The URL can be used to link to this page

01-23-91 MinutesJANUARY 23, 1991 supervisors in Attendance: Stuff in Attendance: Mr. M. B. Sullivan, Chairman Ms. Amy Davis, ~xec. ~. ¢.~. currin, Jx., Vice Chairman Asst. to Co. Admin. Mr. G. H. Applegate Mr. Harry G. Daniel Mr. Jesse J. Mayes Mr. Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator A~t. Co. Admin., Legis. Sv~. a~d Intergove~fl. Affairs MS. Joan S. D~lezal, Clerk to the Board Chief Robert ~ancs, Jr. Fire Department Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Deputy Co. Admi~., Ms. ~ary Leu Lyle, Dir., Ae¢ountin~ Dept. Mr. Robert L, ~asden, Deputy Co. Admin., ~r. R. J. MeCracken, ~r. Richard ~cElfish, bit., ~nv. Eng. Dc~t. Treazurer Mr, Steve L. Zicus, Co. ~rs. ~auline ~itchell, Dir., News & Public c~l. g. g. Pittman, Jr. Chief of Police Mr. William D. PoDle/ Chief, Dev. Review, Planning Department Mr. P~i~hard Sale, Deputy Co. Admin., Development Mr. J.L. Stegl~aier, Dir., Mudge~ & Mgr. Mr, M. D, Stith~ Jr., bit., P=rks & Rec. Mr~ David Welchons, Sheriff C. G. Williams, Sheriff's DeDar~J~ent ~r. Frederick Willis, Dir. of Human Mr. sullivan called the regularly ~ched~ted meeting to order 1. IN~O~A~ION Mr. Sullivan introduced ~r. S. H. Applegate, Clov~r ~ill Distric~ SupervisoI, who gave the invocation with a special 91-41 ~1/23/91 prayer of remembrance for the safety and welfare of all American treops serving in the Persian Gulf. 2- P~ED~E OF ALLEGIANC~ TO T~ FLA~ OF 'r~u~ ~r~-~ STAT~S OF Sheriff Clarence S. Williams lsd the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag cf the United States of America. 3. A~RO~-ALOF~IN~TF~ On motion cf 51r. Cnrrin, seconded by Mr, Apptegatu~ the Board approved %he minu~es of January 9. 19~1, as s~boit%ed. Vote: Unanimous Far. Ramsey introduced Mr. Bob Schrlun, representing the Small Business Task Foree~ who pre~ented a syIlopsis of a survey coa~ucte~ by %h~ Chesterfield Business Council, ~h~ Central C~esterfietd Business and Professional Association, the Chester~iel~ Co~ty Econ~ic Develo~en~ bu~ar~=n~, Virginia State U~iversity Economic Development Depar~ent many oth~r businesses within ~h~ County; noted the objective was to dete~ine the attitudes and parception~ of businesses in ~he Cu~ty, ~ar~iuularl~ small ~usine~, fugardin~ the opport~ities and concerns with which they were confrunte~ in conduc~ing bus~ness in the County; s~arized findings of the study, indicating that the overall o~ =h~ business ct~at~ in the County is strong, that the respondents were generally pl~a~d with the service~ by the County b~t were concerned wi=h the what they perceived that the Small Business Task Force reo~e~ded that a task expanded =o include more me,ers of the b~si~es~ =o~ni~, the cowry in serving the needs of businezz in the future. After ~ome discussion, the Bo~d expxa~med appreciation for the efforts of those involved in the study; indicat~ the~ ~elt additional ~tudy of the results of the survey by Soard would bs beneficiaI~ and r~emted ~taff to bring fo~ard a paper to th~ Board within ~hirty (30] days with =eco~snda=iun~ ~or the e~t~li~ent of a task force per the reco~endation of the ~all Duslnes~ Task Force an~ provide a plan ~or working ~n conjunction with ~he Business Co,oil and Business Lea~e to ad,ess concerns rai=e~ by particip~t~ :he study. ~. R~s~y e~re~sed appreciation for the opport~ity to work with th~ Business co,oil in ~his and indicated he felt it a ve~ positive mechanism which can encourage ~sinesses to locate in the Co~ty. (It is noted a copy of said survey is filed with the papers of this ~oard.) Mm. Ramsey introduced Mr. Pe~er War~, Chairman o~ the chesterfield Community Services Beard, who presented a brief overview Of the Residential Services Development Plan for chesterfield Citizens with Mental Disabilities and outlined recommendations of the Community Serviasa Board regarding said Plan. {It is noted a copy of said Plan is £ile~ with1 the papers of this 91-42 01/23/91 There was brief discussion regarding the legal ra~ifications of one ef the Plan rxcom~enda=ions to amend the County's cash proffe~ policy tc include housing for l~er~ons with mental disabilities aS ab appropriate uze of proffered resources; other potential funding resources; etc. Mr. Sullivan expreseed appreciation fur the e~iorts of those involved in the d~velopmen~ of the sui0mitted Plan. Mr. Currin indicated he would like to further disous~ financing ramifica=ions /el&~ivu to this matter with staff. ~r. Daniel a~d I~fxastructurm Needs C~ittee for inclusion in their 5. BOARD CO~H~i'rr~P. EPORTS There were no Board Committee Reports at thin 6. ~ESTS TO 1~)S~)~ ACTIC~r I~II~.~,ICY ADDITT(~S OR On motion cf Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Currln, the Board added Stem 1~~I., Award of Contract to Planning Associate~ of Dublin, Ohio for CO,unity Consensus Building for Considering Alternatives for Soho01 Programming and Scheduling, to follow Stem 9.C.; added Item il,J., Discussion of D~legate Watkins' Impact Fee ~i~l~ to be heard following Item ll.E. and prior ~u II.g.; deleted Item ll.k.4., Approval of the Purchase of Lend for %he Olover Hill Athletic Complex; deferred untL1 Februa~ 27, 1991 Item 7.A., Re$ol%tion kecognizing Sergeant Robert Doyle, Pclio~ Department; added Item iI.K., Requemt from School Board, to fo!luw Item 7.F.; and adopted the agenda, as amended. Vote{ UnaIlir~ous 7. R~SOL~IO~E AND S~ECiAL RECOGNITIONS 7.B. CHE~'x~FIELD COUNT~ 1990 Mr. Willis introduced the 1990 nominees for the Chesterfield County F/~Dloyee-of-the-Year award, who w~re as followe: Mr. Craig Hill Ms. DeboIah Brad~n Ms. Judy Tunnell MS. Sharon Entsminqer Ms. Joyce Branzelle ~s. Juanita Cersley ~r. Jeffrey ~ranklin ~Ir. Da~y Parnell ~s. Becky Johnson mr. G~rald Duff~ ~z. Jo Ann We~tfall Ms. Janiee Rasnake ~s. Barbara Jenkins Mr. Perry ~ornbarger Ms. E. Florence Smith ~r~ Ramsey congratulated all theee that MS. E. Florence Smith wa~ Sheriff's Department Libraries Poli~e Department Parks & Recreation Planning Department Building Inspection Mental Health/Mental Retardation Accounting Department Utilities Department Treasurer's Office Lucy Corr Nursing ~o~e CoK~unity Diversion seieoted as the 1990 ~mploy~-of-the Year. Mr. Sullivan congratulated M~. S~ith and presented her with a framed resolution, an engraved silver Revere ~uwl, a $50 savings bond, a gift certificate to t-he Swift Creek Mill ~layhou~e from the Ches=erfield County 91-43 01123/91 Employees' As$ooiation and a reserved parking space. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was W~E~EAS~ M~. E. Florence South has been selected to represent the Department of Community Diversion Incentive aS their 1990 E~ployee-Gf-th~-Year nominee as a person possessing the qualities of e~Dcrlor performance and dedicatica eXCellence in public service required o~ the reeiDien~ of this coveted award; and WHEREAS, During four years of service which began in 1986 ae a Senior Clerk T~pist/Reoep~ionist un:il MS. Scuth'~ current position me Administrative Secretary, her enthusiasm, pkofessionalism and responsiveness have gained widespread respect from her peers, superiors and citizens alike; and WEEREA$, Ms. South's selfless dedication ts her reZponsibilities, her oreatlvs approaches to apply new technology and skills and her devotion to teamwork are recog~ize~ a~d appreciated by co-workers, co~ty staff, clients and the qeneral public; W~EREAS, The theroughness, timeliness and dedication to detail ~hat ~s. South demonstrates in her work have helped improve her department's operation; and WHEREAS, W~ile serving cn the Ccmmu/lit~ Diversion Incentive Program Statewide Training curric=lum Cemmit~ee she has developed a trai~iag ecu=se for clerics! support staff and has gained reqional and statewide reco~nitio~ ~er her skills by conduetiag ~he course, oftex preparing on her own %ime; and WHEREAS, MS. South striven %0 continue in her personal and professional development, having recently completed the Career studies Certificate i~ the Supezvislon Series at John TYler Community college and the 1990 Ches%erf~eld county supervisory Institute. NOW, THRREFOP~ B~ IT /%ESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County ~oard of supervisors hereby recognizes the loyalty, superior performance ~nd dedicatie~ of Ms. E. Florence South by naming her a~ the Chesterfield County Employee-of-the-Year for 1~98. 7.C. RECO~IZIN8 F~R~r 1991AE "~a~T~,' On motion of the Bo~rd, the following resolution was adopted; ~AS, Cardiovascular disease continues to be State's major health problem. E~ar= attack~ Stroke, high blood pres~urs and erbar life-threatening diseases affeu~ more than one million Virginians; and ~EAS, ~e Riu~cnd Metropolitan Council of the ~erican Heart A~ociution co~tinuen to lead the ~ight against thi~ tragic toll, wi~h progr~s a~ed at teaching ~ach of us h~w we c~ prevent Cardiovascular disease or treat its effects. ~lve thouga~d volunteers in the Metre area join together in thi~ Vital unsettling every year to improve our odd~ of dying from Ehis dreaded disease, which is ourrently about two-to-one. W~ support their lif~-saving cffcrts. N~, 'r~FORE BE IT RESOLED, that th~ Chesterfield Co~ty ~oard of supervisors hereby recognizes Februa~, 1991 as "H~art Month" i~ Chestmrfield oo~t~ and calls attention to ~1-44 01/23/91 the problem of heart disease and th~ Amc=loan Heart Assooia- tion's role in its solution and urges our fellow eitizene to support the work of this worthwhile organization. Vote: Unanimou~ It was noted that Mr. Sullivan would be presenting the resolution at the American ~eart Association's annual Campaign Kickoff on January 31, 1991. 