Loading...
11-22-1989 MinutesBOARD OF SUP~:RV~r$ORS M~IUT~S WOVF-4~3~'.R 22, 1~89 Mr. G. H. Applegate, Chairman Mr. C. F. Currin, Jr., Vice Chairman Mr. Harry G. Daniel Mr. Jesse J. Mayes Mr. M. B. Sullivan Mr. Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator Sta~ in Attendance: Mr. Ed Beck, Asst. Dir. of Utilities Ms. ~y Davis, Exec, Assr. to Co. Admin. Mrs. Doris DeSart, Asst. CO. Admin., Legis. Svcs. and In~ergovern. Af£~irs · Ms. JOan Dolezal, Clark to the Soard Chief Robert Hanes., Fir~ Department Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Deputy Co. Admin., Management Services Mr. William H. Howell, Dir., Gen. Services Mr. Thomas E. Jacobsen, Dir. of Planning Ms. Mary Leu Lyle, Dis. of Accounting Mr. Robert Masden, Deputy Co. Admin., Human Services Mr. R. J. McCracken, Transp. Director Mr. Richard McElfish, Dir. of Env. Eng. Mr. Gary McLaren, Dir, of ~oonomic Developmt. Mr. Steve Micas, Co. Attorney Mrs. Pauline Mitchell, Dir. of News/Info. Services Mr. William D. Peele, Chief, Development Review, Planning Dept. Mr. Richard Sale, Deputy Co. Admin., Development Mr. Jay Stegmaier, Dir. of Budget Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Dir. of Parks & Rec. Mr. Frederick Willis, Dir. of Human Resource Management Mr. Applegate called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. (EST). 1. INVOCATION Mr. Applegate introduced Dr. Charles H. Chandler, Huguenot Baptist Church, who gave the invocation. Pastor of 89-1000 Mr_ Paul T. ~iller, Jr.~ ~anager ~or Suburban Richmond, with C&P Telaphone Company led the Ple~g~ of A!legiancs to the Flag of the United Statss of America. 3+ ~PROVAL OF ~I~u'r~S On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. SRllivan, the Board approved the mimosas of November 8, 1989, as mubmitted. VQ~e: Unanimous ~. ~O~NTY A~MINISTKATOR'S COMMENTS The Board welcomed Mr. RiQhar~ $ale, Deputy County Administra- tor for Development, tc the meetin~ ~pon his return from a rsc~nt illness and commended Mr, Lewis wendell for his capable p~rfor~anc~ of dntiss during Mr. Sale's absence. 5. BOARD COI.~I'I~EE Mr. B~niel reported he attended the Virginia Association of Counties' {¥ACc) annual ~e~tinq a% which ther~ was discussion regarding VACo~s continued ~upport for the recommendation of the Joint Task Force (copies of which be presented %0 the Board) rela=ive to the Grays~n Commission Report, that the UACo legislativ~ priorities for this year have been eon~ense~ to focus on priority issues, several of which he outlined; attended the VACo ~xecutive Committee meeting at which thers wa~ discussion relative to the report on the Commission on Jails, of which a particular concern to him wa~ that every locality identify a potential mite within the localit~ for 1,000-hsd jail facility, to which he felt the Coun=y's regional jail concept complimd; ~e~erenoed the approval of a VACo resolution re~esting the F~deral gover~ent =o make availabl~ all funds ~ur highway construction that ere currently b~ing withSeld; and referenced a packet of Virginia Association Planning Di~trict~' leqislative material which h~ suggested included at the ne~t meetin~ of =he ~eqi~lativ~ Gon~i~tee and ~he G~n~ral Asse~bl~ delegation~ He noted the Ric~ond Regional Planning District Co--lesion r~uently =~lebrated its 20th Anniversary at the Virginia Muse~ at which Congressman Bliley's remark~ wer~ positive regarding regional cooperation and a Chesterfield County flag was pre~nt~d. Mr. Mayas reported he attended th~ Shiloh Baptist Chnroh Centennial ~nnlv~r~ary service at which he was presented with pens and an anniversary CUp as an expression of appreciation for the Board'~ recognition of ~e church's contrlbution~ and service to the c~unity; the EdUcation Advisory Co~ittee %he Council of Infers=ion ~anagement to review its final report on education in the Co~onwealth prior to its being forwarded to th~ Oov~rnor and General Assembly; the RichmOnd Regional Planning District Co~ission anniversary flaq ~edication ceremony a= ~ Harrowgate Elementary School which SenatOr Robert Russell presented flags in recognition of th~ school's ~0=h anniversary; and participated in Veteran's Day R~membrance event conducted a~ ~he Complex. ~r. Sullivan reported he a~tended the V~teran's Day Reme~rance program and co--ended Mr. Baxter Perkiu$on for his o~ts~an~ing efforts in =his endeavor; the Richmond Regional Planniag District Cotillion Anniversary u~lebration and c~ended Daniel for his leadership in this endeavor; an~ chaired the Water Resource Task Fo~c~ m~e~ing at which a ~uboo~ittee fo~ed and currently i$ in the process of ga~r~ng data to 89-1001 better utilize the water resources of the Richmond Reqional District. Mr. Currin reported he attended the Youth Services Award Program at Meadowbrook High School at which students were honored for their service to the citizens of the County; the Social Services Board meeting and requested that staff review the possibility of including social services needs with school and public utility need~ in conjunction with an issue on the agenda requesting virginia lottery proceeds be returned to the localities for capital expenditures; and attended a ribbon-cutting ceremony to open a portion of Route 288 (bridge over Route 1), which he felt would be a vital link in the road n~twork. Mr. Applegate reported he, Mr. Ramsey and Mr. McCracken attended the Virginia Department of Transportation roundtable meeting conducted at the Holiday Inn-Koger Center, at which local jurisdiction members and VDOT staff had the opportunity to informally discuss the improvement of relationships between local governments and VDOT; he stated they also discussed, in particular, several aspects of the County's Revenue Sharing Program; discussed with the Transportation Board the ramifications of modifying the criteria for through truck traffic restrictions; and potential funding mechanisms for the 1-895 bridge connecting Chippenham Parkway and Laburnum Avenue for which there were several suggestions, one being the initiation oi dialogue between Chesterfield Countyt Henrico County and the City of Richmond for raising partial funding at the local level. Mr. Daniel noted there have been previous discussions at the Metropolitan Planning Organization level relative to local jurisdictions funding a portion of the expense for the 1-895 bridqe connecting Chippenham Parkway and Laburnum Avenue which were not very well received but perhaps should be reinitiated; and further noted that, in terms of impact fees, Chesterfield should follow the example of Northern Virginia to the extent feasible regarding transportation networks, needs and contributions. 6. REQUESTS TO ~OSTPON~ ACTION, ~RGENCY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES IN T~E O~ER OF PRESENTATION When asked Mr. Micas indicat~d that, although Mr. Currin had previously declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act when discussions transpired relative to Item 9.B., Approval of Financing for Johnson's Creek Drainage Project and Setting a Public Hearing Data to Impose a Drainag~ Service District on a Portion of the Johnson's Creek Development District and Item 9.C., Johnson's Creek Drainage District, a conflict of interest did not exist regarding his voting on amending the agenda and, therefore, he could vote at this time. On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board added Item 7.C., Resolution Declaring the Week of November 26 - December 2, 1989 ae "National Home Care Week"; deferred until January 10, 1990 Item 9.B., Approval of Financing for Johnson's Creek Drainage Project and Setting a Public Hearing Date to Impose a Drainage Servio~ District on a Portion cf the Johnson's Creek Development District; deferred until January 10, 1990 Item 9.C., Johnson's Creek Drainage District; moved out of sequence Item ll.J.2.b., Request to Extend Water Service to Glebe Point Subdivision, to be heard after Item 8.; and adopted the agenda, as amended. 89-1002 WHEREAS, MZ, ~al=olm M. Hutton, representing the Dale ~aBisterial Di~trict~ has bean a dedicated member of the chesterfield Community Services Board since 1982 and who iS no longer sligible for reappointment7 and with mental disabilities while a member of the Board and in his having established an outreach ministry in cooperation with the United Way for persons who lack th~ ba~i= needs of food and WEEREAS, The County o~ Chesterfield values the many contribution~ of time and ~ffort provided by Mr. Hutto~ to improv~ the quality of life for all Chesterfield County citizens. NOW, T~P~FORE B~ IT Pd~SOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of s~pervisors hereby expresses, it~ $in~ere gratitude an~ appreciation t0 Mr. Malcolm M. ~utt~n for dedicated co~t~itment as a member of the Chesterfield Community Services Board and his assistance in the provision of q~ality ~sntal health, mental retardation and substanc~ abuse services to the ¢iti=ens of Chestezfleld County. Vote: Unanimou~ ~r. Daniel presented the ~xecuted resolution to Mr. Hutton, c0~ended him for his distinguished service and commitment to improve the quality o~ life in the County and recognized ~rB. HUttOn who was also present. y.B,. R~COGNI~ING__._ DECEMBER 1 -10, 1989 AS "HUNGER AWARENESS WEEK" On morion of the Board, th~ following reaolution wag adopted: WHEREAS, Th~ Ridhmond Association of REALTORS and Richfood, Inc. are sponsoring the Chriatmaa CanTrae project, a community food drive taking place during the week of Deuember - 10, ~9~9 in 0ooperation with a number cf other commUnity-spirited organi~a%ioms; WHEREAS, The Chris,mas CanTree is a symbolic twenty-five ~oot Christmas tree located at Regency Square and consisting of 35,000 cans of food donat~ by Richfood, Inc.; and collect a total of 100~O0Q cans of food from concerned citizens to be distributed to =he needy via the Central Virginia Foo~bank. NOW, TKEREFORE EB IT RESOLVED, that the ch~$terfie!d County Roard of Supervisors does hereby recognize Decembe~ 1 - 10, 1989 as "HUnger Awareness W~sk" in Virgini~ au4 commend all those associated wiB. h the Christma~ Centres project for their commitment to helping fi§he hunger in th~ Commonwealth. Mr. Applegate stat¢~ the executed resolution would be forwarded to the Richmond Association of P~ALTORS Co,unity S~rvioe Co~t~ittee and/or Richfood, 89-1003 7.C. D~CLARING THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 26 - DECEMBER 2, 1989 AS "NATIONAL HOME CARE WEEK" On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: W~EREAS, November 26 through December 2, 1989 is recognized as "National Home Care Week" in the United States; WEEP~EAS, Home care is much more than preventive medicine--it is the most humane form of health care; and WHeReAS, Since the 18th century, home care services have provided our disabled and elderly population with compassionate and comprehensive care; and WBEREAS, Hc~e ease is an effective and economical alternative to institutionalization and maintains the dignity and independence of the ill and disabled. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors does hereby declare the wsek of Novemben 26 through December 2, 1989 as "Home Care Wesk" in Chesterfield County and calls this recognition to the attention of its citizens. Vote; Unanimous Mr. Applegate stated the executed resolution would be forwarded to the appropriate individuals at a later date. HEARINGS OF CITIZENS ON UNSC~EDUr. RD MATTERS OR CLAIMS There wets no hearing of cltizsns on unscheduled matters or claims. ll.J.2.b. REQUEST TO EXTEND WATER SERVICE TO GLEBE POINT SUB- DIVISION Mr. Sale stated that residents of Skybird Road and Skybird Court in Glebe Point Subdivision are experiencing well problems and have petitioned the County for public service in their area. Re stated the Utility Department has conducted a survey in the two (2) sections of Glebe Point that do not have public water and has received 16 contract agreements from 23 home- owners in Section 2 (69.6%) and 5 of the 12 (41.7%1 homeowners in Section 1 that would connect to public water if it were made available. Re stated the estimated cost of extending public water to Section 1 is $92,000 and to Section 2, $214,000. Re stated that in compliance with the Board of Supervisors recently adopted policy requiring water and sewer extensions to existing developments be financed through establishment of assessments districts, staff notified the residents of both Sections 1 & 2 o£ a meeting to discuss financing the extensions by establishing an assessment district; however, none of those attending the meeting were receptive to this method of financing the extension, se stated ~r. Mayss held a meeting with the homeowners in Section 2 on Monday, November 6, 1989 at which time Mr. Mayes requested staff to prepare an agenda item for the Novembmr 22, 1989 Board meeting to reconsider the extension of public water. He pointed out, however, since only 41.7% of the homeowners in Section 1 indicated public water was desired, this area was dropped from further consideration at thi~ time. Be ~tated Mr. Mayes also expressed the desire that the connection fee be at the old rate of $1,000; however, the County Attorney's office advised that the Board may not legally consider the $1,000 fee and that the fee must be $2,307 in accordance with the adopted ordinance. 