Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
02-28-90 Minutes
FEBRUARY 2~ 1~0 Mr. C. F. Currin, Jr., Chairnan Mr. M. B. ~ellivan, Vice Chairman ar. G. H. Applaqate ~r. Jesse J. Mayas Mr. Lane Bt Ramsay Connty Administrator Harry G. Daniel Staff in Attendance: Assr. to Co. Admin. Ma. Joan Dotezal, Cl~rk to tbs Board Ms. Linde G, ~ur~, Asst. Coordinator, Emer, Svc~., Fire Dept. Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Dsputy Co. Admin., Management Services Ms. Alice Heffner, Youth Svcs. Coord. Mr. Robert Eu~bn~r, Emp. Relations and Dev. Train~nq CoorS. Mr. Will,am ~. Howell, Mr. Thomaa E. Jacobsen, Dir. of Planning M~. Ma~y LO~ L~le, Dir. of Acsouating Mr. Rober~ Ma~d~n, Dsputy Co. Admin., Mr. R. J. MoCracken, Transp. Director MX. Richard ~cslfish, Mrs. M. Arlinm McGulrs, Treasurer's Office Mr. Steve Micas, Co. Attorney ~r$. Paulin~ ~itchell, Dir. of ~ews/Info. ~r. William Nelson, ~Dir,, Realth Dost. ~r. Richard A. Nu~natly, Extension Agent Col. Joseph ~ittman, Chief of Police Deputy CO. Admin., Dsvelopment MX. Jean Smith~ D±Z. of Social Services Mr. Jay stegTaaier, Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., bit. of Parks & Rec. Mr. David W~lchons, Cir. of Utilities Mr. Currin called the regularly ~cheduled meeting to order at 9:lQ a.m. (EST). ~. ~NVOCaT~O~ Mr. currin introduced Mr. Richard Nnnnatly, Director of Exten- sion Service, who gave tho invocation. 90-187 2/28/90 Mr. Ramsay led the Pledge of Allegiance United States of America. to the Flag of the $.A. F~BRUAR¥ 14, 1990 On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board approved th~ minutes of February 14, 1990, as amended. Ayes: Mr. Currln, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Absent: Hr. Daniel 3.B. FEBRUARY 21, 1990 On mOtiOn of Mr. ~pplegate, seconded by Hr. Sullivan, the Board approved ihs minutes of February 21, 1990, as submitted. Ayes~ Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Ms, Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. H~m~ur reported that ~r. Mayas has been very active on Council on Information Manage~ent~s Education A~vlsory Committee Board, their goal being to articulate those which address information technology in education. He the culmination of the Committee's work was the adoption oi ten major policy statements which addressed issues dealing with technology change, information integration and ~haring and budget plannin~ and pro0~rement. He stated Mr. contribution~, ~xperti~e an~ viSiOn w~r~ inv~Iuable to th~ committee and expressed appreciation for his participation and efforts toward public education. ~r. Mayas stated he felt the county was very fortunate that the Governor selected an individual from the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors to serve on that committee and that the %ffort~ of that will have great influencm on the changes and info,arian technoloqy in curriculum throuqhout the Co~onwealth. Currin co~endad Mr. ~ayes' participation in ~hi~ endeavor and also ekpreuued appreciation for his co--unica%ion at the General Asse~ly in efforUs =o obtain positive feedback for ~he County on impact ieee. 5. ~(~ARD~O~X~ REPORTS Mr. ApDlegat~ repon{n~ he attendod the Capital RegiOn Airport Commission (CRAC} meeting~ at which it was noted enplanement activity had increased over the last year; and attended the meeting at th~ Cen~raI Assembly rogarding ~en~te Bill 4~ ~impact fees) at which tho House Counties, Cities and Towns Committee voted to carry over the bill, introduced by etna=or Robert E. RuuuelI~ for further stud~. B~ stated he was disappointed in the results; however, it was suggested ~he Beard consider resolving its problems by reconsidering the meals %ax allowed by State law and felt ets issue should possibly be re-reviewed. Water Resource Task Force, which is proceeOing wi~ a regional water plan; stated he felt that all the members of the Legislative Delegation, as well as the members of the ~oard, had m~de every effort passible during the General Assembly 90-188 session ~e obtain impact fee legislation for the County regardless cf a r~cunt article indicating there was net unanimity among them regarding 8aid fees; and stated he £~lt enCOUraged by the comments of severa~ members of the cemmlttee~ and anticipated returning ne~t year for ~sme. Mr, Currin reported he and Mr. Sullivan attended the School Board Liai~en Committee meeting, which committee he felt was ~ommunicating very wstl and ~ucceeding in its currant endeavors; ~tatcd he also attended the General Asselably session a~ which he presented the County's po~ition regarding i~paet f~; stated h~ received correspondence from Senator Russell indicating he wished the Chairman to publicly express his appreciation to all Board me~bera and staff for their assistance in providing him with the informatiou he needed on this matter and that he was very pleased with the events that had tr&nepir~d and was encouraged that mo~e positive action would occur in the next year. 6. ~Q~STS TO POSTPONE ACTION~ RME~%G~NC~ADDITIONS OR C~S ~ ~ O~ER OF P~S~TATION On motion cf ~r. Applegate, seconded by M~. Mayas, ~h~ Board ~eleted Item ll.C,~ Acceptance of ~roperty DOp~tlon and Transfer O~ Fun4s for "~owlet= ~ine" Civil War Site~ added Item ll.G,5., Authorization for County A~ini~tx~%or to Ex,cute a Contract with Powhatan County Provldin~ for the Extension ~f Chesterfield Trunk Sewer Line through Powhatan Coun=y, heard i~ediately following Item lI.G.2.~ received revi~ed r~olution relative to Item ll.F.4., Request =o N~e the ROute 36 ~ridge Over the CSX RailToad~ changed ~xi~%ing Item ll.I., Executive Session for Consultation with Legal Counsel Rela~ing Section 2.1-344(u)(3) of the Code of Virginia, I950, a~ amended, t0 Exeuu=ive Session to Disc~s Personnel Pursuant to Section 2.1-344(a} (I) Of ~he code of Virginia, 19~U, as amended; moved out of sequence Item ll.G.2.~ Consider R~quest from Mr. and ~r~. Wesley ~. ~eiverd to ~stabli~h Sewer Assessment District in Ashley Grove S~division, to fol~ow 8.; added Item ll.M., Internal Transfer o~ Fund~ to Cover Cash Flow Needs for School Construe%ions, %o follow Item Ay~= Mr, Currln, ~r. Sullivan, Mr. ADDleqate and Mrz Mayer. ~sent: Mr. Daniel. 7. R~UTIONS ~ SPECt3tL ~C(Kr~TIONS 7.A. SERGEANT WALTER I~%MAaR LOVEIJ~y. JR., POLICE DEPART~LENT Chief Pittman briefly described Sergeant Lovelady'~ achieve- ment~ during his ten,re with the Selice Department, commended him for his commitment and dedication to the COUnty and state~ he would be sorely missed by his friends and coworkers. On motion of Mr. Applegate, ~econded by ~r. SulliYa~, the ~oaTd adopted the fallowing resolution; WHEt{EAS, S~rgaant Walter Lamarr Lovelady, Jr. has retired from the Polic~ Department, Chenterfield Couaty, on FahY~ary 1, 1990; and 9~ZREAS, Sergeant Lavelady has provided twenty-n~ven years of quality service to the eitisens of Chesterfield County; end WEBREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Sergeant Lovelady~s diligent service; aa4 W~KEA$~ Sergeant Lovelady served Chesterfield's sltizena and Police Department with unquestionable honor as a Patrolman, 90-189 2t2~/90 a Criminal Investigator~ a supervising Patrol Sergeant, and an Employee Background Inv~atigater. Sergeant Lovelady's character, fortitude and loyalty to the Department, Our citizens and to the prinoiDles of law enforcement will stand as the example for total commitment t0 a rewarding, many times dangerous, sometimes frustrating but always purposeful career of being a Police Officer. ~OW, TSEREFOR~ ~ IT 9~SOLVt~D, that the Chesterfield Lamarr Lovelady~ Jr., also respectfully known by the citizens behalf oi its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their aDDreciation for his service to the County, A~D, BB IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that u copy ~f ~-his reeeI~tien be presented to sergeant Levelady and that this resolution be permanently recorded, among the paper~ of thi~ ~oard of Supervieore of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Mr. Coffin, Mr. Sullivan, ~r. Applegate and Mr. Mayes. Absent; Mr. Dani%l. Mr. C~rrin pre~euted the ~eCuted resolution and an engraved Jefferson Cup to Sergeant Lovelady in recognition of his dedicated aervice~ character and loyalty t~ the Police Depar~snt and citizens of the County; wished him well in his retirement end recognized hi~ wife and oew0rker5 who wer~ Dresent. 7.B. MRS. ~L~IE S. ELMORE, SOCIAL Mr. Masden described the many ac¢cmpllshments and years of dedicated service of Mrs. elsie Elmcre to the citizens of Ch~mterfimld County and introduced MS. Jean Smith, Director of Social Services~ to accept the resolution for M~. Elmor~ WhO was unable to attend the meeting. On motie~ of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, %he Beard adopted %he following resolution: WHEPt~AS, ~rs. Elsie S. Elmore has served the citizens of Cheaterfield county and the Commonwealth of Virginia for many year~ through her volunteer work on numere~e boards and committees; and WSEE~AS; Mrs. Elmore ~erved with distinction On the $overnor's Advisory Committee for Child Abuse and Neglect from 1975 to 1980, during which time sh~ was instrumental in promot- ing the statewide development of Child Abuse Malti-disciptine Teams in all tocalitiee~ and WHEREAS~ Mrs. E l~o~e's eutstan~in9 co~nuni%y efforts and dedicated work cn beha%~ of others led to her selection as Christmas Mother for Chesterfield-Colonial Heights in 198t; Outstanding Woman in Government and Polities ~ro~ the Richmond Area YWCA in 1984; and a recipient in 1988 of ~he Governor's Award fo~ Volu~teerin~ ~xcellence; and W~REA~, ers. ~lmere served on the chesterfield-colonial ~e~gh~s Board of Social ~ervices from 1982 to 1990, and as Chairman of this Bcar~ ~as instrumental in organlzinq the Chesterfield Human Services Coalition and the Capital Area WNER~AS, Mrs. Elmorc has demonstrated the highest qualities of citizenship in serving the interest of the disadvantaged children, families and elderly and has given unselfishly e~ her time through membership on the Capital Area Agency on Aging and various committ~e~ ~f the United Way of 90-190 2/28/90 County Board of ~upervisors hereby expresses it~ grafitude and deep appreciation fo ~rs. Elsie S. Elmore for her outstanding eervices and contributions to the ~itizen$ of Chesterfield County and further commendm h~r for the excellent exa~p!e she has set in serving the best interests of Chesterfield County. Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Bntlivant Mr. Appleqate and Mr. Mayas. Abaent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. Currin presented the ex,outed resolution to MS. Jean Smith, commended Ms. Elmcre's outstanding service to the County and Ms. Elmore was affectionately referred %0 a~ "the Central" ~uring he~ service on the ~ocial Services ~card ~e~a~se of the manner in which she handled the affair~ of that Board and he enjoyed serving with kef. Ma. Sullivan mtated all these who served with M~. Elmore held her in high esteem, wished h~r a early recovery and hoped that she would be back soon. Mr. C~22in alSO U~e~ented Ms. Smith with a resolution pamEed by the Senate of Virginia patrcned by Senators Elmon T. Gray and Robert E. Russell coK~endlng ~s. Elmore for her dedicated service to the Commonwealth. Me and other m~i'~bere of the Hoard offered to accompany g~. Smith on her visit ~o Ms. ~Imore. 