7.D. Pd~CO~NIZING FE~HUA~¥, 1991 AS ~u~ICAN HISTORY On motion of the ~oaxd, the foll~in~ =esolutio~ was Revolution ~ponsors Februar~ as "~erican Histor~ Month" each y~ar; and ~EREAS, To st~ulat~ a kn~le~ge in ~th youn~ and old add a sens~ of pride in o~ Nation's great achiev~ents and d~dication to liberty~ and ~ER~S, To stress pride in the United States of ~erica ~AS, T~ough the study of ~eric~ History are we made aware of the ~portance of Freedom, E~ality. Justice and 5~anity in =11 our lives today; and ~, The import~ce of rem~rin~ ~eric~ Hi~to~ should b~ ~uly N~, THE~O~ BE IT ~SOL~, b~ the Chesterfield cowry 8oard o~ Su~rv~mor~ ~at February be reco~ized a~ "~rican Histo~onth" in chesterfield oounty and urges all our ~ellow our lives. Vote: Unanimous It wa~ noted the executed resolution wuuid be given to Mrs. Betty W. Weaver, Chai~an of the Be~uda H~dred Chapter the National Society of the DauqhterR of the ~rican death in her f~ily. 7.E. P~36~IZING FEBRUARYr I991 AS "AF~ICAN-AMKW~CANH~$TORY On ~otion of ~he Boar~, the roll,lng resolution was adopted: of the population of the County and the diver~ composition th~ work for~e~ and ~AS, Contri~u~iuns o~ Afrluan-~eri~an~ :o building of thi~ ~o~try and Chesterfield County have ~AS, In 19~6, Dr. Carter S. Wo~son, historian a~ Virginia natlv~, set aside Feb~ar~ as a time to formaI]~ acknowledge the tr~msndous contributions o9 ~rican-~erlc~s struggle, challenges and r~ark~le achievement of African- ~ericans has become a cultural l~rk and the ethnic celebration in ~arica; and 91-45 01/23/91 W~EREAS, Chesterfield County will h01d its first '~African-A~crican History Month" celebration ~n 1991 to co~ne~norate the vast accomplishments of A£rioan-Amuricans; and De~ar~ent, with qenerouE s~p~Ort from the Count~, local celebrate this histori= event through a play, lecture, jazz entertai~ent, greater D~lic appreciation for the role cultural interaction for citlzsns u~ Chesterfield County. citizens to join in the cel~ration of all tha~ iE stands for. Chesterfield Chapter of the N~CP, and e~res$~d appreciation ~or their participation ~d c0ntri~ions towed this 7.F. P~%~(~IZIN~ ~TLIP MfS[HISt USA FOR IT~ On motion of the Board, the Board accepted a donation in the amount of $10,000 to the Parks and Recreation Department Fund from Philip ~orris, USA for their sponsorship of Chesterfield Ccunt¥'s first African-~ican Ni~t~ry ~onth celebratio~, appropriated revenues and expenditures by $10,000 for ~ame; and adopted the following r~sol~tio~: WHEREAS, Th= Chesterfield County Parka an~ Recreation Department existc to provide quality special events to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, February is re¢og~ize~ as '~African-America5 Hister~ ~c~th.'~ a ti~e to ~ormallF =cknowl~dge the many tremendous contributlonK of African-Americans to the world; and WHEREAS, chesterfield County is prou~ TO coK~emorata ~hc month with its first "A~rican-A~erican Ristory Month" celebration to recognize the value of diversity an~ the contributions of all citizens~ and W~REAS, Philip Norris, USA has provided generous support for the first "African-American Kistory ~onth" Celebration; W~EREAS, Philip Morris, USA has a long and Ais~inguished track reco~d o~ providing opportunities for Afrlcan-American~ and providin~ generous support for worthwhile core, unity activities; and w~ER~AS, This month long celebration will enhance the rauo~nition of the A~rican-Amerioan in Chesterfield County through a lectttr~, concert, art show, play reception and ~reakfast; and WHEREAS, These activities arc intended to providu 91-46 education, entertainment and cross cultural interaction for th~ citizens of Chmsterfield Coun%~ and smrrounding areas. NOW, THEEEFOE~ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors re~ognize~ Philip Morris, USA for its generous centribution to this event. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board Supervisars expresses its deep gratitude to Bhilip Morris, ~Or i~s oentinnous comunity support and good corporate ~itizensh/p. Vote: Unanimous ~r. Sullivan presented the e~ecuted r~$ol=~i~n to Mr. Arthur Mallory, Manager of civic Develel~uent fez Philip Morris, USA and commended the organization's participation and support toward the event. Mr, ~allory expressed appreciation for the opportunity to participate in a first-time event cf this nature. 11.K. SCHOOL BOARD REQUEST Mrs. Jean Gopeland, chairman of the School Board, a~d Dr. E. E. Davis, ~choo1 Superintendent, pre~ented the Board with copies o~ a resolution requestin~ the Boardls consideration for restoration of all or a portio~ Of the County's reducti0~ to the 1990-91 revised sohsol operating budget as it related ~p~ai~ieally ~O f~ding fo~ substitute ~eachmzs and instructional materials and distributed a~d outlined proposed Discussion ensued relative to fun~ing ~or substltuts teachers versus instructional materials; the i~r~act of the re~ested appropriation on th~ Ggn~ral Fund salanoe and futura bond imsue~; diificultics being ~nco~%~red in e~orts to ~und current and/or future program due to a down-~n in the economy; positions frozen at the general County Which poliuy shoul~ be considered at the School A~inistra- There was further discussion that nothing should be don~ which would rssult in the raductio~ of the classro~ instructional instructional materials m~atum~ and stressed ~at, in future budget considerations, school sta~ and officials should On motion ~ Ns. Currin, s~conde~ by Mr. Daniel, the reinstated $400,000 of the School budget red,orion to lessen stitute teachers~ and re~emt~d t~t th~ Count~ School superintendent and school Eoard Liai~O~ C~ittee work together closely to monitor ca an ongoing basis ~he situation regarding instructlonal ~te~ials and dehemlne how to accc~o- the Board for Consideration in the future. Vote: Unanimous These were ne he~rings of citizens on unscheduled matters or 91-47 01/23/91 9.A. There was bri~ discussion regarding a~i~ent to co~itt~ which wer~ defunct, a~ter which it was ~eralty agreed eliminate the Courts Co~ittee bu~ a~re~ raised by the Judge~; the ~o Air Quality Technical c~ittee, Mayes would ~ appointed; and the Legislative Co~ittee, with consideration of r~-~st~lishing ~e in tke Spring/$~er depen~ng u~n event~ transpiring at that O~ motio~ of ~. Daniel, x~condud by Mr. currin, th~ Board ~de the ~oll~ing ap~in~en=s and/or reaffi~ations co~itteu ACTI~ ~C Mr. Appleg~U~ (T~zm expires II. ~-rr~.g A~i~DI'N'I~I]~IT.S WI']~] NO SBT ~ T~AT ~F~/I~ ABIDCO Hr. ~ayes (Board represu~tative; term expires 9/91} Mr. Currin (Businessman ~epresentative; texm expires 9/91) CAPIT~;~~GC~)NSO~II~ Mr. Currin (Position u~ually filled by Chai~an ~r. A~legate, Mr. Daniel, ~. Currin ~Terms expire 4/30/92) Mr. ~ayes, Mr. Currin an~ Mr. willie J. Bradley Mr. Diok Sale (Alternate) (Ail te~s expire 12/31/91) ~I. sullivan (T~ ~i=e$ 19/~1/91; Re~ires Board m~r) (To h~ appointed latex ih RICHM~D~PO ~r, Sullivan, Mr. Daniel and ~r. Applegate Mr. John ~cCracken (Voting); Mr. Dick Sale (Alternate] and Mr. Jim Banks (Alternate) (Terms e~pir~ RR~DC ~-r. Applegate, Mr, D~niet, ~. sullivan and ~. Currin ~r. Larry ~mlche~ (Pla~ing Cu~i~sio~, ~r. Ray ~evener (citizen) and Mr. Dick Bale (kltern~te) {All terms e~ire 11/31/91] Mr. Applegute (Tu~ uxDire~ 6/30/92) Mr. Naye~ (T~ expires t2/31/9t] 01/23/91 BUDGET AND AUDIT Mr. Mayas and ~Ic. Daniel (U~spacifiu~ tazm) ~. Mayas and ~r. Applegat~ (Unspecified Mr. Currin, Mr. sullivan, Mrs. CoDeland a~ DX, Cardea (Unspecified t~rm) ~CLiN~ ~ Mr. Currin and Mr. Ma~es (Unspecified te~) Mr. Currin and M~. Sullivan (Un~peclfled IV. ~'rr~ ~I~S N~ ~G ~ A~ON Mr. Sullivan (Unspecified Mr. C~rin [Board representative) [12/31/93) and Mr, D~d Citizen) (12/31/92) (~o~h appointed by aenri~us Foundation) Mr. Ma~os (A~pointed by Muse~ Co~itte~; uns~cifi~d Mr. Daniel ( A~uinted by 9rlvat~ group a~ citizen rep~a~ntativa) v~ Mr. Daniel (Second Vice President) Mr. C~rin (Executive Board) ~ff~otiv~ ~ov~r~nt ~olicy - ~r. Daniel ~du=ation ~ulicy Co~iutee - ~. Sullivan M~. Mayas IAppuiatud by Governor) on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. ~ayes, the Board nugp~nded its rules to allow simultaneous nomination/appoint- ment to the Revenue Policy and Infrastructure Needs Committea. Vote: Unanimous 0n motion of HZ. Da~iul, seconded ~ Mr. Mayas, the B~ard $i~lt~eoubly nomin=tc~/=ppolntc~ thc following persona %0 serve on the R~v~nu~ Policy and Instrastrueture Needs 01/23/9Z ~a~oaca R~v~rend Harold Braxton Clover Hill Mr. Jmes D. Wrlgh~ Dalu Mr. Charles Quaiff Bermuda Mr. oliver D. Mr. Bob Lei~uxtz 3. ~X~SI~SS CO~CIL Mr. willis Nr. Daniel K. Smith Vote= Unanimo~ Mr. Nica~ e~lai~d that the re~inimg nomin~s on in ~he 0rd~r nominated and the first p~rs0~ to receive a majority vote would bu 6. ~e vot~ on the nomi~bion of ~. C. T. Hill was as f~llows: Mr. D~iel: Aye. M~. Mayes: Pa~. Mr. Applegate: Aye. ~r. Coffin; Aye. Mr. S=llivan: Aye. ~e vote un the nomi~=tion Of Mr. Daniel: Aye. Mr. Applugate: Aye. Mr. coffin: A~. The vot9 o~ th~ ~o~i~ation of ~r. Rudolph F. Janis, Jr., Ph,D., wa~ as fo11~s: M~. Daniel: Aye. Mr. Applegate: Aye. Mr. Curtis: Aye. Mi. Sullivan: Aye. 9. The vot~ on th~ ~omi~t~o~ of Mr. ~. C. "Gene" Aut~ was as follows: Mr. Daniel: Aye. Mr. Applega~e~ Aye. ~. Coffin: Mr. Mayes: Aye. Mr. sullivan= Aye. inclusion of a cat~gory representing the Riu~ond Association of Realtora, which group had previously s~mitted a letter 91-50 01/23/91 raCe,ting same and submitting the name of Mr. Robert E. Barton; the s~tting of ~ prece~en~ ~Qx other groups to be Business Couneil~ etc. Mesers~ Sullivan &~d Applugat~ stut~d they did not object to the inclusion of ~he Realtors~ Association ~nd no~d it was one oi the largest organizations in th~ State, County and Metropolitan axes that could have ~ ~iFai~ican~ impact on the is~ues to be discussed hut would concur with the majority decision of the Board. Mr. Currin aureed but felt a precedent may be set. Mr. Daniel ~de a motion, seconded by ~r. Mayes, directing staff to write the Richmond Association of Realtor~ expressing apprecia=ion for their in=crest and concern in parriciDe=ina on the Reven~e Policy a~d Infr~stru=ture Needs comities and suggesting that the Realtors Association's r~oo~d~d gomi~ee conve~ the organization's inpnt and/or concerns and solicit information t.b_rough the Home~uildors Association or =he Chesterfield Bu~ine~ Council. Ceftin, Mr. Daniel a~d ~r. F~es. Sullivan and Mr. ApDlegat~. It wa~ geuerally aqree4 to recess ~er ~ive [5) minutes. 9 · C. SKT DAI~$ flOR P~BLIC ~t~/~INGS TO C~ID~ CANDIDA~ FOR BE~DA A~ DAL~ DI==~CT ~EP~ATTV~S TO ~ SCHOOL BOA~D On motion of Mr. AD9legate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board set the dates of March 1~, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. at ~a~owbrook ~igh School and May 1, 1991 at 7~0~ p.m. at Thomas Dale ~igh School, respectively~ for public hearings for can~idat~ to present themselves for consideration a~ th~ Dale District School Board representative and the Bermuda District School Board re~resentatlve. 