Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
05-23-90 Minutes
mY ~3~ 1990 Mr. C. F. Currln, Jr., Chairman Mr. M. B. S~llivan, Vice Chairman Mr. G. H. Appleqa5e School BOaxd in Attendance Nr. Jsffrey S. Cribbe, Cheirm~n' Hr. Griffin R. ~urton, Vice Chairman Dr. John A. Cardea Mrs. Jsan P. Copeland Mr. William H. Goodwyn, Jr. Superintendent Staff in At%enhance: Ms. Amy Davis, =xec. Aest. to Co. Admin. Hrs. Doris DeHart, Legis. Svc~. and Intergovexn. Affairs H~. Joan Dolezal, Clerk to th~ Board Mr. Jame~ D~nn, Marketing ~anaqer, ~conomic Developmt. Chief Robert Hanes, Firs DeDar~ent Deputy CO, Admln., Mr. William H, Howell, nlr. of Planning Counsml to the School MS. Mary Lou Lyte, Deputy Ce. Admin., Mr. K. J.'M~Crack~n~' Transp. Director Mr. Riehei~ McElfisk, Dir. of ~ews/Info. Dr. william Nelson, Col. Joseph Pittm~n~ Chief of ~ollce Social ~ervices bit. of Marks & Rec. Mr+ David Welchons, Pit. cf Utilities Admin. for Co--unity Dir. of Human 90-417 5/23/90 Mr. Currin called the regularly ~ehadnled meeting to order at 9:15 a.m. {DST). Mr. Currin in%reduced Reverend Arthur Umback, Sr.i Pastor of Redeemer ~u~haran Church, who gave the invocation. 2. PS, PGE OF ~r.~,m]IA~CE TO -£~u~ FLAG OF 'r~ ~NI-rr~u STATES OF the Chesterfield County School System, led the Pledg~ of Altegiancm to the Flag of the United States of A~erioa. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Daniel, approved the minutes of Nay 9, 1990, as amended. V0te~ Unanimou~ the Roard 4. COUNTY ADI~INISTRATOR'S C0I'~I~TS Mr. Ramsay introduced Ms. J~lie Layer, Director o~ Develo~I~enC, Eichmond Symphony, who briefly summarized the organization'S programs; explained th~ history of the "Golden Circle" poster; presented the poster to Mr. Daniel, which he accepted on behalf of the Beard; and' expressed appreciation for the Beard~s and County's past and continuing support of the R~mphony. Mr. Daniel commended the Richmond Symphony for the many cultural contributions provided to th~ o~tizen~. 5. BOARD~ITTEE REPORTS Mr. Daniel reported h~ attended the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission (RR~DC) m~e%ing at which there wmre dincunmicnm regarding the voting authority o9 the Central Virginia Wast~ Management Authority (C~} member~ and attended th~ Capital Re,ion Airpcr~ Co~i99ion (C~C) meeting at which there wore discussions regarding preparatio= for upcoming budget presentation. Mr. Mayas reported he at%ended the Appomattox Basin Industrial which the Board ~iscus~ed organiminq a businessme~/business- w0men'm advimory council which is anticipa=ud in the near Bridg~ which completion im anticipated in October/November, Mr. Sullivan ~port~d he attended ~he Ric~ond Regional Planning District co~i~sion (RRPDC) meetinq; the Water Resources Task ~crce. mae=lng at which ~here ~r~ continued, on-going discussions toward the planning fo/ better =s~ of wa~er resources; an~ noted he participated in the Ben Air p~ra~e wh~oh event he felt wam mo~t enjoyable for all those Mr. Currin ~eDorted he attended ~he Richmond Repional Planning District Co--lesion (R~DC) m~eting~ addressed those prm~ent at th% groundbrmaking ceremony of ~e Pric~ Clnb which he felt will be a~ asset %o the County; continued his visits wi~ Chief Eanes to variou~ County fire stationm; and atten~eO a Bmnsley Fire Depar~ent Fund Drive. 6. RE~UEST~TO~0~T~OI~ZR~TIOR, F-~IEI~GE~..CYADDITIONS OR ~ES TN ~ O~ OF ~S~ATION 0n motion of Mr. Appl~gat~, ~con~ by ~r. ~=y~, th~ Board moved out Of ~equ~nc~ Item 9.A., ~t~ee~ Light Installation Co~t Appro~al~ an~ Item ~.~+, ~tr~t Light R~que~, to b~ h~ard i~diately follow,ns Item 7.C~ Resolution Recoqni~ing Me~ers of ~ Corporat~ Co--unity for Their Generous Contributions to the Bould~r~ Concert Seriez; and added to existing It~ ll.J., ~xecutive Session, di$au~sion relative t0 p~r~onnel ~atter~ relating to the Capital Region Airport Co~ission, pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) [1) of the Cod= o~ virginia, 195Q, as amended~ an~ adopted the agenda, aS ~ed. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopt~d~ WHE~S, Dr. Ann Bailey Fuqua has served %h~ school children an~ residents c~ Chesterfield County in a proqfe~sive succession o~ jobs within theChe~t~rfi~l~ COuuty School System since 196~; and WHEREAS, Dr. Fuqua b~gan her educational car~r a~ an ~g~i~h teacher ~t ~rovi~ence Junior High School i~ediately after her qraduation fr~n Westh~pton Colt~q%; and WH~AS~ Dr. Fuqua continued h~r education at ~e University o~ Richmond while teaching and in 1972, upon Chairman of the English Department at Clover ~i!l High School and while moving upward as Secondary Sup~rviso~ of Lan~age Arts in 1974, AnEi~tant D~r~ceOr of ~co~ary ~ducation in 1978 and Director o~ Secondary Education in 1980, Dr. Fuqua continued h~r personal pur~ult of education at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and state University; and W~E~S, Upon obtainin~ a Doctor's Degree in Education, Dr. Fuqua was named Assis=ant Suparlntendent for Secondary Education in 1984 and Assistant Superintendent for InstrUCtion in 1985; and ~E~S, Dr. Puqua has consistently ~arried out her dutie~ with a hiqh I~v~l of professional integrity and comp~tenc~ ~n~ has b==n an exemplary role ~odel for her student~ and her NOW, THEREFO~ BE iT RES0LV=D, that the Ch~s=erfield An~ Pulley Fuqua for the service~ she has provided t0 the Superintendent of Sehool~ in E~ira, New York. Uote~ Unanimou~ Mr. Currin pre~nted the executed resolution to Dr. Fuqua an~ 7.B. MR. CHIZSTE~I~ L. SNITIt U~ONllET~.,R~,NT, PLARN1}IG On motion cf thc Beard, the following resolution wan adop~e4: ~HEREAS, ~r. Chesteen L. Smith will r~tiro from the Planning D=partmen%, Chesterfield County, on June 1~ 1990; and 90-419 5/23/90 W~EREAS, Mr. Smith has provided sixteen years ef quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WREi~AS, Ches%erfisl~ Countyr the Board of Supervisors and the Planning D~partment will miss Mr. Smith's diligen~ service; WHEPJ~AS, Mr. Smith has participated in ~_he overall development of Chesterfield County through the review of residential subdivision proposals and building permit applica- has greatly benefitted; and WHEPJ~AS, ~r. Smith ha~ provided invaluable COntribu%ion~ to Chesterfield County's ~loed ~mnor Program and a ~raat service %o Chesterfield County through his participation in the Poster Chi!~ Care ~rogram for'.thg.past eight years; and W~SRZAS, ~r,. Smi~h'z ~alm, ~r~endly manner with the citizens of Chesterflel~ County bas inflmen¢od his CO-wOrk,rs and suDervis0rs alike; and WHEREAS, The Plannin~ Department will mim~ Mr, Smith'~ loyalty~ d~dica%ion an~ NOW, T~R~FOP~ B~ I~ ~SOLVED, that tko Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizem Mr. che~teen L. Smith and ~xtend$ on b~balf of its me,ers and the citizen~ ~f Chesterfield County their appreciation for his service to the County. AND, ~ IT FUKT~R ~SOLVED, that a cu~y of this resolution be presented to Mr. Smith and that thi~ resolution Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. wished h~m w~ll in his retirement and recognized Mrs. Smith and 7.C. ~2~BERS OF T~ ~DRPORAT~ ~IT~ FOR THEIR ~ROUS CONTRIB~TXON$ TO TH~ BOULDERS CONCERT SE~t~S On motion cf ~he ~oar~, ~he ~eard aocep~e~ a donation $17,000 (~5,000 from sigma Development, Inc.; $5,000 from Fidelity ~ankers Life Insurance Company; $~,000 from Caesars' Pizza of Richmond; and $2,000 from PrOperty Se~vicez Corp. of virginia) ~o the Parks and Kecreation Department as a contribution toward the Boulders Concert Series ~or 1990 and adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Music is a ce!turn1 oppor=unity which all citizens of the C©un%y should have access to; and the Chesterfield County Parks and Recreation Department, avenuQ ~o thi$ pursuit; and WS~R~S, The financial contributions of SiVa Development, Inc.; Fidelity Bankers Li~e Insurance Company~ Little Pizza of Richmond; a~d Property Services Corp. of Virginia havc made attendance at this concert s~ri~ free for the public. NOW~ THE~FORE BE IT ~SOLVED, that the Che~terfield Coun=y Board of Supervisors does hereby recognize Siva Dcvel~pment, Inc.; Fidelity Bankers Lif~ Insurance Company; 90~420 5/23/90 of Virginia for their generous ~o~atiens toward the Boulders Family Concert S~rias. AND, BE IT PURTHER ~ESO5%'ED, that the Board of Supervisors doe~ hereby express its appreciation and gratitude to these m~lbers of the corporate con~unity for their interest in and contributions toward the quality of life in Chesterfield County. Vo~e: Unanimou~ ~r. Currin presented the executed resolutions to ~r. Tom Eilarson of Sigma D~velepment, Inc.; ~s. Laura Bo~twiok of Fidelity Banke~m Life Insurance; MS. Martha Tappan of Little Caesars' Pizza of Richmond; and Mr. Lee Eu%ing of Proper~y Services Corp. of Virginia (nob present); recognized Mr, Dave Tarie and Kathl~en Johnson, Parks and Re~reatlon staff; and ~xpr~d ap?r~eiatlen for the corporate corm~unRty's interest in and ~ontr~bu~ion ~oward the quality of life in the County. ~r. Stith presented the Boa~ with framed posters oo~tmemOrating 9. DEFEP~RED 9.A. ~T~EET LIGHT INSTALLATION COST On motion of Mr. ~ayes, seeOndud by ~r. Applagate, the Be~rd deferred until July 25~ 19~0, cenelderatioD of a request for the installation of a street light a~ ~he intersection of Beach Roa~ and Woodl~n~ Pond Parkwa~ in the Matoaca permit an opportunity for another pollin~ of the Woodland Pond Homeowners Association members to obtain a majority vote on the issue since a consensus had not been reached. Vote: Uuanimous 9.~. STREET LI~'r ~QUEETS On motion of Mr. Mayas, seconded by ~r. Applagat~, the ~oard approved obtaining cost eethnates for the installation of street light~ at the followlng ~c~tions in T_he ~atoaca Dis%tier: 1. 24~9 Aldrid~e Avenue; and 2. D~puy Road between Laurel Road and Loyal Avenue. ~. ~EARINGS OP CITIZENS 0~ U~SC~DULED MA=-r~aS OR CLAIMS 8.A. CLAIN OF F~U-CON CONSTRUCTION COF~PAN~ i~C~%~ING CON- STRu~iON OF TH~ EXP~x~m OF T~]~EOCTOR'S Mr. ~arthemos, assistant gounty Attorney, presented a surm~ary Of information r~garding the claim of $2,~00,~46.36 from Fro-COn Censtructlon Compnny arising from the construction of th~ ~xpansion of the ~roctor'~ Creek Wastewa~er Plant; stat~ staff has reviewed said ~laim, both independently and with the assistance of the project engineer, Metcalf =~y, end ~nether ~ndependent oonshttant; and believes that County is legally justified in withholding the full $723,800 from the final payment to Fro-COn and that ~ru-Con's additional claim of $1,763 million is w~thout merit. Mr. Leonard Ruzicka, representing Fro-Con Gonst~uotion Company, outlined the reasons that Fro-Con believes it~ claim is justified, citing changes in contract and interference by 90-421 5/23190 Metcalf and ~ddy as justification fur the delay in completion and that would merit the granting of time exten~ion~ inaccuracies of "as built" drawings showing the location existing pipinq and electrical service for the original pla~t; ~tc~; and in~icated Fru-Con~ i~ willing to negotiate ~ettle~ent for that which they feel is owed to them. Afaer a brief discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Applegat~, secondmd by Mr. Sullivan, re~elved to suspend the rules to add Vote: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded ~y Mr~ Daniel, w~nt in~o ~xeeutive Session to discuss wi~h leqal counsel possible litigation involving Fru-Con Construction Company pursuant to Section 2.1-344 {a) (7) of the Cod~ of Vir inia~ 1950, as amended. On m©%iOn ©~ ~r. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Danisl, tbs Beard adopted %h~ following resolution: WHEREAS, %he Board of Supervisors has this d~y adjourned into ~xecutive Session. in accordance with a formal vote of the Board, and in accordance with th~ pr0vi$ion~ o~ +~he Virginia F~eedom Of Information Act; and W~EREAS, the Virginia Free, om of Information Act effective ~uly 1, 1989, provides fox certification that such Executive Session wa~ cenduete~ in conformity with law. NOW, THEREPORE~ BE IT P~SOLVED that the Board of County Supervisors does hereby certify that to the besb of each member'~ knowledge~ i) only public business matters la, fully Information Ac[ w~r~ discussed in the ~xecutive SesSiOn ~O which this certification applies, and ii} only such public bu~inea~ matters as were identified in the Me,ion by which the considered by the Board. No member dissents from this cereifi- cation. ~r. Mayes: Aye. ~r. ~ulllvan: Aye. Mr. Currln: Aye. On metion of Mr. Applegate~ secund~0 by Mr. Daniel, th~ Board denied the cta~ cf $2,500,546.36 from Fro-Con Construction Compan~ arising ~rom the construction of the expansion of the Proc=or's Creek Was=~water Treatment ~lant. 8.B. MS. ME~ DONOVAN RRGARDTNC ~OUS~ ~ILL ~66 A%~ TRANSPORTA- ·ION DISTRICTS M~. ~eg Donevan preeentad the BoaI~ with an information packet concerning ~ou~ Bill 46~ relating to local transportation districts; presented a summarization of her research on said issu~ which included data on the legislative intent cf transportation districts, the form and function of House Bill 466, and ~ugge~tion~ fo~ preparing for the impact of transportation districts.' She stated 'she was concerned with the potential ramifications of thm3prepo~ed'laqielati0n because of an upcoming zoning request and a~k~d that the'Board Consider delaying implementation of said leqislation by any mechanism possible and that th~y be aware of th~ impact of local transportation districts on all zoning uaee~ and changes in any development plans. The Board expressed appreciation for ~s. Donevan's concerns and information regarding this matter. lO. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10.A. ~0 CONSIDERAN ORDINANC~ ~O A~ND $~10N 8-~ OF Mr. Ste~aier stated this date and t~ had been advertised ~he County of Chesterfield, I950, ~$ amended, to incrgas~ the monthly tax on talephone service for the Emerq~ncy 9-1-1 System. No one c~a forward tO ~pe~k in favor of or agalna~ the matter, On motion of Mr. ~ulli~an, seconded b7 Mr. Daniel, the Boa~d adopted ~a following ordinance, effactiv~ ~his date, May 23, 1990; BE I~ O~AINED, by the Board' Of SUpervisors of the County of chesUerfield, Virginia, - (1) that Sec=ion 8-3t Of. th~ code..gf ~h~ County of Chasterfield, 1978, as ~m~nded~ i's h~.~ebY ~ended a~ follows: Sac. 8-38. ~oun~ of tax. Pursuant to ~e authority ~et forth in S~ction 58.1-3813 of the cede of Virginia, 1950~ a~ amended, th%re i~ hereby exchange telephone ~ervice~ a tax in th% ~ount of thirty-~ive paid by th~ purchaser to the seller of local e~change tel~phon~ service !or the use by the County %o pay the initial capital, 1O.B. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ~ SECTION 5-8 OF x~ COUNT~COD~TO ~CRI~ASE THE CONFIN~ME~TOFDOGS.A~D. ~r, St~gm~ier stated this date and time had be~n a~vertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend the Code of the Count~ cf Chesterfield, 1950, as ~ffaend~d, to increase the confinement of dogs an~ pound charges. No one came fo~-ard to speak in favor cf or against the matter. 90-423 5123/90 on motion cf Mr. Sulli~ant seCOnded by M~. Applegate~ the Board approved ~ha follnwin~ ordinance, eff~otivm this dat~, May 23, 1990: BE IT O~AINED, by the Bosrd of Supervisors o~ the C~unty of Chesterfield, Virginia, (1) thJt Section 5-8 of the Code of the County of Chester- ~9~, 1978, as amended, i~ hereby amended am follows: sec. 5-8. Confinement and disposition of doqm; pound; redemp- :0 O O (b) Any dog confined under ~ny of %he p~ovisions of hhiz ment, i~ such ~og has not been otherwise di~po~afl of un,er ~e provisions U~ this ~ection, upon pa~snt of the proper fe~z. N0 dog shall b~ released to any person clawing o~ersh~D un=i! proof of current dog l~cense receip~ or tag and current valid vaccination certificate are presented, and by pa~ent to the dog warden o~ ~ fee in the ~ount of twenty ~011ars {$28,0Q) if and twelve dollars ($/Z.00) a ~ay for each a~ditional day t~ereafter. Funds collected under this section shall be dispomed of in the game ~ann~r as dog lie~ns~ tax~g. 10.C. TO CONSIDER T~ CONVEYANCE OF ~ T~AT C~llTAIN TRAC~ OR PARCEL OF I~%RD CONTAINII~G APFROXLMA~Eny 6 ACP~ LOCATED AT THE tBESTERFIELD AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL P~ ~TC~ PARCEL FRONTS APPROXIMATELY 476 FF~T ON W~ITEPINE ROAD AND 1,446 FEET NORTtlWEST OF T~u~WEST Mr. Lewis Wendell starer this date and tim~ had been advertised for a p~blic hearing to consider the conveyance o~ all that certain tract or parcel of land containing approximately 6 acres lo=ate~ at the Ch~sterfi~l~ Airport Industrial Park which parcel fronts ~itepine Road and is located northwes= ~ th~ west line of Reycan Roa~ to Alfit America, Inc. ~ noted Alfit America, Inc. had proposed to purchase other sites in Industrial ~ar~ bu~ they have rejecte~ ~i~ ~i~$ a~ they w~re found to contain w~land~; however, Alfit now wi~h~s to purchase the subjec~ parcel after inspections by a wetland~ consultant. Mr. Robert Dolbear, representing Alfit ~e~icat I~c., present, Theme was no opposition. ~en asked, Mr. Jim Dunn, Marketing Manager ~or the County Economic Development dste~ine wstlands acr~ags in the Industrial Park. He noted that the current market price of ~ropmrty at the ~n~um~rlal Park is $65,00Q per acre. On mo=ion oi Mr. D~iel, secondsd by Mr. Mayas, the appzoved and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the Cc=nty A~inis%rator ~ execute the necessary doc~nt~ for the cunveyance O~ all that certain tract o~ parcel of land con~aining approximately 6 acres, located in ~he Dale Magisterial District of Chesterfield County, Virginia, a= Chas=arfield Airport %nduu~ria! Park, which parcel fronts 90-424 5/23/90 approximately 47~ ~ee~ e~ Whitepine Road and i~ located approximately 1,446 feel northwest of %he west line of Reyoan Road and situated immediately adjacent tn and northwest of 8100 ~fhitepine Road! at a ~os% of $43,000 per acre, to Alfit America, Inc. [A copy of ~aid plat is filed with the papers ~f this Board.1 Vote: Unanimous ll.A. AWArD OF CONTPo%CTFOR CHESTER LANDFI~L~P;%~R$ ~OE. ~. by Mr. Sullivan, fihe Board awarded a construction contrae% to E. T. Energies, Inc./G~ntry Wail Work~ Ino., in the amount of $1.775 million, to repair, recap and in~all m~th~ne an4 leachate re~overy $yst~s ~o~ the Chamfer (Carver Heights[ Landfill Project and authorized the County A~ini~trm%or to execute the necessary ~ocument~ for said contract between Chesterfield County and ~. T. Energies, !nc,/~entry Well Works, Inc. (It im noted the FY1990-91 budget has funds ~o cov~ th~ parents required through June 30r 1991 and thereafter, future contrmct ~ayments will he subject to annual appropriation ll.B. CONSIDerATION OFA PPRO~AL OF CERTAI~ "NON-SCHOOL' OR "NON-EDUCATIONAL" USES OF C~S~RF~LD COUNTY sChOOLS mr. Mica~ $~ated ~hat in January and February, 1990, the School Board and Board of Supervisors, respectively, approved a policy governing "non-educational" uses of County schools that provided that non-school uses not inappropriately compete with free enterprise and that all non-school uses ur categories of non-school uses be approved in advance by both the ~chool Board and Board of Supervisors. He stated subsequent to that approval, the School Board, on April 24, 1998, .approved a li~t of acceptabI~ non-school use ca=egorie~ (a copy Of which is filed with the papers of this Board) and recommended approval of ¥~CA child care pro, cams at Bansley, Crenshaw, Crestwood, Curtis, ~tfrick, Falling Creek, Gordon~ Narrowgate an~ Salem Church schools. He noted that. in order for both the general use and the specific YMCA child Care activities to be permitted for the 1990-91 school year, the Board of Supervisors must and the YMCA child care program matters be discass~d/vo~ed on separately. under Co~ununity or s~rvice C~uba: 1. ~ark$ and R~crea~ien - ~epartment ~onsorcd recreation activities - latchkey pro, rams 90-425 ~I23/90 Board of Supervisors constituents mestlngs public hearing~ planning workshops award and PeCOgniticn activities Churches - religious servica~ - recreation activities Governmental Agencies Community Or Service Clubs - recreation activities 9. Private Sector - awards and recognition cf employees lO. Youth Athletic Associations meetings - awards and recognition activities 11. Political Activities (R%quire local zpon~or) Mr. ~amsey stated that the School ~oar~ racoau~sn~ad approval YMCA child car~ programs at the following schools B~nsley, Crenshaw, Cr~stwood, *Curtis, ~ttrick, *Ealling Creek, *~arrowgate and *Salem Chur~..Element~r~ Schools (*schools were noted the ~ChOO1 Board also recommended new programs at ~eliwoed and Matoaca Elementary Schools if community surveys indicated a need for the programs. Discussion, questions and comment~ ensued ~elative to the caD o! 6~ students at those schools indicated for participation in the YMCA child care activities; concern that there would be a mechanism established whereby these familie~ already involved in th~ YMCA child care program~ et these ~chocIs would bt assured that the program would be aontinue~ for =hem; modification~ to the cap limit ~eOOmm~nded b9 eh~ School Board being reduced but no~ expanded; the n~ers of students included in the "EVerybuddy Progr~" involving ~= handicapped students at Gordon and Fallinq Creek sehool~ and the Y~CA; first choice for enrollment in the progr~ wall b~ offered th~ existing f~ili~s ~ith si~Iings already in the program. Mr. Mayas made a motion to approve the YMCA child care progr~s al Lh~ following ~l~en~ary ~ehoolg~ B~ngl~y, Crenshaw, Crestwood, Ettrick, to include the addition of Bellwood an~ ~r. aamsey stated the reco~endation for ~ose schools ~iO include a cap of 68 Mr. Mayas restated his motion to approv~ th~ Y~CA child cure program~ at the following =l=mentary ~chool~: Be~sley, students enrolled in ~e Y~CA chil~ care programs. Mr. Micas stated the Board did no~ hav~ ~he ability to expand the capacity and the motion was not valid. Mr. Sullivan ma~e a motion, seconde4 by Mr. Mayas, to ~pprov~ the Y~CA child care progr~s as follows: 90-426 5/2~/90 1. approve as recommended the six ~chools~recommended by the $~hOol Boa~d (B~n$1ey, Crenskaw, 'Crestwou~, ~ttrlck, B~llwood and Matoaca Elementary Schools with no cap on the number of student enrollment) am submitted by the Sohool Board; 2. approve as recommended C~rtis, Falling Creek, Rarrowgate and Salem Church ~lementary Schools to be sapped at th~ ~%~b~ previously agreed ~pon b~tw~n day care sector and the YMCA - those numDers being 50 at Curtis, 50 et Falling Creek, 6~ a% ~or~on, 40 at 5arrowgate and 40 at salem Churoh, with th~ proviso that those caps could be adjusted upwa~d~ no higher than 60 bat upwards to acoo~odate families already in the progra~ 3. that there be no ~are a~h0ol additions to this pro,ram by the YMCA without the specific concurrence of ~he day oars private ~e~ter; amd 4. that the YMCA establish a pilot pro,ram in ~he middle schools where today none ~xis~$ exo~p~ for re~reationaI progr~s of ~e Parks and Recreation Department. Discussion en~ued relative to enrollment in the current fivm schools and thtt under the cap of 60 that nO new families will be a~ded; clarification 0f Mr. Suilivan's motion; amendment the notion to include 50 at Salem Elementary School h0 consistent with Falling Creek gl~entary as =hmy are in th~ same District; etc. ~r. currin ~xpr~R~d ~one~n that ~s motion with a cap of 50 would preciuds the addition of new f~ilies and not pha~e out this imsue would b~ reviewed on an annual basis. Mr. Applegate s~a~d he could not support the motion as he felt as i% wo~ld continue to allows the YMCA day car~ progr~ areas would be discriminating including some f~ilies and excluding other~ the: hm did not kn~ if B~llwood and Matoaca were served by private day carm but providing ~ervlc~$ in those areas would be co~Dounding the problem; that he could agree that i~ the service is not available then he could support the facilities, if ~ey pa~ the rent, to provide that service but i~ the service can be handled by the private sector then he f~lt that i~ the way it ought tO ~ handled; concurred %hat the program should be phased out, eta. Mr. Currin concurred and off,red R ~ubstitute motion to Ettrick~ B~llwood and Matoaca ~l~entary ~chool~; that in the schools cf Curtis, Failing