7.C. MS. MARILYIq KIM, KEEP CHESTERFIELD CLEAN CORPORATION On motion of Mr. S~ilivan~ seconded by Mr. Appl~qate, the Hoard ~cpted the following resolution: WHEP~AS The Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation has been in existenc~ since I~Sl with ~he objective of educating the public about the problems of littering and the benefits of recycling; and WHEREAS The Board of SUpervisors annually appoints one represen~tlve from each of the five magisterial districts to serve On the Reap Ch~sterfleld Clean Corporation Hoard~ and WHEREAS Mrs+ Maril~n Kim was appointed to serve in 1993 as the ~crmuda District Representative and ha~ continued to ~ecve as a ~olunte~r to the program mince; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Klm ham been very active in the litter prevention and recycling activities of the Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation, having eerved as Chairman for one year; and WHEREAS Mrs. Kim has been a leading advoe~t~ e~ recycling and litter prevention resulting in hundredm of children and adults being involved in the program throughout the year in such activities as the Clean Business of the Month, Hazardous Waste Collection Days and the School Drop Off Recycling Program; and WH~R~A$~ It i~ the desire of the Board of supervisors to recognize her faithful service ae %he Bemuda District Representative on the Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation Board. NO~, T~EREEORE BE IT ~OLV~D, tha~ the Chmste~iel~ County Board of S~pervisors publi~Iy rscogni=es the long and distinguished vol~nt**r nervice of ~rs. Marilyn Kim and her contributions to the County. Ayes: Mr. Ceftin, Mr. ~ullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayas, ~sent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. Currin 9re~ented the executed ~esolution to MS. Klm, expressed appreciation for h~ effor%~ in this ~ndeavor and suggested she may wish =o se/ye om ether ~utur~ co~ittees relative to recyclinq and waste disposal. 90-191 2/28/90 .7.D. SIGNET BANK FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO TNE EXPLORING ALTERNATI%rg~ On motion Of Mr. ~ullivan, eeconde~ by Mr. Applegate, the Board accepted a COntribution in the amount of $2,5Q0 from Signet Bank/virginia, in matching fund~ from the Governor's Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse Problems, to the Youth/Families Exploring Alternatives Program (which iea cooperative effort of the Chesterfield CADRE, Office QD ~Qu~h, Juvenile Detention ~ome, l~Dh District Juvenile Court an~ the Chesterfield Mental Eealth Center) and adopted the following resolution: W~RREAS, Youth ~ubStaDee ab~ee has become ens of the most pressing issues on the national agenda with over half of the Nation'~ high ~choel sen~or$ usin~ illicit drugs at some time; and agencies, organizations, oitissns and youth was formed to and WR~Pd~AS, The Chesgerfield County CADRE applied for and b~ug ~buse ~roblems to address the needs of high-risk youth in Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, The Governor's Council Grant will be used to fund the "Youth/Famillee Explering Alternatives Program" which is a drug abuse intervention program that will be offered to youth in the Chesterflsld County Jnvsnile Detention Home as well as WHEREAS, Th~ goal Of this grogram is to eliminate use of illegal s~bstances after release from d~f~ntion by providing opportunit~ for a~oleeoente to examine the role of drugs in their lives, tc ekplor~ related family issues and to be to pesitivs 'eepin~ skills; and WHEREAS, The "Youth/Families Exploring Alternatives Program" is a cooperative ~ffort cf the Chesferfield CADRE, Office Qn Youth, Juvenile De~ention Home, l~th District Juvenile Court and the Che~fmrfield Mental Health Center; and WHEREAS~ Signet Bank, demonmtrating its cool,men% to efforts which improve the quality of life, generously provided matching dollars for this gr~nt by making a contribution of $2,500. NOW~ THEREFORE BE IT RBSOLVED~ that the Chesterfield gratitude to Signet Bank for supporting this effort to r~direct troubled youth and for being an active partne~ in this and other endeavors which make Chesf~rfield County a positive add caring community ~or all of its citizens. Aye: Mr. Ceftin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate an~ Mr. Hayes. Ms. Puffy ~xpr~ed appreciation for the opportunity to be an active participant in co--unity activities particulsrly the~e involving the youth of th~ County. Mr. Currin presented t5~ executed resolution to Ms. Li!li~n Puffy, Branch Manager of the Genite Crossing, Signet Bank/Virginia, an~ Ms. Faith Thorn~, Assistant to the Capital West Area Manager Of Signet Bank/virginia~ stated he felt this program was very b~neficial and expressed appreciation to S~gnet Bank/Virginia for their participation and contributions to community end~avors. m RECOGNIZING MARCE, 1990 AS "NAVAL RESERVE MONT~" AND THE NAVAL PdRSERYR'$ 75TN ~IRTHDAY On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by mr. Apptegate, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, The Ut S. Naval Reserve traces its proud tradition of services to the Country to the original thirteen and WHEREAS, State Navies were activated during the Civil War and later the existence of thes~ state naval militias prompted ths U. $. Navy Department to e~t&blish the Office of Naval Militia in 1~91; and WHEREAS, Officers and ~n from %hes~ ea/ly navies served along side the regular Navy in the Spanish-American War and by 1915 Congress passed legislation establishing a rsgulsr Federal Naval Red,rye; and WHEREAS~ The Naval Reserve has been called to active duty d~ring the past seventy-five years with increased frequency and sixty percent of the World War I Navy and seventy-five percent of the World War I1 Navy consisted o~ r~servists; and WHEREAS, Naval Reservists have served in the 194S Berlin Airlift, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and more recently aboard the DSS N~w Jersey off'th~ coast of Lebanon in 1983 and 1984~ and WHERRAS, The American public eno citizens of Chesterfield County have depended on the skills, training and dedication ef the men and women of th~ Naval Reserve in ever~ ma~or uonflict for the pact seventy-four years; and WHEREAS, ~ome 135,000 men and women are serving the Naval Reserve and th~ 75fh Naval Anniversary M~reh 1, 1990 marks an outstanding opportunity ~ar Chesterfield County cf Virginia to recognize the achievemen~ and ~mpor%~nt role these men and women play in the defense of our Co~ntry. NOW, TEEREFO~ BE IT P~ESOLVED, The Che~herfluld County Board of Sup~rvisor~ horeby p~oelaims ~arch, 1990 as "Waval Reserve Month." Ayee~ Mr. Currin~ Mr. Sullivan, mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayes. Absent~ ~r. Daniel. Mr. Currin presented the executed resolution to Lieutenant Colander William Wriqht, Co~andlng Officer at the Reserve Center of Chesterfi=ld; commended the dedication~ achievements and the imperaant rol~ of the naval reservists in Board wi~h a letter from the Co~u~anding Officer, N~val Center of Richmond, virginia, an~ expressed appreciation for the honor and r~ccgnitlon bestowed upon them by the County. H~ referenced the cooperative e~forts and mutually beneficial agreement of the operation with the Park~ and Recreation Department which he hoped would continue in the future. 8. HEARTNGS OF CITI~}{NS ON UNst.~ULED NATTKRS O~ MR. AND MRS. WESLEY K. SEIVRRD, R~LATING TO FAIL~ $~PTIC SYSTEM Mr. Jeffrey Mincks, Senior County Attorney, explained the details of a claim by Mr. and Mrs. Wesley K. ~eivsrd relating to a failed septic system st their residence, 550I Copperpenny Road in Ashley Grove Subdivision, i~ which they claim that the 90-193 2/28/90 County was negligent in approving the septic system and should pay them $200,000 in exchange for which they would deed the county their home. He stated, even though the system was installed in conformance with the septic system construction standards in effect at that time, effort~ have been made by the builder of the home and the septic tank contractor to correct the problem but said attempts have been unsu~cessfu!. ~e stated there is nc evidence that the County or Health D~partment officials acted in a negligent manner and staff recommends the claim be denied. When asked, Mr. Mincks indicated it was his understanding that an offer, in the amount of $21,837, had been made by either the homebuilder and/or the septic tank contractor to repair the system. Mr. Currin excused himself from the meeting. Mr. James Eiohner, attorney for the claimants, s~aqed the Seiverds began experiencing problem~ with their ~eptic system in Au_oust, 1988; referenced written material that had bean su~itted to staff doe~entinq the situation; indicated that even though the con,rector has been cooperative in efforts to correct the preblem at his own exp~nse, the Seiverds have not actually received an offer to do so; that he has been advised that his clients would hav~ to relinquish their leqa] rights if the $21,~37 effort to correct the problem were aosepted; that the contractor is unwilling to guarantee the e~feotfv~nsss of the solntion and stated the existing situation is intolerable and considered to be a health hazard not only to the Seiverds but also adjacent property owners. Lengthy discussion ensued relative to identification of the builder~ whether or not there was i~plied warranty on the residence~ identification of other malfunctioninq~ repaired and/or in-proceeD-of-being-repaired ~ystems in the neighbor- hood; d~tuils of th~ extensive investigation by the Hualth Department ~nd it~ oOnclusion~; an ~stlmat~d cost O£ $21,~7 to r~pair the system by u~inq deep trenche~; the contractor*s unwillingness to guarantee the effectiveness of the use of deep trenches; the creation of an Assessment District and whether or not the claimants would he willing to pay their Dso rata sh~re of the cost; etc. Mr. Currin r~turned to the mooting. When asked, Dr. Nelson ~xpIaine0 no~mal and acceptable water usage per day on septic systems; stated that~ at initial failure, the Seiverds were advised to curtail their water u~e in order to reduce affluent surfacing? stated that the site has unusual t=rrain a~d what has happened to the underground system could eot be dete~ine~ without complete exeavation; stated he did not fssl the system would function well unless ~ major repair of .~he kind quoted by the L~ttle Company is p~t into place; etc. There was fur~er discussion r~lative to th~ n~bsr of homes along Copperpenny Road which could be se~d by an Assessmunt District; whether or not any of =hos~ home had expurienc~d the ~e type problem; a survey of the neighborhood which r~vealad there have been a few other probl~s that were corrected but experienced; whether or not the e~stlng ~ptic system policy wa~ used on the ~ubject site; the unusualness of the t~rrain and the soil; etc. Mr. Brickhouse stated the Lyttle proposal is reasonable and more indepth relative to repairs as opposed to thos~ repairs which hsve already b~an completed7 eta=ed test borings to the depth of 22 fue~ w~re completed and found material in which with two year old septic systems are unusual as ~he average 90-19~ 2/28/~9 life of a septic system in the County is approximately 22 Mr. ADpleqate stated he sympathized with the Seiverds' problem hut to ask the County to purchase the property at $200,000 is not a matter he was prepared to act on at this tine. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by M~. Currin, the Board denied the olai~ of Mr. and Mrs. Wesley K. Seiuerd for payment of $200,00O for the purchase of their home, located at 5501 Copperpenny Road in Ashley Grove Subdivisionr d~e to circunstacoes involving a failed ~eptic eysts~ at the'ir residence, in which they claim that the County was negligent in approving the septic System and in exchange for said payment they would deed the County their home. Ayes~ Mr. Ceftin, Mr. sullivan and Mr. Appleqate_ Abstention: Mr. Mayas. Absent: ~r. Daniel. Mr. ~ayes crated that he did not feel ~he County should be the plaintiff or defendant in a case involving s~ptic ~anks in Chestarfiel~ County in lg90, ae he felt t~ere cie or will more p~oblsms similar tc this if people are allowed to continue to utilisa ~eDtfc eystems VerSus public sewerage systems. ll.G.2. CONSIDER R~QU~$T PR0~ MR. AND MRS. W~LEY E. SEI~ERD TO ~STABLISH SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT IN AShleY GROV~ SUBDIVISION After discussion, i~ was on motion of Mr. Applegate, by Mr. Currin, that the Board directed s~aff to poi1 the remainin~ nine (9) residenta along Ceppsrpenny Road in Ashley Grove subdivision to determine if they wished to participate in the establishment of a Sewer Aseessmen= District at a coat cf $25,000 each; requested the ¢laimunts' attorney to eontao~ builder to determine hi~ willingness to pay a pro rata share of the cost ($25~00Q~ for the establishment of the Assessment bis~niot on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Seiverd; diregted staff to determine/research whether or not there can be a better de~erminahion cn the ~21,~39 cost for the correction of the problem and to brin~ the matter back to the ~oard wi=bin thirty (30) days. Ayes: ~r. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, ~r. Applegate and Mr. Mayas. Absent: M~. Daniel. Mr. Currin requested that staff further pursue thc study of the ramifications of assessment methods regarding the extension of water and sewer to existing subdivision~ and to expedite a recommendation. Mr. Mayas expressed concern as to the owneruhip~ utilization and collection of fees relative to the sewer Assessment District System after its installation and stated h~ f~l% the developer, landowner and Count~ should share in the e~pense of establishing %he system. ~r. Ramsay s~ated the Utilities system extends lines becauEe it fs an enterprise system baaed on its ability to pay for eyetem through connection fees and service charges and $250,0~0 lin~ serving e!eveA (tl) resldenoae would not pay for the cost Of that line. Mr. Mayas r~quested that Staff would review ail involvement of all those concerned - the landowner, the developer and the County - as he felt all those en~ities should have ~ r~sponsibili~y in establishing that eystem. Mr. Ramsay crated the current policy is that Assessment Districts are to be used to extend such facilities tc existing eubdivieions and thu~ far the County has been unable to implement that policy. Me furthe~ noted that the recommendation brought back to the Board would most likely be~a combination as indicated by Mr. Mayer. 9~-195 2/~$/90 Mr. Applegate atated that during the interim if Mr. Eichner wished to contact him ha would he glad to assist in whatever manner possible. There were no deferred iueme to be heard at this time. There were no public hearings scheduled at this time. TAX R~TES FEE tax rate~ and fee change~ that require advertisement for public ~ith the tax rates/fee changem as proposed. on motion of Mr. Applegate~ seconded by Mr. sullivan, the Boar~ authorized advertisement of Aprll 3, 1990, at 7:00 p.m., for public hearing tO consider an ordinance to adopt the existing annual tax levy o~ various eIasses of Dregerty for the of Chesterfield, as iullows: Real Estate .............................. $1.09 Pc:serial ~rcperty ........................ $3.60 Machinery and Tool~ ...................... $1.00 Aircraft ................................. $1.10 Ayae~ Mr. Curr~n, ~r. S~l~iv~m, ~r. Applegate and ~r. Absent: Mr. Daniel. ll.B. ACCEPTANCE A~D APPROPRIATIO~ OF FEDERAL "WAR ON DRUGS" FUNDS AND AUTHORIZE ONE NEW POSITION On motion of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the ~eard accepted and appropriated Federal fund~ in the amount of $Z,125 to =he chesterfield Cummuni:y Services ~oard {CSB} for the purpose of establiahing one (1) senior Clinician position to enhance servioes =c the Criminal Justice Sy=~em and which position is to provide e~aluation and connse/i~g to Jail inmaees and Detenzion Home residents, as well as %o persons r~ferred from Probation, Cor~munity Diversion and the Alcohol Safety Action ~ro~ram (ASA~), whiuh Sending is available in the last quarter of FYg0 an~ for which future fnnding is contingent upon the availability of State funds to be finalized at a later Ayes: Mr. Carrin, ~u. Sullivan, Mr. kpplegate and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. lI.b. A~OINT~NTS - CEEST~RFIELD COUNTY LOCAL PLANNING CO~ITTEE On motion Oi Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Hoard ac~aDted tha resignations of the following individuals from the Local Emergency Planning Committee in th~ categories as Mr, Kenneth Cochran Chief Joseph Pittman Mr. John G. Dicks Community Group Industrial Group ~lected Officials 90-196 2/25/9~ And further, the Board ~i~at~d the fo/lowing individuals tQ serve on the Local Emergency Planning Committee in the categories a~ indicated~ whose formal appointment~ will be msd~ on March I4, 1990: Delegate Stephen E. Martin elected Officials Major Dennis McDonald Emergency Respons~ Mrs. Lynda G. Furr Emergency Re~pon~e Ayes: ~r. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appleqate and Mr. Mayee. Absent: Mr. Daniel. II.~. CO~SENT ITEMS ll.E.1, STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE Thi~ day the County Environmental Enqineer~ in accordance with directions from this Board, made report xn writing u~on his exa~ination of Win~i~g Creek Lane and Creekhend Court in Crsekwood, section H, Clover Hill District. Open consideration whereof, and on motion of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Appl~gate, i~ is re~olved that Winding Creek Lane and Creekbend Court in Creekwocd, Sec~io~ ~. Clover Hill District, be and they kereDy ar~ established as public roa~s. And b~ i~ further resolved~ that the Virginia Depar+n~ent Of Tranepcrtation~ be and it h~reby is requested to take into the ~econdary system, Winding Creek Lane, beginning at existing Winding Creek Lane, State Re%tS 3479, and going westerly 0.~1 mile to the intersection with Craekbsnd Court, then continuing w~sterly Q.09 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; ~nd Creekbend Court, ~eginaing at ihs intersection with Ninding Cre~k ~ane and going southerly ~.05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. and de~iqnated Virginia Department of Trensporhation ~ralnags ·hese roads serve I9 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of ~zansportatten a 50' right-of-way for all of thes~ roads. This section of Creekweod is recorded as follows: section a. P/at Hook 58, Pa~e 22~ August 27, '1987. Ayes: Mr. Cu~rin, Mr. Sullivan~ Mr. Applegate en~ Mr. Mayes_ Absent: Mr. Daniel, This day the County Environmental Engineer, in ~c¢ordanes with directlon~ from this Board, made r~port in writing upon hi~ examination of Sagewood Ro&d~ Sagebrook Road, Sagecreek Conrt~ Sagecreek Circle, Sagebrook Cou~t and Sagsbrook Place in Sagewood, Phases III and IV, Clover Kill District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded by ~r. ApDiegate, it is resolved that sagewo0~ Road, Sagebrook Road, Sagecreek Court, Sageere~k Circle, Sagebrcok Court and Sageb~ook Place in Sagewcod, Pha~ III and IV, Clover Hill District, b~ and they hereby are established as public And bs it further resolved, that the Virqinia Department Of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Sagewood Road, beginning at existing Road, State Route 2~7~, and going northeasterly 90-197 2/~/90 end at the intersection with gagsbrsok Road; Sagebrook Road, beginning at the intersecbion with Sagewood Road and going northerly 6.04 mile, then turning and going easterly 0.05 mils easteTly 0.02 ~ile to the inter~ectien with Sagecreek Circle, then continuing easterly 0.02 mile, then turning and going northeasterly 0.02 mile to end in a cul-de-mae. 'Again ~ag~brcok Road, ~eginning at the intersection with gagewood Road and going southerly 0.04 mile to the intersection with gagebrook Court, =hen turning and going easterly 0.05 mile to 0.0~ mils to the intersection with ~agebre0k Roa~, then continuing easterly 0.03 mile, then turning and going ~outherly 0.04 mile, then turning and going westerly 0.0) mile, then turning and going northerly 0.04 mile to end at the intersec- tion with itself; Sagssreek Court, beginnin9 at the tion with gagebrook Road and going northerly 0.04 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; saqecreek Circle, beginning at the intersec- tion with Sagebrook Road and going southerly 8.03 mil% to end in a cul-de-sac; Sagebrook Court, beginning at the intersection with gagebreok Ro~d and going southerly 0.04 mile to end in e cul-de-sac; and Sagebrmok Place, beginning at the intersea=ion with $~gebrook Roa~ an~ going southerly 0.05 mile to end in This request is ~nclu~ive of the adjacent slops, sight distance and designated Virginia Departmest of Transportation drainage Th&ge ~e&ds serve 81 And be it further required, that tbs Board of 9uperviscrs guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a right-of-way for all of these roads except Sagebrook Road which ha~ a 50' rlght-u~-way and Sagewsod Road which hag an BO' right*of-way. These phases sf Sagewood is recorded as follows: Phas~E III & IV. Plat BOOk 43, Peg% 98 and 99, September 9, 1983. Ayes= Mr. Ceftin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegata and Mr. Absent= ~r. Danlsl. ll,B.2. CONSIDER REQUEST FROM TREASURER FOR TEMPORARY BORROWING Z~ ANT~CZ~AT~0N OF TAX P~CEIPT$ After soneidezable discussion, i= was on motion o~ Mr, S~lli~an, seconded by Mr. Ap~legate, the Beard authorized th~ County Treasurer to undertake ~empor~ry bOrrOwing for the General ~und u~ to ~4,000,000 from the Utility and General Fund Capital Projects ~=nds in anticipation of taxes received in May and June, 1990, pursuant to Section 15.1-545 of the Cods of ~qieia and which funds will be borrowed only as needsd, will be repaid upon receipt of tax revenues, with the ~eneral Fund remitting the ameun% Of the loan an~ intsrsst cas% to the applicable fund. Ayes; Mr. Ceftin, ~r. ~ullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. May%s. Absent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. Sullivan requested that staff follow up on Lhs ramifications of the procedures utilized by other localities r~ga~ding their collection of ta~ revenues end advise the Board. ll.E.3. REQUESTS FOR BINGO/RAFFLE P~PJ~ITS On motio~ of Mr, Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Ap~legate, ~he Board approved a request for b~ngo/raffle permits from the followimg organisation~ for calandaZ year 1990~ Harrcwgate Athletic AsseciaZion Chapter 56 Disabled American Veterans Raffle Bingo Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayas, Absent~ Mr. Daniel. II.F. COMMUNITY DEV~LOFMENT ITEMS ll.F.1. STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION CO~T APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Currin, ~conded by Mr. Applegate, the soard approved th~ cost for th~ installation o~ a street light at the intersection of Riggers Station Drive and Woodsaora Lane, with funds in th~ amount of $1,277.00 to be expense4 from the Bermuda District Throe Cent Road Fund. Ayes: ~r. Cu~in, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and ~r. ~ayes. Absent~ Mr. Danlol. I1.F.2. STP~EET LIGHT REQUEST On motion of ~r. Coffin, ssconded by Mr, ~ulli~an~ the Board approved ob=ainin~ a eo~t estimate for the installation of a street light at the end of Msrcer Court (c=l-~e~sac~. Ayes: Mr. Currln, Mr. Snlllv~n, Mr. Appl~gate and ~r. Mayer. Absent= Mr. Daniel. 