Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
12-14-1988 Minutes
~ OF Mr. G. H. Applegata, Chairman Nr. M. B. Sullivan, Vice Chairman Mr. C. F. Currin, Ur. Nr. H. G. Daniel Mr. Jesse J. Mayas Hr. Lane B. Ramsay County Administrator Staff in Att~.n~a~ce: Mr. N. ~. Carmichael, Ms. Amy Davis, Asst. to Co. Admin. ~rs. Doris De, art, ~egis. aves. and Intergovern. Affairs MS. Joan DOleZal, Cl~rk to th~ Board Chief Robert Eanes, Fife Department Mr. Bradford S. ~ammer, Deputy Cc. A~mln., ~r. William H. Eowell, Dir., Gem. Ssrvice~ Mr. Thomas E. Jacobsen, Dir. of Planning M~. Mary Leu Lyl~, Dir. of Accounting Deputy Co. Admin., Human Services Mr. R. J. McCracken, Tranmp. Director ~r. Richard McElfish, Dir, o~ Env. Eng. ~r. Steve Micas, Co. Attornsy Mrs. Pauline Mitchell, Dir. of News/Info. ~r. Jay Stegmaler, Dir. of ~udge% Mr. M, D. Stith~ Jr.~ ~r. David We!chonm, git. of Utilities Dir, of Ruman Mr. Appleqate c&Ited the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. (EST). 1. I~VO~ATION ~r. Applegate introduced Reverend John Brother~, Pastor of Gill G~OVe Baptist Church~ who gays the invocation. 2. PL~D~ OF ALLEGIANC~ TO T~ FLAG OF T~ ~]NITED STAT~S OF Th~ ~ledgn of Allsg~an¢~ ~O ~he Flag of tbs ~nlte~ ~tat~s of A/~erica was recited. On motion of Mr. Ceftin, seoonded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved tko minutes of November 23, 1988, as submitted. Vote; Unanimous absence of Mr. Randy Smith of the Times-Dispatch. Mr. Masden introduced Senator Robert ~. ~ussell and Delegate Stephen ~. Martin whose efforts in the General resulted in ~ app~opzlation of $50,00O fur a Ma~ter ~lam to quids the develo~en% of Pocahontam State Park with the participation of chesterfield County in matching ~aid funds. Mr. B. C. Lyn~s, Director of the Virginia Depar~e~ of Co~issioner of the Division of State 9arks, who will be Mr. Appleqate sxpressed appreciation for %h~ efforts of =hose undertaking and presented a check in the ~cUnt Qf $50,000. conducted in order %o ps--it various organization~, citizens, otc., an opportunity to contribute ~eir input relative to the future of th~ Pa~k. experienced approximately ~i~teen (16) major ~vi~ over the p~% y~r by licensing and/or fundin~ agencies and, as a result h~es in the region meeting all the p~=forma~ce standards, ~ealing with patient characteristics, performance standards and over 500 Federal regulatory ~tandaTd$~ etc. ~e in~roduced Dr. Phelan, Director of NurEin~; ME. Phyllis Anderson, Dirsutor mental Service~, who w~r~ p~e$~Dt and co--ended them and their respective staff for this dimtinghiShed honor. Mr. Daniel reported he aSCended the Capital Region Airport Commission (CRAC) meeting; tbs Richmond Area Transportation Planning Organization (MPO) meeting; and the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission meeting, which th= progress of purchasing the new builddng~ the amount of deem requirsd and a recommendation for nQ increase in dues wore discussed. ~e requested the County Ad~inimtrator to contact Mr+ Kid~, ~kecutive Director of the RP~DC~ to provide their racommeudations at the earliest possible date so that the Board may review them prior to the ~ext K~PDC meeting so the County's delegation may be instructed as to the Ceunty'~ position on the matter. Mr. Mayas r~ported he attended the Crater D~velopment Company, tho Tri-cities Area Metropolitan Planning Organi~ation and the Crater ~lannlng District Con~i$$1on meetings. Mr. Currln reporte~ he att~nde~ the Crater Planning District Cor~miss~on (CPDC) and the Appomattox Basin Industrial Develop~ ment Corporation (ABIDCO) meetings. ~e noted that at the ABIDCO ~ee~ing e status report was distributed regarding various types of potential industries that may be interested in legating in The region and suggested the Sirector of Economic Developmsnt provide the Board with that information. 88-917 ~r~ ~ullivan reported he a~tends~ the Richmond Regional Planning District Co~mis$ion (RRPDC) meeting; and the Lake Genito Committee meeting at which proceedings appea~ to be progressing well toward being able to offer a solution to future water problems. 0n mot~n u~ ~r. ~aye~, seconded ~y ~r. Curr~n, the Beard ~dde~ Item 11.C.7., Re~olution Supporting L~gi~la~ion Pe~ittlnq Lo=allties to Reduce =he Cost of Growth; added I=~m i!.D.~., R~qu~t for Bingo/Raffle Permit - St. Edwards-Epiphany School; regarding Item ll.A., Adoption of Re~olution A=thorlzlng Issuance of General Obligation Bonds or Bond Anticipation Notes for School and County Improv~ment~ and S~ttinq of a Public Hearing Date to Authorized the Appropriation of $25,3~0,000 for Capi%aI Improvem~nt~ and adopted the agenda, as amended. 7. R~$OAUTIONS AND SPECIAA R~COGNITIONS 7.A. CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE LOCAL EH~RGENC~ PLA~NIN~ CO~ITTEE On motion cf the HOard~ the following r=solution WaS adopted~ WHEREAS, The Chesterfield Count~ Local Emergency Planning Committee, one of 107 such conu~ittees in the State, has devoted mamy houf~ of volunt~ tim~ to the func%ionz of emergency planning; and W~ER=AS, The Chesterfield County Local =mergsncy Planning Committee is responsible by federal law for emergsncy planning and community right-to-know for the Cheaterfiel~ County citizens; and W~R~A$, The Chesterfield County Dotal Emergency Planning Co~ittee has contributed toward the outetanding relationship between the County and the indueCria! community, which would have been impossible to accomplish without the Com~ittee'e input; amd WHiP. AS, The Chesterfim!d County Local =mergency ~lannlng Co~ittee has completed ~he Hazardous Materials Emerq~ncy Plan Annex and purchased a data info~ation system for use in emergency ~ervices, whereby the Cogitate should be recognized NOW, ~EREFO~ BE IT ~EOL~D, that the Ches=erfield County Board of Supervisors hereby r~ccgnizes ~he Cheote~field County ~ocal zmergency Planning Cedi=tee and axpresses its appreciation for ~elr invaluable assistance to the County and Vote: Unanimous Mr. Appleqate presented the executed r~$olution to chief =ants and those me.ers o~ the Looal ~ergenoy ~lanning C~itt~ who and its citizens. ~r. R~m~y r~cogniz~d $~rgean~ ~olland of the virginia State Police Department who wa~ present and stated Sexgeant Eolland had informed him that an additional nin~ (9) state Trooper positions had been approved to patrol the s~ctlun of Route 288 in Chesterfield County when it is opened in t989, for a combined total of seventeen {17) positions assigned to patrol sections of the ~owhi~e Parkway aD~ Route 18~ in the County which are greatly appreCiat=d. SERVICE OR notion of the Beerd~ the following resolution ~as adop~dx WHEREAS, The Ettrick Volunteer Fire Department, the first fire d~purtment in chesterfield County, was organized in 1928 by concerned citizenz to provide fire protection to the gttrick community; and WIt~R~AS, The Department has operated continuously ~ince that date and is now celebrating their sixtieth anniversary; and WRERF~S, Over the year~ many public-spirited and dedicated individuals participated in gerving their eeg%munity through ~his volunteer fire company: and WHEREAS, ~he Board of Supervisor~ de$ir¢~ to honor and recognize the Ett~ick Volunteer Fire Department for sixty years NOW, ~HEREFORE BE IT REEOLVED~ tha~ the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes +~he contribu- tion of the past and present ~embers of thc Ettri~k Volunteer Fire D~partment to the citizens of Chesterfield County and extend~ on behalf of its members end the citizens cf field Connty their appreciation and congratulations on ~ixty years of dedicated service. ~r. Apple~ate presented the executed re~olution to Chief 3ohn D. Graham who accepted the resolution on behalf of the Ettriek Volunteer Fire Department and commended the volunteer staff for their contribution ~e the County. 7.C. MS. MARGAILET A. HOLMSCHUM, SOCIAL S~RVICES DE~ARTMBMT On motion of the Eoard, the following remolution was WB~R~A~ Ms. Margaret A. Holzmchuh will retire from the ~ocial services Department, Chesterfield County, on January 1, 1989; and WHEREAS, Ms. Holxschu_h has provided twenty-three years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; end WHEREAS, Chesterfield county and the Board of Supervisors will miss Ms. Holmmchv/n'e diligent servicer and WHEREAS, MS, Hoizschuh has teen a dedlea~ed and consci- entious employee whose competent and efficient manner with flnancia~ and statistical matters has brought credit to the Department and the ctient~ it NOW, TH~REFOI{~ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly reoognizes Ms. Margaret Holzschuh and extend~ on behalf of its ms, ers and the citi~en~ of Chesterfield County their apprucia=ion for h~r service the County. AND~ BE IT FURTEER RESOLVED, tha~ a copy of thi~ tion be presented to Ms. Helzschuh and that this resolution permanently recorded ~onq the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Che~terflel~ Connty, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous lution, co~nd~d her for many years 0f dedica=sd E~rvtce and 88-919 recognized family m~t~r$ who w~e present. 7.D. MRS. CARRIE M. ROGERS~ CHESTerFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD end faithful member of the Chesterfield COmmunity Services representative from the Midlokhian Dimkrlck on ~he Chesterfield reappointment; and WHE~AS, Mrs. R~gers has for a n~ber of years been an aotive VOlUnteer and concerned citizen Of Cheate~field County, serving in various capacities on %h~ Chris,am Mother c~ietee, th~ Chesterfield Senior citizens Council and othsr much impertant co~it~m and c~ganiza%ion~ and WM~AS, Mrm. Rogers i$ also ~ecognized am an advocate for human service~ throughout ~e C~onwmatth of Virginia, an~ WkQ ~n Rights C~it%ee, among ether appointments. NOW, T~E~FOME BE IT ~8OLVED, that the Chesterfield dedicate~ c~itment and significan~ contributions to Eum~n Services Progr~s, in general, and specifically, in the Ceunty. ~r. Applegate presented Mrs. Rogers with the executed reso- le%ion, seconded her fo~ her contributions to the COunty and recognized Mr. Rogers who was also present. fl. HEARTNG~ OR CITIngS ON UNS(~HRDU~.~M~TTRR~0RCL~TM~ There were no hearings of citizens on unscheduled matters or claims. DOUGLAS A, NYCE FOR CONTRIBUTION TO CEEETERFIELD COUNTY TRESERVATIO~ COMMITTEE On motion of the Board, the following resolution was a~opted: WHEREAS~ The Chesterfield County Preservation was established on February Ii, 1987 for the purpose of d~signatinq landmarks or landmark hit,s having ~n important historical~ architectural or cultural interest relating to the heritage oi the County and to protect same ~rcm alteration or destruction; and W~EP~Ag, The preservation of our heritage through the protection of landmarks and sites which can be appreciated and revered by future generations is of th~ utmost i~portance ths citizens of the County; WH~RRA~, Mr. Douglas A, ~yce, ~resid~nt of Investors Management Group~ Ltd,~ is no~ a resident of ~he Connty~ bun a successful entrepreneur Whose developments enhance the quali~y of life of thos~ desiring to live 5ere, reesgnizs~ the WHEREAS, Mr. Nyce has been instrumental in the continuation of thi~ important endeavor by donating to th~ Preservation Committee funds to purchase plaques which will be placed at all existing historlo landmarks, calling attention to all the eiunificanc~ of the structures or sites; and WHEREAS, Such activities serv~ %0 further Chesbe~fiold County's "Firs~ Choice" image. NOW, ~HZREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the CheSterfield County Board of Snpervisor~ does hereby recognize Mr. Douglas A. Nyce for his generous donation. do~s hereby express its appreciation an~ gratitude to Mr. Nyce for his interest in an4 contribution toward the quality of life in Chesterfield County. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Applegate sha%~d Mr, Ryce was unable to attend the meeting~ however, the executed resolution would be presented to him at a reception in hi~ honQ~ at ~agnolia ~ranpe at a future ~ate. 9.B. REQUEST FROM MR. BEN L%~G~RFBLT FOR COmPENSAtION FOR Mr, ~icas presented beck,round information relative to request from Mr. Ben Linqerfelt for compensation for destruction of poultry in the amount of $12,400 based on the claimant's assessment cf their value ag fighting gamebirda; explained bri~fly %he legal provision %or available to any ciaizen who has poultry destroyed by dogs running at-lerg~; etc. Mr. Philip ¢lauer, an Extension Poultry Spscialist a~ Virginia Polytechnic Institute e~d $tate University, briefly explained his review of the list of destroyed birds submitted by Mr. Lingerfelt an~ his reco~endation which he felt represented f~ir market value of the birds for non-cockfighting activities_ Mr. Charles Beddow, representing Mr. Linqerfelt, stated previous minutes regarding this claim refle¢~ =hat a report from staff should have been provided to the claimant, however, no such report was provided; sta~ed thex~ is no evidence that he is aware cf ~hat ~r. Lingerfelt engaged his gamebird~ in any type of illegal activity when his f%o~k was destroyed by doge; indicated additional information from other expertz in the State; and stated he had come prepared 'to compromise the financial value of the gamebirds in an a~ount halfway between Mr. Clauer's and Mr. LingsrfeLt's estimated values Rn~il the illegal activity allegation surfaced~ Mr. Applegatc stated information provide~ to him indicated that the gamebirds in question had been involved in fighting activities outside Virginia~ however, he felt that the matter of illegal activity ha~ no bearing on the in£orme:ion on which the Board must make its decision. Mr. ~eddow stated he felt it wag unfair t3aot such a~ report be submitted to tho Board without permitting him an opportunity to respond to it. Mr. Daniel uugqested it would be appropriate ~o defer the matter for thirty (30) days to permit Mr. Beddow an opportunity to review and respond to gaid On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Currin, the deferred un%il January l%, 1989 consideration of the ~equest by 88-921 Mr. Ben Lingerfelt for compensation for the less of poultry (33 gamebirds) which were destroyed by three dogs on his property. 9.C. APPOINTMENTS On motion Of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board appninted Mr. John V. Cegbill~ III to s6rve On the Chesterfield County Personnel Appeals Board, whos~ teim is effective January 1, 1959 through December 31, 1991. 9.C.2. COMMUNITY gBRVICES BOARD On motion of ~r. Currin, seaon~e~ by Mr. sullivan, the Board appointed Mr. Charles E. Jackson, representing the Be~nda is effective ir~mediately and will expire December 31, 1991. lQ. PUBLIC ~EARINGS 1D.A. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH TEE ROUTE 1/301 AREA SPECIAL TAX OR ASSESSMENT SEWER DISTRICT, TO CERTAIN TAXES OR AggESSMENT~ URON OWNERS OF PROPERTY LOCATED THEREIN EY ENACTING ARTICLE ~, GHAFTEN 20 Mr, Micas stated thia date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to con~ider an ordinance to establish th~ Rout~ 1/301 A~ea Special Tax O~ Assussment Sewek District, to construct certain sewer facilities ~herein and to impose certain taxes or assessments upon owners of property located therein by enacting Article X, Chapter 20 of the County Code. Ms. Barbara Parker, representing Dominion Real Estate Investor~, e~pr~sed concern relative to the establishment of said district, sba%sd her firm feels the amount of =he proposed assessment is ~nfair and would be a tremendous financial burden as the property is presently undeveloped, and requested abe matter be deferrPd to permit the~ additional time for further research. Mr. George A. Bsadles~ Jr. stated he hoped the County would extend sewer to this area to provide for orderly, quality development which would enhance ~he area but expressed concern as to wh~ther or not ~plsmentatlon of an a~e~sment district was the appropriate mechanism to accomplish this. Mr, Gibson Wright and Mr. Chris White voiced supporf for the proposed ordinance e8 they felt it would enable them to develop their properties to the highest and best use possible, enhane~ the a~sthetic appearance of the corridor and that eutablish/~ent of the ~ew~r assc~meat district would px0vide more orderly, quality d~velopment. Discussion, co~ents and questions ensued 'relative to the impact on ~he existing area if th~ s~wer assessment district were established, whether the district i~ an e~et er investment for the Co~nty, who pays for or benefits most from th% assessment district, cor~m~rcial/industriat development assessment die,riots versus residential assessment districts, the County's ~xistinq policy relative to assessment distriets~ etc. 88-922 After further discussion, it was on motion o~ Mr. Currio~ seconded by Mr. Daniel, resolved to defer consideration of an ordinance to establish the Route 1/301 sewer Assessment District and to authorize issuance of revenue bond~ %0 fund the projec~ until January 11, 1959. Vohe: Unanimou~ 10.B. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT SECT~O~ 8-17 OF T~E CODE OF T~E COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978~ AS AMENDED, KELATING TO THE APPLICATION DA?~ P0R TAX ~EL~EF Mr. Micas stated thie date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinauce ~o amend the Count~ Code to extend the filing date for the Tax Relief Program for the elderly and handicapped. ~r. ~. Everstte Carmlchael, Commissioner of Revenue, voiced ~upport for the propo~ed ordinance as it would extend the filing date fee the ?~ Relief Program ~or the elderly and handicapped from April I to December 31 of each year for first time filers and in cases of hardship. No one came forward in o~pcsitiun to the proposed ordinance. