The URL can be used to link to this page

01-24-90 MinutesBOi~,D OF J2~l~ 24, 1990 Mr. M. B. Sullivan, Vice Chalr~an Mr. G. H. Applegat~ Mr. ~arry G. Daniel Mr. Jesse J. Mayes Mr. Lane B, Ramsey County Administrator s~aff in Attendance: Asst. to Co. Admin. ~r. N. Everett Asst. Co. Admln., Intergovsrn. Affairs Ms. Joan Doleza/, Clerk to the Board Chief ~ob~rt Eanes, Fire Department Mr. Bradford $. ~mm~er, Deputy CO. Admin., Management Services Mr. William S. Howell~ Dir_, ~en. Services Di~. of ~lanning Ms. Mary Leu Lyle, Dir. of Accounting Deputy Co. Admin., Mr. R. J. ScCracken, Mr, Richard Meslfish, Dir. of Env. Eng. Mrs. M. Arllne McGuire, Treasurer's office Hr. Steve Miuas, Co. Mrs. Pauline Mitchell, Dir. of Services ~r. Richard A. Nunnally, Extension Agent Col. Joseph Chief of Police Mr. willi~ D. Chief, Dev. Review ~r. Richard Sale, D~pnty Co. Admin., Development Mr, Jay ~te~T~aier, Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Bit. o~ Parks & Dir. of Utilities ~r. Fre4eriuk Willis, Dir. of Mr. Currin called the regularly ~cheduled meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. {~$T). 1, INVOCATION ~r. Cvrrin introduce~ Reverend Gerald Martens, ~astor of ~aCoaoa ~ap%ist Church, who gave the invocation. i i i PLEDGE OF ~LLEGIANCE TO T~ FLAG OF ~HE .~NITED STATES OF ~MERICA Mr. Ramsay led the Pledge of All~giance to %he F~ag of the United States of America. 3. APP~OVALOFMINI~2ES On motion of M~. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved the minute~ of January 10, 1990, a~ amended. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel stated that because Case ~99N0120 wa~ so Lengthy and there were many exhibits that wore actually entered, many of these c×hibi{s did not show up in the minute~ themselves (January lO, 1990), as wall as Some of %he more key argumente that were given by the citizens; therefore, h~ weu%~ like minutes to today's meetin~ to reflect the following: that two (2) copies each of the audio, of the video and minutes of Zoning Case 895N0120 5e properly certified and housed in the County Attorney's Office to be kept for no I~s$ than five (5) years. He stated he has reason to believe that thi~ case will be reviewed at greRt lengths in the 4. COUNTwf ADMINISTRATOR'S CO~q~ENTS Mr. Richard Nunnally, Director of E×ten=ion Servic~ ~tat~d th~ ~eep Cheste~fi~l~ County Clean Corporation received the Five Year Award of Excellence from the Department of Waste Management, Division of Litter Control and Recycling which was presented by Attorney General Mary Sue Terry at the Annual Governor's Award C~remony On Sanuary 17, 199Q. Ms. Susan Craik, Extension Agent, presented ~h~ Board with the plaque. Mr. C~nrin commended tho~e involved for their outstanding 5. BOABD CO~94ITTEE REPORTS Mr. Daniel reported that the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission Charter had been approved allowing Chesterfield County an additional voting Board me~b~r, which nomination i~ mch~duled an today's agenda; and al~o the Honorable Vivian E. Watts, ~ecretary of Transportation and Public Safe=y, on behalf of the Governor of the Con%%onwealth, took action to officially redesignate the Richmond Area Metropolitan P~anning Organisation Study Ar~a, which resolution is scheduled on today's agenda. Mr. Mayas r~ported that he attended the r~tirement dinner in honor of Lieutenant O. C. Graves, Jr., Deputy Sheriff, and presented him with a Board resolution recognizing his Service to the County. Mr. sullivan reported that he attended a School Bo&~d work session on the Sup~rintendent's propose~ Eudget for tbs upcomin~ year which he felt was wall pre~ented: stated tho proposal is currently 3.4% off ($7.5 million) of tho proposed target provided to the School Administration. He stated he felt the efforts of the Board of Supervisors/school Board Liaison Committee is bearing the fruits of its labors. Mr. Carrie reported that he and several etaff members attende~ meetings in Now York wi=h Moody's and $~andard and P0ors, bond consultants/rating agencies, to diet,ss the economic viability of the County, which meetings ha fela were beneficial/favorable 90-85 1/24/90 regarding how ChesterfieId County approaches the issues of growth. Mr. Ramsay stated he felt the meetings were very favorable and that, in addition, the group also met with Investment Bankers that e~kibited interest in pu~cha~in~ Chesterfield County bonds as the County does have s favorable r~putation. C~AN~R IN T~ ORDER OF PRESENTATION The Board was presented with revisions to Item 9.B., Public ~earing to Consider an Ordinance to Amend the code of the County of Chesterfield, 197¢, a~ Amended, by Adding a New Article V R~lating to the S~tlng of sol~d Waste ~anagement Facilltles; and Item ll.B., Adoption of a ~esolution Authoriz- ing the I~ance of $9,040,000 in General obligation Bonds ur ~ond Anticipation Notes for County Capital Improvements. It wes generally agreed to accept th~ agenda, as submitted. 7. ~0L~TIONS ~ SPECIAL ~COGNITIO~S ~.A. CH~TBRFI~D COU~TY E~BLOY~B-OP-THE-YEAR, 1989 Mr. Willis introduced the 19~9 nominees for the Ch~terfleld County ~mployee-of-the-Year, who were as follow~= MS. Vickie MS. Lilly Boggs Ms. Patsy Brown Mr. Richard Cordle M~. Cynthia Button Mr. Lawrence Grlff~n ~r. ~ussell Mr. Clarence King Ms. Phyllis ~a~tin Mr. Bradley Paterson Mr. Willis Pope ~s. Ja~ice Bas,aka Me. Betty ~o Townsend ~s. Linda Mental Health/Mental Retardation Building Inspection Department Accounting Department Treasorer's Office Library General Services Department License Inspection Dep~rtmant Parks/Recreation Department Boli~ Department Planning Department U~ilitles Department Real Estate Assessment Department Nursing ~ome Information Systems Technology Mr. Ramsay congratulated all those nominated and R~o~nced that Ms. vickie Adams was setee~ed as ~he 19~9 ~mpioyee-of-the-¥~ar. Mr. Currin congratulated MS. Ada~ and presented her with a framed resolution, an silver engraved Aevere ~owI, a $50 savings bond, and the reserved parking space. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was WH~R~2~$, Ms. Vickie ~. Adams has be~n s~lected by h~r fellow employees to represent the Department o~ Mental Healtb/~ental Retardation/Substance Abuse Services as the 19B9 ~mployee-of-the-Year no~inee aa a person possessing the quali~ies uf superior performance and dedlcati~n to excellence in public service required of th~ recipient of th~s coveted award; $~EREAS, During twelve years of service which began in 1977 as a Deputy Cl~rk to the Circuit Court until Ms. Ad~s' current position as Administzativs Secretary to the Community ~ervices Board, her enthusiasm, professionalism and ne~ have gained widespread respect from her p~ers, and citi=~ns alike; and W~E~AS, ~s. Adams~ per~onal involvement, steadfast dedication and genuin~ concern a:e recognized an~ by tke many p~ople she comms in r~gular contact with~ including elected of~icials~ ~tat~ and federal agency i i County s~aff, clients and their fami~ie~ and by the general public; end WHEPd~AS, Mm. Ad,ms' knowledge of County procedures, a complete ~nders~andinq o~ her Department's programs and services and he~ excellent relationghip$ throughout the County government enable her to efficiently complete complex tasks requiring effective co~unication and coca,ina%ion with ether County dspar~ents$ and W~EREAS, Ms. Adams' devotion and determination and cooperative spirit are evident in her work as a volunteer on ~he soard of Director~ of Chesterfield Alternatives where she manages ~he Corpora%ion's client lean fund and its financial records. NOW, THEREFO~E BE IT RESOLVED, that the Che~terfie!d County ~eard of Supervisors hereby recognise~ the loyalty~ superior pe~fo~ance and dedication of Ms. Vickle ~. Adams by naming her as the Chesterfield County Employe~-of-the~Year for 2989_ 7.B. Ma. JANICE ~. AD]~Cg, COmmISSIONER OF REVENUE'S OFFICE On motion of thc ~oard, the following resolution wa~ adopted~ W~AS, Ms. Janice S. Adams will retire from the Co~anismioner of Revenu~'g Office, Chesterfield County, on February 1, 1990; and w~P~AS, ~s. Adams has provided twenty-hhre~ years of quality s~rvice to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WEE~J~AS, Chesterfield County, ~h~ Board of $upervisers and the Commissioner of Revenue?s Office will mi~s Ms. Adams' diligent service; and o~ all mobile homes and boats located in Chesterfield County and the County has b~nefi~ted from ~s. Adams~ wealth of knowledge; and WHEPdSA$, Ms. Adams' calm, friendly manner with the citizens o~ Chesterfie!~ has influenced her co-workers and supervisors alike; and WHE/~EAS, The Cor~i~ioner of Re~enue's Offic~ will sorely miss Ma. Adams' loyalty, dedication and friendliness, NOW, THEP~PORE BE ~T K~$OLVSD, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes M~. Janice S. A~ms an~ exten~s on behalf of its members and th~ ¢itizen~ of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County. AND, BE IT FU~T~ R~SQL~q~D, that a copy of this resolution ba presented to Ms. Adam~ and that this resolution be permanently recorded emenq the papers of ~hi$ Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Currin presented the executed resolution to M~. N. ~verette Ca-michael, Commissioner of Revenue, who accepted on behalf of Ms. Adams as she was ~nable' to at%end =he meetinq. 90-87 1/24/90 7.C. DECLARING FEBRUARY~ 1990 AS "HEART MONTH" On motion of the Board~ the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Cardiovascular disease continue~ to he Virginia's number one ~ause of d~ath and re,alas One of oar State's ~ejor health probl~s; and other life-threat~nin~ diseases affect more than one million Virginians; and WHEREAS, The Richmond Metropolitan Council of the American Heart Association continues ~o lead the fight against this %ra~ic toll with programs aimed at teaching each of ue how we W~E~EAS, Twelve thousand volunteers in the Metro area join together in this vital undertaking every year to improve our odds cf dying from this dreaded diEeaBe, which is currently about two-to-one. ~OW, T~EREF0~E B~ IT ~SOLVED, that the CheSterfield County Board of Supervisors docs hereby declare February as problem of h~ar% disease and the A~erican Heart Association's role in its solution and uxg~ i~s fellow citizens t0 support the work of this worthwhile Organization. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Currin stated th~ executed resolution would be presented at =he Hear= Associa=ion's Annual Campaign Kick-Off luncheon on January 25, I990. ?.D. SIGNET BANK/VIRGINIA FOR SPONSORSHIP O~ 1989 LEGENDARY CHRISTMAS PROGRAM On motion of the Board, the Board accepted a donation in the amount of $900 tn the Parkm and R~sreatlon Fund for s~cnsorship of the 19~9 Legendary Christ,s ~rogr~ and a~opted the following resolution: WHEREAS, The Legendary ChrisT-mas Program ham become a traditional o~lebEatlon r~fl~cting th~ holiday sea,on involving Hhe Chesterfield County community both as participants and as spectators; and WHEREAS, The Parks and Recreation Dspartmeat conducts ~hi~ Program each year in order to provide a wholesome seasonal activity for all citizens of Chesterfield Count~ and WHEREAS, Signet Bank/Virginia ha~ provide~ the ~inancial mean~ %o condu~% this ~v~nt for the third consecutive year; and ~FR~$, The 19~9 ~v*nb wag ~ancelled due to inclement weath~r~ Siqn~b Bank/Virginia hag ~raciously offere~ to o~fsmt NOW, THEREFO~ BE IT ~SOLVED~ that the Chesterfield Bnnk/Vir~inia for its generous COntribution to the citizens of Chesterfield County. gratitude to $i~ne% Bank/virginia for its outstanding civic involvement. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Currin presented the executed ~eselution to Ms. Erenda Loyd, Assistant Vice President of Siqnet Bank, and co~ended her organization's civic participation and contrlbution~ to County evente. 7.E. WTVR CHANNEL 6 FOR DONATION 0F TOT-LOT Id IRONBRIDGE PARK On motion of the Deard, the Board accepted a donation in the amount of $22,000 to th~ Park~ and Recreation F~ud for the construction of a Tot-Lot in Ironbridge Park and adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, WTVR-TV 6 ix the ~outh's first television sta=ion~ and W~ER~AS, WTVR-TV 6 ha~ ~hown its concern and caring for children through the "For ~ids' Sak~" Progrgr~ since 1987; and WEER~AS, WTVR-TV 6 has coordinated fund raising fox a "For Kids' Sake" Tot-Lot in Ironbridqe Park; and W~EREAS, The Tot-Lot is designe~ a~ a place where di~able~ and non-disabled children can play together and will include parallel bar~ for children in wheelchairs; and WE~R~AS, This ~et-Lot will be the first cf ~t~ kind in the Richmond M~tropolitan Area an~ will b~ a special plac~ wher~ f~illes can ~pend time tugether~ and W~EREAS, The following entities have contributed to the "For Rids~ Sake" Tot-Lot; W~VR-TV 6; MCV ~ospitals !nc.; Central Fidelity Bank; ~afeway Storas~ Blockbuster Video; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Boar~ of Supervisors hereby axpresse~ it~ appreciation and gratitude to WTVR-TV 6 and accepts their gift of $22,000 on behalf of the children of Ckestar~ie!d County. Mr. Currin 9resunted the execmted resolution t0 Ms. Sandy LaCom]3e, ~rogram Operations Manager, with WTVR Channel 6 and corr~ended them for their organization'~ outstanding civic participation and contributions to the County program~. Ms. Pow!er-Jonee expressed appreciation for the eppcrtunity to participate with the County in providing much a uniqu% facility to its citizens. 7.F. MIDLOTHIAN ROTAR% C~U~ FOR DONATI©~$ TO THE POLICE DEEART~ MENT'S DRUG ABUSE R~SISTA~CE EDUCATION (DARE) PROGRAM On motion of the Board~ the Board accepted a donation in tho amount of $~,OOO tO the Chesterfield County Police D~partm~nt's ~rug Abuse Re~i~tane~ Education (D.A.R.R.) Fun~ amd adopted the following resolution; W~EREAS, The Midlo%hian Rotary Club has made a gen~ro~ donation to the C~esterfield County Police DeDart~ent'~ P~ug Abuse Re~i~tanee Education (DARE) Program; and WHEREAS, The DARE Program is designed to build the self-esteem of the school children of Chesterfield County, to give them the information and skills needed to act in their own bast interest when makinq decisions, to help them decide not to use drugs and to take a stand on their ~ecisien in the face of pressure from their peers; and 90-89 1/24/90 W~R~A~, The Midlothian Rotary Club has assisted the DAP~E Program and its officers by providing funds for the purchase of giving DARE offi~e~$ additional tools with which to inform, educate ao~ protect the children of Chesterfield County against the dangers of drug u~e and abuse; and T~EREAS, ~he Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County Soard of Supervisors does hereby recognize the Mi~lothian Rotary Club and e×pr~g~S it~ gratitude for Program and calls this resolution to the attention of ~. ~ammer and Mr. ~illard D. Stith, ~idlothian Rotary Club There were no hearings of citizens on unscheduled matters or claims. 9.A. 1989-90 RURAL ADDITION PROJECTS Hr. Sale ~reeented a eur~ary of the request ~or the designation of a Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) rural addition project and stated staff is recommending that the $150,000 funds currently designated for rural addition projects in %rDOT's Six-Year Plan be transferred to other projects in the Six-Year 81an. ~e stated, if the Board wishes to continua the rural addition pro,ram, staff recommends that both the unn~ed road off of Church Road in Ma~oaca District and Ramona Aveau~ in Be~uda DistTic% be Oesigna~ed as the County'S Tural addition projects for FY-gO and FY-91. continuing th~ rural addition projec~; addieional fundin~ for said projects from the General Fund a~ in previous years; a list identifying all roads in the County needing improvement title research that would have b~mn required to accomplish the Cent Road Fund money to pay for enqineering expen~e~; etc. On mo%ion of Mr. Currin, s~condud by Mr. Mayer, ~h~ Board approved continuation of %he rural addition projects ~or Chesterfield County7 adopted Att%rnative 2 d~mignatinq an unnamed road off of Church Road in ~a=oaca Distric= and Ramona Av~nu~ in B~zmuda Di~trieh ag the County'~ r~al addition projects for FY-g0 an~ ~x-91 addition project(s), an~ dizec~ staff that Senate Street in Bermuda District be considered for rural addition projects in 199I; and appropriated $57~000 from the Board's Contingency Account to cover the County costs for ~ke projects. Vote: Unanimous 9.B. APPOIntMEnTS - METROPOLITAN ECONOMICAL DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Mr. Ceftin ~tated that, at its January 10, 1990 meeting, he Economic Develoument Council (MEDC}; howeverr considerable ~is~ussion ~nsued and subsequently the matter was deferred to this meeting. ~e stated he had discussed th~ appointment with ho~h Mr. Applega:e and Mr. Daniel; that he made certain co~itm~nt~ to all eh~ Board me~ers that he would request eack one be appointed to certain summitteas to represent the Connty in various capaciti~$~ that he understood he had s~t precedent in appointing Mr. Mayes to serve on the Legislative Con~mittee and this appuin~ment would do the same~ an~, in order to honor his co~itm~nt~ to all the Soard m~mbe~s, he would Stand by his ~ominatlun of Mr. Applmgate to serve on MEDC. Mr. Currin nominated Mr. Applegate to s~rve on ~he Metropolitan Economio Dev~Io~ent Council, He asked if there wur~ uny oth~r Mr. Daniel s%aeed he under$~oo~ that the chai~an has the prerogative to make appointments to co~ittee~ ~hat he has ascending tu the Chairmanship. He ~tated that he has been the future nominees. Mr. Mayes stated he felt the= each mem~r of the Board purely pareisan, and may be other than partisan, b~t he felt ~r. Daniel ~houl~ b~ qiven the opportunity to continue Mr. Sullivan stated h~ had b~u a~k~d by ocher Chairmen he supportm th~ right of the Chai~an and th~ leadership to Mr. Currin sta~ed, prior %o his etsction as Chai~an o~ the Mr. Currin r~stated his numinatlon of Mr. Applmga~e to serve on ~h~ Metropolitan Economic Development Council. Mr, Sullivan th~ rationale for th~ g~l~c~ion of ~h~ leade=ship an~ there had rationale in the selection of the leadsrship un %he ~oard, then ihs public should be made awmre o~ it. Mr. Applegate stated ~h~ information ~que~d by Nr. Mayes is outlined in the 90-91 1124190 Chairman to meR~ appointments to committees he establishes and he austalas that privilege; however, external Boards and Contagions are Board appointments, not the Chairman's prerogative and that was his reason for asking that this issue be discussed a~ a Board d~cision, ES requested ~r. Applegate to withdraw his name from the appointment to MEDC. Mr. Sullivan called for the question on the appointment of Mr. ~. E. App%egate to the Metropolitan Economic Development Council, which term is effectively i~diately and will ~xpire December 31, 1990. ~yes: Mr. Ceftin, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Apple~ate. Nays: Mr. Daniel and ~r. Ma~es. 9,C. FU~LIC NEARINQ TO CONSIDEA T~E ~NACTM~NT, PURSUANT TO SECTION I5_1-239~ CODE O~ VIRgINI~ 1950~ AS ~Jq~ND~D~ OF A~ ORDINANC~ ~N~ITL~D "AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH TH~ ROUT~ I0 SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, TO CONSTRUCT CERTAIM SEWER- AGE FACILITIES THEREIN~ A~D TO IMPOSE CERTAIN TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS UPON THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY 50CATED THEREIN" Mr, Micas gtat~d th~ Board, at its $snn~ry 10, 1990 m~ting, continued the public hearing to consider the enactment of an ordinance to eataDlish the Route ~0 ~ewer Assessment ~istrict; and set the public hearing to authorize issuance of revenue bonds and to appropriate bond proceeds and to approve interim loan from the Sewer Fund Balance~ ~ecan~e one owner raisei questions re~ardinq f_he diatricl. He since that time, staff has met with a number of property owners within th~ assessment district and those property own~r~ have collectively re,nested that the Board consider a mizty (60) day ~e£erral of the matter and based o~ that request, staff is re¢O~m~ending ~aid deferral. Mr. Appl~gate made a motion ~or a sixty (60) day d=fefr&l of th~ public ~ea~ing t~ consider the enactment, pursuant to Section 15.1-239, Code Of Virginia, 1950, as amend=d, of an or~insnce entitle~ "An Or~inance to ~stablish the Routs 10 Sewer Assessment District, to Construct ~ertain Sewerage Facilities Therein, an~ to Impose Certain Taxes cr Assessments Upon the Owners of Property Located Therein'~. Mr. Currin disclosed to the Eoard that he owns property that lies within the proposed Route 10 Sewer Assessment District, declare4 a conflict of i~terest p~r$~an% %0 the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interemt Act and excused himself from the meeting. Sr. William R. Warren, representing the Parkland Corporation, oWner~ of epprOxi~ately 31 acres within the proposed assessment expres~ concerns regarding th~ financial impaet of the proposed district on his property, tkat his corporation had ne~ reo~ived sufficient notification of the public hearinp, and that he had expressed the ~act that his company has Some initial problem understandin~ that th~ County had ocnsldered this property in the pa~t as wetland and, if so, there is great question in their minds as to the suitability of their property for development. ~ ~oted that the four {d)owner~ of this property are eld~rly~ refir~d individuel~ on limited incomes end it his understanding that under the proposed assessment district would require a submtantial iinancial investment, perhaps a that would bs inconvenient and/or impossible for tkem to pay. ~ ~at~d %hat, ~ub~uant to the last Board meeting, he and o~he~s have met with the Utili%ie~ Department, as well as one of the major developer~ within the proposed district, believe~ to be meaningful conversation with %h~ developer that may lead to a resolution of their problems and /eqnms~e~ ~hat 90-92 1/24/90 the Board defer the matter for an additional sixty (60) day~. ~e further noted he underEtood tho developer with which he has spoken concurs with the request for a sixty {60) day d~ferral. When a~ked, Mr. Sale presented a brief summary of the origination of the request for t_he proposed sewer assessment district. Mr. Daniel stated that after further review of the information provided in this Eoard paper he could not support thai it be completely reworked; referenced previo~s instances whe~a three year periods are the timefram~$ in w~ish a return on the investment is expected to transpire; stated he wished to see another draft paper with ~or~ financial options available certainly with less than a five (5) year payback, with details of upfront expenses of the development commnnity~ and also from the poln~ o~ a bond sale that it has a reasonable paybaek of a positive cash flow somewhere in the thre~ to five year range which has been the policy of the Board. Mr. Mayes concurred with Mr. Daniel and stated he felt a ninety (90) day d~f~rral would be appropriate to allow those involved to arrive at some closer agreements. Mr. Applegat~ ~tated hs had no proble~ with either a sixty {6G) or ninety (90) day would alter the situation. After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Ma~es, consideration of the public hearing to consider the enactment, ~ur~uant to Section 15.1~239, Code Of Virginia, laS0, as Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate~ Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayes. ~r. ~icaa noted the~ procedurally this law requires a district, which means that, when this issue is returned to the Board for a decision, with four members sitting i~ would require a unanimous vote fey approval. Nr. Currin returned to the meeting. 9.D. PUBLIC ~EARING TO CON$IDE~ AN Q~DINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CEESTEP~IELD~ t978, AS A~iENDED, BY ADDING A ~W ARTICLE VIi P~ELATING TO T~ SIT~NG QE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES Mr. Jeffrey L. ~incks, Senior A~i~tanf County Attorney, state~ this date and =imo had been advertised f~r a public hearing to co,sider an ordi~anee to amend thc Count~ Code rslatiRg to the siting of solid wasue ~anagemen~ facilities and briefly ~ari~ed the e~dinance and its impacts. Mr. Pat Bo~e~ a co-owner of the Q~alla Road Landfill, stated there is no substantial mention in the proposed ordinance ~elafive to recyclin~ and that h% felt data ~hould be brough% slight conflict of interest involving this proposed leqislatien, the conflict being that the Department of Wa~t~ Management has issued emergency r~gula~ions that affect only requirements of the proposed ordinance relatinq to the siting 90-93 1/24/90 of solid waste manaq*ment facilities; amendments to the ordinance regarding recycling; approval procedures; otc. Mr. Currin reed, for the record, a statement requested by Mr. Pat ~owe to be added to the prepoeed ordinance which stated, "Nothin~ her~in is to be construed in any way as a manner of discouraging, hindering or prohibiting recycllng~'. Mr. ~ayes expressed concern that the revised material was dietribute~ to the Doard earlier in the morning session and he had not had sufficient opportn~it~ to reed it. Mr. Micas suggested the statement ae p~opo~ed by M~ Bowe may be added as Section 10-49 of the proposed ordinance. Mr. Mayas made a motion to defer until ~arch 2S, 1990, consideration of an ordinance to amend the Code of the County of Chesterfield, I975, as a~ended, by adding a new Article V~ relatin~ to the siting of solid waste management facilities until such time as ~he Boa~d has had an opportunity ~o thoroughly peruse ~he revi~ed dale provided to the Board. Mr. Rayes stated :his ~eari does not have a very geo~ record An dealing with landfills. Mr. Micas stated the mOtiOn died for Mr. Sullivan made a motion, seconded by Er. Applegate, to adopt th~ proposed ordinance to amend the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended~ by adding a new Article VII There was iurther ~iscu$$ion relative to the criteria and approval of zoning and/or sitin~ by both the County and/or State Department of Waste Management; which process is the initial process and who is the deciding authority in the matter; input from the ~andfill industryy a meshanism whereby the Board would be aware of whether o~ not all permits have been completed and/or approved at the time zoning is grented~ p~rmit approval, prior to July 1, 1989, that has been isb~ed to operate a solid wast~ management ~aoility by the virginia D~pmrtment of Waste Management or hue received ~oning for the siting of a solid waste management £aoility not being required to obtain si%ins approval for such facility pursuant to t_he provisions of this article; if the ordinance addresses wbeeher or not the zoning would be null and void if there is no permit ha8 been granted; that ~aff include in the Request Analysis as a condition of monies that the zoning shall lapse if the operator does not receive a permit by a certain date; why the n~cemsity to adopt the ordinance this date; etc. Mr. Mayes stated that with the problem~ the County has ex- perienced with landfills he felt more study was needed prier to it~ b~ing voted into law. Mr. Currin stated that~ considering the meetings and public hearings conducted on this matter, he felt ali those involved had h~d ample opportunity to ~hare their input and discuss the ramifications of the matter. Mr. Sullivan moved, seconded by Mr. Applegate, to adopt the ~ollowlng ordinance: SO. IDeaTE MANA~ FACILITIES BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, that Chapter 10 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is hereby amended' b~ ~ddi~ ~ nm~Art~cle ~II es follows: 90-94 1/24/90 Article VII. $itin~ of Solid Waste Management Facilities. Sec. 10-40. Definitions. For the purposes of this article, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed by this section: ~ means the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking or placing cf any solid waste in{o or on any land or water so that such solid waste or any eon~t±tuent theMsof may enter the environment or be omitted into the air or discharged into any waters including groundwatars. energy irom solid the recovery of material or "Sludge'~ means any solid~ semisolid or liquid wastes with similar charact~rlstics and effects generated from a public, ~=nicipal, conu~ercial or industrial ~astewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plaDt, air 9ollutiun control facility or any other waste producing facility. "SoL~d waste~' mean~ any garbage, refu~, sl~dge and o~h~ discarded material, including solid, lig~id, semisolid or contained gaseous mate~iaI, resulting from industrial, commercial, mlulng and agricultural operations, or oo~unity actlvitie~ but dee~ not include (i) ~©lid or dissolved material in domestic sewage, (ii} solid or dissolved material in irriga- tion return flows er in industrial discharges ~hioh are sources subject to a permit from ~he State Water Control Board, cr (iii) source, ~p~eial nuclear, or by-product material as defined by the Federal Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. including incineration or neutralization, designed to change th~ physical, chemical or biological character or compo~itien Sec. 10~41. Siting approval required. No solid wa~t~ management facility shall be sited on property located within the county unles~ the owner of such property, or his authorixed agent, shall have f~rst received siting approval from the governing body oi the county as provided in this article. Sec. 10~42. Applloatlon for siting approval. Any person desiring approval to site a solid waste manage- ment facility in the ~ounty ohall complete an application, ~he form of which Sha~l be as provided in section tO-~3~ end fil= the application with the county's solid waste manager. Only applicatiQus completed on iorms provided by the solid waste manager will be received for filing. Tho county shall not be dccmc~ to have received an application filed under this section until the application is completed and contains all information requested by thm application form or as reasonabl~ requested by th~ ~olid waste manager. SeC. 10-43. Form of application for $itin~ a~roval. The application required by Section 10-42 shall Be in the following form: 1/24/90 90-95 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY CITIN2 APPR©V~L APPLICATION I. ~p_pllcation In~ormaticn~ A. Kamen B. Address: D. Busines~ Telephon~ II. Owner Information {if different from Applicant Information): A. Name: B. Address: C. Contact Person: D. Business Telephone: III.Facility Site Location Information= A. Location Desc~iDtion: Location ~ap (attach) at an appropriate scale showing all of the following charauteristlCs within 1000 feet of the b0undarie~ of %he property on which the facility i~ pnoposed to be located: 1. Surface water supply intakes 3, Groundwater recharge areas 4. Wetlands lO0-year flood plain 6. surface impoundment areas and free-flowing 7. site topography Privat~ and public ~elts 9.Public and private roads Public facilities 11.Residences 12.All o~h~r OCcupied existing ~cning c]aemification~ 14. property lines C. Zoning approval for intended facility IV. D~m¢~iption Of Facility ~hydro~oro~i~{ a~d inoludinF'the following inZermatlon: ~ydrogeologic and soil charaeteri~tic~ of the site Vgrtioal profile of ~oil for three (3) locations to a depth cf five (5~ feet below the lowest elevation of the propoeed facility. C. Water level elevations for each location at twenty-four (24) hours a~ter completion of field observations and permeability Soil olamsifioation data at th~ lowest elevation of the proposed facility E,Certificate on suitability of mite ~oile for use as a liner (if applicable) F.Map showing directions of ~ro~ndwater flow and H. Fenc~ diagra~ or other graphical showing the interrelationship of the mite soils vi. Engineering Plans (attach} including the following: A. Vicinity and location map Boring locations C, Topography and boundary information J. K. L. M. N. O. ~i%e layout plan showing the phaeing and sequencing of the facility and facility ~it~ Road and entrance improvements with payment a~ctions ~ite plan showing all proposed site improvements Site grading plan CC-7 drainage analysis Soil and erosion control plan Disposal cell cross-sections and profiles with seasonal high ground water level {as applicable) Cell detail, liner and cap detail, leachate collection detail (as applicable} Groundwater monitorinq well locations and w~ll construction (as applicable) Accese control fencing and gate house/control facility Provieions for gas venting (as applicable) ~pecifications concerning liner and cap placement and construction Specifications concerning leaohate collection Plan Iattached) which shall include the following= A. Solid Waste quantities, character, and Si~e life calculations ~or the entire site and each phase or area of the C. ~eachate quantity calculations for sizing lsachate collection and removal faoilitles using the water balance m~thod (as appropriate) D. Site development plan d~taili~g the phasing and sequencing of the operational steam, cell appropriate) E. Goundwater monitoring program including number and location of wells and proposed sampling program appropriate) F. Personnel and equipment to be provided for ~he operation G.Operator Statement regarding the q~alifications and eapabilftie$ to operate the site in accordance with the propose~ plan~ Access control describing procedures and equipment that the ~perator will u~e to accomplish the fallowing= 1. Limit aocese %0 ~he 2. Conduct inspections of waste loads for unauthorized materials hazardous or suspicious wastes 4. I~ole~e and dispose of suspicious waste I. Closure plan and closure c~st estimates owner and operator L. Proposed method of meeting the State financial materiale N.~roposed hours of operation O. Manpower and equipment proposed and a~ailable for this project P.Specifications concerning l~achate collection viii.signature and certificate of Applicant By my signature below I hereby certify that I a~ authori=ed by the owner of ~he proposed facility site to submit this application and that all information ~ubmitted on an~ with %his application is ~rue, a~curate and complete. 90-9? 1124/90 Appliaant Sac. 10-44. Cfi=erie for siting a~roval. The governing body of the county shall not grant approval for the siting of a solid waste management facility unless the governing body has determined that: potential danqer to the health, safety or welfare of amy person potential danger to the environ/~ent. Sec. 10-45. Procedur~ for mitin~ approval. {a) NO later than 120 days after the county receives a completed application, as provided in Section 10-42, the governing body of the county shall hold a public hearing concerning the approval or disapproval of the siting of the proposed solid waste management facility. Notice of the public blaring ~halI b~ provid%d in acoo~dano~ with S~ction 15.1-431, Co4e of Virginia, letO, as amended. (h) ~ailure of the governing body to take action to grant or deny siting approval within 120 days after thu county receives a completed application shall sonstitute a granting of siting approval, (¢) If the governing body denies an applicant's request for ~iting approval~ the applicant ~ay appeal such daniel to the circuit court of the county, provided that such appeal is filed within 30 days of the date of the denial. {d) If an application for sitinq of a proposed facility is denied, no substantially similar application shall be filed with the county for twelve {12) months following the date o~ such denial, geo. 10-46. Prior approval. Any person who has, prior to July 1, 19~9, been iezued a Virginia Department of Waste Management or has received zoning for the siting of a solid ~aste management facility shall not be required to obtain siting approval for such facility pursuant ~o the provisions of this article. $9e, 10-47% ~f~ft of sitin~ approval; zoning required. The granting of siting approval pursuant to the provisions of this article shall not be deemed to be a grant o~ zoning approval, Any p~r~on d~fring to operate or maintain a solid waste management facility must obtain appropriate zoning %herefo~ pursuant ~e %he county's zoning ordinance. An application filed pu~enant to Section 10-42 shall not bs considered complete un~il the proper~y upon which a solid waste manuger~ent facility is proposed to be sited has been pzoperly zoned for such use. Sec. 10-48. Application fee. Any person who cubmitc an application pursuant to this article shall submit with the application an &pplieation fee of $1,500. sec. 10-49. Effect on recycl.in~. Nothing contained in this article shall be construed in any way to dlscourags, hinder or prohibi~ recycling. 90-98 1124/90 The Board being pclled, the vote was as follows: Nr. Bani~l~ Aye. Mr. Mayee: Nay, and stated he intended to write a Minority Report and avery time there is reference to thio matter a ~inerity Report will acuo~pany it, Nr. Applegate: Aye. Mr. Sullivan: lye. qr. currin: Aye. Mr. Danial stated he realized thereare inetancee where last that staff take whatever steps necessary to disseminate the communication in a more expeditious manner. Mr. Applegate stated the ~eard does have a provision whereby it adopts th~ agenda at the onset of the meeting and if, at that time, any Board member does not wish to accept a revised or additional agenda item, th~n it is bis prerogative ~ot to do ~o. Mr. Currin stated he had beep informed tha~ a request had been made to take an item o~t of ~eq~ence on the agenda and requested that the rul~$ be suspended to do so. On motion ©f ~r. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board suspended its r~les t~ take out of s~quence Item 10.B., Public ~earlng to Consider Amendments to the County Charter Providing for Impact ?ecs and a Transfer TaX. Vote: Unanimous P~BLIC HEAP~NGS .~.0.~. TO CQ~D~KA~i~D~NTS TO T~ COUNTY C~ARTER PROVIDI~G FOR IMPACT FEES AND A TP~'S~ER TA~ Mr. Micas stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider a~endments to the County Charter providing for impact fees and a transfer %ax a~d discussed sta£~s proposal on cash proffers and Senator Russell's proposed impact fees. There was some consideration to restric~ ~he time on this public hearing; however, it was determined that all individuals in%crested in speaking would be allowed to do so hu= were requeste~ not to be redundant, if possible. Senator Robert Russell expressed appreciation for the Board's consideration to take this issue out of sequance as he had to be at the General Assembly shortly. H~ ~ubmitted copie~ of a prepared statement to the Board relative to proposed impact fses and how he saw their applicability in Chesterfield County. Ke stated the bill he has introduced in the Lsqislature provides for a local impact fee on new homes to defray part cf th~ costs of maw raads and schools but he has not~ and he will net, introduce an~ bill ~or any amendment to the impact fee bill authorizing transfer taxes for this er any other funding need. Ne emphasized the importance of the building industry tc th~ County =nd statad ha hoped, likewise~ the building industry under,toed the importance of finding a solution to the funding of school, roads and other public facilities which are necessary in a high growth co--unity. Me outlined the major provisions of his proposed bill indicating that: 1) if impact fees are authorized by th~ l~gi$1ature, and adop:ad by the County, then the County will not adopt the use of "cash proffere"~ 2} there will b~ a "cap" on the total amount of impact fee accessed on each new residential lot; 3) the collection of an i~pact f~e ~ill only occur upon issuance Of a certificate of o¢cupansy, net at some earli~ point in the building proce~; and that 4) in order to enact any impact fee ordinance and collect the fees, the County mus~ also 90-99 1124/90 appropriate an equal ~ount of general funds fca capital improvement needs in each budget year. He stated the p~oposed l~gislation is the result of combined e~forts of conversations with individual Board membere~ the County Administration end th~ Homebui]der$ A~osiation of Richmond and urged that suggestions regarding the proposed bill be cenveyed to him within th~ next few days ac that ke may convey that information to committee members. Mr. Mayas expressed concern why the legislation omitted the collection of impact fees %0 be used for capital expenditures services s~ch as policet human services, libraries, parks, etc. Senatar Russell indicated he did not feel it was politically appropriate %e request impact fees for services beyond which was authorized by the General Assembly last year for Northern Virginia and he 'felt the legislation had a bett~r chance for approval i~ staucture~ as such. ~e further noted he wam attempting to allow for maxim~un flexibility for the us~ impact fees for funding capital expenditures resulting ~rom new growth and that the proposed legislation, if approved, would not incur double taxation a~ referenced in S~ction 10~6 the impact fee bill were approved~ the upa of the cash proffer system wcul~ cease. Mr. Sullivan asked if ~ransfe~ ta~es could be added to ~e proposed legislation at a later time in the session. Senator Russell stated such an ~en~ment could be adde~ tc the proposed bill; however, as author of the bill, he would resist that as it i~ not hi~ in~ention to take such action. Mr. ~aul ~rasewicz, ~r. Harry weinstock and Mrs. Fays Palmer Voiced support for thc proposed impact fees and cash profferu as they felt develoDment should bear th~ burden 0f the cost of ne~ public ~rvices needed to support th~ occupants of that new thm cost imposed by th~ development industry ~o supper% ~chools, roads, utilities and other public capital ne~s~ that many individuals no longer have children in the school system residential development does not pay for itself; and that the County must either implement impact fees or raise taxes and the rai~ing of ~axe~ for all citizen~ Lo bear the burden of the expense would not be equitable; and urged the adoption an~ implements=ion o~ impact ~ees and/or cash premiers a$ fees can provide the needed monies to maintain the quality of public facilities as th~ County expands. MS. Carolyn "ratlonat~ nexuS"; and ~f he impact fee would be equitably applied to each n~w home. She stated citizens are upset and stated the perception of the quality of life in the County researching up,rent financial assistance to new homebuy~rs being provided by ~mployers as ia done in some areas by ~h~ f~d~ral government and/or private industry~ etc. not been agreed ~p0n by the Board and the Board reserves the right to race,end ~mendm~nts to thai bill. ~e ~tated he did wish Ms. Powers or others to feel that the Board iu confi~ed to th~ aspects of the bill as discussed by Senator Russell Mr. Steve Marsh voiced support for an ac~c~ %h% Beard impact tax placed on all residents as it appeared to him %0 be only equitable means to address the matter. He stated everyone 90-100 living in the County benefits from the Connfy and he f~lt it was a sensible approacS~ It was generally agreed to recess for two (2) minutes. Mr. Barry Bishop, President of th~ ~ebuilders Association of Richmond, voiced opposition to the proposed i~pact fee and stated the Hom~builders Association of Richmond, at this time, is not in favor of Senator Russell's proposed legislation any new tax, whatever its name, that would affect the affordabillty of new homes in Chesterfield Dr. Robert Cook, an economist speaking On behalf of the Womebuildsrs Association of Richmond, stated the issue of impact fees had been discussed in Virginia on more than one occasion; that he had diKc=~sed this problem individually with the Board membetet that ~here had beam aqreament tkat there was sound argument for th~ ~o~ehuilders Association to be part of the process but the financial impact is substantially higher now than that which he ~houph~ was originally diesassed. ~tated th~ Board is not being asked to ~ais~ ta~ %o pay for grQtcth but is being asked to charge citizens an~ industry the amonnt~ of money that were agreed upon to pay for growth in the recent referendum. ~e =tared they have no= stated that pay~ for itself because they under,tend the way the County has conducted its business, the way this tax structure has been implemented, it has not been able to collect the mevenues it anticipated collecting. ~e stated it is the responsibility of staff to collect those taxes and the Board'~ re~ponslbili%y to ~nsure tha~ it is accomplished. There was a brief discussion relative to the scenario as to how many people would be unable to buy new homes if the costs were increased by additional $1,000, $3,000 or $5,000 impact fees. Mr. Daniel state~ the County ha~ collected more money than anticipated and those monies went toward unappropriated capital improvement funds. Dr. Cook stated the taxes anticipated collection when the real estat~ rate was ralse~ ~o $1.09 were not collected. Mr. Mayas agreed that no one wanted taxes raised hut stated the County does want growth to continue and questioned if growth does continue where will the money originate to pay for the ~dltional capital expenditures it generates. Dr. Cook stated the increases enacted by voter approval in th~ reierendum should have been collected end more ~oney would be available. Mr. Jerry Jewett provided observations on residential development in th~ County as related to the direst and/or indirect beneficierie~ of lot development, house cons~rustion the assessed value of all houses and lots mu~t be raised the same ~ou~t; that land being held for development will desline in value aS %h~ a~sOrption rate slows; that the implementation of proffers, impact fees and down-zoning will cripple the industry which is providing income ~or many of the C0u~ty residents; and requested that the County obtain an economic analysis of the true impact of the proposed impact fees. ~r. Bill Maddux, Chairman of the Legislative Committee of the aishmond Association of Realtors~ Mr. Jay Weatherall~ Mr. Channing Martin; and Mr. Charle~ Warren, President of Timmons and Aseooiates, voiced eppositien to the proposed impact fees as they felt such f~ woul~ have a negative impact on their business and employees; ststed the County appaa~ed to 90-101 1/24/90 be trying to blame economic growth an~ ~Lhe real estate industry to be the real culprit; voiced opposition to a proposed transfer tax and stated new revenues should come from sources as broad based as possible os be directly ti~s to the services rendered; rsferenoed an existing grantors tax whlck if imposed with impact fees would constitute doubl~ taxing of residents; and questioned whether or not the County has properly planned its long-range, fiscal planning er more efficiently operated the government to provide for those services for which it promoted co~erclal business and residential development in the Ceunty; and requested that the Board consider the overall welfare of the County and the overall impact of thus issue on its citizens and if ata× is needed, make it a real ta~ and call it a real estate tax, not overly penalize those pereene wishing to purchase a home in Chesterfield County. ll.J. LUMC~ The ~oard generally agreed %e ~e~ess a~ 1:00 p,m, (ESTI for apDro×imately twenty (20) ~inute~ for lunch in the Board ~r. Leo ~yers asked for clarification of the proposed impact fees; questioned if this issue has come about because the County has spent tOO mneh money tOO fast in certain areas and, if so, hs would like to know; and stated he is neither for ncr against the proposed fees at this time as he ie seeking more information with which to make a determination. Mr. C. G. Humphrey, Jr.; Mr, R~$Sell Evans, ~. Nancy white; Mr. Rill Walton; Mr. Rick Whitley; Mr. Charlie Hoff~tt; Mr. Kobert ~mith; ~r. Dan KayhitI; ~r. ~ill ~rmine; ~r. H. Clem Carlisle; ~r. ~lbert ~oward; Mr. Tom Cauble; Mr. Bill Raft; and Mr. Russ ~ar~er voice~ opposition to the proposed ~ees as they felt such fees would jeopardize the economy of the County's County; adversely impact the sales o~ those .businesses which are indirect and/er direct beneficiaries of the c~nstrnotion industry; that alternative solutions should be sought and discussed; ezpressed concern that only a minority of people will b~ paying for problems oreat~ by a ~jority; that impact fees will eliminate the market for affordable homes; that the less of existing and/or potential business will impa¢~ the quality of life in the County; that the implementation of that the government should review internal spending to determine if it is being spent wisely and if it is then raise taxes; expressed concern that the true growth p~oblem is the growth of government expense; ~hat the implementation of such f~ss will impact an already delicate balance in the economy; and urged the Board to reconsider the implementation of impact fees and/or transfar fees. Mr. Curtis expressed appreciation for the participation in be discussing the merits and ramifications of impact f~$, proffers, e~c., at its upcoming retreat~ that it is the intention of the Board to wait Ua~il after the retreat address- ed these issues to make any suggestions and/or recommendations which will be brought forward to Senator Russell. It was generally agreed to recess for two (2) minutes. 90-102 1/24/90 It.E. MOBILE HO~E BEQUESTS 90SNO123 tn Berm3da Nagi~t~riat District, JOHN ~. BODEL~{AM~R r~qu~te a Mobile Hame Permit ~o park a mobile home on property located approximately 160 f~ off the west line of S~inole Avenue, from a paint approximately 830 feet southeast cf Melba Street, and better known as 2311 ~aywood Street. Tax Map 98-6 (3) Bellmeade, Block 10, Lots 17 thronqh 24 (Sheet Mr. Jacobsen state~ staff race--mhd8 approval of Casa 90s~0123, subject to certain conditions. He no,ed the applicant has oomptied with a requirement for skirting on the mobile home and, ~ince he ham placed a foundation for ~he ¢onstr~etio~ of a single family dwellin~ on the proper%y, eta~f is recc~nmending approval for only five (~ Nr. John Bodenh~mr mba~d the race, ended conditions were 1. The applicant ~hall be the owner and occupant of the mobile home. 2. ~o lot or parcel may bm rented or teamed for nme am a mobile home site, nor shall any mobile ~ome be us~ for run,al property. Only one (1) mobile ho~e mhall be permitted ~o be parked on an i~dividual lot or 3. ~he minimum lot size, yard s~tbacks, required front yard, and utkmr zoning ~equirmments o~ the applicable zoning district shall be complied wleh, except tka~ no mobile hame =hall b~ located closer than 20 feet tO any existing residence. onto ~ mobile hom~. Ail mobile homem shall be mkirted shall not be placed on a pe~au~nt foundation. 5. Wh~ public (Counay} water and/er sewer ars available, they shall bm umed~ 6. Upon beinq granted a Mobile Home Permit, the applicant the BUilding Official. Thi~ ~hall b~ dons prior to installation or relocation of ~he mobile home. Any violation of the abov~ conditions shall b~ ~rounds for revocation of ~he Mobile Mom~ Permit. 905N0124 In Bermuda ~agisterial Dis%riot, DAI~I~ SIAI~O requasts a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property approximately 150 feet off the south llne o~ Libwoed Avenue, from a point approximately 300 feet w~t of Telbu~y ~treet, and better known as 771~ TapDahannock street. Tax Map 67-11 (2) ~ayon Park, Block 14, Lots 11 through 19 Er. Jacobsen stated th~ applicant has requested a tkirty (30) day deferral of Case 90SN0124; ~e noted, how%var, ~taff has reco~u~ended denial of tke subject request as the applicant does not intend tc use the mobile home for dwelling purposes. Mr. Danny sited stated he requested a thirty ~30) day deferral in order to clean up his property add resolve other preblmms. ?here was ne opposition to the deferral. On mo%ion of Mr. Currin~ seconded by Mr. Sullivan~ the Board deferred Case 90S~01Z4 until February 28, 1990 so the District Supervisor can meat with staff an~ the applicant in an ~ffcrt ll.L. REQUESTS FOR R~ZONING In Clover gill Magistsrial Di~trict~ B~LZER ~ ASSOCIATES, research and development facilities, printinq~ publishing and allied industries, professional offices, outdoor storage yards and warehou~ in an Agricultural {A) District. An office/ware- house complex is planned. This request lies on a 3.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 262 feet on the south line of Genits Read across from south Ridge Drive. Tax MaD 48-7 Part of Parcel 3 (Sheet Mr. Jacobuon stated the applicant has requeste~ withdrawal of Case 89SN0266. opposition to the request for withdrawal. Vote: Unanimous 89SN0335 (Amended) In Bermuda Magisterial Distrlct~ GEORGE EMERSON rssoRinq from General Industrial {M-I} to Residential (R-15) of 321.4 acres plus amendment to Gonditional Use Planned Develop- meat (Case 87St74) to permit use exssptions on 56.1 acres. A mixed use development ~ith residential~ recreational, and commercial use~ is planned. This request lies om a 377.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 635 feet on the east llns of Kuffin ~iil ~oad, approximately 3,000 feet southwest of Walthall Drive. T~Y ~ap 150-3 (1} Part Of Parcel ll and Tax Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commissien reoo~nded d~nial of Case 899N0335 as the proposed request is considered incompatible with e~isting zoning aS well as emerging industrial development in th~ area and the proposed zoning and land uses dc not conform to th~ Ruffle Mill Area Plan. M~, Cut,in advised the Board that he has no ewnership involvement in the subject property but because the applicant is ~ bu~iuesS partner in other projects he has requested a ruling from the County Attorney and Commonwealth's Attorney to d~termin~ whether or net he may vote on the request. Re stated until such time as he has been advised as to whether or not a conflict of interest exists~ he would declare a potential conflict of iAterest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excuse himself from the meeting. Mr. Jeff Collins, representing the applicant~ requested a sixty (6~) day deferral of Case 89SN8335. There was no opposition to 90-104 1/24/90 m th~ request ~or a deferral. On ~otion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, th~ Eoard deferred Case 89SN033~ until March 28, 1990. Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appleqate, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Currin. Mr. Currin returned to the meeting. 89SN0412 In Bermuda Magisterial District, VIRGINIA POWER requests rezcning from Heavy Industrial (M-3) to ~ea~- Industrial with Conditional Use to permit two (2) electric generation units at an existing electric power generation plant. This request lies on a 2.7 acre parcel lying approximately 300 feet west of the northern terminus of Coxendal~ Road. Tax Map 99-6 (1) Part of Parcel 1 (Sheet Mr. Jacobsen presented a suI~ary Of the request and stated the Planning Commission race--ended approval of Ca~e ~95N0412, subject to certain conditions. ~r. Sullivan state~ he had concerns regarding the subject request. Mr. Currin stated that since there wsr~ concerns expressed reletivs to the case, it would be placed in regular sequence on the agenda. 