11.F.3. ROBTOUS AND CRANBECK ROAD DEEIGN CONCEPTS There was discussion relative te the Virginia Department of Transportation policy that require~ the County to pay one-half (1/2) of the construction cost uf sidewalks if they are requeste~ to be included in the Robious/Cranbeck Read~ design~ funding sources and recom~en~ed alternatives f~r ~aid improvements; etc. On motion o~ Mr. Sullivan, Seconded by Mr. Appleqate, the ~oard a~optsd Alternative 4 to advise the Virginia Department of Tran~Dort~tion to prouee~ with th~ design of the Robious Road Drojact without sidewalks, with the undermuanding ~hat if there is sufficient supDort for said sidewalks at the public hearings, they may be requested; and further, the Board r~quest~d that VDOT provide bike lan~s on C~anbeck Rea~ by paving the shoulders at their expense. Ayes: Mr. C=rrin, ~r. sullivan, Mr. Apple~at~ and ~r. ~ayes. Absent: Nr. Daniel. ll.F.4. P~EQU~$T TO NAME THE ROUTE 36 ~RZDGE OV~R C~X RAILROAD On marion cf ~r. Mayem, seconded by Mr. S~lt~vsn, the ~o~rd adopted the following resolution: W~ERFA$, virginia is ths firs~ State to recognise the fifty years of continuous performance of the Airberne concept which ha~ occurred ~rom 1940 ~O I990 with tho Airbofn~ Forces of the ~nited states showing always their ~upport and love of this groat country in the successful performance of thei~ duty; and WHEREAS, The 555th Parachute Infantry Battalion whluh became the Third Battalion of the 505th Regiment of the 82nd Airborne Division; %hu~ b~cominq %he nation's first all black airborne soldiers inteqrated into the United States Armed WHEREAS, By Joint Resolution ~197 of the House and SenatE, January 31 and ~ebruary 17, 1989, the General A~sembly of Virginia extended appreciation to the 555th Parachute Infantry Association for the splendid accomplishments, and commended each member of the Trt-Citles Chapter of the "Triple Niokles'~ for continuing thc legacy of this Organi=ation; end WHEREAS, GovcrnoE L. Douglas Wilder has been an honorary member of the 5~Hth ~arachute Infantry Association, Inc. since 1984; and WHEP~AS, Under the administration of Governor Gerald L. Daliles and the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, the Route 36 grade s~paration project was initiatedy and W~ER~AS~ A grade separation i~ currently under the CSX Railroad in Bttrick. NOW, T~R~FO~, BE IT RESOLVED~ %hat the CheSt~fleld County Board of Supervisors r~quests the Virginia Department of Transportation to name thi~ bri~g~ in hQDQ~ of Virginia Ayes: Mr. Coffin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appleqate and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. ll.M. INTERNAL TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO COVER CASN FLOW NEEDS FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTIONS Discussion, questions and comments ensued relative to the need for an internal tranefe~ of funds to cover cash flow needs for school oon~tructlons; whether or not the school constructions were on the appropriate time schedules; if approved, a cap $1~ mi!lion be egtablished for transfer; accomplishing said tnansfer utilizing Generul Fund and/or Utility Capital Improvement Project funds; etc. Mr. App!egate stated hs felt such action would set a precedent and could not support th~ paper. Mr. ~ullivan stated the ~atter had been discussed b~ the S~hocl Roa~d Liaison Committe~; ~h~y had not been aware of the construction projects that were annennced at the previou~ evening'~ School Boar~ ~e~tlug hut did agree that such action would be a protective nea~u~e as the School S~stem did not wish to issue contracts without ensuring that sufficient Sundlng is available to meet the cash flow demand~ of certain ~ehool projects; an~ that he felt such aetlon would not affect the County's bond r~ting. ~r. Applegats stated h~ felt uncomfortable utilizing Utilties would be available to accomplish the projects; that no one from the ~chool Board was present to indicate what the impact may be~ inquired as ~o %he identification c~ the llst of etc. Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Maye~ indicated they felt approval of the request w~uld not alter or affect any of the projects costs; that it was advisable to have sufficient funds available to meet the cash flow demands of the pr0jeot$; and that the projects were already funded and c~mmitmcnts hsd been made and iN wa~ only a matter of providing the funding now rather than later. Mr. Currin stated he did not think the funds were necessary at this time; however, he could understand the school System not Wanting tc authorize contracts without ensuring that sufficient funding was availablE. .! approved and authorized the County Treasurer %0 tzansfer cask funds internally, not to exossd $15 million, from the General Fund, the Rmserve for Capital 9rojeet~, County capital projects accounts and the Utilities Funds, es needed, to ensure sufficient cash is available tO meet cash flow demand~ of school projects, which transferred fund~ would he replaced, along with interest, when the 1991 bonds are sold. Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Mayes. Ways: Mr. ADplegate~ as he felt there was insufficient inf0rma=ion available. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 11,G, UTILIT~ ~FAKT~NT ITEMS ll.G.1. ~UT~ORI~ATI©~ TO EXpeCtS= EEI~NT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A ]6~ SANITARY SEWER EASR~T AND lQ~ T~MPORARy CONSTRUCTION EASE~LE~TS FOR BEXLEY-SECTI~N lq 0~F-~IT~ SEWER ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF MR. AND MRS. RUDOLPH F. J~NIS Mr. Sale ~xplained that staff has been working w~th the P~nn Company, the developer o~ ~exley-Section 15, to provide public ~ewer service to this proposed dSv=lopment. He e~plalnsd the proposed route for the line, the history of d~velepment in the area and stated the Board authorized the Right-of-way Section to enquire the easement across th~ Jenis property and an offer of $894.00 was ~ade ~o the owners for the purchase ~f a 16' ~anitary sewer easement and t~' temporary construction ease- ments for th~ Be~ley-Sectlon 15 off-site ~aw~f. He ~tated that, since this offer has not been accepted and no counter- offer has been made, it is necessary to p~oceed with ~mlnent domain on an sme=genoy basis for th~ health and safety of the public to.provide sewer service to homes with failing septic systems. 5e noted staff ha~ been unsuccessful i~ their efforts to contact Mr. and Mrs. Janis but will Continue eo attempt to contact/negotiate with the owners in an effort to reach a settlement. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board authori=ed the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the acquisition of a 1~' sanitary the property of ~r. Rudolph F. and ~s. ~dlth C. Jani$, Tax Map No. 39-6{2)1-A-11 and ~xsrcisa i~e~iate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of th~ Code of Virginia, 1950, a~ amended, and instructed ~he County Administrate'~ to notify the owners by certified mail on March 1, 19~, of the County's Ay~: ~r. Ceftin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. ~ayss. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 11.~.~. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTy ADMINISTP~ATOR TO EX~CUTE A CONTRACT WIT~ ~OWHATAN COUNTY PROVIDING FOR T~ EXTEN- SION OF A CH~MT~KFIELD TRUNK SEWER LINE THROUGM POWHATAN COUNTY Th~r~ was discussion relative to the contract wi~h Powhat&n County 9rovid~ng for the ~X~en~ion of a Chesterfield ~runk sewmr line through Puwhatan County enabling the Utilities Department to extend said lin= at conslderable $~vings to the ~ate payers and without the necessity of using pn~p stations; that the trunk line ~culd permit large portions o£ the northwestern portion of the County to be served by gravity sewer; the extension of water on Rout~ 60 b~ing included in said agreem~nt~ the pursuit of water line extensions along Reut~ 60 in future negotiations with Powhatan County; the benefit ~O Chesterfield of the installation of sewer lines in 90-201 2/28/90 this area of the County as opposed fo the ume of septic On motion of Mr. sullivan, second0d hy Mr. Mayes, the Board authorized the County Adminimtrator to execute the necessary amd Powha~an County for the extension Of a Chesterfield trunk sewer line through ~cwhatan County~ which contract also authorizes the construction of the sewer line and gives Chesterfield County th~ authority to condemn in Powhatan County's name, if necessary, to acquire any easements no~ded to install the trunk sewer; however, it is noted preliminary indicationu are that tho County can acquir~ the without resorting to condemnation. (A copy of said contract is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and ~r. Mayes. Absent: Mx. Daniel. The soard farth~r directed ~taff to prepare an additional contract providinq for the Connty to make 1.5 million gallon~ o~ water Der day available to Fowhateu County from Chester- field's Nuguenct Springs Road/Route 60 fecility. ll.G.3. CONSENT ITEMS ll.G.3.a. AWARD OF CONTRACT $TONEWOQD EAEO~, ~ECTION i AND WATER IMPROVEMENTS ALONG RIVER ROAD On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Boar~ approved the following contract and authorized th~ County Administrator to execute any necessary documents: ~toncwoo~ Manor - Section 1, Utititia~ and Additional Water Line Work along River Road, Project Number 89-079S Developer: William B. and Gene B. Dural Contractor: Old Dominion Grading su~ Utilities CO.~ Inc. Contract ~L~ount: E~timated Total - $t11,569.50 Total Estimated County Cost~ Water Estimated Cash Refund $ 27,482.50 (Additional Work) Estimated Developer Cost: $ 84,087.0Q Cods~ Cash 5N-572~0-B9S2O0B Ayes: Mr. Coffin, Mr. sullivan, ~r. Applegate and Er. Mayes. Absent! Mr. Daniel. ll.G.3.b. ACCEPTANCE OF D=~D OF DBDICATIOR ~OWG IRO~BRIDG~ RO~D FROM RICHARD M. On mctlcn of Mr. ~ullivan, ~econded by Mr. Ma~uS~ the Board accepted, on behalf of thc County, the conveyance oi a 0.052 acrs strip of land along Tronbridge Read from Allen and authorized the Tounty Administrator to execute the necessary deed of dedication, {A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of this Board.~ Ayes: Mr+ Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayes. Absent~ Kr. Daniel. ll.G.3.o. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DBDICATION ALONG GENIT0 ROAD PROM MR. ROBERT N, STA~S, JR. On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by ~r. ~ayss, the Board accepted, on behalf of th~ County, the conveyance of a 0.316 acre strip of land alon~ G~nito Romd ~rom ~r. Robert ~. staples, Jr. and authorlz~d the County Admini~trato~ to e~ecute tkis area of the County as opposed tO the USe of septic syeteme; On motion of Mr. Sullivan, e~conded by M~, Mayas, tke Board authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary doc~ments to enter into a contract b~tween Chesterfield County and PowhaCan County for the extension of a Chesterfield trunk ~ewer line through Powhatan County, which contract also authorizes the construction of the sewer line and giv~ Chesterfield County the authority to conde~nn in Powhatan County's name, if necessary, to acquire any easements needed to install the trunk sewer; however, it is noted preliminary indications are that the County can acquire the easements without resorting to condemnation. IA copy of said contrast is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Mr. Curt±n, Mr. S~l!ivan, Mr. Applegate a~ ~r. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. The Board further directed staff to D~e~are an additional e0ntracf pr0vidiRq for the County to make 1.5 million ga/long ef water per day available to Pow~atan County from Chester~ field's ~ugu~not $~rings Road/Route 60 facility. ll,G,3. COMgEN~ .ll.G.3.a- AWARD OF CONIRACT MTON~00D ~ANOR, SECTION 1 AND WATER IMPROVEMENTS ALOW~ Gn motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by Nr. Mayss, =he Moard approved the followln~ contrast and authorized the County Ston~wood Manor ~ Section 1, Utilities and Additional Water Line Work along River Roa~, ~ro~ect NUmber 89-0798 Developer: Wi!li~m ~. and Gene H. Dural Contractor: 01d Dominion Grading and Utilities Co., Inc. Contract Amount: Estimated Total - $111,569.50 Total Estimated County Water Estimated Cash Refund - $ 27,482.50 (A~ditien~! Work) Estimated D~vetoper Cost: Cod~: C~sh S~-57240-8~8200E Ayes: ~r. Cu~rin, ~r. Su'llivan, Mr. Apptegate a~d Mr. Mayas. Absent: ~r. Daniel. ll.G.3.b. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG IRONBRIDGE ROAD FROM RTCHAED M. ~_LLEN On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by ~r. Mayas, the Board accepted, on behalf of %he County~ the conveyance of a 0.052 acr~ strip of land along ~rQnbri~ga ~oad from ar. Richard M. necessary de~d of dedication. (A copy of said plaP is £ilm~ with tke papers of this Board.] Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate ~nd ~r. Mayas. ~sent: Mr. Daniel. ll.G.3.c. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG GEN!TO ROAD FROM MR. ROBERT ~. STAPLES, JR. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. ~syes, the Board acGepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyanc~ of a 0,~16 acre strip of la~ a~ong ~enito Road from Mr. Robert ~. Staples~ Jr. and authorized the County A~minist~a~Qr to execute 90-202 the necessary deed of dedication. (A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Mr. Coffin, ~r. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayas. Absent~ Mr, Daniel. ll.G.3.d. ACCEPTANCE O~ DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG SOUTHLAKE BOULEVARD PROM G.D. PACRAG~ M~CHINERY, INC. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board accepted, on ~ehal~ o~ ~he County, ~ke conveyance o~ an acre parcel of land along Southlake Boulevard from ~.D. Packaqe Machinery, Inc., A Virginia Corporation and aathorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed of dedication. (A copy of said plat is filed with the papers e~ this Boa:d.) Ayes: Mr. Cu~rin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appl~gat~ and Mr. Mayas. ll.G.3.e. ACCEPTA~C= OF D~D O~ D=DICATiO~ ALONG FROM MR. BRYCE A. COOK AND MR. TUCKER G, COOK On motion of Mr~ Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board accepted the conveyance of an 0.04~ acre strip of land along Bailey Bridge Road from ~r. 5ryc¢ A. Cook and Mr. Tucker G. Cook and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary de~d of d~dication. (k copy of ~aid plat is ~iled with th~ papers o~ this Board.l Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr, Sullivan, M~, Applegate and Mr. Mayas. Ab~ent~ Mr. Daniel. ll.G.4. REPORTS Mr. Sale presented the Board with a report on the dsvsloper water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. ll.B. REPORTS Mr. Ramsay presented the Board with e status report on the General Fund contingency Account, Gen~ral Fun~ Balance, R~merve for Future Capital PrOjectS, Di~k~iot Road and Street Liqht Public Hearing Schedule. Mr. Ramsay stated the Virginia Department Of Tranmportation has formally notified :he County of the acceptance of the iollowi~g road~ into the State Secondary System: COVE RIDGE - SECTIONS I AND II (Effective Route 2954 {Huntgate Woods Road) - FrOm Ro~te to 0.0! mile Northwest Route 4650. 0.1~ Mi. Route 4650 {Cove Ridge Road) - ~rom Route 2954 to Southwest cul-de-sac. 0+31 Mi. Rou%~ 4651 (Cove Ridge Court) - From Route 4650 to Southeagt cul-de-sac. Route 4652 (Cove Ridge Place) - Prom Route 4550 to West cul-de-sac. 0.I3 Mi. Eoute 4653 (¢ov~ Ridge Circle) - From Route 4652 to South e~l-de-~ao. 0.04 Mi. i COVE RIDGE - SECTIONS I AND II (Effective 2/8/90) Route 4654 (COVe Ridge Trac~} ~ From Route 4653 to Southwest cul-de-sac. Route 4655 (Cove Ridge Terrace) - From Route 4650 to Southwest onl-de-$&c Route 4656 (Cove Ridge Lane} - From Route 4550 to Route 604. 0.09 Mi. 0.12 Mi. 0.07 Mi. 11.I. EXECUTIVE SESSION On mo%ion of Hr. ~ullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayer, th~ ~oard went into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters relating %o the Airporg pursuant to Section 2.t-344(a] (1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950~ as amended. Vote: Unanimous Reconvening= On motion of Mr. Applegute, seconded by Mr. Maye$, ~he ~oard adoDted the following resolution: WBBk~AS, ~he Soard of Supervisors ha~ thi~ day adjourned into Executfv~ Session in accordance with a ~oxmal vets of the Board, and in accordance with the provf~fon~ Of the Virginia Freedo~ of I~fofmati~n Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Is£orm~tion Act effective July 1, 1989, provide~ for certification that such Executive Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV~ that the BOard Qf Ceungy SuDemvi~o~s does hereby certify that to the best of each member's knowledge, i) only public bunln~$~ ma=tots lawfully Information Act were discussed in the Executive Session tc which th~s c~rtificatlon apptie~ and ii) only such public business matters as were id~otlfied is the Motion by which the considered by th~ ~Oard. No member dissents from th~s certifi- The Board being polled, the vote was as follows: Mr. Mayes: Aye. ~r. Appleqa~e~ Aye. Mr. Sullivan: Aye. Mr. Curtis: Aye. Mr. Daniel= Absent. ll.J. LUNC~ The Board r~cessed a~ ~1~18 a.m. son's R~staurant for lunch. (EST) to travel to D. Denni- ll.K. MOBILE HOME R~QUESTS 90SN0124 In ~ermud& Magisterial District, DANNY ~IANO r~qn~t~d ~ ~bil~ ~oms ~ermit bo park ~ mobile home on property located approximately 150 ~eet o~f th~ south lin~ Of Libwood Avenue, measured from a point approximately 300 feet west of Telbury 90-204 2/28/90 Street, and better known as 7715 Tappahann0ck Street. Tax Map 67-I1 [2) Rayon Park, Block 14, Lot~ 11 through 19 (Sheet ~r. Jacobsen pre~ent~d a ~u~mary of Case 90SN0124! stated staff feels the proposed request doe~ not meet tko spirit and intent of the Mobile ~ome Permit which is for mobile homes that are used tot dwelling purposes; that it would be difficult for the owner' to comply with certain other conditions sines he would be movinq the home b~ck and forth between th~ subdect property and Mr. Slant stated th~ pri~ery uss of the subject mobile home is a recreational vshlcle; that it would only be parked at the subject site for six months of ~he year; that he ~sets it is basically considered the ~ama as a recreational vehicle; and does not feel that it would adversely impact the neighborhood. Ms. Christine ~sa~ley, an adjacent property owner, voiced opposition to the proposed request~ stated that Tappar~hannock Street is a narrow, one-lane dirt road that is in very rough condition end could not support the frequent movement of this vehicla~ noted that the applicant has dog pens with dog~ in them as well as two dogs on leashes and cats; feels that the existing condition of his property is unattractive and nc~ conductive to the sale of her property if she were to desire to sell it; and feels that approval of the request would have an ~dverse impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Siano stated his property is f~r enough removed from other parcels that it would net adversely impact the neighborhood and did not see that it would bother anyone. Mr. Jacobsen ~xhihitad ~lid~ ~pieting the subject ar~a~ the mobile home, etc. Discussion, question~ and comments ensued r~lative to th~ gunm~r location of the mobi]~ hom~; how frequently the mobile home is moved; what the trailer is used fo~ when it is located in Cbesterflel~; why it would not be more feasible to leav~ the mobile home at it~ alternate location rather than move it back and forth to the County; who takes care of the animals left behind when the applicant is Mr. Cur=in stated he had visited the subject elto: that the mobile home ia currently located in an established single family residential neighborhood, which he felt inapproprlate7 and that he was not comfortable with the mobile home being located at that sits. On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board Mr. Applegate stated he supported the motion but noted tha~ removed i~dlately and suggested that perhaps the applicant should be provided an approprlat~ ~imeframe within which to Mr. Currin amended hi~ motion, ~econded by Mr. Sutlivan~ to approve Case 90SN0124 for ninety (90) days, at which time the approval would automatically expir~, shbjec% t0 th* following conditions; 1. The applicant shall be the owner of the mobile home. ~obile home ~it~, nor ~hall any mobile ho~ be used for rental property. Only one (1) mobile home ~hall permitted to be parked on an individual lot or parcel. (s~an~ard 3. The minimum lot size, yard set,acks, required front yard, and other zoning requirements of the applicable zoning district shall be complied with, except that no mobil~ home shall be located closer ~han 20 feet to any existing residence. (standard Condition) 4. Ne additional permanent-type living space may be added onto a mobile homo. Ail mobile homes shall be skirted but ~hmll not be placed on a permanent foundation. (Standard Condition) 5. Any violation of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the Mobile Home Pextmit. (Standard Condition) this location. 7. The mobile home shall not be hooked np to eI~¢tri¢ity and the County water and sewer. When parked at t_his location, the mobile home shall be secured, locked, and not acce~ibl~ to She public. Ayes: Mr. Currln, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applogato and Mr. Hayes. Absent: ~r. Daniel. 90SR0141 In Bermuda Magisterial Di~trlct, StLAS ~D~G requested renewal of Mobile Home Permit 85SR019 to park a mobile home on property fronting the east linc of Seminole Avenue, approximately 100 ~eet south of Maywood Street (unimproved) and better known as 10607 Semin01o Avenue. Tax Map 9~-6 {3) Betlmeade, Block 13, Lots 31 .through 34 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen presented a sugary of Case 90SM0i~l indicating that ~taff's flold visit reveal that additional living space {storage room) had he~n added to the tsar of the mobile home and tho mobile homo is placed un a permanent foundation. He noted the applicant certifies that said addition and fonndation were ccnztructo~ prior to the imposition of the Standard Mobile ~eme Conditions on this mobit~ home in 198~; thsrefore, as opposed to requiring ~he applicant to remove the addition and the permanent foundation, staff recommends amendment of Condition 4 and approval of the request. Mr. $ilaa Breeding stated the recommended cenditicn~ were acceptable. There was no opposition pxosent. On motion of Mr. Currin, secon4ed by Mr. ~ullivan, the Board approved Case 90SN0141 for seven (7) year~, subj~c~ to Standard Conditions i thro=gh 3 and $ through 7, with amended Condition The applicant shall be th~ owner and occupant of the mobile hom~. mobile home site, nor ~halI ~ny mobile home be used for rental property. Only one (1) mobile home shall be permitted to b~ pa~ke~ on an individual lot or parcel. 