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board adopted the ~ollowing ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO P/~ENBAND ~EEN~CT S~CTION 8-17 OF T~ECODEOF 'r~s COU~T~ OF C~STERFIEL~, 1978, AS A~ENDED RE.TING TO T~APPLICATION DAT~ FOR TA~IEFi~OR -r~ELDEPJ~E BE IT 0t~DAINED by the soard of Supervisors cf Chesterfield County: [1) That Section 8-17 of the Cod~ of %h~ County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. ~-17. Procedure for claiming exemption. {a) The person or pe~on~ olaiming suck exemption shall file annually with the commissioner of revenue of the county, on forms tc be supplied by the county, an affidavit setting forth the names of the related persons occupying such real estate, the total contbined net worth, including equitable intereet~ and the combined income fro~ ail sources of the person or persons seeking to qualify. The commissioner of the revenue ~halI also make such furthe~ inquiry of persons seeking SUCh sxemption~ re~iring answers under oath, as may be reamon- ably necessary, including prO~uction of certified tax returns, ~o ~etermine qualification therefor. Such affidavit shall be filed no% late~ than April 1 of each year provided that such application may be filed nc later than December ~1 of each year by first time applicants or in cases of hardship a~ d~Eine~ by the commissioner. · If Such person is under sixty-five (65) years of age such form shall have attached %h~reto a certifica- tion by the social Security Administration~ the Veteran's Administration or the Railroad R~tire~ent ~oar~, or if such person is not eligible ~or certification by any of these agencies, a ~worn affidavit by two (2) medical doctors Iicanse4 to practice med~clne in the ~ommen~ealth, to the effect that such person is permanently and totally disabled. The affidavit of at lea~t one (1) of such doetoru shall be based upon a physical e×~mination of such person by such doctor. The affidavit of one (1) of such doctors may be based upon medical information contained in the records cf the civil service com- missioner which is relevant tc the standarde for determining permanent and total disability. Such affidavit shall be filed no later than April 1 of ~ach year. (b) SUCh exemption may be ~ranted fcr any year followinq the date ~ha~ the head of the househol~ occupying such dwelling and owning title or partial title thereto reached the age of sixty-five {65) years. Cha~gea in respect ko income, financial worth, ownership of property o~ other factors occurring during the taxable year for which the affidavit is filed and having the effeo~ of e×ceeding or violating the limitations and condi- tions provided heroin shell nullify any exemption for the then-current taxable year and the ~axable year immediately following; provided, however, that a change in ownership to spouse less than sixty-flv~ (65) years of age which resulted solely from t~he death of his or her qualified ~pouse result in a prorated exemption or deferral for the then-current taxable year. snot ~rorated portion shall be determined by multiplying the amount of the exemption or deferral by a fraction wherein the number of complete months of the year such property was properly eligible for such o~emp=ion or deferral is the numerator and the number twelve ~12) i~ the denominator. (6-27-79; 11-4-79, Section 1~ ~-12-$0, Section 1) Vote: Unanimous 1o.c. CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY AT GOYNE PARK FOR OPMP~TION OF FOOD CONC~$MIONS Mr. ~asd~n stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hmaring to consider the conveyance of a lease of real property at Goyne Park for the opera,ion of a food concession. Mr. Bill Fisher, Presi~en~ of ~he Chester Sport~ Boosters, voiced support for the conveyance. There was no opposifion present. On motion of Mr. Curtis, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the ~eard approved th~ convmyance of a I~ase of real property at Goyne Park to the Chester Sports Boosters for a period of three (3) 1, 1989 and endin~ DeeenfoeM 31, 1991. 10.D. APPROVAL OF C0$NTY'S 1989 LEGISLkTIV~ PROGRAM AND CONSIDERATION OF Ai~ENDMENTS TO TEE COUNTY CHARTER Mr. Micas stated this date and ~ime had been advertised for a public hearing to consider approval of the County's t989 Legislative Progra~ and amendments to the County Charter and suggested the two mac,ers be discussed individually. Mr. Mayos requested that an additional amendment be included in th~ 5~qislativ~ Program r~lativ~ to S~ction S.1 of the County Charter regarding the appointment of school board members by d~leting the phrase "and other members may" and include language "and the Board of Supervisors may only appoint the School Board m~mbere nominated by such supervisor." (The last c!au~e was not requested by Mr. Mayas.) Mr. Applegate stated that in order to includ¢ the propOSed amendment in ~he Legislative Package, if the ~oard so desired, it would be neCessar~ to take this item separately as an amendment to the charter and duly advertise =he mat%or for a public hearing on this individual item prior to the convening of the General Assembly on January 14, 1989. After a brief discussion, Mr. Mayas made a motion, seconded by Mr. Curtis, to include an additional amendment in the proposed 88-924 m amendments to the County Charter, relative to Section 8.1.r Education ~ Appointment of School Board Members, stating "the Supervisor from such magisterial dietrict shall nominate ~n ap~Iioant fo~ tho appointment who idsnti~ied himeelf at the prior public hearing and the Board of Supervisors. may only appoin~ th~ ~ohuol Board members nominated by []ach supervisor" (The last clau~e wac not requested by Mr. Mayes.) and s~t tho date of January 11, 1989, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to con[]ider said amendment, and if approved, that th~ propose~ amendment ha forwarded to the General Assembly prior to January 14, 1989, for consideration as part of the proposed 1989 Legislative Program. Mr. Daniel sta~ed, after discusstnns with the County Attorney, he felt it inappropriate to advertise the matter for a public hearing as the sole nomination of an applicant is tantamount to controlling th~ final appointment ~nd such a=tion would ho a waste e~ the publie'e time and may convey signals of fals~ hop~ and create animosity. Mr. SullivaD Stated he did not support bri~gi~g the matter back before the Boa~d as he felt the Board had enacted a Charter that wac carefully, completely and equitah!y considered and supported by the public, that ther~ was not sufficient justification to go back through th~ public hearing process on t~is issue. when asked, Mr. Micas stated, in his opinion~ th~ proposed amendment would violate the 196~ Voting Rights Act and world not be approved by the Justice Department. Mr. Mayee ~fated he considers th~ current selection prcc~$$ ~o be a violation of the one man/one veue mandat~ and requested that the Board either vot~ to 9~nd the proposed a~ndmsnt to the General Assembly for rsvlew or vote it down. Mr. Applegate called ~or the vote on the motion. Ayes: Mr. Currin and Mr. Mayes. Nays= Mr. Appl~gate, ~r. Sullivan and Mr. Daniel. Mr. Mioa~ briefly explained the proposed eight (~) amendments to the County Charter which wer~ identified during previous work ~e$siens regarding the County's propoeed 1989 Legislative Program and stated several of the amendments wer~ to some degree a product of the Growth Ce~ittee Re~ort. ~r. Bernard Savage, representing the Richmond Board of Realtors Association; Ms. BanS~i Barnette, Legislative Liaison for the Richmond MO~e $uilders Association; Mr. Mar~ Ch~istian~ a member of the Richmond Board of Realtor~ Association; and Mr. Phil Cunningham, a previous President of the Salem Elementary School PTA~ voiced concerns rslatlve to the impact of transfsr fees and impact fee taxes on the male of homes in th~ County; young couples' ability to purchase a "first kom~'1 in ~he future; growth paying for qrcw~h; that imposing a tEansfer tax may place new home~ ~t an un,air advantag~ oven if impact fees were enacted because the impact fees world be i~clud~d in the b~se price of a home; that new revenue should como from sources as broad based as possible; that transfer tax is not tax deductible~ etc. Mr, George A. ~eadles, Jr. expressed concern that implementation cf transfer and/or impact fees would place a financial b~z~en on the taxpayer aa well as the rate payer. There being nQ one else ~o address the matter, Mr. Appleqate eloped the public input and stated t~e next item o~ discussion would he amendments to the Charter language. Nr. Currin and Mr. Sullivan encouraged the Board to adopt the Growth Committeu Report as a package to ~n~ure the continued support of the entire membership of the committee and area developers, with an amendment to Item 9 regarding trans£er taxes of the proposed amendments to include the sentence "All revenues must be used to fund capital needs created by growt/5,w ~r. Daniel and Mr. Applegate ~tated they f~lt the language should be more broad based so the Charter may serve as a 88-925 ~le×ihle document for conducting the public's business and reguested that consideration be given to not quantifying the amount of the tax as such action is deriva~ t~rcugh ordinances and/or enactment of general law. Mr. Mayas stated he felt the constitutional rights o~ the residents of Metoaoa is a most important issne; that his request to change the Charter relative to the nomination/appointment process of Ocheol Board members being omitted from that document is denying those residents the privilege of selecting their own School Doard representative; etc. Mr. Appl~gate Stated the issue Mr. Mayas Was addressing had already teen considered and defeated and r~led Mr, Mayas out of order. Mr. ~ayes indicated that since his requested amendment was omitted from the Charter proposal, he would abstain from voting on other Charter proposalS. ~r. Daniel made' a motion, seconded by Mr. Applegute, to adopt the proposed recommended Charter amendments to ha forwarded to the General Assembly delegation for introduction in the 1989 General Assembly, with the following modifications: Section 3.5. Powers Item (k): To a~opt ordinances providing for the assessment of a transfer tax on the sale of all unimproved p~ope~ty and on improved residential property after the initial sale of such residential property. All transfer fees paid to the County shall be used to finance such capital facilities as are needed to accommodat~ population growth. S~ctiOn 7.6. Residential Impact Fees The Board of Supervisors may impose impact fees un developers, rs!sting residential development. All impact fees paid to the County shall be used to finance such capital facilities as are needed to accon~odate population growth. There was further discussion relative to adhezing to the Growth Committee's reoonunendatlon~ as submitted as ~t would be breaking faith with %he County's development cO~unity end others involved in the report process who endorsed the document if th~ ~pecific ~ax rates were' not included in th~ Charter lanqnage; that the Charter is the mechanism hy which ~he governing body obtains enabling legislatlon to enact such fees and the ~u~eunts of those fees should not be quantified at thi~ ~ime; Mr. Sullivan made a substit=te motion, ueconded by Mr. Cu~in, to adopt the proposed race,ended Charter amendments as submitted to be forwarded to the General Assembly delegation for introduction in the 1989 General Assembly, with following modifications: Section 3.5. Powers - Item (k); To adopt ordinances providing for the a~seasment of a transfer tax on the sale oS all unimproved property and on improved re~identiaI property ~fter the initial sale of such residential property which tax shell not exceed 0.5% o~ the sales price. Ail trausfe~ paid to the County shall be used to finance such capital ~aeilities as are needed to acaom~o~ate population growth. Section 7.6. Residential Imf=ct Eees The Boar~ of Supe~visor~ may impos~ impact fees on developers, relating to ~esidential development based on an at, cunt per square foob of finished space. The Board cf Supervisors may establish diffe=ent amOuntS per mq~are footage for separate ~welling-u~it Categories. Such fees shall not exceed $2,58~ per dwelling unit and shall b~ paid to the COunty p~ior tO the issuance cf an occupancy permit. All impact fees paid to the County shall be used to finance each capital facilities as are needed to ac=om~odato population growth. Mr. Applegate stated the ~card represents tho entire eitix~nr~ of Chesterfield County; he felt it imperative the Board realize the citizens of the County have indicated they are tired of paying far new growth with real estate taxes and measures must be assumed to deal with th~ ~ervice de,ands being plao~d on t~e County. Mr. C~rrin stated he felt the long-range impact of approving impact fee~ Mould be mere beneficial to the citizens of tho Ceunty than ie realized at this fime~ hewever, if there is not a commitment ko rheas persens who are willing to lobby for and support thia proposal, then it will fail. Mr. Apptegate call~d for the vote. Ayes: Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Currin. Nays: Mr. Applegate~ Mr. Daniel and Mr. Thers was further discussion relative Be the purpOSs o~ the Growth Committee to study ways ~o generate revenuss to meet coats primarily for schools and road~ in the County over n~xt £iva (~) years; establishment of a "pay as you philosophy rather than relying on bend issues er debt to finance capital need~; a coaumitment to those who endorsed the recommendations o~ the Growth Committee; ~he L~pact c~ transfer and impact ~ee~ on the sale of un~provedlimproved D~Opurties; the flexibility of the Charter language SQ :ha% it may be used as a mechanism for enacting a~Droved legislation; etc. Mr. Applegat~ made an amended motion, seconded by Mr. Daniel, to adopt the proposed r~co~end~d Charter amen~en~s to be forwarde~ to ~e General Assembly d~l~ga~ion for in the 1989 General Assembly, with ~he feiIowing Section 3.5. Powers - Item (k): To adop: providing for the assessment of a transfer tax on ~h~ sale of all unimproved prop~rey ~n~ on improved re=id~ntia~ after the initial ~ale of suck residential property. All capital facilities a~ are needad ~o acco~odate population growth. Section 7.6. Residential I~pact Fees - The Board of supervisors may impose impact fee~ on developerm, r~latlng residential development. All impact fees paid to ~ County shall be used to ~inance ~uch capital facilities as are needed to acco~odat~ population grewth. Ay~ Mr, Applegat~ ~nd ~r. Daniel. Nays: Mr, Sullivan and ~r. Currin. Ie was generally agreed to taSle ~urther consideration of County'~ 1989 Legislative Pro~r~ and ~men~men~s to thm Ceunty Char~er until after the rezoning ~e~ion as i~ was fo~ Mr. Sullivan to leave to attend a Virginia D~par=ment Transportation meeting. Mr. Sullivan excused himself fr~ ~e meeting. Mr. Applega=e r~que~ted the Beard suspend its rules to hear Item 11.~,2., Authorizatien to Proceed with condemnation of sewer Easement for Spring Trace S~division, mu% of ~quence. On motion o~ Mr. Maym~, ~econded by Mr. Coffin, the Board suspended ibm rules ~o hear Item ll.E.2., Authorization Proceed with Condemnation of a Sewer Easement for Spring Trace Subdivimion, out of Ayes= M~. Appl~te, Mr. Coffin, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Sullivan+ CONSIDER CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS ACROSS PROPERTY OE MRS. LAVELETTE ~. ~ENRY FOR A SEWER EASeMeNT FOR SPRING TRACE SURDI~I$~0N Mr. Wc!uhons sta~ed at its September 28, 1988 meeting th~ Beard 88-927 authorized the Right-of-Way Section to aid Spring Trace Associates in acquiring a sewer easement across the property of Mrs. Lavelette G. ~enry to serve Spring Trace Subdivision and further authorized the County Attorney to begin condemnation proceedings So the $~r~eyors could enter on the property; how- ever, action by the County Attorne~ was not necessary as Mrs. Henry allowed the surveyors on her property so the line could Be ~esigned. He crated staff has been unable to negotiate a settlement Wi~h Mrs. ~enry and is requesting the Board authorize con~e~tnatfon proceedings. There was discussion relative to the use of eminent domain, portions of previous minutes were cited regarding the proposed condemnation, tkat the easement was needed for the bet=erm~nt of the County; the need to serve the overall drainage area and will facilitate water and sewer servic~ in new developments for the h~a!th and ~&fety of the rauidentu: the total number of acres cf addi- tional property needing gu=ute s~wcr uervice, other available alternative routes; th~ Board'~ desires for water and ~ew~r sexvice in n~w developments ~cr tke healtk an~ safety of residents; e l~tter regarding the Nenry'm property; etc. ~hat may have been misinterpreted, stated that it may be ten (lo) to fi£teen (15) years before this property is developed, and that she intended to leave ~h~ property to her children. I~ was generally agreed to recess to locate the file containing Reoonvening: Mr. Applegate read a copy of a letter from ~rs. Henry to ~he Board. Mrs. ~enfy clarified the subject l~tter indicating she ~a~ ~nformsd the developers on several occasions she did not want to ~ell or p~rmit any additional ~a~em~nt~ aero~ ~r property and that such intent was reflected in the latter. Mr. Sullivan returned to the meeting. Mr. Welchons ~estated staff's po~ition regarding the necessary sewer easement and indicated the only ~ay to serve the entir~ drainage area was to cross Mrs. Henry's property. After further discuesion~ it was on motion of Mr. Mayas, with condemnation of a eewer easement for Spring Trace Subdivision across t~a property of Mrs. Lavalette G. ~anry. Ayes: Mn. Daniel and Mr. Mayas. Nays: Mr. ~pptegate, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Currin. On motion of Mr. Currln, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved and authorlz~d the Ceunty Attorney to proceed with condemnation of a .16' mewer eam~ment and 10' construction easement for Spring Trace Subdivision across the property of Mrs. Lavalette G. Henry~ the lucation of said parcel being