Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
02-25-1987 Minutes
0 BOAI~D OF S~PF2~VISOP~ MINUTES February 25, 1987 Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Chairman Mr. Jesse J. Mayee, Vice Chairman Mr. G. H. Applega~e Mr. R. Garland Dodd Mrs. Joan Girone Mr. Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Mr. Stanley Baldersen, Dir., Econ. Develop. Ms. Joan Dolezal, Clerk to the Board Chief Rober% Eanes, Fire Department Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Asst. Co. Admin. MS. Virginia Gordon Registrar's Office Ms. Alice Heffner, Youth Byes. Coord. Mr. Robert Hodder, Building Official Mr. William Howell, Dir., Gen. Services Mr. Thomas Jaccbecn, Dir. of Planning Mr, Robert Masden, Amst. Co. Admin. for Human Services Mr. Richard McElfish, Dir. of Env. Eng. Mr. R. J. McCracken, Transp. Director Mr. Bteve Micas, Co. Attorney Mrs. Pauline Mitchell, Dir. of News/Info. Services Mr. Richard Normally VPI Extension Agen~ Mr. Lane Ramsey, Asst. Co. Admin. for Budget and S~a~fing Mr. Richard Sale, Assr. Co. Admin. for Development Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Dir. of Parks & Rec. Mr. Robert Wagenknecht, Dir. of Libraries Mr. David Welchcns, Dir. of Utilities Mr. Frederick Willis, Dir. O£ Human Re~curce~ Management 1. INVOCATION Mr. Hedriek introduced Reverend Richard T. Woodall, Pastor of Woods MethodiEt Church, who gave the invocation. 2. PLEDGE OF ~LL~GIANCE ~) -r~w. i~bAG OF 'x~ ~D STATES OF AMERICA The Pledge of Allegiance America was recited. to ~he Flag of the United states of 87-102 REO~EHT-~ TO PO~T~0KE AcTIoN~ E~ERGENCY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES IN T~ O~UEE OF ~E~TATI~ On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board added Item 3.B., Approval of Minutes for February 18, 1987 a~d changed Stem 3., Approval of Minutee to Item 3.A., Approval of Minutes for February 11, 1987; added under Item 8., Hearings of Citizens on Unscheduled Matters or Claims, Mr. Read F. Goode to address consideration o~ changing the name of Powhite Parkway Extended; and added Stem ll.L., Executive Session, to consult with legal counsel involving legal matters concerning an existing contract, pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (6) of the 9s~e. of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and adopted the agenda~ as amended. Vote: Unanimous 3. APPROVAL OFfS 3.A. FEBRUARY 11, 1987 On motion o~ Mrs. Girone, ~e~onded by Mr. Dedd, approved tho minutes of February 11, 1987, as amended. Vote: Unanimous the Board 3.B. FEBRUARy 18, 1987 On motion o~ Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, approved the minutes of February 18, 1987, as amended. Vote: Unanimous the Board 4. COUNTY ADMTNI~TRATOR'S Mr. Hedrick stated he did not have any comments at thi~ time. 5- BOARD CO~4ITTEEPJ~PORTS Mr. Dodd stated he, Mr. Balderson and Mr. Medriok met with a delegation ~rom the city of Hopewell to discuss participating in the Port Study, stated the meeting was very productive and he anticipated a positive response regarding the matter. Mr. Hedrick stated Mr. Strum, the City Manager of Hopewell, had advised him that Hopewell will be moving forward affirmatively toward participation in the Port Study and they will continue to attempt to acquire funds to make improvements to their existing facility. Fir. Applepate reported there had been a decrease in the number of enplanements at the Richmond International Airport due to the adverse weather; there was a 6-1/2% increase in cargo volumes at the Airport; the State presented to the Airport Commission a check to assist in defraying the costs of the new service road; WWBT-Channel 12's annual balloon classic event will be held at the Richmond International Airport this year in conjunction with the Airport's 60th Year Anniversary celebration; the Airport'~ Ground Transportation Service Committee has recommended that the walk-up limousine service be bid and a final reeommendatio~ is anticipated in March. He stated he had attended a reception at ~he Holiday Inn Koger Conference Center at the Koger South Holiday Inn on February 23, 1987 honoring area real estate developers and County officials. Mr. Daniel stated Governor Baliles would officially sign the Chesterfield County Charter bill at 11:00 a.m. (EST) on February 26, 1987. 87-10~ © RESOLUTIONS OF SPECIAL RECOGNITIO~ RICHMOND RENAISSANCE PROJECT F~XI PRESENTATION Mr. Clarence Tow~es, Acting Executive Director of Richmond Renaissance, was present and introduced Mr. Brenton Halsey, the Chairman and Chief Administrative Officer of Richmond Renaissance. Mr. Halsey presented an overview of Project XXI, which included strategic recommendations, as well as an overall evaluation of key data gathered in interviews and research conducted by Glenn Monigle and Associates, Inc., (designed to focus On the major growth and city enhancement opportunities of Richmond through an image and theme program which will spearhead business growth, city enrichment and broaden the tax base). Me addressed issues relative to strategy, objectives for promotional and developmental activities, the Image Foundation (promotable features), the role of partnerships in the Richmond area which are viewed as crucial to the overall image and theme program, amenity assets, geographic proximity of Richmond to major population centers and commercial markets, the general quality of life, local business and commerce, historic heritage, the cultural amenities, natural and architectural beauty, the process by which the project will be implemented, if adopted. Mr. Townes summarized the consultant report, identifying the proposed logo for the project and indicating the importance of such aspects as gaining the support and ccnzenzuz of key public and private agencies, partnerships and groups currently participating i~ various development and promotion of tho Metro area; gaining the support and concensus of the business and commerce community, which is essential in promoting Richmond as a place for conducting business; assignment of responsibilities for selection of specific leadership for the implementation of the program, as well as selection of an ad agency or public relations firm to further develop and coordinate the image promotion; funding, and the organization of means for continued funding of the program; development and implementation of support communications, which entails agreement upon final name identification, as well as graphic identification for the program; estimated costs for implementation of the project; etc. Mr. Halsey stated through this program promotional efforts in Richmond will become more consistent, more highly visible and more effective. He stated representatives of each political entity and appropriate organizations are being invited to serve On this committee and requested that Mr. Hedrick and one member of the Board be appointed to serve. Discussion ensued regarding participation by Metro Richmond as well aa the Tri-City areas, the sharing o~ expenses, the regional survey, how this project related to CONTOUR, ere. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the information shared by Mr. Halsey and Mr. Tewnes with the Board. Ee stated any action on the proposed recommendations would take discussion among the Board members. He stated the Board would bo more than pleased to participate and be representative on the project discussion, however, no action could be taken at this time. He further pointed out that there are a tremendous number of requests for projects and careful consideration will have to be made due to budget constraints and adjustments. MRS, K3%THERINE C. GODSEYr UPON RETIREMENT FROM REGISTRAR'S OFFICE Mr. Willis recognized Mrs. Virginia Gordon, County Registrar, who introduced Mrs. Godsey. She stated Mrs, Godsey has served the County nineteen years and in the capacity of Assistant Registrar has been a loyal and conscientious employee who will 87-104 be deeply missed by her friends and cc-workers. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Mrs. Katherine C. Godsey retired from the Registrar~s Office, Chesterfield County, on January l, 1987; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Godsey provided nineteen years of quality service to the citizens c~ Chesterfield, serving as a loyal and conscientious Assistant Registrar; was always willing to serve on committees and help whenever necessary; and her departure leaves a void in the Registrar'$ office where she will be deeply missed; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Mrs. ~odsey's diligent service. NOW, THEREPORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Mrs. Katherine C. Godsey and extends on behal~ of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mrs. ~odsey and this resolution be permanently recorded a~onq the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel presented the executed resolution to Mrs. Godsey and introduced Mr. Godsey, who was present. M_rs. Godsey expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to have worked with the County and £or the recognition bestowe~ upon her. 7.C. 0U~STA~DIRG ~FFORTS OF '£~ EASTER SEAL SOCIETY On notion Of the ~card, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the Faster Seal Society has provided services to disabled children and adults in Virginia since 1944; and WHEREAS, the Society operates speech centers across the State and provides direct, rehabilitative services such aa wheelchairs and braces to people in need;, and WHEREAS, %he Society sponsors Stroke Clubs and voice Clubs and operates C~-~D Easter Seal East and West in an effort to improve the quality of life for disabled persons. NOW, THEREFORE HE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Beard o~ Supervisors encourages the support cf all i~s citizens to aid the Society through volunteer actions and through contributions to make the 1987 campaign even more successful for those who are aided by the untiring and enthusiastic efforts of the Easter Seal Society as demands for human service programs are ever increasing. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel stated the executed resolution will be presented at the Easter Seal Telethon in March. 7.D. DECLARING ~4AY 6, 1987 AS "MODEL COUNTY GOVERi~MENT DAY" Ms. Heffner stated Model County Government Day is a worthwhile project in which County officials have been participating with students for several years and requested Board adoption of the resolution proclaiming May 6th as Model County Government Day. 87-105 On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHBREAS, students in the eleventh and twelfth grades in Chesterfield County Schools have been studyinq local government; and WHEREAS, through a competitive process, a special group of thes~ students have been seleeted to represent their schools in portraying the roles of County Officials on May 6, 1987; and WHEREAS, an understanding cf the process and functions of local government is a key ingredient to effective citizenship; and WBEP~EAS, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the importance of young people having opportunities to learn about their government in order to become informed~ active citizens; and WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors supports activities that cultivate leadership among the youth of Chesterfield County. NOW, TBEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors that the 6th day of May, 1987 is hereby proclaimed Model County Gover~ent Day in Chesterfield County and that this observance is called to that attention of all citizens. Vote: Unanimous ~Lr. Daniel stated the Board will recognize the students involved in this program on March 25, 1987 and participate in the various activities of the day. DR. W. CLINTON PBTTUS FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC ~RVICE Mr. Masden stated the State Council of Higher Education has established an annual award program for faculty members in State Institutions cf Higher Education for outstanding instruction, research and public service. He stated Dr. Pettus has provided critical leadership in various capacities at great sacrifice to himself and his family and is deserving of this nomination. He introduced Mrs. Pettus, Dr. Burr Lowe, Mrs. LUX, MS. Yvette Ridley, Ms. Carrie Rogers and ~i~. Richard Nunnally who were present. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the State Council of Higher Education has established a program for annual recognition of faculty members in State Institutions of Higher Education for outstanding contributions in Instruction, Research and Public Service; and WHERSAS, Dr. W. Clinton Pettus, Dean of School of Natural Sciences at Virginia State University, is a candidate for the award for outstanding public service by a faculty member; and WHEREAS, Dr. Pettus has provided critical leadership on Chesterfield County's Cor~munity Services Beard for six (6) years in various capacities including Chairman and Vice Chairman; and WBEHEA~, Dr. Pettus provided the principal leadership on the recent countywide Human Service Needs Assessment requested by the Beard Of Supervisors and the Board of Trustees of the Greater Rich/nond United Way; and WHEREAS, Dr. Pettus has served the County and his local community in numerous capacities at great sacrifice to himself and his family. 87-10S NOW, THEREFORE B~ IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County that the State Council of Higher Education is hereby urged to carefully consider Dr. W. Clinto~ Pettus for the award o~ Outstanding Faculty Member in the Commonwealth of Virginia for his dedicated public service. AND, BE IT FURT~IER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors hereby expresses its sincere appreeiatio~ to Dr. Pettus for his dedicated public service to the County cf Chesterfield and his fellow citizens. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Mayem stated it was an honor and a pleasure to present the executed resolution to Dr. Pettus and congratulated him ~or his achievements. 8. HF2~INGS OF CITIZENS ~/N UNS~EI) ~A'i-i'~ OR CLAIMS Mr. Read Goode stated the Chesterfield Business Council is in favor of renaming the Powhite Parkway to the Chesterfield Parkway, which name it is felt would be more appropriate for this particular arterial road system, as it travels through Chesterfield County. He presented the Board with a map of the road system, explained the various issues raised concerning the change and costs involved in the transition. Discussion and questions ensued relative to the potential legal aspects that could evolve from the name change, suggestions that the wording "expressway" be utilized rather than "parkway", an alternative compromise ~or the name change which would appropriately identify ho~h the Richmond and Chesterfield portions cf the road system, etc. Mr- Goode requested that the Board consider adopting a resolution supporting the name change, that if there are oostm involved ~ha~ tho Board would be supportive of funding a portion of the comte, postpone the painting of signs for the 9owhite ~xtension until a decision is made, etc. Mr. Micas stated he would research the legal aspects of the request and advise accordingly. It was generally agreed that no action could be taken at this time on the request, however, the Board directed staf~ to prepare the necessary papers for the resolution supporting the name change, to explore the costs, to explore the mechanism for financing whatever the County's portion of the expense would be, if the Board were to undertake such a project prior to the proposed signs for the constructed segment of the road being painted. 9. D~/{ED ITE~ 9.A. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING GUIDELINES RELATING TO THE E~X- TENSION OF UTILITY LINES TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Mr. Daniel stated the public hearing to consider guidelines relating to the extension of utility lines to promote economic development was deferred from the last meeting to allow the Chesterfield Business Council to review the matter. No one came forward to address the matter. Mr. Sale advised that staff would be meeting with members of the community and Business Council this afternoon regarding this issue. Mr. Dodd stated that, since the meeting was scheduled for a later time in the day, he would request an additional deferral. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board deferred 87-107 consideration of the guidelines relating to the extension of utility lines to promote economic development until March 11, 1987. Vote: Unanimous 9.B. APPOINTT4ENTS - DRUG ANUSE TASK FORCE Mr. Daniel requested the rules be suspended to allow the nomination and appointment simultaneously of Mr. L. T. Hobson to the Drug Abuse Task Force. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board suspended the rules to allow the nomination and appointment simultaneously of Mr. L. T. Hobson to the Drug Abuse Task Force. Vote: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board nominated and appointed Mr. L. T. Robson to the Drug Abuse Task Force, whose appointment is effective immediately and will be at the pleasure of the Board. Vote: Unanimous 10. PUBLIC HF~%i~INGE o PUBLIC HE~ING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO APIEND ARTICLE CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OP THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED. BY ADDING SECTION 6-2.3 AUTHORIZING TEE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE VOLUME II OF TME VIRGINIA UNIFOPJ~ STATE- WIDE BUILDING CODE Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance authorizing the Building O~ficial to enforce Volume II of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. Mr. Hcdder stated currently, under state law, the County's Building Official is required to enforce Volume I of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (VUSBC) regulating new construction and this ordinance would authorize the building official to also enforce volume II. He stated the only change in the cffice'~ current program that would occur as a reault of the ordinance amendment would be to give the Building Offisial the legal authority to compel, rather than merely encourage, compliance with the Building Code in an existing structure. Me stated no additional personnel will be required and staff would continue to handle inspections on a complaint basis only. Mr. F. A. Clover, Executive Officer of the Home Builders Association in Petersburg, voiced support of the ordinance and recommended adoption. Mr. Dodd stated he was pleamed that inepectione would continue to be handled on a complaint basis only and would support the ordinance, as he felt it was needed. Mr. Mayes inquired if the ordinance would be applicable whether the building is occupied er unoccupied. ~kr. Hodder stated it would. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING SECTION 6-2.3 AUTMORIEING TME BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE VOLUM]Z II OF THE VIRGINIA UNIFORM STAT~WIDE BUILDING CODE 87-108 BE IT ORDAINED by the Hoard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That the Cede of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended by adding Section 6-2.3 as follows: Section 6-2.3 Same - Authority to enforce the Building Maintenance Code. In addition to the authority otherwise granted by this chapter, the building oificial shall have the autherity to enforce the provisions of Volume ZI of ~he Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, 1984 edition, Or a~ may be a~ended, known as the Building M~in~enance Code. Vote: Unanimou~ 11. NEW BRSI/~ESS ll.A. REGIONAL FAP~ERS' MAi~KET SUPPORT Mr. Dodd stated the Metropolitan Economic Development Council supports a resolutien establishing a regional far~er~' market, as it is a regional project that has taken a long time to develop. ~e ~tated if a metro area site i~ selected it would provide farmers and cons~ers with a facility at which to Mr. Nunnally presented a revised resolution. Mrs. Girone stated the revised resolution addresses a change wherein four traditional fa~ers who have converted all or part of their land to the production o~ ~ruits, vegetables and other horticultural On motion o~ the Board, the followinq resolution wa~ adopted: ~EREAS, the General Asse~ly authorized the formation o~ the Virginia Farme~' Market ~o~rd, a mechanism for ~rea~i~g a network of wholesale, shipping point and retail farmers' markets throughout the Co~onwealth; and wHEREAs, the Virginia Farmers' ~rket Hoard has been empowered by the legislature to establish a network of fa~ers market facilities across the state; and WHEREAS, localities across the state have expressed their interest and support for the ~evelopment of a farmers' market netwerk by offering valu~le land for locating a market facility; and W~E~S, the Rie~ond Metropolit~ area anticipates such Virqinia agriculture as well a~ the local economy; and WHEREAS, four traditional farmers have converted all or part of their land to the production of ~ruits, vegetables and other horticultural crops; and WHEREAS, seven additional operators are currently producing only horticultural crop~ much a~ fruits, vegetables and ~EREAS, Chesterfield County farmers will benefit from this outlet ~or marketing their locally gro~ co~odities. NOW, THE~FO~, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors endorses the development of a wholesale distribution fa~ers' market ~acility ~or the Ric~ond Metropolitan area, to serve as the centralized marketing hub for this statewide marketing network. 87-109 Vote: 11.B. © CONTRACT AWAI~DING ROOF DESIGN WORK FOR SEVERAL COUNTY BUILDINGS Mr. Howell stated staff is ~eeking authorization for the County Administrator to enter into a contract with Momeley ~ening Associates (MHA) for design work and direct supervision to replace roofs on four County Building~ (Juvenile Courts, Board Room, Circuit Court Record Room and original portion of the Circuit Court Clerk ~ office). Mrs. Girone expressed concern that an architect is needed to oversee the replacement of roofs on these buildings, some of which were not very old. Mr. Howell stated the request for an architect to provide this service is based on the fact that replacement of these particular roofs would require a set of specifications because the job is so complex and the present construction manager is fully occupied wi~h completion of the Data Processing Building, the H~m~%n Services Building, the Courts Building, the three new fire stations, and the jail addition. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. ~aniel, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to enter into a contract with Moseley Hening Associates, Inc. for design work and construction inspection to replace roofs on the Juvenile Courts Building, the Board Room, the Circuit Court Record Room and the original portion of the Circuit Court Clerk's Office, for a total of over 32,000 square feet of roof area, with a design fee of $17,710 ($11,710 for design and up to a maximum o~ $6,000 at $40 hour for direct supervision of contractors). It is noted funds are available in the Buildings and Grounds maintenance capital operating budget- Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Dodd. Nays: Mrs. Gircne, as mhe felt County staff should be able to handle this project. ll.c. APPOINTMENTS - PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board nominated the following peraons to serve on the Preservation Committee and whose formal appointments will be made March 11, 1987: Mr. Bryan Walker, member of the Chesterfield Historical society: Mr. Jim Daniel, interested in history and in the development business; Mr. Carl Morris, architect; Mrs. J. sol Wrenn, President of the Ben Air Historisal Society; Mr. Zane Davis, contractor; Mr. Lewis Martin, retired horticulturist; Mr. I. C. Peoples, real estate business; Mr. Hampton Davis, executive at DuPont and owns home which would fit under the ordinance criteria; Ms. Dale Smith, real estate business; Ms. Mary Ellen Howe, member of Chesterfield Historical society, owns property in the County, but does not reside in the County; and Ms. Roberta R~id, member of the ~tate Division of ~istoric Landmarks. 87-110 Vote: 11 .D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS ll.D.1. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY AT THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL P~4~K TO MR. AND MRS. GEORGE A. KCP~GET A~D AUTHORIZE CONTINGENT SALES CONTRACT Mr. Balderson requested that the Board consider conveyance of property at the Airport Industrial Park to Mr. and Mrs. George A. Kcraget and authorize execution of a contingent sales Mr. Dodd inquired how many additional requests were pending sale at the negotiated price of $25,000 per acre. Mr. Balderson stated this request was the last one quoted at the $25,000 price. Mrs. Girone expressed concern that other applications, that have been in the negotiating stages for some time, may be affected by an interim price change, as the interim price change issue would be discussed as the next item on the agenda. Mr. Applegate inquired as to the date of the contract with the ~eragets. Mr. Balderson stated staff entered into negotiations with the Kcragets on the purchase of the property in November, 1986. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved and anthorized the County Administrator to execute a contingent sales contract an~ set the date of March 25, 1987, for a public hearing to consider the conveyance of a parcel in the Airport Industrial Park to Mr. and Mrs. George A. Kcraget. ll.D.2. EST~BLISRMENT OF INTERIM SALE PRICE FOR PROPERTY AT THE CHESTERFIELD COU~ AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK Mr. Balderson stated the Board is requested to establish an interim sale price for property in the Chesterfield County Airport Industrial Park to be set at $37,500 per acre for all land versu~ the current price of $25,000, with the exception of the taxiway frontage which would be $40,000 p~r acre versus the current price of $32,500. Mr. Applegate stated the Board paper indicated a price of $37,500 for all land versus its current prices. Mr. Balderson indicated the figure o~ $37,500 in the Board paper was applicable to all land in the Industrial Park with the exception of the taxiway frontage and the information relative to the price of the taxiway frontage should have read $40,000. He indicated the independent appraisal would be available within sixty (60) days. Mr. Daniel inquired if the County Assessor's o~fiee was given the opportunity to assess the value of the land. Mr. Balderson stated the a~messor has rcvicwc~ the recommended price changes and is of the opinion that those recommendatione are reasonable. He stated the assessor did not desire to provide a professional appraisal of the property as it may have been misconstrued as a conflict of interest with respect to his charges as the County Assessor. Mrs. Girone inquired if there was a reason why action was necessary beiore the independent appraisal is received. Mr. Eedriek stated that if negotiations are to continue, property will have to either be sold at the existing price or there must be a curtailment of any negotiations until such time as the new appraisal is available. ~krs. Girone inquired if the intent was to approve the interim price change, which would increase %he price of the property, and then address the request from Young 87-111 Moving and Storage, Inc. Mr. Balderson stated there have been ongoing discussions with Young Moving and Storage, Inc. indicating that the quoted contractual price may be higher either through an independent action of the Board without an appraisal or after an appraisal has been made and the client is aware that this situation exists. Mr. Hedrick stated staff is of the opinion that there is not a moral or ethical obligation with Young Moving and Storage, Inc. as there was with Mr. and Mrs. Keraget and two other potential clients. Be stated it is anticipated the appraisal prices will be compatible with, if higher than, those recommended by staff. Mr. Applegate stated he requested a review of the price structure for the sale of property at the Industrial Airport in August, 1986~ and received a r~co~uenda~ion the same month that the property be offered at the proposed increased prices. He inquired as to the reason why the Kcraget contract was negotiated in November, 1986, at $25,000. Mr. Medrick stated that the timeframe involved has been to gather feedback and data suffieien~ ~o warrant bringing the paper forward to the Board. Mr. Daniel stated he found it difficult to understand why it has taken so long to move forward with the price increase. Mr. Dodd stated he felt an adjustment in prices is necessary, particularly with the impact cf the construction of Route 288 on the value of the land in the area. He stated he felt the interim sale price may still be conservative, however, action should be taken at ~he present time, with the understanding the prices will be temporary. Mrs. Girone stated she agreed with increasing the prices of the property, however, she felt the Board does not present a favorable image in negotiating for sales when there exists two different prices with two different clients. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved the establishment of an interim sale price for property in the Chesterfield Co%~lty Airport Industrial Park to be set at $37,500 per acre for all land, with the exception of ~he taxlway frontage which shall be $40,000 per acre, with the understanding these prices are interim prices and may be subject to adjustment at some time in the future when an official appraisal is available. Mrs. Girone stated she felt the matter has been handled very poorly. Mr. Daniel stated that when the review of prices for the property was authorized and when price adjustments occur there will always be someone who will be involved in the transition period. vote: unanimous ll.D.3. RESOLUTION CONFIP~4ING PROCEEDINGS OF IbiDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPROVING ISSUAI~CE OF REVENUE BONDS FOE Mi~. LINWOOD R. LUCORD, On motion of Mr. Dcdd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield (the Authority) has considered the application of Linwood R. Lucord, Jr. (the Applicant), for the issuance of the Authority'e i~dust~ial d~v~lopm~nt revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $650,000 (the Bonds) to assist in the financing of the Applicant's acquisition of land and construction and equipping of a manufacturing facility (the Project) to be located on approximately 2.8 acres of land which fronts 350 ~eet on the south side of Reycan Road, commencing 350 feet southwest of the west line of whitepine Road, in the Chesterfield Airport Industrial Park in Chesterfield County, 87-112 Virginia, and has held a public hearing thereon on February 17, 1987; and WHEREAS, the Authority has reguested the Board of Supervisors (the Board) of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia (=he County), to approve the issuance of the Bonds to comply with Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended; and WHEREAS, a copy of the A~thority's resolution approving the issuance of the Bonds, s~bject to ter~s to be agreed upon, a record of the public hearing and a "fiscal impact statement" with respect to the Project have been filed with the Board; BE IT RESOLVED HY THE HOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, approves the issuance Of %he Bonds by the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield for the benefit of Linwood R. Lucord, Jr., to the extent required by said Section 147(f), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by Section 147(f), does net constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the Applicant, but, as required by Section 15.1-1380 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as a~ended, the Bonds shall provide that neither the County nor the Authority shall be obligated to pay the Bonds or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and moneys pledged therefor, and neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonweal%h, the County nor the Authority shall be pledged thereto. 3. The Board hereby authorizes and directs the County Administrator o~ the County to make application on behalf of the Applicant to the Allocation Administrator, pursuant to Executive Order No. 28 (86) issued by the Governor of Virginia, for an allocation from ~he State Allocation for the Project, in accordance with the provisions of said Executive Order. 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. ll.D.4. AGREEMENT PEP~4ITTING GREATER RIC~OND TRANSIT CORPORA- TION TO OPERATE WITHIN COUNTY AND WAIVER OF REQUIRE- HEHT FOR THIP~D PARTY SURETY BOND Mr. Micas stated the Greater Richmond Transit Corporation (GRTC) cnrrently operates three routes within the County and the State Corporation Commission has informed GRTC that they must provide a third party liability bond unless the localities in which they operate enter into a contract that permits the operation within those counties and provides for a self insurance approach to the liability claims. He stated GRTC has indicated they cannot economically provide a third party surety and is asking the Hoard e~ Supervisors, by agreement, to approve operating within the County with a self-insurance program. M~ stated the agreement does not provide for any opera=lng subsidies or any changes in the existing routes being provided in Chesterfield County. He stated since the item was placed on the agenda, two additional protections have been added to paragraph 2, which protections require notification of the County and documentation of the nature and ~undlng of the self-insurance Mr. Daniel inquired as to how the County would be basically liable. Mr. Micas stated the agreement provides local permission for GRTC to operate within the County with a ~7-113 self-insurance liability pro,ram and it does not create any liability risks to the County that do not already exist. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to e×eoute a contractual agreement with the Greater Richmond Transit Corporation to operate within the County, with the understanding that GRTC is currently self-insured for liability claLm~ and waive~ the requirement for a third party surety bond. (A copy cf the Agreement is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.E. CONSENT ITEMS ll.E.1. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE This day the County Environmental Engineer~ in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Chesterfield Meadows Drive, Matoaca District. Upon consideration whereo~, and on motion cf Mr. Dodd, ~¢ended by Mr. Mayes, it i~ resolved that Chesterfield Meadows Drive, Matoaca District, be and it hereby is established as a public road. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Chesterfield Meadows Drive, beginning at the intersection with Iron Bridge Road, State Route 10, and running easterly 0.14 mile to tie into existing Chesterfield Meadows Drive, Wrexham Estates, Section 1. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Depart/~ent of Transportation drainage easements. This road serves as access to the adjacent commercial property. And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a variable 60' to 80' right-of-way. Chesterfield Meadows Drive is recorded as follows: Plat Book 52, Page 7, January 17, 1986. This day the Cottnty Enviror~ental Engineer, in accordance .with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Manuel Btreet, Manuel Court and Dorius Drive in Kings Forest, Section 9 and a portion of Sections 10 and 3, Dale District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion c~ Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, it is ~esolved that Manuel Street, Manuel Court and Doriu~ Drive in Kings Forest, Section 9 and a portion of Sections 10 and 3, Dale District, be and they hereby are establishe~ as public roads. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Manuel Street, beginning at the intersection with Canute Drive, State Route 2828, and running southerly 0.08 mile to the intersection with Thierry street, then continuing southerly 0.07 mile to the intersection with Manuel Court, then continuing ~outherly 0.05 mile to the intersection with Dorius Drive, then continuing southerly 0.02 mile to end in a dead end; Manuel Court, beginning at the intersection with Manuel Street 87-114 and running westerly 0.19 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Derius Drive, beginning at the intersection with Manuel Street and running westerly 0.16 mile to tie into existing Dories Drive, State Route 2805. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve 78 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of these roads. These sections of Kings Forest are recorded as ~ollows: Section 9. Plat Book 48, Page 89, March 14, 1985. Section 10. Plat Book 51, Bag~ 54, November 15, 1985. Section 3. Plat Bock 30, Faqe 100, April 5, 1978. ll.E.2. AMENDMENT TO 1987 BINGO PERMIT FOR THE BENSLEY-BERMUDA RESCUE S~UAD On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the reguest by the Bensley-Bermuda Volunteer Rescue Squad to amend its 1987 Bingo Permit Dy changing the days of its bingo games from Friday to Wednesday nights at 7:00 p.m. ll.E.3. REQUEST FOR BINGO/RAFFLE PERMIT O~ Motion Of Mr. Dcdd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the request from the Future Homemakers of America (Monacan Sigh School) for a raffle permit ~or calendar year 1987. ll.F. UTILITIES ITEMS ll.F.1. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A PORTION OF DRAINAGE EAS~MFI~T WITHIN BAILEY RIDGE ESTATES Mr. Welchons stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to vacate a portion of a drainage easement within Bailey Ridge Estates. NO one came forward to address the matter. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board adopted ~he following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE to vacate a portion of a 16 foot drainag~ easemen% within Lot 17, Block C, Section A, Bailey Ridge ~states Matoaca Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 50, at page 55 and 56. WI{EREAS, Potts and Minter petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a 16 foot drainage easement within Lot 17, Block C, Section A, Bailey Ridge Estates, Matoaca Magisterial District 87-115 Chesterfield County, virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Slat Book 50, pages 55 and 56, made by Foster and Miller, P.C. dated August 9, 1985. The drainage easement petitioned to be vacated is more £%lly described as follows: A Portion of a 16 foot drainage easement within Lot 17, Block C, Section A, the location Of which is more fully shown, shaded in red on a plat made by Pott~ and Minter dated February 4, 1987, a copy cf which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Cod~ of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and W~EREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the portion of the drainage easement sought to be vacated. NOW THERP=FOI~E, BE IT OI{DAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuant to section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of V~, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid portion of the drainage easement be and is hereby vacated. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virqinia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, =ogether with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no: sooner than thirty days herea£ter in the Clerk's Office of thel Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.1-485 of the Code of Vir~inia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This ordinance shall vest fee simple title of the portion of th~ drainage easement hereby vacated in the property owner of the lot within Bailey Ridge Estates free and clear of any rights of public use. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the County of Chesterfield, as grantor, and Finer Hemes, Inc., A Virginia Corporation, or its successors in title, as grantee. Vote: Unanimous ll.F.2. RIGHT OF WAY FOR TURNER ROAD On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to accept the deed from Mr. Jack Cullather, sign the option with the state Department of Highwaym and Transportation, set the date of March 25, 1887, at 9:00 a.m. for a public hearing to consider the conveyance of the right of way and sign the right of entry letter with the State Department of Highways and Transportation. Vote: Unanimous ll.F.3.a. CONTRACT FOR INSTALLATION OF WATER LINES FOR COVE RIDGE, SECTION ~I On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for the following water contract: Water contract Number W86-21CD, Cove Ridge - Section II: Developer: Brandermill Contractor: R. M. C. Contractors, Inc. 87-116 Total Contract Cost: $71,174.00 Refund through Connections: $18,900.00 Cash Refund: $ 3~137.34 Total Estimated County COS%: $22,037.34 Estimated Developer Cost: $49,136.66 Number of Connections: 36 And further, the Board transferred $3,137.34 from 5H-5724-2009 to 5H-5724-7269 for cash refund. Vote: Unanimous ll.F.3.b. AGR~F~MENT WITH VIRGINIA DEPART~IENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR ADJUSTMENT OF UTILITIES ON ROUTE 145 On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute an agreement, on behal~ o~ the County, with the Virginia DepartmeNt of Transportation for the adjustment of utilities for the proposed reconstruction Of the intersection cf Route 145 and Hopkins Road, which agreement is subject to review and approval of the County AttorneF. (It is noted the County*s cost for relocating these water lines will be funded from 5B-5835-400E miscellaneous highway projects.) ll.F.3.c. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG WAR~RO ROAD FROM MRS. RANDOLP~ KELLY On motion of Mre. Giro~e, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Boar approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a 5' strip of land along Warbro Road from Randolph Kelly and Carol D. Shively. (A copy of the plat is filed with the paper~ of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.F.3.d. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG WEST HUNDRED ROAD FROM MR. AND MRS. R~3G~ A CLINE On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the ~oard approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a 15' strip of land along West Hundred Road from Hugh A. and Deborah P. Cline. (A copy of the plat is filed with ~he papers of %his Board.) ll.F.3.e. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG REEDY BRANCH ROAD FROM MR. PEP~RY G. MIL~ On ~otio~ of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Admlnls~ra~cr to execute a deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the e0nveya~ee of a 25~ strip of land along Reedy Branch Road from Perry G. Miles. (A copy of the plat if filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.F.3.f. DEED OF CORRECTION PROM SOUI~EASTERN ASSOCIATES, INC. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator to execute a deed of correction, on behalf of the 87-117 County, from Southeastern Associates, Incorporated, a Virginia Corporation, for a variable width strip of land north of existing Mall Drive. (A CODy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) ll.F.4. REPORTS Mr. Welchons presented the Board with a report on the developer wa~er and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. II,E, PRESENTATION ON F~ NEEDS OF LIBRARY SYSTEM Mr. Wagenknecht stated the Virginia Commonwealth University Center for Public Affairs and the Department of Urba~ Studies and Planning conducted a study o~ the present and future needs of the Chesterfield County public library system. He stated the study consisted of random telephone surveys o£ citizens at large and known library patrons to ascertain their feelings about present and proposed library services and policies and how the library can improve its usefulness to our citizens. He presented a summarized overview of the study, which included: the necessity for enlarging the Central Library and the Ben Air, Midlothian and La Prade branch libraries, as well as the replacement of the Chester branch library; the need for effective collections to serve the adult population utilizing the facilities; insufficient numbers of staff to select books, assist adults, etc.; hourR of service not geared to the working adult; consideration of expanding the hours of service to Wednesday night; insufficient seating capacities and space requirements for shelving, staff work area, etc.; the unavailability of popular books, reference material, paperback books, large print books, foreign languag~ books, etc.; expansion of videooassette and audiocassette collections; more publicity about library services; public use of microcomputers and typewriters; the addition of three new branch libraries by 1993 in Enon, west of Route 288 and near the intersection of ~opkins Road and Chippenham Parkway; increase the flexibility of meeting room space; develop special collection facilities; provide additional parking; etc. Mr. Daniel questioned if the libraries are included in the capital Improvements Program. Mr. Bedrick stated they are. Mr. Daniel inquired if the information provided at the budget work session included addbacks to maintain curren~ levels of service or to i~prove the levels of service. ~5r. Hedriok stated although the needs exist, there are no addbacks included in the budget, action is needed to improve the services in the area. He stated the Enon area is growing very rapidly and there is a need fer the County to be a full-service County in this particular area not only for libraries but for all services. Me stated he would support such services in his district, as well as the other districts. Mr. Applegate stated the construction of three new branch libraries, as well as improvements to the Central Library, Ben Air, Midlothian and La Prade branch libraries, wo~ld be capital in nature an~ would require a bond referendum. Be stated such recommendation should be forthcoming from the County Adrainis- trator which he would support. Mr. Wagenkneoht recognized a contingent of staff, as well as members of the Friends of the Library, who were present, Mr. Hedrick commended staff for the productivity and the level of service they attain and provide the citizens of the County. 87-118 Mrs. Giro~e also expressed support for the library eystem. 11.H. REPORTS Mr. Hedrick presented the Board with a status report on the General Fund Balance, General Fund Contingency Account, Road Reserve Funds, Capitalized Lease Purchases, District Road and Street Light Funds and schedule of School Literary Loans- Mr. Hedriok stated the Virginia Department of Transportation has formally notified the County of the acceptance into or abandonment from the following streets with respect to the State Seeondar~ Road System: ADDITIONS LENGTH POWDEP~AM SUBDIVISION - SECTIOM~ B&C Route 1237 (Ellesmere Drive) - From 0.07 mile southeast of Route 1014 to Route 1068 0.43 mi. Route 3355 (Rdmonthorpe Road) - From Route 1~37 to ROUte 3356 0.25 Route 3356 (Cassaway Read) - From Route 1237 to 0-05 mile north of Route 3355 0.21 mi. ABANDONMENT Route 2540 '(Savoy Road) - From Route 1990 to 0,03 mile west of Route 1990 0.03 mi. ll.L. F~XECUTIVE SESSION On motion o£ Hr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board went into Executive Session to consult with legal counsel invelvlng legal matters concerning an existing contract and Personnel matters, pursuant to Sections 2.1-344 (a) (6) and [1) respectively, of the Code o~ Virginia, 1950, as amended. Vote: Unanimous Reconvenlng: LUNCH WITH MUSEU~ COMMITTEE AT 12:00 NOON The Board recessed at 12:40 p.m. to have lunch with the Mu~eu Committee at the Chesterfield County Museum. Mr. Mayes called the meeting to order, in the absence of Mr. Daniel. ll.J. REQUESTS FOR ~OBILE HO~E PEP~IT$ $7S035 In Matoasa Magisterial District, R. J. ELLIS, requested renowal of Mobile Home Permit 85SR087 to park a mobil~ hom~ on property 87-119 fronting the east and west line of Hillview Street, approximately 270 feet south of Mahene Street, and better known as 21613 Hillview Street. Tax Map 186-3 (2) Augustus Wright, Lot 23 (~heet 52). Mr. Jacobsen stated staff recommends denial o~ this request. Ms. Joyce Rowland, the applicant's daughter, stated her father has been ill for some time and unable to comply with the instructions set forth at the time this permit was last renewed. She requested a two or three month deferral to permit efforts to sell the property. Mr. Charles Jones, an adjacent property owner, opposed renewal of the permit as he felt the applicant has had ample time to clean up his property and relocate the mobile home. He stated he cannot sell his property because the appearance of the Ellis property is detrimental to the value of his property. Mr. Mayes inq%lired i£ Mr. Jones would object to a deferral to permit the applicant's daughter time to sell the property. Mr. Jones stated he would not object provided the time frame did not adversely affect his ability to sell his property. Mr. Dodd stated this case has been before the Board on several occasions and has been a problem; however, considering the condition of Mr. Ellis' health, he would consider approving the request for ninety (90) days, with instruction to sta~ that a report be forwarded to the Board at the end of the ninety (90) days advising them o~ the status of this request. Mr. Applegate suggested it may be appropriate to only defer the case for ninety (90) days and take action on it at that time. On motion of Mr* Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board deferred consideration o~ the request until May 27, 1987. Ayes: Mr. Mayes, Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Daniel. ll.K. REpUESTS FOR RRZON!NG 86S120 In Midlothian Magisterial District, IZAAK WALTON PARK, INC. requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-9) of 228,1 acres and Residential (R-12) of 18.7 acres on a 246.8 acre parcel lying at the northern terminus of Ashbrook Landing Road, the northwestern terminus of Gordon School Road, and the western terminus of Yucca Drive, and lying approximately 500 feet off the north line of Lucks Lane. Tax Map 26-14 (1) Parcel (Sheets 7 and 13). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Residential (R-t2) with Conditional Use Planned Development with conditions, which are basically equivalent to the conditions ~ow proffered by the applicant, except that the number of lots proffered are 313 as opposed to 320 lots per the Planning Commission's conditions. Ne stated the request excludes a 22.8 acre parcel in the southeast portion of the request site, which the applicant wishes to withdraw. Mr. John OBrion presented a brief summary of the request, explaining the applicant's proffered conditions which addressed residents' conc~r~s (i.e., number of lots accessing ~ordon School Road, Yucca Drive and Ashbrook Landing Road, phasing based on building permits, amenities, establishment of community association, ownership maintenance responsibility and 87-120 improvements to the existing lake am part o~ the development, finished, livable area of no less than 1800 square ~eet, restrictive covenants, no vehicular access that would connect the area east o~ Falling Creek to the area west of Falling Creek, recreation areas, increased traffic volumes, etc. Be stated the applicant feels the proposal is reasonable and compatible with existing development and the project will be one of quality. Mr. Daniel arrived at the meeting. Mr. Dodd inquired as to the number of lots planned by the applicant and the number approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. OBrion stated the applicant has proffered a total of 313 lots and the Planning Commission recommended a total of 320 lots. Mrs. Gironc asked that Mr. OBrion explain the phasing of the northwest portion of the project which accesses Walton Bluff Parkway. Mr. OBrion stated proffered condition 4 indicates the area north of the existing lake and west o~ Falling Creek will be developed in four (4) phases from the southwest corner with initial access by way of Shoredale Drive and Walton Bluff Parkway, with said phasing based on building permits, with no building permits being issued in connection with Tract 3 until Walton Bluff Parkway has been constructed to its intersection with shoredale Drive and until the necessary sections of Shoredale Drive have been constructed. Ms. Barbara Rowe, President of the Walton Park Community Association, stated she was present to represent collectively the residents cf Walton Park, Smoketree and Evergreen sttbdivisions and to voice their opposition to this request. She presented the Board with copies of petitions containing the signatures of approximately 1,181 residents opposed to the rezoning. She addressed residents' concerns relative to increased density, increased traffic volumes, limiting the n~mbers of homes to be constructed along Ashbrock Landing Road, limiting the numbers of homes to be constructed adjacent to Smoketree, the adverse impact of this development on the health, safety and welfare of citizens and quality of life in the existing eor~mtt~ities, etc. Mr. George Morrison presented slides indicating the location of homes in Walton Park Subdivision in relation to the roads, the conditions of various roads such as Walton Park Road, Ashbrook Landing Road and Lucks Lane, the various tYPeS and sizes o~ homes, the volumes o~ traffic at the intersection of Route 60 and Walton Park Road, etc. He stated the majority of roads in these areas are winding, curvy country roads which are unsaf~ for joggers, pedestrians, bicyclists and are not capable of handling the additional tra£fic volumes that would be placed on them i~ densities are increased by more development such as the subject proposal. Mr. Appl~gate inquired about the area where Lucks Lane crossed Mansfield ~ranck and inquired how it related to this particular zoning case. Mr. Morrison stated he thought the water from Izaak Walton lake would flow into Mansfield Lake and go through the culverts under Lucks Lane and could cover Lucks Lane with water. There was discussion relative to water flow and drainage problems, culverts blocked by erosion, etc. i~ the Mansfield Branch/Swift Creek areas and how these issues relate to this rezoning request. It was generally agreed to have Mr. McElfish check into th~se problems. Mr. Applegate inquired as to the number of additional vehicular trips generated per day on Lucks Lane and Ashbrook Landing Road by the proposed development. Mr. Morrison stated the number of additional vehicular trips generated per day on these two roads, respectively, by the proposed development would be approximately 87-121 500 trips each, for a total of appEoximately 1,000 additional vehicular trips. Mr. Russell Gulley, President of the Smoketree Association, voiced concerns relative to the appropriate use of