11. NEW ~USI1T~SS 11.I. AWARD OF ¢0N~RAcT TO PLA~ING ASSOCIA~ OF D~ O~tO FOR CO~NIT~ C~SEN~OS ~UiLD~N~ FOR CC~SI~ERINC~ Mr. Daniel voiced ©ppositio~ to ~he hiring of a consultant fur ~pen~ing funds ~nneoe~sarity during this dif~icut~ economic time and suggested that another mechanism b% ~ought to initiate the study. Mr. ~ayes concurred. re~ort advising tho Countw how to aconrm~ndate future growth, 91-51 81/23/91 one alternative r$=ommendation being consideration of year round schools, etc. ~r. Sullivan stated h~ felt an outside uonsultant would provide the school plarraing process more credibility with the public nad would be instrumental in encouragin~ 0o~unity involvement in th~ process and building a con~ensu$ oB ~he final decision. On motion cf Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board awarded a contract in the amount Of $75,000 to Planning Associates of Dublin, Ohio ~or community consensus building for considering alter~ative~ for school prs~r~ing and scheduling and appropriated $75,000 ($43,567 from the Board o~ Supervisors Co~tingenc~ Account an~ $31,433 from the General Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance) for the study. Ayes: ~r. Sullivan, ~r. Currin and Mr. Applegate. PUBLIC MANAG~NT AUTRO~ITY ~C%V~) AND ~.~T~RFIRLn Mr. ~er stated this da~e and time had been a~v~r~ised ~or a Duello hmaring to 0onsider an agre~ent between Chesterfield County and the Central Virginia Wasne Management Authority (~) for a Pilst Curbsi~e Recycling Pro~. ~. Seorge Beadl~ stated he ~elt a ~ecycllng ~ffort$ i~ County wer~ n~ded; h~ever, if there were no plans to continue the Drogr~ b~yond FYgl, tken he f~l~ the progr~ Skoul4 nut be initiated. On mo~ion of ~r. AD, legate, seconded by ~. Currin, th~ Board authorized ~e County A~inistrator to enter i~o an agre~ent wi~h the Central Virginia Waste Manag~ent Authority (~) for a Pilot Curbside Racy=ling ~rogz~, which Dro~r~ least 1,850 h~es within the County at a cost to the co~ty of $1.60 per household per month f~r each home served on u w~kly schedule fur ~our (4) months in the current ~iscal year; which agre~ent provides =hat a~inixtratio~, public collection, p=oc~sslng an~ marke=ing of nhe rec~lable pro~ots for said ~ro~r~ be ~rfo~ed by Wast~ M~agement, years with previsions for renewal ~yond the i~ial =e~ flexibility fo: each participating jurisdiction to increase or annual fund appropriations. (It is noted funds in Sanitation ~par~ent's op~ra~ing budgmt are avail~le ~or the remaindar of ~91 to fund the Pilot Curb~ide R~cycling Progr~; however, costs for ~92 an~ b~yond will depend the n~er of h~es served and will ~ addressed in a~ual Vote: Unanimous 11. N~BUSIN]~gS ll.A.1. DESI~FORA~IXIONSAND]~[OVATIONSTO~nT~TAN LIBRARx On motion o~ Mr. Currin, ~conded by ~r- Applegate, the Bcaid approved modification Of ~he architectural desig71 contract to Design Collaborative of Virginia Beach, in an ~eun% not to 91-52 D1/23/91 ~xceed $89,000.00, for thc design of the additions and renovations to the Midlothian Library, the source of funding for this project provided by general obligation bonds from the 1988 Bond Ro~erend~. Vote: Unanimous 11=A.Z= R~POVAL OF ~BESTOZ FOR ~TSTING M~NTAL ~2%LTH/~NTAL P~TA~DATION~UILDING ~r. ~n~ner noted ~ corr~tion to It~m~ I~.A,~, ~nd ~ha~ the =riles o~ the agenda items should indicate award of contract rather than award of ~si~ con~rao~, awarded a ~ontract %o HICO, Inc., in th~ ~o~t ~f for the removal of asbestos from th~ existing Health/Mental Ret~dation Buildinq~ w~ch f~ding im avail~l~ ll.A.3. ~OVAL OF AS~O~ FOR T~ ~TSTIN~ ~ ~R LI~f On motio~ ~£ Mr. Cuzrin, ~e¢on~ed by Mr. Appl~ga~e, thu Doar~ awarded a contract fo HICO, I~c.~ i~ the a~oLmt cf $42~989,00~ for the removal of asbestos from th~ existing Ben Air Library, which funding is available from the 1988 Bond Referendum ~rojeot. 11.B. A~POINT~4E~TS 11.B.1. C~I~s-r~a~FIELD E~EP.G~CY PLAN~ING ~'r-£~.~ On motion of Mr. Appolgate, seconded by Mr, Daniel, the Board accepted the remignatione of Mr. Fred Kershner, ICI Films, Inc., and Mrs. Bernie Simmons, WWBT-TV 12, from the Chesterfield F~ergeney Planning Committee e~fective immediately; and further, nominated the following persons to serve on sa/re, whose formal appointments will b~ made February 13, 1991~ Mr. Barrett Brunsman ~ir. Paul ~lements Mr. Jake Willis Mr. Jim wil~on Vote: Unanimous Tri-ci~ies ches=erfield Plus virginia Power Volunteer Rescu~ ICI Films, Imc. ll.B.2. ~ VIRGINIA WASTE ~LANAC~T PLAN suspended its rules to permit simultaneous nomination/appoint- ment to the Central Virginia Waste Mana~ment Plan - Citizens Advisory Ce~T~ittee. Mr. Cu~rin inquired and was informed that the nomination of Ms. Judy Dunn, a realtor, did not constitute a cnn~lict of interest for him. On motion ef Mr, Currin, seconded by F~r. Applegate, the Board simultaneoumly nominated/appointed Ms. Judy Dunn to 91-~3 01/23/91 ~he unexpirgd term of Ms. Dermic Anderson on the Central Virginia Waste Management ~lan - citizens Advisory Ccu~ittne, whose term is e~ctive i~ediatety and expires J%l¥ l, 1991. Vote: Unanimous ll.C. CONSENT ITemS ll.c.1. STATE]~OADACf,~A~ANCE This d~y ~he Co~ty Enviro~ental Engineer, in accor~nce with directions f~om ~his Board, maim re~o:~ in wzi~in~ u~on ex~ina~icn o~ Pri~ Ci~ Boulevard, Matoaca Diakrict~ Upon consideration whereo~, and on ~otio~ of Mr. Apple~atm, ~on~e~ by Mr. Coffin, i% i~ resolv~ that Prioe Boulevard, Matoaca District, b~ and it hereby im as a p~liG road. And be i~ further resolved, that th~ virginia Depar~ent seconda~ system, ~ri~e Ci~ Boulevard, begi~ing at suu~heamterly 0.23 mil~, th~n turning ~d going mOUthW~sterly 0.21 mile, th~n turnlmg and going w~s:~rly 0.17 mil~, ~hen :urning ~d going southwesterly 0~t9 mile t~ end at the intersection with ~eni~o Road, state Rou%e ~04, and La~diRg Drive, state Ro~te 4130. This re,est is i~cl~sivu of the adjacent slope, dist~c~ a~d d~si~ed Virginia D~par~men~ of drminage easement~. ~is road serves as access fei adjacent co~ercial properties. And be it f~ther resolved, that th~ Board o~ ~aran~ez to the Virginia Depar~ent of Transportation variabl~ width 6~' to 95' ~ight-of-way. Price Ci~ Doulev~d is recorded as follows: Plat Book 2133, Page 85, January ~2, 1991. SET PUBLIC HEA/~N~ DATES ll.C.2.u. TO CONSIDKRANORD~ANCE~0AMEND~HAI~I~ ARTICLE VI, OF THE c~ OF 'rs COBqF~Y OF FiaT.n, 1978,. A~ A~NDE~ R~-~NG ~ ~ DI~F, On motion ~f Nr~ Applegate, s~conde~ by Mr. Currin, the ~oard set the da~u of F~br~y 13, 1991 at 6:30 D.m. for a p~lic hearing to consider an ordinance tu ~end Chapter 10, Ar=iclm VI, of the Code o~ =he county of Chesterfield, 1978, ~ended, rela=in~ to the disposal Of d~bris waste and providing for a Duna!~y. Vote: Unanimous 1l.C.2.b. TO CONSIDER C~a%~TING A ~T PLYI{~/ANTTOCO~TTY C~DE SKUTION 3-1TOATLANTICAMBIrLANCE;%~0CIAT~0N On motion of ~-r. Appleqate, seconded by Mr, Currln, the Board set the date of FeblU~ary 27, 199~ at 9:00 a.m. for a public hearing to consider granting a p~rr~it pursuant to COU/I~¥ Code Section ~-1 to A~lantic A~ulance Association. 91-54 11.C.3. C0~SID~i~ AG~E~ST W%TM ~Ii~GIb]IA B~i~ OF TRANS~0RTATI~FOR D~SI~ OF HOPKINS ROAD (B~uLAHROAD TO INCADRI~) On motion of Mr. Applega%e, ~econded ~y ~r. Ceftin, the Buar~ authorized s~aff ~o ~pcute an agreement between Chu~tunfiel~ Cowry and the Vimgini5 Depa~ent cf Tr~sportation (~] ~or t~e desi~ of improvp~ents for ~opkins Road (Route 637) from Beulah Road tO Inca Drive, including thi~ road's crossin~ of Kingsl=~ Cxeek; appropriat~ $117,451 ~rom anticipated desi~ in ade~a=e, with the underst~di~g that, under the be rei~ursed by ~T for maid sx~nses and that the co~ty's consultan~ u~d~rstands that he will be paid only after the o~ ~aid ag=cement is ~iled with the pap~ of thi~ Board.) iI.c.4. IND~IFICATION A~RRN]~TT FOR ~AI~'A'~ANCE OF W~LT~N LAKKASA~ESTMANAG~FACILI~Y On motion of ~. A~legaue, ~co~e~ by ~. Curtis, the ~oar~ authorized the Count~ A~inistrator to Best ~anagement Practice Facilit~ (B~) with ~he developer of Walton Lake, with the undarstan~ing that the ~ouAty'$ only involvement is %he a~urance that the to be ~ollowed by the developer. (A cody Voto: Unanimou~ 11.C.5. ADOI~IONOF~OLUTION AUTHOR_IZING PAYmenT OF AL O ST COUPONFOR CERTAIN~ESTERFIRV.nCOUW~YBONDS On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr, Ceftin, the Board authorized the County Treasurer to pay Crestar Seuu/ities, as paying agent for certain of Cheeter~iel~ County bonds, for cna lost coupon from bonds purchased ~rom the 1982 Chesterfield County Public Improvement Issue, valued at $~37.50, baaed on submission Of an affidavit Of lOSS a~d an unlimited liabilit~ bond indemnifying the Gotul~y against double pa~ent, pursuant to Section 15.1-209 cf the Code o~ virginia, 1950, as amended. Vo~e: Unanimou~ 11.c.6. A~T~0RIZATI~ TO PERMIT 'r~ T~3~%SU~K~ TO ~ND~aT.~E SHORT-'~'~K~ IX~I~RXM LO~N ~O~O~iNG FOR CASH FLOW On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. currin, the Board authorized thc county Treasurer to negotiate short-term interim loans, not to exceed $8,000,000.00, in accordance with Section 15.1-545 cf the code of Virginia, 1950, aa amended, and the rate of intmrest as determined in compliance with Section 2~1-326 of the Code of virginia, 1950, as amended; which loans wculd be negotiated as needed to pay operating expenses for the months of March, April and May, 1991; and w~uld k~ ma~e from m~ey~ held in variou~ County funda including Internal service, capital Project and Risk Managemen~ ~u~ds to be repaid prior to June 30, L991. 91-55 01/25/9I 11.C.7. APPROPRIAT~ ~CESS Ikx~TF2%~lI~IGS OF $215,000 ~ COURTS BUILDTNG PROJECT A Letter ~rom Judge John Daffron was regarding the project was referenced and filed with the papers of the Board. On motion Of Mr. AD, legate, seconded by Mr. Curtis, appropriated $215,000 in revenues and expenditures in the Courts Building project to cover the cast of final change orders for the b~ilding and to close out the project. Vote: Unanimous 11.C,8, ]~4~FOA BIN~O/P2%FIr~E~TS On motion Of Mr. Applegate, ~pproved re~e~t~ for bingo/ra~f!u organizations for calendar year !991: Chesterfield Little La~e The ~erican Lugicn, Midlothian Pos= 1~6, Inc. Manche~t~r-~c~ond Chapter Women of the VA Power, Chesterfield District, Volunteer Co~ittee the Board for the following Rafile Bingo Raffle tl.C.9. ~ TO THE C~'S RISK FJ~AG~N~ pLA~ TO On motio~ o~ 2~. Apple~a~c, secoh~ed b~ ~r. Curtis, amended the County's Risk Management Plan tc provide protection, in accordance with a Virginia Supreme Co=ri r~li~g pursuant to Title 3S.2 and Title 46.2 of the Code of ~%rqlnla, 19950, as amended, for officials an~ e, mployee~ covered un~er th~ Rlan who are injured in automobile accidents, wh~le performing their jobs, caused by driver~ who are uninsured, with the eever&~e afforded under the ~lan being tho minimum required by law as follows: $25,QQ0 for bodily injury te any individual; $50,000 for bodily injury arising out of any accident; and $20,~00 for prop=rt~ damage arisin~ out of ~e noted a copy of said amendmen= is £ile~ with the papers of this Board.] Unanimous On motion of Mr. Applega==, seooaded by Far. curtis, the Peard appropriated $4,500,~00 of interest and reserves {$3,008,000 d~ interest end $1,500,000 in debt servi=s reservel for payment of debt service in the current year in accordance with bond covenants and ~ effset the cost of debt service, whiuh So,roes include inter,st earning~ on £unds as f~llows: 91-56 01/23/9% SOURCES Interest, Count~ Capital Projects: Route 2~ $ 1,461,000 New Courts Building 1,162,~00 othex 376~80Q Debt Service Reserve $ l~50O~gO0 $ Vote: Decreas~ other budgeted Unanimous $ 4r5007000 ll.D. UTILITIKS ll.D.i. ~RAIi~AGE EAS~E~T IN PI~VISION OF m:HK~T~tbtFIRT,I] AI~-- ~O~.TINDUSTI~IAL~AP~,...