The URL can be used to link to this page

01-09-91 Minutes ~I~JTES JANUARY 9, 1991 Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. M.~. Sullivan, Chairman Mr. C.F. Currin, Jr., VLceChairman Mr. G. H. ADDlegate Mr. Barry G. Daniel Mr. Jesse J. Mayes County Ad~inistraqQz Staff iu Attendan=e: MS. A~¥ Davis, Exec. Asst. to Co. Admin. Mrs. Doris DeHart, Asst. Co. Admin., Legie. SVCS. and Intergovern. Affair~ MS. Joa~ S. Dolezal, Mr. John Boykin, Asst. Dir., Gen. Services Mr. Craig Bryant, Asst. Dir., Utilities De~t. Fire Depar~men~ Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Deputy CO. A~mi~., ~anageme~t Services Mr. Thomas E. Ja=ob~o~ Dir., Planming Dept. MS. Mary Leu Lyle, Dir., Accounting D~pt. Mr. Robert L. ~asden~ Deputy Co. Aclmi~., Mr. R. J, McCracken, ~r. Richard MeElfisk, ~rs. Pauline ~itehell, Dir., News ~nd public Col. J. E. Pittmen, Jr. chie~ o~ ~olice ~r- Richard Sale, Deputy CO, Admin., Di~., Parks & ~ec. Sheriff C. G. Williams, Mr. F~ederick Willi~ Dir. of H~an Mr. Ramse~ calle~ the requl~rly scheduled meeting to order 2:00 p.m. I~$T) in the Administration Building Conference ~oc~ (Room 502). 1. ORC~%NI ZATI(~4i~L 1.A.F.L~TI~ OF ~ AND VICE Mr. ~amsey stated the 91eotio~ of Chairman. first order of ~u$inGss wc~ld be the 9~-1 ' 0~/09/9~ Mr. Currin nominated F~r. Sullivan to serve as Chairman for 1991. Mr. ~ayes nominated Mr. Deniel to serve as Chairman for 1991. Hr. Daniel e~c~reeeed appreciation for hie being nominated to ~c~ve as chairman but withdrew his name from consideration. He stated, however, he 00eld not SUpport Mr. Sullivan's nomination for several reaeor~ lack of consensus building and collective direction. ~kr. Mayes stated he felt Mr. Daniel's length of servise on the Board and expertise q~Aalified him as the best can~date for the position. There beinq no further nominations, Mr. Ramsey declared the nominations closed. The vote on M/. Sullivan's nomination to serve as Chairman of the Board for 1991 was as follows: Nays: Mr. Daniel. Abstention: Mr. Mayes. Hr. Sullivan was elected Chairman. honor and t~u~t bestowed upon him and for their candor and honesty. ~e pledged to the Beard and, particularly, the eltizens of the Count~ to perform the duties and responsibilities of ~he chsirmanshi~ to the best of hi~ abilities. ~r. Sullivan stated nominations wer~ epee for Vice Chairman. ~r, kPPlegate sta~ed he inteadcd to nominate Mr. Da~liel t~ serve as vice Chairman, however, ~r. Daniel had declined the nomination sad therefore he would nominated Mr. Curri~ to ~erve in the capacity cf vice Chairman for 1991. ~r. Daniel stated he would reconzide~ the nomination if th~ supper% of ~hs Board were unanimous. Mr. ~ayes nominated Mr. Daniel to serve in the capacity of Vice Chairman for 1991. Upon request of gLr. kpplsgate, ~he ~oar~ recessed for a Recenv~g~ Mr. Sullivan i~quircd i~ there were any further nominations. There being none, nomi~a=iuns were uluse~. The vote on Mr. Currln~s nomination to serve as Vice Chairman of th~ Board for 1991 was as follows~ Ay~Z: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Currin aD~ ~r, Applegate. Abstention: Mr. Daniel and Mr. Ma~es. Mr. Currin was elected Vice Chairman. 1.B. ADOPTION OF 1991 PROC~DURES FOR -£~ CONDUCT OF )~TINGS There wa~ discussion r~garding amendments to the adoption o~ ~he procedures for the 0onduo~ of the meetings of the Board for 1991 with respect to th~ Chairman setting a reasenabi~ time limit for all public h~arin~s, =hat zoning case~ must be 91-2 01/09/91 disposed of by s motion approved by a majority vote and clarification that co~nittees are sometimes afeared by the Board and ~ometimes by the Chairman of the Board. The Board agreed to an amendment to Section 3 that "The Chairman shall set reasonable time limits for all public hearings, subject to approval of the Board of Supervisors". After dise~ssioa, it was on motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Currin, resolved tha~ ~he Board adopt the 1991 Procedures for Co~d~ct of Meeting~ of the Board of Supervisors, as amended. IA oopy of said ProGedure~ is filed with the papors of this Board.) 1.C. $~1"£IM~ OP ~E~ULAR~rING DATES Mr. Ramsey presented the s~hedule of regular meeting dates to the Board ~d noted ~he~ may wish to recommend dates for scheduling pub/lc hearing~ to consider caadidates for school Board representatives for the Bermuda and Dale Districts. There wa~ dlmcu~sion relative to ohanqing the ~im~ of the first ~eeti~q of the ~enth from 7:00 p,m. to 6:30 On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~r. Currin~ th~ Boar~ SOt the tim~ of the first meeting of %he month at 6:30 p.m, with the understakdi~g that scheduled work sessioas would be con=luded at 4:30 p.m. an~ that routine bu$ine~ of the Te~lar meeting (i.e.~ Invocation, Pledge of Allegia~lce, Approval Of ~i~u~es, County Administrator Co~ne~ts, Board Committee Reports, Resolutions and Special Reeog~£ti©I~, woul~ be beuween 6:30 p.m. - 7~00 Vote: Unanimous on motion of ~r. ApDlegate, seconded by Mr. Carrie, the Board set the second w~d~esday at 6:30 p.m. an~ the fourth Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. of aach ~o~th for Board meetinqE, with the exoeptioa Qi J=ly and Au~l~s~ when only one mesting will be scheduled for the fourth Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. and when only one me,ting will he scheduled Wednesday at 9~0 a.m., as fellows: January 9, 1991 at 7:00 P.m. July January 23, 1991 at 9=00 a.m. Work Febraax!z 13, 1991 a~ 6:30 p.m. February 27, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. Auqllst September March 13, 1991 March 27, 1991 April 10, 1991 April ~4, 1991 at 6:38 p.m. at 9:00 a.