the s%Kbject parcel, ineffective long-range planning by the County, development of adequate road networks to handle traffic volumes, densities, adequate ingress/egress into developments, etc. He stated the coalition of residents ~rom Smoketree, Evergreen and Walton Park subdivisions suggest that, to make more effective growth-related decisions, the Beard should consider the establishment of specific long-range planning functions in the County government that would be responsible for simulating what-if scenarios to determine the best use for land and that each Board member organize, in each respective district, an interoommunity network, to have an interactive role with the County long-range planning group. Mr. Galley expressed appreciation, on behalf of the Board of the Smoketree Association and the residents of Smoketree, to ~Lrs. Girone and the Board for their efforts and dedication in assisting with the passage of the truck ban issue in Smoketree. Approximately twenty-five (25) persons stood in support of the request for rezoning; approximately twenty (20) stood in opposition to the request. It was noted, however, the petitions submitted contained over 1,000 signatures of residents in opposition to this request. Mr. OBrion stated the residents' groups have been well organized regarding this project; however, this area, by whatever planning mechanism there is in place, will develop as single ~amily residential rapidly and in the near future. He stated this proposal is responsible, reasonable, is compatible with the land use plan and it is not without benefit to the surrounding areas. He stated the developer and applicant have refined conditions and/or compromised to the best of their ability to resolve residents' concerns regarding this project and the submitted proffered conditions are as low as they can go. Mr. Applegate inquired if elementary school children in the proposed development would attend the new Evergreen school. Mr. Jacobsen stated he thought they would and also that the phasing of this preject, as noted for Section 3, would help the School Administration in their planning. Mr. Applegate inquired as to the opening of Route 288 and the Powhite Expressway. Mr. MeCracken stated Powhite, and the section of Route 288 between the Powhite Parkway and Route 360, is s~heduled to open in October, 1988. Mr. Applegate inquired how this development would impact the ability to access and/or exit Powhite to get downtown. Mr. McCracken stated staff is of the opinion that Powhite is constructed there will be an equal distribution traffic between the areas, as the Powhite Parkway is designed to accommodate traffic from the proposed site. Mr. Applegate inquired how many lots ea~ be developed prior to the opening of the Powhite Parkway, provided this application were approved with the applicant's proffered conditions. Mr. Jacobsen stated a maximum of 195 lots could be built by December, 1988. Mr. ~ayes inquired if there would be a problem in getting utilities to this site once approval has been given to proceed with construction. Mr. Jacobsen stated information from Utilities and Environmental Engineering indicates the infrastructure can be provided for this development without any condemnation. He stated the Request Analysis indicates that both 6 inch and $ inch water lines, and 24 and 36 inch sewer lines, exist on site and no off-site easements will be necessary. Mrs. Girone clarified the n~r~ber of citizens who live in the neighborhood around the park OppOSe the rezoning and the membership of the park is supporting the developer because the membership of the park ow/%s the park and desires to sell to the developer and move elsewhere. She stated, in her experience, 87-122 this ease is one of the most difficult and unique oases she has seen before the Board. Mrs. Girone stated all those involved have attended many meetings and worked diligently on this case for quite some time; she stated the case has been very difficult and unique; the park has been controversial in some ways, as many people living around it want it to stay because the park was there when they purchased their homes; there have been ~o~e proble/~s with the gun club and the noise an~ safety hazards of the sheeting and some people wish the club would leave; traffic is a problem County-wide, but is a particular problem in Walton Park because it was developed in the early 70's before the County began its more extensive planning; the road was just a country road not designed to handle large volumes of traffic which were generated as the development expanded; the Board has to consider the fact that people have a right to use their property; the proposed use is compatible with existinq uses surrounding it; the gun club is ready to move, as they feel their use is no longer compatible with existing development, and they desire to sell the subject property; retaining the site as a County park would be nice however, the constraints o~ the proposed budget are enormous and resources are not available to acquire the site for a Count park, as there are other priority needs that must be qiven equa consideration; the proffers which have evolved through this case satisfy the needs in Smoketree, they satisfy the needs of Ashbrook Landing in that they permit it no more than the subdivision ordinance allows; density adjacent to Walton Park has been reduced; phasinq on Walton Bluf~ Parkway will resolve some of the traffic problems and it is difficult to determine exactly where the traffic will go. She stated she regretted that residents of Walton Park would net be satisfied with the results of this ease, however, she felt a reasonable solution has been reached. Mr. Dcdd voiced support for the project and stated he felt a fair compromise between the community and the landowners has been reached. Mr. Daniel voiced support for the request and commended the citizens who participated in the rezoning case for a well prepared presentation regarding their points of view and the slides. He stated, however, one must be cognizant of the fact that local government is a creation of the state and the state does dictate the rules. ~e ~tated the rules in zoning are straight-forward with regard to compatibility and local governments cannot be blinded to the fact that services (such as schools, roads, utilities, etc) will be provided. ~e stated he did feel this ~oard would not conscientiously take any action that would deter from the quality of life in the Count~. O~ motion Of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board accepted the applicants' request to withdraw approximately 22.8 acres in the southeast portion of the site from the reguest and approved Residential (R-12) on approximately 225 acres and accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Youngblood, Tyler & Associates and submitted with the application shall be considered the Master Plan. 2. The maximum num~ber of lots accessing ~crdcn ~chool Road and YUCCa Drive shall be eighteen (181 and twenty-five (25), respectively. The maximum number of lots accessing Ashbrook Landing Road shall be fift~ (50) of approximately the same size. There shall be no more than two-hundred-twenty (220) lots ~evelope~ in the area north of the existing lake and west of Falling Creek. No areas shall be reserved for future development. 3. The acreage within the 100 year floodplain and the lake shall not be included in lots, but rather shall be main- 87-123 tained as common open space. This shall not apply tc those lot~ in Tract I which abut the sower line. The floodplain and lake shall be used for a recreation facility, subject to schematic plan approval. The recreation area shall be approved in conjunction with the first subdivision approval. 4. The area north of the existing lake and west of Falling Creek will De developed in phases from the southwest corner with initial access by way of Shoredale Drive and Walton Bluff Parkway. The phasing will be based on buildin( permits and will be as follows: December 31, 1987 50 maximum total building permits December 31, 1988 10O maximum total building permits December 31, 1989 150 maximum total building permits December 31, 1990 220 maximum total building permits No building permits will be issued in connection wit Tract 3 until Walton Bluff ~arkway has been constructed to its intersection with Shoredale Drive, and no building permits will be issued u~til the necessary sections of Shoredale Drive have been Constructed. 5. The developer shall provide a minimum of two (2) tennis courts, a playground, and a bicycle or jogging trail prior to issnanco of the 151st building permit. 6. A con, unity association shall be established in conjunction with the first phase of development. The community association shall be responsible for the maintenance of the floodplain, lake, and recreation area. 7. The existing lake shall remain as a part of the devel- opment. Maintenance and improvement~ of the dam shall be in accordance with a qualified engineering consultant's study and report to be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Department. All necessary work to be performedl on the dam shall be satisfaotQrily completed and certified by the design engineer prior to the recordation of any lots adjacent to the lake. Ownership and maintenance responsibility of the lake and the land surrounding the lake that is not proposed to be recorded as lots shall be transferred to the Izaak Walton Lake Homeowner's Association, after occupancy of the 51% of the lots. Until that time, the owner/developer shall be responsible for maintenance. Articles of incorporation shall be approved by the County Attorney's Office and the Planning Department prier to any recordation. 9. Homes shall have finished, livable "heated" area of no loss than 1,800 sqnare feet. 10. In conjunction with recordation of the first phase of development, the developer shall be required to record Restrictive Covenants comparable to those of Walton Park Subdivision. 11. No vehicular access shall be permitted that would connect the area(s) east o~ Falling Creek to the area(s) west of Falling Creek. Additionally, Gordon School Road and Yucca Drive shall not be connected through this development. 12. The owner and/or developer of this development, or any portion thereof, shall notify the Civic Associations in Walton ParK, Smoketree, and Ashbrook Landing of any and all 87-1~4 13. 14. suhmittale for tentative approval and/or schematic approvals or renewals. The area east of Falling Creek and south of Smoketree shall be developed in a fashion such that no roads in this area connect te roads in Smoketre~ and/or Ashbrook Landin( Subdivisions, Conditions 3 and 5 require recreation area(s) be provided These will likely be in the floodplain area(s). Schematic plans for the recreation area are required by Condition 3. During the review of these plans, vehicular parking may be considered and may be allowed in the floodplain with pedestrian access crossing Falling Creek. However, no vehicular access will be permitted to cross Falling Creek and parking areas will be located such that vehicles will not utilize existing roads in Smoketree and/or Ashbrook Landing subdivisions to reach such parking area(s). Vote: Unanimous It wa~ generally minutes. agreed the Board would recess for five (5) Mr. Daniel stated that Mr. Mayes requested that Cases 87S005 and 87$012 be taken cue cf sequence as it was necessary that he leave to attend the Crater Planning District Commission meeting. On motion of Fir. Mayes, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board suspended the rules to amend the agenda to hear Cases 87S005 and $750~2, respectively, out o~ sequence. vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel advised the Board that Mr. Applegate, who was in conversation with Delegate Watkins at the General Assembly, needed information as to the Board's direction regarding a bill. Mr. Applegate stated, with respect to Hill 1511 regarding waste flew, Chesterfield has requested to be included in the regional bill and now needs direction as to whether or not the County desires to be a part of the waste flow bill. After a brief discussion, it was generally agreed that the Board's position: was that Chesterfield County desired to be included in the regional bill provided the legislation is permissive, not mandated. 87S005 In Matoaca Magisterial District, LINWOOD F. B~LC~ requested amendment to a previously granted Conditional Use (case 825071) to permit expansion of the limits of an existing landfill in an Agricultural (A) District on a 22.1 acre parcel lying off the northern terminus of Beleherwood Drive. Tax Map 77 (1) Part of Parcel 36 (Sheet 21). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission reoon~ended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. Mr. Bob ROOp, with J, K. Timmons and Associates, represented this case and stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dcdd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: 87-125 t. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by J.K. Timmons and Associates, P.C., revised November 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. Within the fifty (50) foot buffer along the western prop- erty line, landscaping, including existing vegetation, having a euffioient initial height and of a species which will provide year-re,nd screening shall be installed. If existing vegetation and/or topography is not sufficient to provide year-round screening, additional landscaping shall be installed. Other than utilities which r~ generally perpendicular through the buffer and a fence, there shall be no facilities located with the buffer. The limits of the buffer shall be defined to preclude dumping and grading within the buffer. Also, there shall be no filling or grading permitted in the buffer except that necessary to accon~modate utilities. A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final plan review. (P) 3. Until such time as it has been determined by the Environ- mental Engineering Department and/er the Department of Waste Management that the existing landfill has been constructed and adequately stabilized in accordance with a plan approved by Environmental Engineering, there shall be no new debris deposited in the proposed landfill area. (EE) 4. The final document titled, "General Standards for Permit Issuance for Construction-Demolition-Debris (CDD) Land- fills" and the final plan of development shall be submitted to, and approved by, Environmental Engineering, the Planning Depart~ent and ~he State Department of Waste Management. Upon final approval, the document shall serve as the plan and operational program ~or the land~ill. 5. Standard and Specification 1.26 eedLment ha~in~ shall be installed in those locations deemed necessary by the Environmental Engineering Department. (EE) 6. The area of permitted landfill activity shall be clearly defined by a permanent mean~. The Method of delineation shall be approved by the Planning Department. (P) 7. Prior to a~y vegetative disturbance, all n~c~E~ary off-site easements dow~strea~ of ~he affected drainage area shall be obtained. (EE) 8. The plan shall indicate the desired sequencing of events for the proper implementation of erosion control devices in conjunction with the plan o~ operation. (EE) 9. Hydroseeding and mulching shall be completed within fifteen (15) days after achieving ~inished grade of each cell. (EE) 10. Prior to any vegetative disturbance, all necessary ap- provals and/or permits from the Department of Waste Man- agement, Environmental Engineering, and the Planning Department shall be acquired. (EE) 11. Fill material shall be limited exclusively to soil, stone, rock, land cleared and building materials. (P) 12. Prior to any further fill activity, a certified engineering report identifying the contents of the existing fill area shall be submitted to the Planning Department. Upon completion of filling, a certified engineering report identifying the contents shall be submitted to the Planning Department. (P) 13. The access road i~to t~e site shall ~e secured with a gate 87-126 which shall be locked to prohibit indiscriminate dumping. (P) 14. Unless required by the Department of Waste Management, every twelve (12) months from the date of approval, a certified report of the surface and groundwater shall be submitted to the Planning Department. This report shall reveal that the landfill has not resulted in the con- tamination of the suriace and groundwater. (P) 15. Until such time as plan compliance and stabilization of any existing eel~ has been determined bM Environmental Engineering, there shall be no operation of a succeeding cell. (ES) 16. Construction of any facilities over the fill area shall not be permitted unless soil engineerinq stUdies approve the suitability of such construction. (ss) 17. During the hours of operation, a supervisor shall be located on the site for the purpose of monitoring and directing the fill activity or the site shall be secured to preclude indiscriminate dumping by the general pLhblie. (P) 18. A plat showing the exact metes and bounds Of the fill area shall be submitted to the Planning Department. Thi~ plat shall note all conditions stated herein and, upon approval by the Planning Department, shall be recorded in the Circuit Court with the property reference. (P) 19. Prior to any filling, the fire control plan shall he approved by the Chesterfield County Fire Prevention Bureau. (P) Vote: Unanimou~ 87S012 In Matoaca Magisterial District, CONTINENTAL LAND SASSY, INC. requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (~-25) on a 639 acre parcel fronting approximately 5,600 feet on the north line of Beach Road, also fronting approximately 6,500 feet on the southeast line of Hensley Read, approximately 2,200 feet northeast of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 109-3 (1) Parcel 1 (Sheet 29), Mr. Jacobsen Stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, s~bject to a single condition and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mr. Delmonte Lewis accepted the recommended conditions. There was no opposition present. Mr. Applegate advised the Board that, because oi his involvement in property across the street from the subject site, he would declare a conflict of interest, pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act, and ~xcused himself from the meeting. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved the request, subject to the following condition and accepted the applicant's proffered condition~: PROPFERED CONDITIONS 1. There shall be no lot recorded with a gross area of less than 30,000 square feet. 2. The total lot yield shall not be more than 0.5 units per acre. 87-127 CONDITION A fifty (50) ~OOt building setback line and buffer, exclu- sive of utility easements, shall be provided on lots adja- cent to Beach ~oad and Hensley Road. The area within this buffer shall be planted and/or le£~ in its natural state ifi there is sufficient vegetation to provide adequate screen- ing. Prior to recordation, the developer shall flag this buffer for inspection by the Planning Department. If sufficient vegetation does not exist, a landscaping plan shall be approved by the Planning Department and a bond posted to cover the cost of implementing the plan, prior to recordation. This building setback line and buffer shall be noted On final check and record plats. The Planning Commission may modify this condition at the time o£ tentative subdivision review to allow for accese break(s) (P&T) Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girune. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Applegate returned to the meeting. Mr. Mayes excused himself from the meeting to attend the Crater Planning Distric~ Commission meeting. 86S162 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, DEWEY L. HURLEY, requested a Conditional Use to permit a second dwelling on one (1) parcel of land. This request lies in an Agricultural (A) District on a 13.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 100 feet on the east line of Newbys Bridge Road, approximately 1,150 feet south of Burnett Drive. Tax Map 64 (1) Parcels 44 and 122 (Sheet 211. Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this rs~uest, subject to certain conditions. Mrs. ~arilyn Hurley accepted the recommended conditions. There was no opposition present. Mr. Applegate stated he had met with the previous landowner and, through the efforts of etaff, thi~ unique situation was resolved. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: 1, occupancy of the second dwelling unit shall be limited, exclusively, to guests and/or family members of the prop- erty owner. At no time shall the unit be rented or sold as a separate use. (P) 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction indicating the requirement of Condition 1. (E) 3, This use shall run with the land. (P) 4. Prior to th~ issuance of a building permit, forty-five (45) feet, measured from the existing centerline of Newbys Bridge Road, shall be dedicated to the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, for future read and utility improvements. (T) Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. ~irone. Absent: ~r. 87-128 In Midlothian Magisterial District, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY requested ~endment to previously granted Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 82s031) in a Residential (R-40) District on a parcel fronting the east line of Robious Crossing Drive at its intersection with Ambergate Drive, and located in the vicinity of Robious Middle Sehool. Tax Map 8-12 (1) Part of Parcel 3 and Part of Parcel 6 (Sheet 2). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Co~ission recommended approval of this request, s~bject to a single condition. Chief Eanes stated, as early as 1982, the Fire Department recognized the need for a fi~e station in the general vicinity of Robious a/%d Huguenot Roads. Be stated recently the County purchased 3.1 acres and is in the process of purchasing an additional 1.537 acres of the Residential (R-40) tract with the intent of developing a fire station. He stated, at its February 4, 1987 meeting, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a special Exception, subject to certain conditions, to permit the fire station in the Residential (R-40) District. Mr. Dodd stated he felt this issue is a health, safety and welfare issue. Mrs. Girone stated the issue in the neighborhood is whether er not this is an appropriate site or if another site ~hould have been chosen instead of this one. She stated she felt the Board should understand why staff chose this site, Mr. Jacobsen stated there has been some discussion regarding whether or not a fire station can be built On that site* HO stated that according to the County zoning ordinance, this use requires a special exception in a residential district. He stated the Board of ZoBing Appeals has determined that this site is appropriate, subject to certain conditions. He stated the issue before the Board is whether or not to exempt this 4.5 acre site from the larger Belgrade development upon which the Board of Supervisors imposed a number of conditions that address improvements necessary to mitigae the impact of a large mixed use project. He stated in the opinion of planning staff and the Planning Corm~i88ion those conditions are inappropriate to this specific fire station and the Planning Condition is recommending this site be exempted from those conditions; however, require that the County staff bring the schematic plan back to the Planning Commission for their review and approval, thereb~ allowing residents to attend the meetings to view the specific design of the site. Mr. Lloyd Journigan, representing area residents, stated their only opposition to this request is to the particular site for the fire station as it will generate increased noise and traffic volumes. He requested the site be relocated to Huguenot Road. Ms. Sandy Payne presented a sur~mation of material to the Board. She stated area residents feel a fire station is obviously needed, however, the more appropriate location for the station Would be on Huguenot Road, not Robious Crossing Drive. Mr. Dodd inquired as to the problem with the site on Muguenot Road. WITS. Girone stated the two issues raised by the public concern relocating the proposed development to Huguenot Road and the noime problem. Mr. Daniel stated this case would not have come before the ~oard for consideration in this form had it not been for the fact that one had to go through the process of going before the Planning Con%mission and the Board o~ Supervisors to get some conditions removed £rom a previous zoning case. He emphasized the fact that this issue is a land use decision. Chief Eanes stated this site was selected in order to provide appropriate fire protection for the area. He stated the County needs a facility in a location to serve the northwestern portion 87-129 of the County. He noted that records indicate approximately 70% of the responses will north and west of the intersection o~ Robious and ~uguenot Roads. He stated he would not want to inject emergency fire apparatus directly onto Huguenot Road which is a major arterial highway, as it would be preferable to approach a major arterial highway from a feeder road. He stated the State requires the use of warning lights and sound apparatus when emergency equipment is responding u~der emergency conditions; however, it is anticipated there will be a minimum of noise as the sirens would not be utilized until much time as the emergency units encounter traffic. Mrs. Girone stated she appreciated and understood the concerns of the area residents, however, she felt the impact of this station will not affect citizens adversely. She stated she feels it will be an attractive site, well buffered, will have access to ~uguenot Road as well as both ways on Robious Road where future development is imminent. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applogate, the Boar approved amending a previously granted Conditional Use Planned Development (82S031) to remove approximately 4.6 acres from the overall planned development, subject to the following condition: Schematic plans shall be submitted to the Planning Commis- sion for approval. (CPC) Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Mayes. Chief Eanes stated it has been suggested that staff meet with area neighbors regarding screening, buffering, etc., of this site and they would be most happy to do sc. 86s121 In Bermuda Magisterial District, J.W.B. PARTNERSHIP requested rezcning from Residential (R-71 to Communit~ Business (B-2) of 1.95 acres lying approximately 420 feet off the east line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also lying approximately 170 feet off the north line of Reymet Road, and northeast of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 82-13 (1) Part of Parcel 64 (Sheet 23). ~r. Jacobsen stated the P~anning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to a single condition. Mr. Dale Gipe accepted the recommended condition. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved this request, subject to the following condition: A thirty (30) foot buffer shall be maintained along the northern and southern boundary and a fifty (50) foot buffer shall be maintained on the eastern boundary. These buffers shall be maintained in their natural state with ne facil- ities permitted in the buffer other than a solid board fence and utilities. If utilities are located in the buffer, they shall be located such that they run generally perpendicular through the buffer. If existing vegetation is not sufficient to screen the use from adjacent properties, additional planting and/or a solid board fence shall be installed to provide sufficient screening. (CPC) Ayes: Mr. Daniel, ~r. Applegate, ~r. Dedd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Mayes. 87-130 86S149 (Amended) In Midlothian Maqisterial District, R AND O ASSOCIATES requested rezoning from Residential Townhousc (R~TH) and Residential (R-7) to Residential (R-9) on approximately' 80 acres lying approximately 130 fee~ off the north line of Looking Glass Road, also frontinq approximately 3,150 feet on the south line of Southern Railroad. Tax Map 9-16 (1) Part of Parcel 1 (Sheet 3). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Ce~mission recommended approval of this request and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. He noted that staff had prepared an addendum to the conditions to better stated the Commission's recommendation. Mr. Kenneth Owens stated the recommendation is acceptable, with the understanding that the intent of proffered condition 2 is that there will be no community swimming pools constructed on the eubjeet With respect to proffered condition 3, Mrs. Girone inquired if the intent of the condition is to include "heated" finished living space. Mr. Owens stated the condition meant "living area", since "heated space" would exclude areas such as solariums, Florida rooms, closets, pantries, etc., which are typically not heated and the condition would be more easily understood if it remained as Written. There was no opposition present. Mrs. Girone stated she felt this project is to the advantage of the neighborhood as it reduces the density and makes the entire area single family residential neighborhood. She stated the developer has worked closely with the leadership in the civic association and they have done a good job. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved the request and accepted of the following proffered conditions: 1. The builder will conve~ to the Greenfield $oooc~ Asso- ciation, at no cost to the Association, the open space land (described as such on the site plans) for the exclusive use of the A~Eeeiation. No swimming pool will be constructed on the site. (Note: At the February 25, 1987, Board cf Supervisors meeting, the applicant's representative indicated that Condition 2 was intended to preclude the construction of community-type pools in the project.) ~. The single family homes shall have a minimum equate footage of 1,600 square feet of finished living space. 4. The following shall be incorporated into the Restrictive Covenants: a. The owner will strive to maintain the integrity of the property and leave as much natural area and trees as possible. b. The single family homes shall be architecturally and cost comparable to the exis%ing homos in Settlers Landing. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, ~Lr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Mayes. 86S158 In Bermuda Magisterial District, DAVID A. BANTY AND GEORGE P. 87-131 EMERSON, JR. requested rezening from Agricultural (A), Residential (R~lS), and Community Business (B-2) to Convenience Business (B-i) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions on a 4.6 acre parcel fronting approximately 405 feet on the north line of West Mundred Road, approximately 1,150 feet west of ~eadowville Road. Tax Map 117-11 (1) Part of Parcel 24; Tax Map 117-11 (2) Riverbend, Section A, LOt 11; Tax Map 117-12 (1) Part of Parcel 20; and Tax Map 117-12 (2) Riverbend, Section A, Lets 1~, 13, and 14 (Sheet 33), Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recon~ended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. Me stated if the Board were to approve this request, staff has prepared an addendum, which has been reviewed with the applicants, which supports the intent of the Planning Commission's recommenda- tions. There was no opposition present. Mr. Jeff Collins accepted the addendum and the Planning Commission's recommended conditions, except for their Condition 16. Me stated the site could be developed with septic tanks and the applicant would connect to public sewer once it is brought to the site and he asked that Condition 16 be amended accordingly. There was considerable discussion relative to the extension of public sewer to the proposed site, who would be responsible for payment of the extension/connection fees, how long it will take for public sewer to be extended to the proposed site, legal requirements, etc. Mr. Harley Young inquired about the extension of public sewer to his prol~erty, which is adjacent to and west of the proposed site, and questioned how Ear he would have to extend sewer, the cost, etc. Mr. Eedrick stated that, generally the process of extending public sewer throughout the County in an orderly process, is based on the policy that the developer pays the cost of extension. He suggested, since Utilities Department staff was not present to answer questions about this matter, it may be appropriate to consider deferring it so the problems/concerns can be resolved. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board deferred consideration of this request until March 25, 1987. Ayes: ~r. Daniel, Mr. Applegate, Mr- Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Mayss 86S161 In Bermuda Magisterial District, GEORGE P. EMERSON requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Light Industrial (M-l) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions on a 1.5 acre parcel fronting approximately lO0 feet on the north line of West Hundred Road, approximately 2,250 feet west of Meadowville Road. Tax Map 117-11 (2) Riverbend, Section A, Lots 4A and 5 (Sheet Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions and, again, staff had prepared an addendum to clarify the Co~ission's recommendation. Mr. Jeff Collins, representing the applicant, accepted the addendum and the Commission's recommendation except for the following. He requested that Condition 6(b) in the addendum be amended to permit ten (10) foot side yards on both sides. He 87-132 noted that he did not feel that the Commission's Condition 2 provided the flexibility his client needed to replace the existing drainfield with another one of the sa~e size. Mr. Hedrick suggested that perhaps this case also should be ~eferred to review/resolve concerns regarding the extension of sewer. Ms. Sue Liptrap opposed this request as she felt it is an inappropriate use for the subject property and is out of character with the existing residential neighborhood. Mr. Daniel excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Dodd pointed out this area is in a rapid transition to business and area residents would probably see more businesses in this area in the future. He pointed out that changes in the land use plan mandate rezoning changes and this area has been affected by those changes. ~here was further discussion regarding the reduction in the buffer along the eastern boundary from thirty (30) feet to ten (10) feet. Mr. McCraoken stated that until the access plan for the area was approved, no decision should be made on the ~bandonment of the existing County right-of-way. Dn motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Soard approved this request, subject to the following conditions: 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Charles C. Townes and Associates, P.C. dated August 6, 1985, and the Textual Statement submitted with the application shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. At such time as public sewer is extended to the site, all structures shall be connected to public sewer. (BS) In conjunction with the approval of this request, a seventy (70) foot exception to the 100 foot setback reguirement where adjacent to residential zoning shall be granted. A ten (10) foot buffer shall be maintained along the eastern boundary, within the thirty (30) foot setback along the northern boundary of the site and the ten (10) foot buffer along the eastern boundary cf the site, landscaping having a sufficient initial height and of a species which will provide year-round screening shall be installed. Other than utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, and a fence, if desired, ~here shall be no facilities permitted in the buffer. A conceptual landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval in con- junction with schematic plan review. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. IBS) ~. Signs shall comply with the requirements of the Special Sign District for shopping centers or similar group of buildings in a Convenience Business (B-l) District. Landscaping shall be provided around the bases of the freestanding sign. Sign colors and styles shall be com- patible with the architectural style of the buildings. Prior to erection of any signs, a complete sign package depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (P) 5. Yards. The following yard requirement shall apply: (a) Setbacks along Route 10. All buildings and drives shall have a minimum seventy-five foot setback from the proposed right-of-way of Route 10, as indicated on the Chesterfield General Plan, as amended. Parking 87-133 areas shall have a minimum one hundred foot setbae~ from the proposed right-of-way of Route 10. The parking area setback may be reduced to seventy-fiv~ feet when parking areas are located to the side rear of buildings. Within these setbacks, landscapinc shall be provided in accordance with Condition 10 (f). (b) Side yards. The side yard setbacks for buildings, drives, and parking areas shall be a minimum of thirt~ feet. The minimum corner side yard shall be fort5 feet. One foot shall be added to each side yard fox each three feet that the building height adjacent thereto exceeds forty-five feet Or three stories, whichever is less, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. It) Rear yard. The minimum rear yard setback for build~ ~ngs, drives, and parking areas shall be fifty feet. One foot shall be added to each rear yard for three feet that the building height adjacent theret¢ exceeds forty-five feet or three stories, whichever less, subject, however, to the provisions of Sootier 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) 6. Permitted Variations in Yard Requirements. The required minimum front and side yards may be reduced with the provision of additional landscaping: (a) Setbacks along Route 10. The required setback fox buildings and drives along Route ID may be reduced t¢ fifty (50) feet with the provision of landscaping ir accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3], "Psrimetex Landscaping C." The required setback for parkin~ areas may be reduced to ~ifty (50) feet with th~ provision of landscaping in accordance with Ccnditio~ 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C," and when suol parking areas are located to the side and rear buildings. (b) Side yard. The required side yards may be reduced tc ten (10) feet with the provision of landscaping ir accordance with Condition 10, (g) (2), "Perimetei Landscaping ~." (P) (c) Rear ~ard. The required rear yard may be reduced t¢ thirty (30) feet with the provision of the buffs! described in Condition 2. 7. Utility lines underground. Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. This requirement shall apply t¢ lines serving individual sites as well as to utility lines necessary within the project, All junction and boxes shall be screened with appropriate landscaping. Ali utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the sit~ plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, otc., shall be recognized and integrated with the archi- tectural elements of the site plan. (P) 8. Loading areas. Sites shall be designed and buildings shall be oriented so that loading areas are not visible from the adjacent residential property to the north or from Route lO. (~) 9. Driveways and parking areas. Driveways and parking areas shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or other similar material. Surface treated parking areas and drives shall be prohibited. Concrete eurb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas, Drainage shall he designed sc as not to interfere with pedestrian traffic. 87-134 10. ~.andscaping Requirements. (a) Purpose and Intent. A comprehensive landscaping p~cqram for the site essential for the visual enhancement of the Corridor and to protect and promote the appearance, character and economic values of land along the Corridor an, surrounding neighborhoods. The purpose and intent such landscaping requirements is also to reduce visibility of paved areas from adjacent properties streets, moderate climatic effects, minimize noise and glare, and enhance public safety by defining spaces influence traffic Movement. Landscaping will reduce the amount Of storm water runoff and provide transition between neighboring properties. (b) Landscapin~ Plan and Planting Requirements. (1) A landscaping plan shall be submitted in con- junction with site plan approval. Such landscaping plan shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances, and clearly delineate all existing and proposed parking spaces o: other vehicle areas, access aisles, driveways, and the location, size and description of all landscaping materials. (o) Plant Materials Specifications. (1) ~uality. All plant materials shall be living and in a healthy condition. Plant materials used in conformance with the provision of theme speci-: fications shall conform to the ~tandards of the most recent edition of the "American Standard for Nursery Stock," published by the A~erican Association cf Nurserymen. (2) size and Ty~e. (a) Small Deciduous Trees. Small deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature, crown spread of greater than twelve (12) feet. A minimum caliper of at least two and one-half (2 1/2) inches at the time of planting shall be required. (b) Large Deciduous Trees. Large deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature crown spread of greater than thirty (30) feet. A minimu~ caliper of at least three and one-hal~ (3 1/2] inches at the time of planting shall be required. (c) Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shall have a minimum height of five (5) feet at the time of planting. (d) Medium shrubs. Shrubs and hedge forms shell have a minimum height of two (2) feet at the time of planting. (~) Landscapin~ Design. (a) Generally, planting required by this section should be in an irregular line and spaced at random. 