~EC~IONA ~r. Sale stated this da~e aad =imm had been advertised for a public heari~ to co~sider an erdi~a~eu to vacate a 16 foot drainage eaeemenn in ~look A, R~vision of Industrial Purk, Section A. No one c~ forward to speak in favor of or againak the pr~Dosed or~i~nce. On mo%iQ~ uf ~r. Daniel, ~eoond~d adopted the following o/dinance: ~ O~IN~CE whereby th~ CO~ ~EST~IET,D, VIRGI~A, {"G~OR') vacat~n ~0 CK PINE ~L~ LIMITED P~ERSHIP, ('G~TEE"], drainage eas~ent in Block A, Revision of Chesterfield Airport Ind~txial ~ark, Se=~iun A, Dale Magisterial District, Chesterfield Co~t~, Virgule, as shown on a ~lat thereof duly ru=orded in the Clurk's Office of the CirG~it Court of ~t~rfiel~ C0~=y in Plat Book 27, Pages 63 and 64. ~R~S, CK Pine ~len L~ited Partnership, petitione~ =he ~uurd o~ S~ervisorm of Chesterfield vacate a 16 ~oot drainage easement Chesterfield Airport Industrial Park, Section A, Magisterial District, Ches~erii~ld Co~ty, Virginia more particulaTly shown on a plat of record in th~ Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court o~ said County i~ Pla~ Book 27, Page~ 63 and 64, made by J. K. Tigons & ~sociates, 9.C., dated October 2~, 1976. The easement ~u=i=iune~ to be vacated is more fully described a~ follows: A 16 foot d~ai~a~e eas~nt in Block A~ Revision of Chesterfield Airport Industrlal Park, Section A, the mo~e fully sho~, on a plat made by Dewberry which i~ attached this Ordinance. 91-57 01/23/91 W~EREAS, notice hes been given pursuent %0 Section 15.i-431 of the Code of Virqinia, 1950, as amended, by advertising~ and of the easement sought to be vacated. That pursuant to Section 15.1-452(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as hereby vacated. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accoxdanee with section 15.1-48~(b) nS the coda of Virginia, I950, as amended, ~%d a ~rti~i~ copy of thi~ ordinate, together with the plat attached hereto shall be r~corded no sooner ~han thirty days hereafter in th~ Clerk's O~ice o~ the Section 15.1-485 of ~h~ The effect of ~his Or~i~anc~ purmu~t to ~Gtiun 15,%-483 portion of Eh~ plat vacated. ~iE Or~iaanc~ shell vest fee s~1~ title of easement hereby vacated in the property owner of Block A~ Revision Of Chesterfield Industrial Park, Section of the Co~ty o~ Chesterfield, as grantor, and CK Pine Glen ll.D.l.b. TO C(~TD~ AN ORDI~ANC~ TO VACATE A PORTI~ OF KILDARK ~X AND bn~.~.~ IN ~ OF C~ESC~f PA~K SURDIVISION Mr. Sale stated this date and time had been advertised for a public h~arln~ to consider an ordin~nc~ to vacate a portion of Kildare Street e~d alleys in Sleek 12, Plan of Crescent ~ark. Ne one came forward to speak i~ favor of or against the proposed ordinance. On motion of Mr. Coffin, seconded by Mr. Apple~ate, the Board A~ O~DI~A~CE whereby the CO0ifXX OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, ("GRAN~R'~) vacates =o L. EUGF. NE JOBB, Equitable Separate Estate, (G~L%h"rEE), and David L. Hershey and Brenda P. w. Ncrshey, h=sba~d and wife, grantee, a portion of a 50 foot Road and 16 foot and veriable width Alleys in Block 12, Plan of C~escent Park Bermuda District, Chesterfield, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof of the Circuit COUrt of Chesterfield Co~t¥ in plat Book 4, Page llO. W~EFd~AS, Eugene JOD~, petitioned the Board of of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a 50 foot Read known as Kildare Street and 1~ ~uot and vaIiable width Alleys, in Block 12, Plan o£ Crescent Park $~bdivision, Bermuda District, Chesterfield County, Virginia more perticularly shown on a plat of record ia th~ Clerk'~ Office 91-58 Q1/23/91 of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 4, Page 110, ma~ by J. Temple Waddlll, dated 1928. The portion of Road and Alleys petitioned to be vacated are more fully deseriSed a~ follows: A portion of e 50 toot Rued known as ~ildare s~reet and 1~ foot an~ variable widt=h Alleys, in Block Plan of Cresceat Park Subdivision, the location of which is more iu!ly mhown, on a plat by Balzer & Associates, Ina. dated Septm~ber 17, 1990, a copy of which is attached. 15.1-431 of the Code of. Vi~_~, 1950, as amended, By advertising; and WHEREAS, no public necessity ~xists for th~ continuance of the portion of Road and Alleys sought to be vacated. NOW TEEP~FORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: Tha~ purs~%t to Section 15.1-482(~) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the a~ore~aid portion of Road and hereby reserves a 50 foot sewer and wat=r easement as shown on =he at~ached plat. This ordinance shall be in ~ult ~oree cad effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482{b) of the Code o~ Virginia, 1~50, as amended, and a certified coDY of this Ordinance, together with the plat attached hereto shall be sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant to section 15.1-4~5 of the Code of VirGinia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance p~r~TLa~t to Section 15.1-483 is to 4estro¥ the ~erce and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This Ordinance shell vest fee simple title oK the oenterline of the portion of Road and Alleys hereby vacated in the owners of the %_buttin~ lots within the Plan of Crescent Park Subdivlaion, free and ~lear o~ any rights of p~blic Accordingly, this Ordinanc= shall b= indexed in the names of the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, as grantor, and L. EUG~E JOB~, EqUitable Separate Estate, end David L. Hcrshe~ and Brenda W. Hershey, husband and wife, o~ ~heix successors in title, as grunt=~s. ll.D.2. CONBIDER RE~T F~ AP~"I'i~/~ RIVER WATER AUTHORIT~ TO ADOPT ~t~.~O~4~O~ ~GA~DII~ BANK ELIGIBLE L~UNDS On motion of Mr. Applegate, Seconded by Mr. ~urrin, the Boar~ adopted the ~ollowing resolution and authorized the Chairman o~ the Beard to execute same on ~ehat~ of ~he County: WH~KEA$, Appomattox River Water Authority (the "A~thority"} has informed the Boar~ O~ S%p~rviaors of the County of chesterfield, Virginia (the Board) that the Authority intends to issue in ~ar=h of 1991 approximately $7,000~000 in revenue bonds [the "Beads'~) to ~inance the construction oi two water trea%men~ Dlan~ sludge lagoons. 91-59 W~REAS, The AuLhority ha~ ~urtker informed the Board that the Authority intends to designate the Bonds as "qualified ~a.x-exemp~ obliga~ioas~' uadar S~c%iun 2~5(b) o~ tam IDternal Revenue Code o~ 1986, as am~nde~ (~he "Code"), encourage som~ercial bank~ and similar finansial institutions to purchase the Bonds. WHEREAS, Th~ Boar~ understands that i~ it d~es not the action evidenced by this Resolution, the County of chesterfield, virginia (=he "county") and each of Authorit¥'s other member jurisdictions will have to take into aceotult the full final original priacipal amount of the Bends in determinln~ whether it is eligible to issue c~uali~ied tax-~x~mp~ obli~ation~ in calendar ysaz 1991. WV~ERFJ%S, The Beard irravocably agre~ that the ~inal orlgiaal aggregate principal amount o~ the Bonds will be allocated for purposes of Section 265(b} (3) (C) of ~he Code to the Authority's member jurisdictions on the ba$i~ o~ the allocations of the capacity of the Authcrfty*s water treatment plant, which will result in the final oziginal aggregat= principal ameunt o~ the Bonds being allecated as Chesterfield Cou/~t~ .......... 53.35% City of Colonial Heights ..... S.02% Dinwiddie COUnty ............. 3.24% Princa ~orge County ......... 0.54% NOW, T~FORE, B~ iT P~BOLI~F~D T~AT, The Board finds that =he allooatlun for the County set ~erth in ~aragraDh 1 bears a reasonable relationship to the benefits expected to be received by the County from the issuanca of the Bonds and that this ResoSution wil~ tak~ effect immediately. ll.D. 3, OO~F~E~T ll.D.3.a. S~T DATE ~OR P~BLIC TO ~ 1990-91%~I~-TT~ CA~ITA~BUDC~ AND API~OPR/ATIONTOADDBERMUDAH~DRED IND~STR~kL WA~TWW~£~K ~¥ST~ on motien of Mr, Cuzrin, secondad by ~ir. Mayas, the Bnard set the date of February 27, 1991 at 9;00 a,m. ~er a public hearing to consider amendment of the 1990-91 Utilities Capital Budget to add the project k~own as Bermuda ~u~dr~d sawaz Service Area and to appropriate $1,313,400.00 £rOm developer contributions. Vo~: Unanimous ll.D.3_b_ m~ov~L OF ~]~T~N~IO~ FOR ~ E~GINKEi~ FI~ TO p~wmO~ WOR~ UNDER AN ANNUAL On motion o~ Mr. Currin, Seconde~ b~ ~r. ~a¥~s, ihs Board e~tended engineering contracts for o~e (11 year for the following ~our (4) firms and authorized uhe county Administrator to execute said contracts: Dewberry and Davis R. Stuart Royer & Assosiates Whitma~ Ruguardt & Associates 91-60 01/23/91 11.D.3.¢. A¢CEFI'~CE OF VARCEL OF IA,ND C~iNF-~E BAi~iST(~UR~0FRIC~MOND, VA On motion of Mr. Currin, ~con~e~ by Mr~ ~aye$, accepted on behalf of the Count~ the conveyance of a acre parcel of land along Parkway Lane from Chinese sap=is= Church of ~c~ond, VA., and authorize~ the CountM A~inis~ra%oz ~o exe~u~ t~e n~uessa~ deed. {A eo~y of ~aid plat is filed with tko papers of tkis Board.} Vote: Unanimous ~DWEK COMPA~V~ AT IKON~HIDGE PA~K On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by ~r. Mayes, the Board authorized the Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator to exeuute an easement agre~mmnt wlZh virginia Electric a~d Power Co, an9 to in~tall underground cabl~ within a 15 foot easement at Ironbridge Park to provide for service to the park. (A copy o~ maid plat is iiled with the papers o~ this Board.) 