Creek, Gordon, ~arrowqate and salem th~ YMCA program remain be= ~ha~ the program wo~ld De phased m~e~s of those f~ilies; that if th~ cap of 6Q cannot be expanded then it would r~ai~. Mr. Applegat~ ~econded the motion. ability tc siz~ approved progr~s with ~he widest discretion and th~ ability to limit said service~; that %her~ i$ no legal ramifiGa=ion as long as there i9 no discrimination ba~ed gender or race; and that the Board iE grandfath~ring existing people using services. Mr. C~rin stated he felt that if =he free enterprise were allowed to bid on the ~¢hOO1 u~es, as the YMCA was to do, whether it wa~ a bid or contract, he did not think a 90-427 5/23/90 problem would exist. Ee stated he agreed that the children are the primary iSSUe of concern in all of this and that if in fact they are in an area that is growing and the private sector does not see tha~ they can compete to accon~odate any new children evsr and ah0v~ what they already havui then the YMCA has the privilege oi offering to do s0 and may he given consideration at that time, Mr. Sullivan stated thatz although the substitute motion is going to phag~ out this program, it is in the best both the YMCA and the private day care providers, that the program wo~ld las% no more than three (3) years. He concern that the substitute motion jeopardizes the current program and its phasing out within the next three (3) years if this motion were approved; it would adversely impact those handicapped indivi~ual~ participating in the programs; and he personally could not support that, Re n%m~d he felt that this program is important to the County and that, while Mr. Applegate is quite correct in thm support that this Moard has for free ente~prise~ he wished to reiterate that there are approximately 240 children now using this program, whose parents are also taxpayers end whose taxes have also paid for those s~hool¢ and if that i~ how they wish their tax dollar to be spent then he would support that. ~e urged the Board to defeat th~ ~uhstltute motion and approve the original motion. Mr. Mayes state~ he believed there was and is a service for day care which was not being provided by the free enterprise system and the YMCA provided that service~ ~hat this Beardr recognizing that no government agency should b~ in competition with the free enterprise $~stem, is attempting to resolv~ tko proSlem and in some way make a fair judgment on how to bring it to a~ ~nd without injuring either the enterprise ~ystem or those f~iliee who have come to depend on that available service provided hy the YMCA. Ee stated ha believed that the two motions under consideration both recognize that the grandfathering conmideration protects families and does not permit them to be cut off until they are fairly phased out of the program; that Mr. Sullivan's motion best addressed that ~ituation and h~ wo~Id s~pp0rt %hat motion. Mr. Applegate called for the q~estion. Mr. Daniel asked if Mr. Sullivan would amend his motion to include the keeping of a ~eri~ of ~{aei~ti~ and th~ ~portinq said statistics tu t_he ~oard next year in terms of those caps and allow for the appkop~iate County organization, whoevur it may be, te track t/tis information to give ~h~ Board proper Mr. Mayes oalled for the question. Mr. Micas stated the vote woul~ be on the substitute motio~ whiu~ wa~ to app=0ve th~ YMCA child care program for Bensl~y, Cr~nshaw, Crestwood, ~tt~ick, B~tlWOO~ and Matoaca ~lementary echcols~ that in the school~ of Curtis~ Fulling Creek, Gordon, Harrcwgate and Salem Church the existing families that are in those schools under the YMCA program remain but that the program would be phased ant over period of a timefram~ as deemed appropriate by the YMCJ~ as they families; that if the cap of 60 cannot be expanded then it would remaiD. Mr. ApplPgate seconded ~he Ayes: ~r. Curxin, ~r. Applegate, Nays: Mr. Sullivan~ Mr. Mayes. Abstention: Mr. Daniel. ~r. Sullivan called for the question on his original motion which was to approve the YMCA child care programs a~ 1. approve as recommended the ~ix ~chools reco~n~nded by the SchOOl BOar~ (~enstey, Crenahaw, Crestwood, ~trick, 90-428 5/23/90 Bellwood and Matoaca Elementary Schools with nc cap on number of ~tudent enrollment) as ~ub~itted by th~ School Board; 2. approve as rseonu~ended Curtis, Falling Creek, Gordon, ~arrewgate and salem ch~ch Elementary Schools %0 be capped at the number previously agreed upon b~tween the day care ~ector and the YMCA - thoee nttntbers being 50 at Curtis, 20 at Falling Creek, 60 at Gordon, 40 at Marrowgate and 40 at Salem Church~ with the proviso that those capa could bm adju~ed u~ward$ no higher than 60 bat upwarde to accommodate families already in the program; 3. that %h~r~ b~ nO mo~e school additions to thi~ progr~ ~y 4. that th~ YMCA establish a. pilot program in 'th~ mid~l~ schools where today none exists except for the recreational progr~s of the Parks and Recreation D~pa~tmen%; And further Mr. ~ullivan ~tmt~ he would accept Mrl Daniel's suggested amendment to include ~he kgeplng of a series of y~ar in t~rm~ of those caps and allow for tko appropriate County organization~ whoever it may 'be,~ to track ~this in~o~ation =o give ~he Board pro~r ~tatis~icSl Mr. Mayes stated he second the amended mo~ion. Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Mayer, & Mr. Daniel. Nays~ Mr. A~plegate, Mr. Cu~zin. and Recreation Program as a Debitted bsa and he wanted clarify his intent. It was generally agreed that it was Mr. $ulllvan's intent retain the Parks and Recreation Proqram as a pe~itted n~ hid motion and nO further action was nO,essa~, RESOLUTION TO CANCEL K~ISTING 1985 ~P~%L OBLIGATION sceooL BOND, ACC~? A ~49~.~, LUIiP ~HCASH PAYMENT ~ROM TH~ V~RG,I~]I.IAPUB~ZC SC.~O0~ AUTBORITYANDAu'£~ORt~ TIlE N~CES~Y OFFICIAL~ TO R"A~CUTE TH~ Ci,0Si]~G DOc~qITS FOR ~HIS TRANSACTION On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded b~ ~r. Sullivan~ the Board 90-429 5/23/90 The Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Chasterfisld, Virginia [the "County") has reselved a written offer dated April 13, lg90 from the Virginia Public School Authority (the "Aukhorihy") to exchange certain outstanding ~eueral obligation school bond~ of the County held by the Authority for (i) a like principal amount of non-callable bonds of the same tenor and (ii) a lump sum cash payment, and the Board had determined to accept ~UCh offer ~nd to iseue general obligation ~ahool refunding bonds in exchanqe for a like principal amount .of aertain outstanding bonds of the county held, and a lump sum payment to be made, by the Authority. NOW, T~R~O~, BE IT ~$0~V~D BY 'x~ ~ O~ S~E~ISO~ OF x~ CO~ OF ~S~IE~, 1. An~o~ization of ~= ~dinq Bonds. The Board bOndS in the amount of $1,500,000 (the "Refu~dinq Bond~") for the purpose 0f refundinq a like principal ~ount of general obliqation ~ohool bond~ of the County ths principal %e~$ of which are set for~ in Exhibit A ~ths "Refunded Bond~"). The issuance o~ the Refunding Bond~ in ~xehanqe for Khe aefunded ~onds and a l~p s~ ~ash pa~ent upon the terms to t~e Authority in exchange for the Refunded Bond~ and lump s~ cash pa~ent ~et forth in E~hibit B. The appropriate officers of the County are hsreby authorized and dirscted ~xchanqe the Refunding Bonds with VPSA for the Refunded Bonds and Lhe l~p ~ cash have the p~inci~al provision~ ~et forth in, and shall be a~ a siugle, typewritten bond substantially in the attacheO hereto as, Exhibit C. ~onds in the principal emcon% of $1,500,000 and to affix the payment of the principal of an~ the interest on th~ Refnnding Bonds authorized by thi= Resolution a= the =~e shall b~come ~ue, the full faith and credi~ of the County are hereby irrevocably pludged, an~ each year while a~y of =he Refunding Bonds shall be outstanding there shall be levied and collected in accordance with law an annual ad valorem uax upon all principal o~ and the interest on the ~efundinq Bonds as such principal and in=crest shall become ~ue, which %ax =hall uther taxes au=horlzed =c b~ levied in the County. exten~ ~s it is excludable' on ~' date of issue of th~ Refunding Bonds. 7. Cer~ifica~. The appropriate officers and agents the County ar~ hereby authorized and directed to 9xecute and deliver the Certificate attached a9 E~iSit D~ including the 90-4B0 5/23/90 8. certification and Filing,. The Clerk of the ~oard is hereby authorizud and directed to file a certified copy o£ this ReSOlution with the Circuit Gourt and, within ten .days thereafter, to cause to be ~bllsh~d once in a newspaper having general circulation in the County a notice scttinq forth (a) in brief and general terms the p~rponen for which the Refunding Bonds are to be issued and (b) th~ amount Of the Refunding Bonds. 9. F~rtber Actions. Each Supervisor and all other nfffcer~r employees and agents of the County are authorized bo take such action as they or any one of them may consider necessary or dssirable in connection with the issuance and exckange of the Refunding Bunds for the Refunded Bends and the lump sum cash payment and to accept and c~mply with the terms of tho offer of the Authority. 10. ~ffootive Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. Vote: Unanimou~ (It is noted a copy of said Exhibits, a~ 'referred to in sai~ re~oluticn, ere f~led with the papers o~ this Board.) ll.D. C~ZSTERFIKI~D CO~NT%r AIRPORT IT]~S ll.D.1. I~TERIM CASH FI~W LOAN FOR AIRI~ORT OPERATIONS F~rND On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved and au%hurizod the Ccunty'Adminietra~or to provide an interi~ cash flow loan in an amount not to exceed $75~000 from the General Fund to the Airport O~erati0ns Fund for cash flow p~rposes for the c~rent fiscal year. There was brief discussion relative t~ ~he-manag~ment study of Airport operations to include the e~am~in~t-ion of several altsrnativ~ methods of operation; current management of the facility by County staff; etc. Mr. Currin stated he had net nn~erstoed that, when the ~oard met with members of the Airport Advisory Board to discuss future plans for the CoDnty Airport, there had been a Beard c~nsensus to ~ugqeet authorizing the proposed study to includ~ alternativ~ operations of the Airport facility by entities ofher than the County; noted he did not personally concur with that; ~n~ asked for further clariiicatien of t. he discuesion~ that' transpired at that meeting. On motion of Mr. kpplegate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan~ tbs Beard cost not to exceed $27,000, to p~r£orm a management study of the County Airport Operations; appropriated $27,000 from th~ Board Contingency Account for said ~tudy; and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents for 90~431 5/23/90 ll.B.1. ~ ~ ~D OF DIRECTO~ On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, %he Doard nominated the followin9 persona to ~erva On the Camp Baker Board of Directors, whose formal~ appoin~nts/reappoin~e~ will be made June 13~ 1990: 1. ~r. James Lumpkin, Dale District; 2. Mr. Robert M. Sta%lworth, Jr.? Midtothian District; MS. Jenlce Mack, Mate&ca District; and 4. Mr. Alfred P. Elko, Richmond Are~ Retarded Association Vote: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Applegate, ~econded by Mr. Mayer, the Board suspended its rules ho allow simultaneous nomination/appoint- ment o~ Ms. Mildred D. Tn~ker and nomination/reappoint~enh of Ms. Lynne Cooper to serve on %he Soulal Services ~oard. Vote: Unanimous On motion cf Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board simultaneously nominated/appointed Ma. Mildred D. Tucker and nominated/reappointed Ms. Lynne Cooper to serve on the 'Social expiye June 30, 1994. Vote: Unanimous I1.P. CONS~'~ II.F.1. ACCEPTANCE OF $22,500 IN ~ BAY YOu're ~ATIONCO~SI~iNDS FORWO~KAL~G 'rflK J;~ES RI~R IN IN ETTRICK P~IVEP~IDE PARK On motion Of Mr, C~rin~ s~conde~ by Mr. Applegat~, ~h~ Board W~ER~$, The Department of Conservation an~ Bi~toric Resources, DivisiOn of Parks an~ R~¢rea~i0n, has established a Chesapeake Bay Youth Conservation Corp~ Proqram; and W~EREAS? The areas of the State eligible IOr Chesapeake ~ay YCC funds include the County of Chesterfield} and WHEREAS, Henricus Historical ~azk is located alon~ ~e J~es River and Ettrick Riverside Park is located adjacen~ %O the Appomattox River, bo~h cf which even=nelly empty into ~e Ch%~ap~ake Bay. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ~SOLVED, that ~he Chesterfield County Board of Sup=rvisors approve allowing ~he Parks and Recrea~i0n D~par~e~t to ~pply for a Chesapeake Bay Youth Conservation Grant of $22,500 to employ youth durinq the S~r trail and clean up ~e trash on the bank. m m m ll.F.2. AWk~ C0NTR~CT FOR CONSTRUCTTON 0~ ;%~HL~T~C FACILIT~ nIGHTING AT IRON BI~DGE PA~K, HUGUENOT ~A~K AND E~OFF E~NTARY SC~OO~ awarded a contract for the construction of athI~tio facility lighting to Commercial Electric, Inc. in the a~ount of $32~500 for Eccff Elementary basketball eo~rts, E~g~enot Park tennis courts and Iron ~ridge Park softbalL, baseball, tennis a~d basketball facilities ~nd authorized the COunty Administrator to execute the necessary doc~ment~ for said contract. (It is noted funds are available from the 1985 and 1989 Bon~ Referendum Issues (1985 ~ron ~ridge ~ark, Phase III Bond Pund~; 1985 Huguenot Park Bond Funds; and 1989 Goyne Park ~ond Funds). ll.F.3. STATE I~0ADACCEPTANCE This ~ay tho County ~nvironmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, mad~ r~pcrt in writing upon his examination of Arhoretl~m Place and A~b~retum Parkway, Clov~r Hill District. Upon consideration whereof, end on mo~ion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Apptegate, it is resolved that Arboretum Place and Ar~oret~ ~rkway, Clover ~ill District, De and they h~reby are e~tabli~hed ag public roads. An~ be i~ further regolved, that %h~ Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby ig requested to ~ake int~ the Secondary System, Arboret~ Place, beginning at ~ in%ersuc- tion wi~h Midlothlan Turnpike, U.S. Route 50, and goinq sou~erly 0.04 mil~, then turning and going southeasterly mil~, ~he~ turning ~nd going southerly 0.10 mile %0 ~nd at the beginning at tbu int,=section with A~ch Road, S=ate Route 672, and ~oing ~outheast~rly 0.rS mile to the inters~ctlon mer~ with the southwest bound collector lanes of Parkway Extension, $=a=e Route 76. tangents. These roads serve adjacent con~ercial properties. And bs it further resolved, that the Board of Supervi~or~ guarantees to the Virginia Dep~x~unt of Transportation variable wid~ 65~ to 2tI~ right-of-way for Arboretum Place and a variable width ~5' to 240' right-of-way for Parkway. Corrected Plat o~ Dedication of Arboret~ Parkway. Plat Book 65, Page 55, M~ch 6, 19~9. D~dioatio~ of Arboretum ~Iace. ~lat Buck 69, Pa~ss 73 & 74, February 5~ ]990. This day the County ~nviror~sntal =ngineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Ap~ma=ioa ~ane and E1va~s Lane in Matoax Hundred, Section 1, Matoaca Distrlct, ~0-433 Upon consideration whereof, and on motion cf Mr. Currin, seconded by M~. Applegate, it is resolved that Apa~atlca Lane and Elva'~ Lan~ in Matoax ~undr~d, Section 1, Matoaca District, be and they hereby are established as public roads. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Depart~ent of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary system~ Apanatioe Lane, beginnin? at the inter~ectioa with Bradley Bridge Road, State Route 631, and going south- easterly 0.09 mile to the intersection with E1va's Lane, then southeasterly 0.08 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Elva's Lane, beginning at the intersection with Apamatica' LaPs and going easterly 0.07 mile, then turning and going southeasterly 0.11 mile.to end in a temporary turnaround. This request is inclusive cf the adjacent slope, sight distance end designat%d Virginia Department of Transportation drainage These roads serve 29 lots. And be it further resolved, that the ~Qard Of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a rlght-o~-way for all of these roads. This section of ~atoax Kundred is resorded as ~olluws: Section 1. Plat Bock 59, Pags~ 23 s 24~ Ncv~ber 9, 19~7. Vote: Unanimous This day the County ~nvironm~nta~ Engineer, in accordance with directionm from this Board, made report in writing uDcn his examination of Munter~ll L~ue, ~unt~rs~ell Place and Hunters- dell T~rrace in BOa Air Forest, Section A, Midlothian District. Upon eonmid~ratien whereof, and on motion of Mr. Currin, seconded hy Mr. Ap~legate, it is resolved that Huntersdell Lane, Huntersdell Blace and Hunt~r~d~ll T%rrace in Ben Air Forest, Mention A, Midlothian District, be and they hereby are ~mtahlimhmd as public roads. AD~ be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it h~rsby is requested to take into the tion with Old Ben Air Rcad~ State Route 718, end going north- then confirming northwesterly 0.06 mile tn the intersection inter~sction with Hunter~dell Lane and going northeasterly 0.03 This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department o~ TranspOrtation drainage guarantees to the Virginia Dep~rtment of Transportation a 50~ which has a 40' right-of-way. ~ectlon A. Plat Book 49, ~age 73, J~ne ~6, 1955. This day %he County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Huntersdell Place in Ben Air Fore~t~ Section B, Midlothian District. upoD ¢on~ider~fion whereof, and on '~otion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Applegate, it i~ rW~clved that Huntersdell Place in Ben Air Forest, Section D, Midtothian District, be and it hereby is established as a public road. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of S~ccndary System, Huntersdell Place, beginning at existing HuntersdelI ~lace, State Acute number to ~e assigned~ and goin~ northeasterly 0.02 mile to ~nd in a cul-de-sac. This ~equ~st ix inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Departm~n~ of Transportation 'drainage This road s=rves ? lots. guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 40' right-cf-way ~or this road. S~etion B. Plat Book 49, Page 90, July 11, i985. ll.F.4. DONATION OF VEHICLE Fi~OM HR-. GORDON DROI~{E~.T.RR TO LUCY CORRNURSIN~ ~0~ On motion o~ Mr. Currin~ $~on~ed by Mr. Applegate, ~he ~oard accepted the donation of a 1987 Mercury, Sable, four-door sedan from Mr. ~ordo~ Dru~heller to the Cheeter£iel~ County ~nrsing ~oms to provide n~oesSary transportation for volunteers a$~i~iug iD the fa=ilities' motivi~ies program. Vete~ Unanimous The Board asked that staff express a~preciatien to Mr. Drumheller for his generosity. ll,F,~, REQUEST ~)~ ~I~C,O/F, AFFI,~ P~F,.'~LIT On motion of ~r. Currin, seconded by ~r. Applegat~, t~e Board approved a r~uest for a raffl~ parfait from the ~ening Athletic Association, Inc. ~ur calendar year 199O. Vote: Unanimous lI.F.6. S~T DATR~ FOR I~UBLIC ~GS lt.F.6.&. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ~24~D $~CTION 15.1-12 OF THE CODE OF THE COUNT~ OF CKESTEliFIELD~ 1978, AS A~D~D, BY ADD:L~IG A I~W SEC~g~ 15.I-22.5 RELATING TO ~F6ZZLE~AOADING RIFI~S on motion of M~. Currin, seconded by Mr. Applegat!, th~ Board set the date of J~ne 13, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing te consider an ordinance to amend the Coda of th~ County of 90-435 5123/90 che~terfie_l~, t978, as amended~ relating to muzzle-loading rifles. Vote: Unanimous ll.F.6,b. TO CON$I~ER;~N ORD~ ~Oi%~ND '~'~ CODB OF ~OUNT~OF C~IESTERFIELD~ 1978, AS AMENDED, SECTION 21.1-127(f) ~T~NG ~ 0n mo~ion of Mr. currin, ~econd~d by ~r. Applegat~, the set ~= dar= of June 13, 1990 at 7:0Q p.m. for a public hearinq 5o consider an 0rdinanc~ to amen~ the Code of the Count~ of Ch~ster~i%ld, 1978, a~ ~nded, relating to landfills. Vote: Unan~ous On motion of Mr. Ourrin, seconded ~y Mr. Apple~ake, khe appropriated $1~000 from the available funds in the existing limit and "No Fishing'~ signs on Woolridge Road and adopted the following and approaimately 0.6 mile south of Genlto Road crossing the 8wif= Creek Reservoir is not a state maintained road; and WI~BPd~AS, Sections 46.2-878 and 46.2-1300 of =he COO~ of virginia enable %h~ Board of Supervisors to establish speed maintained; and WSE~S:~ ..A /ar~ff~c _.engip~eriDg investigation has. been cumpl=~=d for this sec=ion of woolzidge Road; and W~AS, The increase in traffic on Woolri6ge Road and ~s lack of adequate faciliti~ for fishing activities on th~ box culverts]bridges on Woolridge Road c~eate an'~nmafe NOW, THE~F0~ BE IT ~SOLVED, that the Chestezfield County Board of Supervisors h~reby eStablL~h~ a 35 ~P~ ~peed limit on Woolrid~e Road between Genito Road and approximately and SuCh decreased speed limit shall be effective when 35 MPH speed l~it ~igns are installed. AND, BE IT FURTHER ~SOLVED, ~at the Board approves prohibition of fishing activity on %he thre~ Woolridge Road Vote: Unanimous 11.6, COHMUNt~";DE~ELOPM~NT ITEMS On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded ~y ~r. Applegate, the Board approved the. cost for a street lipht installation at the inter~ection of Jean Drive and Reymet Road, in the amount o~ Road Fund. Vote: Unanimous .! After a brief dissuasion, it was on motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Appl~gate, re~o!v~ to defer until Jane 27, 1990 obtaining cost estimates for the installation of a street light at the following locations: 1. ~etween 2336 en~ 2342 Buena Vista ~oulevard, Bermuda District; and 2. C~l-de-sac, end of Specks Drive, Clover Hill District. Mr. Currin stated he wished to di$cus~ with staff the location between 2336 and 2342 Buena Vista Boulevard. On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved obtaining a cost estimate for the installation of a ~trest light at the intersection ef Lucks Lane and Walton s!uff Parkway in the Midlothian District. Vote: Unanimous UTILITIES DEPARTMENT ITRMS ll.H.1. CONSI~TT0 I~PRESENTATIO~B~ ~CGUI~ WOODS, I~%TTLEAND BOOTW IN MULTI~]IAISDICTIONALN~GOTIATIOW$ ~ITH THE On mCtlou of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by ~r. Applegate, the Board consented to the provision of generic advice to a group of eleven local governments owning and operating publicly owned sewage treatment works (POTW Group) throughout the Commonwealth by Mr. David E. Evan~ and ~h~ fi~m of McGuire, Woods, ~&ttle and Booths which jurisdiction~ include the Citie~ of Richmond, Alexandria~ ~$mptce an~ Lynchburg and the Co~ntie~ of Arlington~ Ch~terfietd~ Pairfax and Prince William; and furt~her ~uthoxized the County A~iministrator to ~ign a letter cenaenting to Mr. ~an~ and McGuire, Woods, Battle and Booth~'s representation of the County in negotiation~ with the state Water Con~rol Board ("SWCB") on toxicity standards. no,ed that said letter indicates it is Mr. Evans' understendin~ that Chesterfield County consents to McGuire, Woods, Battle and Boothe's repr~$eneation cf olient~ in land usa, tax and other matters directly adverse to 'Chesterfield COUDty, including litigat£on which may arise from these representations, at the same ti~e they are doing work for the ~W Group and said consent also extends to future clientm and future adverse to Chesterfield County, ~s long as they do ncc involve issues on which the POTW Group may be advised. It is noted copy of said letter is iiled with the papers of this Vote: ll.H.2. CONSENT IT~4S MI$~ION ~0 ~CROAC~'ON AN EX~STING 16 ~ ~ ON ~T i8~ B~ J, SECTION E~ G~IE~ SG~I~T~IO~ approved the request frem ~r. william A. Cri~p and M~. Alice E. Cri~ to encroach on an e~isting 16' ~a~me~% on ~Q~ 10, Block J, Section E, Greenfiel~ Subdivision, to acco~odate potions c~ a deck and ~cr~n porch, subject 20 the execu%iun of a license agre~en2, with the understanding that they be re2pon~ible for any d~age to th9 ~tructurs if i= interferes with County maintenance of the facilities prez~ntly located in 90-437 5123/90 the easement and any future faciliti'e~ the County sees fit to install in the easement. (A copy of said plat is ~iZed with the papers of this Board.) ll.H.2.b. APPROVAL OF U~ILITIES CONTRACT FOR HAHP~TF~.