89-1004 severity of those problems; the typ~ Of testing performed on wells~ the estlma~ed increased value of these lots with public th~ existing li~t of projects approved by the Board prior to =he adoption of said policy; identification of an alternative funding source for the approved~ how many total lots would be served if public water lines were extended; th~ actual connection fee cost tO the cost of extending existing public water one black to the and newer extensions to e~isting develo~menbs be financed through establishment of assessments districts and voiced exemption to such action as being unfair as any change in thee policy could impact all County far,payers. Mr. Mayas stated that when the Board adopted said policy the problems in Glebe POint Subdivision already ~xi~te~, Chat he did not feel the implementation of an assessment district was applicable to this situation, and that the governing body should give the same volvod alonq Rexmoor Drive in Stonehenge Subdivision. Mr. ~ayes moved approval, s~¢onded by Mr. Daniel, of the the a~ount of $92,000 and Section 2, in ~he amoun~ o~ ~214~000, Wast County Water Line, Project 890643R, to th~ Glebe ~olnt There wa~ £urth~r discussion relative to how many more such mxtend public water services ~o Chair areas~ the impact of thio connection to publiu water service; the overall financial burden of expense of providing public water to ell re~ident~ currently utilizing well water ranging in the millions of dollars; Mr. Daniel asksd if Mr. Mayas would consider a thiTty day citizens to review their options and explain in more detail the Mr. Mayas stated that he had no objection to a deferral if the residents in this area to review %he problem and agree upon 2 so that staff and the District Supervisor could meet with back to the Board at tkat 89-100~ Mr. Sullivan stated he did not feel his decision relative to this matter was a cursory decision, that the burden of expense for this project should not be borne by the ratepayers, and that he would not support a thirty day deferral. Mr. Daniel stated he felt the issue at hand was the establishment of an assessment district versus no public water ~ervice at all for this area and that the intent of his substitute motion was to allow a period of time for discussions So that ares homeowners could fully understand the ramifications of an assessment district and its direct affect upon them. Mr. Applegate stated there is an existing policy in effect and the issue being discussed should either be approved or denied. Mr. Daniel called for the question end the vote was as follow~: Ayes: Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayee. Nays: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Currin and Mr. Sullivan. There was further discussion relative to how many years finans- lng would be involved and what the breakdown would be per year per homeowners if the assessment district were established. Mr. Ra~sey stated the financing would be for 10 years at an annual payment of $900 per year in addition to interest or $75 per month. Mr. Currin stated the establishment of an assessment district is the mechanism by which these residents can be assisted with their water p~oblems and he felt it was a viable avenue. Mr. Micas restated the original motion by Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, for approval of the extension of public water to the homeowners in Glebe Point Subdivision, Section 1 in the amount of $92,000 and Section 2 in the amount of $214,000, respectively, with funding to be transferred from the Water Capital Improvement Budget Funds, West County Water Line, Project 890643R, to the Glebe Point Water Project. Ayes: Mr. Mayes. Nays: Mr. Apptegate, Mr. Currin and Mr. ~ullivan. Abstained: Mr. Daniel. It was generally agreed to recess for five (5) minutes. 9. DEFEP~ED ITEMS 9.A. PUBLIC BEARING TO CONSIDER A LEASE TO THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION OF PARCEL OF LAND BOUNDED BY COURTH~USE ROAD ~XT~MD~D AND KRAUS~ ROAD CONTAINING APPROXIS~kTELY 17 ACRES AS A S~TE FOR T~ C~STE~FTELD COUNTY FAIR Mr. Micas stated that, at its September I3, 1989 meeting, the Board approved an Interim Land Use Agreement 'between Chesterfield County and the Chesterfield County Pair A~ociatfon for the use of a 17-acre parcel bounded by Krause Road and Courthouse Road Extended to cover use of the parcel for the 1989 Fair. Be stated that, in anticipation of a similar use for future years, a subsequent public hearing was scheduled to consider a ten-year lease agreement between the County and the Chesterfield County Fair Association for said use. He noted the term of the lease would remain ten years, with the possibility of renewal in five-year increments by agreement of the parties. Mr. Jerry Hancock, representing the Chesterfield County Fair Association, voiced support for the proposed agreement. 89-1006 Mr. Daniel inquired if the $¢hool Adminis=ration knew o~ theee arrangsments. Mr. Hammer stated they Were aware and there ~heuld nee he a problem since the Fair is ached:led prior to ~chool reopening. On motion of Mr. Sullivant seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved a Lease Agreement between the County of Chesterfield and the Chesterfield County Fair Association for the use of a I?-acre parcel hounded by Krause Road and Courthouse Road Extended to cover use of the parcel for Fair events, which Agreement is subject to certain modifications, and which iz effective for a period of ten (lO) years commencing this dale and ending December 31, 1999 but may be extended by agreement of the parties for additional five {5) year terms, with the initial ten-year period being renegotiated by the County at such time as ~ proposal for a permanen~ buildiag is approved by the Planning Department. 9.D. STR~T LIGHT INSTALLATION COST APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Appteqat~, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved the coot for street light installation at 4401 ~undred Road. Clov~r ~11 District, in the amount of $299 to be expended from the Clover Hill Street Light Fund; and approved Virginia Power alternative locatio~ fur street light installa- tion on an existing pole, located roughly halfway between the two Iouation$ of the intersection of Milhrae Court and Milbrae Road and the intersection of Milbrae Road and Re,bridge Road, which light should be able to provide illumination to both of the intersections concerned, there being ~O COSt associated with the in~tallation of a street light on the existing pole and no impact on any of the hOmeOwners involved. Vote~ Unanimoue o TO CQ~SIDER AN AMENDMENT TO TH~ 1989-90 ~UDSET TO APPROPRIATE $1,300~U00 IN ANTICIPATED ~V~NUE FROM T~ $A5~ OF LAND TO PURCHASE PROPERTY IN T~ COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK ~r. Micas ==a=ed =hi~ date and time had been approved to consider an amendment tc the 1959-90 Budg~ to appropriate $1,3Q0,O00 in anticipated revenue from the eele of land to purchase property in the County Industrial Park and to au=horize the counky Administrator and/er Chairman of the ~oard ~ark~tability of the ScanC~nter huil~ing tO prospective On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. C~rrin, th= Board emended the 1989-90 Budget by appIopriating $1,300,000 in ScanCenter property in the Chestar£ield County Airport 89-1007 the said property, with the purchase terms: subject to the following 1. Payment by Chesterfield County of $1,300,000 to Union Bank of Norway at closing to be held on November 22, 1989 or as soon thereafter as possible; 2. Agreement by the County to pay one-half of all unpaid interest due through November 22, 1989 upon resale of th~ property by the County or expiration of twelve months from November 22, 1989, whichever Occurs first (total unpaid interest as of November 22, 1989 is $132,454.14; interest accrues at a rate Of $576.63 a day); and 3. Transfer of the fifteen-acre parcel to the County by deed from ScanCenter, Inc. and Union Bank of Norway free and clear of all liens and restrictions. Vote: Unanimous 11. m~W BUSINESS ii.A. ACQUISITION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY FOR MATOACA PARK Mr. Masden stated Mr. Carroll Faster, who owns property adjacent to Matoaca Park, contacted the County and offered to sell the County 13.73 acres of the property for $65,916 which equates to $4,800 per acre; however, both the County Assessor and an independent appraiser hired by the County have appraised tho property at approximately $3,000 per acre or $41,190. He noted the existing park is fully developed and the property owned by Mr. Foster would permit a future expansion of the park but Mr. Foster has been unwilling to accept a lower offer. He stated if the Board desired to purchase said property, sufficient funds would be available from the 1988 Parks Bond proceeds but, if used, would substantially reduce the funding available for the Harrowgate Park project. Ee stated the County Attorney estimates that the cost of acquiring the property by eminent domain, including court costs, would be less than Mr. Easter's offer of $65,916. There was brief discussion relative to the monetary differences in the market value requested by the property owner versus the appraised value by the County and an independent appraiser; the seeking of alternative avenues for expansion of the park; whether or not the subject property is road ~rontage property; whether or not to utilize the process of eminent domain to acquire said property; the need for further review and negotiation; the total number of acres owned by. the property owner; whether or not the property owner has the option to take legal action if tho County were to use eminent domain; etc. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred until January 10, 1989, c6nsideration of the acquisition of additional property for Matoaca Park. Vote: Unanimous ll.B. AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE ON COGBILL ROAD, TO ACCEPT A CONVEYANCE OF THE REAL ESTATE AND TO TRANSFER FUND~ TO PURCHAB~ TH~ REAL ESTATE Mr. Currin stated that at =he November 8, 1989 meeting he disclosed to the Board that his business partner was involved in negotiations with Continental Land Sales, Inc. regarding the acquisition of real property for public use, declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the Executive Session. He stated that, subsequent to that meeting, his 89-1008 business partner has withdrawn his offer, the County Attorney has advised him that a conflict of ~n%erest ne iengar and, therefore, he intended to vote on the purcha~ of real estate on CogbiL1 Road. There was brief discussion relative to the prapesed u~e for subject property az a future school or park ~ite, anticipated use of funds from the sale of the property; On motion oi Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board authorized the County Administrator to enter into a contract with Continental Land Sales, Inc. to purchase approximately 210 acres of land along Cogbill Road near Belmont Road in the Dale Magisterial District; accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of the approximately 210 acres of land along Cogbill Road near Belmont Road in the Dal~ Magisterial District; aad authorized the County AAmlnlstrator to sxecu=e the necessary deed; and transferred $630~000 from the Capital Improvement Reserve to the Capital Improvement ~nd to purchase said proper~y. (A copy of 8aid ~lat is filed wi~h the papers of this Board.] ll.C. ~SOLUTION REOUESTING VIRGINIA LOTTERY PROCEEDS TO B~ RETURKED TO LOCALITIES FOR FUnDInG OF CAPITAL ~XPENDI- TURES There was discussion relative to the consideration of addition ~o the 1990 County legislative program requesting the return of l~ttery proceeds to the localities for funding of capital e×panditurea (i.e., construction' of public sewage system, renovation/additions to schoele, social services, structure of the resolution to coincide with a Virginia Association of Counties resolution ~egar~iag draft resolhtien to be brought to the Board for consideration and, which resolution upon approval, woul~ be added to the 1990 County Legislative Program requesting that Virginia lottery proceeds be returned ~e localities ~or funding oi capital expenditures. Vote: Unanimous The Board requested that, upon cemplctien of the draft resolution, Buckingham and Netteway Counties be advised of the SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ll.D.1. TO CONSID=R APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR ACQUISITION OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT After a brief diseu~ion, it was on ~otion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Applegate, resolved that the Board set the date of December 13, 1999, at 9:00 a.m., ~or a public hearing to consider the appropriation of $2,015,570 lea~e purchase proceeds for the acquisition o£ com~uter equipment fo~ Information System Technclo9y's 3090 computer upgra~ project. Mr. Sullivan e×~ressed concern relative to the Usa of the lease purchase process and reques=ed that staff, in the future, seek out alternative m~thod~ for purchasing. Mr. Mayas stated ha felt the lease purohase process was a more appropriate ~or purchasing and more beneficial %0 the County. 