =o the north, there s~all b~ no freestanding bu~ine~ ~ign per~iteed o~ this property. Other freestand- ing si~s, for directional and identifioa=ion purposes, ~y loua=ion ~oes not pe~it visibili=y from Huguenot Road or adjacent properties. All o%ner signs snell be as regulated 86-251 in the Offic~ BUSiness (O) District wit~ the exception that signs may be externalt~ lighted; but may only be internally llg~ted if t~e sign ~ie%d is opaque wi~ translucent letters o~ ~y~ol~. P~ior to ar~ction of any signs, a sign packag~ Shall be m~mi%tmd to the Plannin~ Depar~ent for approval. ~erlmetsr o~ all ~riveways an~ parkin~ Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mr, Appleqate, ~s. G~rone and ~. ~ayem. 86S024 In Dale Magisterial Distrin%~ COUNTRY ~AP24S CONVEMI~M? 5t%RTS ASS0C%AT~ requested an amsn~ent to a conditional Use Pissed Development (Case 8~8054} Condition 4 ~o pe~it internally %ign~e of ~rner Road, also fronting approximately 130 feet on the north of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map ~0-6 (i) P~re~l 64 (Sheet 15}. applicant. There was no opposition ~esent. On ~tion of ~. Dodd~ seconded by ~. Applegate, the Board approved ~is r~quest. Ayes: ~. D0dd, Mr. kppl~gate, ~$. Girone and ~. ~yes. ~sent: ~r. Daniel. ~6s027 In ~atoaca Magisterial District, JA~LES S. RITCHI=, JR. requested re~ouing from AgriCultural {A) to Residential (R-i~) un ~ 44.7 ~ver Road OppOglte Magnolia Avenue. Tax Map 187-2 (1) Parcel (Sheets 53 and 54). ~. Peele sta%~d t~e Planning Co~ission nad reco~ended approval of this request s~ject to a ~ingl~ co~Oi~ion. R~. Jim Ritcni~ was present and stated ne understood and agreed wi%n hi~ ~eque~t ~nbjeet to the following condition: A fifty (50) foot buffer and building setback snali tain~ along R~ver Road, Tni~ buffer snalt be exclusive of utility easements excep~ tnos~ treat cro~s the easements perpendicular to t~s buffer, No individual lot access s~aI1 be permitted thrOUgh the bnffer. The buffer s~all be land- ~cape~ wl%~ plmnts which will screen rear yards from ~ver Road. A b~rm ~y be installed in t~e buffer. A landscaping plan dapicting tnis re~irm~nt shall be submitted for approval within t/.irty (30} day8 of tentativu Subdivision approval of ~nis ~i%e. The subdivision snall not be raeord- ed ~%il the landscaping plan nas been submit%ed and ap- prove~ by the ~lanning Departing. Final c~euk and record plats snail snow the re~ired buffer. (P) Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mr. Applegate, ~m. ~i~one and Mr. ~en%: Rt. Daniel. In ~ermuda Magisterial Di~ric~ ~AN~ DAVIS requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) fo Light Industrial (M-t) On a 19.0 parcel frontin~ approxi~tely 750 feet on t~e nor~ line of Muffin Mill Road, approximately 1,050 feet ca~t of 1-95. Tax Map 150-~ (2) ~a~k~ Valley ~arm$, Lets ~A and 8 (sheet 42). of t~is request subject [o a single condition. Mr. Zane Davis this re,est sub)eot to the following condition: A ~iity (50) ioof buffer snalI be ~intained along Ruffin ~1! Road. T~e nortner~os~ twenty-five f25) fa~t of this buffer ar~a may b~ utilized for parking. Trois buffer S~all areas. A d~taile~ landscaping plan ~nall be ~ubmitted the Planning Depar~en~ for approval i~ conjunction wi~n final Bit~ plan review. Ot~e~ t~an utiliti~$~ which ~y run generally perpendicular ~nrougn ~ne b~ff~r, a single to Ruffin ~ill Road and tau parking area d~scrib~d ner~in, tnere gna11 be no otner facilities p~i~ted wire,in buff,r. Ayes: Mr. Dodd, ~. Applegate, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayer. ~sent: ~. Daniel. In Midlotnian ~4~gisterial District, G&~, INC. requested amenclment to a previously granted rezoning (Case 815113) eo amend the lies in a Residential (R-25) District on two (2) parcels of land for a total of 1.6 acres, the first parcel fro~%iag 103 feet on the north line cf Castle~ord Road, approximately 900 ap~roxlma~ly 900 fue~ w~ of Cast!eford Terrace. Tax Ma~ 7-13 (3) Salisbury Cas%leford, Lots 38 ~d 41 (Snee~ 2). applicant. There was no opposition present. On ~tion of ~s. Girons, seconded by ~. Dodd, the Board Ayes~ Mr. D~dd, Mr. Applegate, Mrs. Girone and Mr. ~sent: Mr. Daniel. 86S035 In Clover Rill Magisterial District, $OUTHGATE ASSOCIATES requested amen~ent to Cen~itlonal Use Planne~ Development (Cass 85S076) to permit bulk (parking space size and loading space requirements} exceptions in an 0f~ice Business (0) District on a line of Midlotnian Turnpike, approximately ],100 feet east of east Line of NOrth Arch Road, approximately 150 feet south of Knign~sbridge Road. Tax Map 28-1 (t] Parcels 8 and 9 (Sheet 8). Mi. ~QOle sta%~d tn~ Planning Co~mi~Eion n~d r~ee~nend~d approval of the request snbject to certain conditions. Mr. ~arles conditions were acceptable. Mr% Dodd stated tt~is wa~ adjacent to the Pownite corri~Qx and inquired if ~e County were planning ~o 86-253 take any position on tile portion of the land wnlcn might needed for an interchange if nothing else ~appens. ~r. s~a~ed ~e understood ~nis proper~y nad ~een already d~ign~d acquired. There was no op~si~ion present. On ~tion of ~. ApDlegate, seconded by ~r. Dodd, ~n~ Board approved this re~est subject to t~e following A~ %ne ti~ of $~n~ma~ic pled r~view, ~e Pla~ing sion may grant a 8.5 foot exception to the ten (10) foot parking spaoe widen requirement. T~e ~lanning Co~is~ion's tne site is such that a nigh t~rnover of vehicles is Dot ~pect~d. 2. Where the parking space ~ize is reduce~, parkin~ areas snell to include within the p~rking ar~a or adjacent to the area snell contain a minim~ o~ 100 s~are f~et and snnll primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall tr~s wnicn provid~ sna~e or are capable of providing snads at maturity. Eaon landscaped area snell include at least one ~1) :tee, having a ~lear tru~k of a~ leas= five (~) for eau~ 2~0 squar~ feet, or fraction %~reof, of required inter~or landscaped area. The re~ining ar~a snalI b~ complement the tree landscaping. Landscaped areas snail reason~ly disperse~ ~nrougnou= =ne par~ing area or a~Daoent to tz~e parking area and snell be lucated ~o as to divide and break up the ~xDanm~ of Daring. Tn~ area d~gn~ted t=~ese r~quirements snell be Submitted to the Planning Co,lesion for approval in conjunction with schematic plan r~vi~w. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted the Planning Department for approval within ninety (90) days of roug~ ~learing and grading. (P&CPC) 3. At t~e time of scz~ematic plan review for ~2 use, Planning Co, lesion ~y modify Zoning Ordinance requirements r~lative ~o the n~er, size, and location of off-street loading spaoes, based upon t~e determination rna= re~ired by tiaa Zoning Ordinanoe, and that the location 86S036 In Midlotnien }lagisterial Disfrict~ HAYWOOD-CLARKE PORSCHE-AUDI~ I~C. requ=stad amen~enf to Conditional Use ~la~d Developmenf (Ca~e 84S019) ~lative to n~r and ill~nation of ~ign~ in a General easiness (B-3} District on a 4.54 a~re parsul fronting approxi~tely 670 feet on tn~ north lin~ of Midlot*~ian Turnpike, of increasing =ne size of =~ primary freestanding ~ign ~j~c~ to a single condition, reco~ended denial for a second free- standing sign and reco~ended approval of ~.e requ~s~ for amen~ent to the llgnting standards on %ne ~i~s. Mr. Rick G~bbs 96-254 was present representing tz~e applicant. Mrs. Girone stated sue did not feel ~n~ reque~%~ were On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by ~. Dodd, the Board approved all requests of tz~e applican~ s~ject to the following conditions ~ 1. Tn~ prOpOSed dealersz~iD snell be Debitted one (1} free- standing sign, not to exceed an aggregate area of 168 s~are feet and a nei~t Of thirty (30) feet; and a feet. (Note: This condition supersedms conditions Development 84~019.) 2. Signs ~y b~ internally and/0~ externally lighted. (Note: This condition supersedes condition 845019,) Ayes: ~tr. Dodd, Mr. Applegate, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayas. Abuent: Mr. Daniel. ~6~037 In Bermuda ~agisterial District, C~NE AUtOmOtIVe, ~NC. re~ues~e~ r~oning from Co~munlty Business (B-2) to G~neral Business (B~3) on a 0.71 acre parcel fronting appr0×~mat~ly t53 fe6t on the nort£~ line of ~illis Road, approximately 150 feet ~ast cf Jefferson Davis Highway. Tax Map 81-8 (1) Part of Parcel 65 F~r. Peele stated the Planning Commission nad recommended approval of t~e request. Mr, Jonn Dickey was present representing the was concerned with zoning B-2 to B~3 WithOUt eondition~ of wnnt trying to upgrade the area and the proposal is an improvement; Ayes: Mr. ~odd, Fr. Applegat~, Mrs. Qirone and Mr. ~ayeu. 86S041 In Midlotnian Magisterial District, THE UNITED STATES POSTAL ~E~¥ICB requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 79S102) to permit an e~ception to the 12,000 square foot gross ~loor area limitation ~or individual stores and shops in a Convenience Business (B-l) District on a 3.52 acre parcel fronting approximately 345 feet on the east line of Sycamore Square Drive, also fronting approximately 357 feet on t~ south llne of Wesffleld Road and located in the southeast qu=dr~nt of tu~ intersection of these roads. T~x Map 15--12 Parcel 1O4 (sheet Mr. Peele stated t~e Planning commission nad recommended approval On motion Of Mrs. Girene, seconded by PLr. Applegate, the Board 88-255 Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mr. Applegate, Mrs. ~irone and Mr. Fk%yes. A~sentz ~4r, Daniel. wo~k session on ~ne S~condary Road Six Year Pla~. It was g~n~rally agreed that since ~r~e Eoar~ me,ers would be out t~n d~ring that timee ~nat ~f the ot~r three felt it one could be ~eld i~ t~,=ir absence. Mr. Hedrick suggested me,ting. On motion o~ Mr. F~yes~ seconded by Mr. Doddr ~e Board adjourned at 3:35 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. on April 9, 1986. Ayes: ~r. Dodd, ~Ir. Apple~ate, NLrs. G~rone a~d NLr. ~&yes. Absent: Mr. Daniel. Ri~n~rff L. Hedrick County Administrator R. ~arland ~odd~-=~ Chairman