89SN0421 In Clover Hill Magisterial Dietr~ct, COREAST ~%UINGS BAD~K requests amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 745021 and 85sG02) relative to signs. This request lies in Office Business (O) and Light Industrial (M-l) Districts on two [2} parcels fronting in three (3} places for a total of approximately 3,~00 feet on th~ ~orth line of Mull Street Road, also ~ronting approximately 1,400 feet on the north and east lines an~ approximately 2,~00 feet on the south and wemt lines of Harbour Points Parkway, ~nd located in the northeast and northwest quadrants of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 61-16 (1) Parcels 2, 5, t9, and 27 and Bart of Barcs! I (Sheet 20). stated the Planning Commission race--ended ~enial of the applicant's request which would increase the amount of $ignage on the site beyond whek was originally approved ~nd b~yond what th= current zoning ordinance would permit. We further noted that the Commission recommended approval of additional freestanding signs and overall signage that conform~ to the recently adopted Zoning Ordinance for =merqing Growth plus a freestanding si~n :o identify the neighborhoods Of Harbour Points, subject to c~rtala ~onditions. Mr. Earley Joseph, representing the applicant, stated the ~lanning Coi~r~ission recommendation end conditions wer~ acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by ~r. ~ullivan, the Roard approvs~ Case 89SN0421, subject to the following conditions: 1. Except as noted hersin~ sigm~ shall comply with Zoning Ordinance, Sact£ons 11.1-265, 21.1-266, 21.I-268, and 21.I-269. (P&CPC) 2. Exoept for the following freestanding eignn, diructional and directory signs, there sSall be no free,tending signs along Herbour Points Parkway: 90-105 a. One (1} free,tend±ns sign to identify khe overall development within the Of£i~e Busine~a (O) and Light Industrial (M-l) tracts. One (1) freestanding sig~ not to exceed 190 equate feet in aras and zin~teon (19} feet in Overall keigk%, to idsn%ify the residential n~iqhborhood~ of Harbou~ Poin~o, located in the vicinity of Route 360 and Ha~bour Pginte Parkway, a~ approvgd by co~m~ni~y association, d~velcper~ and Planning staff. (P&CPC) Building-mounted and freestanding sign~ sh~l! be po~itioned so as not to be visible from any district within Hat, our Pointe. {CPC) A site in the vicinity of ~ar~our ~oinCe Parkway and Rout~ 3~0 ~hall b~ provided for the freestanding sign to identify the residential neighborhoods of Earbour Poin~e, (cpc) (NOTES: A. Theee condition~ ~uporaodo tho Textual relative to signs for the request property only. B. ~xcapt as noted herein, all other conditions of zoning approval for Cases 74S021 and 85S002~ aa amended by any subsequent amendments, remain in effect. Unan~mou~ In Clover ~ili ~aqiaterial Distrigt, ~ P/~kTN~RS~IP aUDBARD) r~ug~t~ ~onin~ from Light Industrial (M-I) to General ~uslness (c-5). A commercial/office warehouse complex is planned. This request lies on a 17.8 acre parcel frontin~ approximately 1,450 feet on the west line cf Johnston Willis Drive~ approximately 850 f~L $o,~h of Midlot~ian Turnpike, Mr. Jm~obaon pr~nt~d a 5~mary of the aubje~t requezt and stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Case 89SN0423 and a~oeptan~e of ~e proffered Mr. James Hubbard, representing ~he applicant, stated th~ on mo~ion of Mr. Applegate, ~edOndad by Mr. Sullivan, khe Board app/oved Cas~ 89EN0423 and auu~pqed the following condition: Th~ following C-5 us%~ ~hall bs 1) Occult sciences such as palm readsrs, 2) Auction sales or salvaq~ barn~. 3} Fa~ implements and machinery sales, service, 4) ~anu~actura~ hom~s, mobile hcm~s, modular and rental. 5}P~blic garages. 6)Tire recapping and vulcanizing esCaDl~shmen~s. S) Outdoor advertising signs. Vote: Unanimous 89SN042S In Clover Hill Magisterial District, R~YON COP~ORATION; P.S. METCALF requested rszoning from Community Business (B-2) to Community Business lC-3) . A motor vehicle repair shop is planned. This request lies on a 1.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 224 feet en the north line of Hull Street Road, also fronting approximately 248 feet on the east line of Genito Read, and located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 49-10 (1) Parcel 28 (Sheet 14). Mr. Jacobsen presented a suntmery of the subject request and 89SN0428. Daniel expressed coneern~ regarding the subject request. ~r.Curria stated that since there were concerns relative to the requestr it would be placed in its regular sequence on the agenda. 89SNO43S In Midlothian Ma~isteriai District, ~3~?~¥, ~NC. requested rszcning fro~ ~esident]al (~-15) an~ Communify Busines~ to Neighborhood Business (C-2). A planned. Th~s request lles on a approximately 44 f~et on the east lin~ of Duford Road, approxi- mately 180 ~oot nortk o~ ~orest Hill Avenue. Tax Map 10-2 (~) Parcel 30 and Part of Parcel ~4 end Tax Map 10-2 (3) EOn Air Heights~ Block ~ Lot iA (sheet 3). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary cf the subject request and ~tat~d th~ Planning C~iS$iOn I~co~onded approval of Case 89SN0435. Mr. John Pearsall, ~epre~enting the applicant, stated the On motion of Mr. Sullivan; seconded by Mr. Mayem, the hoar~ approved Case 898N0438 In Dale Magisterial District, YERNON ~%~/%%D~ requested reaching from Community Business (B-2) to Community ~usin~ze (c-3). A coa~erci~l complex is planned on thre9 (]) parcels ~o~alling ~.3 acres. Th~ first parcel frcs~s approximately 250 feet on the east line of Iron Bridge Road and approximately ~60 feet on the south line of Irongate Drive, and is located in the south- east ~adrant of the intur~ection of ~ese road~. The ~econd paroel fronts apDr0ximatety 280 ~=st on the east line of Iron Bridge Road, approximately 290 feet south of Ironqa~ Drive. line of %rongate Drive, approximately ~O0 f~et eas~ of Iron Bridge Road. Tax Map 66-2 (1) Parcel~ 1 and 67 (Sheet 22). Mr. Jacobsen presented a eu~a~y 0f the subject reqnes~ and stated the Planning Co~ission reeoEended approval of ca~e 89SN0438, subject to certain condition~. Mr. Daniel eEp~essed concerns regardinq the subject request. Mr. Carrie sta~ed since there were concerns relative to the 90-107 1/24/90 request, it would be placed in its regular sequence on the agenda. In B~rmuda ~agi~terial District, VIRGINIA i~O~ER requests rezoning from Heavy Industrial (~-3) to Heavy Industrial {I-3) with Conditionel ~$e to per.it two (2) ~l~tric g~neration units at an existing electric power generation plant. This west of the northern terminus of Cexendale Road. Tax Map 99-6 (1) Part cf Parcel 1 (Skeet Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of ~h~ rgquest and ~tated the Planning Ce~mi~sion recommended approval of Case 89SN0412, subject to certain conditions. ~r. Sullivam stated he had been informed the applicant did not request the applicant consider a thirty (~O] day deferral b~ean~e it~ Unit 7 plant was begun without a required Conditional Use permit, which is currently required by the $oning Ordinance for ~tecfric power generation facilities in ~eavy Industrial (~-I/I-3) Districts. He further noted applicant or ether parties hav~ ~xpressed an interest in constructing two additional fac£1itiss in the County and, prior to any furtker approvals of such facilities, he would llke to have an opportunity t~ study the possible impact cf these on the County's Comprehensive Plant ~pacially as it relates to the location and design of high voltmga transmission lines. Mr. Sullivan made a motion, seconded by Mr, Daniel, to defer ~r. Tom 0'Brien, representing the ~ppllcant, ~tated that, although hs did not necessarily object to the deferral as requested ~y ~r. Sullivan, ha no,sd that Virginia 90war ha~ obtained a Ceztificat~ of Public Naceszity for the con,traction 0~ units 7 and 8 from ~he State Corporation Com~isslon; the service several years ago in =he normal uourse of upgrading Ch~$t~rfi~ld's power stations; and would b~ glad to present the Board with whatever information necessary conuer~ing the continue~ D~e~ for ~nifi~ 7 and 8 which will p~ovide a cri=ical in the County. Mr. Daniel inquired if the subject ~nits wer~ for g~neral applicability for all customers or =argeted to industry in that are Virginia ~er's two generating unit~ designed for use by present who are experts in their field~ and are qualifie~ ~r. Currin sta%~d Iepmesen%~tive$ from Virginia Power had Contact%d him expressing they did not wish a d~fe/ral and had a~re~d; however, hs had also requested that if any members they attempt ~o resolve them prior ~o the muetlng~ ~e apolo- gized to the applicant and Mr. Sullivan for the mlscu~unica- tion a~d stated, ~er th~ eirc~stances, he f~It he should hoped any concerns could be resolve~. Mr, O'Brien stated he Supervisors is a legitimate governing body in tke Commonwealth and he did not appreciate Virginia Power, or other~, nat exhibiting respect for the Iaw~ and ordinances of Chesterfield County. M~. S~ltiv&n restated his motion, s~conded by Er. Daniel, to defer Case 89SH0412 until February 28, 1990. 89S~0428 Tn Clover Hill Magisterial District, EX]feN COlk~O~d~OH; ~.~. ~TCAI~ requested rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to Community ~usin~ss (C-3). A mo~o~ vehicle repair shop is planned. This request lies on a 1.3 acx~ parcel fronting approximately 224 fe~t on the nor~] line of Hull Street Road, also fronting approximately 240 feet on the east tins of Road, and located in th~ northeast quadrant of the intersection of these reade. Tax MaD 49-20 {I} Parcel 20 (Sheet 14}. Mr. Jacobsen presented a ~Ummary of the r~que~t and stated the Planping Commission recommended approval Mr. Daniel questioned how ~ke repair shop is designed on layout o~ the subject property. Mr. Jacobsen indicated on a slide the layout 0f ~he subject property and the location of the repair ~hop. Mr. Bob Puryear, representing th~ appli=an%, stated the On motion of Mr. Apptega~e, seconded by 89~043~ In Dale Magisterial District, ~ON LAP,APE requested from Community Business {B-2) to Community Business (C~3). commercial complex i~ plan~e~ on thr~e (3) parc~l~ totalling 8.3 acre~. The first parcel fronts approximat%ly 250 feet the South line of Irongate Drive, and i~ located in the south- east quadran~ of the interseutiun of ~hese roads. The second Dri~ge Road, approximately 290 feet south of Iron,ate Drive. The third parcel fronts approx~at~ly 140 feet on the south line of Ironqate Drlv~, approximately 400 fmet ems= of Iron Bridge Read. Tax Map 66-2 (~) Parcels 1 and 67 (shes% Mr. Currin disclosed to ~u Board that he serves on the ~oard of Directors of a bank in chesterfield, d~clared a conflict i~tere~% pursuant tu the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict ~r. Jacobsen present~ a s~ary of the request and stated the Planning Co--lesion race--ended approval of Case ~9SN0438. Mr~ Daniel questioned the differences in ~he devel0p~ent CO~unlty Business {C-3) classification aB opposed ~o ~he Co,unity Busines~ (B-2). Mr. JacobBon briefly explained tho~ differences. 90-109 1124/90 Me. Carol Hyatt re~e~ted clarification ss to the requested zoning and permitted uses. Mr. Jacobsen explained that the applicant has requuot=d rezoning of th~ subject property which if approved by the Board of Supcrvlsers would allow the applicant to construct facilitie~ subject to all requirements permitted by the zoning Ordinance in a Co--unity Business (C-3) Disk/itt. Ms. Myatt further voiced objection to the men,cai/dental complex that ha~ been located adjacent to Aer property; requested that the privacy fence along her property et the medical/dental complex be continued along the development to prohibit the nuisance, indecent exposure~ vulgar language, littering of the construction crews~ and requested the use of the private entrance to her property bs prohibited to those entering and/er exiting the medical/dental complex. Er. Daniel requested that staff assist MS. Hyatt regarding the problems she is experiencing with ingress/egress on her property, as he understood the Irongate Shopping Center as well es the ~hepping tenter itself+ There wa~ brief discussiun relative ~o the types o~ uses permitted under the Fuqt~est and the ntu~be~ of /tO,standing and location signs as permitted. Mr. Jacobsen stated the ordinance currently requires that on the rear of u shopping center zoned C-3 that there be a ~ave~y-five (75) ~oot bu~er; that existinq vegetation be preserved, if possible, and if not, Landscaping C standards he required; that any shipping and/or receiving for any uses must be screened from adjacent residences; that the rear of tbs building be architecturally compatible with the front of the building; etc. Mr. Mayas inquired as to what ~tated that the ¢~rrent situation regarding the ~dioal/dentai approved Case Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate, ~r. baniel and Mr. Mayas. In M~toace Magisterial ~istrict, CON'i'~ C~L~U-~%R requested Conditional Use to permit a 1~5 ~oot tower in an ~gricultural (A} District. This reqtt~st lies on a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approxlm~tely ~O ~eet Qn the northwest llne of ~awbys Bridge Road, approximately 1~180 feet west of Courthouse Road, also fronting approximately 290 feet on the south lane of Tax Map 78-I fl)' Part of Parcel 2 [Sheet 21). ~r. Pools presented a ~ttmmary of the propossd request and stated the ~lanning Commission recommended approval of Case 89SN0425, subject to certain conditions. Mr. John Dodeon~ ~eDr~sen~ing eh~ applicant, ~tated the race,ended conditions were acceptable and no,ed tha~ and resolved. There was no opposition present. on motion of Mr. ~ayes, seconded by ~r. Apptegate, the Board approved Case 89S~0425, subjec~ %0 the fottowinq conditions: 1. The plan p~epa~ed by Pott~, Minter and A~sociates, ~.C., dated September 1, 1989, and the pictures and elevations All driveways and parking areas shall be gravelled and maintained to minimize dust problems and provide ease of ingress and egress. (P) There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. Ihs base of the tower shall be enclosed by a minimum six (6) foot high f~nce, designed to preslude trespassing. Between the fence and the property bmnndaries, existing vegetation shall be maintained and, if necessary, supplemented with evergreen plantings having an initial heigh~ and spacing to provide screening of the base of the tower and the equipment buildinq from adjacenf properties and public rights Of wSy. A detailed plan depicting this requirement ~hall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. Prior to release of a huildin9 permit, a copy of FAA approval shall be submitted to the Planning Department. The tower and equipment shall b~ designed and installed ~o as not to interfere with the chesterfield County Public Safety Trunked System. The developer ~hall perfoz~ an engineering study to determine the possibility cf radio frequency int~rferenc~ with the County system. Prior to reissue of a building permit~ the study shall be ~bmitt~d to, ~nd approve~ by, the Chesterfield Coun%y Commnnication~ and Electronics staff. (FD) The developer shall be responsible for correcting any frequency problems which affect the Cheeter£i¢ld County Public Safety TrunRed System caused by this u~s. Such corrections shall be made in~ediately upon notification by the Chesterfield County Communications and Electronics staff. (~D) AcCeSS shall he secure~ se as to prevent trespassing. The exact method of smearing th~ acee~ shall be approved by the Planning Department at the time of site plan review. IcPC) Vote: Unanimous In Sermuda ~agisterlal District, P~INCZ G~ORGE SERVICE COP~OI~A- N~ighborhood ~usiness [C-2) of 1.95 acres and to Co, unity Bu$ine~ (C-3) with Conditional Use on 2.15 acres to permit automobile sale~, service, r~pair, and r~ntal facility. An office/co~rcial complex an~ ~utomobile sales, service, repair, and r~ntml facility is planne~. This request lie~ total of 4.I acres fronting approximately g60 f~% on the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approx~ately 380 feet on the north line of San~ ~ill ~rive, and located th~ northwest ~ndrant of the intersection of ~he~ road~. Tax Map ]]6-15 (1) Parcel I (Sheet the Planning Co~isslon race,ended approval of C~se 89SN0439, subject to certain conditions. H~ farther noted that staff had race, ended approval of the reZCning and denial of Conditional Us~ since ~h~y felt the site could be ~evetoped and better ~rotsct the adjacent residential neighborhood without' the Conditional Use. Mr. Dean Hawkins, reproach%ins the applicant, stated the 90-1tl 1/24/90 Planning Cem~ission's recommended conditions were acceptable. There was discussion regarding ownership of the vacated fifty (50) foot right-of-way; use of said right-of-way development as part of the subject parcul; the request for an exception to staff's reeor~Beuded buffer; ~he zoning Qrdiance requirement for a fifty (50) foot buffer for C-2 zoning and sevemty-flve (75) foot buffer for C-3 zoning when ad,scent to re~identielly zoned properties; that the imposition of a seventy-five (75) foot buffer along =ha western property line Wo~ld significantly reduc~ the development o~ the subject parcel; that the applicant is being requested to provide a buffer that is unnecessary; etc. There was no opposition On motion of Mr. Coffin, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the ~oard approved Case 895N0439, ~ubject to the following cendition~ 1. The following buffer~ ~hall he maintained: A. A fifty (50~ foot buffer along the western boundar~ of the C-2 ~rac~. B. A fifty {50) foot buffer along the western boundary of the C-3 tract. {CPC) Th~se h~ffers shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 21.1-226 through 21.1-22S. (P) 2. There shall be no outdoor paging systsm. 3. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 6~00 a.m. ~nd 10:08 p.m. (NOTE: Conditions ] and 3 apply to the C-3 with Condi- tional Use tract, only.) And further, the B~ard accepted the following proffered condition: Prior Co the issuance of a building permit, ~ixty (60) feet of right of way, measured from the center- line of Jefferson Davis Highway, ~Aall b~ dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and r~trict~d. 898N0444 In ~atoacs ~aglsterlal Di~trlct, ~ L. ~LTON AND C. NAPIER requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential to permit nee (recreational facility) and b~lk (lee a~ea and width and building setbacks) e~ceptions on this ~raet and an adjacent 70.2 acre tract zoned Residential (R-12~. A single family residential subdivision with recreational facilities is planned. ?his reques~ lies on a to,al of 311.4 acres fronting Road, approximately 900 feet north ~f Riparian Road, also of saldwin Head. Tax Map 13Z~l (1) ~arcel 1~ Tax Map tZ3-5 Parcel 1; Tax Map 133-9 {1) Parcel 1; Tax Map 133-10 (I) Parcel 5 and Part of Parcel 1; and Tax ~ap 133-13 (2) Fur~st Heights, Lo%~ 12A and 13 (Sheet Mr. Jacobsen presented an overview of the proposed request and i 89S~0444, subject to certain conditions and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Nr. Oliver R~dy, representing the applicant, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable, referenced support expressed by adjacent property owners, submitted a letter of support for the record and noted that the applicant wac not seeking to extend Baldwin Road to other stub roads. He stated he felt it important to note that the cash proff%~, $1,500 per let for improvements to ~appy ~ilI Road an~ $17~ per lot for school improvements, offered by th~ applicant is reasonable and that tho County will be well served ~y this project. Nr. ~ayes stated he wished to clarify that thi~ case did not receive favorable consideration when pre~ieu~ly presented to the Board primarily due to Happy Hill Road not being able to adequately handle additional traffic problems. Mr. Joel Clapp, Becretary of th~ Mistwood ~erast Civic As$ooiation, stated the proposed request as presented appeared to be somewhat improved and expressed appreciation for thc proffered conditions addres~in~ area residents concerns; however, he expressed conc~rn~ relative tO th9 impac~ of the proposed project on projected ~tudent ~n~ollm~n% in the area, vehicle p~r day traffic volume~ on ~appy Hill Aoad, emergency were sufficient to address school needs. Nr. Mares expressed concern relative :o staff's recommendation for approval of the mubj~ct r~qu~mh in light of information in the Request Analysis i=dicatlng that the cash proffers will capital facilities which is estimated to be approximately $5.25 on ~he fact that the r~quested zoning a~d land uses confo~1%o Land Use ~nd ~rans~ertation Plan. '~hsn asked, ~r. McCracken to deny Case 895~0444. There was no second. There was further discussion relative to timing of the payment constructed with tho cash proffer payment; the timeframe school capital improvements resulting from the Drop0sed ~r. Daniel stated he felt sincere efforts had been made to address capital improvement ~onCerns but, based on the presented and did not feel the primary issues, as previously appropriate and he did not feel this governing body had the right, since ~ile request was filed prior to July 1, 1989, to their application if the ~oard were to require cash proffers when he did not feel it appropriate. ~e craped, however, the applioants convinced him that, in order to proceed with their project, they were willing to offe~ cash proffers for both rea~ 90-113 1/24/90 request, also filed prior to July 1, 1989, that was granted without cash proff~r~ and etate~ au much as he disliked accepting cash proffers on this case due to the past history on the subject property and the fact that the Board had not fcrmally adopted a policy concerning cash proffers, he would support the request provided that his vote does not establish the cash proffer policy which will have to be decided at e later ~ata, Nr. Sullivan s~ated he too rejected the subject proposal when it was p~evio~sly presented to the Board; stated that although he agreed somewhat with area residents, Mr. Mayes and Mr. Daniel, he felt the County had gained through the applicant's cash proffers substantial ~und~ for necessary capital improvements resulting from th~ development of this project. ~e stated he was 91ease~ that the County had been able to Eot a precedent regarding cash proffers as it indicates to the community that the Board ia serious about cash proffers. He stated h~ would prefer to ~ a much higher rate, that he understands the concerns raised but supports the idea of cash proffers to fund necessary capi~l i~provement$. Mr. Currln stated that hc was concerned with acceptlug cash proffer~ prior to the Board setting a general pcliey on their u~e; however, he stated he would suppor~ the request pro~ide~ hi~ vote ~as not 0onstrued as e~tablishin~ the cash proffer policy which would have to be decided at a later date. Mr, Daniel stat~ he did not vote against =he pr0pos~d r~quest when it was p~eviously presented in the absence of cash proffers nor did he vote against it as an incentive to obtain cash proffers. He stated he sincerely voted against the proposal ba~ed on health, sa~e~y and welSars reasons and in particular reaeon~ dealing ~ith education. ~e ~tat~d some positive mea~ura~ have ~een taken to provide oa~h to address road needs; however, there appears to be a timing problem as to when the actual monies will produce road improvements. Ee stated he did not intend to vote for or against a motion for approval or denial because he feels the ~aee i~ st~ll flawed on a health, safety and welfare basis. Mr. Mayes stated he felt much progress had been made and expressed appreciation for those efforts; however, he felt the case shcul~ be d~ferred for an ~dditional sixty (60) days tc provide the applicants and opposition an opportunity to come closer to~ethe~. On motion of st. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Danisl, the Board deferred Case 89SN0444 until March 28, 1990, Ayes: ~r. Mayes. Nays: Er, Currin, Mr. sulliva~ and ~r. Applegate. Abstention= Mr. Daniel. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved Case BPSN0444, subject to =he following conditions: 1. In conjunction with approval of th~s request, the following bulk exceptions shall be granted to the requirements of the Residential (R-12) ~oning district: u. A 2,000 square icot excuptlon to the required minimum lot area of 12,000 square fse% provided, however, that permanent open space or land in an amount equivalent to that by which each residential lot or building site is reduced in area, shall be provided in coramcn recreational area within the development in conjunction with ~uhdivision approval. Such area(s) shall be noted on final site plans and any final check and recordation plat~. (P) 90-114 1/24/90 (NOTE~ This exception sh~ll not apply to those portions of the r~uest site adjacent to Midden Valley Estates and Mistwood Forest Subdivisions where the applicants have proffered minimum 1Qt sizes of 15,000 square feat and 12,000 square feet, respectively.) A ten (10) foot exception to the required minimum lot width of ninety (90) feet. (NOTE~ This e~ception shall not apply to the lots adjacent to Hidden ~a!ley Estates where the applicants have proffered a minimum lot width of 180 fe~t at the building line.) A two (2) foot exception to the required minimttm side yard of ten ~10) f~et. A five {5) fcc% exception to the required minimum side yard on a corner let when said lot is back to back or side to side. (P) 2. ~hen bulk requirements ~or buildingm or lot$ are no% e~tabli~hed by the Master Plan or ar~ otherwise established by proffered conditions, those of the Residential (R-12) District shall prevail. {P) And further, the Board accepted the following conditions! proffered 1. The ~ollowing conditions notwithstanding, =he Textual Statement and plan prepared by E.D. L~wis and Associates, P.O., titled "Longmeadow Farms," da~ed January 2~, 198~, revised November 22, I989, ~hall he the ~aster Plan. Approval of the plan by the County does not imply ~hat the County gives final approval of any particular road align- ment or typical section. ~ublic water and was~ewete~ (sewer) shall be used. Prior to submittal of any schematic, tentative subdivi- sion, Or si~e ~lans, a~ overall plan of the proposed water distribution and wastewater collection system for th~ development shall be submiteed to the D~partment of Plan shall reflect the routing and sizing of both on-site and off-site Ii~ applicable) extensions of lines, identify points of futura connection ~or ad,ad,nb prop~rtlee by showing easement locations (if applicable), end he accompanied by appropriate supportive design date. This shall include a statement acknowledqing the Pire Depart- meat's approval of the fire protection water flows and pressures that are being proposed for the d~valopmant. All approved easement locations for uso by adjacent properties ~hall be dedicated to the County in oon~unction with the recordation of the Subdivision or prior to approval ~f any site plans. 4. Prior to any vegetative disturbance or approvals beyond the zoning of the property, the ~ngineering Depart-meat must be provided with do~ttmentation (p~rmits) from the with respect to any wetlands (as defined by the U.S. Army Cor~s of Engineers) ~ha% may ~e located on the site. 5. A fifty (59) foot buffer s~riD, exclusive o~ easements and required yard~, ~hall be established and ~aintaiD~d adjaQent ~o Eappy ~il! ~oad (acute 619). The ar~a of thi~ buffer strip shall either be left in its ,~tural state, if 1/24/90 sufficient vegetation exists tc provide adequate Bcreen- ing~ or be planted and/or bezmsd in accordance with a land~cape plan approved by the Planning Department; if su~ieient vegetation does not exist to previd~ adequate ecreenlng. Prior to approval of ~Dy final efta plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shall flag this buffer strip for inspection, and shall po~t a bend to cover the implementation of ~he landscape plan, if such plan i~ required. ~xcept for approved public road access{es), no access shall be permitted through this buffer strip~ Thim building setback and buff=r strip shall he noted on any final site plane, and any final check amd recordation p/atm. The Planning Commission may modify this condition at the time of tentative ~ubdivision review, ~ours of operation for the recreational facility ~hall be limited to from 8:00 a.m. to ll~00 p.m., Sunday thrnugh Thursday; and from ~:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, Friday amd Saturday. Landscaping shall be provided for surface parking areas in accordance with Section 21.1-255 of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance. (NOT~; Ail off-~tTeef parking areas m~st also comply with all applicable raquirementm of Division 2. ("Parking") of th~ Ch~gterfield County Zoning Ordinance~ a~ existing as of the da~e of zoning.~ 8. Ail exterior lights for the recreational facility shall be arranged and i~stalled ~o that the direct or reflected illumination deee not exceed 0.5 foot ~andles above background measure~ ~t the lot line of any adjoining r~sidentiat parcel. Light standards shall directional-type capable of shielding the light source from direct view from any adjoining parcel or public right of way. Farther, no exterior lighting shall be higher than twenty (20) fee~. One (1) sign, not to exceed eight (8) ~quare feet in area, ~hall be permitted at the entrance to the recreational area. Lighting for the sign shall comply w~th Section 21.1-266 of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance und illumination ~hatl be permitted only during normal hours of operation. A rendering of this sign ~hall be submitted to the Planning ~epartment for approval prior to erection. 10. Thexe shall be no outside public addre~ system er upeaker~ per~it~od in conjunction with the facility. 11. In conjunction with final site plan review and the release of building permits, a detailed landscape plan for the recrea=ional facility shall be submift~d to the Planning Department for approval in accordance with Section 21.1-22~ (a) (2) of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance. This plan shall incorporate pedestrian and bicycle paths to provide the greatest possible safety and 12. A ~hir~y (301 foot buffer shall be established and main- tained along the northern and eas~urn property lines of the recreational area. Th~ area within the buffer ~trip shall be left in its natural state er supplemented in accordance with the landmoape plan (~ee Condition 11). Nc access ehall be permitted through this buffer, sxc~pt for the entranc~ driYaways, utilitie~ and bicycle paths, as required by the landscape plan, 13. Forty-five (45) feet o~ right of way, measured fre~ the eanterline ~f Happy ~ill Road, shall be dedicated to 14. Additional pavement shall be provided along Sappy Hill Road to provide leftr and right-turn lanes. 15. A collector road shall be provided through this property. The location and design of this cellector shall be approved by the Transportation Department. 16. A twenty-five (25) ~oet buffer strip, exclusive of ease- ~snts end req~ire~ yar~s, shall b~ ~st&blished and main- tained adjacent to the proposed internal collector read as depicted on the Master Plan for Long Meadow Farms_ The area of this buffer strip shall either be left in its natural state, if sufficient vegetation exiStS to provide adequate screening, or be planted and/or harmed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Planning Department, if sufficient vegetation does net exist to provide a~equate screening. ~rlor to approval cf any final site plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shall flag this buffer strip fur inspection, a~4 shall post a bond to cover the ~Dlementation of the landscape plan, if such plan is re~uir~d. ~xoept for approved through this buffer strip. Thi~ buildiDg setback and buffer strip shall be noted on any final ~ite plans, and any final check and recordation plats. 17. There shall be no road connection between this property an~ ~idden Valley Estates. 18. The ma~i~]um number of lots ~hatl he 650. 19. A fifty (50) foot buffer strip, exclusive Of easements and required yards, shall bs established and maintained along the entire boundary of Lot I3, Forest Heights, Tax Map 133-13 (2) and adjacent to Lot l~, ~ores~ ~eights, Tax Map 133~I3 (2). The area of thi~ buffer strip shall either be left in its natural ~tate~ if Sufficient vegetation sxlsts in accordance with e landscape plan approved by the Planning Department, if sufficient vegetation does nut exist to preu~de adequate screening. ~r~o~ to the plat, the Oev~loper shall flag thi~ buffer strip for inspsction~ end shall post a bond to cove~ the implementa- tion of the landscape plan, if such a plan is required. Except for approved public road or public ntility access(es), no ~u~e~ shall be psrmitted throuuh this buffer strip. Thi~ building setback an~ buffer strip shall be no=sd on any final site ptan~, an~ any final check end recordation plats. The ~lanning Com~ission may modify ~his condition at the time of tentative subdivision 20. Ther~ shall be a 5~-feet wide buffer adjacent to the prspsrty llne o~ Psrcal 135-5-(1)-4, Parcel t33-5-(1)-5, 133-5-(1)~3, 132-8-(])-12 and 13~-~-(1)-f3. S~id buffer shall e~tend around the perimeter of a portion of the property to be zoned a~ ~bOwn on ~h~ ~astex Plan. The area of this buffet strip shall either b~ left in its natural ~tate, if sufflclen~ vegetation exists to provide a~equste screening, or be planted and/or bermed in accordance wi~h a landscap~ plan approved by the Planning Dapartment~ if sufficient vegetation does net ex,st to provide adequate screening. ~rior to approval of any final site plan or recordation of any plat, the developer shali flag this buffer strip for inspection, and shall post a bond to cover the implementation of the landscape plan, if such plan is required. Exc=pt for approved public road or public utility accede(es), no access shall be permitted through this buffer strip. This building 90-117 setback and buffer strip shall he noted on any final site plans, and any final check and recordation plats. The ~lannin~ Commlssicn may modify ~his Condition at the time of tentative 21. There shall be a 50-foot buffer adjacent To the Midden Valley E~tate s%lbdiTision. This buffer will be on Parcel 133-1-(1}-1. The area of this buffer strip shall either be left in its natural orate, if sufficient vegetation exists ~o provide adequate screening, or be planted and/ur termed in aCCordance with & landscape plan approved by the ~lanAing Department, if su~ioient vegetation does not exist to provide adequate mcreening. Prior to approval of any final site plan or recordation cf any plat, thm developer shall flag this buffer strip for inspection, and landscape plan, if such plan i~ required. Except for approved public road or 9~blie utility access(es), no access shall be permitted through thi~ buffer ~trip, This building setback and buffer strip shall be noted on any final site plans, and any ~inal check and recordation plat~. The Planning Commission may modify this condition ~t the time of tentative subdivisiou review. All proposed lets adjoining ~idden Valley =state subdivi- sion shall contain a minimum of 15,090 square feet in area and shall be 100 feet at the established building li~e. This proffer will apply to Parcel 133-1-(1~-1. 23, The applicants uhall provide an easement from a water line through its property to Baldwin Road to allow for a possible water line extension to serve property along Saldwin Road and the two parcels shown on the map herein- above referenced to a~ ~afcel$ 13~-5-(t]-4 and 133-5-(1)-5. The parcel through which this easement extends will be Parcel 133-5-(1)-1. 24. The developer shall provide an easement for sanitary sewer 1/nas to serve the property of G,P. Barbour, his heirs and assigns, and shall almo provid~ a 5Q-foot wid~ ntub road to the aforesaid property is said stub road ia approved by Chesterfield County. The parcel through which this easement ~xtand9 will be Par~l 133-5-(1)-1. 25. Applicant pro/farm to landscape the buffer area along the northern and par~ of the eastern property lines of ~he Motto property in accordanse with the landscaping plan attached hereto. 26. All proposed leas adjoining ~istwood Forest euhdivisioD shall contain a minimum of 12,000 square 27. Applicant proffers that the ~estrictlve Cov~n,nts to be adopted for the proposed development which affect any lot in the proposed development in any section adjoining Mimtwood Forest S~bdivision shall contain the fOllOwing Restrictions: (a) No trees mmas~ring six (6) inches or mor~ in diameter at a point two {~} feet above ground level may be removed without the written approval of the Architectural Control CoE~itte~ ior Lonpuuuadow Farms. Approval for ~he removal of %~ees located within fifteen (15) ~eet of the approved ~it~ ~or such buil~inq will he grante~ unless such removal will substantially decrease the beauty oi th~ property. (b) In order to implement effective insect, reptile and woo~s fire sontrol, the owners and their agents hays the right to enter upon any property on which a building or structure had not been constructed and upon which nc landscaping plan had been implemented, 9~-118 1/24/90 for the purpose of mowing, removing, clearing, cutting or Droning uuderbrumh~ weeds or other un- sightly growth, wkich in the opinion of the owners detracts from the overall beauty, setting and safety control shall be kept as low as reasonably and shall be paid by tho owner of the property. The owner~ and their aqenHs may likewise enter upon such property to remove any trash which has collected. Such entry shall not he made until thirty (30) days after the owner of the property ha~ bson notified in writing of the n~ed of such work an~ unless such owner fails to preform the work within said thirty {30) day period. The provisions in ~his paragraph shall not be eons=mad a~ an obligation on the part of the owners to mow, clear, cu~ or prune any property, to provide garbage er trash removal ~rovisions cf this paragraph sh~ll not be de~msd a 28. The Applicant shall provide an eamement for ingress and egress mt the end of Mistwood Forest Drive into the parcel sltuate~ at the southeastern corner of its development, an~ will also provide an easement from its own development to said parcel, ~o that said parcels may b~ used for passive recreational purposes by the ownere of lots in both developments, and at such time as the Community Association8 of both subdivisions have been organized, developer will convey said pazcel to said Associations for the a~ereseid p~rposes~ Said eaxements ~hall be shown generally on tko revised a.D. Lewis plat. 29. The applicant shall make nc connection between the boulevard entrance in the proposed development as shown on the ~.D. Lewis Plan an~ the currently resorded Sections of Mistwood Forest for a period of three years from the of moning. 