89-1009 ll.D.2. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH T~U ROUTE 10 SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND TO AUTNORIZ~ ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS Mr. Currin disclosed to the Board that he owns land in the area under Consideration for the establishment of said assessment district, declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayee, the Board set the date of January 10, 1990, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to con~ider an ordinance to establish the Route 10 Sewer Assessment District and to consider adoption of a reeolution authorizing the issuance of $2.262 million in revenue bonds to fund the project. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes and Mr. sullivan. Absent: Mr. Currin. Mr. Currin returned to the meeting. ll.E. CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RADIO/COMMUNICATIONS REPAIR FACILITY On motion of ~lr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board appropriated an additional $65,000 from the Vehicle and Communication Maintenance Fund (Fund 71) for the construction of a new Radio/Communications Repair Facility; and further, approved the awarding of a construction contract, through the biddin~ process, to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. (It is noted there is no General Fund requirement as the project funds are available within the Vehicle and Communication Maintenance Fund to absorb this additional expense.) ll.F. REPLACEMENT AND CONVERSION OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY LUCY CORR NURSING EOME Mr. Currin advised the Board that he owns a parcel of land to which a company is atte~mpting to transfer an existing Certificate of Need and it is the County Attorney's legal opinion that as a result of action taken on this matter, the County will be requesting a Certificate of Need and, therefore, would place him in competition with the County, declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. There was brief discussion relative to the possible continua- tion of a general moratorium on the Certificates of Need for nursing home beds; the financial impact on the County if such a moratorium were to continue; the possible termination of the moratorium in 1990 or 1991; etc. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute all necessary documents and contracts to undertake =he Certificate of Need application to the Commissioner of Bealth for the construction of a replacement 300~bed Nursing Home and the hiring of an architect, financial consultant and other related professional~ to prepare preliminary architectural design drawings for the replacement Nursing Home to 35% completion for Medicaid application approval; and further, authorized appropriation of up to $450,000 from the Nursing Eome Fund Balance for the completion of said project. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes and Mr. Sullivan. Absent: Mr. Currln. 89-1010 Mr. Currin r~turned to tho Meeting. ll.G.1. COMMITTEE ON ?~E FUTURE On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the BOard suspended its rules to simultaneously ~ominate/apDaint Mr. Harley Yonnq~ representing the Bermuda Maqi~terial Dis%ri~t, to serve on the Committee on the F~ure. Vote~ Unanimous On motion of Mr. Currin~ seconded by ~r. Daniel, the Board ~imultaneousl~ nominated/appointed Mr. ~arley ~. Young, rapre~onting tho ~ermuda Magisterial District, to ~erve on the Co~t~it~ee on the Future, whose term is effective i~ediately and will be at =he pleasure of fha Board. tt.6.2. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BLANNING CON/~I~SIO~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currln, the Beard nominated Mrs. Carol Boisineau to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Michael J. Kelly, representing the Midio~hian Magis%srlal District, to serve on the Chesterfield County Planning Con,mission, whose formal appointment will be made on December t3, 1989. Vote: Unanimous It was noted that an additional nominee for the Committee on ~he Future representing the Midto[hian Maglsterlal District was necessary and that staff would bring forth a Board item at the December 13, 19~9 ~eeting~ ll.N. CONSENT ITEMS ll.E.1. BEQUESTS FOR BIN~O/RAFFLE PERMITS On motion of M~. Sullivan, seconded by ~. Mayas, the Board approved requests for ~ingo/~affle permits from the following organizations~ as indicated, ~or th% calendar year 1990~ ORGA/~IZATIONS ~t. Edward-Epiphany Sohool Thomas Dal~ Music Boosters Club Bichmond Joanes River Lions Club Manchester-Richmond Moose Lo,ge Optimist Club of Chesterfield Mid-Citle~ Civic A~ociation, Inc. Knights of Columbus Council ~6159 South Ric~ond Rotary Clu~ Vote: Unanimous Bingo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle Bingo/~affls ~inqo/Raffle Aaffle Bingo/Baffle Bingo/Raffle Raffle 89-I011 ll.H.2. REQUEST TO RESTOR~ RAPFLE PERMIT FOR ENON CIVIC ASSOCIATION On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved a request by the Enon Civic Association for the restoration of a raffle permit ~or the 1989 calendar year; and further, waived the $25.00 fee as permitted by State law, as the organization is currently in compliance with requiremente of the Internal Audit Department. Vote: Unanimous ll.M.3. REQUEST BY VIRGINIA DEER HUNTERS ASSOCIATION, INC. FOR RESTORATION OF RAFFLE PERMIT FOR 1989 CALENDAR YEAR On motion of Mr, Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approvad a request by the Virginia Deer Eunters Association, Inc, for the restoration of a raffle permit for the 1989 calendar year until December 31, 1989 upon completion of the application and the financial report in a fashion satisfactory to the Internal Audit Department. Vote: Unanimous ll,H.4. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Salem Oaks Drive, Salem Oaks Court, Salem Oak~ Place, Springwood Road and Salem Oaks Terrace in Salem Oaks, Matoaca District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Hayes, it is resolved that Salem Oaks Drive, Salem Oaks Court, Salem Oaks Place, Springwood Road and Salem Oaks Terrace in Salem Oaks, Matoaea District, be and they hereby are established as public roads. And be it furthsr resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Salem Oaks Drive, beginning at the inter- section with Centralia Road, State Route 145, and going southerly 0.15 mile to the intersection with Salem Oaks Place and Salem Oaks Court, then continuing southerly 0,09 mile to the intersection with Spr±ngwood Road, then continuing southerly 0.06 mile to the intersection with Salem Oaks Terrace, then continuing southerly 0.03 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Salem Oaks Court, beginning at the intersection with Salem Oaks Drive and going southwesterly 0.04 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Salem Oaks Place, beginning at the inter- section with Salem Oaks D~ive and going northeasterly 0.04 mile, then turning and going northerly 0.08 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Springwood Road, beginning at the intersection with Salem Oaks Drive and going westerly 0.07 mile to end in a temporary turnaround. Again Springwood Road, beginning at intersection with Salem Oaks Drive and going easterly 0.03 mile to tie into existing Springwood Road, State Route 2090; and Salem Oaks Terrace, beginning at the intersection with Salem Oaks Drive and going westerly 0.04 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, Eight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve 53 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 except Salem Oaks Court and 89-1012 Salem Oaks Terra=s which have a 40' right-of-way. Salem Oaks is recorded as follows~ Plat Book 59, Page 17, November 4, 1987. Vote:. Unanimous This day the County Environmental Hngineer~ in aecerdano~ with directions from this Beard, made report in writing upon hie examination of Master Stag Drive, Whistler~ Cove Drive, Little ~orn Ridge and Pointer Ridge Road in Spring Trace, Section A, Matoaoa District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Maye~, ft is resolved that Masta~ Stag Drive, Whistlers Dove Drive, Little Horn Ridge and Painter Ridge Road in Spring TracE, Section A, Matcaca District, be and they hereby are established as public roads. And be iH further resolved, that the Virginia Departa%ent of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the secondary System, Master Stag Drive, bsginnlng at the end of existing Mas{er Stag Drive, State Route 4715, and going easterly 0.04 mile to the intersection with Whi~tle~$ Cov~ Drive, %hen continuing easterly 0.09 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Whistlers Cove Drive, beginning aH the intersection with Master ~%ag Drive and going northerly 0.07 mile to the intersection with Little Rorn Ridge, then turning and going northeasterly 0.05 mile to end at proposed Whistlers Cove Drive, Spring Trace, ~ection B; Li~%l~ ~ern Ridge, beginning at the intersection with Whistlers Covs Drive and going easterly 0.18 mile to end at the intersection with Pointer Ridge Road; and Pein=er Ridge Road, beginning at the interssetion with Little Horn Ridge and going southerly 0,07 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. Again Pointer Ridge Road, beginning ae the inter- section with Little Horn Ridg% and going northerly 0.01 mils tu end ut 9reposed Pointer Ridge Road, Spring T~ace, Section C. This re,est is inclusive of the adjacent ~lope, sight dist, ance and designated Virginia Department ef Transportation drainage easements. These roads serve 55 lots. And be it further remolved~ t_hat the Beard of Supervisors gusrantee~ to %he Virqinia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of ~hes~ road~. g~ction A. Plat Book 60, Page 94, April ~, 19~8. Vote: Unanimous i%.B.~. GILL STREET On motio~ Of Mr. S~llivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes~ the B~ard appropriated $3,500 from ~he Bermuda Distr~ct Three Cent Koad Fund ~or propose~ ~provements to Gill Street and adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Citizens have expressed concern Over the poor vertical sight distance on Gill Street. WOW, THEREFORE, EE IT RESOLVED, That the Hoard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County requests %he Virginia D~partment of Transportation to regrade Gill Street with th~ cost not to exceed 89-1013 11.I. C0~UNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS ll.I.1. STREET LIGHT REQUESTS On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved obtaining cost estimates for the installation of a street light at the inter~ection of Fairpines Road and Jessup Read, Dale District; and further deferred obtaining cost estimates for the installation of a street light at the intersection of N. Arch Road and Redbridge Road, Clover Will District, until such tlm~ as staff could obtain the required number of signature~ fro~ the residente living at the inter- sectlo~ - 11.I.2. 