11.D.3.e. AWARD OF WA~-~A-~-~K CONTI~CT FORGet, TO ~STATE~, on motion of ~, ~rrin, seconded by M~. Ma~es, tho Bourd awarde~ a was=~wacer con, rat= (%87-7067) for the construction 0f a~ 8" wa~tew~tex linu to the lowest bidder, T & E construction, in ~h~ ~o~% of $1~3,055.80 to provide service to Genito Estates, Section A and tnansferred $70,00~.88 from 5P 58BS0-89Sg00E =~ 5P-5835O-8770~7E f~: =ai~ project. (It is noted the Cost for approximatel~ 2,816 L.F. of wastewater lines will h~ reissued ~ the D~v~loper of ~ut~e St. Regent's Lake Section 2 when th~ pr~pert~ develops.) Vote: UnanLmous ll.D.3.f. AWARD OF WAST~WAT~R C(~fRACT FOR MOORE'S LAKE On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by Mr. Maye$, the ~oard awarded a wastewater contract (%89-0597) for the construction of 10" and 12" was~ewater lines between southland Drive ~d Redwater Creek to the lowest bidder, T & E Construction, in %he amount of $77,630.30 and authorized the County Administrator to ex~cut~ any necessary documents. {It is not~ ~unds {ur this praject are appropriated in the current Capital Improvement Budget.) Vote: Unan~/~ous ll.D.3.g. AWARD OF W.AST~WA_~ER C~/~ACT FOR CRADDOCK POI~T~ OFFS~r~ WASTEWkr~ 0n motion of ~x. Cut,in, seconded by Mr. Mayes, ~he Board approved the following wa~t~wate~ Contract and authorized the Coun~ A~inistrator to ~ecute any necessary doc~ents: Cradduck Point - Or,site Watt,water ~te~io~ Project Developer: signet Bank/Virginia Contractor; Southern Co~truction Company Contract ~o~t: Estimated Total - $87,381.0Q 91-61 Total Estimated county cost: (Refund from ¢on~ection fees ia escrow) - $62,100.00 E~timated Dmvelep~r Cost: $25~281.00 Code: 5P-57240-S98800R (It is noted this County/Developer contract wa~ prOp~e~ with a provision to reimburse the Develops= from the wustewater capital recovsry charges collected from C=addook Pein=, Section~ 1, 2 and 3 which charge~ were authorized in 1980 to be ~laoed in an escrow account targeted for this project.) Vote: Unanimous Mr. Sale presented the Board with a report on tho developer water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. Mr. Ramsay presented tha Board with a statu~ report o~ the General Fund Contingency Account, General Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District Road and Street Light Funds, Lease ~urshases and School Board Agenda. ~r. Ramsay s~ated the Virginia Departmen~ of Tr~s~ortation has 9~rmally notified the Cowry of the acceptance o~ the WINTERS HILL P~CE (Effectiva Route 4247 (Winters Eill Place) - Prom Route 647 to Rou~e 424~ ~.15 Rcute 4248 (winter~ Hill circle) - From Route to Route ~249 0.46 ~i. ROUte 4249 (Win~ers Hill Court) - From Rou~e 424~ t~ 0.05 mile Southwest Route 4248 0.05 FOKEST ACRES - SECTIONS C & D [Effective 1/08/91) Route 1453 (Frencill Drive) - From Route 1457 to ROUte 4771 ~oute 4770 (Francill Court) - From Route 1453 to 0.08 mile West Rout~ 1453 R~ute 4771 (Marblethorpe Road) - From 0.12 mile West Route 1453 to 0.08 mile ~ast Route 1453 0.12 ~i. 0.08 ~i. 0.20 ~i. R/V~R~ BEN~.~ SECTIOns 1 AND 2 (Effective 1/l~/]l) Route 4855 [Rivers Be~d Road) - From Route 10 to 0.41 mile Northwest Route L0 Route 4856 (Rivers Bs~d Circle) - From Rou~e 4855 ~O 0.64 milo Northwest Route 4855 Route 4857 (Rivers B~nd Court) - From Rou~e 4858 to 0.08 mile East ROUte 4856 Routs ~89S (Karlyn Court) ~ From Route ~856 tO 0.06 mile Southeast Route 4856 Route 4859 {Kristsn Leas) -Frum Route 4856 to 0.15 mile Southeast Route 4855 0.41 Mi. 0,64 ~i. O.OS 0.06 Mi, 0.2~ Mi. 91-62 01/23/91 ADDITIONS ~GT~ MA/~EOUI{ MILL [Effective 1/11/91) Route 4845 IRarbour Rill Road) - Fz0m Route 2023 to Route 4846 0.13 Mi. Route 4846 (Marbeur Rill Place) - FrOM 8.87 mile South Route 4845 to 0.16 mile North Route %845 0.23 Mi. li.J. DISCUSSION OF DEL~GAT~ WA~S' IMPACT ~I. Sullivan stated one of his constituents had requested to which the proposed i~pact fee bill is written and addressed issues regarding the fee schedule, credits an~ mat~hlng funds. She stated she felt the County should rewrite its own legislative bill and provi~e it to the Legislative Delegation to st~b~it i~ the General Assembly and no~ give up =ash prof£e=s fox a flawed Lmpact fee bill. Mr. Sullivan suggested, due to time constraints, that the remainder of discussion on this mat~er ~e deierred until.after the zoning Session. Mr. Daniel requested that, due to a previous commitment, said discussion transpire Drier to ~he zoning session. on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board suspended it~ rules tO change ~he or,er of presentation to hear the remainder of ~he dise~ssio~ on the proposed impact ll.F. E~CUTtV~ S~SSION On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board we~t into Executive Session ~ursuant to Sect~cn 2.1-544 (a)(3) of the Cods of Virqinia, 1950, as amended, ~O discuSS the condition, acquisition and use o~ reel property ~or public P~Doses relating to the sxtensioa of Route 28~. Vote: Unanimous On motion of %he ~oard, the Board adopted the following ~esolutien: W~F/~EAS, the Boar~ o~ Supervisors has this day adjourned into Executive Sessicn in accordance with a formal vote o~ the Board, and in accordanc~ with th~ provisions of the Virginia Frse~om ef In{ormatien Act; and W~EREAS~ the Virginia Freedom of Information Act eficetive July !, 1989, provides for certification that such ~xecutive Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEFd~FORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of member's knowledge, i) only public business ~atter~ lawfull~ 91-63 01/23/91 which this certification applies, and ii) only such p~bli¢ business matters as were identified in the Motion b~which the Executive Session was ¢onvonod woro heard, discussed considered by the Board~ No m~mber dissents from this certification. The Board being polled, thc vote wad as follows: B~r. Daniel: Aye. F-~. Mayas: Aye. 51r. Applegate: Aye. Mr. Curria: Aye. Mr. Sullivan: Aye. ll.G. LUNC~ T~e Board recessed at 12250 p.m. Kitchen for lunch. (EST) to travel to Klara's (continued) Mr. Sale distributed data and presented an overview of the financial analysis of impact fees v~rsus cash pro~fers; year cash receipt projections o~ same; credits for market value o~ land; etc. Discussion, ~uestions and cou~uents ensued relative to the financial advantages and/or disadvantages o~ v~rsu~ impact feeD; the actual amount of funds received b~ the Counhy throuqh the use of the cash proffer system; which process would ~ield the most cash receipts ever a ten year which would net the most r~v~nue; ~tc. ~r. ~ayes ax~ressed concerns regalding the financial analysis; iudloatzd not all the pertinent facts were available~ and stated, if approved, ~aid aGtion would be passing the burden onto the taxpayers and he felt they should b~ made aware of all the facts. Mr. Applegatc stated that people were present to addreas zoning ig~ueg and the i~paffit fee issue was taking up a considerable amount of discussion time and requested the Chairman to utilize hii prerogative to suspend the rules to permit proceedin~ with the rezoning rec~dests and bring back conclusion of Mr. Daaiel stated the Chairman could utilise his prerogative to suspend the rules to bring back the impact fee after zoning but if he w~re to do so he would conveying a negaflve message to the p~blic; that there were possibly sufficient votes to ac% on the mat~er but he wa5 boand b~ the majoritM decision of thc Board and would be willing to go ts the General Assembly on his own; that he himself had not received the hill until just one or two nights prior to this meeting; and he felt such action woul~ not be in the spirit of cohe~ivenes~ and trying to identify what the ~roblems are and what uhe solutions should be. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board suspended its rules to permit proceedin~ with the rezcniug re,nests and bring back discussion of the proposed impact fee bill after the cunslusic~ of 91-64 01/23/91 Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Currin and Fir. Applegate. Mr. Mayes: and Mr. Daniel, as he felt such action ~ot in the spirit of cohesiveness o~ the meeting and that he had a prior coE~i~ment for which he must leave. ii.H. ~ FOR MO}3ILE~(IN~PERI~IT~AND~EZ[H4II4G 90SN0311 I~ Midlothian Magisterial District, DASD J~ r~ested withdrawl Of a mobile home permi~ %o park a mobil~ h~e in a Residential (R-7) District. ~e density of the proposal i~ approximately 4 ~ni=s per acre. The comprehensive Plan Avenue, ix~m a point approx~ately 140 ieet east of T~r L~ght R~ad, in the vioimity o~ 1468 ~ilroad Avenue. T~ Map 15-7 (1) Farm.l~ 60 a~d 88 (Sheet 7). to return to work and re~sted his ease be with~aw~. or not the 8~ject property could have a mobile hcm~ a~d/or residenc~ placed on it. On motion of ~. Sulliv~, seconded by ~. currin, the Board Vote: Unanimous In Clove~ Hill Magistsrial District, JAMES Uu~BARD requested u thirty (30) day deferral of aB a~endment to Conditional Usu Planned Dsvelopmsnts (cases 83s024 and 88SN00S2) to permit an ~en~nt will be controlle~ by zoning ~onditions or Ordinate standar~. The Comprehensive Plan ~a~i~nates the property for light industrial use with den~it~ to be dets~ined by ~evelopment re~!atiuns. This rs~est lies in a Light Industrial {M-l) District on a 2.3 ac~e parc=l fxontin~ approximately 278 feet on the east tins of Johnston Willi~ Drive, approximately 1,130 feet south o~ ~dlothian TuxnDike. Tax Map 17-10 (1) Paro~l 32 an~ Part of Parcel 29 [Sheet 8]. ~. P~ole stated ~h~ a~plicant had re~ested a thirty (30) day deferral of Case 89SN0422 ~til n~C~ ~e as his re,est for Board. Mr. J~es ~bard ztat~d the t~irty (Z0) day deferral was acceptable~ ~, AD, legate in, cared ~e p~lic heariRg date meeting and he ~elt it appropriate to defer the rezoning until such t~e as ~hat ~rocess ha~ been completed. On motion of Mr. A~91eqate, seconded b~ Mr. curiin, the Beard de~erred ~onnideration of Ca~e 895N0422 ~til February 27, 1991. Vote: Unanimous 01/23/91 In Midlothian Magisturiul Distridt, pLAN~I~G A~D ZO~F/HG, INC. requested rezonin~ from Agricultural (A) ~o Residential (R-25). Residential us~ of up tc 1.74 u~its per acre is permitted in a Residential (R-25) District. The density of such amendment wall be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance ~kandards. The Cemprehanalvc Plan ~esignates the property for residential use of 1.5 units per acre or less. This ruq=¢st lies on a 48.6 acre ~arcel lying appz0ximately 220 feet off the w~st line of South Nether~ield Drive, seuthera tor~iau~. Tax Map 6 (1) ~arcel 16; TaX MaD 7-1 (1) Parcel 3; and Tax ~ap 7-5 (1) Parcel 12 (Sheets 1 and 2). Mr. Peele presented a summary of Case 89SN034B and stated the Plannin~ Cc~issicn r~so~ended approval and acceptanc~ of the appli¢~t's proffered conditions. It was no,ed the applicant's representative had left the meeting momentarily, and i= was generally agreed te set aside the ~equ~ until later in the meeting. 