in the Matoaca Magisterial District, Ta~ ~ap 76-2(5) 2. (A cody of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: ~r. Applegate, ~r. Sullivan, Mr. Currin and Mr. Daniel. Hays: M~. Mayas. ~8-928 The Board recessed ak I2:15 p.m. ~EST) to travel to the Holiday ReCOnvening~ ll.H. MOBILE HOME REQUESTS In Dale Magisterial Pistrict, B~TTYE. ST~PHER$ON requested re- newel of Mobile Home Per, it S3SR191 to park a mobile home on proper=y fronting the southeast line of Hill Read, approxi- mately 200 feet southwest of Canasta Drive, and better knowD as 6515 ~ill Road. Tax Hap 66-1 (3) ~pthill Gardens, Section I978. Mr. Jacobsen stated s~aff recommended approval of Case 88SR0276, subject to certain standard conditions. Mr. Robert Fitzgerald, representing MS. St~phcnson, sta~ed the recommended conditions were acceptable. There wa~ no opposition present. Mr. Schmalz stated County policy is to reql%ee~ that connection to public water and sewer facilitie~ be made ~here possibl~; however, public ~ewer is no% readily available in this area at property is acceptable. Mr. Daniel stated it has been hi~ pas~ ~eco~nda~ions ~ha~ such xequ~sts be approved for five (5} years ~athsr than, seven hardship does exist in that Ms. StephensOn is in ill health and has no other place to On motion of ~r. Dagle!, seconded by ~r. ~aye~, ~ Board approved Ca~e 88SR0276 for seven (7) years, subjec~ to the following ~tangard conditions= 1. The applican~ shall be fha owner an~ occupant of ~e mobile home. mobile home sit~, ~or shall any mobile home be u~ed for rental property. Only one (1) mobile hom~ shall permitted Uo bs parked on an individual lot or parcel. The minimum lot size, ~ar~ ~etba~ks, re,ired front yard, and other z~ning requirements of the applicable zoning district shall be co~plied with, ~xcept that no mobile home shall be located closer than 20 f~t to any residence. Re additional p~rmanunt-:ype living space may be onto a mobile home. Ali mobile hom*~ Sh~ll buskixted shall not be plac~ on a permanent ~. where public (County) water and/0~ ~e~er are available, they shai-i 6. Upon being granted a Mobile Home P~i=, =he applicant shall then obtain the necessary p~rmits from the office the Building Official. This shall he done prior to th~ in~tall~tion or relocation of %he mobile home. 88-929 Any violation of the above conditions shall be greusd~ for revocation of th~ ~obile ~c~e ~ermit. $$~R0277 In Matoaca Magisterial District, LONNIE ~ BETTI~ BOLTON re- quested renewal of Mobile Bome Permit 8~$R%9§ to park a mobile home on property fron%in~ the northwest line cf Shawonodases Road, approximately 300 feet southwest of Courthouse Read, and better known as 9012 Shawonoda~es Road. Tax Map 79-14 (I) ~arcel 8 (Sheet 22). The first permit wag i~ued on ~ovember ~, 1964. Mn. Jacobsen stated staff recommended approval of Ca~e BBSR0277, subject to certain standard conditions. Rs. ~ettle ~oiton stated the' recommended conditions were acceptable as tong as Condition 5 did not require connection to public sewer as it was not generally available and would place a hardship on the upplicant. Therm wa~ no opposition pre,est. On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr. Curtis, the Board approved Casa $8SR0277 for seven (?} years, subject ~o the following standard conditions: 1. The applicant shall b@ the owner and occupant of mobile home. 2. ~o lo~ or parcel may 'be rented or leased for use as a mobile home site, 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 ~izet yard setbacks, req~i~ed front yardt and other zoninq requirements of the applicable zoning district shall he ¢omplie~ with, ~cep= that nc mobile home shall be located cloger than 20 fee% to any existing 4. ~o additional permanent-type living space may be added onto a mobile home. All mobile homes shall ba skirted but shall not be placed on a pe~an~n~ 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 obtain the necessary permits from the Office of the Building Official. This shall be done prior to the installation cr relocation cf the mobile home. Any violation of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the Mobile Kome Permit. 888R0278 In Matoaca Magisterial District~ JA~ES A]~D V~AI{ Cl{~{}~ re- quesse4 renewal of ~obile Home ~ermit 83SR196 to park a mobile home on' property fronting the northwest line of ~hawonodas~ Road, approximately 200 feet southwest of Courthouse ~ead, and better known as 9006 Shawonodasee Road. Tax Map 79-14 Parcel 9 (sheet 22). The first permit was issued on Rovember 4, 1964. Mr. Jacobsen stated staff reso~ended approval of Case $85R0278, subject to Certain standard conditions. Mr. Applegate ~ta~ed M~s. Crane had discussed this matter with him and had requested a thirty (30) day deferral to resolve opposition present to the request for a deferral. On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr, Sullivaa, %he Bear~ deferred Cass $8SR027~ until January 28, 1989 so 5hat e~ncerns regarding Ownership could b~ r~eolved, Vote: Unanimous Ii.I. REQUESTS FOR ~EZONING 88SN0076 In Matoaea ~a~isterfal Distri~t~ J~I~ES E. ~, ~ A~ re- quested rezoning fr~m Agricultural IA} to Light Industrial {M-l) On a 4.9 acre parcel fronting approximately B~0 f~e~ on th~ north line of Carvmr ~eigh%s Drive, approximately 197 fee~ we~t of West Booker Boulevard. Tax Map 114-11 {1) ~a~$~I I iSheet 31). Mr. Currin disclosed to the Board that his company was involved in the sal~ of tk~ subject proper~y~ declared a conflio~ of in,erect pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and e~cumed himself fMom the meetinq. Mr. James Evan~ requested Ca~e 98SN0075 h~ wit~d~R~. The~e was ~o opposition to the reques~ for withdrawal. On mQtion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Beard accepted withdrawal of Case 89SN0076. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, ~r. Sullivan~ Mr. Daniel and Mr. ~ayes. Absent: ~r. Currin. ~r. Currin rsturne~ to the meeting. 879106 In Midlothian Magisterial District, ~RI~$X L. ~EL~q~ requested rezoning from A~rioultnral {A) and Co~t~unity Business IB-~) to Liqh~ Industrial ~M-1) w~th Conditional Use ~lann~d ment. A commerclal/ind~rial c~plex is planned. This ~uest lies on a 70.~ a~re parcel f~ontin~ on the south line of ~i~lothian Turnpike in four t4~ plaee~ for a total of ~pproxi- ma~ely 895 feet, also fronting approximately 253 feet on the east llnt of County Line Read. Tax Map 13 il) ~ar~els 23~ 24, ~r. ~aco~son stated the Planning Commission reco~ended denial (~Q) day deferral. the ramification~ of a proposed draft rec~ndatiQn for the ~pper Swif~ Creek Growth Management Plan which incl~de~ the six (6) month deferral would be aQceptable to the aDDlicant. Mr. Belvin ~tated this would b~ acceptable. On mo%ion of ~r. Sullivan, s~cond~d by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred Ca~ 87S106 unhil Jun~ 28, 19~9. 88-931 ~ Matoaca Magisterial Dis%fist, WILLIAM B. DUVA~ aND GE/~g ~. U~VAL requested rezoninq f~om A~ricultural (A) to Residential (R-9). A single family residential ~ubdivision is planned. This request lies on an 18.6 acr~ parcel lying at ~he easter~ terminus of Tip,on Street, also lying ut the northern terminus of Ida Avenue. T~x Map 149-15 (1) Part Of Parsel 1 (sheet 411. Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case 885N00~1, sub, act to a ~ingle condition. ~r. Dslmente Lewis, repre~entin~ th~ applicant, stated the reco~u~ended ~ondition was acceptable. There was opposition present to the proposed access for ~he project; fherefore, the Board placed the request in it~ proper s~quens~ On the agenda to be hear~. The citizen present in opposition to the request stated he would be unabl~ to r~main until suGh time as ~he case Could be heard and su~itted a letter %o the Board to be entered fn~O the recor~ relative to his concerns r~garding the matter. 88S~0197 (Amended) In Bermuda ~agisterial District, RAMBL~'~OOD TRUST requested zoning from A~ricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) plus a Conditional Uae Permit to permit an outdoor recreational facility. A single family residenfial $~bdivision, with resreational facilities, is planned. This request lies on e ~54.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 450 feet on the north line of Enun Church Road, approximately 800 feet east Of Ra~bl~wood D~ive, also lying at the southern terminus of ~ermuda Orchard Lane. Tax Map 135-5 12} Bermuda Ochre Co., Lots ?, 8C, and SE; Ta~ Map I35-9 (l) Parcel 2; and Ts× ~ap 1~5-13 (1) Paro~l 84 {sheet Mr. Jacobsen sta~ed the Planning commission recommended approval of Case ~$S~O197, subject ~o certain conditions and acceptance of proffered conditions. Mr~ Currin ~i~closed to the ~oard that he is part owner of the subject property, declared a conflict of interest pursuan= the Virginia Ccmprehansiv~ CenflSct of Interesf Act and e~cuSed himself from the meeting. ~r. Jeff Collins, representing the applicant, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable and indicated public waee~ and sewsr fa¢ilitles will be provided for the site. There was no opposition present. On motion of ~r. Appl~gate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board 1. A fifty (S0) foot bdffsr strip, exsIusive of easements and required yards, shall be established and maintained adja- cent to Enon Church Aced (Route 746}; and a thirty-five (35) foot buffer strip, e×clusive of eas~memt~ and required yards, shall be established and maintained adja- cent ~o Rer~da Orchard Lane [Route 8~). The area of these buffer strips shall either be left in their natural state, if sufficient vegetation exists %o provide adequate screening; or be planted and/er harmed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Planning Department, if sufficient vegetation do~s DOt exist to provide screening. Prior =o approval of any final site plan cr recordation of any plat, the ~evelep~r shall flag these buffer strips far inspection, and shall post a bond to cover the implementation of the land,cape plan, if such plan is required. Except ~or approved public xoad 88-932 buffer strips. These buffer strips shell be noted on any final sit~ plans, and any final ch~ck and recordation plats. The Planning Commission and/or Staff may modify this conditinn at the time of sit~ plan or tentative subdivision review. (NOTEs Limitations relating to access through designated buffer strips do not apply to public utility service, provided all utilities run perpendicular, rather than parallel, through the buffer and do not, in any case, require the removal of natural vegetation, other than that which is absolutely essential for the location of the service line.} 2. The plan prepared by Charles C, Towhee and Associates, ~.C., titled "~ochedals Hundred, Recreation Center~" dated October i8,' 1988, shall be considered the Master Plan for the outdoor rec~eatlenal facility, and be sub~ect to the following conditions. ~rior to approval of site plans Sox this recreation area, the developer shall have approved by either th~ Planning Director or the ~lanniDg either an overall road layout for this project end/or tentative subdivision plats. At the tlm~ Of approval of the road layout/tentative plats, the Planning Direc- tor/Planning Com~isslon may au~hurlze the move o~ the recreational area to a sultable location. (P&T) ~ours of operation shall be limited from ~:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday through ?hursday~ and from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., on Friday and Saturday. Parking 10ts stall be barricaded with e locked gate at al~ times Other than operating hoers. 4. Parking shall be provided on the basis of one (~) space for each ninety (90) ~quare feet of combined swimming and wading pool areas, and fnur (4} spaces for e~oh playing court. (NOTE= The Zoning Ordinance requires that all ~riveways and perking area~ for six (6) or mor~ vehicles be paved. Al~o, %he BOC~ Code requires two-way drive,aye to be a minimum of twenty-four (24] feet in width unless local ~gencies grant exceptions. On a routine basis, driveways ~erving parking lots containing up to fifteen (15) parking spaces to be twenty (20) feet ~n width are permitted: and drive,aye serving parking lots of si×t~en {16) to thirty {30) parking ~paces to be twenty-t~o (22) feet in width.) 5. There shall be no o~tside public address system or ~peak- 6. All exterior lights shall be ~rrenged and installed that the direct or reflected illumination doe~ net exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at ~he lot line of any adjoining residential or aqricult%ral parcel. Lighting s%andard~ ~h~ll be of a directional-type capable of shielding the light source from direct view from any adjoining parcel or public right of way. F~rther, ne e~terior lighting shall be higher than forty (40) feet. 7. In conjunction with final site plan review, and prior to the release of building p~rmits, a detailed landscap~ plan for th~ Site shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. This plan shall incorporate pedestrian and bicycle paths to provide tho greatest possible safsty and eonvenieRce of aocesu to th~ site from ~urroundlng identiak development. 8. A thirty-live (35} foot buffer strip, exclusive of ease- ments, parking areas, recreational facitit~e¥ and build- 88~933 ings shall be established and maintained along all proper- ty lines of the site. Where easements already exist within thirty-five I35) feet of the property lines, the buffer strip may be divided or eat hack, but shall not be reduced in total cumulative width. The area within the buffer strip shall be left in its natural state, or sup- plemented with bermst planting, fences, or gazebos, in accordance with the landscape plan (see Condition 7]. access shall be p~rmitted through this buffer except for shall be required by the laDd~cape plan (see Condition 7). 9. Public watmr and sswer shall be used. (U) 10. Only one (i) sign, not to exceed eight (8] square feet in ar~a, shall be p~r~ireed, This sign shall not be illu- minated nor shall it be lnmineus. A rendering of a sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. 11. There shall be one (1) entrance/exit onto Bermuda Orchard Lane for the proposed recreational area. The exact lo- cation of this entrance/exit ~hall be approved by the Transportation Department. IT) And further, the ~oard accepted the following proffered 0enditions~ 1. Maximum density on said property shall be 1.5 unit~ per 2. Minimum lot size shall ~e fifteen (15,0001 ~heusand square feet. (NOTE: The proffered conditions, as recommended by the Planning Commission and e~aff, apply only to the portion of the r~que~t ~ite located south of the e~isting ~aboard Coastline Railroad right of way.) Ayes: Mr. Applegate~ Mr. Sullivan, ~r. Daniel and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Currin. Mr. Curtis returned =e the mae=ins. 88SN0201 In Bermuda Magisterial District, ~CHAI~ ~. KING, dR. requeuted re,cuing ~rom A~ricRl~ural (A) eo COmmunity B~sinese lB-2) . A commercial complex is plunned. This r~quest li~s on a ~.9 acre parcel lying approximately 200 feet off the north llna of West ~undred Road west of Meadowwille Road. Tax Map 117-12 (1) Part of Parcels 2 and 4 (Sheet 33). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Pla~ning ~ommiesion recommended approval of Case 88SN0201, ~uhject to a single condition and acceptance of a single proffered condition. Mr. Curtis disclosed to the Board that although he is not aifiliated with the subject property it is ad)scent to a parcel that he owns~ declared a potential conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Conflict of Interest Act and excused Mr. King ~tated the ~eeOmmended condition is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, ~he Board approved Ca~e ~$N02~i, subject tQ the following condition: The required thirty (30) foot side yard setbacks along the eastern and western proper=y boundaries s~all be maintain- ed as buffers. Existing vegetation within ~heee buffers shall be retained where possible and shall be supplemented with landscaping so as to provide year-roun~ screening the view of parking areas from area residence~ to the east and the day care facility to th~ w~%. These buffers shall be provided with a readily availabls source of water ~or irrigation purposes. Other than landscaping, fencing, irrigation, and utilitiss that run generally p~rpen- dicular through the buffers, there shall be no facilities located in the buffsrs. A conceptual land~capinq plan ~hall De submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. A detailed land- scaping plan shall be submitted to the ~lanning Department for review and approval within thirty (30) day~ of rough clearing and grading. Th~ detailed plan shall include tbs general location of e~isting vegetation to be r~tained, the location of proposed vegetaticn and f~ncing, and sections through the buffers that depict how screening the site from area residences will be accomplished. The easternmost buf~sr may be modified at such time that adja- cent property is zoned and/or developed for a similar use. The westernmost buffer may be modified at suc~ time that the day care site is redevelcDed for any other permitted commercial use. And further, the Beard accepted the following proffered ~ondition~ .. The following B-2 uses shall net he psrmitted~ (a) ~utomohite service station. Carpenter and cahine~ shops. (c) ~leotrical, plumbing or heating shops, sale~ and service, (d) Printing shops. Theaters, except drive-in theater~. (f) Tool and equipment rental. (g) Other motor vehicle tran~portatloa. A~¢u: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Sullivan~ ~r. Daniel and ~r. ~ayes. Absent: ~r. Curtis. ~r. Curtis returned to the meeting. 88SN0203 In Matoaca Magisterial Die,riOt, F~E~E~H AYSC~ requested re- zoning from AgricuLtural (A} to Re~idential (R-9). A single family resX~en~ia! subdivision is plannsd. This request lies on a 22.I acre parcel fronting approximately 760 feet on th~ ~outh line of Spring Run Road, approximately 980 feet we~t of Bailey Bridge Roa~. Tax Map 9I-4 (t) Parcel 2 (Sheet 29). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Co--lesion record%ended apFroval Of Case 88eNO203, subject to a single condition and acceptance of prell=red conditions. Mr. Applega%e inquir=d if the subject tract wa~ conveyed to ~r. Ayscue's family when they purchased the adjacent trace. Mr~ Ayscue stated it was. Mr. Applegate stated, based on that information he would declarsa conflict of interest ~ursuant to ~he Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of In%eres~ Act because he is an owner of the adjacent propsrty and eXcUsed himself from the meeting. ' .... Mr. Frank Pott~, representing the applicant, Stated the recommended condition was acceptable. Mr. Phil Rome, reDre~entfn9 an adjoining property owner to the subject tract, sta~ed ~hers they were not notified of the original h~aring becuus~ ~e title h~d been transferred ~o a new o~er~ that 88-935 there were several modifications necessary te the proposal and requested a thirty (90) d~y deferral ~o resolve these concerns. Mr. Sullivan stated, in view of the stated concerns, the request would be placed in its regular sequence on the agenda. Mr. App!sgate returned to the meeting. zoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-~). A single pecker Road. Tax LaD 162 (1) ~arcel 52 (Sheet 49). Mr. Mayas stated, although this iS a small project and the r~que~ted u~e and r~zening appear to conform to the Southern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan, he did not feel there was sufficient reason to deviate from his position regarding approval of new residential rezoning requests without public water and sewer facilities and ~id not intend to deviate from that position. compliance ~ith requirements for Residential (R-88) zoning; feasibility o£ requiring public water and sewer for new residential projects; consideration cf current applications being considered under existing ordinance ~riteria; eta. It was noted the applicant could develop approximately four [4] lots under th~ current Agrie~Itural (A) zoning bet h~d been working with the Planninq Commission and staff in an effort to comply with existing policy regarding R-$8 zoning. On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr. Eullivan~ the Board Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Daniel and Mi. Mayas. 88S~0228 In Clover Hill ~agistsriul District, DAVID COLE~N~I~LIA~4S re- quested conditional Use to permit a two-~amily dwelling in Residential (R~9} District on a ~.5 acre parcel frontinq approximately 100 feet on the we~t line of Barkbridge Read, approximately 230 feet south of Drexelbrook Road. Tax 51-10 (2) Pennwood, Section 1, Block B, Lot 6 (sheet 15). Mr. Jacobsen stated the ~lanning Commission recommended approval of Cas~ ~SN022~, subject to a single eonditien and acceptance of proffered conditions. Mr. David Williams stated the recommended condition was a¢ceptab!e and submitted petitions in favor of the proposed request for the record. There wa~ no opposition On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by ~r. Sullivan, the Board approved Case SSSNO228, subject to the fcllowlng condition: The accessory uni~ shall be redesigned to include only one (1) enclosed inhabitable room segregated from the living room and kitchen. And further, the ~eard accepted the following proffered conditions: ©cCupaAcy of the second dwelling addition unit shall limited to guests of the property owner. At ne time shall the second dwelling addition unit 5o ren~ed or sold as a separate use. UnlaDe and until th% lob is rezonad to psrmi~ such ranting or sale. ~rior to issuance of an ouaupancy permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction indicating the r~qulrament in Condition 1. Thi$ shall run with the land. 4. Public water and sawer shall be used. 5. The property owner shall net request a separate address for the proposed second dwelling unite the existing property owner's address and mailbox shall b~ utilized. 6. The property owner sh~51 not request a ~eparate driveway connection for the proposed ~eeond ~wsIling addition. Vote: Unanimous In Clover Mill Maglstsrial District, C~)RDON M. BO~R~ requested rescuing fro~ Agricultural {A) to Light Industrial (M*i). An office/mini-warehouse facility is planned. This request ties on an 8.7 acre parcel fronting approximately $59 foot on ~he east line of Genito Place, also frontin$ approximately 340 feat on the west line of the Rout~ 2~$ right of way, approximately 1,320 feet north of ~snitc Road. Tek Map 37-13 (1) Parcel 6 (Sheet 15). Mr+ Jacobsen stated the Planning Conunission recommended approval of Case 8S~N0243 and acceptance of the proffered ~ondition$. Mr. Gordon Bowers s~a~sd the recommendation was acceptable. The~e was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Appt~gate, seconded by Mr+ Mayps, the Boa~d approved Case 88S~0243 and accepted the following proffered condition~: 1. A minimum fifty (50) foot building and parking setback shall be maintained a~jac~nt to Rou~e 288. Eowever~ the Planning Department wall allow reduction o~ ~he building providud that the vegetation in th~ r~duced set,ack pre- serves the high story tree canopy. Within the setback, all existing v~getation, elqht (~) inche~ in caliper or greater, ~hall ~ retained unless approved fOr.removal by the Planning Dep~r~ent. 2. A conceptual landscape plan ~howing th~ location of ~xis=- lng v=g~tu=ion to be retained and shying sufficient new Vegetation to break the visual monotony of =he building facades shall be submitted to the Planning Depar~ent for approval with the site plan. A detailed land,cape plan will be submitted to ~e Plan- ning Depar~ent for review within sixty (60) days after rough clearing and grading of the ~ite. 88-937 All signage will comply with the requirements for "limita- tion of $ig~s" iu the Corridor Overlay Distri=t. A thirty (30) foot right of way, measured from the oenterline of Genito Place, will be dedicated to and for th~ County of Chesterfield, free and Unrestricted, prior to release of a building permit. The rear of the property, consisting of not le~ than two (2) ~cres, which are bounded by Route 25~ and the side property lines, will be d~v~Ioped az a ©ne-~tory mini-storage facility. The design, materials, and celar~ of the mini-storaqa facility will be substantially the same as Chesterfield Mini-~terage, 11320 Iron Bridqe Road. The exterior walls of mini-storage buildings facing Route 288 and the side property tin~s will h~ Split c0n0rete masonry units as used in Chesterfield ~ini-$toraqe. Mini-storage loading doors will no~' face Rcu~e ~$~ or the side property llnes. Mini-storage mechanical equipment will be shielde~ and ~creaned from Route ~8 and the adjoining sites. The mini-storage facility will comply with "Development StandardS" (a), (d), and (e) of the Corridor Overlay District. The balance of the property will be developed in accordance with the "Development Standards" of the Cozri~Q~ 0verlay District. Vote: Unanimous 88SN0245 In Clover Bill Magisterial District, ~ENITO FOREST ASSOCIATES requested amendment to Cenditional Use Planned Development (Case 87S045) to permit an automobil~ repair ~acility in a Community Business (B-2) District on a 0~9 acre parcst fronting approximately 175 f~t on the morth lane o~ ~ull Street Road, also fronting approximately 263 f~t on the wemt line of Wood- ~ong Drive, and located in the northwest quadrant of the inter- ~eetion of these roads. Tax Map 49-10 (1) Part of Parcel 3 (Skeet 14). ~r. Jacobsen stated ~he Planning commission recommended approval of Case 88SN0245, Subject to certain conditions. Mr. Edward Willey, Jr., representing the applicant, stated the opposition present. Mr. Applegate stated he had discussed with ~r. ~illey remanding tha schematic plan to the Planning Commission for further review with Mr. Willey and he had indicated thi~ was acceptable aS his client has an application pending before the Planning Com~issio~ tO ~mend the plan. After further discussion, Mr. Appleqate requested staff provide the Board with schematic plan data in the future on Conditional Use Planned Development requests and that thi~ particular request be processed as expeditiously a~ possibls. On motiou of Mr. Applegate, seccndsd by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved an amendment to a Conditional U~e Planned Development [Case 87B045) to permit an automobile repair facility in a Cont~unity Business (B~2) District, ~bject to the followinq ¢cn~iticn~ 1. The following conditions natwithstanding~ the plan pre- pared by Jordan Con~ulting ~ngineers, P.C., dated ber 16, 1988, shall he considered the Ma~ter 91an. 2. Within the setback along WoodsOng Drive, a combination of harming and/or deccratlve f~nc~ng shall be installed to screen overhead doors f~om public view. The berm shall be on the landscaping plan pr~pareO by Jordan Consul%lng ~ngineers, P.C., dated September 16, 1988, end ~hall ba provided with a readily available source of water for irrigation purposes. Other than landscaping, fsn~inq, (1) sign to identify Ganito Feres~ $~bdivision, and util- ities that run generally perpendicular through the set- back, ther~ shall be no facilitie~ located within the setback. De:ailed sections through the setback, depicting hew ~creening of the overhead doors £rom Woodsong Drive will be accomplished, shall be sub~itted to the Planning Depar~ent for approval. And further, the Board supported ~he applicant's intent to resubmit the schematic plan for the Merchant's Tire Store to relative to signs and architectural style. in Matoaca Magisterial Dis=rich, K~ET~ ~YS~ requested re- zoning from Aqrfcnltu~l (A) to Residential {R-9). A single family residential subdivision is planned, This request lies on a 22.1 ac~e parcel fronting approximately 700 feet o~ south line of Spring Run Road, approximately 900 feet we~t of Bailey Bridge Road. Tax Map 91-~ (1) Parcel 2 (Sheet 29). Mr. Jacobsen stated the applicant has requested a thirty day deferral. ~r. Applegate etete~, based on that information relative to purchase of the subject property, h~ would declare a conflict of inheres= pursuaa= to th~ Virginia Comprehensive Conflict cf Interest Act as he is an owner of the adjacent property and There was no opposition to the reques~ for the deferral. On marian of Mr. Mayas, ~econded by Mr. Currin, the Board Ayes: ~r. Sullivan, Mr. Currin, ~r. Daniel and M~. Mayas. Absent~ Mr. Apple~ate. Mr. Applegate returned co the meeting. In Mato~¢~ ~gieterial District, WILLIAM B. DO~rA~ AN~ G~ H. DD~A~ ~equested rczoning from Agriculture1 (A) to R~si~en=ial (R-9). A single family residential subdivision is planned. Thi~ request lies on an 18.6 acre parcel ~ying aT %he eastern terminus of Tipton Street, al~o lying a~ the no~t~urn terminus of Ida Avenue. Tax ~ap 149-1~ (1) ~art of ~arcel 1 (skeet 41). ~r. Peele presented an overview of %h~ subject /equmst re!a~ive cabin,ion race--ended approval of C~se 88SN0091, subject to a single condition. 88-939 Mr. Delmonte Lewim, ~epresenting the applicant, mtated the A letter of opposition from Mr. Dennis Jarre:t, a resident of 2829 Tipton Street, relative to his concerns regarding the proposed access for the subject property was read for the record. Mr. Daniel excused himself from the meeting. case is the highest end best use Of the property~ the applicant has complied with ~11 requirements, and although there is valid concern reqardinq access to the site, he did not feel it necessarily sufficient to deny the request. Mr. Daniel returned to the meeting. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, the Board approved Case 88SN0091, sub,est to the following condition: A seventy-five (75) foot buffer, exclusive of setbacks and easements, shall be maintained along the eastern boundary of this ~ite. The area of thim buffer mtzip mhall contain sufficient plantings such that it contains 2.0 times the ~en~ity of plantings noted in 9ezlmeter Landscaping C [Zoning Ordinance, Section 21-67.22 (g) {3)]. The area of this buffer ~trip shall either be left in its natural screening; or be planted and/or bermed in accordance with n landscape plan approved by the Planning Department, if sufficient v~getation doe~ no~ ~x~t to p~ovide ad,quake screening. Prior to recordation of any plat, the developer shall fIag this buffer for in~pectlen, ~nd shall plan~ if such plan is required. Except for public road access(es}, no access shall be ~hrough this buffer strip. This buffer strip shall be noted on any final check and recordation plat~. The Planning Commission and/or Planning Director may modify this condition at the time of tentative e~bdivi~ien review. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Currin and Mr. Mayes. A~tention: ~r. Daniel, as he was not present during the discussion. 87S133 (Amended) In Dale Magisterial Dl~tr±ct, DOUGI~Z K. WOO~FOIAK requested rescuing from Agricultural {A)~ Residential (R-15), and Residential (B-7) to Office easiness (0) wiuh conditional Planned DevelopmeDt. An office/commercial ~d residential complex is planned. This request lies on a 125.0 acre parcel f~onting approximately 1,360 fe~t on the west line of Iron Bridg~ Roa~, also fronLing approximately ~,176 feet os fhe south line of Chippenham Parkway, and Iocat~d in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of %hess roads, also fronting on Doth side~ of Kenton Drive for its entire l~ngth, on the east line of Chicora Drive for its entire length, and approximately 325 feet on the north line of Gr&velbrOOk D~ive west of Iron Bridge Aoado Tax Map 41-13 (1) ~art of Parcel 1; Tax ~p 41-14 (1) Part of Parcel 6; Tax Map 52-2 Il) Parcel 1; Tax Map 52-2 {3) Gravelbrock Farm, Block A, Lots 1 through 5; and Tax Map 9~-6 (4) $ravelbzuek F~rm, D1ock D, Lets ~ through 9 {Sheet Mr. Jacobsen presented a brief overview of the propose~ re,nest and stated the Planning Cormmissi~n recommended approval, sub, eot to certain conditions and acceptance of pro~fsre~ conditions. Mr. Douglas Wo01folk presented an overview of thm recluest with e slide presentation exhibiting the proposed quality of the project, layout, nsec, acces~ etc. Me stated he has worked diligently with area residents and Hening Mlementary School to protect their property~ ensure tbs most minimal impact tO the ar~a add to provide an appropriate entransaway to the project to accommodate concerns relative to school and residential area traffic. Lieutenant Colo~el (Retired) Robert s. Bruce expressed concernm relative to the heavy siltation being experienced in Felling Creek, the potential of this project to accelerate siltation problems if adeq~at~ drainage control measures were not takea~ etc.; Ms. Carmenette Jervi$ expressed concerns relative to the proposed en%ranceway, traffic congestion, the dist~aOtiOn of students during spring/fall months by noise tavels when classroom windows are open for v~ntila~ion, e~e.i ~r. Elbsrt Howard, reprssenting the Dale Puritan Foundation, and Mr. ~eorgs Jones~ President of the Dale Rurltan Club, expressed concerns relative to the impact to State's proposal to four-lass Route 10 and the Ruffian Club's inability to have convenient access to a crossover on Route I0 based on VDOT's proposal; ~s. Royce Claytor expressed concerns relative to d~nsity, stub roads~ the height uf certain b~tldings, the saturation of the County with she~ia~ centers an~ there being no need for one in this i~ediate vicinity, the overall impact Of this d~velop~ent on the entire con, unity and requested to participate in future discussions if the Board approved the request; and ~s. Diane Hall expressed concerns regarding this project's impact on area schools, traffic, drainage, etc. When asked, approximately seventy-five (75) per~ons ~ood in opposition to the proposed request. ~r. Woolfolk stated he felt he hue addressed all the concerns expressed by area residents to the best of his ability to en~ure that the proposed project is a cpaallty development that will not adversely impase those a~jacent to it; added he would be willing be reduce the height of the propo~d office buildings to a more suitable height; would support the Board's deciuion relative to stub roads$ and would assist the Ruffian Club in whatever way pussihie regareing a crossover through tho median proposed by VDOT. There being no one else to addres~ the matter, ~r. Appiegate closed =he public input. ~r. Daniel stated he.was initially prepared to modify several of th~ race--ended conditions to strengthen them; however, with the infora~ation that had been presented r~lative to the proposed Transportation Plan and other matters, he felt he could not pass on a case of this maqnitude until all details were addres~e~. ~e stated the applicant's zoning is predicated upon the Transportation Plan, which it appearmd R~eded further review, and be felt it imper~tlve ~hat a meeting be scheduled immediately involving the Virginia Department of Transportation, Planning and Tran~portatlun staff, Mr. Wool~ulk, ares resi- dents, leadership of the Dale Ruffian Club, Father Gooch of the St. Barnabas ~piscopa! Church and that these involved proceed as expeditiously a~ possible to resolve these concerns. He addressed oQDcerns relative to d~ainage, maintaining a hardwood buffer along Chip~enham Parkway, no lounge permitted iu th~ proposed restaurant; and £urth~r requested written documen£a- tien from ~r. Woclfork regarding proposed eonstructlon of gas stations vis-a-vis Belgrade prior to the next meeting~ that the developer provide a mots d~tailed layout of the balance of the tract relative to the bank, restaurant and gas stations siees: and requested that MS. Claytor be provided with a copy of the ~ire Department's letter regarding their recommendation for the proposed entraneeWay. 88-94I Os motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Curtis, th~ Board deferred Case $7513~ until January 25, 1989. Ih was genarally agreed :o recess for two (2) minuteD. 