1989-90 RURAL ADDITION PROJECTS There was discussion relative to the number of potential rural addition projects and the priority of said projects. It was qenerally agreed that staff would bring back a list of rural addition projects eligible for consideration with a recommendation as to the priority of said roads. On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board deferred until January 24, 1990, consid~ratlon of the 1989-90 Rural Addition Projects. Vote: Unanimous 11.I.3, STONEHENGE SUBDIVISION CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC STUDY On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board appropriated $2,000 from the Midlothian District Three Cent Road Fund for a license plate survey in the Stonehenge Subdivision to dete~mine the cut-through traffic volumes and authorized staff to take all necessary ~tep~ fo carry out the study. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel asked for clarification' of the cut-through traffic study process and stated he could foresee many future requests for such action. ll.M. LUNCH The Board recessed to travel to the Chesterfield Center for lunch with German Ameurop CleF students. Technical Reconvening: ii.N. REQUESTS FOR REZ0NING 89H~0417 Landmark designation for TOMAHAWK. Located in Clover Hill Maqisterial District on property frontinq the southwest line of Old ~undred Road, and better known as 2500 Old Hundred Road. Part of Tax Map 36 (1) Parcel 20 (Sheet 13). 89-1014 Mr. Jaoobson stated the ~lanning Ce~tmission and Preservation Committee recommended approval of Landmark Designation for the Tomahawk ~omesite, as shown in the Kequest Analysis, based on th~ following findings: 1. This is a distinguished building of high architectur- al quality and historic interest; and 2. This designation will cause no ~ignlficant adver~ effect on the £utu=e development Qf the County. No on~ came forward to represent the request. There was opposition present. ~r. Applegate disolosed to the Board that he i~ a trustee of the subject property which i$ owned by ZMG~ declared a eonfliot of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Inter,at Aot a~a excused himself from the meeting. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved Historic Land~ark Designation for Tomahawk, ~eaoribed as follows: 9'0~%~W~. Located in Clover ~ill Maqi~terial Distric~ On property fronting the moutkwest line of Old Hundred Road, and better known as 2500 01d Mundr~d goad, Part of Tax Map 36 (1) Parcel 20 (Sheet Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Daniel, ~r. Maye~ and ~r. Sullivan. Absent: Mr. Applega~o. Xr. Applsgats returned to the meetinq. 89SN0266 In Clover ~ill ~aqisteria~ Di~trict~ ~E~ ~ INC. requested Conditional Use to per, it laboratories and other research and development faeiliti~$~ printing~ publi~hin~ and alli~ i~dustri~s, professional office~ outdoor storage yards and warehouse in an Agricultural (h) District. An hous~ complaM {s planned. Thi~ Fequ~st lies on a 3.5 acre Genito Road across from South Ridge Drive. Tax Map 48-7 Part of Parcel 3 (Zhest Mr. Jacobsen stated the applicant was unable to be pre~ent and' has reguested a ~iEty (60) day deferral of Ca~e 0n motion of Mr, Appl~ate, seconded by Mr. Coffin, the Board deferred consideration of Caoe 89SN0266 until January ~4, 1~90. Vote: 89gN0350 ~n ~ato~ca ~agistcrlal District, R AND C ASSOCIATES r~quest~d r~zoning from Agricultural {A) to R~$~en~ial (E-~). A single family remid=ntial subdivision ie planned. This r~quest lies on a 64.8 acrs parcel frontinq approximately 120.7 feet on the wast line of Et~o Road, approximately 2,860 feet north of Woodpecker Road. Tax Map 162 (1) Parcel 29 (Sheet 49). Mr. J&cohson stated the applican~ has regueate~ a deferral of Case $9SN03S0 to the December 13~ 1989 Board of Supervinorg 89-1015 Ms. Allie Baird stated the applicant was unable to be present and requested that the ease be deferred to the Board's December I3, 1989 meeting. There was no opposition to the request for deferral. Mr. Applegate noted there was only one meeting scheduled in December and that it would be very lengthy. Mr. Mayes asked if a sixty day deferral would be acceptable to the applicant. Ms. Baird stated the applicant would prefer to have the case scheduled for the December 13, 1989 meeting. Mr. Mayes stated he would prefer to defer the ease for sixty days and moved that Case 895N0350 be deferred until January 24, 1989. There was no second. Mr. Applegate noted that since there was no opposition the request could most likely be considered under the Resorting Consent Agenda during the December 13, 1989 meeting. Mr. Daniel cautioned that the case was approved on a 2-0 vote by the Planning Commission as two members were absent and one declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and perhaps the c~se may require a bit more scrutiny st the Board level than anticipated. When asked, Ms. Baird s~ated the applicant had accepted the recommended conditions, there was no opposition to the project when it was presented to the Planning Commission and indicated she would prefer not to defer the case for sixty days. Mr. Mayes amended his motion, seconded by Mr. Currin, to defer Cass 89SN0350 to the December 13, 1989 meeting. 87S167 (Amended) In Bermuda -Magisterial District, DOCTOR GURPAL S. BHULLER requested resoning from Residential (R-7) to Neighborhood Office (0-1) on a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 200 feet on the south line of West Hundred Road, approximately 430 feet east of Curtis Street. Office uses are planned. Tax Map 115-8 (3) Oakland, Lots 5 and 6 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case 878167 and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. MS. Allie Baird, representing the applicant, stated the recommendation was acceptable. Mr. Currin stated he did net think there was opposition present; however, there was a citizen present who wished to express certain concerns regard- ing this request, Mr, Applegate stated the request would be placed in its regular sequence on the agenda. 88SN0054 (Amended) In Bermuda Magisterial District, JAMES V. DANIELS requested rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Neighborhood Office (O-1) on a 1.2 acre parcel fronting approximately 58 feet on the south line of West Hundred Road, also fronting approximately 260 feet on Gill Street, and approximately 202 feet on Oakland Avenue, and located at the intersection of these roads, office uses are planned. Tax Map 115-4 (12) East Chester Resubdivision, Block H, Lots 157 and 158 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen stated the approval of Case 88SN0054 proffered conditions. Planning Contmission recommended and acceptance of the applicant's 89-1016 NO one ea~e feigned te represent the request. Mr. Currin stated he did not think there was opposition; however, there regarding this request. Mr. Applogat~ $~ated the request would be placed in it~ regular sequence on the agenda. 89S~0287 ~Amended) In Matoaca Magisterial District, ~ ~. ~i~ ~ ~S BAILEY requested rezoning from A~rfoultural (Al tc Residential (R-12). A single famliy residential subdivision is planne~. This request lies on a 3~5.5 acre parcel frentin~ appro×imately 450 f~et Qn %he so~thea$~ iina Q£ ~ail~y ~ridge ~oad, approxi~ ~ately 880 feet ~outh of Quail~oed Road. Ta× Map 76 (1) ~r. Jacobsen sta~ed ~he ~lanning Commission recommended approval of Ca~e $9SM02ST, subjec~ to a single condition and acceptance cf the applicant's proffered conditions. ME. John Do4son, ~ep~esentlng ~he appliean~t stated ~eom~nded ~endition wa~ aCCeptable. Mr. Sullivan stated he had concerns regarding this case and re,nested ~hat i~ bs placed in its regular se~usnce on the a~enda. Mr. Apple~at~ stated the request would be plae~d in In Matoaea Magisterial District, ~ %~ONBRIDG~ ASSOCiATeS LIMITED ~ARTN~R~H~P requested amen~ent to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 785105, 86S097, and g~gN0061} tO pe~it use ~mul~i-family complex) and bulk exceptions. A multi-f~ily residential complex is plannmd. Thi~ re~es~ lies in Residential (R-7 and R-15} Districts on a 9.4 aero parcel lying approximately ~50 feet off %h~ north line of Iron Bridge Road, measured ~rom a point acro~ from Lewis Road. Tax Map a~provaI of Case 89SN0336, subject to c~rtain condlti~ns. Mr. Daniel requested that the ease be discussed in its regular be placed in it~ raqular ~nce on the agenda. ~9~N0347 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, P~TLLIP M. AND NANCY C. COOK requested rezoning from Residential (R-7} ~o Corporate Office (0-2). An office complex i~ plann~d~ This request on a 1~96 acre parcel frentiDg approximately 265 fe~t on the north line of Dull Street Road, approximately 600 feet east of Pocoshock Boulevard. Tax Map 40-5 (1) Pareel~ 1, 2 and (~heet ~r. Jacobsen ~tated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case 89SN0347 and acceptance o~ the proffered conditions. Mr. Bill AxselLe, representing the applicants, stated the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition presen=. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, the Beard approved Case 89MN0347 and accepted the following proffered condition: 89-1017 Prior to the issuance of any building permit on the property, any right of way necessary for the widening of Route 360 as required on VDOT's current construction plans shall be dedicated. 898N0351 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, BRADLEY INVESTMENTS, LTD. requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential Town- house (R-TH). A residential townhouse project is planned. This request lies on a 2.0 acre parcel fronting 340 feet on the north line of Hull Street Road, approximately 1,350 feet west of Winterpock Road. Tax Map 75-1 (1) Parcel 2 (Sheet 20). Mr. Jaeobson stated the Planning Con,mission reco~mended approval of Case 89SN0351, subject to a single condition and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. Mr. Jim Hayes, representing the applicant, stated the recommended condition was acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Appleqate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board approved Case 89SN0351, enbjeot to the following condition: A fifty (50) foot buffer strip, exclusive of easements and required yards, shall be established and maintained adjacent to Hull Street Road (Route 360). The area of this buffer strip shall either be left in their natural state,.if ~uffieient vegeta- tion exists to provide adequate screening; or bs planted and/or bermed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Planning Department, if suf- ficient vegetation does not exist to provide adequate screening. Prior to approval of any final site plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shall flag this buffer strip for inspection, and shall post a bond to cover the implementation of the landscape plan, if such plan is required. Except for approved public road acce~(e~), no buffer strip shall be noted on any final site plans, and any final check and recordation plats. The Planning Commission or the Director of Planning may modify this condition at the time Of tentative subdivision review. (P&T) And further, the Board accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. The maximum density shall not exceed 4.00 units/acre. 2. A twenty (20) foot wide etrip along State Route 360 (Hull Street Road) will be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. Vote: Unanimous 87S167 (Amended) In Bermuda Magisterial District, DOCTOR GURPAL $. HHULLER requested rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Neighborhood Office (0-1) on a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 200 feet on the south line of West Hundred Road, approximately 430 feet east of Curtis Street. Office uses are planned. Tax Map 115-8 (3) Oakland, Lots 5 and 6 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request and acceptance of the applicant's proffered condition. 