89~N0340 In Matoaca Magisterial District, FINANCIAL ~'£~SES requests~ rezo~iag from Agricultural (A) to Residential Residential u~e of up to 4.84 unit~ per acre ia permitted in a Resid~ntis1 (R-9} District. The Comprehensive Plan the property ior residential us~ of 1.51 ~nits per a~re or two (2) places for a total of apprcx~ately 441 feet on the w~St line of Bailey Bridge Road, also frontin~ 187 feet on th~ north tine of Quailwood Road, 1,205 feet west of Ba~le~ Bridge Road, and located northwest 20; Tax MaD 76-2 {1) Parcel 6; and T~ ~p 76-3 (1) Parcel ~. Peele presente~ a s~a~ of Case ~9SN0340 ~ad ~tate4 the Plannin~ Co~ission reco~ended approval of the r~e~t acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. ~essrs. sullivan and Na~ps ~ress~d concerns regarding the z~est an~, therefore, it was place in its r~lar o~ th~ a~e~da for dincuss~on. 90~N0300 In Clever Hill Magistorial District, JA~F~ F. requested rezoning from Residential (R-7) to Nei~b_borhoed Development [Case 83S024) relative to buffers. ~e density Ordinance st~d~d~. ~e C~pr~h~naiv~ Pi~ desi~tus the development re~lmtions. This re~St lies O~ a 1.6 parcel ~rontin~ aDDrox~t~ly ~00 fe~t on th8 south ~d west lines o~ Sturbridge Drive, approx~at~ly 1,750 f~t ~outh Midlothian Turnpike. T~ MaD 17-10 (1) Part of Parcel 15 and T~ ~ap 17-15 (1] Parcel 3 (Sheet Mr. 9cole presented a s~ar~ of Case 90SN03Q0 ~d stated the Pla~ing cool,zion rec~ended approval s~ject to a single Mt. Jim H~burd stated the reco~undution was There wa~ ~0 o~position present, 01123/91 On ~otio~ of M~, Applegate, seconded by ~r. Curtis, the Board approved Case 90SN0300, sLubject to the ~ollowin~ condition: The portion of the reg~ired buffer of Case 83S$24 which is the subject of this case shall be deleted. (NOTE~ This condition is in addition condition 6 of Case 83s024,) An~ further, th~ Soard accepted the following proffered condition: of the following shall be accon~lished for fire protection: A. For building permits obtained On or before June 3U, 1991, the owner, developer or assignee(s) shall DaY to the County $150 per 1000 ~uar~ feet of gross floor area. If the build/hq ~rmit is obtained afte~ June 3Q, 1991, the amount of the required payment shall be adjusted upward or dow/Iward by tko percentag~ that the Marshall Swift Building Cost Index increased Or decreased between June 30, 1991, and the date of payment, With the approval of the County's Fire Chief, the owner, developer or assignee(~} required pa~rment for the cost of any requiled by law which is included as a part of the development. OR The ~wner, developer or assignee(s) shall provide a fire nnppression system not otherwise re~u~red by law which the County's Fire Chie~ determlnes substantially reduces the necessary for fire protection. The applicant stipulates and agrees that the need for the additional fire protection measures required by this proffer i~ qenerated ~olely by this rezoning. vo~e: unanimous ~05~0304 In Matoaca Magisterial District, ~DOS~ITH BR~r~u~, requested rezeninq from Agricultural (A) to General (C-B). The density Of s~h amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive ~lan designates the property ior industrial use with density to be determined by development rcgulationm. Thio regueEt lies on a 26.85 mare parcel fronti~ a~roxima=ely a96 feet on the west line ~ Iron Bridge Road, approx~at~ly 1,6B0 feet north o~ L~wi~ ~oad. Tax Map 114-5 (l) Pair Of Parcel 1 (Sheet 31). 91-~7 01/23/91 Mr. Pools presented a summary of Case 90SN0304 and stated the Planning Commi~si0n recoau~ended approval and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. He noted the applicant's representative, Fir. John Dodson, had to leave for a court appearance but indicated the reco~endatioa was acceptable. Mr. Curtis disclosed to the Board that he owns property adjacent to the sub, eot site, declared a cenflict of in=crest pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. system is rea/aired b~ ordinance with respect to this request and the applicant intended te use same. ~r. MeCracken stated ~he iagres~/e~ress plan wo~ld be submitted for approval by ti~e of site plan review. On mot&on of Nr. Mayas, zeconde~ by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved Case 90SN0304 and accepted the followimg proffered 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, 100' Of right-cf-way on Rt. l0 measured from the center line shall be dedicated to Chesterfield County free ~eutrict~d. 2. In addition to ~ub~is$ion of read cunstructi0n plans to VDOT and Environmental Engineering, the plans shall be submitte4 ~o and approved by the Transportation D~partment. 3. To provide for an adequate roadway system at th~ time cf the complete development of the proposed project, the Developer will be responsible fo~ the following: An additional lane of pavement along route 10 for the entire property frontage plus a separate right turn lane at each approved access to Route 10. b) Full comt of a traffic signal, if warranfed, at the Route 10/Iror~bridge Parkway/rite road c) The developer will d~dieate, fr~e and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield county, any additional right-of-way (o~ easement) requir~ for the imDrevements identified above. 4. In ¢c~junetion with the first sche~ati~ or SA~e plan ~lkbt~ission for other than an existing parking area, whichever occurs firs%, a phasing plan for req~ire~ road improvements, with supporting traffic analysis, if requeste~ by the Transportation DeparLment, shall be submitted to the Transportatio~ Department for approval. 5. ~peciflc roadway impreve,~ent~ met ~orth in theme transportation proffers arc required by the time of full site development and are to be constructed in accordance with the phasing plan approved by the T~anspor~at±en D~partm~nt. The developer shall provide the TrallspOrtutiun Department with additional traffic studies ~pen completion Of each phase if requested. Roadway improvement~ shall be increased ur decreased by the developer aB required by the Transportation Department the~e ~tudies demonstrate ~hat Traffic generation rates and distributions solely by this development are materially different as ~etermined by the Transportation Department from pre~eCtiOns set forth in the traffic study approved by the Transportation Department at th~ time of the initiul site/schematic plan approval for other thcs the e~isting parking area. If 91-68 01/23/91 . improvements canner be provided, the Pl~nnigg Commission may redu~ the permissible d~nsi~ies to the extent that by th~ T~a~sportatio~ Department, 6. In the event public transportation is ever made available dssiqna=~ by the Transportation Department and within the development may be utilize~ for the pickup and discharge of 7. Prior to any schematic or site plan approval, for other than the existing parking area, a traffic analysis shall road improvements. ~e developer ~hall ~ responsible identified in th= approved tra~flc analysi~ a~ 8. Ther~ shall only be one dir~t access from the property to Route 10. The approved a~cesm to Ro%t~ 1~ shell ali~ the existing crossover amce~, and shall De dezignad constructed to be ~ha~ed with adjacent properties as following shall be accomplished for fire protection: For buil~i~ p~its obtaine~ on or b~fore J~e 1~91, the owner/developer shall pay to th~ County $150 per 1000 s~ar~ ~ee= of gro~ ~loor area. If the building permit is obtained aft~: ~e 30, 1991 the ~ount of the requir~ pa~ent shall be decreased between June 30, ~991 an~ th~ ~a~e of Chief, the own~r/develu~r shall reueive a credit zuppression system not othe~ise re~ired by law which is includeA a~ a port of the development. 10. OR 11. The owner/developer shall provide a tire suppression system not o~herwlse required by law which the County's Fire Chief determines substantially reduces the need for County fasilitles otherwise nece~al-~ ~or fire protection. The land owner stipule=es an~ agree= that the need ~er the right-of-way dedication, road improvements ~nd fire protection measures ~p~cified herei~ i~ ~enerated solely by this rezoning. The developer further proffers that the following usus Display houses or shell Manufacturs~ home, mobile homes, mOdnlar homes, travel trailer sal~s, s~rviee, repair and 3) Nat~rial reclamation receiving centers; 4) Notels, motor courts or tourist 5) Public garagea. 91-69 01/23/91 12. Further developer proffers that with the exception of out~i~e ~isp~ay a~sociat~d with automobile er motorcycle sate~, outside display of merchandise for sale shall be Ce~fiaed to areas located within covered sidewalks or shall be screened from vi=w of any external public road or adjacent properties un which there is ne such outside displa~ or Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Applegate, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Mayes~ Absent: Mr. Coffin. ~o~ro3o~ In Matoac& Magisterial District, LAWR~C~ PiNK~E~ON rezonin~ from Agricultural (A) to Residential Residential use of ~p to 3.63 units per acre ia permitted in a Residential (R-L2) District. The Comprehensive Plan designates the propsr~ for residential use of 1.51 to units per acre. Thi~ request lies on a 0.31 acre parcel frontin~ approximately 90 feet on th~ north l~ne of ~eado~iew Drive, approximately ~90 fee~ e~t ~ ~alloway Ave~. MaD t~0-15 (1) Parcel 69 {sheet 52), ~r. Peele ~re~ented a s~ary o~ Casa 90SNQ308 and stated the ~lanninq Co~ission re~o~e~ded appr0v~l and acc~p~ancs of the applicant's pr0~fered condition. Mr. Lawrence Pi~leto~ stat~ th~ reco~endatio~ was approved Cas~90SN0308 and accepted the followfDq proffered condition: The a~plicant, s~divider, or assignee(s) shall pay the fo~lowiag to ~he County of Chesterfield at the t~e of building ~it application ur within ~wu years cf record pla~ approval, whithers= shall occur first, for infrastructure within the service district for the property~ a. $2,000 p~r lot, if paid prior to July 1, 1991; or b. The ~o~t approved by the Board o~ lu~, if paid between July 1, 1991, and July 30, 1992, incluEive; or c. The ~ount appIoved by the Beard of S~pervisors not to exceed $4,000 per lot, if paid between July 1, i912, and Jul~ 30, 1993, inclusive~ or d. ~e ~o~t approved b~ the Bo~d of Supervisors no~ %0 exceed ~4,000 per let adjuste~ u~ard by any increa~ in the ~arshall ~d swift Cc~t Index between July 1, 1992, and July I of the fiscal ~ear in which the pa~e~t is made if paid after June 30, 1993. Prior to final s~divi~i0~ plat approval, the applicant, subdivider or assign~(s) shall furnish to the Board of Supervisors a surety 91-70 Vote~ bond, approved by the County Attorney, sufficient to cover the cost of such payments. The applicant ~tipulates and agrees that the In Midlothian Magisterial District, PLA~NG A~D Z0~II~, re~fueeted rezoninq from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-25). Residential use of up to 1.74 units per acre is permitted in a Residential (R-25) District. T~e density of 9ro~erty for residential use 0f t.5 ~its per a~re or l~ss. ~i~ r~nt li~ on a 48.