3. The minimnm lot size, yard setbacks, reqnired front yard, and other zoning requirements of the applicable zoning district shall be co~plied with, ~xCept that no mobile home shall be tocaCe~ closer than 20 feet to any existing residence. 4. NO additional permanent-type living ~pace~ other than the existing addition, may be added onto the mobil~ home. Use of the existing addition to the mobile home may be continued during the renewal period; however, such addition may not he enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted, or structurally altered. 5. Where public (County] water and/or sewer are available, they shall be used. 6. Upon being granted a Mobile ~ome Permit, the applicant shall than obtain the necessary permits from the office nfl the Building Official. Thi~ shal~ be dQna prior to the installation or relocation of the mobile home. 7. Any violation of the above conditions shall he grounds for r~vecation of the ~obila Homo ?~rmit. Ayes: Mr. Currin, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate and Mr, Mayas. Ab~entt Mr. Daniel. ll.L. REQUESTS FOR REZONING ~gsN04Z9 In Dale ~agietarial District, /~O~-n C. ~&iK requested rescuing from Agricultural (A) and Com~nity Bu~ines~ (R-2} ~o Community ~usiness lC-3}. A commercial complex is planned. This request lies on a 4.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 598 feet on the southeast line of Iron Bridge Road~ approximately 630 feet south of Irongate Drive. Tax Map 66-1 (1) Parcel 9 (Sheet 22). day degerral of Cage 89SW0429. Mr. John D~dson, re~rese~ting the ~ppticant, stated that in the absence of the Dis~rict s~pervisor, the applicant is agreeable to a thirty [30) day deferral. Mm. Carol Hyatt, an &d~acent property owner, mtated she was not opDose~ to the request for a thirty (30) day deferral. On motion of Mr. Applsgat~, seconded by Mr. sullivan, the ~oard deferred Case 89SM0429 until March 28, 1990. Ayes: Mr. OutrAn, Mr, Sullivan/Mr. Applegate and Mr, Mayas. Absent~ Mr. Daniel. ~9~0317 requested rusonlng from Agricultural {Al to Residential A single family residential subdivi~io~ is planned. This request ii~ on a 37.8 acre parcel fronting approximately 566 feet on ~he north line of Thurston Road, approximately 1,600 feet east of ~opkins Road. Tax Map 81-10 (2) Squarefield Park Farms, Lot 31 ISheet 23}. Mr, Jacobsen stated the applicant ha~ rashest a thirty (30) day deferral of Cane ~9SN0317. Mr. Joh~ Do~son, representing the applicanes, statQd a thirty {30) day deferral is requested in order to refine remaining detail~ of area residents concerns. Ther~ was DQ OppOsition present to the deferral. Mr. Curr±n s~ated that he had discussed this cage with the applicant's representative; wa~ agreeable to a thirty (30) day deferral7 ekd also had indicated that he would be available to visit the neighborhood. Qn motion ox Mr. Currin~ seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Bea~d deferred Case 89SN0317 until March 28, 1990. aye~ Mr. C~rrie, Mr. Sa!liven, Hr. Applegate and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. ~9S~0396 re~enin~ from Agricultural (A) to Neighborh~o~ B~ine~ (C-2) of 4.7 acres and to Corporate Office (O~2~ o~ 2.4 acre~. A connmercial/offlce complex i~ planned. This request lies on a to,al of 9.1 acres fronting approximately 623 feet on th~ north line of Iron Bridge Road, mea~re~ from a point approximately 580 feet east e~ Branders Bridge Road, also lying ut the southern terminu~ of Tet~rling Road. Tax Map 114-12 (1} Parcel 30 (Sheet 31). ~r. Jaoobson stated the applicant has recently requested that %his case be remanded to th~ Planning ¢ommiszion so the a9plicant may amend the application. Mr. Cnrrln advised the Board that h~ d~es not own any of the subject property; however, the applicant is one eX his bus/ness partners and that there was a possibility that his real estate firra may have the opportunity ia represent the property in the future~ declared a potential confliot of interest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflio= of Interest Act; and e~cused himself from the me%ting. ~r. Jeff Collin~, repr~genting the applicant, stated the applicant has determined that he is in a position tn amend the propoBed r~que~t to coincide with th~ Chester Village Plan and is requesting that the case be remahB~d to the Planning Commission for said amendment. There was no opposition pre~ent. When asked, Mr. Collins indicated the applicant is working with the Chester Fishing Club and the Buxton area residents to resolv~ conserns. On motion of Mr. Applegate, maconded by Mr. Mayes~ the Board remanded Case 89SN9396 to the Dlanninq Commission fo/ further review. .- Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Hr. Applegate and Mr. Mayem. Absmnt: Mr. Curtis and Mr. Daniel. Mr. Curtis returned to th~ meeting. 89SN0412 In Bermuda Magisterial District, VIRG/NIA ROWER r~quested rezening from ~eavy .Industrial (M-3) to Heavy Industrial (I-3) with Conditional Uae to permit two {2} electric generation units at an exis%ing electric power generation plant. Thim request lie~ on a 2.7 acre parcel lying approximately 300 feet w~mt of the northern terminus of Coxendale Road. Tax Map 99-6 (1) Part of Parcel 1 (Sheet 33). Mr. Jacob~on pretested a sun~ary of Case Bgswo412 and scared ~h~ Plan~ing Commission recommended approval, subject to ce~taln conditions. Mr. Gene Parris, representing th~ applicant, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. There was oppo~ition present to th~ request. Mr. Carrie ~tated since ther~ was opposition present, thm request would be heard in its regular ~equence on th~ agenda. 90-208 2/28/9~ 89SN0442 $~RVI80~ requeste~ resening from Reaidentlal .(R-7) te General Busine$~ (C-5) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a junk yard. An au=omobile sales, service, and ~eDair facility, and junk yard are planned. This request lies on a 0.7 acre parcel fronting approximately 170 feet on the mast line of Old Hundred Road, also fronting approximately 150 feet on the north line of Richmond Street# and located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of th~e road~. T~x Map 115-7 I1! Parcels 27 and 28 (Sheet 32). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 89SN0442 and stated ~ertain ~ondf~ion~ and acceptance ~f the p~offerad conditions. ~e noted Condition 2 was modified relative to the location and ~taff recommends approval ~bj~¢t to staff's re~o~aended Coadltlon 42. Mr. Sullivan indicated ha had a Gonc~rn regarding the proposed r%qua~t. Mr. Currin ~tated ~inc~ concern had bean ~xpr%~ed regarding the case, the request would be heard in its regular sequence on the agenda. 90SN0110 In ~idtothian Magisterial Di~trict~ M/DLOT~IAN ANIMA~ CLINIC AT SO~K~ILLE requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Ca,es 80S092 and 87S021} to per~it a cc~erci~I kennel in a Light Industrial (M-l} Dintrict on a 1.O acre parcel fronting approximately 136 feet on the north line of Ott~rdale R~a6, al~o fronting appr~x~ately 150 feet on the south lime of So~erville Court. Tax Map 1~-5 (1) P~rcal 1~ (Sheet 7). M~. Jaeobmon ~ented a a~ary of Ca~ 90SN0110 and $~ata~ the Planning c~i~ion reeo~en~ed approval, s=bjec~ to certain conditions. Mr. Apple~ate disclosed to the Board that he was uncsrtai~ a~ tc the financial arrangements cf the Midlothian Animal Clinic a~ So~erville .with So~ervilTe Associates; however, ~ince he Mr. Andy Shirtzer, representing the applicant, ~tated ~e opposition. approved Cass 90SN0110~ subject to the following con~itloDs~ 1. The following condition~ ~o~wi%hatanding, the plan prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc., revised F~bruary 3, 19S~, shall be considered =he Mas=er Plan. (P) out,ocr kennel runs shall be screens4 from public view in accoraance wi~ Section 21.1-228 b. and 21.1-228 b. of the Zoning Ordinance. (P} zoning approval for Cases 80~092 en~ 87~021 remain in effect). Absent= ~r. Applegate and Rt. Dsniel. Mr. Applega%e returned ~o the meeting. 90~r~O 111 In Bermuda Magisterial Hi,trier, 3M/NATIONAL AhV~k~ISING requested rezoninq from ¢~ne~al Industrial (M-2} to General Industrial {I-2) on a 3.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 290 fast un the north li~e of Station Road, approximately 310 feet east cf Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approxi- mately 525 feet on Phc south, line of chippenham Parkway, approximately 350 feat east of J~ff~r~on Davis Highway. Tax Map 53-11 (1) Parcel 16 (Sheet 16). Nr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Cass 9OSNOlll and ~tated the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Tom 0'Brion, representing th~ applicant, stated the recemmsndation was acceptable. There was no opposition On motion cf Mr. Currin, sscended by Mr. Sullivan, the ~oard approved Case 905N0111. Ayes: Mr. Carrie, Mr. sullivan, Mr. Applegate and ~r. Mayer. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 90sNOll2 In Matoaca ~agi~terial Dt~trictt JA~8 EARL GATTIS requested rezonlng !rom Community Business {B-2] to Neighborhood BUsiness (C-2) on a 0.7 acre parcel frentin~ approximately 140 feet ~he aas~ line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approx- imately 140 feet on ~he ~outh line of Arrowfie%~ Rea~, and located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of the~e roads. Tax Map 163-11 {1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 49). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 90SNOI~2 and stated the Pla~nlng Co,lesion recommended approval. concern that th~ applicant's representative was not present and suggested that perhaps the case should be deferre~. Collins indicated his firm is representing th~ applicant and, famillur with the case and ~elt that it could be moved forward since the reco~ndation was acceptable to %he applicant. There was discussion relative to the availability of p~lic water and sewer facilities and other issues. Mr. Currin stated that since tbls was a Cong~nt Agenda i~em and ~here were concerns that needed %o b~ resolved, the request should be placed in it~ regulmr ~equence on the agenda fo~ discussion. 90BN~I~1 In Matoaca Magisterial Di~trlet, JO~I~ DOD~ON r~quested Condi- tional Use to permit a 198 'foot tower in an Agricultural District. This request lles on a 1.0 acre pareet fronting approximately 35 feet on the ~est line of Beaver Bridge RoaO, Tax Map 88 approximately 846 feet south of 8ulI Street Road. (1) Part of Parcel 10 ISh~ts 18 and 27). the ~lanning Commission recommended approval, certain conditions. ~r. John Dodson stated th~ recommended acceptable. There was no opposition present. and sta~e~ ~ubjeet to 90-2!0 condition aze On motion of Mr. Mayer, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board apprqved Case ~0S~Ol21, subject to the following c~n~itions: 1. The plan prepared by Ports, Winter and Associates, P.C., dated October lO, 1989, and the picture~ und elevations submitted wirfa the application shall be considered the plan of development, (P) Ail driveways and parking areas shall be gravelled and maintained to minimize dust prcDlams and provide east of ingress and egress. 3. There ~hall be no signs permltt~d to identify this use. 4. The base of the tower shall be enclosed by a minimum (6) foot high fence, designed to preclude trespassing. Between the fence and the property boundaries, existing vegetation shall b~ maintaiDed and, ii D~¢eseary, supplemented with evergreen plantinqs havinq an initial heiqht and SpaCing tO provide screening of the ~ase oi the tower and the equipment building from adjacent propertfes and public rights of way. A detailed plan depicting this r~qu±rement ~hall he submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final sits plan review. Prior to release Of a bhilding permit~ a copy of FAA approval ~hall be submitted to the Planning Department. 