30. Applicant hereby makes the following cash proffers; {a) $1,500.00 per lot for improvements to Happy Hill Road between Harrowgate Road eastwardly to ~he Site Access Road to Lo~gmea~ow ~arm; {B) $1'75.00 per lot for school improvements. (c) After March 31, 1996, the amount of any remaining unpaid cash proffers ~et ~erth in (a~ and (b) above shall be adjuetcd upward by the mama percentage that the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Ind=x increased between March $1, 1995 and the date such cash proffers are paid; {d! ~o cash proffers shall he paid with respect to first seventeen (17) lots ~hat ara developed. Begionin~ with the eighteenth (lath) lot on which ~ building permit above (as adjusted pursuant to (c) above for after MarcA ~1, 199~) shall De paid ~or each lot developed at the tLme of application for a building permit for suck lot. The Board being polled, the vote was as Mr, Daniel: Abstention. Mr. Applegate: Aye. ~r. sullivan: Mr. Currin: Aye. 90-119 The Board generally agreed to feces5 for two (2) minutes. Reconvening: MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER TO INTRODUCE On motion cZ ~r. Sullivan, secQn~ed by ~r. Applegate, the Board set the date ~f March 29, 199~, at 7:08 p.m., at Midlothian High School, for a public hearing for candidat~ for the Midloth~an District School Board M~h~r to introduce themselves. 10.A. TO CO~$IDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF TH= COUNTY OF CHESTENFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDBD~ BY AMENDING AND R~HNACTING S~CT!O~B 18.1-21, 18.1-24, 21.1-271 A~D 21.1-273 RELATING TO THE IDENTIPICATION OF GRAVES ON SUBDIVISION PLATS~ SCHEMATIC PLANS AND SZTE Mr. Sale stated ~his date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend the Code of the County ~f Chesterfield, 197~, as amended, identification of grav~s on subdivision plats, ~chematic plans proposed ordinance. 0n ~o%i02 of Mr. Appl~qate, ~eond~d by Mr, Sullivan, the Hoard adopted ~e following ordinance: (1) The Code of the County pf Chesterfield, I978, as ~e~ded, i~ he~'~y'"~me~ed to read as follows: The tentative plat shall be dra%~n at a scale no greater than one inek equalling fifty fee= for %ownhou~e for sale scal~ of une inch equalling one hundred feet. VariatioDs in mant of Planning. The DIa~ shall ~how correctly on its fac~ (q) The location o~ any grave, object marking a place of burial. 90-120 1/24/90 Sec. 15.1-24. Final Plat. The final plat sheet{s) shall be sixt~mn inches by twenty-four inches and shall be prepared by a certified professional engineer or land surveyor. The final plat of the subdivision shall conform to the approved layout of the tenta- tive plat unless chanqes are approved and show on its fae~ the following information: (2) The location of any grave, object or structure marking a place of burial, O O O 21.1-271. Schematic Plans. (b) Schematic plans shall includ~ th~ horizon=al layout of the D~oje0t based upon a metes and bounds survey; location of any grave, object or ~tructur~ marking a place of burial; list of uses; square footage or number of'dwelling units; conceptual deemed necessary by the Transportation Department, a traffic impact a~a!ysis; and/or'any additional information necessary to insure compliance with the condi~ion~ Of Xon~ng. See. 21.1~273. Preparation and Submission of Sitm Plans. (c) Every site plan mhall he prepared in th~ following mender ~nd show the £cl~owing information and location of land (30) Graves, objects or structures markinq places of burial. (31) Any o~her feature of the development which is requi~ed by %his Chaptmr to be shown on a site plan. Vote: Unanimous ll.A. AWARDING OF CONTRACT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR G~OSRA~IC INFORSL~TION SYSTE~ (GIS) PROJECT There was brief discussion relative to the composition o~ the GIS implementation team and steering committee; contact with th~ S~ate Coordinator of ~he state-wide mapping project potential om~peration! cost savings and/or interaction of technical assistance between the Commonwealth and the County; On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr. Sulllvan, th~ ~oard eXcee6 $12~,000, to provide professlonal/technical ¢0nsul%ing Geographic Information System (GIS) project an~ authorized the said contract between Chesterfield County and ~lanGraphlos, Inc. (It i~ noted funding ~or said project has been appropri- ated by the Board in a previous 90-121 1/24/90 ll.B. ADOPTI0~ OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $9,040,000 IN GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OR BOND ANTICIPA- TION NOTES FOR COUNTY CAL~ITAL I~PROVEMENT$ Mr. Micas staked in order to fund the second year capital improvement needu for the County and the schools~ it is necessary to issue $25,22~,000 in general obligation bonds, of which thc requested $9,040,000 r=presents thc County~u capital impruvemante needs. He noted it is anticipated approval of the issuance of general obligation bond~ for th~ sehools' capital improvements needs will be sold in February, 1990. When asked, Mr. Ramsay orated he f~lt the $16,185,000 representing the school's second year capital program sufficient to take care of those needs. Mr. Daniel requeeted lis~ing o~ projects for which %h~ i~nuan~ of general obligation bonds for the school'~ capitol improvement needs will fund. On mo~ion of Mr. kpplegate, seconded ~r. Sullivan, the Board adopted the following re~olution: A ~SOLNTION AUTHOI~ISlNG ~ Pi~OVIDI~'IG FOE x~ {$9,040,000} P~NCIP~ ~O~ OF P~LIC ~~ OF T~ C0~ OF ~S~I~, ~IN~, ~ P~VID~G WIT~ ~SPECT TO ~ IHSU~CE ~ Sa OF I 5I~ P~NGIP~ ~TCI~ATION OF ~ ISSU~ ~ S~ OF ~U~ ~E IT RESOLVED BY TH~ BOA~ OF SUPERVISORS 0F TEE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA~ SECTtO~ I. Findin~ and Data.ina=ions. (=) ~ursuant to Chapter ~ of Ti%l~ 15.1 of the Code cf Virginia. 1950~ as ~ended (the ~ame being the P~blic Finance Ac~), and election duly called and h~td nndar %h~ Public Finance Act in the County of Chesee~field~ Virginia (the "County"), on November ~, 1988 and ~ Order of ~he C~rcui% Court of the County dated Deco.er 8, 1988, the County is authorized, alia, ~c con~ract 6~b~ and i~sue its general obliqae~on bonds in the maxim~ ~ount cf twenty-nine million nine hundred thousand dollar~ ($29,900,000) for =he purpo~s ~et forth (i) general obligation bonds in the maxim~ of eleven million six hundr~ %~ousand dollars ($11,600,000) provide publi~ saf~t~ improvement projects in ~he including a fire ~ta=ion an4 a police and fire training academy (~i) general obligation bond~ in the maximum ~ount of five million three hundred thousand dollars ($5,300,000) provide p~rk and reer~ation improvement projects in the County: (iii) general obligation bonds in the maxim~: ~ount of seven million one hundred thousand dollars ($7,100,000} proviZ= library improvement projec~ in %he County; and (iv) general obligation bonds in the max~um amount of five million nine hundred thousand dollars ($5;900,000) provide mental health an~ m~ntal retardation improvement projects in the County. (bP As of the date hereof, six million ~v~n hundred five thousand dollar8 ($6,705,000} principal amount of SUCk general obligation bonds authorized by the voter~ of the County at ~he afcr~entioned election held on November S, 19~8 hav~ purpO~e~: 90-122 i/24/90 {il two million one hundred nineteen thousand dollars {$2,119,000) to provide public safety improvement projects in the County; {ii) two million eight hundred thirty-five thousand dollars {$2,~$,00~) for park and recreation improvement prc~ect~ in the Connty; (iii) six hundred fifty-one thousand dollars ($651,000) for library improvement projects in the County; end {iv} one million one hundred thousand dollars (~1,100~0001 for mental health and mental improvement projects in the County. (c) The Board cf Supervisors deems it advisable end in the best interests of the County to authorixe and provide at this time for the issuance, sale and delivery of nine million forty thousand dollars ($9~040,000) aggregate principal amount of such general oblige%ion bonds for the following purposes: (i) four million two thousand dollars 154,002,000) to prcvlde public safety improvmment projects in th~ County; (ii) cna million ~ix hundred sixty-one thousand dollars ~$1,661,0~0) for park and recreatlo~ improvement (i&i} ~hree million three hundred seventy-seven thousand dollars ($3~377,000) for library improvement p~ojects ia th~ County. $~CTIQN 2. Authorization of Bonds. For the purpose of financing the costs of varione capital improvement projects in the County, as described in Section t(c] hereof, there are hereby authorized to be issued, ~old and delivered an issue of nine mill&on forty thousand dollars ($9,040,000) principal amount of ~ne~al obligation bonds of the County to be designated and known as "~ublic Improvement ~onds" (hereinafter ~eferred to as the "Bonds"). The Bonds shall be issued and sold in their mntirety at one time, or from time to time in parb in s~ries, as shall be determined by the County Administrator of the County. The ~ond~ may he SOld at the same time as other general obligation bonds are sold by the County. Th~ Bonds shall bear interest at such rate or rates per annum as shall b~ specified in the bid accepted by resolution of the Soard of Supervisors for the purchaee of the Bonds of such aeries, if any bid th~r~f©r be accepted. The County Administrator is authorized tm determine! in accordance with and mubject to the provlsion~ Qf this resolution: whether the Bonds cf any series mhall be in fully-registered book-entry form; the denomination or denominations of the Bonds7 th~ method of numbering %he Bond~; th~ date or dates the Bonds; the interest payment date~ thereof; the record dates for the paym~n~ of interest thereon; the maturity dates thereof; the amount of principal maturing on each maturity date; ~he place or places of payment thereof and th~ paying agen~ or paying agents therefor; ~he place or places of registration, exchange or transfer and the registrar therefor; and whether o~ not the Bonds shall ~e subject to prior to their crated matnrity or maturities and if subject to such ~demptlo~, the premium, if any, payable upon s~ch redemption and the respective periods in which ~uch pr~mium~ are payable. S~CTIO~ 3, A~ointment of ~e~istrar; Payment of Bonds~ Becks of R~qistry; ~xehan~es and ~an~fs~$ of (a) Appointment of Registrar. Subject to the approval of =he soard of Supervisors by subsequent resolution adopted on %h~ date of sale of the Bon~s, the County Administrator is hereby authorized to molest, for ~ach ~riea 90-123 1/24/90 of Bonds, the registrar for the Bend~ cf such series (hereinafter referred to as %he {"Registrar"), which Registrar may be the County Treasurer. (b) Pa~ent of Bonds. (i; At any time during which the Bonds of any series shall be in fully registered form, the interest on th~ Bonds of such scrims shall be payable by check or draft mailed by the Registrar to the registered owners of the Bonds of such series at their addresses as the same appear on the books of registry as of the record date for the payment of inber~st on the Bonds of such seri~s, and the principal of and premium, if eny~ on th~ Bonds shall be payable at the principal office of the Registrar. (ii) At any time during which the Bonds of any series shall be in book-entry form, ~he principal of and premium, if any, and inter, st on the Bonds of s~ch series shall be payable in accordance with the arrangement~ made wi~h the depository liii) The principal of and premium, if any, end of the United States of America as at the respsctive dates o~ paymen~ is leqat tender for public and privets debts. Bends. (i) At all times during which any Bond remains kept at ire principal ef~ie~, boek~ of registry for the presentation a= t~he principal office of the Registrar for such be registered, exchanged or transferred, on the books of registry the Bonds as herein eec forth; pccvided~ however~ that any Bend altus the ¢lo~u Of businuss on the fcrty-~i~th {45th) day next preceding any date fixed for the ~edemption of such (ii) Any Bond may be exchanged at the principal office cf the ~sgistrer for a like aggregate principal amount (iii) Any Bond may, in accordance with its ter~s, be name it is registered, in person or by his duly authorized agent, upon surrender of such Pond to the Registrar for duly e~ecuted by the registered owner in person or his duly authorized agent, in form satisfactory to the Registrar. (iv) Ail transfers or eMchanqes pursuant to this ezchange of any tax or ether governmental charges required ~o 3(c} shell he cancelled and not reissued. SECTION 4. Aedem~tion of Bond~. (a) Provi~ion~ for Redemption. subject to the approval of th~ Board o~ Supervisors by subsequent resolution adopted on the date of sale of the B~nds, the County A~inistrmtor shall determine the provisions for the redemption 90-12~ 1/24/9D (b} Notice of Redemption. Notice cf any such redemption shall be mailed not less than thirt~ (30) days prior %o %he date fixed for redemption by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner Of the Bonds to be redeemed at such registered owner's address as shown on the books of registry. Such notice shall specify the date, numbers and maturities of the Bonds to b~ redeemed, the date and place fixed for their redemption and the premium, if any, payable a~ount of any ~ond is to be redeemed, ~hat ~uch Bond must be surrendered in exchange for the pxineipal amount thereof to redeemed and the issuanc~ of a new Bond equallin~ in principal ~mount that portion Qf the principal ~mount thereof not redeemed, and shall also state that upon the date fixed for redemption there shall become due and payabl~ upon each Bond called for redemption the principal amount %o b~ redeemed togethe: with the app!ica~le redemption premium, if any, and the interest accrued on such principal amount tO the date fixed for redemption, a~d t~at ~r~m and after soch date interest on such principal amount ~hall cease to accrue. (c) Effec~ of Redemption. When notic~ of of any Bond shall have been given as hereinabovs set forth, ~uch Bond (or %h~ p~incipat amount thereof to be shall bec~me due and payable on th~ r~dempticn date specified in ~uch nceic~ at a pric~ equal to the principal ~mnunt thereof an~ redemption premium, if ant, thereon, together wit~ the iuterest accrued on such Bond (or on the principal amount thereof to be redeemed} to such date. Whenever payment of such redemption price shall have be~n duly made er provided interact on th~ Bond (or On the principtl ~ount thereof to be r~d~med) ~o called for redemption shall seas~ %o accrue from and after the date so ~pecified for redemption. (d} Cancellation. All redeemed Bond~ ~all be cancelled and not reissued. SECTION S. Execution end Au=hentioation of Bonds; CUSIP Identification Numbers. in the name cf the County by %he manual or facalmile signature or facsL~ile signature o~ =he Clark of the Board of Administrator shall direct the ~gintrar to authenticate hhe Bonds and no Bond shall be valid or obliq&tory for any purpose siqnator of the Regis%tar. Upon the authentication of any aa follows: {i) if the Bond is authenticated p~ior to the of the date the Bonds ar~ delivered to and paid for by initial purchasers thereof; (ii) if ~hs Bond is a~t~enticated as of ~uch inter,st payment da~e; (iii) if th~ ~ond is dat~ an~ (iv) in all e~her instances, the certificate shall be ~he Bonds. 90-125 1/24/9~ (c} CUSIP Idsntifi~ation Numbers. CUSIP identification numbers may be printed on the ~ends, but nmi%hex the failure to print any such number on any Bond~ nor any error or omission with respect thereto, shall constitute cause for failur~ or refusal by the successful bidder for the Bonds tn accept delivery of and pay for the Bonds in accordance witA number shall constitute or be deemed to be a part of any ~ond or a part of the ¢oDtract evi0enoed thereby and no liability ahall attach to the County or any of its officers ur agents because of or on account of any such number Or any use made thereof. 14t-150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and ~aith and credit of the County shall be and is hereby irrevocably pledged to the punctual payment of the principal of and ~nterest on the Bonds a~ the same become due. There ~hall sufficient to provide for the payment of the principal of and payable. substantially th~ form ~et forth' below with such necessary er [~AC~] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMmONWeALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF C~ST~P~EI~LD PUBLIC IM~ROVF24~NT BOND REGISTERED Nc. R- REGISTEP~D ORIGINAL INTEREST MATURITY ISSUE CUSIP RATE: DAT~; DATE NO.; REGISTERED OWNER: PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: The County of Chesterfield Ihereinsfter referred to as the "County"}, a political subdivision of the Contmonwealth o~ Virginia, for val~e received, hereby promises to pay to the Registered owner (named above), or r~qistcred assigns~ on the Maturity Date (specified above), unlcsu this Bond shall have been duly called for previous redemption and payment of the r~dem~tion price shall have been duly mad~ or provided for, the Principal Amount {specified above), and to pay interest on such Principal Amount on , 19__ and semiannually on each and thereaite~ fro~ the date h~r~of or from the interest payment date next preceding the date of authentication hereof to which interePt shall have beep paid~ unless such date of anthentication is an interest payment date, in which ease from such in,erect payment 90-126 1/2419~ date if interest has been pai~ =o such date, er u~less suoh date of authentication is within the period from [insert appropriat~ tanguags depending on whether interest payment date is first or fifteentk day of calendar month] to such interest payment date, in which case from such interest payment date if interest has been paid to such date, until the payment of ~ueh Principal A~ount (each such date iu hereinafter referred to as an inEerest payment da~e) at the Interest Rate [speei£1ed above) per annum, by check or draft mailed by the Registrar hereinafter mentioned to the Registered Owner hereof at his address as it appears on the books of registry kept by the Registrar, at the close of business on [insert appropriate language depending on whether interest payment date is first or fifteenth day of calendar month]. The principal of and premium, if any, on this Bond are payable upon presentation and surrender hereof at the principal office of in the of , (th~ "Registrar"). The prlncipal of and premium, if any, and interes~ on this Bond are payable in such coin or currency of ~he ~nited States of A~erica as at ~he respectlv~.datss of payment ia legal ~or puklic and prlva~e debts. REFERENCE I~ MADE TO THE FURTHER PROVISIONS OF T~IS SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES HAVE THE EFFECT AS TEMUG~ FULLY SET FORTH HEREIN. The full faith and credit cf the County are hereby irrevocably pledge~ to the payment of the principal of interest on this Bond as the same become due. This Bond shall not b~ valid or obligatory unless the centiliters of authentication hereon shall have been manually signed by an authorized sLgnater of the Registrar. It is hereby certifle~, r~cited and declared that all acts, conditions and things required to have happened, to exist and tO hays been performed precedent to and in the issuance this Bond and the series of which it i~ 0ne~ do exist, have happened an~ have been performed in re~ular end due time, form and manner as required by law, and that this Bond and the Bonds of the aeries of which this Bond is One do not exceed any constitutional cr statUtOry limitation of indebtedness. I~ WITM£$$ ~E~0F, the County, by its ~oar~ of Supervisors, has caused this Bond to be executed by the manual or fa=simile signature of Eke Chairman of such Board; a facsimile of the corporate seal of ~uch BO~rd to be imprinted hereon, a~tes~ed by the manual or facsimile signature e~ the Clerk of such Board~ and this Bond to be dated as of , 19 A~test: Clerk o~ the Board of ~upervlsors Chairman of the Board S~perv~ors Date ef Authentication: CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This BOnd is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant the within-msntioned proceedings. 