__I~ACE, SECTION i On motion of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. ~aye~ th~ Board approved th~ followin~ Utilities contract and authorized the Contract %~9-0919, ~ampstead Place, Section Dev~10per~ Stoney Glen West Associ&t~s Contractor: I.P.K. Excavating Company Contract Amount: Estimated Total - Total Estimated County Cost: We~er (Ov~r~iziDg) ~ $ 27,681.45 [Refund thru connections) Wastewater (Qvezsi~ing) - $ 8,806.10 =s=ima=e~ Developer Cost: $20~,512.45 Cede: (water 0versisinq) (Wastewater dye/sizing) 11.H.2.c. i~Pp~OV/~OF CO~TRACT FOR NEWB¥'S BRIDGE ROAD WATER LINE On mo~ion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded by Mr. Nayes, the Board approved the following wate~ line extension contract and authorized the County Administrator to execute any Con=tact ~87-0146, N~wby's Bridge Road Water Line Contract Amount: E~timated Total - $ Total Estimated County Water {Oversizing) - $ 22,255.75 (Refund thru connections) Water (offside] - $ ~,6~7.50 (R=fund thru connections) Code; (Oversizing) 5H-58350-890732 vote= Unanimous ll.H.2.d. CONSID~P~TION OF A RAILROAD AGREF/V~NT FOR A ~A%STE- On mO~ion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded b~ Mr, Mayer, the Board approved an agremment between Chesterfield County and CSX Corporation to install and maintain a wastewater p~De ~ro~sing the CSX TransportS%ion ~hd Right-of-Way e~ Trackage at a point 2~8 feet north of Milepost A-13 in the .C~nty in chester, Virginia, -whiGh ac~iOh- i~- ne%%~s~Y~ '"i'h-'"o~der to replace an existing wastewater line on ~he CSX Transportation Right o~ Way that is causing maintenance problems and has caused blockages; and further authorized the COUnty Administrator to ex,cute the necessary documents for said rail:dad agreement subject ko approval as to form by th®.County AttOrney. HOI~NER, JR. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr, Mayas, the Board accepted on behalf of the County the conveyance of a parcel of land, containing 0.112 acres along ~enito Read from Mr. Alden J. Mornei, Jr. and MS. Sara $. Morner and authorizsd the Administrator to e×~out~ the necessary deed of dedicatlcn. copy cf said plat is filed with the papers ct this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ALONG HILL AND TIPTON STP. EET$ FROM On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board accepted on behalf of th~ County ~he conveyano~ o~ a .Q0~ acre of land along Hill Street and Tipton Str~t f~om Mr. Carl D. ~denauer and ~s. Diana D. Adenauar and authorized the Connty Administrator to execute the n~c~SSary deed of dedication. {k copy of said plat is filed with ~]a paper~ of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous 11.~.2.~.3. ALONG JEFFERSON DAVIS ~GI]WA¥ FI%0~ }IR...~_.A__D~_ TAYLOR, JR. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayss, the Board accepted on behalf of the County the conveyance of a 20~ s=rip of land alon~ Jefferson Davis Highway fron Mr. Paul Taylor, Jr. and authorized th~ County ~inis~rator to execute the necessary deed of dedication. (A copy of said plat is filed with ~hs papers of this ~o~rd.) 11.~.2.~.4. ALONG ROBIOUS ROAD~RO~ B~$ETT & C0~ANY On motion cf Mr. Sullivan, seconded by M~+ Mayu~, th~ Board accepted on behalf of the County the conveyance of a variable width strip of land along Robious Road from Base,it & C~pany~ A Virginia Bartn~r~hip, and authorized tka County Administrator to execute the necessary deed of dedication. (A copy Of said plat is ~iled with the papers of %his Board.) Vote: UnanLmous ll.H.2.e.5. ALONG JEFFERSON DAWI$ HIGHWAY COI'~'AN~/~__]~.~. O~ motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr, Mayas, the Board accepted the conveyanc~ of a 25' strip of land along Jefferson Davis Eighway from Advance Storen C~pany, Incorporated, A Virginia Corporation, and authorized the County ~dmini~=~ator to ax~cate th~ necessary deed of d~dication, (A copy of said plat is filed with the papers of th~s Vote: Unanimous ll.M.3. I~tPRTG Mr. Welehons prsssnted the Beard with a report on the developer water and ~ewer =entr~cts executed by the County A~h~inietrator. 90-439 5/23/90 ADDITIONS KINGS g0P~ST - S~CTION 10 Route 38~1 (Thistly Street) - FrOm Route 3800 to Route 3802. 0.12 Mi. Route 3802 (Thierry Court) - From 0.07 mile Southwest Route 380I to 0.06 milo Northeest PGWDERHAM - SECTIONS F & G, A & B (Effective 5/8/907 Route 1257 (Rl~mer~ D~iv~) - From ~.12 mils ~ast Route 106S to Route 711. Rout~ 4161 IGlendower Courtl - From Route 1868 to ' 0.15 mile ~orth route 1068. Route 4162 (~osham Court) - From Route 4166 to 0.05 mile East Route 4156. Route 4163 Drakewood Circle} - From Reute 4166 to 0.06 milo South Route 4166. Route 4~64 Drakewood Court) - From Route 4166 to 0.09 mile Southwest Route 4166. Route 4166 Drakewood Road) - From 0.04 mile Northeast Ro~to 1068 to Rout~ 4162. Route 4166 ~osham Lan~) - From 0.13 mile North Route 1068 to Route 416~. Rout~ 4167 (Cawood Drive) - ~ron Route 4166 to Route 711. Route 4158 Drakewoo~ Terrace) - ~xom Route 416~ to 0.15 mile South Route 4t66. 0.37 Mi. 0,15 Mi, 0.05 Mi, 0.05 ~i. O.OB ~i. 0.59 0.13 Mi. 0.I2 Mi. 0.13 Route 4166 - Bosham Lane [Old Roule 1085) - From Route 1068 to 0.13 ~ile North Route 106~. 0.13 Mi. I1.J. R~RCN~TI~q~ SESSION On motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded by Mr. Applegete, the Board went into ~xecative $~ssicn pursuan~ to ~eo~ioe 2.1-344 {a) (7) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, for con~ultation with legal counsel regarding ~ettl~ment of probable litigatieD involving Chinaberry Drive-Boulder~ Boulevard and pursuant to Section 2.1-~44 (e) (3} ol ~h~ ~p_~ uf Vir~j~nia, 1950, as amended, for discussion of the condition, acquisition or u~e Of publicly held property, and pursuant to Section 2.1-344 of the Cod~ of Virqinia, 1950, ss a~ended, to discuss personnel matters relating to the Capital Region Airport Commission. Vote: Unanimous RecOn~ening: On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Appl9ga=e, the Hoard adopted the following resolution: WHEREASr the Board of Supervisors has this day adjourned into Executive Session in ac¢or~anQE with a formal vote of the Board, and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia ~r~dom Cf Information Act; and WHEREAS, the Virqinia Freedom o~ Information Act effective July t, 1989~ provides for certification that such Executive Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RES0LV~D that the Board of County SupErvisors doeu hereby certify that to the be~t Of EaEh member's kn0wl~dqe, L) only public business matters lawfully exempted fro~ open ~eeting requirements under ~he ~reedom of Information Act were discussed in the E~ecutlvs Session to which this certification applies, and i~) Only such public business matters as were identified in the Motion by which the considered by the Board. No member dissents from thi~ c~rtifi- cation. Thc Board b~ing polled, the vote wes as follows: Mr. Daniel: Aye. Mr. Mayee: Aye. Mr. Applegate: Aye. Mr. Sullivan: Aye. . Mr. Currin: Aye. lI.K. LUNCH The Board recessed &t 1:00 Howle~t'e Tavern for ~uech. p.m. (DST) %o tn,vel to John 11.L. ~EQUEZT FOR MOBILE HOM~S 905N0208 In Bermuda Magisterial District, WILLIAm4 AND PATRICIA ULHICH request a Mobil~ ~ome Permit to park a mobile home on ~ro~erty £renting the south line of Velds Road~ approximately 300 feet west of Jefferson Davis Highway, a~ b~ttar known as 2~21 Velds Roa~. Tax Map 82-13 (I) Parcel 2 {Sheet 23). This is the applicants' first permit request. However, other~ have parked the same mobile home on the property since 1973. Mr. Jacobsen presented a su~ary of Ca~e 90S~0288 and ~tated staff recommended approval, with the provision that the mobile home be occupied by the applicants~ danqhter and her i~dia%~ family only. 90-441 Mr. and Mrs. William Ulrich stated the recommended conditions were acceptable+ ~h~re wa~ no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by ~r. Appleqate, the Board approved Case 90S~0208 ~cr seven (7) years, subject to Standard Conditions 2 through 7 and amended Standard Condition l= 1. The mobile home shall be occupied by ets applieaDt$' ~aughter, P~ela Sprouse, and her immediate family only+ 2. Ne lot or parcel may be rented os leased for use az a mobile home site, nor shall any mobile home he used for rental property. Only On= (11 motile home shall be permitted to be parked on an individual lot 0r parcel. 3. Thc minimum lot sizE, yard setbacks, required ~ront yard, and other zoning recfuirement~ of the epplicabl~ ~Oning district shall b~ complied with, except that no mobils home shall be located closer khan 20 feet to any existing residence. 4. No addi=ional permanent-type living space may he adde~ Onto a mobile hom~. All mobile h~em shall be skirted but shall no___~tbe placed on a permanent foundation. 9. Where public (County} water and/or sewer are available, they shall he used. 6. Upon being granted a Mobile Moms Permit, the ~ppllcant shall then obtain the necessary permits from the Office of the Building Official, This shall be done prior to the installation or relocation of the mobile homo. Any violation of the ab0vu conditions shall b~ grounds for revocation of the ~ebile Home Permit. Vete~ In Clover Hill Magisterial District, requeste~ rescuing from Agricultural (A) to ~esidential A single family residential subdivision i~ planned. This request lies on a 39.5 acre parcel ~reefing approximately 1,26~ feel on the south line of Genito Road, approximately 2,000 f~et west of Woolridge Road. Tax Map 46 |1) Parcel 57 {Sheet 12). Mr. Jacobsen stated the applicant has requested a ninety (90} day deferral of Ce~e $95N033~. Mr. Duff ~a~ley, the ninety (90) day deferral to furthe~ discuss concerns wi~h star!. There was no opposition pre~n~ 'to the request for deferral. On motion of ~r. Applegate, seconded ~y Mr. Sullivan, the Hoard deferred Case 89SN0333 to August 22, 1990. Vote: Unanimous 905N0118 In Midlothian Magisterial District, ROBERT D. BAI~I~EX requested r~zoning fr~m Agricultural (~) t~ Con~nuni~y Business (C-3} ~n a 2.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 260 feet on the north line of ~idlothian Turnpike, approximately 1,620 fee~ west of Winterfield Road. Tax Map 15-6 (1] Part of Parcel t (Sheet 7). J i Mr. Jacobsen stated the applicant has requested a t/~irty (30} day deferral. Mr. Jerry Barney, representing the applicant, requested a thirty {30) day deferral to further discuss concerns ~i+_h staff. Thoro wa~ no opposition to the request for a deferral. On mo%ion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board deferred Case 90SN0118 until JuDe 27, 1990. Vote~ Unanimous In Clover Hill Magisterial District, GEORGE B. SOP;ERS, JR. rezoninq (Case 88SN0032~ relative to density and average lot size in a Residential (a-12) District. This request lice On a 5§.68 acre parcel fronting approximately 822 feet cn the line o~ Lucks Lane, approximately 600 feet west of Abingdo~ Road. Tax Map 38-1 (1) Parcel 25; Tax Map 38-1 (7) ~oplar Creek, Lot 1; Tax Nap 35-1 (6) Poplar Creek, Lets 1 through 12 and 27 through 51; and Tek Map 38-5 (3) Poplar Creek, Lots 13 through 2~ (Sheet 14). Mr. Jacobsen stated the Planning Commission d~ferred Case 99SN0139 for sixty (60) day~ and, a~ a result, the Board cannot aut on the requus~ a~ this time and must defer the request p~nding %he Co~is~ion's action. Mr. Tom Relier, the applicant, stated a sixty (60) day deferral wa~ acceptable. There was no opposition to the deferral. On motion o~ Mr. Appleqat~, ~eeonOeO by Mr. Sullivan, the Beard deferred Ca~e 90$NQ139 until July 25, 1990. Vote: Unanimous 90S~0140 Tn Matoaca Magisterial District, MIFd~ ~ requeste~ rezoning from Aqr~cultnral (A) to Residential [R-25) of 7,4 acres, plus amendment to proffered con~it~on~ on ~69.6 acres of an existin~ zoned Residential (R-25) tract. A S~ngle family residential ~ubdivinion ie planned. Theee requeets lie ez a total O~ 277 acres which fronts approximately 3,400 feet on the west fine of Bradley Bridge Road, aerate from ~lebe Point Road. T~x Map 131-2 (1} Part of Parcel 1~ Tax Map 131-9 (1) Parcel 1, and Tax Map 131-14 (1) ParceI 1 (Sheet 40). Mr. Jacobsen presented a sul~mary of Case 90S~014Q and state~ the Planning Commission recor~mended approval and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. Mr. Cuzrln ~isclosed ~o the Board t-hat he owns proper~y adjacea~ to the subject site, declared a conilict of interest puzeuan~ to the virginia Comprehensive Conflict cf Intereet Act and excused himself from th~ m~eting. Mr. Tom Balzer, representing the applicant~ erased the recommendation was acceptable. There was no opposition present. When asked, Mr. Balzer indicated ~eptlo eyeteme/drainfielde would be utilized. Mr. Mayes stated he felt there was insufficient information in the Requeet Analysis to determine the applicant'e intention for sewage disposal and fel~ the request should be deferred for thirty (30) days se he could be inf0rmeO of such information, On motion of Mr. Mayes~ seconded by Mr. Daniel, th~ Board deferred Case 90SN0140 until June 27, 19~0. 