87-135 Ce) (f~ (b) Clustering of plant and tree species shall be required to provide a pleasing composi- tion and mix of vegetation. (c) Decorative walls and fences may be inte- grated into any landscaping program. The use of such walls or fences, when having a minimum height of three (3) feet, may reduce the amount of required plant materials at the discretion o~ the Director of Planning. (4) Tree Preservation. (a) Preservation of existing trees is encouraged to provide continuity, improved buffering ability, pleasing scale and image along the Corridor. (b) Any healthy existing tree may be included for credit towards the requirements of this Condition. Maintenance. (1) The owner, or his agent, shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all landscaping materials as may be required. (2) Ail plant material shall be tended and maintained in a healthy growing condition and free from refuse and debris at all times. All unhealthy, dying or dead plant materials shall be replaced during the next planting season. (3) All landscaped areas shall be provided with a readily available water supply. The utilization of underground storage chambers to collect runoff to be later used to ir~iga%e plant materials is encouraged. Installation and Bonding Requirements. (1) All landscaping shall be installed in a sound, workmanship-like manner and according to accept- ed, good planting practice~ and procedures. LaP,soaped areas shall require protectie~ from vehicular encroachment by such means as, but not limited to, wheel stops or concrete or bituminous curbs. (2) Where landscaping is required, no certificate of occupancy shall be issued until the required landscaping is completed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. When the occupancy of a structure is desired prior to the completion of the required landscaping, a certificate of Occupancy may bo issued only if the owner or developer provides to the County a form of surety satisfactory to the Planning Department in an amount equal to the costs of the remaining plant materials, related materials and installation (3) All required landscaping shall be installed and approved by the first planting season following issuance of a certificate of occupancy or the bond shall be forfeited to the County. A~terial Frontage Landscaping. Landscaping shall be required along Route 10 the require~ setback and shall be provided within except 87-136 (g) where driveways or other openings may be necessary. The minimum required landscaping for this setback shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping B" below. Perimeter Landscaping. Landscaping shall be provided at the outer boundaries or in the required yards, except where driveways or other openings, may be required. The minimum required landscaping for all outer boundaries shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscapinq A" below. There shall he different landscaping requirements as identified herein, which nhell be provided an follows: (1) Perimeter Landscaping A. (a) At least one small deciduous ~ree for each fift~ lineal feet and at least one evergreen for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At lnant One medium shrub for each twenty lineal ieet shall be planted within the (c] Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- senably di~perned throughout. (2) Perimeter Landscaping B. (a) At least one large deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at leant one evergreen for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At least one small deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) At least one medium shrub for each fifteen lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. OR: (a) A minimum three (3) foot high undulating berm, and (b) Perimeter Landscaping A. (3) Perimeter Landsea~'~ng c. (a) At least one la~ge deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen tree for each thirty lineal ~eet shall be planted within the setback area, {b) At least one small deciduous tree for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (o) At least one medium shrub for each ten lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. 87-137 11. OR: A minimum four (4) foot high undulating berm, and Perimeter Landscaping (h) Landscapi~ standards ~or Parking Areas. (1) Interior parking area landscaping. (a) The parking area(s) shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior land- scaping for each space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten feet. with the provision of this landscaping, parking apace ~ize may be reduced to 9.5 x 18 feet or 185.5 square feet. (b) The primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Each required landscaped area shall include at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition. The total number of trees shall not be less tha~ one for each 200 square feet, or fraction there- of, of required interior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs and other vegetative material to compliment the tree landscaping. (c) Landscaping areas shall be r~a~ona]nly divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required land- ~caped area. (2) Peripheral parking area landscaping. (a) Peripheral landscaping shall be required along any side of a parking area that abuts land not in the right of way of a street A landscaped ~trip at least ten feet in width shall be located between the parking area and the abutting property lines, except where driveways or other openings may be required. Continuous hedge forms or at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition, shall be planted in the landscaped strip for each fifty lineal feet. The architectural treatment of all buildinq~ shall be such that no building facade Iwhether front, side, or rear) ~uality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. Mo portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Route Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened f~om public view and de- signed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Elevations and/or renderings depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval in conjunction with schematic plan review. 87-138 12. Ail sxterier lights shall be arranged and installed so that ~he direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line of any adjoining residential district or Route 10. Lighting standards shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from dires~ view. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planninq Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 13. Tn conjunction with schematic plan review, an overall access plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Transportation Department for the area north of Route 10 from Earbour East to the proposed access into River Bend subdivision. (T) 14. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, one hundred feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Route 10, shall be dedicated to and for Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted. 15. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Route 10 for its entire property frontage. (T) 16. Prior to, or in conjunction with, final site plan approval, a utility easement shall be dedicated along Route 10 to acecn~odate a parallel force main. The width of the easement shall be determined at the time of site plan review. (U) additional land use (No~e: At the time of schematic plan review, conditions may be imposed to further insure compatibility and quality development.) Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayes. 87S007 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, TME AcQUEST CORPORATION requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to office Business (0) on a 2.2 acre parcel fronting approximately 349 feet on the east line of Branchway Road, approximately 420 feet south of Southlake Boulevard. Tax Map 17-13 (l) Parcels l~ and 16 (Sheet 8). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recon~ended approval of this request and acceptance o~ the applicant's proffered conditions. Mr. Don Balzer stated the recommendation wa~ acceptable. There was no opposition present. Mr. Applegate requested that staff review the Northern Area Plan to clarify where the line between industrial and medium density residential land uses south of Southport was located in the approved plan. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request and accepted the following proffered conditions: I. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved in conjunction with the site plan approval depicting the following requirements: i. The interior of the parking area shall be land- scaped ~o a~ to break up the expanse o~ pavement. 87-139 2. '~rovide ~roper buffering© for the lesidential ~eas to _he south. 3. Provide low level lighting to minimize effect on the residential areas and provide adequate transition from the industrial zoned property to the north. A detail signage package with street address signs and their locations. II. Building erected On this parcel shall not exceed two (2) stories in height. III. Structures to be erected on this parcel shall have either a Colonial Williamsburq design similar to the proposed Huguenot Professional Park being developed by the Woolfolk Companies, or an all brick contemporary similar to the project at the southeast corner of $cuthlake Boulevard and Branchway Road. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Gircne. Absent: Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayes. Mr. Daniel returned to the meeting. 87s011 In Midlothian Magisterial District, INVESTORS SERVICE CORPORATION, TOPVALCO, INC. re~dested amendment to a previously granted Conditional Ume Planned Development (Case 85S066) rela- tive to uses, parking and setbacks in a community Business District on a 23.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 1,250 feet on the north line of Midlothian Turnpike across from Sturbridge Drive, also fronting approximately 70 feet on southwest line of Robious Road, approximately 820 feet southeast of Fernleaf Drive. Tax Map 17-7 (1) Parcels 13, 22, 23, 26, 32, and 53 (sheet 8). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. ~r. Willis ~lac~ood accepted the recommended conditions. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the approved the request, subject to the following conditions: 1. Board The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by J.K. Timmons and Associates, P.C., dated November 4, 1986, revised November 10, 1986, and the Textual Statement dated November 14, 1986, revised November 25, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 2 of Condi- tional Use Planned Development $5S066.) The request parcels may be considered one (1) zoning lot for the purpose of calculating parking and setback re- quirements if the tract is subdivided and sold to different entities. If the request property is subdivided and driveways and parking areas are to be used in common by the tenants located on the property, cross easement agreement~ shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. Upon approval, the cross easement agreements shall be recorded. (P) (Note: Should any parcel be subdivided or sold without an approved cross easement agreement, parking and setback 87-140 reguirements will be calculated individually and separate from the original request parcels.) 3. Parking areas shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior landscaping for each space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum o~ 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten (10) feet. With the provision of this landscaping, parking space size may be reduced to 9.5' x 18' or 171 square fee~. A conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 4. In addition to Con, unity Business (B-2) uses, and the use exceptions previously permitting the following General Business (B-S) uses shall be permitted: a. Motor vehicle repair, Hotel and motel, c. Motor vehicle wash in conjunction with gasoline sales operation. The motor vehicle wash or motor vehicle repair shall not be located adjacen~ to Avon Park. (Note: All previously imposed conditions o~ Conditional Use Planned Development $5S066 remain applicable.) Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Applegate, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent; Mr. Mayes. Mr. Daniel announced the Board of Supervisors had been invited to attend the formal signing by Governor Baliles of the Chesterfield County Charter hill at the Governor's office at 11:00 a.m. on February 26, 1987. 12. ADJO~%NMENT On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board adjourned at 5:15 p.m. (EST) until 6:00 p.m. on March 5, 1987. Ayes: ~r. Daniel, ~r. Applegate, M~. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr, Mayes, Ric~rd L. Eedrick County Administrator Chairman 87-141