90-127 1/24/90 ], ~egistxar Authorized Signator f~A¢~] COUntY OF CBE~T~I~LD, VIrGInIA This Bond is one of a duly authorized i~sue of Bonds (herein referred to as the "Bonds~) of the aggregate principal amount of Dollars ($ ) of like date and tenor herewith, except for number, denomination, interest rats, maturity and redemption provisions, and is issued for the purpose of financing the costs of various capital improvement projects in and for the county, under and pursuant to and in full compliance with the Constitution and statutes of the Cont~onweatth of Virginia, insluding Chapter 5 of Title I5.1 of the Cods of Virginia, 1950, a~ amended {th~ same being t~he Public ~is~nce ~e~), an ~lection duly held in the County under ~uoh Chapter 5 cn November 8, 1988, and a resolution duly adopted by the ~oard o£ Supervisors cf the County under such Chapter 5 on January 24~ 1990. The ~onds of ~he series of Bonds of which =his BOnd is one maturing on or before ~ shall not he subject to redemption prior to their stated maturities. The Bonds of the series of Bonds of which this Bond is on= (or porticna thereof in installments of $5,000} maturing on and after shall be subject to redemption at after , in whole at any time, or in part from time to tame on any interest payment date in ~uch order as may be determined by the County {~xcept that if at any time less than all of the Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the particular ~onds er per,fens thereof to be redeemed ~hall be selected by the Registrar by lot), upon payment of the following redemption prices (expressed as a percentage of the principal amount of Bonds to be redeemed], together with the interest accrued on such principal amount to the date fixed ~or the redemption thereof: Redemption Dates Redemption Prices % If this Bond or any portion of the principal a~o~nt herco~ shall bc calIe~ for redemptlun, notice of the redemption hereof, specifying %he data~ nuI~h~r and maturity cE ~hi~ ~ond~ the date and place or places fired for its redemption, the premium~ if any, payable upon such redemption, and if less than the entire principal amount of this Bend is to be redeemed, that this Bond must be surrendered in exchange for th~ principal amount hereof to be redeemed and the issuance cf a new ~ond equalling in principal ~ount that per%ion of the principal amount hereof not redeemed~ shall be mailed not less first clauu mail, postage prepaid, to the Registered Owner of this Bond at his address as it appear~ on ~he books o~ r~gi~try kept by the Registrar. I~ notice o~ redemption of ~i~ Bond shall have been given as aforesaid, and 9a~ent of ~h~ principal amount of thi~ Bond {or the portion of the principal premix, if any, payable upon ~Uch redemption ~hall have been d~ly made or provided for, interest hereon {or on the portion of %he prinuipal amount hereof to be r~deemed) shall cuau~ fro~ 90-128 1/24/90 Subject to the limitations and ~pon payment of fhe charges, if any, provided in the proceedings authorizing th~ Bonds ef the series of which this Bond as one, this Bond may be exchanged at the principal office of the Registrar for a aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the series of which this Bond is one, of other authorized principal amounts of the same interest rate and maturity. This Bond is transferable by the Reqistered Owner hereof, in person cr by his attorney duly authorized in writing, at the principal office of the Registrar but o~ly in the manner, subject to the limitations and upon payment of the charges, if any, provided in the proceedings authorizing the Bonds of the s~rlea of which this Bond is one, and upon the surrender hereof fo~ cancellation. Upon seth transf,r, a new BenO Or Ponds of the series of which T_his Send ae one, of authorized denominations and of the ~me aggregate principal amount, will b~ i~u~d ~o th~ ~r~nsferee in exchang~ herefor. Notwithztanding the ~oregoing, th~ Registrar ~hall not b~ required to ~ehange ~r transfer this Bond later than the close of business on th~ forty-fifth (45th) day next preceding any date fixed for the redemption of this Bond or any (FORM OF ASSIGNMeNt) For value receivud, the undersigned hereby sell(s), assign(s) and kransfer(e) unko {Pleas% print or type name and addr~mS, including postal zip code, of transferee) ?LEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER TAX IRRNTIFY%N$ NI/~BER OF TRANSFEREE: the within Bond and all rights ~heraunder, and hereby ~rrevocably constitutes and appoints a~torney~ to er~usf~r such Bond on the books k~pt for reqistration thereof, with full ~owmr of substitution an the Dated: $ig~ature~s; Guaranteed NOTICE: Signature{~) m=~t '('Signature(s) of he qua~anteed by a member Owner) firm of The New York Stock NOTICE: The signature(s) sial bank or ~zust company, the n~rne of th~ Registered Owner as it appea~ on the front of this bond in every particular, witkeut altera- tion or enlargement or SECTION 9. Bond Antieipatlon Notes. Public improvemen= bond anticipation notes are auth'6~Ized for issuance and sale by the County in anticipation of the issuance of the public improvement bonds authorized for issuance herein. Such notes shall mature and be payable within two years form their date and shall be sold at competitive or negotiated sale at not less than par plus accrued interest and on such other terms and conditions az are determined by the County Administrator. If such notes are o~ered for competitive sale, a Summary Notice 90-129 1/24/90 of Sale and/or Detailed Nohice of Sale shall be prepared, published and distributed, and a form of Proposal for purchase prepared and dietrfbnh~d~ in eccordance with Section I0 hereof. There is also authorized tn be prepared and distributed in accord=nee with Suction 10 hereof a preliminary and Official Statement relating to such notes in such form a~ shall be approved by thc County Administrator. This issuance and details of such no=cs shall be qoverned by the provisions of Section 15.1~223 of the Code of Virginia, 19~0, as The provisions of Sections 6 amd 7 hereof shall apply to such notes to the same extent the same apply to the Bonds except, in the case of the provieion~ of such Section 7, only to the extent such notes are nc= paid from the proceeds of the Bonds or from any other available f~nds. The sale of sush notes and the form and other d~tails thereof shall be approved, ratified and confirmed by resolution of the Board of supervisors of the County. ~o~ds in anticipation of which such bond antisipation notes are isened pursuant to %his paragraph may be issued and sold in ascordance with the provisions of this resolution at any time within five (5] years of the date of issuance of the first no%es issued in anticipation of such SECTION 10. Sale 0£ Bonds. The County Administrator is hereby authorized to cauls to b~ ~ublished and distributed a Summary Netiu~ of Sale and/er De%ailed Notice of Sale of the of and investors in the ~onds such Summary ~otice of Sale purchase of the Bonds and a Preliminary Q~icia! Statement of SECTION ll. FiI~g of this Resolution. The County this resolution, certified by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to be a true and correct copy hereof, with ~he SECTION 12. Invalidity of Sections, ~aragraphs, Clauses or Provisions. If any section, paragraph~ clause or provisions of this resolution shall be hel~ igvalid or unenferoeability of such s~¢tien, paragraph, clause er prevision shell net affect any of the remaining portions of =hie resolution. SECTION t3. ~eadin~s of Sections. The headings of interpretation or e~feot of such sections er of this ll.C. LOCAL RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR CREATION OF CENTRAL VIRGINIA WASTE MANAGEF~E~T AUTHORITY AND SET DATE PUBLIC MEAR!NG TO CONSIDER TNE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE CREATING TH~ AUThORiTY There was hrief discussion relative to eta~ involvement in thc develot~ment and implementation of waste management plans which will achieve a phased waste recycling program over the next five {51 years; compliance with State mandates in order to obtain State waste management permits for any landfill On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Applega~e, the Board adopted the followinq resolution of support for the creation o~ a Central Virginia Waste Management Authority and set the dat~ 90-190 1/24/90 cf February 20, t990, at ~s00 a.m., for e public hearing to consider the adoption ef an ordinance for the cr~atio~ of said Authority! BE IT RESOLVED by the Board cf Supervisors of the County cf Chesterfield: 1. That the County of Chesterfield (hereinafter the ("County") has found and determined and does hereby declare that the County, together with several other jurisdictions in the Richmond-Petersburg Metropoliten statistical A~ea, desire~ to establish a public service authority pursuant to the provisions of the Virginia Water and Sewer Authorities Act, being Chapter 28, Title 15.1, Code of Virginia, 1950, a~ amended, in the manner and for the purposes set for therein. 2. That the Article~ of Incorporation for the Central Exhibit A-1 attached hereto. 3. That the County hereby expresses its intent to appoint ~r. william H. Howell tO $prve on the Beard of Directors of the Central Virginia Waste Management Authority for a term to commence en the date of issuance of the C~rtificate of Ince~-poration by th~ S~ate Corporation Cou~iasicn for a term of four years or until relieved of this appointment by resolution of the Connie. 4. That in accordanc~ with the r~qulrements ef Section 1~.1~1243 of the Cede of virginia, 1950, Ss emended, thi~ resolution shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County, and a duly oon~titn%.d public h~aring shall he held thereon on such date as shall he set Xorth in the notice ef publicatien. 5. That the County Administrator shall notify the Executive Director of th~ Richmond Rcglonal ~lanning District Co--lesion (RRPDC) of Connty pae~age of this resolution of ~upport and transmit a copy cf sa~e to the RRPDC in timely fashion. 6. That thi~ resolution shall take effect from the date of its adoption. Vote~ Unanimous (It is no,ed a copy of said ~xhlbit A-1 is filed with the papers of this Board.) ll.D. CONSENT ITEMS ll.D.1. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE This day thc County ~nvirnnmantal Engineer, in acne,dance with directions from this Bo~r~, made raport in writing u~on his examlnati~n ef Silver Sirch Lane and Silve~ Birch Court in ~ilver Birch, Clover HiS1 Di~trict, Upon consideration whereof, and On motion of Mr. Daniel, sacended b~ Mr. Mayes, it ia resolved that Silver Birch Lane and ~ilver Birch Court in Silver Birch, Clever Bill District, ~e an~ they hereby are established a~ public roads. And be it further resolved~ that the Virginia D~partment of Transportation, be and it hereby i~ requested to take into the Secondazy System, SilVer ~irch Lan~, beginning at the intersec- tion with Woodlake Village Parkway, State Rout~ number to be sssiqned~ and going southeasterly 0.06 mile, th~n turning and going northeasterly 0.06 mile to the intersection with Silver Birch Court, then continuing northeasterly 0.04 mile, the~ 90-131 1/24/90 turning and going easterly 0~05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Silver Birch Court, beginning at tko intersection with Silver Birch Lane end going southeasterly 0.07 mile to end in a cul-d~-~ae~ and designated Virginia Depar~J~ent ef Transportation drainage easements. And be it further resolved, that the Board cf supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50t right-of-way for all of these roads. Silver Birch is recorded as follows: Plat Book 57~ Pages 4, 5, & 6, May 8, ~957. This day the County Environmental Engineer, in ~ocordance with direotion~ from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of ~leasant ~rove 5an~ and Pleasant Grove Court in Pleasant Grove, Clover Hill District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, i~ is resolve~ ~La~ Plea~an~ ~rove Lane and Pleasant Grove Conr% in Pleasant Grove, Clover Hill District, be and they hereby are established as puhl~e road~. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be an~ it h~reby is requested to take i~te the Secondary System, Pleasant Greys Lane, ~sginning at {he in~er- ~eetion with Woodlake Village Parkway, State Rents number to be a~igned, and going easterly 0.07 mile, then turning and going northerly 0.06 milo to th~ interned%ion with Pleasant Court, then centinnin~ northerly 0.05 mile to end in a cul-de- sas; and Pleasan~ Grove Court, beginning at the intersection with Pleasant Grove Lane and going wemtarly 0.04 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. This request is in~lusive of the adjacen~ slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage And he it further resolved, ~-hat the ~oar~ of guarantees to tho Virginia Department of Transportation e 50' right-of-way for all of these roads. Pleasant Grove is recorded ae fcllow~: Plat Book 57, Pages 14 & 15, May 2~, 1987. ~his day the County Environmental Englneert in accordance with diree~ion~ from thi~ Board, made report in writing upon his examination of woodIake Villa~ Parkway, Clove~ Hill Dis%rick. Upon consideration whereof, an~ QD mo~ion of ~r. Daniel~ Seconded by Mr. Mayas, it is reaotvsd that Woodlake Village PaMkway, Clover Hill District, be an~ it hereby is amtabllmhed as a public rc~d~ And he it further resolved, that the Virginia Department c~ Transpor~ation~ be and it hereby is rauuested to take into th~ Secondary ~ystem, Woodlake Village Parkway~ beginning at interssotion with Beechwood Point Road, and going northwesterly 0.11 mile to the intersection with Watercraft Road, then continuing northwesterly S.11 mile to the intersection with West Shore Road, then continuing northwesterly 0.09 mile to the intersection with Clipper Cove Road, then turning and going sou~her!y 0.05 mile to the intersection with Rock Barbour Road, then continuing southerly 0.09 mile to the intersection with ~leasant Grove lane, then continuing southerly 0~05 mile to the intersection with Standing Oak Lane, then turning and going westerly 0.14 mile to the intersection with Silver Birch Lane, then turning and going southerly 0.O% mile to end at the intersection with Chatmess Road. This reques~ is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of TranspOrtation drainage easements. This road ~erve~ a~ aooe~s to adjacent subdivision ~ntrances. And be it fufthe~ ~esolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department Of Transportation a 70' right-of-way for this road. Woodlake Village Parkway is recorded as follows: Deed Book 1857, Page 163, April 24, 1987. Vote: Unanimous Thi~ day the County Enviroemental ~ngineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing u~en his examination of 01de Queen Terrace, Olde Quee~ Court, Swanhurs~ Drive~ swanhurst Dircle~ Edgeview Lane end Normandstone Drive in Roxshire, Section 10, Midlothian District. Upon consideration whereof, and On mo~ion of ~n. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, it ia resolved that Ol~e Queen Terrace, Olde Queen Court, Swanhur~t Drive, Sw~nhurst Circle, ~dgeview Lane and Normandstone Drive in Rox~hire~ Section 10, Midlothian District, be and they hereby are established as public roads. An~ be it further resolved, thaP ~he Virginia Department of Transpcrtetion~ be and it hereby is rcquemted to take into the Secondary System, Olde Queen Tek,sue, beginning at the inter- section with Framer Drive, State Route 417O, and going aQubherly O.ll mile to the intersection with Olde Queen Court, then continuing ~outherly 0.15 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; 01de Queen Court, beginning a~ the intersection with Olde Queen Swa~hurst Drive, beginning at 'the intersection with Fra~ar Drlve~ Sta~ Route AIT0, and going southerly ~.1~ mile to the continuing southerly 0.06 mile to end in e cul-de-sac; Swan- Edg~view Lan~, beginning at the inter~ection with Swaekurst Normandsten~ Drive, then continuing we~%erty 0.04 mile to end at existing E~geview Lane, State Route 4146: and Normandstone going southerly 0.t8 mile to end in a temporary turnaround. This request ia inclusive cf the adjacent slope, sight distance These roads serve 67 lots. 90-133 And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantee~ to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way fen ail of ths~e roads. This section of Roxshire is recorded as follows; Section 10. Plat Soak 60, Pages t4~ 15 & 16, January 14, 1988. This day ths County Envirenmen=al Engineer, in accordance with directions from this BOard~ made report in writing upon his examination o~ Yucca Drive and Zeadewcreek Drive in smoketree Ridge, Midlothian District. Upon considsratie~ whereof, and on motion of Mr. Daniel, Mssdowcreek Drive in Smokekre~ Ridge, Midlothian District, be ~nd they hereby ars e~tabllshod as public roads. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia UeparTJ~ent of Transporta%ion~ be and it hereby is requested to take into the Sscondary system, Yuoca Drive, beginning at ezisting Y~cca D~ive, State Route 3tQ5, and going westerly 0.05 mile to end at the inuerssotion with ~eadowcreek Drive; and Mesdewcreek Drive, beginning at ihs intersection with Yucca Driv~ and going northerly 0.03 mil~, then turning and going northeasterly 0.05 mile to end in a c~l-de-sac. Again M~adowereek bri~ b~giu- ning at =he intersection with Yucca Drive and going ~outherly 0.05 mile, then turning and go~ng ~outheaot~rly 0.07 mils to snd in a col-de-sas. This requsst is inslusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and d~signated Virginia Department of Transporhation drainage ·hese roads serve 25 lot~. And h~ it fur%h~ re~olved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 58' r±ght-of~way for all of these roads. Smoketree Ridge is recorded as follows: Plat Book 62, ~age 37, ~ugust 1, I9~. Vote: U~animous ll.D.2. REQUESTS FOR BINGO/RAFFLE PERMITS On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. approved r~qu~sts for bingo/ra~£1e permits organizations for the calendar year 1990: ORGANIZATIONS CaYalier Athletic Club, Inc. Dale Wrestling Club Mayas, the Board for the followlag TYPE Bingo Raffle lI.D.3. AUTHORITY FOR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO INTER- JURTSDICTTONA5 COOgERATI~ AGR~NT FOR LAW MENT PURPOSES On motion of Mr. Daniel, ~econd~d by Nr. Mayes, the Bo~rd authorized the County Administrator to ~nter into an Int~n~ Jurisdictional Cooperative Agreement for multi-jurisdictional cooperative law Enforcement effoxts and dirosted ~he County Administrator to advise the Board ef tko existence and nature o£ any suck ag~esment that he has entered i~to on behalf of the COUnty promptly after ifs exucution. Vote: Unanimous ll.E. A~O%NTM~NT$ 11.~.1. g~HP CR~T~EFI~D COUNTY CLEAN CORPORATION On motion of Mr. ~ayes, seconded by Nr. Applegate, the Board suspended it~ rules to allow ~imultaneous nomination/appoint- ment Rnd/or reappointment of nominees to serve on the Keep Chesterfield County Clean Corporation. On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board simultaneously nominated/appointed and/or reappointed the fellowinq per~on~ representing th~ District as indicated, to serve on the Keep Chesterfield County Clean Corporation, who~e te~ms are effuctiv= February 1, 199Q and expire January 31, 1991~ Mr, Warren Dieteriuh Mr. Willie~ Harri~ MS Alma ~mith Ms. Anne Belsha Mrs. Pam Rickett Vote: Unanlmou~ Midlothian Magisterial District Matoaca Magisterial District Dale Magisterial District Clov~r ~ill Magisterial District B~rmuda Magisterial Dietrict Th= Board ruquested that a resolution commending Mrs. Marilyn Kim's service during her tenure with the Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation b~ preparsd for presentation at a future ~ate and that that sta~ contact or schedule a meeting with Rickett. Mr. Sullivan rsquested that when ~hese Chesterfi~Id County Clean Corporation ~h~t staff convey to them the Board~s high regard for their effort~. Ii.E.2. CENTRAL VIRGINIA WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTH0kITX ~0ARD OF DIRECTORS On motion of Mr. Appleqate~ seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board nominated Mr. William 5. ~owell, representing chesterfield Co~nty~ to serve on the Central Vi~ginla Waste Managemen~ Authority Board of Directors, whose formal appointment will be made on February 14, 1990. Vote; Unanimous 11.=.3. APPOMATTOX RIVER WAT,ER AUTHORITY On motion of ~r. Daniel, s~cended hy Mr. $ullivan~ the Reard nominated Mr. Lan~ B. Ramsay (County R~presentatlve) and Mr. David Welshons (Alternate) to serve on the Appe~atto× River Water Authority, whose formal r~appointments will be made On February 14, 1990. tl.E.4. RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Boa~d 90-135 1/24/90 suspen~e~ its rules to allow simultaneous nomination/appoint- ment of a ~e~ ~oti~g mumber representing Chesterfield County to serve on the Richmond Regional P1Rnning District Commission. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Sulllvan, the Board simultaneously nomlnated/a~pointed Mr. C. F. Currin, Jr., as serve on the R~ch~ond Regional Planning District C0mmie~ion~ whose term is effective immediately and will expire on December 31, 1991 ll.F. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS ll,F.1. STREET ~IGHT INSTALLATION COST APPAOVAL On motion of Mr. ~pple~ate, seconde~ by Mr, Coffin, the Board approved the cost for ~treet light installations at 3325 Wood Dale aoad, in the amount of $1,723.4~, to be ~xpended from the Bermuda District Streat Light ~und and at the intersection of Middle Roa~ and Twilight Lane, in the amount of $/39.17; to be expended from the Clover ~ill District Street Light Fund. Vote: Unanimou~ .ll.F.2. STREET LIGET ~d~QUEST On motion of Mr. currin~ ~econded by Mr. Applegatu~ the Boa~d approved obtaining a test estimate for the installation of a street light at 16029 Continental Boulevard at the entrance to Continental Industrial Chemicals in the Bermuda Magisterial District. DATE FOR PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21,1~16 OF THE COUNTY CODE RELATING TO DISCLOSURE S~ A~ICANTS FO~ ZONING BENTS On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~r. Sullivan, the ~oard set the date of March 14, 1990, at 7:OQ p.m., for a public hearing to consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 21.1-16 of the Code of the Co~nt~ o~ Chesterfield, 1978, ae that af~urnoon as well. Uote: Unanimous i1.F.4. P~SOLUTION CONCURRING IN THE REDESIGNATION OF THE RIC~NOND AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEPd~AP, Title 2], Code of Federal Regulations, Part 450, provides for a continuing; cooperative; and comprehensive urban transportation planning proc~; and WRRR~A$, The Richmon~ Are~ ~P0 took action at its 0trebor 13~ 1988, m~eting to expand it~ mtn~ area ~o include Powhatan County and ~he Town of Ashland; and i WHEeLErS, Secretary of Transportation and Public Safety, the Honorable Vivian E. Warts, on behalf of the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, took action by letter dated January 12~ 1990~ {attached hereto and incorporated by reference) to ollieie!ly redesignate the Richmond Area MP0, providing for the addition of Powhatan County end the Town of Ashland to the MPO's me~0ership; and WHEPJ~AS, 23 CFR 450.106(a) states that designation of an MPC shall be made by agreement among local guwcrnments and tbs NOW, T~EREFOAE, B~ IT ~SOLVED~ that the Board of ~upervi~or$ of Chesterfield County, ~kis 2~th day of January, 1990, doe~ hereby concur wi~ the redesignation ~f %he Richmond Area M~O a~ ~p~la~d by th~ S~cretary of ~zanspor~ation and Public Safety, the Konorable Vivian E. Wat%~, in her letter Vote: Unanimous Mr. Sullivan co--ended Mr. Daniel fo~ his very diliqent efforts ll.G. UTILITIES DEPARTMEMT ITEMg ll.Q.1. PUBLIC HEARINQ ~0 COwSI~EK AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A PORTION OF SIR DINNADAN DRIVE public hearing to con~ider an ordinance to vacate a portion cf Sir Dinnadan Drive in Kingsland Woods ~ubdivi$1oe, Section Dale District. NO one casa forward to speak in favor of er against the matter. On motion o£ Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Hayes, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE to vacate a portion of Sir Dinnadan Drive in Kingsland Woods Subdivision, Section ~ Dale District, Chesterfield, Virginia, as shown o~ a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk?s Offic~ cf the Circuit Court of Che~turfield County in Plat Book 54, Pages ~ and WB~REA~, by resolution dated February 22, 1989, the ~oard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia inStr%ct~d staff to vacate a portion of Sir Dinnadan Drive in Kingsland Woods Subdivision, Section 2, Dale District, Chesterfield. County, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat o~ record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat ~ook ~4, 9~ges 55 and 59, made by Charles C. Towhee and A~ociates, P.e., dated May 6, 1986 and revi~e~ July ~3, The portion of road petitionmd to be vacated is ~ore fully descrlbud as follows: A portion o~ Sir Dinnadan Drive adjacent to Lot 12, Block A and Lot 1, Block E, Kingsland Woods Subdivision, Section ~, the location of which is more fully shown, on a plat by Chesterfield County Department of Utilities, dated March 28, 1989~ a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of thi~ Ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virqinia, 1950, as a~ended, by advertising7 and 90-137 1/24/90 W~R~A$, nc public necessity exists far %he continuance of the portion of road scnqhk fo b~ vacated. NOW T~EREFOEE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TH~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF C~ESTERRIRSD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuant to Section ~5.1-4S2(b) of the Code of yirginia, I950~ as amended, the aforesaid portion of read be and is hereby vacated. The County hereby reserves a 20 foot and variable width drainage and ufilities easement as shown on the attached pla%. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with section I5.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a o~rtified copy of thi~ Ordinance, together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than fhirty day~ ~reafter in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant tc Section 15.1-485 of %h~ Cede cf Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect cf this Ordinance pursuant to section 15.1-483 ~s to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This ordinance shall vest fee ~fmple title to the cente~linu of thc portion of Sir Dinnadan Drive hereby vacated in the owners of the abutting Lots within Ei~gslsnd Woods s~bdivisien, Section 2, fr~ and clear of any rights cf public use. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the COUNTY OF CMESTE~/~IELD, as grantor, and ~.E,Y. CONSTRUC- TION CO., INC., A Virginia Corporation, and STEPHEN M. YUHASE and KAREN L. YUHASE, (husband and wife), or their successors in title, es grantee. ll.G.2. AUTHORIZATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY SECTION TO ACQUIRE ONE MASEPkENT FOR BEXLEY~ -~Rc'TI~ 15, ACROSS PROPERTY OF MR. AND MRS, RUDOLP~ F. JANIS On motion of Mr. ADpl~gate, ~eoonded by Mr. sullivan, the Board authorized the Utilities Department's Right-of-Way Section to acqulrs One remaining off-site sanitary ~ewer easement for The Penn Cempanyi the developer of Bexley - ~ectien ~5, who has been unable to acquire came, across the property of Er. Rudolph F. Jenis, Lot 11, Section 1, Be×ley Subdivimion~ fo provide public sewer service to the proposed development which will aisc provid~ public sewer availability to tw~tv~ (12) sxinting homes in the area. (A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of ~his Board.} Vote= Unanfmou~ ll.G.3, CONSENT ITEMS ll.G.3.a. ACCBPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG ROUTE 360 HA~SOUK POINTS R~DICAL ASSOCIATES On motion of Mr. sullivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board strip of land along U.S. Route 36~ from Barbeur Points Medical Associates, L.P. and authorized ~he County Administrator to execute the necessary deed of dedication, (A copy of said plat A~CBPTA~C~ OF DEED OF DEDI__C,~ION ALONG HARROWGATE ROAD AND BF~C~WOOD AVENUE ~R©M ~QWER COMPANY On motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded by ~r~ Appleqate, the Board a~e~p~d, on behalf of the County, ~km conveyancz o~ a varie~Se width ~trip of lend a~on~ ~errowqate Road and B~c~o~d Avenue from Virginia Electric and Power ~ompany and authorized the County gdminiztrator to ex,cute the n~c~ggary deed of dedioation. (A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of this Boa~d.) Vote: Unanimou~ ll.~.~.c. ACCEPTANCE OF ~ED OF ~EDICA~ON ALONG WEST HUNDRED ROAD ~RO~ P.~.¥..~NSTRUCTION CO., IN~, On motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~e~ond~d by ~r. Appleqate, the Board accepted, on behal~ e~ the County, the conveyance ~f a 20~ strip of land along West ~undr~d Road from P.~.¥. Constru0tion Co., Inc. and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed cf d~dica~icn. (A cody of said plat i~ ~iled with the papa~m ~f thi~ Boerd.) ll.G.3.d. APPROVAL OF A~REEMEN~ WI~E VIAGIMIA DEPARTMENT OF · FuA~$PORTATION FOR DESIGN WOR/{ FOR HIGHWAY WIDE~C PROJBCT~ ALONG COURTBOUoB ROAD AND LUCKS LANE On motio~ of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Boerd epproved an aqreement for utilities d~sign work between the Virginia ~epart~%ent of Transportation and Chesterfield County for project~ alon~ Route 653 (Courthouse Road, fzom Koute 360 to Powhite Parkway) project ~umber 89-0808; Rou~e 653 (Courthouse Roa~ at Lucks Lan~ intersection) project nu~er 90-0020~ and Eoute 720 (Lucks Lane fro~ Spirea Road to Courthouse R~adl project number 89-0826, which will necessitate relocating a portion Q~ tk~ ~xis:inq utilities and installinq new utilities to upgrade the existing system within the highwjy. corridors; and authorized the County Administrator to execRte any necessary documents for said agreement. (It is no,ed funds az~ availabl~ in the Capital ~udget under miscellaneou~ Hiqhway Projects and the coat for the engln~ering ~ervices will not exo~ed $1,954.00 ~or project number 99-0808; $9,196.00 for project number 90-0026~ and $9,23~.00 for project number 89-082~.) Vets: Unanimous ll.G.4. P~PORTS Er. Sale presented the Board wi~h a report on t~e developer water and se~er ¢ontract~ executed by th~ County Administrator. for FUtUIe Capital Project~, Di~triot Road and street Light Publio nearing schedule. Mr. Ramsey stated the Virginia Depart~m~nt of Transportation ham formally notified the County o~ the ecceptance of th~ following roads into th~ Stat~ SecOndary ~yz~em: 1/24/90 90-139 ADDITIONS SALISBURY, HATFIELD {Effective 1/3/9~) Route 3796 (Helmsley Road} - From Route 714 to 0.04 milo West Route 3798. Route 3797 (Rochester Court) ~ From Route 3796 to South CUl-de-sac. Route 3798 (Viburg Court) - From Rout~ 3796 to South cul-de-sac. SUNNYRROOR, SECTION B (~ffeotive 1/3/90} Route 4129 (Alberta Circle) - From Route 885 to West cul-de-sac. SYCAMORE RIDGE, P~ASB I (~ffec{iv= 1/3;90) Route 3974 (~yeamore Ridge Court) - From Route 3970 to Southeast cul-de-sac. GLEN TARA, SECTIONS 4A, 4C & 4D (Effective 1/3/9~) Route 3123 (Twelve Oaks Road) - From 0.16 mile South Route 3127 to Route 3124. Route 3]24 {Glen Tara Drivfl) - From 0.02 mile South Route 3127 to Rout~ 3123. Route 4370 {Gable Way} - From Route 3124 to 0,03 nil~ Southmost Route 3124. Route 4371 (O'Hara Drive) - From Route 3123 to Route 3124. Route 4372 (Twelve Oak~ court) - From Route 3123 to Northwest cul-de-sac. Route 4373 IGlen Tara Courtl - From Route 3124 to Southeast cul-de-sac. Route 2697 {Dobbs Lane] - From Route ~5~ to Rout~ 2699. PROVIDENCE MEADOWS, SECTION D (Effective 1/4/90) Route 2696 (Middle Road} - From 0.02 Route 853-South to Routs Route 864 (~iddls Circle) - From Rou~e ~696 to WALTHALL CPa~EK, SECTIONS 1,2,3,&4 (Effsctive 114190) Route 4060 (Howlett Line Drive) - From Route 620 to Route 4061. Route 4061 (Fox Knoll Drive) - Prom Routs 4062 Route 4062 {Wood Duck Lane) - From 0.05 mile Northwest Route 4061 to 0.07 mile ~ou~heast Route 4061. Route 4063 {Deer Springs Run) - From Route 4061 to 0.04 mil~ ~=st Route 4861. 0.24 Mi. 0.3~ Mi. 0.28 Mi. 0.09 iii. 0.17 Mi. 0.39 Mi. 0.03 Mi. 0.~5 Mi. 0.04 Mi. 0.06 0.03 ~i. O.OB Mi. 0.03 Mi. 0.49 ~i, 0.78 Mi. 0.12 ~i. 0.04 ~i. 90-140 1/24/90 ADDIXlONS ( nourished ) LENGTH CANDLELAMP - SECTION C (Effective 1/ll/90) Rout~ 4198 (Natural Bark Drive) - From Route 6~3 to Northwest cul-de-sac. Route 4199 (Hourglass Court) - From Route 4198 to Southwest cul-de-sac. 0.24 Mi. 0.21 Mi. QUALLA FARMS - SECTION E ~Effentive 1/11/90) Route 30~1 (Ridge:un Read~ - From Route 65~ to Southeast cul-de-sac. Route 4530 {Ridge,un Place~ - From Route 309t to ~orth Route 4531 {Eidgezuu Terrace) - From 0.lO mile Southwest Route 3091 to 0.10 mile East Route 3091. 0.26 Mi. 0.05 Mi. 0.20 Mi. ll.I. EXECUTIVE SESSION On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Zr. Sull~van~ the $oard went into ~xecutiva Session {or consultation with legal COunsel relating to the extension of the County Utility 9ystem through Powhatan County pursuant to Section 2.t-344 (a)(7) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and for personnel mat~e~s relating to the annual evaluation of the C0nnty Administrator pursuant to S~c~ion 2.1-344 (a)(%) of the Code of vir9inia, 1950, as amended. On motion of Mr. Applegate, eeconSed by Mr. Sullivan, th~ Board adopted the following resolution: W~ER~AS, the $oard o~ S=pervicors has this day adjourned into Executive Session in accordance with a formal vote of ~oard, and in accordance with the previsions o~ the Virqinla Freedom o~ Information Act; and W~EREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act e~feotiva July 1, 1989, provides for certification that ~uch Executive Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of C0un=y Supervisors docs hereby certify that to the best of each meter's know~edge, i) only public ~usines~ mac,ers lawfully Information Act were discussed in the Executive Sessio~ which this certification applies, amd ii) only such public busines~ matter~ a~ were id~ntlfle~ in the Motion by which Executive Session was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the Board. NO mem~ez dissents from this certifi- cation. The Board bein~ pelled~ the vote was as follows: Mr~ Daniel: Aye. Mr. Mayas: Aye. Mr. Apple~ate: Aye. ~r. Sullivan: Aye. Mr. Cur,in: Aye. 90~141 1/24/90 ll.M. DINNER The Board recessed at 5:45 p.m. {~T) to travel to th~ Sun,et cafe for a dinner meeting with the Airport Advisory Board. IntrOdUctionu were made of theme present and dinner was served. Mr. Roger Burns, Chairman of the Airport Advisory Board, distributed copies of a Report and R~to~endation to th~ Chesterfield County Muard cf Supervisors from the chesterfield County Airport Advimory Boa~d (a copy of which is filed with information r~lative tO future growth and improvements in b~nefi~$ the Airport ~ou~d bring to the Discussion, q~stimn~ and co.meats ensued relative to the inventory of existinq myMtem condition~, ~emoguaphi¢ and economio trond~ an~ forecasts~ external factors affecting aviation, aviation activity tr~ndg and of airports system needs and opportunities, policies for Airportm Symtem Plan, plan alternativ~, implementation plan, regional issues 'related to air transportation, obtaining a The Board ~xpr~ssed appreciation for opportunity to m~t ~h~ ~he Advisory Board to discuss the merits and ranification8 cf ~he repo~ stated each one realizes the significance of the sit.aLien; and that the ~eport WOuld be forwarded to staff that they may take, the necessary steps to obtain consulting services and subsequent to that, etaf~ would be consulting with both the consultant and the Advisory Board. 12. ADJOURNMENT On mo~ion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board adjourned at 7:50 p.m. (EST) until 5:0D p.m. on January 25, 1990 (~ST) at Fort Magruder, Williamsburg, Virginia, for its scheduled retreat. Chairman