88SN0165 In Matoaca Maqisteriai Di~t~ict, EAS~ ~ST pARTNer8 OF requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) ~o Re$i~entiaI (R-I2). A ~ingle f~ily residential ~ubdivi~ion i~ planned. Thi~ quest !ie~ on a 166.7 acre parcel fronting approzimately 1,966 approximately 1,545 feet on the east line of standers Sridge Road, and located ~outh~n~t of th~ inte~mection of these road~. stated the Planning Co--lesion reco~ended approval of from Agricultural (A) to R~sidentlal (R-15), subjeut %o a ~inglu condition and acceptance of proffered conditions. Mr. Jeff Collins, ~epresentlng th~ applicant, stated the conditions which included an a~diaional proffered condition re!a~ive to %he installation o~ a fence which wa~ submitted staff prior to the Board meeting; ~hat m~%ing~ w~re wi~ ~rea residents to resolve their concerns and that Mr. Don the project at the Planning Co~is~ion meeting and %hat he conv~y their support to the Board for the proposed dev~io~nt; an~ indicated that Mr. V~rnon Cou~in~, who also voiced support for the proposed project at that meeting, was pre~en~. There was lengthy discussion relative to the requested zonin~ not being in confo~ancs with the Southern A:ea Land U~m and · rans~ortation Plan; th~ applicant's proffered and singl, f~ily residential development; the availability of public water and ~ewer ~a~t of the request ~ite that would ensure the proposed development could be ~ervefl by existing infrastructure connections; the reali~ent/e~tension of Happy Hill Road a= proffered by the applicant being con~is%en~ wi~h rezonlng request by area property owners~ etc. M~. Vernon Cousins, Sr. voiced ~uppor% for %he proposed request ~ he ha~ reason to believe there may be public water to him %o replace the pollu=ed wall wa:er his f~ily is currently u~inq and that public m~w~ facilihi~ may available in =he fu=ure; the quality of home~ =o be in the proposed subdivision would be up~caled, quality homes comparable to or better t~an ~xisting homes; the realignmenL and extension of Eappy Hill Road will ~liminat~ ~xighing ~afety hazards; etc. ~e starer ther~ were other~ present in support Mr. Jerry Jernigan, a me, er of the Matoaca District Clti=ens and Transportation ~lan as adopted, should be adhered to proposed request is inconsistent with th~ Plan ~nd even with proffere~ conditions does not meet criteria for R-88 zoninq; and indicated that if the area had to be ~ transition area would hope that an ~-40 classification on one (1) acre lots with public water and sewer woul~ be that the applicant had met with the majority of property owners individuals have indicated their general support of the established for having higher densities located near sewer ~acilities as it would convey a message to othe~ that ~f they wish to ~evelop in chestsrSield Ceunty thsy consider ~ewer if they wish to hav~ higher density develop- closed tke public input. ~ion on this request ~isr~gar~ed the desire of the people who were responsible for developing that Plan and the g-88 zoning~ transition between th~ R-I~ and R-9 zonings adjacent subject property into the R-g8 area. ~e ~tated, although he could not disregard =he wishes of those individuals who worked willing to defer the request for sixty (60) days to ~ive the at a b~tter transition in the area, Mr. Mayas made a motion, seconded by Mr, Daniel, %0 defer Cass opportnnity to reconsider the request and arrive' at a be=tar (e.g., R-gg) and water/sewer facility connections are not u~er$ to pay for the wader/sewer systems versus the financial classifications if utility facilities were use~; user ~ees per maintaining the system~: W-nan asked, Mr. Collins stated the applicant cannot accept a contra=t obligations. ~r. sullivan stated be felt this proposal p~ovides the Opportunity to provide public facilities to this area n~ the County; a policy regarding the use of than R-15; approved ~esidential {R-IS) zoning and acceptanc~ of the following pro,fared condition~: 88-943 1, Overall density of development shall be two (2) units per acre or less, exclusive of right cf way. Happy Hill Road shall be realigned to be routed through the suhjeef parcel in general conformance with the plan as proposed by the Chesterfield County Transporta=ion Depart- 3. A fifty {50) fo~t buffer shall be provided along that per,ion of Happy Hill Road lying north of the proposed relocated alignmmnt of Happy Hill Road. 5andscaplng in accordance with the landscaping "A" requirements of the Overlay District standards shall be provided within the fifty (50) foot buffer along Happy Hill Road wherever use o~her than mingle family ~e$id~ntial is d~ve~op~ (i.s., church site). 4. Restrictive ~ovenante shall he recorded prior to the recordation o~ lots in this development that ara equal to the existing restrictive covenants for existing Creek Subdi¥izion. ~ubli¢ sewer and public wate~ shall be used. 6. A thirty (30) ~oot buffer shall be maintains4 adjacent to the property pre,early owned by Vernon Cousins, Sr. This property is presently described as Tax Map 132-6 Paroel~ 3, 4, and 31. In addition, evergreen trees shall be planted withi~ the limits of the buffer to adequately visually ~reen th~ Cousins property. Initial trees shall be a mlaimum of five (5) £esf in height and planted in a staqqered formation of two (~) rows with the trees eight (8) foot on oenters in each row. 7. ~n addition to the buffsr and plantings outlined in proffer %6 the applicant shall install a wire security ~ence ~0 ~set off the property line of tax map 132-6-(1) parcel~ 3~ 4 and ~1 being fhe property Qf Ve~DQn St. at the tlms of developing and recordinq lots adjacent to this property. There was further discussion relative to adjacent zoning classifications as compared to the recommended R-15 zoning for the ~ropesed request; whether er net the z~quested R-12 zoning with proffered conditions may be more beneficial to the community ~hau ~h~ recem~ended R-l~; kyes: ~r. Daniel. Nays= Mr~ Applegate~ Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Currin and Mr. Mr. Cu~rin made a motion, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, tc approve Residential (~-12) zoning, subject =o =he following condition: A fifty (50) foot buffer strip, exclusive cf easements and required yards, shall he established and maintained adjacent to both Drander~ Bridqe Road (Route 625) and Happy ~ill Road (Route 619), including both sides of ~ppy Hill Road (realigned) that is proposed to be through the subject property. The area of this buffer strip shall either be left in it~ natural ~tate, if sufficient vegetation exists to provide adequate screen~ ing; or be planted and/or bermed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by =he ~lanning Department, if sufficient vegetation does not exist fo provide adequate sczeenln~. ~rior to approval of any final ~ite plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shall ~lag this buffer fur inspection, and shall post a bond to cover implementation of the landscape plan, if such plan is access shall be permitted through this buffer strip. This bu£Ser strip shall be noted on any final site plan~, and any tlnal check and recordation plats. The Planning Cc~mi~sion may modify this condition at the time of site plan or tentative subdivision review. {PAT) And further, the Board accepted the fotlowiDg proffered conditions: 1. 0retell density of development shall be two {2) units per acre cr less, exclusiv~ of right of way. 2. Happy Hill Road shall be realigned to be routed through the subject parcel in general conformance with the plan as proposed by the Chesterfield County TransDortati0n Depart- 3. A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be provided along that portion of Happy Hill Road lying north of th~ proposed relocated alignment of Happy Bill Road. Landscaping in a~cordance with the landscaping "A" requirements of the 0v~rloy District standards shall be provided within th~ fifty (50) foot buffer along Happy Hilt Road wherever a use Other than single family rssldential i~ d~veloped (i.e., church site). 4. Restrictive' covenants shall be recorded p~i~ t~ the r~cordation cf lots in this development that are equal to the existing restrictive covenants for existing Stony Creek Subdivision. 5. Public ~ewer and public welex shall be used. 6. A thirty (30) foe% buffer shell be maintained adjacent to the property presently owned by Vernon Cou~np, Sr. This p~operty is pre~entiy described as Tax asp 132-6 (1) Parcels 3, 4, and 31. In addition, evergreen trees shall be planted within the limits of the buffer to adequately visually screen the Cousins property. Initial trees shall bsa minimum of five (5) fe~t Ln height and planted in a staggered formation o~ two (2) rows with the trees eight 7. In addition ~o the buffer and plantings outlined in proffer %6 the a~plicant shall install a wire security fence 30 f~et off the proper=y line of tax mad 132-6-(1) parcels 3, 4 and 31 being the property of Uernon Cousins, St. at the time of deve!opln~ an~ recording lots adjacent to this property. Ayes= Mr. Applegate~ Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Cunrin and Mr. Daniel. Nays= ~r. Mayas. 88SN0192 In Midlothian Magisterial District, ~. Di%LE Pi%.RRI~ r~quested Conditional Use tn permit an office ~ in an Agricultural (A) District on an ~.Q acr~ paroelfronting approximately 13~ feet on the soutk line of Ro~ious Road, also frontin~ approximately 289 fast on ~von Avenue, and located in the $outheas~ quadrant of th~ inter,eerieR o~ these roads. Tax Map 17~7 {3) Avon Park, Lot 3 ISheet 8). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Co~missiOD recommended denial of Case ~S~0~92; however, they stated that if a~ea residents concerns coul~ be resolv~ prior ~o t~e ~oard of Supervisors puklic hearing, the Commission would recommend approval o£ th~ request, subject -to certain conditions. He stated staff received a letter from are~ residents stating they preferred the case be denied; however, if the ~oard were to see fit to approve the case, then they would like the r~co~ende~ cOndi- tions to be imposed. 88-945 acceptable, Thsre was no opposition present. On motion of ~r. Sullivan~ Seconded by Mr, C~rrin~ the BOard approved Case 885N0192, subject tO the following conditions: 1. The ~ollowlng conditions n0twi~hstanding , t~e Dian pre- pared by Dean E. ~awkins~ ASLA~ dated J~Iy 13, 19SS, shall be considered th~ plan of ~evelopment. (P) 2. Public water shall be used. At such time as the existing structure is enlarged and/or a new mtruetu~e erected on five (5) year period to permit a permanent office um~ on the propsrty, tbs owner shall exten~ public sewer to th~ p~eperty and connect all structures to the public system. Driveways and parking areas shall be paved with concrets, bituminous concrmt~, tar and gravel, or other similar material (such as brick, cobblestone, waffIs pavers) as approved by th~ Planning Department. Curbing material such as brick, cobblsstone~ er timbers shall be installed around the perimeter of driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be demigned so as not to interfere with pedestrian traffic. (P&EE) (~OTE: The ~oning Ordinance r~qulr~s that ail and parking areas for six (6) er more vehicles be paved.) 4. There shall be no direct anc~s~ to Robiou~ Road. {T) 5. Prior to the' release o~ an occupancy p~rmit forty-fiv~ (45} feet Of right of way, measured ~rom the ceuterline Rebio~ Road shall Chesterfield, free Signs shall be as home occupation~. be dedicated to and for the County of and unrestricted. (T) regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for This Conditional Use ~hell be granted to and for L. Dale P&rrlsh only end shall not be transferable nor run with the land. No more than two Parrish, shall be (2) employees, not to includs L. Dale permitted. (P) structure shall be maintained. Driveway and parking ar~a~ ~h~ll ~e screened ~rom view of determined at the time of $i~e plan review. and 5~0 p.m., Monday through Friday. There shall bo no 5. Dale Parrish's insurance company. This Conditional Use shell be granted for a period nut to exceed five (5) years from ~he date of approval~ (P) wae ~enerally agreea to rece$s for t~o 12) minutes. I0.D. APPROVAL OF COUNTY'S 1989 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM AND CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO ?HE COUNTY CHARTER There was further discusaion relative ko general support for th~ r~o~en~ations Of the Gr0w%h Committee Report but not action to quantify the amount of the transfer and/or impact fees at ~hi~ time; "good faith" oemmlt_mant for the endorsement of the entire packaqe~ etc. Mr. Daniel made a motion, seconded by Mr. Appleqate~ to adopt the proposed recommended Charter amsndments to be forwarded to the G~neral Assembly delegation for introduction i~ ~he 198~ ~n~ral Assembly, wish the roi'lowing modifications, and with th~ under~tanding that the County's proposed 1989 ~gislatlve ~rogram would include language specifying the reeemmende~ amount of impact rates as submittsd in the Growth Ceuu~ittee ~eport= Section 3.5. Powers - Ita~ (k}: TO adopt ordinances after th~ initial sale of such r~eidentiul property which ta~ paid to th~ COunty ~hall be u~ed to ~inance such capltal facilities as are needed to ac¢on~odate population qrewth. Supervisors may impos~ impact ~ees on residential development, All impact fees paid te the County shall b~ ~s~d to finance growth. Rt. ~icas presented an overview of the r=vlsed proposed 1989 County Legislative Program, indicating an additional item would ~e included relative to the recommended language from the Growth Con~ittee Report ~ga~ding impact foes, a regional gas tax, and the inCluuion of an ordinance amendment to allow counties the ability to cate and proaesute under Section 46.1-65(e} operators of mOtOr vehicle~ owned by co~po~a~ions, businesses, par%norship~ or associatien~ for failing to obtain and display COUnty licen~ tags or decals upon euch motor vehicles. Mr. Daniel sta=ed he felt i~ inappropriate for hi~ to vote on the item relative to the inclusion of an ordinance amendment to allow counties she ability to cite end prosecute under Section 46.I-65(e) operators of motor vehi¢ie~ owned b~ eorporation~, busiDosses, paxtnerskips er aeec~iatien~ for failing to obtain and dieplay county license tags or decals upon such motor vehicles as his employer maintains many such vehicles in Chesterfield County. Aftsr a brief discussion, it was o~ ~otion of Mr. Sullivan, ~ecnnded by Mr. Currin, resolved to include in the proposed 1989 Leqislative Program, Section V. - Criminal J~$fice, an item relative to ordinance amendment %o allow counties, the ability t~ cite an~ prosecute under operators cf motor vehicles owned by corporations, businesses, partn~r~hip~ Or assooia=ions for failing to obtain an~ display county license teqs o~ decals upon such motor vehicles. 88-947 Abstention: Mr. Daniel~ as he felt it inappropriate to vote because his ~mployer maintains such vehicles in tko County~ and Charter that nominahion~ for School Board members from a district be made only by tks suDervisor from that district was not included in the adopted the balancs of the draft 19~9 L~gislativs Program, as amended, a copy of which is filed with the papers of thi~ Board. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Currin and Mr. Daniel. ~bst~ntion~ Mr, Mayes, aS his suggested amendment to the Charter that nominations for School Board members from a dis%riot be made only by ~he supervisor from that district wa~ n~t included in th~ proposal. (The last~c!ause was nut requested by Mr. May~.) N~WBUBINE$$ ADOPTION OF NESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUA~C= OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OR BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR SCHOOL AND COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMenTS AND SETTING OF A PUBLIC HEARING DATR TO AUTHORIZE T~E APPROPRIATION OF $25,300,~0U FOR CAPITAL On mot~on o~ ~r. Daniel, saconded by Mr. ~aye~, tbs Board adopted the following resolution authorizing the issuanc~ of General Obligation Bonds or Bond Anticipation Notes for School and County capital improv~ment~ and set the date of January i1, 1989, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to authorize the appropriation of $25,300,000 for said capital improvement~: A R~O~UTIONAu'r~0~IXINCARD~i%f~/DT~G FOR 'r~ ~L~ {$23,900,000) P~CIP~ ~URT OF P~LIC WI~ ~S~CT TO T~ ISSU~ ~ ~ OF A LI~ ~ OF P~LIC I~RO~ BO~ ~TICIPATIO~ N~8 IN S~CTION 1. (a) ~indinqs and De~e~inations. (a) Pursuant amended (the ~e being the P~lic Finance Act), an election and an Order of the Circuit Court of th9 County dat~ December hundred sixty-five million eight hungry4 thousand dollars hundre4 thirty-f~ve million n~ne hundred thousand County, including the acquisition of s~tss for future eleven million six hundru~ thousand dollars ($11,600,000) provide patti= ~afety improv~ent projects in the Co~nty~ i t i (iii) general obligation bonds in the maximum amount of five million three hundred thousand dollars ($5~300,0001 to provide park and recreation improvement projects in the County; (iv) general obligation bonds in the maximum amount of seven million one hundred thousand dollars {$7,100,008} to provide library improvement projects in %h~ County; and ~v) general obligabion bonds in the maximum ~mount cf five million nine hundred thousand doll&ss ($5,900,000) to provide mental health and mental r~tardat~on improvement projects in the County. lb) Pursuant to S%ctien 15.1-189 of the Public Finance Act, the School Board of the County on Decembe~ 13~ 1988 adopted a resol~tioB ~=questing the Board cf Supervisors ho issue general obligation bonds in the principal amount of one hundred thirty-five million nine hundred thousand dullars ($135,5O0,808) for capit~l school improvement projects in the County as authorized by the voters of th, County at the aforementioned election held on November 8, 1988. (c) AS of the date hereof, none