~ acr~ parcel lying 220 feet off th~ west line of South Netherfield Drive, southern terminus. T~ Map 6 (t] Parcel 15; T~ Map 7-1 Mr. Peele presented a s~mmary of Case 895N0348 an~ ~tated ~e Plsnning commission recommended aDprovat and aoceptanee of the applicant's pref£ere~ ~onditions. Mr. Edward willey, Jr., representing the a~plie~t, sta~e~ the r~nun~ndati~n was =cc~ptubl~. Ms. Fay~ Palm, r, representing ~ha Salisbury Civiu Associa=ion, voiced support for the proposed request indicating residents had met with Mr. Willey and would be ~ilin~, with Mr, Willey's assistance, a res/test for vacation of the ntub road from N~therfield Drive- There On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board approved Case 89S~034~ an~ accepte~ the following pro~iere~ conditions: The minimum lot size shall be 30,000 square ~eet. The average lot size ~hall be ~o less tha/l 40,000 f~uu. The stub road f~em Nethe=field ~rive shall be used only one single family residence and for utilities to serve the immediate area. No construction tr~ffie, except for the single family residence or for utilities am noted in Proffer 3, ~hall Netherfield Drive~ Applicant shall 3sin with the o~rnerm of Lot 15, Block A, and ~e~ 1, '~lock C, W~s= Kenne= Settler o~ Salisbury Subdivision in a re~emt to vamate the stub road from Nether~ield Drive iK~ediatety, provided that an easement, not to exceed twenty-five (25} feet in width, for ingress and egress for One single famil~ residence and for utilities as noted in Proffer 3 is reserved ov~i and through said stub road. Property owner shall notify the re~ident~ cf Netherfield Drive, c/o Fays ~almer, 14210 ~th~r~i~ld Drive, ~idlsthian, Virginia 23113, upon the ~iling e~ any :entative subdivision plan for the property, which filin~ 91-71 01/23/91 shall be for Co~u~ission. Vote: Unanimous hearing before the Chesterfield Planninq 89SN0340 In Matoaoa Magisterial District, ~INANCIAL ~rKw/~ISF~ II requested rszoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential Residential use of up to 4.84 units par acre is permitted in a Residential (R-9] District. The Comprehensive Plan designates less. This request lies on an 86.8 acre parcel fronting in two (2) places for a ac:al of approxirm~tely 441 feet on the west line of Bailey Bridge Read, also frsnting approximately 187 feet on the north line oi Quailwood Roa~, approximately 1,2D5 feet west o~ Bailey Bridge Road, and located of %he iatersection of these roads. Tax Map 62-15 (1) Parcel 20; Tax Map 76-2 (t] Parcel 6; and Tax Map 76-3 (1) Parcel 27 (sheet Planning Commission race,ended approval and acceptance of the app!ieant's proffered conditions. Mr. Ashby Stinson, representing the request~ state~ the recom~endation was acceptable and presented the Board with a statement that no development plan has been considered that did not utilize public wa~er and sewer~ (A copy of said statemen~ is filed with the pape=s of the Board.) A concerned citizen indicated he had not had an opportunity to provided and subsequently, after reviewing the request, voiced opposition to the approval of R-9 zoning, density, eec. Mr. Woodfin voiced concerns relative to the proposed house sizes and asked that ~ame be u~raded to coincide with other residential dwelling~ i~ the area. to density, lot ~izes, provisions for public water and sewer; transportation improvements; upgrading the rezening fr~m to R-12; internal road designs, layout of the terrain; the nunlbez of developable lots using either R-9 and/or R-12 zoninq; buffers; the lack of opposition at the Planning Commission ~ublic hearing; etc. When asked, Mr. S~inaon state~ that rather than defer the ~equest he would agree ~c R-12 so~iBg with his proffered conditiomm. ~r. ~ayea made a motion for approval of Residential (R-12) zoning, SuLbj~ct to the following condition an~ proffers as listed herein, in addition to the applicant's previously mubmitt~d statemen~ agreeing to the use of public wa=er and A fift~ (50) foot buffer strip, exclusive o~ req~lired yards a~d easements which do not run generally perpendicular through th~ buffer, shall be established and maintained adjacent to Bailey Bridge Road (Route 654). The area of thi~ h~f£er strip shall either be left in it~ ~at~ral state~ if sufficient Yegutution exists to provid~ adequat~ screening~ or be planted and/or harmed in a~cordance with a lanci~cape pla~ approved by ~he Planning Department, i~ vegetation does not exist to provide adequate soreeniag. Prior to approval of any final sits plan or recordation of any plat, the developez shall flag th~s s~rip inspectioa, an~ shall Dost a bond to cover the 91-72 01/23/91 implementation of =he landscape plan, if such ~lan is required. Only acc=ss(as) approved by the T~a~sporta- tion Department shall be lmermitted through this buffer strip~ Th~$ buffer ~hall be noted on any final site plans, and any final check and reuordatlon plats. And further, the Board accepted the following pref~ered conditions: 1, At time of recordation of ~ sub~ivi~ion plat for the adjacent to Bailey Bridge Road, forty five [45) feet of right-of-way on the west side of Bailey Bridge ~oad m~asured from th~ centerline of that part of Bailey be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. 2, A buffer shall be provided along Quailwood Road for the entire property irontage, Access through this buffer shall be approved by the Transportation Department. 3. Additional pavement shall be constructed along Bailey Bridge Road at the approved access to provide le£t and right turn lanes. 4. The ditch line along Bailey Bridge Read shall be relocated no provide adequate shoulders for %he entire property ~rontaqe. 5. The maximum density of this development shall not exceed 175 lots, and the developer shall ~e respon=ihle for the reconstruction of a section of North Bailey Bridge Road between Bailey Bridg~ Road ~nd Route 360 er a section Bailey Bridg~ Road between the subject property and North Bailey Bridge. The exact location cf the section ~halt ~e de~ermiaed a~ approved by th~ Transportation Department. The reconstruction shall be to VDOT Urban ~inor A~terial Stan~rd~ with modifications as approved by the Transportation Department. The developer shall not be required to make any sash improvements (other than the left and right turn lanes required by proffered condition ~3), ~eyond those t~at can be constructed for a cost not to exceed $262,508, as determined b~ the Transgortatien DeDarLment. This reconstruction shall completed as determined by the TranS~Ortatio~ prior to final check plat applo~al of more than 6'0 lots ~nl~s otherwise approved by the TIansportation Department. Mr. Micas indicated the applicant had not proffered the use of p~lic water and sewer prior tc the meeting and sam~ could not be included in the condition unless the zoning were modified ~o a ~onditional ~e. ~e f~rther no~e~ it eeuld not be part of the motion and be legally binding nor does the applicant's to accomplish this the r~q~eSt m~st be deferred. Mr. Daniel inquired if ~he motion could be made to Residential (R-12) with Conditional Use Planned Development, subject to the recommended condition and acceptance of the appllcant~s proffere~ conditions, including the use cf public water an~ sewer. Mr. Misa~ ~tated that such action would be legal and appropriate; however, it was unusual procedure. Mr. Mayas amended his ~otion, seconded by ~4r. Daniel, to approve Residential (R-12) with Conditional Use Planned Development, subject =o the following conditions: 1. A fifty (50) foo~ buffer strip, exclusive of required yards and easements which do not run generally perpendicular through the buffer, shall he established 91-73 01/23/91 a~ maintained ad3acent to Bailay Bridge Road (Route 654). The area of this buffer strip shall either be left in its natural stats, if sufficient vegetation exists to provide adequate screening; or be planted and/or harmed in accerdano~ with s land.cape plan approved by the Planning Department, if sufficient vegetation does not exist %0 provide adequate screenAng. Prior to approval of ~-~y final site plan or recordation of a~y plat, the developer shall flag this strip for inspection, and shall post a bond to mover the implementation of the l~dscaD~ plan, if s=ch Pl~ is ~e~ired. Only access(es~ approved by the Transporta- tion Dapar~ent shall be p~r~%tmd t~ou~h this buffer s~riD, ~im buiier s~ll b~ noted OB any fill site plans, and an~ ~inal check and r~cor~ation 91aUz. P~lic water and smwer shall ~e used. ~urther, thc Board accepted the ~ollow~ng 1, At tim~ of r~or~=io~ of a s~ivlsion plat for the lots a~jao~nt to Bailey Bridge Road, fort~ five (~5) ~eet right-of-way on the wes= si~ of Bailey ~ri~g~ Road measured from the centerline o~ that part of Bailey B~idge ~ad ~udiately adjacent =o th~ property, shall b~ dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Che~terfiald Count~. 2. A buffer shall be provided along Quailwood Road {or $~ll be approved by the Trunspo~tation 3. Additional pavement shall ~ constructe~ along Baile~ Bridge Road at the approved access to provide left and right t~ra lanes. 4. The dutch lla~ along Bailey Bridge Road ~hall be retocate~ to provide ade~a~e shoulders for th~ enti/e ~ro~mrty frontage. 