6. The tower and equipment shall be designed amd installed so as no~ to interfere with the Chesterfield County Public Safety Trunked System. The developer shall perform an engineering study to determine the possibility of radio frequency interference with th~ County ~ystem. Prior to release of a building permit, the study shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Ch~st~rfi~l~ County Communica- tions and Electronics staff. (FD) 7. The developer shall be responsible for correcting frequen=y problems which affect ~he Chesterfield County Public Safety Trashed System caused by this use. Such correo~ion~ shall be made immediately upon notification by the Chesterfield County Communications and ~lectrOnlc~ staff. 8. The ac~e~s tO the site shall be designe~ to pre$1ude trespassing. The exact method of securing the access ~hall bs approved by the Planning Department a~ the time Ayes= Mr. Curr~n~ Mr. Sui~ivan~ Mr. Applegate and Mr. Mayes. Absent~ Mr. Daniel. 90~0125 In Bermnda ~agiste~ial District, CHg,%LES E. ESTES ARD ~_KT~ ~. GROt'ER requested r~zoning from Agricultural {A), Community Susinsss I~-2) an~ Light Industrial (M-I) to GensraI industrial (I-2) on a 75.5 acre parcel fronting appro~imately 1,52~ feet on the southeast l~ne cf Wars Sottom Spring Roa~, also fronting approximately 118 feet on the south line of West ~undred Road these roads. Also fronting approximately 322 feet on the east line of Ramblewood Drive, approximately 380 feet south of Ware Bottom Spring Road. Tax Map 117-9 (1) ~ar~l 6 (Sheet 33). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 905N0125 and stated the Planning Commission recommended approval and acceptance of the applicants' proffered ¢ondi%ion~. 90-211 2/28/90 this request and it was generally agreed to p!ac~ it in its 89SNG412 In Bermuda Magiaterial District, VIRGINTA ~W)WER resorting from ~eavy Industrial (~-3) to Heavy Industrial with Conditional Uss to permit two (2) electric gen=ra%ion units at an existing ela¢tric power generation Dlant. This request lies on a 2.7 acre parcel lying approximately 300 feet west of the northern terminu~ of Coxendal% Road. Tax ~ap 99-6 (1) ~&rt of ~arcel ~ (Sheet 33). Mr. Jacobsen presented a stu~mary of Case ~9SN0412 and the Plannin~ Commission recommended approval, subject to certain condition~. Mr. Tom O'Brion, representing the applicant, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. envirenmen%aI impact in this ar~a if thi~ request were taking advantage of new techncloq~ to lower the water ¢on~idered a~ ~xisting sources when they skou!d be considered disappointed that-neither the Board nor staff were concerned or more involved with the ramifications of this days. cited fo~ any violations. When asked, ~r. M~ca~ ~ndicated that Virginia Power was not in violation of any regulations/require- ~nts of which he Was aware. Mr. Sullivan stated ~21a~ he had previously requested ~eferral transmission lines count,-wide, not just in the Midlothian virginia Power who had provid~ maps indioatinq ~ufrent and they had answered satis£actorily any qu~stion~ he may have had ~nvironmental impaut hut felt it would be better handled by th~ feedback he had received and intended to support the request. app~ar~ the Environmental Protection Aqenc~ bad given the State Water Control Board the ability to control the quali~y cf 90-212 2/28/90 water sbandards Statewide; felt that if the State Water Control Board and/or the State Corporation CommiSSiOn could h~ndle any problems that may arise since the County d~d not have the ability to regulate such matters; and that be intended to When asked, ~r. Jacobsen stated that Condition 3 requiring that copies cf all reports submitted to th~ State Water Control seard relatnd to monitorin~ the "miring zone" be submitted to the Planning Department for filing on record within thirty days following their submission ko the SWCB was imposed by the Plannfng Commission and ~ha~ his d~pertm~n= 4id no~ have technical expertise to evaluate and communicate such data to %he County's citizens. Mr. Currin s~ated the s%atu~ of the James River has be~n a concern of many citi=ens in his district for quite some time; however, he concurred that the County d~ not have the ability to ~eg~lat~ these matters and that the State Watsr COntrol ~oard and/or the state Corporation Commission would be more knowledgeable and better able to regulate Virginia Power'~ plant than the County. On motion of Mr. Currln, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approved Case ~9SN04~2~ subeect %o fha following condition~= 1. The plan, dated September 10, 1989, and the application, shall b~ considered the plan of development. 2. ~etween the James River and the northernmost driveway, as depicted on the Maatsr ~ian, all exls~ing vegetation shall be retained. The nemoval Of vegetation fo aecoM~odate utilities and other facilitiss associated with tbs electric power generating un'its shall be permitted onl~ upon approval by tko Director of ~lanning. 3. Virginia Power shall submit copies of all reports submit~ ted to th~ Miata Water Control Board of the Commonwealth of Virginia to the Chesterfield County ~lanning Depar~me=t related to monitoring t~e "mixing zone" for the Che~ter~ within thirty (3Q) day~ following their submission to State Water Control Moard. (CPC) Ayem~ Mr. Ceftin, Mr. Sullivan~ Mr. Apploqate and Mr. Mayas. Absent: Mr. Daniel. 89SN0442 In Bermuda ~aqisterial District, CHE~TEI{FIELD COUNTY BO~{D SUPE~VI~OP~ requested rez0ning f~om Residential (~-7) to ~eneral Business (C~5) with Conditional U~e Planned D~velopmunt to permit a junk yard. An automobile aal~s, Service, and repair facility, and junk yard are planned. This request on a 0.7 acre parcel fronting ap~roximata!y 170 feet on the east llne of Old Hundred Road~ alpc fronting approximately 150 fee~ On the north line of Richmond Street, and located in the northeast quadrant of the inter~ection of these roads. Tax Map 115-7 (1) Parcels 27 and 28 (Sheet 32}. Mr. Jacobsen presented a sugary of Case 89SN0442; stated The Planning Commission recommended approval o~ the r~quest, subject to certain conditions and acceptance of the applicant~s proffsred cendi%ions~ and noted that, upon adoption of ~h~ Chester Village Plan, the Board indicated that under certuin circumatances~ it may be appropriate tQ rezone certain property to permit u~e~ which were permitted on the property prior tn the County-wide rezonlng ia t971. Mr. Edward willey, Jr., representing the property owner, stated the reocF~end~ conditions were a~cep~abl~ but asked that the 90-213 2/25/90 Condition 2. current uses of the ~ubj~at property. Mr. Cnrr±n briefly the time the Board adopted the Chester Village Plan, Mr. Woodard reqneste~ censideration 6e given to resonlug his propezty as approval of that ~an would adversely affect hi~ proper%y~ end that he had requested that, as part of the motion, that staff prepare an application for rezening to uecond occasion, to his knowledge, in which %he Boar~ has been approve~ Case ~9SN0442, subject %0 the follow~ng This Conditional Use ~lanned D=vulopmsnt to permit a junk yard shall be granted to and for B. D. Woodard, Jr., and Claudette J. Woodaxd and/or their inm~ediate family+ For the purDcse of th±~ ~ondifion, immediat~ family is defined spring, ~pouse o~ parent. (P) view from adjacent properties and public rights of way. Within thirty (30) days of the approval of this v~hicles shall be confined %0 the approved area. 3. There shall be no more than five (5) junk vehicles located on th~ site at any one ti~e. 4. The junk yard shall only be permitted in conjunction with a motor vehicl~ ~ale~, service, and repair ~acility. And further, the 5card accepted %h~ following proffered in hhe C-2 ~eighborhccd susiness District plu~ public garage, motor v~hicles sales, $~rvice, Ayes: Mr. Currln, Mr. Sullivan and ~r. Applegate. 90~N0112 In Matoaca Magisterial District, JA~ ~ .GAT'TIS resunlng ~eom Cor~unity Business (B-2) to Neighborhood ~usines~ (c-2} on a 0.7 acre parcel fronting approximately ~40 feet on the east line of Jefferson Davis ~ighway', also frontin~ approx- imately I40 feet on the south line Of Arrowfield Road, and located in the southeast quadrant of th~ intersection of roads. Tax Map 163-11 (1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 49). 90-214 ~r. Jac6bseu presented a sugary of Case 90SN0112 and stated the Planning Co, ice,on recemmended approval. Mr. Micas inquired if the subject request was within the distance as required by the zoning Ordinance requiring the installation of public sewer. Mr. Jacobeon stated the property is subject to septic tank standards adopted by the Board in August, 1988, which allow =ommezcial uses subject to restriction~ one being a maximum usage ef 3,080 gallons per day, Mr. Bernard Schmelz indicated the U~ility Ordinance sp~uifies that if the proposed use is within 500 feet of an existing sewer liner then public sewer is required. Mr. Jef£ Collins stated the applicant's representative was ii1 and unable to attend the meeting; however, he was familiar with the request and could proceed with representing the case on his behalf. ~e stated the use of public water is required by ordinance and is intende~ ~ar the site. Hs st=ted, however, connection to ~he public wa~tewater ays~m i~ not considered feasible, due to the Virginia Department of Transportation restrictions with respect to the extension of the existing wastewster llne and possible conflicts with other area utilities, ~ven though there is an 8 inch public wastewater line located on the west aide of Jefferson Davit ~ighway, approximately 150 feet from the sDbjeet sit~ and that ~aid connection is required by the ordinance. Mr. Mica~ indicated that~ in hie cpinion~ public water and sewer are mandatory. Mr. Mayes s~eted his only alternatives were either a deferral or denial. Mr. Collins inquired if the Board could grant an exception in this instance. Mr. ~iaaa stated the only option other than the installation o~ public sewer would be to amend the Utility Ordinance. There was further discussion relative to installing sawer lines underneath Jefferson Davis ~ighway; VDOT not allowing the applicant to opaacut ROute I; no upgrading plan~ for the sewer lines on the east sid~ of Jefferson Davis Highway; the area that could ba served if a sewer assessment district were established; etc. Mr. Collins stated it appeared that, given the circumstances, the Board may be able to find that sewer is net, in ~act, by the septic system regulations, Mr. ~ayes stated he felt that a complete history of events surrounding this request wa~ excluded from the R=quest Analysis and he did not like the information not being provided. Er. collins stated a thirty (30) day deferral was accsptable. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the so=rd deferred Case 908N0112 until ~arch 28, 1990. 90ZR0125 I~ B~r~uda ~agi~t~rial Digtriot, C~ES E. ~STE~ A/~DI~R~%~. 