90-443 Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appleqat~, ~. DaniEl Absent; Mr. Cumin. Mr. Curr£n returned to ~he meeting, 90S1~0152 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, ~VIR~ ~. C~/~TER rcqvest~ rezoning from Agricultural (Al to Community Business (C-3) on a 1.58 acre parcel fronting approKi~tely ~93 feet on the north linc of Hull Street Road, approximately 204 feet east of S~ncre~t Drive. Tax Map 49-7 (1) Parcel 10 (sheet 14). Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 90SN0152 and s~ated the Planning Commission recommended approval of a single condition and acceptance of thc applicant's profferc~ conditions. Mr. Mike Ca,tar, representing the rscommendc~ condi=ion was asceDtable. present. applicant, stated the There was nc oDDositicn On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board approve~ Case ~0SM0152, subject to the fo!lowing condition: Tbs minimum required side and rear yard setback~ adjacent to Tax ~ap 49-7 Parcels 3~ 12~ and 13 shall be maintained as a buffer. At the rims of site plan review, the ~xae& %rea~msnt of the b~ffer an~/er screening shall bs approved by ths Planning Department. At such time that adjacent properties are soned or utilized for nOn-re~idential uses, this buffer shall b~ eliminated. (NOT~: Prior to release e£ a building permit, site plans must be submitted fo~ review and approval.) And further, the Board accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. Prior kO obtaining a bvilding p~rmit, one e~ the following ~hall b~ accomplished for fire protection~ A. For ~uilding permits ebtained On er b~fore June 199~, the ownsr/developer ~hatl pay to the County $150 per 1~00~ square lest of gro~s floor area. If the building permit is obtained after J~n~ 30, I991, the amount of the required payment ~hall be adjusted upward or dcw~nward by ~he same percentage ~hat the Marshall Swift Building Cost Inde× increased or dccrmased between June 30, 1991, and thc date of payment. With the approval of the County's Fire Chief, the owner/developer shall rsceive a credit toward the required payment for the cost of any firs suppression $~stem not otherwise requlrsd by law which i~ included a~ a part of th~ d~velot~m~nt. OR system not otherwise required by law which the County's Firs Chief determines substantially reduces abe need for County facilities otherwise necessary fQr fire pro,teflon. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or within sixty (60) days ~rom the date of approval of this rescuing request by the Board of supervisors, whichever occurs fi~t, additional right of way and easements along Street Read as identified on the current VDOT construction plans for the widening of ~ull Street Road (Reu~e 360) shall be dedissted, free and Unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. Prior tO the issuance of any occupancy permits, additional pavement~ curb and gutter shall be constructed along Route 360 for the entire property frontage. 90SN0154 In Matoaca Magisterial District, B~I~GE~ KING CO~ORATION requested amendment to Conditional U~ Planned Develot~ment (Case $5S01~) relative to setbacks. This request lie~ in a Co~mnity Bovine55 [B-2} District on a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 100 feet on the south llne of Hull s~reet Road, al~o fronting approximately 250 fe~t on the east line of Genlto Road, and located in the southeast g~adrant of ~he intersection of these ~oad~. Ta~ Map 49-10 (1) Part of ~arcel 48 (Sheet 14). ~r. Ja¢0bs0n presented a summary o~ Case 90SNO154 and ~tated the Planning Co, isaiah race--ended approval subject te certain conditions and acceptance of the applicant'~ p~offered condition. Mr. Dan Slosh, representing th~ applicant, stated tho recommended conditions were a~ceptabl~; Ther~ ~as no opposition present. When asked why the R~que~t Analysis indicated staff had recommended denial of the case, Mr. J&cobs0n explained that staff, after discussion at the Planning Commission meeting, concurred that the re~uested use wa~ not over-development of the subject site. Me~r~. Daniel an~ Sullivanstatad they had concerns regarding the request; therefo~e~ ~r. Currin indicated the r~qnest would be placed in i~s regular sequence on the agenda for discussion. ~0~0170 CHURCH requested Conditional Usa to permit a private school in an Agricul~u=al (A) District. This request lies on a 2.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 140 feet on the $o~%.~ llne Lucks 5eno, approximately 420 feet west of Westcree~ Drive. Tax Map 3S-1 {1) Part of Parcel 2 (Sheet 14). ~r. Jacobsen presented a summary of Cas~ 905~0170 and Mr. Don Gorley, representing the applicant, ~%ated the opposition ~resent. When asked, Mr. MeCrack~n indicated transportation concerns were ~uffieiently addressed. On motion of Mr. Appleqate, ~cOnd~d by ~r. S=ll'ivan~ the approved Case 9~SN0170, subject %o the following conditions: 1. The following conditions notwi~standing, th~ plan prepared ~y Bodie, Taylor and P~ryear, Incorporated, dated January 5~ 1990~ 'shall b~ considered the plan development. 2. The public water ~y~um shall be used. (U) 90-445 5/13/90 The public wastewa%ex system shall hs used for any buildings beyond the proposed addition to the existing ~uilding~ am shown on tke plan Of development. At such time that public wastewater is ¢~tended to serve the proposed buildings, all structures shall be connected to thc public wastewater system. (U) And ~urther~ the Board accepted the following conditicn~ ~rior to operation of any buildings far a school use, or within 60 days from the date of approval o£ this rescuing request by the Board of Supervisorsr whichever occurs first, additional right of wsy and easements, as indicated on the approved cnnstruction plans for the widening of Lucks Lane shall be d~dicated, free add unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Ch~ct~rfi~td County. Vote: Unanimous proffered 89~N0353 In Matoa~a Magisterial District, '~¢~IA ~. POWEbL, ET AL. requested rezoning from Agricultural (Al to Residential (R-15). A sinqle family residential subdivision is planned. This request lies on a 4.9 acre parcel fronting approximately 421 feet on th~ northeast line of Marrowgate Road, also fronting approximately 795 fee: on the southwest line of Happy Hill Road, appro×i~ately 8QO f~et west of Tetris Lane. Tax Map 132-12 (4} Garden City ~ight~, Lots lS and 20 (Sheet 41). Mr. Pools presented a sur~ary of Case 895N0353 and stated the Planning Ccn~nission reco~n~nded approval of the request subject to certain conditions. He further noted that, ~ince the Board last considered thin r~qU~st, ~%af~ has periodically be~n contact ~ith Mr. Powell to discuss the ~pact of the r~c~ended buffers along ~appy Hill and Harr~gate Roads; as r~ult ~f these ~iscu~i0ns~ staf~ prepared two alternative plans depicting possible lot la, outs with and wi~kout the reco~ended fifty (50) foot buff~r~ which h% ~plain~d and applicant, were attached %o the Request Analy~is; and abated ~taff r~ains steadfast in it~ reeo~endation for maintenance of a fifty (50) foot buffer along both Happy ~ill and ~r. Horace Howell, a ~o-owner of ~e subject proper:y, distributed copies of his proposal to the Board an~ explained ~h~ dutail~ of hi~ proposal versus ~taff's proposals; reque~t~ a reduction in the reco~ended buffers; expressed concern that the reco~nded fifty {50) foot buffers along Harrowgate and ~appy Hills Roads would reduce the number of Io%s that could be developed on ~e subject site: stated he did not intend to develop said property until such tim~ ~$ p~blic w~ter and were available to serve the proposed lot development; and stated he had made every effort to compromise and address utaff'u concerns rulutLve to this project. ag~ tO btilize public sewer facilities On the pr0j~et; clarification on ~he reduction to the size of the buffers reco~ehde~ by scarf and said impact on the subject advantages/disadvantages cf the reco~ended fifty (58) r~i~ica~ions o~ ~he-buffpr i~sue; the ~xpense of additional 90-~46 5/23/90 fees the applicant would have to pay if the request, were deferred eo an additional proffer ccul~ be offered; closinq of the public hearing; etc. After further discussion, Mr. ~ayes made a motion, seconded by Mr. Applegate, to a~prevs Case 89SN0353 to permit the d~veloDment of seven {7) lots with ~ive {5} foot bn£fars along sappy Hill and Hnrrowgate Roadst subject to the following csnditionz A f~ve (5} foot buffe~ strip, exclusive of casements and req~±red yarde, shall be ~t~blished and maintained adjacent to ~arr0wgate and Happy ~ill ROads. The ar~a of these buffer etrlps shal~ a~th~r be left in their natural state, if sufficient vegetation ~xlste te provide edequa~e screen- lng; or be planted and/or bermed in acsordance with a landscape plan approved by the Plannin~ Department, if sufficient vegetntio~ do~ not exist to provide adequate Screening. ~rier to approval of any final site plan or cordation of any plat, the ~eveloper shall flag these buffer strips for ~nspeetion, and shall post a bond to cover the implementa- tion of the landscape plan, if ~uch plan is. required. E~cept for ~pprovsd public road ~ccess{es), nc access shall be permi{~ed through these buffer ~trips. These buffer strip~ shall be noted on any finaA sit~ p~ans, and any~final ch~ck and recordation plats. The Planning Commission or th~ Director of Planning may modify this condition at the time of t~ntatlve eubdivieion review. Messrs. Daniel and B~llivan concurred that the reduct~o~ of the reco~T~ended bufi=rs from fifty {50} feet to five (5) f~t would place traffic too ctos~ to the proposed ~evelopm~nt which is located along roads identified as major arterials, would compound noise pollution and glare from these roads~ etc.t ~r. Sull~van stated he could ~ct support the request based on %h~ health, safety and welfare of those citizen who would be impacted by thin request; Mr. Daniel suggested the casa be deferred until ~uch ~ime as right-of-way and other ~ransportatien co~ccrn~ were defined and re~01ved; Mr. Applegete referenced a recently approved rezonlng toques= in this vicinity. M~. Daniel euggeshed the request he deferred for six (6} months ~o determine the marketability of the subject property. Mr. Mayes withdr~w his motion :e approve Cate 89SN0353 to permit the development of seven (7) lots wXth five (~) foot buffers along ~appy Kill an~ aerrowgate Roads. Mr. Applegate withdraw his second. Qn ~otien of Mr. Mayee, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the deferred Ca~e SPSN035A until Novmmbar 28, 1990. Mr. Currin ~uggested the applicant consult a p~olessional engineer and/or marketability expert to assist him with his request. ~r. ~icas note~ =hat a~tion mupt bu taken on the request within twelve months and the= period Would expire in October, 1990. Mr. Applega%e made a substitute motion to defe~ Case 89SN03~$ until Octobsr 24, 1990. Mr, Mayes ~eeonde~ the motion. Vote: Unanimous 90-447 5/23/90 50~N0148 In Bermuda Magisterial District, COGENTRIX OF i~IC~ND request- ed re~oning from General Industrial (~-2} to ~eavy Industrial (I-3) with Conditional Use to permit an electric power genera- tion plant. This request lies on a 39.7 acre parcel lying st tho eastern terminus of Station Read~ also fronting approzi- mainly 1,463 feet OD the west line of Interstate 95, approximately 331 feet on the sou~_h line of Chippenham Parkway~ and located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of these roads. T~X Map 53-8 (1) Part o~ Parcel 2 and Tax Map ~3-12 (1) Parcel 1 (Sheet ~r, Pools presented a sua~ary