5. ~e m~i~ d~nsity o~ this development shall not exceed 175 tots, and the developer ~hall b~ responsible for reoo~truction of a sectio~ of North Bailey Bridge Road between Baile~ Brid~e Read and R~ute 36~ or a section Bailey Bridge Rua~ between the s~j~ct p~operty and ~orth Bailey ~rldge. ~e ~xact location of ~e section sh~ll be detrained and approved by the D~partment. The reconst~ction s~ll bu to ~ by =he Transportation Depar~ent. ~e developer shall not be re~i~ed to make ~y ~u~h imDrov~ents (other the left a~d riqht ~urn 1ahem re.ired by proffered condition ~3), beyond those =hat ca~ be oo~struct~d for cost ~ot to exceed $262,5Q~, as determined by the Transportation Dupar~ent. This rec~nst~ction shall be ~0mpleted as de=e~ined ~ the Transportatio~ Depar~ent, prior to final ch~ck plat approval of more than 60 lot~ unless otherwise ap~roved ~y the Transportation Dep~r~ent. ~en asked, Mr. ~ica$ indicated th~ Board h=s granted such action in the if the a~licaut would be williag to ~e~d his re~e~t to comply with all conditions of R-12 zoning. ~. Currin suggested ~he re.est be ~eferred for thirty (30) days. Mr. Applegate ma~e a s~stitute motion, seconded by Ceftin, to du~ur Case 89~0340 ~til Feb~y 27, 1991 so the 91-74 01/23/91 applicant could meet area residents and his engineer to resolve the previously raised issues and concerns. Vote: Unanimeus In Midlothian Magisterial District! WINDY HILL, LTD. requested amendment to Conditional Use (Case 79S06~) to permit the sale and consumption of alcohol at an existing commercial recreational facility, The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The comprehensive Plan designates the property for residential LL~e of 1.5 units p~r a~re or less. This regemt lies on u 0.12 acre parcel lying approximately 36O feet off the north line Midlothian Turnpike, approximately 600 feet east of Old Kundred Road. Tax Map 14 (1) Pert cf Parcel 5 (Sheets 5 and ~r. Peele presented a mummery of Case 90~0302 and stated Plannin~ coK~issien reoo;m~ended denial. Mr. Hilton Phillips, representing the applicant, presented a $~m~azy of the ~e~p~e~ end aske~ the Board'~ favorable consideration to permit the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages (beer on-premise only) at the exi~:ing recreational facility. He noted there was no opposition voiced when the notice was posted regardiRg the application for an ABC license. Mr. John Russell; Reverend Edward ~cwell, ~astor of the Bethel ~aDtls= Church; Mr. Joe Meschtar; Ms. Carolyn Powers; and Mr. ~eorge Beadles voiced opposition to the proposed request; stated that ori~inall¥ area residents had opposed the complex, but after negotiating ~ith the applicant at that time ~hey agreed to the sports comple~ with the sondition that ne alcohol would be permitted and ~hey considered ~hat agreement binding; expressed concern that the sale an~ consumption of alcoholic beverages would be detrimental ~o the famil~ atmosphere of the complex and would be detrimental to the area youth an~ so. rounding neighborhood; etc. Mr. Phillip~ m~atud he felt the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverage~ could be controlled sufficiently that it would no% detrimentally impact and/or influence the neighborhood youth or community. ~r. Sullivan stated he felt the oo~pl~ was ~/1 ~s~et to co.unity but that permitting the male and consumption alcoholic beverages on the premises would reflect a lack of integrity in following through on and protecting the original conditions of zoning and would not be in the best interest of the cer~munity. Mr. Mayes stated he ~elt i~ inappropriate to introduce the ~ale an~ consumption of alcoholic beverages a~ the complex a~d into a~ established residential co--unity. Mr. Daniel stated he felt if an agreement ha~ been ma~e at :he time the request was originally zoned, thee he considered those coaditions of zoning a contract that should he honored. On motion o~ Mr. sullivan, seconded ~y Mr. Daniel, the Board denied Case 98SN0302. Vote: Unanimous 91SN0122 In Midlothian Magisterial District, W. F. R., INC. requested an amendment to previ0a;ly granted Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 74S121 and 74St22) relative to buffer and controllud by zoning =onditiona or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property fez light commercial use with density to be determined by development regulations. This request lies in a convenience Business ($-1) District on a 0.~ acre parcel fronting the south llne of Alleclngie Parkway, approximately 490 feet southeast of Hugueno~ Road. Tax Map $-16 (6) Huguenot Commercial ~ark, Block A, Lot 2 (Sheet Mr. Peele preuented a Summary of Case 91SN0122 a~d ~tated the Pla~ing Cc~aieeion race,cooled approval, subject to o~rtain conditions. Mr. ~dward Willey, Jr., representing the applicant, stated the Planning Commission's ~aco~euda~ion was acceptable. was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board approved Case 91SN0122~ subject to the following 1. The portion of the required buffer of ca~es 74S121 and deleted. (P) [NOTE: This condition is in addition to Condition 7 of cases 74S121 and 74S122.) 2. Parking space eiz~ may b~ :educed to nine ~ighteen (15) feet. (CPC) 3. In conjunction with the granting of this request, a two I2) parking apace exception to the required number of parking spaces shall be granted. ~CPC) Vote: Unanimous 90~-N0309 IH ~atoa~a ~agisterial District, ~'~ Ct~I~TIAN rc~/ested Conditional use to De,it a day care in Agricultu=al (A) District. The density of such ~en~ent will be con~rolled by zunin~ co~itions or ordinance ~tandar~s. The C0~pruhunsive Plan designates ~he pzoperty for residential use of 1.51 to 4.00 units per a~re. ~is re~es~ li~s on a 1.78 acre parcel fronting approx~ately 257 feet om the south llne of Ka~Dy Hill Road, approx~atel~ 580 feet we~t u~ Tetris Lane. T~ ~p 13~-12 (4) ~ar~en city Height~, Lot 72C 41). Mr. Peele presented a S~ary of Cas~ 90~03~9 and stated the Planning Cohesion leco~u~d~ m~roval, s~ject to certain conditions. He noted there had ~en a~stantla~ Qpposition the Ie~est a% %he Pla~ing Co~is~ion meeting; however, the Commission had rec~ended ~osition of conditions to C~owding problem ~nd to only provide ~Dace for this school the use of existing church comple~ space (non-Dro~it ramifications of said use on the ~a~ infrastructure. He noted proximity and they would be impo=ted by the noise and/or other nuisances associated with the proposed use. Mr. Miller, an adjacent property owner, i~quired if the conditions would be binding, as discussed during the preceding rezoning request. AfTer a brief explanation, ~r. ~itler indicated he did not oppose the request provided the intent was to use the church only until Jlule $0, 1991. On motion of Mr- ~ayes, seconded ~ Mr. A~le~ate, the Board approved CasePOSN0309, s~ject to the ~ollowing 1. The foll~ing oonditions notwi~s~a~in~, the plan submit=ed with the a~plication shall be considered the plan o~ 4evelo~en~. 2. The Conditional Uss shall expire on June 30, 1991. (CPC) 3. The ho~x~ o~ operation ~11 b~ li~ted ~o ~we~n 7:~0 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and to between 3:00 D.m- and 6:30 p.m., Money through Friday. (CPC) 4. ~e enrol~ent shall be l~it~d to a m~ ~wenty~five (25) school ag~ children. (C~C~ propos~ play area and adjac~n~ properties. Within =his plan depicting the play area ~d all othe~ planed and/or re~ired i~roveme~=s ~o ~he property must be to the Pla~i~g Dupar~unt for review and approval.) ll.J. DISCUSSION OF D~Tm~TE WATKINS I~PACT ~ BI~ (continu~l} Mr- Daniel in~ieatod he had been able to resolve his prior commitment and it was no longer necessary for him ts leave the meeting Discussion, ~uestiuns and comments cont£nne~ regarding the r~ifi=ations of the proposed impact fee legislation; proposed ~nts %o the e~isting l~gi~lation ad~ressing certain verbiage, fee~, etc.; the ~paet of =aid ~un~ent nego~iatlons ~ung County officials, homebuilders d~velo~e~s and Delegate Watkins; etc. Mr. Sullivan stat~ he felt the Board should compr~ise on the Delegate Watkins could support and get passed in the ~neral Mr. Daniel e~ressed oon~ern that there had b~en no broad-based p~lic input regarding this matter eight revisions to the bill aa Section 10.1 - Prefers allowing the Board to choose aither impact fee~ or cash proffers for all development on a "case by case" approach; ~eetiom 10.4 - Impact fees could increase in the future UD to the "capital cost created by each new unit of Payment of impact ice at building permit instead of certificate of occupancy; 91-77 Create two categories of house size "big and little" with a beginning $4,000 impact fee; 5. ~arsha~l Swift I~dex ~hould be limited tO the cons~ructien portion of impact ~ee and that other costs, e.g., land acquisition, could increase at a faster rate; Section 10.6 - No credits for deduetfons er improvements 7. Beotien 10.9 - Expenditure by the County must b% within Section ZU.10 - Eliminate "ma~h'~ re~ir~-menb by the Mr. ~ayes stated he s~pDorted the impact fee Di~l with th~ proposed changes; would lik~ to increase the fee for the la~e~% house categories from $2,500 to $~,500 ~nd $3,500 to proposal. Mr. Applegate stated that he supported the i~pa~t fee bill with the proposed changes, preferred a single impact i~e of $2,100., recommended elimination of ~rediUs fez future eh=nges bKt would prefer an additional $500 a/~ount for third There was lenqt21y discussion relative to the proposed amendments tO the existing legislation: fun~ing for projects other than schools and road improvements with impact fees, if possible; the loss of the cash proffer pr0oess if impact fees Mr. ADDlsgate made a mo~ion, seconded by F~r. CB=:i~, to amend proposed legislation regarding an impact fee bill introduced at the Senerat Assembly as follows: 1. Change "shall~' to "may" in Section 10.1 which would allow resolv~ diBpute~ over the fair market value of Equalization (Section 10.6); $2,500; a third !~ar fee of $3,800; and ~%ub~equently, after the third year, the maximum combined impact tax is i~provements may be adjusted annually (based on certain economic adj~$~ent$) by the Board o~ Supervisore following a public hearinq provided, however, tha~ fha percentaqe increa~ in the Marshall swift Reqienal Construction Price I~dcx during the preceding yea~; improvements that has not b~en expended within ten (10] years of receipt of sai~ tax; 5. Delete from Seotio~ !0.6, DaIagraDh. 1', ."~e~ sim~le dedications of l~d made, or required ~o be made, by the dsvelopsr for school facility or roa~ i~provsmsnts directly attributable to new development; Clarification of definition of match funds, including money received from the State, on Ca~i:al Projects within the County; and Directed that the Chairman of th~ Board and County Administrator attend the G~neral A~eembly public hearin7 ts i~disats s~pport for the proposed legislation and to oppose any measure to change tha~ which the Bo~d has voted on. Vets: U~a~imous When asked, with copies of Ra~sey sta~ed staff would provide the Beard the draft proposed legislation as soon as prior ~o its being forwarded to the General Assembly. 12. ADJO%IH1,R/E)F~ On motio~ of Fir. Applugat~, seQunde4b¥ ~r, Currin~ the Doa~d adjourned at 6:30 p.m. (~STI until 2:00 p.m. on February 13, 1~91. County Administrator 91~79 01/23/91