8ROVER requested rezonlng from Agricultural (A~, Community (I-2) on a 75.5 ac~ pare~l fronting approximately 1,520 feet on the'southeast line of Ware ~ottom Spring Road, also fronting approximately 110 feet on the ~outh line of We~t Hundred Read and located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of th~se road~. Also fronting approximately 322 feet on the east line of a~blewood Drive, approximately 3~0 fee~ south of Ware Bottom Spring Road. ~ax Map 117-9 {~] Pa~c~l 5 (Sheaf 33]. Mr. Jacobsen presented a s~zary of Cu$~ 90SN0125 and ~ta~ed the Plannln~ C~isslon reco~ende~ approval and acceptance of 90-~15 2/28/90 i the applicant's proffered conditions. Mr. John Grover, representing the aDDlicants, sta~ed the r~cQmm~ndation was acceptable. There wa~ no oppo$1tlcn. Mr. Suttivnn refe~ocsd the Request Analysis whlck stated that this ease was filed after July 1, 1989 but the applicant not pxoffered cash for off-site road improvements, ~e stated the Soard adopted an ordinance reqarding cash proffers to accept said proffers and as discussed during the Williamsburg retreat, it was generally agreed tha~ cash proffers ~elative to road and firs service improvements would be appropriate. state~ it would appear considering the requested ~se that there wo~Id be an impact on roads tad fir~ service and he felt the matter should be deferred in order to give the applican~ an opportunity tc determin~ whether cr not they wish ~e come forward with cash Mr. Applegate expressed concern that there is no indication that there are any additional off-site road imDrovements for the propese~ use.. When asked, Mr. Banks stated ther~ are on site improvements identified in the Request Analysis; however, cash for off-site improvements had not been identifi~O. Mr, Ramsay stated that under the pending proposal before th% Board this case would probably necessitate cash proffer calculations but the formula and/or amounts have net been adopted by .the Board. ~r. Sullivan stated he intended ~o make a motion, at the appropriate time, to defer Case 90SN0125 until ~arch 28, 199Q not only to allow tim~ for staff to review the request in conjunction with the applicanf b~t al~o to giv~ tk~ Board an cpp0rtuDity to ~etermine the direction they wish to proceed relative to cash proffers. Discussion~ questions and somment~ ensued relative to proffers being applicable to residential pro~erty; the regulations by which the Board would abide fur off-site cash c~f-site imprcv~ment~ a~e ~eq~ired on development: whether or d~veloper for ~aklng certain improvemen=s; eec. prepar~ a memo informing him hha~ they anticipated cash prollers are expected on zoning r~quest~ rather than just noting it in =he Request General Industrial (I-2) zoning and staff do~s not have sufficient data a% this time to det~ine the actual traffic generation for calculating cash proffers. and/or ~ounts =o be implemented for said proffers and staff's inability to negotiate with the applicant for that reason; applicant's request impacting Ware Bottom Springs Road and Route 10; etc. not ready for presentation to the Board and if there was insufficient information with which %o render a decision, staff should have reco~ended deferral ~ntil such t~e a~ the could provide staff wi~h the information needed for appropriate reco~endation. Mr. Currin expressed concern that staff ha~ ne% brought forth more detailed informs%ion relative to cash proffers on the 90-216 Drainage ~asin but is not th~ s~bject property and is not affected by this request; however, wished to inquire since portion Of the applicant's proper~y is located in the Basin, if the applicant is beinq required to provide On-sit~ retention basins; i~ on-site drainage basin information was pro%ided to him and if he ie being required to pay his pro rata ehsre of the expanse; etc. Mr. McElfish stated the applicant's plan depicts on-site retentio~ basi~s and they have proffered these condition~; on-Bite information was provided and they will pay building permit. Mr. Appleqate inquired if the applicant ~ere prepared to provide the minimum road improvements, if nessssary, as outlined in the Request Analysis for 1~ additional improvements along Route iQ for the entire pro,arty frontage; improvament~ to th~ Ware Bottom Spring~ Road/Route intersection to included traffic signalization; 31 additional pavement to provid~ lef~ and right-turn lan~m and ditch line relocation ~er adequate shoulders along Ware ~ottam ~prings Road; and' 4) additional pavement to provide left- and right-~urn lanes, if access is provided to Ra~J01awood Road. Mr. ~rov~r stated he wa~ prepared to provide these impreve~ manta, provided the Virginia Department of Transportation permits signalization et that location. ~r. Micas indicate~ the Board ¢c~ld not, at this tim~, accept either oonstr~ctfcn or cash proffers; the case would haYs to be deferred until such time as the proffere were received in writing prior to the public hearing. Mr. currin stated ~hat it ippears the applicant will be constructing quite a bit of off-site improvements, although the dollar amount is not yet determined, and asked if Mr. $~llivan w0uld feel comfortable rescinding his motion for thirty (3~) day~. Mr. Sullivan stated he did not, as he felt the Board had made its decision on cash proffers and h~ would prefer to stand by that decision; and he would like staff to com~ back within thirty ~30) days with a reco~nlen~ation for a sash proffer Mr. ~ullivan m~de a motion, ~conded by Mr. Ma~es, to defer Case 9QSNO125 until ~erch ~8, 1990. Ayes: Mr. Sullivan end Mr. Mayas. Nays: Mr. Currin and Mr, Applegate. Absent: Mr. Daniel. ~r. Micas stated %he motion failed. Mr. Currin made a motion, seconded by M~, Applegate, to approve casa 905~0115 and accept the following proffered 1. That portion of the subject property which naturally drains to the Northern Property ~ine and is outsid= of the Johnson's Creek Drainage District will have a stormwater retention/detention system installed. This ~ystem will be designed to contain the post d~veloped ssnditlon ten year frequency ~torm to a maximum outflow discharge equal to the maximum two year frequency ~isoharga for the existing coadi~iona 2. That portion of the subject prope=ty which is within Johnson's Creek Drainage District will have a temporary retention/detention system installed. This system will be removed when the downstream construction o~ the Johnson's Creek Outfall is completed. This temporary retention/ds- t~ntion ~ystem will be designed to contain the 50 year post developed storm to a maximum release rata equal ~o 90-217 2/28/9Q the maximu~ diseharqe for the lO year frequency storm at existing conditions 3. At th~ southeastern portion of %he property, a stermwater drainage easement will be dedicated to the County of Chesterfield by the property o~ner. The purpose of this easement is to accommodate the completion of th~ Johnson~ Creek Drainage District Improvements across the property. The final location and extent of thi~ ea,%meat will approved by the County ef Chesterfield once the final Drainage District Plan~ have been approved through property. 4. Prior tO issuance of any building psrmit on the ~ubject property, the Property Owner will dedicate ~dditionai right of way tO ~he County of Chesterfield free and unrestricted other than any existing easements, rights, etc. ~s ~lready exist. The llmit~ of these dedications Along Route 10 - 1OO fe~t from the centerlin~ of Route Along R~mb!ewood Drive - 45 feet from the een~erline Ranblewood Drive. line of Wars Bottom Spring Road. Mr. Sullivan expressed concern %hat the Board woul~ not adhering to its established policy regarding cash proff~r~ and indicated h~ f~l~ that the ~oard i~ sending false slqnal~ to the deuelopm~nt community. Mr. Currin stated he inten~s to vote On sash proffers at the ~arch 14, 1990 meeting and, at that time, would ~eel more comfortable with what he would be voting on regarding cash proffer~ for cemmersial develo9ment off-si~s improvements. Mr. Banks indicated that the minimum improvements identified in the Kequest Analysi~ are mostly on-site improvements. ~r. Sullivan noted that~ a% this time~ %h~ Board can not legally accept ~he off-site improvernents to which the applicant has agreed. ~r. Currin w~thdrew hf~ ~o~ion, s~conded by Mr. Applegate, Aftpr further discussion, ac furthsr motions were mad~ and it was noted Case 908N0125 would automatically be ~eferred until ~aroh 28, 1990. 90~N0128 In Bermuda M*gi~erlaI District, OLIVE~ D. P/~D~ requested ~%eadment co Conditional Use Planned Developments (Ca,es 87SD39 and 89SN026~) relativ~ to signs. This req~e$% lies on a total of 974.8 acres fronting, in two {2) places ~or a total of approximately 1,600 fe~t on the north line of East Road~ also fronting on the west tine of the Route 295 right of way, and along portions of the north and south liaes of Meadow~ ville an~ ~ermuda ~undred Roads. Ta~ Map 99 (1) Parcel 20~ Tax Map 1O0 (]) Part of Parsul 19; Tax Map 11~-5 (1) Part of Parcel 38; Tax Map 118-9 (2) Westover Farms, Lot 120; Tax Map 118-10 (1~ Parcel 39 and Part of Parcel 33; and Ta~ Map 118-14 Parcel 40 (Sheet 33). ~r. Jacobsen presented a ~ummary of Case 90S~012~ an~ s~ated the Planning Commission accepted withdrawal of Tax Map 10D (1), Part of Parcel 19~ neCommunded d~nial of two {2) 700 square foot freestanding signs along Route 295; and recommended approval of the amendment to allow aign~ that comply with the Bmerging Growth Distric~ Standards, ~ubject to certain conditions. 90-218 2/28/9~ Mr. Currin disclosed te the Board that he i~ a partner in the ownership cf Rivsrsb~nd, deulared a conflict of interest pursuant to the Virginia CCmpr~h~nsive Conflict of ~nterast Act and excused himself from the meeting. Mr. Oliver D. Budy, representing the applicant, stated the subject d=vulopment is one of the' leadin~ developments in the County, one that is demonstrated to bring about an adjustment in the residential/commercial tax bass ratio, and being such a development should be idantifie~ appropriately. ~o one cams forward to speak in opposition to the raciest. Mr. A~Dleqate stated he felt the subjeot develor~ment is a quality development that could b:ing finan=ial investments to the County and that he supported the request a8 i% i~ oonfined to th~ Riv~rsbend ar~a. ~r, ~utlivan sta~ed he originally intended %o ~uppo~t th~ Planning Co--lesion/staff reco~enda- ~ioD; however, he felt that ~he Couney should ~mi% ~ignals it i~ in favor of qnality development and manaqed/controlled growth and he felt the s~jec~ requ~ut aucumplishes =hat and he On motion of Zr. Sullivan, ~conded by Mr. MayaS, the Boa~d approved Case 90SN0128, subjec= Co ~h~ following condition: Except as stated herein, signs shall comply with %he requirements of %he 5ontng Ordinance, Sections 21.1-255, 21.1-266, 21.1-267, 21.1-268, and 2].1-269. In ~d~i~ioD to the permitted free- standing sign~ identifying th~ project~ two (2~ additional freestanding ~ign~, each not to an m~a Of 700 Square feet and a height of ~wenty- five (25) feet, shall be permitted along Routs 295. For tke purposes of siqnage, regidential and agricultural %ra~%~ shall be viewed as zoned ~, R-T~, or R-~ depending eden the use in ~e t~ac% and office, co~ercial, and industrial tract~ ~hall be viewed as baing zoned O, C, or I. (NOTES: A. Thi~ ~ondi~ion is in addition Condition 2 o~ Casa 87S039 Condition 1 of Case 89SN0264, ~lativ~ to Signs only. 'B. ~xcept as noted herein, all other condition~ Of zoning approval for Cases 89S039 and 89SN9264 remain in ~ffect. C. Prior to erection of any signs, sign permits must be obtained.) Ayes= Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appleqate and Mr. Absent; ~r. Currln and ~r. Daniel. Mr. Currin returned to ~he meeting. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board adjourned at 4:25 p.m. (EST) until 12:~ Noon on March 14, 1990, in th~ Administration Building Conference Room {Room 592). Ayes: Mr. currin, Mr. sullivan, ~r. Applegate and M~r~ayes. Absent: Mr. Denial. 90-219 2/28/90