of Case 905N0148 and stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request, subject to certain conditions. Mr. App!egate submitted a notarized affidavit to the Board stipulating that he had been present at the April 25, 1990 Beard of supervisdrs meeting which concerned a rescuing application filed by Coqentrix of Richmond, Virginia, Case 90SN0148; that he was' not present for the entirety of the public hearing but had heard the t~$timony of certain fndividual~ whom he named in the statement; and certified that he had reviewed the videotape cf ~aid meeting on %he subject case and was therefore familiar with the entirety cf the pub/i: hearing held on that evening. {It is noted a copy of Said affidavit is filed with the papers ef this Board.) There was brief discussion/questions relative to tho distance of the proposed use ~o the DuPont Plant, Specifications for the smokestacks, and specifieation~ of the filterin~ ~ystems for the smokestacks. Hr. Currin asked that inpu~ tod~y be restricted to only ~hose individuals who had not spoken at the previous meeting or those who had new information to add. Mr. James A. Lows, Vice PresiSent of Development for Coge~trix, presented a su~arlzation cf the proposed application; addressed ~oncerns e~pre~sed by adjacent n~ighbcrhood residents and stated Cogentrix had attempted to compromise and those concerns; explained operation of the facility and listed reasons why Cogentrix had decided an alternate site for the proposed u~e was unworkable as it would entail disruptions to DuPont~s operations, delay the air pollution p~rmitting process and indicated there were enviromuental uncertainties of the proposed alternate site; and stated Cogentrlx WQul~ be a good industrial neighbor to the community. Mr. Bill Campbell and ~r. Don Dcwling also addressed issues raised by area residemts concern 0potation of the facility, noise and air pollution, traffic congestion, environmental impacts on the community and the James River, abc. M~. George B~adles voiced support for the proposed development as he felt it was the best use roi the subject property and urged the Board to approve the request. Mr. Willis B!ackwood, Chairman of %he Chesterfield Business Council, stated the ~card cf Directors of %he Council r~comm~nd~ and urges the Board of Supervisors to approve Cogentri~ of Aiohmond's rezoning application a~ they felt such ~svelopmeDt is the t~p~ n~d~d in the County to increaS~ industrial tax base; that Cogentrix has a reputation as one of %he nation's outstanding builders and operators of eogsneration ~acilities and would be an asset to the County in its providing a needed power source for two of the Counf¥'~ finest o0rporat~ eitiz~n~ - virginia Power and R. I. DnPont. ~r. Daniel submitted ~ copy of M~. Blaekweod'~ letter of endorsement for Cogentrix of Richmond for the record. It was generally agreed to recess for ~ive (5) minutes. 90-448 5/13190 Mr. Lawrence Klehert; Mr. T. ~. Selby; Mr. Bernard T. ~r. Alan Williams; Mr. ~iohard Hill; ~r. Edward Kshou; and Mr. Leon Johnson voiced opposition to the proposed request as they felt approval of the subject request would deteriorate their community if built wihhin such close proximity tO them; staked they felt the company did not care what impact it Would have on their lives and that the Co~nty would not be able to control their 0psratiun of the facility adequately; that the construction of the plant would result in undu~ hardship on the community's health and financial status. ~r. Daniel Burger, s~ruance Plant Manager for DnPent~ stated that the DuPont steam generating facility ~s 60 years old 'and in need of overhaul in order to keep operating at a competitive level7 that alternative locations within the Du~ont plant site were reviewed and ne~e found to be viable by Ccgentri×; and that denial of this request would deIay bu~o~'s plans to replace its o~n generating facility. ~r. Andy Anderson; ~r. Richard Fagan; M~. Rose ~hitt; Mr. Smiley Medler; Ms. Bonni~ McCormiek~ ~nd Ms. Ruth Kersey also voiced opposition to the proposed rezoning request e~ they felt of life and disrupt the tranquility of their community. Mr. Lows addressed concerns expressed by area residents; reminded ~he Board of the economic impact the plant would hays on the County; stated the residents' fears were unfounded and that the plant would be a good industrial neighbor. There b~nq no further public corniest, the public hearing wa~ Closed. Mr. Daniel statsd he had listened intently to the comments of all ~ho~e concerned with this project; refsrsnced a list of notes he had mede f~om the meetings and addressed his ~oncerns regarding noise/air pollution, coal-fired operations, water pollutiOn~ operation of the facility, the health, safety and welfare of the area residents, prsservation of their community and quality of life; co--ended the div~rs~ groups of individuals who had worked so diligently on this project~ referenced comments from vario~ individuals who had spoken during the ~ublic hearing citing their concerns~ letters from citizens citing n~erous adversities cf the project which hs suhmittsd for the record and ~ packet of material he had received from Cogentrix regarding the development; disclosed to the Board that although hi~ brother works at D~¥ont he had not discussed this matter with him at ali; referenced petitions, which he s~hibited~ from the April 25, 1998 masting containing ~pproxlmately ~00 signatures of residence in opposition to the request; and indicated he intended to vote against the project. He furt3aer noted that, if th~ ~oar~ should approve the rego~et~ at the appropriats time, he wished to offer several amendments. Mr. Hayes expressed appreciation to all those citiz~n$ who attended the meeting ~o Yeic~'their opinions/concerns regarding this case; stated he f~lt the Board was the only protection The citi=ens had when dealing with matters of rezoning; that the i~ee before the Board was one oi whether Or not the land use overwhelmed the health, safety and welfare of an established cO--unity and stated, in his opinion, i~ did; expressed concerns relative to the application, details of the proposat~ specifications for smokestacks, filtration systems for smokestacks, emission controls, protection mechanisms for the environment, reasons for not locating on the al%emote site~ etc.: and stated that he felt that this use of wohld impose 90-449 5/23/~O upon an established neighborhood and would adversely affect it, Mr. Applegate expressed appreciation for the participation of welcomed to the county and was now confronted wish so much adversity; stut~d he hud apprcuch~d the mutter from a standpoint of health, safety and welfare issue for the entire County ~ no% j~st one area of the County; that he had reviewed the videotape of the meeting and was still ¢oncerne~ with aspects of noise/air pollutiou, vibration when unloading coal, noise levels~ ste.; and would prefer to hesr the remainder the Board me~bers comments before making his decision. ~r. Sullivan stated that adjacent p~cperties are ~oned that it should be no surprise that industrial development being considered for ~h~t ~rea: ~ha% the plant would be located in an industrial a~ea; that the decision was solely a land decision and the project was appropriate for the site~ ~tated the overall welfare of all the citizens of the County, ins!uding the impact of this project on tho t~x base, Should be considered; and stated he favored the project. Mr. Currin e~u~rated the reasons as to how Ccqentrix came to apply for location in the County, why the application should be approved; outlin=d, statisticu comparing Cogentrix's operation emissions with these of other eegeneration faci!itia~ er industrial plants; described the community of ~enuley which he v/sited and addressed its lon~ establishment and the need prevent the encroachment of industrial development along the Jefferson Davis Highway Corridor which he indicated has enveloped tko Beltwood area located south of Bensley; stated he was pro-business and welcomed qood, ~o~nd development to the County but stated however he could ~ot support the proposed p~opect. On motion Of ~r. Currin~ seconded by ~r. Applegate, the Board denisd Case 90SN014~. Ayes: Mr. Currln, Nr. Applegate, Mr. Daniel and Mr. ~ayes. Nays: Mr. ~ullivau. Mr, Daniel ~tated he wished to third the motion. It wan generally agreed to recess for ten (10) minutes. 90S~0154 !~ ~a~o~¢a ~aglete~iat District, ~R~E~ KING requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned (Case ~5S013) relative us so,backs. This request lies in a Community ~usiness (B-21 District On a 1.0 acre parcel fronting approximately 200 feet on ~he so~h line of ~ull Street Road, also fronting approximately 250 f=et on %_he east line of G~n~to Road, and located in the southeast quadrant of %he int~r~ection of these roads. Tax Mup 49-10 ~1) ~art of Parcel 48 Mr. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 90SN0154 and stated the Planning Co,lesion recommended approval subject to certain conditions and acceptance of the applicant's proffered condition. Mr. Joh~ Cugbill, representiag the applicant, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. ~s stated the applicant only wished ~e encroa=h into the Genito Road s~tback 5/2~/90 m willing to dedicate right-of~way along ~nito Road for future road improvsments. water flow and pressure being available to supply fire protec=ion needs o~ the proposed use; provision of adequate parking Spaces; traffic patterns, internal circulation of the Mr. Bernard Schmelz, Principal Utilities ~ngineer, stated that water flew and pressure may not be available to supply the firs protection needs of 'tbs proposed use and %hat it may bm necessary to loop the water lines in er~er to provide fire (Corridor Overlay District Standards and Emerging Grew~h widening of Genito Road and the proposed road improvements, if the new right-of-way ~re acquired, the subject parcel's required setback; and he could not ~uppert the request. subject to th~ following conditions: 1. Th~ following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Sunbelt Engineering and Surveying, Inc., dated (NOTE: This condition ~Upersedes Condition i of Case ~SS053 for the roques~ property only.) within the setback along Geni~o Road as depicted on the accordance with Sections 11.1-22~ thrcuqh 21.1-22~ of the Landscaping C shall ~e installed. (P) k. Thi~ condition supersedes that portion of Condition 3 of Case ~55013 for the setback area along the G~nito Road frontage for th% request This condition will require preservation of trees having a caliper of eight (8) inches or greater, unle~ re,%oval is approved by the Director of Planning.) the Board accepted ~he following proffered And farther, condition: Brier to the ~uaDce of a building permit or within 60 day~ fr~m th~ date of approval of this rezening request by the ~oard of Supervisors, whichever com~s first, additional land an~ easeme~=s along Genito Road and Hull Street Road identified a~ right-of-way on ~he ourren~ VDOT construction plan~ fo~ the widenin~ of Hull S~r~t Road shall be dedicated frss and unrestricted to 90-451 Ayes: Nays~ Abstention: and for the benefit of CheSterfield COUnty for road improvements. (NOTE; Except as noted herein, all other conditions of zoning approval for Case 85S013 r~ain in effsct.~ Mr. Ceftin, Mr. AppLegats and Mr. 