89-1018 Ms. Alli~ Baird stated, at this' time, there arq no definite plans intended for the subject request; however, the suggested use is for N~ighborhood Office (O-1) with m~die~l uses. Mr. Jacobsen presented a sugary of %he proposed request, noting that approval of the request for O-I zoning and land use on the subject property co,forms to the Chester Village Plan's designation for property along this portion of Route 10, that the proffered use restrictions address concerns relative to the intensity of use that could be d~veleped On the property well as access and stated the Planning commission touch, ended approval of resorting from Residential (R-7) to office Ms. Dorothy Armstrong, a resident of Chester, expressed concern that she saw no condition in the Request Analysis to protect the residential landowners adjacent to the sub~ect property; e×pr~s~ed concern r~Iative to developer rights versus residents' rights, that there was ~o means of identifying specific uses for the site and that there was nothing provided to ensure that the project is developed as required; requested that a Planning staff parson be assigned to the Chester corridor to ensure continuity of development~ and stated ~h~ felt the citizens of Chester should have input into ~he design of lighting and other aspects of the prc~ecte. When asked, Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff will monitor the gite design proce~ a~ the r~quas% property lies within the Chester Village District and development must comply with the Village District ~tandsxd$ oi the ~oning Ordinance, which ~tandards address, but are not limited to, architectural compatibility with e~isting development within the Village of Chester, peripheral parking landscaping to ~inimize the visibility of parking areas, buffers, access and signags. ~stabli~h a ~ystem whereby MS. Armstrong and/or other of the Chester Area Advisory Committee may be kept informed approval of the plans. On motion of ~r. Coffin, seconded by ~r. approved Case 87S167 and accepted the condition; The follow±n9 u~es shall be peehiBite~: sullivan, the Board following proffered I. Convalescent homes, nursing homes and rest homeD. 2. Group care facilities. 3. Playgrounds or athletic fields. Advisory Ce~ittee may he kept informed regarding ~ite plan approval. 88SN0054 {Amended} In Bermuda Magisterial District, JAM~S V. DANIELS requested resorting fro~ Residential (R-7) t~ Neighborhood Offic~ (O-1) on a 1.2 acre parcel from=ing approximately 58 feat on the south line of W~st Hundred Road, also fronting appro×imat~ly ~60 feet on Gill ~treet, and approximately 202 feat on Oakland Avenne, ~nd located at th% ~ntersection of the~ roads. Office uses 89-1019 are planned. Tax Map 115-4 (12) East Chester Re~ubdivision, Block H, Lots 157 and 158 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request and aeceptance of the applicant's proffered condition. Po one ca~e forward to represent the request. Mr. Jacobsen referenced a letter from Mr. James Daniels indicating he was unable to attend the meeting but stating his acceptance of the recommendation. There was no opposition present. Ms. Dorothy Armstrong requested that Planning staff review the rec/uirements of drainage as she was opposed to large to large drainage ditches in Chester aa well aa seek an alternative to black-topping the surfac~ of perking lots. On motion of Mr. Currin, Seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board approved Case 88SN0054 and accepted the following proffered conditions: Uses shall he restricted to those uses permitted by riqht and with re~trictions in the O-1 District except that the following uses shall not b~ pe~mitted: a) Convalescent homes, nursing homea, rear homes b) Group care facilities c) Playgrounds and/or athletic fields. And further, the Board directed staff to establish a system whereby MS. Armstrong and/or other members of the Chester Area Advisory Committee may be kept informed regarding site plan review in the area prior to approval of the plans. Vote; Unanimous 89SN0287 (Amended) In Matoaca Magisterial District, GLENN M. H~LL A~ro CHAI~LES E. BAILEY requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12]. A single f~mily residential subdivision is planned. This request lies on a 365.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 450 feet on the southeast line of Bailey Bridge Road, approxi- mately 880 feet south of Quailwood Road. Tax Map 76 (1) Parcels 28 and 63 and Tax Map 76-7 (1) Parcel 3 (Sheet 20). Mr. Jacobsen presented a brief ~u~mmary of the proposed request outlining the applicants' proffered conditions which addressed the dedication of 21 acres for either a public school or park site, the use of public water and sewer, a maximum of 750 lots and a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet and stated the Planning C~nm~ission recommended approval, subject to a single condition and acceptance of the applicant's proffered Mr. John Dodsen atated the recommended condition was acceptable and that he would be glad to address Mr. Sullivan's soncerns. There was no opposition present. Mr. Sullivan expressed concern that the requested rezoning and density of development do not conform to the Western Area Land Use and Transportation Plan which designates the area for low density residential development (1.50 units/acre or less); that there are no on-site retention basins to mitigate an adverse enviror~uental impact on Swift Creek; that sailey Bridge Road is inadequate to safety handle the traffic the request would generate; that the proposed 7~0 lots with an anticipated increase of 540 students would have a significant impact on the School System's Capital Improvements Program, particularly at the elementary level; that he did not see any indication as to 89-1020 Mr. Appl~qate noted that the r~qui~emente in the Upper swift Creek Plan wore primarily designed to negate any adverse impact On the ~wif% Creek anticipated increase of students ia the school zone is of ~r. Daniel expressed concern regarding the inadequacy of Bailey Bridge Road to handle the traffic generated by this request, impact of this development on ~ailey Bridge Road and how those proffering public water and sewer for the projeot but felt it should be deterred in order to addr~sm transportation concerns until after January 1, portent standards/requirements for a subdivision by ensuring there would be public water and Dublic sewer for the pro3ect~ that there is a problem as to whether or not Bailey. Bridge ROad volumes generated as the project i~ developed but in accordance w~th the SuDreme Court decision he did not feel the leek of the present'road requirements in thi~ can~ was sufficient to defer ~r. Currln stated the applicants have proffered the dedication Creek Study and did not see how that would imDaot this project~ Mr. Sullivan co~ented that he felt this project's anticipated $40 Students w~ calculated on the buildout of the entire approved Case 89SN0257, subjest to the following condition: A fifty (50) foot and maintained adjacent to Bailey Bridge Road (Route 654). The area o'f this buffer ~trip shall air_her be left in its natural state, if ~uffieient be planted and/or bermed in accoYdaRce wi~h a land- scape plan approved by th~ ~Iann~ng Depar~z~ent, if shall flag this buffer strip for inspection, and the land~cape plan, if Such plan is required. Except for approved publis road a~ae~(e~}, no access shall be permitted through this buffer strip. This building setback and buffer ~trip shall be noted on any final ' site plans, and any final uheck and recordation plats. The Planning Coa~ission or Director of ~lannlng may modify this condition at the time of tentative subdivi sion reviuw. And further, the Board accepted the following proffered (1) Curb and gutter will be used. B9-1021 (2) (3) Public water and sewer will be used. A seventy (70) foot wide collector road fram Bailey Bridge Road to the Eastern Property Line shall be dedicated to Chesterfield County free and unrestricted. At minimum a two-lane "No-Lot Frontage" road shall be constructed within this right of way. (4) Twenty-one (21] acres to be dedicated County for School or Park. (5) MAXIMUM number of lots shall be 750. (6) MINIMUM lot size of 15,000 square feet. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Currin and Mr. Mayas. Nays: Mr. Sullivan. Abstained: to Chesterfield Mr. Daniel, as he felt the request could have been deferred. $9SN0336 In Matoaea Magisterial District, iMG ~P4~NBR~DG~ AB~OCIATE$ LIMITED PARTNERSHIP requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 78S105, 86~097, and 88~N0061) to permit use (multi-family complex) and bulk exceptions. A multi-family reeidential complex is planned. This request lles in Residential (R-7 and R-15) Districts on a 9.4 acre parcel lying approximately 500 feet off the north line of Iron Bridge Road, measured from a point across from Lewis Road. Tax Map 114-6 (1) Part of Parcel 17 ISheet 31). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of the proposed request and stated the Planning Commission recommended approval, subject to certain conditions. Mr. Applegate disclosed to the Board that he is involved in a business venture with IMG in another portion of the County, declared a cen£1ict oi interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict cf Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Currin 'disclosed to the Board that IMG has a contractual agreement with Irenbridge Associates and Ironbridge Associates hold an option on property he owes in this vicinity. He stated although he did not have a personal financial interest in the subject request nor did he feel his property would benefit by approval of the request but to avoid any misconception he would prefer not to vote on the matter, declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Glen Moore, representing the applicant, Stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. There was no opposition present. There was discussion relative to the overall history of the proposed project concerning the total number of apartment unite collectively proposed; the total number of unite that can be built as permitte~ by the existing zoning; whether or not the number of apartment ~nits are traffic neutral in regard to the previouely approved uses; the number of unite/acre~ to be developed; if amenities were integrated into the current application; etc. On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved Case 89SN0336, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Textual Statement comprised of the letter dated June 26, 1989, including Attachments 2 and 3 with the chart 89-1022 appended thereto; the letter from Wilbur Smith and Associates, dated June ~l, 1989, including the chart appended thereto; and the plan entitled '~Conceptual Site Plan - Waterside II" prepared by Dewberry & Davis, revised October 2, 1989~ ~hall be considered the Master Plan subject, huwever, to the following conditions. This condition incorporates and supersedes Ite~ (a), of the applicants Te×~ual Statement, Attachment S.) Tract I On the Revised Master Plan mhall be developed in accordance with Division 12, Multi-family Residential Dimtrictm (R-MY) cf the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance, subject bo the following exueptlons and additional (a) Tract I, as shown on the Re,icad Master Plan, may be developed as any combination o~ hotel and business and professional offices. Further, the tract may be developed for multi-family residences or heuslnq older per~enB. The term "housing for older persons," as used herein, shall have the s~a~e ~efinition and m~aning as the telnn is defined and u~ed in the Fair aousing Act at 42 U.S.C. Section 3607(bl (2] and Any development of Tract I as housing for older persons may be comprlse~ of ~icensed or unlicensed facilities (i.e., with or without a Certificate ~eed from thc V~rgfnia Department of Health) cz any combination thereof and may include me~ical staffing and uther customary support and ancillary facilities. Parcel density an4 ma~inual number of units. If developed for residential u~em, the density of thc dev~lc~yment shall Dot exceed a maxi~u~ of 126 multi-f~ily residential nnits or 150 units of housing for older persons. This condition supersedes Textual Statement, Attachment 3~ Ieem {b~, Maximum N~ber of Unit~ ~n0 ~ (d), ~arcel Area and ~n~ relating %o density only and ~ends Division 12, section ~1.1-108 Multi-F~ily R~m~dential District (R-MY) of th~ Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance.) (c) R~cr~tional Facilities. Recreational facilitie~ Tracts.F-1 and ~-2 may be made availabl~ to resident~ of mul~i-f~ily residences on Tract I, in lieu oi the requirement for providing such recreational facilities on Tract I, provided, however, that The standaxd~ for recreational ar~as set forth Division 12, S~cticn 21.1~188 (i) Mu~ti-F~ily ~emiden=ial District (R-~) of ~he Chesterfield County z~ning Ordinance. (NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Sba%emmet, Attachment 3~ Item Recreational Facilifieg and amends Division 1'2, Section 21.1-108 (i} Multi-F~ily Res- idential District (R-~) of the Chesterfield County zoning Ordinunc=.