of suah general aforementioned election held on November 8~ 1988 hay= b~en i~ued by the County, and the Board of ~upervisor~ deems it advisable an~ in the best interests of the County to uuthorize and provide at this time for the issuance, sale and delivery of twsn~y-~hree million nine huadred thousand dollars ($23,980,000~ aggregate principal ~mount of such gen~ra~ obligation bends for the following purpoe~: (i) seventeen million one hundred ninety-five thousand dollars {$17,195,000) for capital school improvement projects in the County; (ii) two million one hundMed nineteen thousand ~oll~r~ tS2,I19,000) to provide public safety improvement projects in the County; (iii) two million eight hundred thirty~five thousand dollars ($~,$~,000) for park and recreation improvement projects in the County; (iv) six ~undred fifty-one thousand dollars ($651,~00) for library improvement projects i~ ~he County; and (v) one million one h~ndrod thousand dollars in the County. $~C~ION 2. A~thorization of Bonds~ FOr the purpose of financing the cost~ of various capital improvement projects of the County, as described in Section 1 {el hereof, there are hereby authorized to b~ i~$ued, sold and delivered an issue of ($23,9~0,000) principal amount of general obligation bonds of Bonds" (hereinafter referred to as the "Bonds"l. The Bonds mhatl be issued and sold in their entirety at one time, or from tim~ to ti~e in part in series, as shall be determined by the County Administrate~ of tho County. The ~onds may be ~ol~ at th~ sam~ time as other general obligation bonds are sold by the per ~nnum ae shall be specified in the hid accepted by subsequent resolution of th~ Board of Supervisors ~or the purchase of the Bonds of such eerier, if any bid therefor be accepted. The County Administrator is authorized to determine, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this resolution: whether the Bonds of any series shall be in fully-registered er hoek-~ntry form; the .denomination or denominations of the Bends; the method of numbering the Bonds; 88-949 the date or dates of the Bonds; the interest payment dates thereof; the ~aturity date~ thereof; the amount Of principal maturing on each maturity date; the place or places of payment thereof and the paying agent Or paying agents therefor; the piece or places of registration, exchange or transfer and the registrar therefor: and whether er not the Bonde shall be subject ~o redemption prior to their stated maturity or maturities and if subject to such redemption, th~ premiu~ if any, payable upon suuh redemption and the respective periods in whist such premiums are payable. SECTION 3. Appointment of Registrar; Paym=nt of Sends; Books Of Registry; Bxchang~. and Transfers of (a) Appointment o~ Be~istrar. subject to the approval of the Board of S~pervlsors by subsequent resolution adopted on the date of the sale of the Bend~, the County Administrator is hereby authorized to select th~ Registrar for the Bonds (hereinafter referred to as the "Registrar"), which Registrar may be the County Treasurer. (b) ~ayment of Bc~ds. (i) At any tLms during which the Bonds of any series shall be in fully registered form, the interest on the Bonds of such series shall be payable by check er draft mailed by the Registrar to the registered owners the Bonds of ~uch ~eries at their addr~ss=s au the ~ame appear on the books of registry as of %he record date for the payment and premiem, if aey~ On the Bonds shall be payable at the principal office of the Registrar. (ii) At any time during which the Bonds of any series shall be in book-entry form, the principal of and premitu~ if any, and interest on the Bonds of such series shall be payable in accordance with the arrangements made with th~ depository (iii) The principal of and pre~ittm, if any, and inter~s~ the Bond~ ~hall b~ payable in ~uch coin or currency of the (i} At all t~e~ during which any Bond remoras out,tending and unpaid, the Reqistrar shall keep or cause to be kept at its principal o~fice, books of regLstry for the regi~tration~ exchange and transfer of the Bends. Upon presentation at the principal offic% of %h% Registrar for such purpose, the pre~cribe~ shall register, exchange, transfer, or cause to be registered, exchanged or transferred, on the books of the Bonds as herein set forth. (ii) A~y ~ond may be exchanged at the principal office Bonds in order authorized principal ~ounts of the interest rate and maturity. (iii) An~ Bond may, in accordance with its te~s, transferred UpOn the book~ of registry by the person in whose ~uly executed by ~he registered owner in person or hi~ duly au~orized agent, in form smtisfactory %o thc ~ugistrar. (iv) All transfers or exchanges pursuant to %hi~ Section 3lc) shall be made without expense to the holder of such ~xc~pt a~ othe~i~e herein provided, and except that the Registrar shall re,ire the pa~ent of the holder of the q0ver~ental charge~ required to be paid with respect to such 88-950 transfer er exchanqe. All Bo~ds surrendered pursuant to this Section 3(c) shall be cancelI~d. cf the Board of Supervisors by subsequent resolution adopted on the date o~ sale of the Bonds, tko County Administrator shall determine the provisions far th~ ~edsmption of the Bonds. (b} ~etice of Redemption. ~otice of any such redemption shall be mailed not less than thirty (30) days p~±or to the date fixed for redemption by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner cf the Bonds to be redeemed at such owner's address as shown on the books of %he registry. Such notice shall speci£y the date, numbers and maturities Of th~ Bond~ to be redeemed, the date and placed fixed for their redemption and the premium, if any, payable upon such redemption, and if less than the entire principal amount 0~ any Bond ia to be redeemed, that such Bond must be surrendered in the exchange for the principal amount thereof ~o be and the issuance of a new Bond equalling in principal amount that portlon of tAe principal amount thereof not redeealed, and thereon to th~ date fixed for redemption, and that from and (c) Effect of Redemption. When notice uf redemption Of any Ponds $hslI have been given as hereinahove set forth, their redemption at a price equal to the principal amount thereof and redemption premium, if any, thereon, together with such redemption price shall have been duly made or provided ~demptlon, All redeemed Bonds shall be cancelled and not Identification Numbers. (a) Execution of ~cn~s. The Bonds ~hall be ¢×~cuted in the Chairman an~ the CLerR of the Board of S~Der¥1sors, and corporate seal of this Board ~hall be impressed, er a facslm~l~ thereof printed, on the Bonds. (b) Authentication of Bond~ The County Administrator Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose unless and until the certi£1oate of authentication endorsed on such Bond date a~ of which such RQ~d is authenticated as follow~: (i) if dat~, the eertiflcate shall be dated as of the date the Bonds are delivered to and paid for by thm initial purchasers thereof; (ii) if the Bond is authenticated upon an interest payr~ent date! the certificate shall be dated aS of such interest p~yment date, [iii) £~ the ~cnd is authenticated on or be dated as of such interest payment date; and (iv) in ali other instances th~ certificate shall be dated upon which the Bond is authenticmted. The execution and authentication of the Bon~s in tko manner above set forth is adopted as a due and (c) CUSIP Identification Numbers~ CUSIP ide-tification numbers may be printed on ~he Bcn~s, but neither the fail,re to print any such nu/~her on any BoDds, nor any error or omission with respect thereto, shall constitute cause for failure or refusal by the euecessful bidder for the Bonds to accept delivery Of andpay for the Bonds in aucordancewlth the terms of its proposal to purchase the Bonds. NO such number shall constitute or be deemed to be a party of any Bond or a part of the contract mvidenced thereby and no liability shall attach to the County or any o~ its officers or agents because of or on account of'any ~ueh'number or ~ny use made thereof. SECTIO~ 6. Tax Covenant. The County covenants and agrees to comply with th~ provislo~s of Sections 103 and 141~150 of the Internal Bev~nu~ Code of 1986, as amended, and t~he applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder throughout %he term of the Bonds. and credit of the County shall b~ and is hereby irrevocably pledged to ~he Duno~uaI payment of the principal e~ and interest cn the Bonde a~ the same beCOme due. There ~hall be levied and collected an~ua!!y, at the ~ame time and in the same manner as other taxee are aezessed, levied and collected, ad valorem :axes limitation as to rate er amount, s~ffie~ent to provide for the payment of the principul of and interest on the ~onds as the same respectively become due and payable. ~ubstantially the for~ set forth below with such necessary or appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are incidental to their numbers, inter,ct rat~ and maturities or ae are otherwise permitted or required by law or this resolution: [~C~] COU~T¥ OF CHESTEP~I~LD RI~GISTERED INTEREST RATE: MATURITY DATE: ~RINCIPAL A~QUNT: The ~cunty of Chesterfield (hereinafter referred to as tho "County"), a political ~ub~ivi~ion o~ th~ Conmtonwealth of Virginia, ~or value received~ hereby promises to pay the Registered Owner (named above), or regis~ere~ assigns, on the Maturity Date (specified above), unless this Bond shall have been duly called ~or previous redemption and payment of ~he redemption price shall hmve been duly made or provided for, the Principal Amount on ., 19 and semiannually on hereof cr from the i~t~rest payment date next preceding the date of authentication hereof to which interest shall have heen paid, unless such dat~ of authentication is an inter~st payment date, in which case fro~ such interest payment ~ate if interest has been paid to such date, or unless such date ~f authentication is within the pe~±od from the fourteenth (14th) payment date, in which case from each interest payment date i~ interest has been paid tu such dat~, until the payment cf such 88-952 an interest payment date) at the Inter~st Rate (~p~cifi~d above) per annum, by chuck or draft mailed by the Registrar this Bond is rugisterad on the hooks of registry kept and maintained by the Registrar as of the close of buslucss on the first day of each calendar month in which interest is. payable to the address cf th~ Registered Owner as it appuars on sush hooks of registry. The principal of and premium~ ~f any, on this Bond are payabl~ upon presuntation and surrender hereof a~ ~hs 9rincipal corporate true% office of in the City of ~ Itbe "Registrar"), The principal of and ~rsmium, if any, and interest on this Send are payabl~ in coin or curruncy of the United Sta~es Of America as at thu respective dates of payment is legal tender for public and private debts. REFERENCE IS ~%D~ TO TH~ FURT~BR PROVISIONS OF T~%$ $~T FORTH ON THE REVERgE ~EREOF, W~IC~ FURTHER PSOViSIO~$ SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES ~AVE TR~ EFFECT AS T~OUG~ FULLY SET FORTH ~EREIN. The full faith and c~edit of th~ County are h~r~by irrevocably pledged ~o ~he pa~ent of the principal of and This Bond shall not b% ~alid 'or obligatory unless certificate of authentication hereon shall have b~en manually signed by an authorized ~i~nator of the It is hereby certified, recited and declared that all acts, ~onditions and things ~equired to have happened, to and %o have been performed pracud~nt to and in the issuance of this Bond and ~he series of which i~ is one~ do exist, have happened and have been perfo~ed in r~qnlar and du~ tim~; and manner as re,ired by law, ~n~ that this Send and the Bon~s of %he ~=ries o~ which ~is Bond is one do not excee~ any conmti~ntiona% o~ Statutory limitation o9 indebtedness. facsimile signature o~ the Chairman of such Board; a facsimile Of the corporate ~eal of such Foard to bm ~prlntad hereon, attested by the facsimile signature of the Clerk of such Board; and thi~ Bond to bu d~ted as of , 1989. [SEAL] Clerk of the Board of Date of Authentication: Chairman c~ the Board of ~upurvisors CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This Bond is one of ~he Bcn~s delivered pursuant within-mentioned proceedings. ], Registrar By: Authorized $iguator [SACK] to th~ 88-953 COUNTY OF CHESTRRFIELD, VIRGINIA, PUbLiC IMPROVEMENT BO~D, SERIE~ O~ This Bond is one of a duly authorized issue of Bends {herein referred to as the "Bonds") of the aggregate principal a~ount of Dollars ($ ) of like date and tenor herewith, except for number, denomination, interest rate, maturity and redemption provisions; and i~ issued for the purpose of financing the costs of various public improvement projects of and for the County, under and pursuant to and in tull compliance with the Constitution and statutes o~ the Commonwealth of Virginia, including Chapter 5 of Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended (the same being the Public Finance Act), an election duly held in the County under such Chapter 5 November B, 1988, and a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervlsor~ of the County under such Chapter 5 on December 14, 1988. The Bonds of the Series of Bonds of which this Bond is one maturing on or before , __ shall net be subject to redemption prior t6-%~r stated maturities. The Bonds of the series cf Bends of which this Bond is eno maturing on and after the County prier to their stated maturities in whole at any time, er in part £rcm time to time en any interest payment date, on or after .w __~ upon payment of the principal amount of the ~e~ds (or the portions of the principal amount thereof to be redeemed), plus a premium of of one percent {__ o~ 1%) uf th= prlneipal amount 0f each Bond or portion thereof te be redeemed for each ( ) month period or fraction thereof between the date fi~ed ~or redemption and the stated maturity date of such Bond, but not to e~ceed percent ( %) of such principal amount or portion thereof, in the e~nt less than all of the Bonds of a particular maturity are called for redemption, the particular Bonds of such maturity or portions thereof in installments of $5,000 to be redeemed shall ba selected by the ~egistrar by lot. ~fi this Bond or any portion of the principal amount hereof shall be called for redemption, notice of the redemption hereof, specifying the dahe and n~mber of ~his Bend, {he date and place er places fixed for its redemption, the premium, if any, payable upon such redemption, and if less %ham the entire ~rineipal amount of this BOnd is %0 be redeemed, t~% this Bond must be surrendered in exchange for the principal amount hereof te be redeemed and the issuance of a new Bond equalling in principal amOune that portion of She principal amount hereof not redeemed~ shall be mailed not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date ~ix¢~ ~or =edemptien by ~irst ola~$ mail, postage prepaid, to the Reqist~r~d Owner of this Bond portion hureef to be re~e~mmd) shall have bs=n as aforesaid, and payment of the principal amount of this Bond (or portion of the principal amount hereof to be redeemed) and cf the accrued interest and premium, if any, payable upon such redemption shall have been they made or provided for, interest hereon shall cease from and after the data so specified for the redemption hereof. Subject to the limitations and upon payment of the charges, if any, provided in the pxoeesdings authorizing ~he Bonds of the seri~s of which this Bond ia one, this Bond may be exchanged at the prinolpal corporate trust office of the other authorized principal amounts and of the series a£ which this Bond~ is one. This Bond is transferable by Owner hereef~ in person or by his attorney duly authorized in writing, at the principal corporate trust office Of the Registrar but only in the manner, subject to ~he limitations and upon pa~nuSnt of the charges, if any, provided in the proceedings authorizing the Bends of the series e~ which this Bond is one, and upon the surrender hereof for cancellation. 88-954 titus and of =ho same aggregate pr±noipal amount of the series of which this Bond is one will be issued %o =he traneferee in exchange herefor~ (FORM OF ASSI~NMEN?) For value received, hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER TAX IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE: the w/thin-mentioned Bond and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints , attorney, to transfer the sue on the boo~s cf registry of the County kept at the principal corporate trust office of the Registrar with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Signature Guaranteed: NOTE: Registered Owner with the name as written on the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration, enlargement or any chanqe SECTION 9. Bond Anticipation We=es. Public bond anticipation notes are authorized for issuance and sale by th~ County in anticipation of th~ i~uance of the public shall mature and be payable within ~wO y~ar~ from their date conditions as are determined by the County A0mlnistrator. If such notes are off.red for competitive male, a Notice of Sale shall be D~epared, published and distributed in accordance with S~ction 18 herein. There shall also be prepared an~ distributed a preliminary and final Official Statsm~et relating to such notes in ~uch form as shall be approved by the County Administrator. The issuance and details of such notes shall he governed by the provisions of Sea,ion 1§.1-223 of the Code of Virginia~ 1950, as amended. The provisions of Sections 6 shall apply to such ncte~ to ~he same extent the same apply to the Bonds except, in the ease of the provisions of paragraph 7, the Bonds or from any other available funds. Th~ mal~ of much notes and the form and o~her details thereof shall he approved, ratified and confirmed by resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the County. sends in anticipation of which such bond an=folD&=ion notes are issued pursuant to thi~ paragraph may be issued and sold in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance at any time within five (5) year~ of the issuance of ~he fir~% notes iszue~ ~n anticlpat~on of such Bonds. SECTION lO. Sale of Bonds. The County Administrator is bsreby authorized to cause to be published a Notice of Sale of the Bonds and to cause to be distributed to prospective form of Proposal for the purchase of th~ Bonds and a Preliminary Official Statement of the County r~lating to the 88-955 Bonde, the forms ~f which shall be filed with the minutes of the meeting at which this resolution is being adopted; is hereby approved, ratified and confirmed. SECTIO~ tl. Filing Oi This Resolution. The County Attorney is h6reby authorized and ~i~ected to file a copy cf this resolut±on, certified by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to be a true and correct copy hereof, w~th the Circuit Court of the County of Chesterfield. SECTION 12. Invalidity of Sect/one, ~aragra~he, Clauses or Provisions. If any section; paragraph, clause or provision of this resolution shall b~ held invalid or unenforceable for sn~ reason, the invalidiey Or unen£orceability of such section, paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this reuclution. SECTION 13. ~eadin~s of Section~. The h~a~ings of the reference and shall not affect the meaning, constructiou, SECTION 14. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. Vote= Unanimous ~I.D. APPOINTMENTS - COFuMUNITY SERVICES BOARD On motion of Mr. ~utlivan, eeoonde~ by Mr. Currin, the Board nominated Dr. Sanford Schwartz to serve on the Chesterfield County Cemmunlty Servle~s Eoard, representing the Midlothian District; whose fo~mal appointment will be made on January 11, 19¢9. ll.C. CO,UNITY DEV~LOgM~NT ~T~MS ll.C.1. 1988-89 RURAL ADDITION PROJECTS On motion o~ Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved and authorized notifioation of the Virginia Department of Transportation that no rural addition project is being requested for Chesterfield County for FY89~ that Rhodes Lane be included in the Slx-Year Plan as one of the 9riorities~ and that funds, currently accumulated and designated for rural additions, be transferred to the P~hedes Lane prejest. 11~c~2~ SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RESTRICTIO~ O~ THROUGH T~UCK TRAFFIC ON IRONGATE DRIVE Qn motion u~ ~r. Daniel, s~eonfled by ~r. Sullivan, the Board set th~ date of January 11, 1989, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to consider th~ reetriction e~ thro~qh truc~ traffic on Irongate Drive (Route 3025) from Ironhridge Road {Route 10) to Beulah Road {Route 641). When asked~ M~, McCraoken stated VDOT has made a minor modifi- cation and i~ is anticipated further efforts may be forthcoming on these requests. 8S-956 I1.C.3. STP~ET LIGHT INSTALLATION COST APPROVALS On me,ion of Mr. Mayer, ~econded by Mr. Sullivan, the ~oard deferred indefinitely conslderatinn of street light installa- tion coat approval~ for the Midlothian District so that addi- tional information may be obtained and the list prioritized; and approved the following ~trset light inskallatlenm for the Ma%ceca Magisterial District with funds to be expended as indicmted~ Intersection of Fielding Road and Leganwood Drivs, ($1,078 to be expended from the Ma%ceca Dis%riot S~neet Light Fund and $166 from the Ma%ceca District Three Cent Road Fund, for e total co~t of $1,244); Intersection of Loganwood Drive and Trah~rn Drive, ($3,621 to be expendsd from the ~atoaca District Three Gent Road Fund); Inter~eotion of Prairlewood Road and ~oganwood Drlu~, ($1,~76 ~e be expended f~em ~hc Ma%ceca District Three Cent Road Fund); In%ermection of Fielding Road and Trebor= Drive, ($881 to be c~pended fzom ~ke Matoa~a Dl~trict Three Cent Road Fund}; Intersection of Loganweod Drive and Ledgewood Drive, ($1,577 ~o bm ~xpended from the Ms%ceca District Three Cent Road Fund); and In~r~etion Of Fielding Road and Ledgewood Drive, {$1,277 to be expended from the Ma%ceca District Three Cent Road Fund). I1.C.4. STI~EET NA~4E CHANGES I1.C.4.a. CHANGE "CKINABERRM BOULEVARD" FROM ROUTE 5S TO UANNEE ROAD TO "BOULDERS ~AR3fWAy" On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. C~rrin, the Board approved a ret/uss% to rename "ChiD~berry Boulevard" from Route 60 to Jahnk~ Road ~o "~oulders Parkway." (It i~ noted that no tenants in eithe~ building object to the proposed street name change and the devmtoper will pay for the incidental address 'change expenses of the t%nants.) U0te: Unanimous ll.C,4,b, CH~BG~ PONTIQN OF "OLD HUNDRED SOUTH" TO "C©MMONWEALT~ C~NTBR FAR~WAY" On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by ~r. Currln, 2he ~oard approved a request to rename a 500' portion of '~Old Hundred South" from Route 360 mouth to "Commonwealth Con=er Parkway", as the d~v~lepers of Commonwealth Centre will be extending Old ~undred South into- their development and will be into Ro~te 11.C.5. REFER TO ~LANN%NG CO~%~ISSIO~ A ~O~ING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MAKING HALFWAY HOUSES A COM~ITIONAL RATHER T~AH PEPJ4tTT~D USE IN RBSID~NTIAL DISTRICTS On motion of Mr. ~ayes, seconde~ by ~r. Daniel, the Bea~d referred s Zonin~ Ordinance amendment making Halfway Kou~es a Conditional, rath~ then a Permitted, Use in residential districts to the Planning Commission for a reoommendation. 11.C.6. AF~NDMENT TO CONDITIOMkL USP P~RNIT GRANTED TO MR. Mr. Micas stated Mr. Curtis has requested that the Board consider an amendment to Mr. Irvin G. Eorner's Conditional Use Permit to allow Mr. Morner to transfer the permit to members of his 15~/ediate family including, but limited to, his spouse, brothers, sisters, children and grandchildren and, in order for ths Board to review this Conditional Uss Permit, it should refer the case to the Planning C0~ission for u recommendation. Mr. Cnrrin stated he felt the condition imposed upon Mr. Horner was unfair and requested %he Board reuonslder the matter. On motion of Mr. Curtis, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board remanded Condition 16 of Conditional Use Permit for Mr. Irvin G. Homer, Case ~8S005, to allow Mr. Homer to transfer the permit to members of his immediate family including, but limited to, his spouse, brothers, sisters, children grandchildren to the Planninq Co--lesion for a rec~endation. Discussion~ q~st~OnS and comments en~ued relative to such action ~einq inconsistent with previous astions regarding this rezoning, the !egali~y of such action, the setting of precedent by the Board for ~uture rezoning requests, the applicant submitting a r~gu~st for th~ proposed amendment rather than it being originated by the Board, modification of the proposed amendment to ~liminate the grandchildren as pa~t of those to whom the permit may be transferred~ existing constraints on the project, policy for sh=tting down the landfill operation if it were not run properly, etc. After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Coffin, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, r~solved ~hat the Soar~ r~mand Condition 16 of Conditional Use 9srmlt for Mr. Irvln G. Rorner, Case 88S005, to allow Mr. Homer to transfer the permit to members of hi~ immediate fsmily including, but limited to, his spouse, brothers, sisters, and children to the Planning Con~nis~ion for a roccmmondation. Ayes: Mr. Appl~gate, Mr. sullivan, Mr. Currin and Mr. Daniel. Nays: Mr. Mayer. 11.C.7. ~SOLUTIO~ SUPRORTING LBGISLATION PERMITTING LOCALITIZS TO REDUCE THE COST OF GROWTH Mr. Ra~ey explained that representatives from ten (lO) virginia looalities, experiencing high rates of growth, recentl~ met to discuss possible solutions to the increasing costs associated with rapid residential growth and, as a result of that meeting, agreed to present a resolution to their respective governing bodies ia support of a uniform %~gislative program, for adoption prior to the 1989 session of the General Assembly, that would allow each individual community to control frs own growth demands an~ problems. On motion of th~ Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, many counties and cities in the Commonwealth are dramatically affected by the demands and needs associated with rapid growth and development~ and WHiP, AS, such growth can create financial demands which far eut~trip the ability of counties and cities to pay for those demands; and 8B-958 WMER~A~, planning and financing optionz ourrently available to ceuntie~ and citie~ in the Commonwealth are inadequate to meet the demands of a high growth~ Rrban environment. NOW, THEREFOFd~, BE IT RESOLVED, that the goverDiDg bodies of the signature jurisdiction~ support the following legislative initiatives and seek the n~c~$sary authority to conditional Zoning The General Assembly should exten~ to all localities the conditional zoning authority currently authorized for Northern Virginia and the Eastern Shore. The extension of this the Code o5 Virginia. SoUYoo to offset thc financial demands created hy rapid growth end development. Conn~i~s and cities reoognize that demand~ of rapid growth and development. The General Assembly should ~utherize counties and sities capital costs created by rapid growth and development. This authorization should include a prevision to credit 9riot Gasoline Tax tax should be levied on a percentage basis. Where possible, tax on regional basis. CORRECT CLERICAL ERROR~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. C~rri~, the Board amended the minutes o£ previously approved Board m~utings, a~ in~icated, relative to ordinances, with ~he following additions, deletions and/or corrections: 1. Page ~S-~3 of the Jal~ary 27, 1988 meeting: Amend the word "correction" to read "corrective"; 2. Page 88-39 of the January 27, 1988 meeting: Delete the first paragraph of Section 20-42; Vote: Page 88-7S5 of the october 12, werd~ "or a" iD Section 12-3. 88-224 of the April 13~ 1988 meeting: Insert the "public" before the word "hearing"; Page 88-$$7 of the August 24, 1985 meeting: Change "plan" to ~he word "Diane"; amd change the word Page 88-588 of the August 24~ 1988 m~e%ing~ Add "~ feeder lines" in subparagraph (k); delete the period a~d add "o~ the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers." in subparagraph Page 88-589 of th~ Angus: 24, 1888 meeting: Dele~ the word~ "detailed in"; Page B8-593 of the August 2~, 1988 meeting: Delete the ll.D.2. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR TENNIS COURT tLEPAIRS AT PROVIDENCE MIDDLE SCHOOL On motion of Mr. Sullivan, m~¢onded by Mr. Coffin, the Board approved the transfer of $2,000 from the Clever Hill District Thr~ Cent Road Fund ~o ~he ~rovidence Middle School Bond Account to make fepai~ to the existing tenni~ courts. Vote~ Unanimoub ll,D.3. APPROVAL CF RESOLUTIOE REQUESTING RECREATION ACCESS FU~D~ FOR H~NRICU5 PARK On motion of Mr+ Su~livan~ S~ond~d by Mr. Currln~ the ~oard hereby reque~tE grant funds from the Virginia Highway and Transportation Board, totalling $~00,00O, for the oonstruotiou of a 1.3 mile long entrance read to Hcnricus Park~ with the County share of said project being $100,000, which funds were included in the 1988 Parks Improvisor Bond Re~orendum~ and further, the Board adopted the following resolution: W~EPd3AS, the Eenrious Eistorio~l Park is owned and is to be developed by the County of Chesterfield as a recreational facility serving the residents of Chesterfield County and adjoining oonntiesy and $~HEREAS, the facility is in need of adequate access; and ~EREAS, the right~of~way of the proposed access is provided ~y the Ceunty of Chesterfield at mo cost to the and WHEREA~, the procedure governing the allocation of recreational asse~ funds as set forth in Section 33-136.3, Code of Virginia, 1~66, a~ am~nded~ requires joint action ~y the Director of Conservation and Historic ResouroeE end the Highway and Transportation Bear~; and NEEP~EAS, a statement of 9olicy agreed upon between the said Director and Board approves the use of such fund~ for the construction of access roads to publicly-owned recreational areas or histcnical sites; and 88-960 WHEREAS, the Board o~ Supervisors of Chesterfield County has duly adopted a zoning ordinance pursuant ~o Artiel~ (Sac%ion 15.1-486 et seq.), chaD%er 11, Title 15.1; and WHER~A~, i~ appaarB to the Board that ell requirements of the law have been met to permit the Director of Conservation and Historic Resources to designate the Henricus Park as a recreational facility and historical site and further permit the Virginia Highway and Transportation Board to provide funds for access to this public recreation area in accordance with Section 33-136.3~ Code of Virginia I966, a~ amended; and WBEREA~, the Board acknowledges that pursuant to provisions of Section 33.1-22Z, as amended, this road ~hall be designated a "Virginia Byway" and recommen~ th~ Sta~e Highway an~ TraDspcrta~ien Board in cooperation with the Director of Con~ervation and Historic Resources, ~ake the appropriate action ~e implement this de~ignatlon. Fnrther~ the Board agreeS~ that in keeping with the intent of Section 33.1-6~, to use its good office to reasonably pre~ect t~e aesthetic or ~ultural veln~ Of this road. NOW, T~EREFORE, BE IT RE~OLlrED, that th~ Bo~r~ of Supervisors of Chesterfield county h~reby reque~t~ th~ Director of Conservation and ~istorlc Re~ouree~ to designate the Henrieus Historical Park as a public reer~&tlon area; and to recommend to the State ~ighway ~D~ Transportation Board that recreational access funds be allocated for an acc~ serve said park; and BE IT FU~T~R ~OLVED, ~at the Virginia ~ighway and Transportation Board i~ hereby requested to allocate the ll.D.4. SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CON$IDEE A~ OP~DINANC~ TO AMEND CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, 1978, AS 1~4~, 2X ADDING SECTION 12-25 RE~ATING TO THE PAYMENT OF BUSINESS LICENSE TAX IN INSTALLMENTS On motion of M~. S~lliYan, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Boar~ Se% the d~te of January 11, 1989, at 7:00 p.m., for a pubti~ hearing to consider an ordinance to amend Chapter l~ of the Code of the Counb¥ of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, by addin? Section 12-25 relating %0 the payment of business license tax in installments. Vohe: Unanimuaa ll.D.5. REQUESTS FOE BINGO/RAFFL~ ~EP~4ITS On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by ~r. approved requests fo~ bingo/raffle permits organizations for the calendar y~ar 19~9: ORGANIZATION~ St. Augustine's Roman Catholic Church Chester Civic A~noeiation Grange Hall PTA St. Edward's Knights of Columbus ~6546 Vote: Unanimous Coffin, the Beard for th~ following TYPE Bingo/Raffle Ra~le Raffle Bing0/Ra~fle directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his Fernbrook, olde Williamsburg Section Phase IV, a portion cf Eernbrook, Olde Williamsburg Section, Fhase II and a portion of and Olde Liberty Road in Fernbrook, Olde Williamsburg Section Phase II and a portia5 of Fernbrook Sec. A., Clover Hill District, be and %hey hereby are ostablishe~ as public reads. And be it further resolved, that the virginia Department of Secondary System, Burgess House Lane, beginning at existing milo to cad at the intersection with 9ropo~sd Glouches~ershire Liberty Road, beginning at the intersection with Burgess House Olde Liberty Road, ?ernbrook, Olde Williamsburg Section Phase V. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department O~ Transportation drainage These roads serve 25 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board of ~upervisors right-of-way for all of these roads. These sections.of Fernhrook, are recorded as follows: 01de Williamsburg ~ection Phase II, Plat Soo~ 45, ~ago S6, May 9, 1984. This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from ~his Doard, made report in writing upon his examination of Sandbag Road, Sandbag Way, Sandbag Terrace and Sandbag Circle in O1~ B~cklngh~m Forest Section ~, Midlothian District. Upon consideration whereof~ and on motion cf Mr. Sullivan, seconded by sr. Cur~in, it is resolved that Sandbag Road, Sandbag Way, Sandbag Terrace and Sandbag Civets in 01d Sucki~gham Forest Sec=ion 4, Mi~lothlan District~ be and ~hey hereby ar~ established as public And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into Secondary System, Sandbag Road, beginning at existing Sandbag Road, State Route 1268, and going westerly 0.02 mile to the intersection with ~andbag T~rrace, then continuing westerly 0.03 mile to the intersection with Sandbag Way, then continuing westerly 0.04 mile to tie into existing Sandbag Road, Stats Route 1268; Sandbag Way, beginning at the intsrsestion with cul-de-sac; Sandbag Terrace, beginning at the intersection with Sandbag Road and going soutkoast~xly 0.06 mile ~0 the ~8-962 intersection with sandbag Circle, then continuing southeasterly 0.12 m~la to end in a cul-de-sac; and Sandbag Circle, b~g±nning at the intersection with Sandbag Terrace and going south- weeterly 0.04 mile to end in = col-da-sac. This request is inolueive of the adjacent slope, sight and deeign~ted Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve 37 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board cf Supervisors guarantees to the virginia Department o~ Transportation a flight-of-way for all of thes~ roads except Sendb~ ~oad which has a 50' right-of-way. This section of Old suokingha/~ Forest is recorded as follows: Station 4. Plat Book 54, Page 28~ September 9, 1986. Vote: Unanimou~ This day the County Environmental Engineer, ~n accordance with directione from this Board, mad~ r~port in writing upon hi~ examination of Pramar Drive, 01~e Queen Terrace, Olde 9tone Read end Olde Stone Circle in Rexshire Section ~, Midlothian District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, it is resolved tha~ ~ramer Drive, Olde Queen Terrace, 01de Stone Road and Olde Stone Circle in Roxshirs ~ Midlethian District, he and they hereby are established as public And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the secondary system, Framer Drive, beginning at the intersection with Corner Rock Road, State Route 72~, ~nd going westerly 0.09 mile to the intersection with Olde Queen Terrace, then continuing westerly ~.08 mile to 5h~ intersection with proposed ~wanhurst Drlvs, Roxehire Saetlon 9~ then continuing westerly 0.08 mils to the intersection with Olde Stone ~cad, than continuing westerly ~.07 mile to the intersection with proposed Bdgeview Lane, Roxshire ~tlon 9, then continuing westerly 0.08 mile to cud in a dead end~ Olde Que~n Terrace, beginning at the intergection with Framer Drive an~ going northerly 0.11 mile to end in a cul-de-pac; Olde Stone Roa~, beginning at intersection with Pramer Drive and goin~ northerly 0.0S mile to the intersection with Olde Stans Circle, then continuing northerly 0.0~ mile to end in a sol-de-sas; and Olde stone Circle, beginning at the i~terseation with Olde Stone Road going westerly 0.06 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. This request is inclu$iv~ of the adjacent slope, eight distance and designated Virginia Department of Tra~sportatlon drainage Theme roads serve 46 lots. And b~ it further resolved, the= the Board of gaarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of these roa~s. This sectio~ of Roxshire is recorded as follows: Section $. Plat Book 51, Pages 10 and 11, October 2, 1985. Vote: Unanimous 88-963 This day the County Environmental ~nqin~r, in a¢oordamce with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Crossiug'$ Way, Crossing's Way Court and Crossing's Way Terrace in Cross Creek Section A, Midlothian District. Upon consideration whereof, an0 on motion Of Mr. seconded by Mr. Ceftin, it is resolved that Crossing's Way, Crossing's Way Court and Crossing's Way Terrace in Cress Creek Section A, Midtothian Dimtriet, be and they hereby are ~tablish~d as public roads. ~n~ be it further r~selved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Crossing's Way, beginning at %ha intersection with Winterfield Road, State Route 714, and going northeasterly 0.03 mile to the intersection wi=h Crossing's way Court, then turning and going northerly 0.12 mite to the intersection with Crossing's Way Terra,e, =ken continuing northerly 0.01 mile to e~d et proposed Cf0esing~s Way, Cross Creek SectiOn Crossing's Way Court, beginning at the intersection with Crossing's Way and going easterly 0.06 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Crossing's Way Terrace, beginning at the intersection'with Crossing'~ Way and going ea~terty 0.06 mile to and in a cul-de-sac. This requ~s~ is inclusive of the adjaoen~ ~lops~ sight dis~ance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve 20 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board Of Supervisors right-of-way for all of these roads except Crossing's Way which has a variable width, ~0' to 80~ righ~-ef-way. This section of Cross Creek is recorded as follows: Section A. Plac Book 52, Page 41, March 7, 1986. This day the County ~nvironmental ~ngin~er, in a~cordance with directions Zrom this Board made report in writing upon hie examination of Crossgate Road, Split Creek Drive, ~ompton Lane and Split Creek Court in Holly Creek, Bermuda District. Upon consideration whereof~ and on motion of Mr. Snllivan, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, i~ is resolved that Cro$$ga%~ Road, Split Creek Drive, Pcmpton Lane and Split Creek Court in Kelly Creek, Be~uda DiStrict, be and they hereby ars eetablished an public road~. ~nd be it further rssolved~ %ha% the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and i~ h~reby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Crossgate Road, beginning at the end of existing Crossgate Road, state ROUte 1593, and going nor=h- westerly O,O2 mil~ to the intersection with Split Creek Drive, then continuing northwesterly 0.t7 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Split Creek Drive, beginning at the intersection with Cros~gate Road and going southerly 0.88 mile to the intersection with ~omp~on L=ne, then con~inuing southerly intersection with Spilt Creek Court, then continuing southerly 0.05 mile tu mud in a cul-de-sac; P~pto~ Lan~, beginning the intersection with Split Creek Drive and going northwesterly 0.13 mile to end in a cul-de-~ac~ and S~lit Creek Court, beginninq at the intersection with split creek Drive and going w~$=erly 0.0~ mile re end ~n ~ i This request is inclusive of the adjscen=~ slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve ~0 lots. And be it further resolvsd, that the Board of Supervi~or~ guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of the~e roads. Holly Creek i~ recorded a~ follows: Plat Book 51~ Pages 59 & 70, November 27, 1985. Vote: Unanimous This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with difectien~ from this Board, made report in writing upon his examinstion of Fielding Road and Prairie Wood Drive in Happy ~ill Farm~, Section 3 and a portion of Happy ~ll Farms, Section I, Matoasa District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, s=conded by Mr. Ceftin, it is resolved that Fielding ~oad and Prairie Wuod Road in Ha~py Hill Farms, Section 3 and a portion of Happy ~ill Farms, Section 1, Matoaca District, be and they hereby are established as public And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Bepartmenf of ?ransportation, be and it hsreby is neg~ested to take into Secondary S~stem, Fielding Road, beginning at th~ end of existing Fielding Road, State Route 3235, and going south- westerly 0.16 mile to the intersection with PRairie Wood Drive; and Prairi~ Wood Drive, beginning at the intersection with Fielding Road and going southeasterly 0.07 mile to the inter- section with existing Loganwood Drive, S~nte acute This request is inclu~ivm of the a~jaeent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage Theme roads serve 20 And be it further resolved, that the Boar~ of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Tr~nsportatlon a 50' right-of-way ~or all of rhode roads. These sections of Happy Rill Farm~ are recorded as Section 3. Plat ~eok ~2, Page 71, April 24, 1986. Section 1. Plat Book 39, Pages 95 & 96, October Zl, This day the County Envlronmental Engineer, in accordance with diruction~ from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of B~rryston~ Road, Stoneway Drive and Fall Harvest Drive in Field,tone, Section 2, Matoaoa bi$trleP. Upon consideration whereof~ and on motion of ~r. Sullivan, secon~ed by Mr. Currin, it is rssolved that Burrystone Road, Stoneway Drive and Fall Narves~ Drive in Fieldstone, Section 2, Matoaca District, be and they hereby are @stabtlshed as public ioads. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportetien~ be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary Systeml Berrystone Road, beginning at the end of existing Berrystonc Road, State Route 3901, and going westsrly 0.09 mile to the intersection with Stoneway ~rive, then 88-965 continuing westerly 0.09 mile to the intersection with Fall Marvest Drive, then continuing westerly 0.05 mile to end in a temporary turnaround; ~toneway Drive, beginning ak the inter- section with Ber:ystone Road and going southerly 0.19 mile end in e cul-de-sac; and Fall Harvest Drive, beginning at the intersection with ~errystcne Road and going northerly ~.14 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. This request is inclumiv~ of %he adjacent slope, sight distance and designated virginia Department of Transportation drainage And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department cf Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of ~hese roads. This section of Fields=one is recorded am follows: SeG~iom 2. ~lat ~ook 53, Pages 26, 27 and 28, June 20, Vote: Unanimous 1I.D~7. R~QUEST TO SUPPORT AN UNDERGROUND DESigN ALTERNAT!~ FOR A PROPOSED VIRGINIA POWER HIGH VOLTAGE TI{ANSMISSIUN LINE On motion of Mr. Sullivan, aeeond~d by ~r. Currin, the ~oard ada~ted the following resolution to be presente~ to the ~tate Corporation Conuui~ion on ~ebruary ~, 1989: W~EP~k~, On August 2, 1988 Virginia Power applied to the State Co~poration Commission tQ amend its certificate of public convenience and necessity so as ~e be authorized to build a 5.9 mile, single-circuit 230kV transmission Iin~ from the Mid!othian Substation to the proposed Trabue Station; and ~H~R~A$, approximately 3.0 ~iles o~ the proposed line from Coalfield Road to the Trabue Substation will b~ adjacent to existing residential subdivision or will run through planned residential developments; and WEEREAS, ar~a re~ident~ eno proper~y Owners will adversely £mpaute~ ~y the proposed high voltags line; and W~EP~ASe planned residential development i~ thc area of the proposed line will al~o bu adversely affsc~ed~ WNEik~A~, the installs=ion of %he proposed line underground from Coalfield Road to the Trabue Substation would kava minimal or ne impact on exiseing or future growth in this area of Chesterfield County; and WHEREASt the installaeion of the proposed line underground would preserve existing property value~, residential aesthetics and future development already planned for the area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ~SOLVED, by ~h~ Board suDervisor~ of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia that th~ Board, on behalf of the citizens of %h~ CoDnty, ~upport~ an underground design alternative for the proposed high vol=age and ~eque~ts the State Corporation C~ission to approve portion of thm lin9 as an underground facility when the Co~ission renders its decision in Case NO. PUE880071. On motion cf ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Curtis, the Board approved a request for issuuncm of a bingo/raffle p~fmit, ©u as emergency basis, to St. ~dwards-EpiDhany School for the calendar year 1988. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT AWARD ENGINEERING C0~TRACT TO CA~P~ DP~SSER AND MCKEB FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ~ WAT~R~D ~ANA~EMBNT P~AN FOR TH~ SWIFT CREEK RESERUOIR On motion of Mr. Sullivan, s~cended by Mr. Currin~ the Board awarded an engineering contract ~c Cam~, Dresser an~ ~cKee~ at a cost of $149~960~ fo~ development of a Watershed Management Plan for the Swif~ Creek Reservoir to protect water quality assuring the availability of the reservoir as a water supply, a copy of whloh agreem~nt/~cope of services is filed with the papers cf this Board. (I% is noted funds for the project are inclu~ in the FY$8-89 Utilities DeparTment operating hudget.~ Vote* Unanimous ll.B.3. INITIATION OF STUDY OF DEVELOPMENT AND US~ OF ~U~LIC UT~LIT%ES WITHIN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY There was discussion relative to the i~itiation of a ~tUdy of development and uae of public utilities within the County; that ¢onsideratlon be given to requiring the property Owner to connect to the public system when water and/or wastewater s~rvice is extendtd to existing developments; the potential affect on the County of current and future residential development not using p~blic water or Bower; recommendations for land use and utility poli~i~S and/or ordinance uhan~es to address anticipated qrcwth~ the need for a work session to obtain more data regarding th~ focus cf the propose~ st=dy; that all types of users, including mobile homes, be included in the scope of the study~ eta. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Nayes, ~he Board deferred consideration of initiation of a study of development and use Of public utilities within Chesterfiel~ County until Je~u&ry 11~ 1989 so that a work program could be pre~ente~ to %he Board. Vote: Unanimous ll.B.4. CONSENT ITEMS ll.E.4.a. APPROVAL OF WATBR CONTRACT FOR BPG - R~¥CA~ ROAD On motion of Mr. Mayus, seconded by Mr. Curtis, th~ Board approved ~he following wate~ contract and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for: W88-250CD, P~G - Reycan Road. Developer: william G. and Helen Jo-Ann Lind~a~ Contractor: Brackl~y and Vo~lkel Cons~ruotiQn Ce., Inc. Sub-Contractor: John MarshalI~ Inc. Total Contract Cost: $31,145.00 Total Estimated County Co~t: $ 4,453.90 (Refund through connection ~ees) Estimated Developer Cost: $26,691.1~ Eumber of Connections: FUTURE Code: 5B-2511-997 88-967 Vote~ Unanimous TP~NSPORTATION FOR ADJUSTMENT AND EXTENSION OF UTILITIES ALONG HOPKINS ROAD BETWEEN BEULAH ROAD AND MEADOWDALE BOULEVARD On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, the Board approved and authorized the County Administra:or te execute an agreement between the County and the Virginia Dapar~ent of Transportation ~es the relocation and extension of water lines and sanitary sawer lines along ~opklns Road between Beulah Road and Meadowdale Boulevard due to the 'reconstruction of this portion of Hopkins Road. (It i~ noted funding for this project is From the approved FY'~8-'89 Capital Improvements Budget and that the State is r~sponsible for 4.2% of the water lin~ relocation cost and 46~3% of the sanitary sewer line extension cost, with the remaining paid by the County.) Vote: Unanimous APPROVAL OF~AGREEMENT WIT~ VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES ALONG ROUTE 15 THROUG~ CHESTER On motion of Mr. Maye$~ $~conded by Mr. Currln~ the Board appzoved and authorized the County Administrator to sxecu2e an agreement b~tween Chesterfia'ld County and the ~irginia Department e~ Tranaportatiun ~er the relocation and extension of water lines and sanitary sawer lines along Route I0 through Chester due ~o reconstruction. (It is noted funding for this project is from the approved FY'SS-~89 Capital Improvements Budget and the state is rsepcnsi~la for 4.9% e~ the water line relocation cost and I4.1% of the sanitary sewer llne extension cost, with the renaininq paid ~y the County.) Vote: Unanimous ACCEPTA~C~ OF DEED OF D=DICATION OF P0RTIO~$ 0F LARR- BLUFF PARKWAY AND TI~IBER BLUFF PARKWAY FROM INVESTORS ~OODnAKS UEV~LOP~=NT C0~0~TION On mellon of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, ~he B0~rd accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of portions of Lakebluff ParkwaN and Timber Bluff Parkway from Investors Woodlak~ Development Corporation and authorized the County Admlnletrater to execute the necessary deed. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF D~DICATION FRO~ SPRING ASSOCIATES 11.~.4.e.1. AT INTER~ECTION OF BETHIA AND WINTERPOCK ROADS On motion ef ~r. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Eoas~ accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a 5-acre intersection of Bathia nnd WintarDock Roads and authorized the the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Coffin, the Board accepted, On behalf of the County, the conveyance of three strips of land along Spring RUn Road (1,113 acres oi land lying along the west line of Spring Run Road and two parcels, totaling 0.742 acres of land, lying along the south line of Spring Run Road) and two ~trip$ of land along Winterpock Road (1.133 acres of la~d lying along the south line of Winterpock Road) from Spring Run Associates, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (copies of said plats are filed with the papers of this Doard.) ll.~.4.f. REQUEST BY MR. AND MRS. ROBERT B. WADKINS FOR LIC~NSR AGRB~MENT TO COVER AN ~NCAQACSM~NT OF D~CKS AND OTS~R APPURTENANCES ON SEWER EASBMEETS On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded bN ~r. Coffin, the Board approved a request by Mr. and Mrs. Robert B. Madkins for a license to cover the encroachment of decks and other structures appurtenant to their house on existing 25' and 16' sewer easements on LOt 80~ ~arbour Sill in Brandermill to bring the encroachments in complian=e with the County Code and permit the Wadkins to close on the purchase, with the conditions re~uiring the Wadkins, ur subsequen~ owners, te remove the structures at their expense if said structures conflict with maintenance or future construction of public sewer in the easements and authorized the County A~inistra~or 'tO sign the license agreement on behalf ef the ~oard upon approval by the County Attorney. VOtS~ Unanimous Mr. Welehen$ presented the ~oard with s report an the developer water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. Mr. Ramsay presented the ~oard with u uterus report on the General ~und Contingency Account, G~nsral Fund ~alance, Road Reserve Funds, District Read and Street Light Funds, Lease Purchases, School Boar~ Agenda, Study Report from the Committee cn the Future and the Board Public Hearing Schedule. ~r. Ramsay stated the Virginia Department of Transportation has ~ormally notified the County of ~hu acceptance, discontinuance and/or abandonment of the following reads into/from th~ State Secondary System: Kou~e 667 - From 0,07 mile southwest Route 1368 to Route 60 0.11 Mi. Route 2230 - Section 4 of new connection Route 2230; Project: 01S0-0~0-101, C503, D630 0.29 Mi. Route 2~20 - $~otion 5 of new connection Route 2520; Project: 0150-020-101, C5~, D630 0.21 Mi. STONEHENGE ~EST - SECTION 4 Route 1070 IGlengate Road) - From 0.13 mile e~st Route ~4 to Rou~e Dl16 0~0~ Mi. '88-969 Route 3116 IRossmere Drive) - From 0.06 mile north Route 1073 to 0.09 mile no~th Route 107Q Route 3119 (Rossm~re Circle) - From Route 3116 to west cul-de-sac Route 3133 (Rossmere Court; - From Rout~ 3116 %O w~t cul-de-sac LENGTH D.3Q Mi. 0.03 Mi. 0.06 ~i. Route 677 - From Route 60 tn 0,01 mile northeast Rou%e 60; From 0.OS mile northeast Route 6Q to 0.1O mile northeast Route 60 0.03 Mi. Route 663 - Section 1 of old location Route 663; Project: 01~0-020--101, C503, D630 0.09 Mi. Project: 0150-020-101~ C503, D630 O.Q4 Mi. ABANDO~i~T $ Re~te 677 - From O.01 mils northeast Route 60 to 0.DS ~ile northeast Route 60 0.07 Mi. 12. ADJO~T On motion of Mr. Sullivan, secon~s~ by ~r. Daniel, ~he Board adjournu~ at 6:45 p~m, (EST) until 2:00 p.m. on January 11~ 1989. Lane B. Ramsey ' · coun=y AdmiDi~trator