'Mayas. Mr. Sullivan. Mr. Dan±el. 905N0172 In Clover ~itI Magisterial< District, LOU~$ A. FARMER requested rezonin~ from A~ri~ul%ural (A) to ~esidential {R-12). A single family residential subdivision is planned. This request li~s on a 7+6~ acre parcel located at the eastern retinue of Copperpenny Court. Tax ~ap 51-13 (1) Part' of Parcel 11 14 and Mr. Jacobsen presented a gtnnma~y of Ca~e 90SN0172 and stated the Planning Commissien recommended approval and acceptance of the applicant's proffered cOndition~. He not%d, however, staff recommended denial as there had been septic tank failures in the surrounding neighborhood (AshI~y Grov~); that public sewer the property would no~ be suitable for residential development and s~a~f was COnCerned that the installation of new septic systems under such conditions could result in additional failures and significantly increase the potential for contamination of the tree's groundwater supply. HO noted Dr. William Nelson, Director of th~ ~ealth Department, and Mr. Bernard Schmalz, Principal Utilities Engineer, were also present to answer questions. Mr. ~om Gordon, representing the applicant, explained the applicant wished to subdivide th= property into three (3) residential 10ts; assured the Board that the applicant has no intention of developing any additional parcels Or the remainder failures had occurred in an adjacent neiqhborhood; and stated that preliminary soil tests indict=ed that the properey could supp0r% homen up to four (4) or five (5) bedrooms in eisa. There was no opposition present. ~r. Applegate stated the applicant is proposing th~ of the site into ~hree {3) let~ r~ngi~g in size from two (2) to three (3) acres each~ noted that public wastewater $~ruics is curren=ly available approximately 400 fee= east oi ~he site, and that development of the site would be sub3ect to the new system s~andards which he fel~ ensure~ adequat~ protection at On motion of ~r. Appt~gatee approved Case 90SN0172 and At the time of submission seconded b~ Mr. Currin, the Bo=r~ acoepte~ ~h~ following proffered cf the final subdivision plat for recordation pursuant to Section 18.1-~(a) (4) 0x Of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as which plat shall divide the propart~ into a maximum of three ions, ~he ~ubdlvlder shal~ pay th~ followlng to the County ~choO1 improvements within the service d~striets serving the property: (a) If a final subdivision plat is submitted on or before June 30, 1991, the subdivider shall pay $2,000.00 per 10t: (b} If a final sub~ivimi0n plat is submitted betweem July 1~ 1991 and Jnne 30, 1992, the snbdivider shnll pay 90-45~ 5/23/90 the amount approved by the Board of supervisors not to axcasd $2,000.00 per lot; If a final subdivision plat is submitted between July 1, I992. and June 30, 1993, the subdivider shall pay the amount approved by the Beard of Supervisors not to exceed $4,000.00 per lot; and If a fiDal subdivision plat is submitted after Jun~ 3Q, 1993, the subdivided 5hall pay the ~mount approved by the Boazd of Supervisors not to exceed $4,000.00 per lot adjusted upward by the sa/ne percentage tha~ the Marshall and Swift Building Cost the fiscal year in which the payment is made. Mr. sullivan expressed concern relative to ~ubpa~agrapk (d) of the proffered condition reZative to cash proffer~ and ~tated he felt it was incorrect and should be ~llminated. Ee also expressed coneezned ~elative to the appllcant'~ not being willing to accept staff's recommendation for the usa of public wagtewater fauilities ~n conjunction with development of the site given the history of septic system ~ailure in adjacent neighborhoods and the potential for uncoordinated, piecemeal development of the larger parent tract. Mr. Daniel suggested the motion be a~endsd to not accept proffer (d). Mr. Gordon stated the applicant wa~ agreeable to withdrawal of that portion cf the proffer. Mr. Micas indicated that if proffer (d) were withdrawn, the amount of the cash proffer as of June 30, I993 would be Mr+ Applegate called for the vote on ~he motion. Ayes: Mr. Currin and Mr. Applegate. Nays~ Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Daniel and ~r. Mayas. Mr. Daniel made a subs%flute mution, seconded by Mr. Appleqate, to approve Case~ 90S~0172 with the understanding that the developer would record the subdivision plat prior to June 30, 1993 and accepted thefcllowing proffered 00nditions: . At th~ time Of Submission of-the final subdivision plat far ~acerdation pursuant tc Section 18.1-16(a) (4) or of the Codu of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as ~mended, which plat shall divide the property '~ a maximum of lots, thc subdivider ~hall pay the iollowing to the County for school improvements within the service district~ sebring the property: tf a final subdivision plat is submitted on or before June 30, 1991, the ~ubdivider shall pay $2,000.00 {b) if a final subdivision plat is submitted between July 1, 1991 and June 30~ 1992, th~ ~ubdivider shall pay tO exceed $3~000.00 per lot; and If a final subdivision plat is submitted between July t, 199~ and June 30, 1993, ~hs subdivider ~hali pay to exceed $4,000.00 par lot. Ayes: Mr. Currln, Mr. Applegate and MX. Daniel~ 90-453 5/23/90 90~D~9~ in Clover Hill Magisterial District, L.~,R~ AS~OC~TE~ quested ~mendment ko Conditional Use Planned Development CCase ~5SI57) relative to uses, signs, and architectural treatment. This rsques~ lies in a community Business (~-2) ~is~rict on an 8,2 acre parcel fronting approximately 6la feet oD tbs south line of Hull ~treet Road, also fronting approximately t75 feet on the north line of Walmsley Boulevard, and located southeast of the intersection u~ these roads. Tax Map 39-12 (1} P~rcel 19 (Sheet 14] . Mr. Jacobean presented a su~ary of Case 90SN0191 and stated the ~lanning C0mmi~sion recommended approval, subje¢~ to certain condltlon~ and accsptan~ of the apptisant'$ proffered oonditi0ne. Mr. Edward Willey, Jr., representing the applicant, discussed the request aDO stated ~he ~eoommen~ed conditions were acceptable. There was nc opposition present. On motion of Mr. Appte~atc, seconded by ~r. Daniel, the Board approved Case 905~0191, subject to the following conditions: 1. The following ~onditlons notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Glare NeWman Anderson Architects and submitted with the application shall be Considered the Masts= Plan for the private or public college. 2. Uses within that portion of the property d~slgned for "Future Development" shall be limited to Office Bnsines~ (0) uses and private or pubkic colleges. (~OT~ The~ cond~tion~ supersed~ Conditions 1 and 9 of Case 85S157 relative to use~ and Master Plan approval for the request prop~rt~ only. ~. The request property shall be considered a separate development from the adjacent shopping cente~ to the west. A single freestanding si~n, not to exceed fifty-five (55] square feet and a height of fifteen (15) feet shall be permitted to identify the davelapmant and the tenants the sign package approved by th~ Planning Commission on September 15, 1987, and April 18, 1989, for Cross Points Marketplace. The freestandin~ sign to identi~y the development shall be permitted to have an opaque blue background with luminous white er ivory letters. as stated herRin, ail signs shall comply with ~he requir~- merits of the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 21.1-265, 21.1-266, ~1.1-~68, and ~1.1-~69. (CPC} (NOTD~ Thin condition ~up~rssd~ Condition 8 of Case 855157 for the request property, only.) 4. The architectural treatment of all buildings ~ithin the subject site shall comply with Sea,ion 21.1~48 of the Zoning 0rdinanc~ and all buildings within the subject site (NOT~: This c~ndltien supersedes C~n~ition 9 of Case S5S157 relative to architectural treatment fo~ the property, only.} (NOT~ Except as noted herein, all conditions of son~ng approval for Case 85S157 remain in effect.) And furthpI, the Board mccepted the following proffered condition:' 90-454 5/23/90 Vote: Prior ~o ~he issuancs O~ a bu~ld%ng or within a time p~riod specified by the Transportation bepar~ment, whichever shall first occur, additional right of way casements along the south side of Route 360 in, mediately adjacent to the property identified on the ¥DOT con~trnction plans for the widening of Route 360 shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit o£ Chesterfield Mr. Sullivan requested the rules be suspended to ad~ ~wo items to the agenda f~r c0n~i~eration. On motion Of Mr. Sul!ivan~ seconded by ~r. Applegat~, the Board ~uspended it~ rule~ to a~d to the agenda Item ti. P., Set June I~, 1990 Public Hearing to Consider Conveyance of Property at 810~ Whltepine Road (8¢anCenter Building) in Airport Industrial Park to Arburg Maschinenfahrik, Eahl ~ Sohne OmbH KG er Assigns; ~nd Item iI.Q.~ Authorize Purcha~ of 4301 ~eadowdaIe Boulevard Medical Building for U~e ae Branch Library and Set a Date for a Public Hearing to Consider the Appropriation of $730,000 for the Purchase. Vdt=: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Sutlivan~ $~¢o~de~ by Mr. Applega:e, ~he ~oard added to the agenda Item 11. P.~ Set June 13, t990 Public H~aring ho C~n~ide~ Conveyance of Property at ~I0~ Whitepine Road ($canCcnter Building) in Airport Industrial Park to Arbors Maschinenfabrik, Mehl & Sohne GmbH KG or Assigns; and Item ll.Q.~ Authorize Purchase Of 43Ol Meadowdale Boulevard Medical Building for U~e a~ Branch Library and Sst a Date for a P~l±c Hearing to Consider the App~opriatlon of $730,000 for the VOte~ Un~Dimou~ 11.~. ~T ;~...13, 1990 PUBLIC B~-JkI~IG P~0PER~AT 8100 WHITEPIN~ ROAD AIPmORT IND0~TR~AL ~A~E ~0 aa,BORG ~ASCHI~ABP~K, On ~otion of M~. Daniel, seconded by set ~he date of June 13, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. for a public h~azing to consider the conveyance of property (ScanCenter Building) in ~m Airport Industrial Perk t0 Arbors Maschinenefabrik, Hshl & Sohne Gmb~ Vote: Unanimous AUT~O~ZE PURCHASE OF 4301~a/]OWDALB BOIFLE~ARDM]~)ICAL BUILDING FOR USE AS B~ANC~ LTR~ ~ S~TA DATE FOR A PUBLIC ~NG TO CONSIDER T~E APP~0PRIATIO~ OF ~%~',000 FOR TBE PURCHASE On mo~ion cf Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board authorized the Count~ Administrator to execute all .n~ce~$ary documents ~or the acquisition of a 2.29+ acre parcel of land and building located at 4301 Meadowdale ~ulevard for use as a branch library and set the da~e of June 1~, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider ~aid conveyance and ~ppropriatien of $730,000 for said purchase. Vote= Unanimous 90-455 5/23/90 The Board recessed to travel te the Administration Building Conference Room (Room 502} for ~in~e~ with the School Board. On motion of M;. Applogate, seconded by Mr. sullivan, ~ha Board went into Executive Session to discuss the condition or use of real pr~p~r~y for public purposes (specifically school sites) pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (3] of the Code of Virginia Vote: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Burton, geconded by Mrs. Copeland, the S~hool Board went into E×eoutlve Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (3) of the Cod~ of Virginia, 19~0, as amended, to discuss ~ocei~le land acquisition. Vote: Unanimous On motion of ~r. Ma~s, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board adopted the following resolution: ~EREAS, the Board of Supervisors has this day adjourned into Ex,dative Session in accordance with a formal vote cf the Soard, and in accordance with the previsions of the Virginia FreedOm cf Information Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Inform~ti0u Act effective July I~ 1989~ provides for certification that SUCh E~eoutive Cession was con4ucted in conformity with law. S~pervisers does hereby certify that to the bust of each member's knowledge, i) only public business matters lawfully ~xempted from open m~etin~ requirements under the Freedo~ of which this certification applies, and ii) only such public Executive Session was convened were heard~ discussed or considered by the Beard. No member dissents ~rcm this sertlfl- cation. Thc Board being p~lled, the vot~ wa~ as fcllow~ Mr. Daniel: Aye. Mr. Mayes: Aye. Nr. Applegatc: Aye. Mr. Sullivan: Aye. Mr. Coffin: Aye. On motion of ~r. Bur=on, seconded by ~rs,~.Copeland,. ~Ae School Board approve~ ~h~ following resolution: ~ 90-456 5/23/90 her~b~ Certifies that, to the best of each m~ber'~ knowledge, (i) only public bu$ines~ mat~er~ lawfully exempted from open ~e~kinq requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the applies, and (ii) only much public business matter~ aa were The School Bo~r~ being polled, the vot~ was as follows: Mr. Goodwy~ Aye. Mr. Cribbs: Aye. 12. aD4OU~ On motion of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. App2~mter ~he Board adjourned at 10:00 p.m. (DST) until 2:00 p.m. {DST] on June 13, 1990. 90-457 Chairman 5/~3/9o