~ (d} ~etback~ from roads and property lines. All ~tructur~s ~hall ba ~et b~ck a minim~ of nwenty-Sive (25) feet ~rom interior' private driveway~. If the ~tructur~ i$ forty-eight (4~) feet or more i~ h~iqht, the setback may be red,ced to twenty (20) feet where adjacent to a fire lane. ~truc=ur~ ~hall be back at least fiftee~ ('15) feet from any parking Sg-lOZS Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes and ~r. Sullivan. Absent: Mr. Applegate and Mr. Currin. Mr. Appteqate and Mr. Currln returned to the meeting. epace and at least fifty (50) feet from any proposed right-of-way of a public road. All structures shall be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from all property lines, unless adjacent to Tracts P-1 and F-2, in which case a minimum setback of at least thirty (30) feet will be maintained. Apartment buildings constructed along adjacent or internal public road(e) shall ~ront that road(si. (NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, Attachment 3, Item (e), Setbacks and a~endlng Division 12, Section 21.1-108 (d), Multi-Family Residential District (R-MF) of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance.) (e) Compatibility With Waterside Project. The architecture of multi-family residential buildings constructed on Tract I shall be compatible with the architecture of residential buildings on Tracts F-1 and F~2, comprising the d~velopment known as Waterside. A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be established and maintained along the entire boundary of Tract I. The area of this bufier strip shall either be left in its natural state, if sufficient vegetation exists to provide adequate screening; or he planted and/or bermed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Planninq Department, if sufficient vegetation does not exist to provide adequate screening. This plan shell also incorporate pedestrian and bicycle paths to provide the greatest possible safety and convenience from Tract I to Tracts F-1 and F-2. Prior to approval of any final site plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shall flag this buffer for inspection, and shall post a bond to cover the implementation of the landscape plan, if such plan is required. Except for approved public road access(es), pedestrian and bicycle paths, no access shall be permitted through this buffer strip. This building setback and buffer strip shall be noted on any final site plans. Planning Department may modify this condition at the time of site plan review. The public wastewat~r system shell be used. (U) (NOTE: In addition to the recommended conditions, all previously imposed zoning conditions shall apply.) No building shall encroach closer than fifty (50) feet to the lake. 89SN0303 In Midlothian Magisterial District, CHILD~SS KLEIN PROPERTIES requested rezoning from 'Agricultural (A) and Office Business (0) to Neighborhood Business (C-2). A shopping center is planned. This request lies on a 9.8 acre parcel fronting approximately 837 feet on the west line of Huguenot Road, fronting approximately 762 f~t on the southeast line of Alverser Drive, also fronting approximately 717 feet on the northeast line of Old Buckingham Road, and located in the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 16-8 (1) Parcels 9, 10, and 11 (Sheet 7). 89-1024 Mr. Jacobsen presente~ a s~nmary of the proposed request and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. E~ stated staf~ recommended denial as the proposed zoning and land use do not conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan (Alverser/Otd ~uckingham Area Plan Amendment], which designat%m t~e request pCoperty and adjacent property to north and west for office use and the requested rezoninq and land use represents typical strip co~umerGial development and does not provide t~e desired transition between intense commercial u~e~ to %he ~cuth and ~as~ in the v~cinity of the Huguenot Road/Courthouse Road/Midlothian Turnpike and existing ~ingle family residential development %o th~ north the proposed proj~u%~ ~%a~ed he lived within close pruximi=y the p~oposmd project and felt Childress Klein Properties w~uld develop the property better than another ~eveluper or that they than office uss which uoul~ be requested for the ~i~e. Mr. Ellis Gilford, Vice Pr~zid~n% of ~e Olde Coach Vi~lagu Civic Association, voloe~ support for th~ proposed project a~ he felt let=er of ~up9ort from th~ Chai~an of the 01de Coach Villaqe Civic Association which was previously submitted to the Board When asked, Mr. Jacobsen stated proffered ~ndition 10 Mr. Sullivan stated he felt it important to note that neighborhoods. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Coffin, :he approved Ca~e 89SN0303 and accepted the following profferud conditions: 1. The property shall be developed as a coordinated retail 2. Development ~hall be l~i~ed %o a maxim~ of 9,500 gross squax~ feet per gross acre as d~tsrmined prior to any the buildings shall conform =o ssction 21.1-248 of zonin~ Ordinance. Building~ shall utilize a eo~ina~ion of red brick, whi=e accents and a shingled mansard roof. A "village" a~osphure shall be created for pedestrians Dy shall be separated from %he parking'areas by a colonnade. Rooftop m~chanieai equipment shall be screened from p~bli= view. In con3uncticn with ~ite plan review, arohitectural plans shall be submitted to the ~lann~nq C~i$~iou for approval. hack a minimum of twenty-fiv~ (25) fee= from ~ke right of way of old Buckingham and Alverser Roads. 5. Ail d~psters and compactors shall be screened from view wall~ compatible with the brick utilized in the buildings. 89=~025 6. In addition to the r~quirements of Section 21.1-239 of the Zoning Ordinance, evergreen tree~, having a minimum initial height of eight (8) to ten (10) feet, shall be planted in double staggered rows fifteen (15) feet on center along Alverser and Old Buckingham Roads so as to screen loading and service areas from view of public rights of way. 7. Any use located within a 200-foot radius of where the developer's property line along Alverser Drive intersects the ~uguenot Road property line shall be restricted to the following uses: a} Tho~e uses permitted by right or with certain restrictions in the 0-1 district, bi Bank, Savings & Loan or other deposit-taking financial institutions, c) Office supply store, d) Copy/printing business, e) Optical store. 8. The Developer shall notify the last known president of the 01d Coach Village Homeowner's Association of thc tima and date of any site plan hearing. 9. Site plans ~hall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval. 10. Signs shall comply with the requirements of Section 21.1-269 of the Zoning Ordinance. 11. The following road improvements will be provided: 1) Additional pavement and curb and gutter along the developer's property frontage on Huguenot Road to provide an additional through-lane. ~xcepting the 01d Buckingham/Huguenot Road intersectiont a right-turn lane at each access and intersection along Huguenot Road will also be provided. 2) Additional pavement and curb and gutter along Alverser Drive and Old Buckingham Road relocated for the entire property frontage, plus addition- al pavement at both intersections with Huguenot Road to provide adequate storage/turn lanes. 3) One right turn in, right turn out only accems point into the project on Huguenot Road. 4) One-half (1/2) of the cost of traffic signals at both the Old Buckingham Road Relocated/Huguenot Road intersection and the Alverser Drive/Hugue- not Road intersection. 12. Prior to the i~snance of a building permit, the following right of way shall be dedicated to Chesterfield County, 'free and unrestricted: 1) 60 feet of right of way measured from the center line of ~uguenot Road. 2) 35 feet of right of way measured from the center lin~ of Alverser Drive. 3) 30 feet of right of way measured from the center line of Old Buckingham Road. 89-1026 Up to 25 f~et £rom Retail Building "D," aa defined by the preliminary site plan as drawn by ~odges and Associates. dated 9 August 1989, for the purpose of realigning the Alverser Drive/Huguenot Road intersection. Vote; Unanimous It was generally agreed to recess for five minutes to permit VCR equipment to be set up for a presentation relative to Case SPAN0324. ~9SW0324 In Midlothian Nagi~terlal District, CHESTERFIELD ~ERI~Y INC. r~que~ted Conditional Use to permit retail sales and outdoor recreation exceptions in an Agricultural {Al District. This request lies on a 15.0 acre parcel lying approximately feet off %he western terminus of Pear Orchard Lane. Tax Map 85 (1) Part of Parcels 9, 18 and I2 (Sheet 26). Mr. Peele presented a summary of th* proposed ~qu~$t and stated th~ ~la~ning Commission recommended approval cf Ca~a 89SN0324, subject to Certain conditions. Mr. Grah~ Jennings,' representing the applicant, ~tated applicant is requesting a Conditional Use to permit retail sales and outdoor r~creation in an Agricultural (A) District. Hs submitted a file to the Board containing a petition with 154 signatures of residents in favor of the proposed requem~ and a copy O~ a letter ~rom ~s. Ruth B. Rinker, President of the Virginia Farmers Direct Marketing Association, highligkting the educational value and contributions to the com~nnity of direct marketing. He introducmd Mr, Mik~ ~enry, the Cooperative Extension Serv~c~ agent for Chesterfield County; Mr. Bill Ferguson~ Virginia Department of Agrlo~ltare; Mr. Lowell Scott, Dr. Robert Turner and Mr. Danny Lenq~ ~Sidents.of the County, who voiced ~upport for the proposed request as they felt use wes an asset to the County and provided an educational &ndJor recreational opportunity for children and adults as well. When asked, approximately sixty-five (65~ persona ~toed in support of the request. ~e further add,eased recommended conditions and requested that .Condition 4 be amended to permit the uae for ten ye=r~ rather than five; that Conditions 5(~) and 5(b) be deleted and the applicant permitted extended hours of operation to accommodate activities conducted during the variou~ growing Se~ons~ and that Condition 10 be amended ~o permit "Pumpkin Lend" in conjunction with a maze for the childsen as part of the ongoing activities at the Farm. He further noted that Pear Orchard Road iea very narrow, winding ro~d; however, there have been fe~, if any, accidents ~here and felt ~ha= should be a favorable factor to consider. Mr. Jeff Appleman, representing Mr. and ~rs. Kite and Mr. Milton Ritter, adjacent landowners ho the subject site, ~ubmit- ted matesial to the Board containing ~ocumentation of pertinent data related to the operation of the subject ~ite and letters of opposition to thc propose~ request. Mr. Kite presented a videosassette recording tape of th~ Chesterfield Berry Farm operation, Pear Orchard Road, etc., indicating the character and intensity of the Berry Farm's impact on adjacent property owners, specifically, the ~eneration of excessive traffic volumes to and from the facility. Mr. KAte expressed concern relative tn the intrusion ~9-1027 of the usa into their privacy and tranquility by attracting large numbers of people who would not ordinarily visit the farm but are attracted by specific recreational events; excessive noise generated by such activities as hay rides, bonfires, fund raisers and festivals; etc. Mrs. Kite stated that Pear Orchard Road i$ a narrow, winding 5 mile long road with no alternative access which could be utilized in the event of a serious accident/injury; that excessive use of the road generates dust and pollution; and asked that the Board deny the request. Mr. Appleman stated that cars park on private property and the public road when there is no parking space left at the farm; and asked that the Board consider the individual property owner's rights in their deliberations of this case. Mr. Jenninqs addressed Mr. Applemen's and Mr. and Mrs. Kite's concerns relative to the hours of operation and stated the varied hours were needed to accommodate the sale of any form of goods produced on a farm as an acceesory use to a farming operation; stated the traffic volumes, as depicted on the tape, were large but orderly; that the speed was not excessive and did not appear to generate that much dust; stated he felt the operation was favorable to the County and asked the Board to consider approval of the request. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Daniel stated he intended to vote for the request but expressed concern relative to certain conditions. He stated he felt Condition 4, as stated, was aceeptable regarding the five year period for which the use is approved; that he SUpported the Planning Commission's recommended Condition 5 regarding the hours of operation; that outdoor activities be confined to the month of October, be limited to a single day and that an outdoor festival be obtained through the proper procedure as stated in Condition 10; and that Condition 7 be amended to include a provision to control the amount of parking on the public access road and more parking spaces. Mr. Mayas stated he felt parking on the public road should be eliminated by the provision of eufficient parking onsite to accommodate both the existing parking as well as the overflow from the existing parking facilities; that other concerns had been adequately addressed and he could support the request. Mr. Currin expressed concern relative to the access to the site, the condition of the existing road and improvements to that road, sufficient parking spaces to accommodate overflow parking as opposed to parking On private and/or public property, appropriate outdoor festival permits, security and policing of the facility, the usual daily traffic on Pear Orchard Road compared to other rural roads in the County; etc. Mr. Applegate stated that if the Board were to grant approval of the request he felt there were sufficient conditions to address any violations through the legal process; that he had no problem with the period of time for which the use is granted, the hours of operation or the Pumpkin Festival, etc.; and that he supported the proposed request. Mr. Sullivan stated ~hat he objects to every a~peot of the proposed use; that he felt there must be a distinction between an agricultural operation and a commercial venture; that he took exception to the fact that this business was operating without obtaining necessary permits from the County in the appropriate manner; that consideration should be given to the adjacent property owner's rights; that Pear Orchard Road is a dangerous road with inadequate access and approval of the case would be promoting a potentially dangerous situation; that there are inadequate, insufficient parking facilities avail- able; that he would not like to have such a commercial venture 89~1028 not support the proposed request. Mr. Sullivan moved to deny Case 89SN0324. ~here wa~ no eecoDd. Mr. Applegato stated tbs motion failed for lack of a second. There was discussion relative to Condition 7 being expanded establish a predetermined number of parking spaces, that such spaces be improved, that overflow parking shall bs provided sufficient to prevent parking on public rights-of-way, which would enable ~taff to enforce the conditions of zoning. Mr. Sullivan stated that was acceptable. There was further discussion relative to Condition 10 for extending outdoor recreational activities such as hayri~es, e~c., into the months Of Qctober/Nevember, etc. Mr. Sullivan stated Condition 10 a~ re~o~nd~d by th~ Planning Con, lesion wa~ acceptable to him hut not otherwise. When asked, Mr. Sullivan ~ta~ed he would agree to Condition ~ remaining a~ sta~ed ~n the Request Analysis. On motion of ~r. Sutlivan~ seconded by Mr. Daniel, th~ ~oard approved Case 89SN0~24, subject to the following condition~: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan Chesterfield B~rry Perm, Inc~ and ~ubmitt~d with the aD,lice%ion shall be considered the Master Plan. (P). 2. In conjunction wi~h retail sales associated with the permitted farming operations, ~h~ following items may sold: a. ApRles and cider other novelties c. Short cakes ou berries d. 0r~a~e~tal corn e. Wreaths and tree ~tands for you-ou~ trees f. Related pumpkin items [re: ~arving kits) g. Candle holder~ that go inside the pumpkins h. Stick-on pumpkin face kits and other costumes. (NOTE: This condition limits ~he retail opera,ion the existing structnres and facilities depicted on the Ma~t~r Plan.) This Conditional Use shall be granted to and for Cheoterfield Berry Farm, Inc. and shall not transferable nor ru~ with the land. 4. This Conditional usa shall be qranted for a period not to exceed fiv~ (5) years ,nd may b~ renewed upon satisfactory zeapplication and demonstration that the ~se has not detrimentally affected area properties and will be compatible with area development trends. 5. Hours Of op~ratlon shall ~e limited to between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m., Monday through ~aturday, and Sunday 1~ noon to 6:00 p.m. 5. Tho aras between the farm entrance reed and the property llne shall be maintained as a buffer. This ~uL~er shall comply with the re~nirement$ of the Zoning Ordinance, S~ction$ 21.1-226 through 21.1-229. This buffer shall be installed by Juno ~, 1990. (P) 7. A minimtu~ 0£ 100 improved parking spac~ ~hall be provided. A sufficient number of overflow spaces shall be provided on-site to prevent parking within th~ right of way of Pear Orchard. Road. 89-1029 10. outdoor lighting shall comply with Section 21.1-240 of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Except for directional signs which shall be permitted as outlined in Section 21.1-268 (d) of the Zoning Ordinance, signs shall be limited to a single freestanding sign not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet and a height of ten t10) feet. This sign shall not be lighted. (P) Outdoor recreational activitiee for a fee shall be confined to the month of October and shall be limited to hay rides, bonfires, and picnics. Further, on a single day during the month of October, an outdoor music festival shall be permitted on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. (CPC) (NOTES: a. Site plans must be submitted for review approval. b. Driveways and parking areas must be paved, and curb and gutter must be installed around the perimeter of driveways and parking areas, unless a Variance is obtained from %he Board of Zoning Appeals. c. The~e conditions apply only to the r~tail sales and not to the 'pick-your-own' operation.) Vote: Unanimous It was generally agreed to recess for five minutes. 89SN0325 (Amended} In Bermuda Magisterial District, ~ATTLB HEATiNG ~RD AIR CONDI- TIONING requested rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Agri- cultural (A) with a Conditional Use. A heating and air condi- tioning office/shop is planned. This request lies on an 1.6 acre parcel fronting approximately 200 feet on the west line of Pams Avenue, approximately 200 feet north of Willis Road. Tax Map 82-5 (3) Kingsland Meights, LOt 9A (Sheet 23). Mr. Poole presented a sum~ary of Case $9$N0325 and indicated the applicant had recently submitted a revised plan which planning staff had not had sufficient time to review; stated the Planning Commission recommended denial because there was substantial concern relative to the impact of this use upon area residents.and felt that the proposed use represented an encroachment of an intense commercial use. near a stable single family residential neighborhood. Mr. Currin disclosed to the Board that his company has b~n the recipient of some monetary benefit from this particular contract, declared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the m~eting. Mr. Edward Willey, Jr., representing the applicant, presented a summary of the proposed request for rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Agricultural (A) with Conditional Use to permit a heating and air conditioning/fuel oil business and introduced Ms. Kathleen Dobbins, who also spoke on behalf of Mr. Petroff, and Mr. Leo Meyers who voiced support for the subject request and felt the use appropriate 9or the property. 89-1030 Ns. Darlene Ali~n, Mr. Gene Shirley, Mr. ~teve Allen, and Zeslie Cregory voi~d opposition to the proposed use ae %hey felt it was inappropriate for the loeatien~ that it would adversely impact their health and welfare and represented an intrusion into ~eir privacy and tranquility. Petitions of opDoslti~n were submitted to the Board for the record. There being no further public comment, ~he public hearin~ closed. Discussion, que~tlens and comments ensued relative to whether or not this request represented a health~ ~afety and welfare problem; the applicant's request ~u bu permitted to temporarily install a septic system until such time as public sewer facili- ties are within 200 feet of the subject sit~ and can be connected; modified buffer requirements; the proximity of the ~ubject site to Kingslaad Eeights Subdivision; ~ngres$/egress; the restriction of traffic to P~s Avenue to Willis Road access ~his slte~ whether or no~ the request meets the overlay sign district standards, etc. On motio~ of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, th~ Board approved Case 895N0325, subject to the follo~ing conditions: 1. The £ollewing conditions notwithstanding, the plan revised March 1, I989, shall be considered the ~lan of Development. (P) 2. Uses shall be limited to the following! A. office office warehouse C. co~trsctors office, shop and storage yard parking for service v~hioles and oil delivery trucks, not to exceed two (2) axles. [P) 3. Except as noted herein, development shall conform to the requir~ment~ of the ~oning Ordinance £or General Co~l~ercial (C-5) Districts in Post Development Areas+ Prier ~o ~ny clearing, grading, or grubbing, e drainaqe plan ~hall be Submitted to Environmental Engineering for approval and all necessary off-site easements shall be obtained. 5. At such time as public sewer is within 200 fast of the proper~y lin~, all structures shall be connected. (U) (NOT=: Septic system use shall be restricted to domestic wastes only and shall be utilized only if approved by the ~ealth Department.) 6, A twen=y-five (25) foot buffer shall he provided along th~ southern property line ~nd a ~wenty (20) £oot bu£fer shall be provided along the northern property line. {BOS) 7. With the exception of automcbila~, all vehict~s shall be required to u~ Pam$ Avenue to willis Road to access thi~ site. {BOS) Ayes= Mr. Applagate~ M~. Dani~l, Mr. ~ayss and Mr. Sulllvan. Absent: Mr. Currin. Mr. Currin returned to tAe meeting. 89b~10353 In Matoaca Magisterial District, requested ruz0ning from A~ricultural (A) to Residential (R-IS). 89-1031 A single family residential subdivision is planned. This request lies on a 4.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 421 feet on the northeast line of Harrewgate Road, also fronting approximately 795 feet on the southwest line of Happy Hill Road, approximately 800 feet west of ~arris Lane. Tax Map 132-12 (4) Garden City Heights, Lot~ 18 and 20 (Sheet 41). Mr. Peele presented a summary of the proposed request and stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case 89SN0353, subject to a single condition. Mr. Horace Powell, a co-owner of the subject property, submitted a drawing to the Board for their perusal; expressed concern relative to the recommended buffer requirements imposed by the Planning Commission and requested that said buffers be eliminated so that seven, rather than five, lets could be developed. There was no opposition present. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. Discussion, questions and comments ensued relative to the setback requirements, design of the property, safety factor of access to Happy Hill Road; the development of said property with the use of public water with septic systems versus development at such time as public water and sewer are available; the generation of additional traffic along Happy Hill Road, which road can not facilitate such traffic because of its undulating vertical and horizontal alignment, poor sight distance and minimal shoulders; deferral of the request; etc. Mr. Pcwell stated the applicant does not intend to development the property until such time as public water and sewer are within close proximity so that such services can be provided and at that tim~ they would like to develop seven lots. Mr. Mayes stated he was prepared to support the request for development of five lots with the provision of public water and It was the general consensus of the Board that the subject ~equest was not in the appropriate posture for a vote at this · time. After further discussion, Mr. Mayes moved to defer Case 89SN0353 for until January 24, 1990. There was no second. Mr. Powell further statsd, with respect to a deferral of the case, that due to family commitments he would be away until April, 1990 and would like to have the r~qu~st approved at this time if possible. Mr. Peele suggested that perhaps a six month deferral would be acceptable. Mr. Mayes amended his motion, seconded by Mr. Daniel, to defer Case 89SN8353 until May 23, 1990. Vote* Unanimous ll.J. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT ITEMS ll.J.1. PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A ~6 FOOT EASEMENT ACROSS LOT lQ, BLOCK A, GREENBRIAR SUB- DIVISION, SECTION 2 Mr. Sale stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing ko consider an ordinance to vacate a 16 foot easement across Lot 10, Block A, Greenbrier Subdivision, Section 2. No one came forward to speak in favor cf or against the matter. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board 89-1032 across Lot 10, Block A, ~et~On 2, Greenbrier Subdivision, Matoaca Magisterial Dietrich, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorde~ in tho Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 14, Pages 70 and 71. petitioned the 5card of Supervisors of chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a 16 foot easement across Lot 10~ P~0ck Section 2, Greenbrier ~ubdivision, Matoaca Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia more p~rtioularly shown Qna plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Cour~ of said Count~ in Plat Book 14, Page~ 70 and 71, made by E. wilkerson, C.L.B., dated February 27, 1965. The portion of the follows: Block A, Section 2, Greenbrlar Subdivision, th~ location of which is more fully shown, on a plat made by E. O. Wilkerson, C.L.S~ , February 27, 196~, a copy of which ie attathed hereto and made a part of this Ordinance. W~EREAS~ notie~ has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia~ 1950, a~ amended, by adv~rtiaing; and WSRR~A$, no public necessity exists for =he continuance of the portion of the easement sought to be vacated. ~QW T~ER=FORE~ BE IT ORDAINED B~ TNB BOAP~D OF SUPERVISORS OF CEESTB~FIELD COITkTTy, VIRGINIA! That pursuant to Section 15.1-~$2(b) of the Cods of This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Coda of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat attached her,to shall be r~corded sooner ~han thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.I-4S5 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this ordinance pursuant to Section 15.]-483 is to dest~y the force and effect of the reeoxdin~ of portion of ~he plat vacated. This Ordinance shall vest fee simple title of the portion of the easement hereb~ vacated in the property owner of the lot 10 within Greenbria~ Subdivision free end clear oi any rights of public use. Accordingly, thi~ Ordinanue shall be indexe~ in the names of the County of Chesterfield, a~ grantor, and Robert Vets: Unanimous ll.J.2. WATER AND SEWER ITSM$ ll.J.2.a. REQUEST FROM DEVeLOPeR OF ROcKWOOD PLAZA TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A PRIVATE SEWAGE ~UMPING ~T~TION AND FORC~ MAIM TO $~V~ FORTION OF THEIR D~VELOPMENT On me,ion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by ~r. Sullivan, the Board 89-1033 approved a request from the developer of Rockwood Plaza, Tri-Equity Group, Inc., to construct and install a private sewage pumping station and force main, subject to the following conditions; and authorized the County Administrator, on behalf of the County, to exeeute the necessary documents: 1. The property owner/developer agrees to abandon the use of a private wa~tewater pump station and connect to a public gravity wastewater system at the property owner's expense when it becomes available within 500 feet ~rom the northeast property line. 2. The costs associated with the design~ construction, and maintenance of the pump station and force main to be borne in its entirety by the property owner/developer. 3. fhe property owner/developer agree~ to Own, operate and maintain the wastewater pump station and to execute an agreement to guarantee maintenance. An agreement for maintenance must be approved to form by the County Attorney's Office and recorded by the County's Clerk of Court prior to occupancy of any buildings within the pump station service area. 4. The property owner/developer agrees to' design and construct the necessary dry relief line from the pump station to the- property line which will align with the future offsite relief line. In addition, the property owner agrees to dedicate sufficient onsite easements for the onsite relief line and position such that an offsite relief line is located properly. 5. The property owner/developer agrees to obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the local and/or State Health .Department, Virginia Department of Transportation, etc. 6. Detailed plans for the connecting into the existing manhole are to be submitted to the Utilities Department along with a detailed hydraulic analysis verifying that the existing sewer lines hays sufficient reserve capacity to handle the proposed development for review and approval. Mr. Daniel requested that staff provide the Board with information relative to the County's exposure to pumping stations that are not operating properly. ll.J.2.c. CONSIDER =XT~NBION OF WATER AND SEWER LINES TO CUSTOM OPTICS, INC. AND COLONIAL MARBLE PRODUCT, LTD. On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved a request from the developer, Roslyn Farm Corporation, for funding of the required water and sewer line extension through the Economic Development Extension Policy, for the extension of water and sewer line~ to Custom Optio~, Inc. and Colonial Marble Product, Ltd., two firms who have selected sites on Ru££in Mill Road located on the Koslyn Parm Corporation property for development, a copy of which application is filed with the papers of this Board; transferred $52,800 for the sewer extension to Colonial Marble Product, Ltd. and $44,115 for the water extension to Custom Optics, Inc. from the sewer and water Economic Development Account; and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents to complete the project. (It is noted under the County's Utility Inducement Program for economic development, funds have been set aside for extension of water and sewer lines provided the County's share of total construction cost does not exceed 75% and is repaid to the Utilities Department 89-1034 from increased taxes within three Vot~: Unanimous ll.J.2.d. REQUEST FROM MESSRS. WAYNE WALPOLE AND GEORGE MREPARD FOR PERM%SSION TO ~E UI~DEV~LOPED STREET FOR ACCESS On motion of Mr. Currin, secondsd by Mr. Daniel~ the Board approved a ~eqnest by Messrs. Wayne Wa%pole and George Shepard for permission to utilize a p~rtion cf an undeveloped ~tr~et for acc~s~ to their respective lot~ located near th~ south end of Austin goad, subject to the execution of a license a~reement and wi~ %k~ understanding thai ~ny improvements or maln~onance will b~ the responsibility of Masers. Walpole and Shepard. C©N~ENT ITEMS ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ~ONG BELMONT ROAD FROM ASBURY UNITED METMODIST CHURCH accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance o~ a 15' ~trip of land along Belmont Road from Trustees of A~bury United Methodist Church and authorized tho County Administrator to execute the necessary dead. (A copy of said plat i~ filed with the papers of this Vote: UnanJ-~ous ll.J.3.b. ACCEPTANCE OF HEED OF DEDICATION k%ON~ SIR DINNADAN DRIVE FgOM P.E.Y. CONSTRUCT%O~ COMpANyt INC. On motion of Mr. sullivan, seconded by Mr. Danisl, the BOard accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a va=iabt~ width pa~ce/ Of lan~ a%on~ Sir Dinnadam Drive f~Om P.E.Y. Constrnction Co., Inc. and authorized the County Administrator to execute tko necessary d~ed. (A copy of maid pla~ is filed with the papers of this Board.) Unanimous ll.J.3.o. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION AT THE SOUTHERN TMR~TNU$ 0F NESTOR ROAD FROM MR. DAVID C. PEARSON 0n motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance O£ ~ variable width parcel of land fur a ~urnaround at the southern terminus of Nestor Road from M~. D~vid C. Pearson an~ authorized the County Admlnlstra~ox to execute the necessary deed. ~A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of thi~ Doard.) APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT FOR VACATION AND REDEDICAT%0N Agg0CIA~ 0~ FZV~ FORK~,, On mo%ion of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board previously recorded plats, and authorized the Chairman of the Boa~d an~ th~ County Administrator bo exsoute ~he easement agresment. (A ~opy of said plats are filed with the paper~ of this Board.) 89-1035 ll.J.3.e. APPROVAL OF CBANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR CONIP~CT FOR WI~TRRFOCK ROAD BOOSTER STATION On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board approved Change Order No. 1 for Contract No. W87-40C, Winterpock Read Booster Station, in the amount of $39,610.35, in order to comply with Zoning requirements that the site be shielded from the road by v~qetation and that the station building be as unintrusive as possible (the cost of site preparation and fill, $27,513.75; the cost of drainage trench and perforated pipe, $4,646.60; and the cost of additional clearing and grading to provide additional sight distanse for the entrance road to the station as required by the Virginia Department o~ ~ransportation, $7,450.00); and further, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents. (It is noted sufficient funds are available under the project to cover this change order.) Vote: Unanimous ll.J.4. REPORTS Mr. Sale presented the Board with a report on the developer water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. ll.K. REPORTS Mr. R~sey presented the Board with a status report on the General Fund Contingency Account, General Fund Balance, Road Reserve Funds, District Road and Street Light Fund~, Lease Purchase and School Board Agenda. Mr. Ramsey stated the Virginia Department of Transportation ha~ formally notified the County of the acceptance o~ the iollowing roads into the State Secondary System: ADDITIONS L~I~GT~ AUTUMN OAKS DEVELOPMENT, SECTION ~ & A, FORTION OF SECTION C (Rffeetive 11-1-89) Route 4490 (Golden Leaf Road} - From Route 2514 to South cut-de-~au 0.25 Mi. ROXSHIRE, SECTION ~ (Effective 11-1-89) Route 4174 (Swanhurst Drive) - From Route 4170 0.17 mi~es Ror~h Route 4170 Route 4175 (Olde Stone Road) - From Route 4170 to South cul-de-sac Route 4176 (Edgeview Lane) - From Route 4170 to 0.31 miles Southeast Route 4170 0.17 Mi. 0.18 Mi. 0.31 Mi. HOLLYCREEK (Effective 11-9-89) Route 1593 (Crossgate Road) - From 0.08 miles East Route 1574 to Northwest cul-de-sac Route 4385 (Split Creek Drive) - From Route 1~93 to South cul-de-sac Route 4386 (Pompton Lane) - From Route 4385 to Northwest cul-de-sac Route 4387 (Split Creek Court) - From Route 4385 to West cul-de-sac 0.19 Mi. 0.19 Mi. 0.13 Mi. 0.08 Mi. 89-1036 ADD~ON~ MAYFAIR, gECTION E Route 4545 lMillers Run Road) - From Ront~ 2081 to West cul-de-sac 0.07 Mi. ll.L. EXECUTIVE SESSION On motion of ~r. Sullivan, seconded ~y Mr. Mayas, %he Soard went into Executive Session for consultation with legal counsel pursuant to Sgction 2.~-$44 (a)(7) of the Code of Virqinia, 1950, as anended~ regarding settlement of probable litigation involving Chinaberry Drive ~ Boulders Extension. Vot~ Unanimous Pertaining to consultation with legal counsel pursuant to section 2.1-344 {a) (7] of the Cods of Virginia, 1950, ae amended, regarding eettleman~ of probable litigation involvin~ Chinaberry Drive - Boulders Extension, it wa~ on ~utien of Mr. Daniel, sasonded by Mr. Currin, resolved that th~ Board adopt thc following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has this day adjourned £ntu Executive Session in accordance with a formal vote of the Board, and in accordance with the p~ovisions of the Virginia Freedom of Info,marion Act~ and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act effective July t, 1989, provides for certification %ha% such ~xecutive Session was conducted Ln confozuuity with law. NOW, TEEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of County Supervisors does hereby c~rbify that to the beat o% sash member's ~ucwi~dge, ~) only public business matters lawfully which thi~ e~rtifieatiQn applies, and ii] only such public business matters a~ were identified in the Mobion by which the Executive gession was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the Board. No member dissents from thi~ c~rtifi- cation. The Board being polled, the vote was as follows: Vote: M~, Daniel - Aye. Mr. Mayas - Aye. Mr. Currin - ~r. Applegate- 12. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Sear~ adjourned at 7:30 ~.m. (EST) until 9:0~ a.m. (EST} on December 13, 1989 . Vets: Unanimous County ~dmini~tr~tor ~9-1037