~, at 6:30 p.m. at 9:00 8, 1991 at 5~30 p.m, 22, 199t at 9:00 a.m. June 12, 1991 at 6:30 p.m. Jtme 26, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. for the second 24, 1991 at 9;00 a.m. Session (July-August) 28, 1991 at 9:00 a-m. ll, 1991 at 6:30 Septentber 25, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. october 9, 1991 at 6:30 p.m. O~tober 23, 1991 a~ 9:00 a.m. November 13, 1991 at 6:30 p.m. Nov~nber 27, 1991 at 9:0~ a.m. December 11, 1~1 at 9~08 a.~. It is noted work sessions shall be scheduled for the second Wedl~esday of each month at ~;00 p,m, as necessary. The $oard d~erre4 oonai&eraticn for settin~ the dates for Dale ~agisterial District~ School Board Representatives un,il brought forward ~o the ~oard by the Distriot Supervisors. i.D. ~-D~I(3)4'[ OF C:{2)E~,'lI'l=r{e~s Mr. Sullivan stated he was would like the opportunity ~c review the list of Committee Appointments ann consider candidates for same, requested solicitations from the Board members for their reooramendations and stated hs anticipated being prepared to appoint at the next meeting. ~ere was some the Chairman; prcvisionE of the County Charter that pex~it the Chairman to establish committees an~ appoint individuals to and appointed by the Board; etc. On motion cf Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~ir. Applegate~ the Board deferre~ until January 23, L991 consideration o£ Committee Appointments. ~r. Micas presented an overview of sash preffers~ ezglainin$ the existing cash proffer policy, caps on cash pro£fer amounts, time of payment, bonds, restrictions on new development standards, allocation of cash proffer amounts between roads and ether capital imprevement~, provisions o~ the proposed "impact tax" bill bein~ sponsored by Delegate Welkins in the General Assembly, etc. Discussion, q~estions ~nd comments ensued relative to clarification of the existing cash proffer policy adopted ~y the Board regarding road improvements; a recent zoning request cash proffer~ amou~tz for road~ versus other capital imprQvement needs; ~aleulati0ns of future sash progfer~ as COmpared to current amountn ac~epte~ in zonin~ oases; whether or not a cash proffer policy could be retained if an impact t~x hill for the County were passe~ by the General Assembly; Verbiage o~ Delegate Watkins' proposed impact tax bill; adoption o~ impact ~ees through the char[ex a~andmcn~ process versu~ general law; ets. 0n motion of ~r. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Duniul, th~ Board to retain the current pcllu¥ for determining future cash pro~fers. ~z. ~icas presented a brie~ sun~al-y of vesting protection language and stated in order to pre~eet ~he ~eard's ability ts initiate zonin~ ohange~ in the future, ~taff will ask the applicant to stipulate tha~ the need fez tho Drc~er is qe~e~at~d solely by the re~uested rezoning. Re noted if the applicant chooses not to do so, staff will note the omission within the staff report. application of s~e; reluctance to change such a policy without conducting a pttblic hearing on the m~er; legal ramifications that could result i~ the pelicy were changed; on motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Fir. Daniel, the ~oard diree=e~ staff to retain the current policy regardin~ vesting protection until the Board provi~e~ staff with further direction to proceed with a public hearing on same. 91-4 01/09/91 Vote: Unanimous Mr. Stegmaisr presented a brief su~m~ary re~arding the calculation of future cash proffers. ratio of 40% for road needs/60% for all other capital needs; the uncertainty in being able to identify the mount cE each cash proffer contribution available; whether or not actual cash dollars had been collected since said policy was implemented7 etc. When asked, Er. Ra~sey provided the Board with data from the minute~ of previous Board meetings indieatin~ cash proffer policy and application of ca~h non-residential rezoning and road improvements. ~r. Daniel e×~usedhimself fro~ the meeting. After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Applegat~, seconded by ~r. Currin, resolved %o adopt ~he following allocation policy for cash proffers: o 40% of thc prevailing cash profier Amount for roads 60% o~ ~hs ~rsvailln~ cash proffer amount for all other (schools, parks, £ire stations libraries) a. The amount allocated ~o a specific use wo~ld never exceed the calculated cost of the facility req~lired by the rezoning. The allocation would be applicable in instances where the f~ll prs~er amoun= is offered. Ayes: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. C~=ri~ and ~r. Applegate. Absent: ~r. Daniel. Abstention: MX. Mayes, as he ~lt the problems wer~ not being addxessed. It was generally agree~ ts r~cee~ fo~ five [~) minutes. Reconvenimg: bill bei~ sponuor=d by Dulagate Watkins, e~plained the r~mifieati0n~ Of same and provided the ~sard with copies of said bill. (A copy of said bill is filed with the papers of ~his ~card.) Discussion, questieRe a~d cements ensued relative to verbiage of the proposed impact tax bill~ implementation of impact tax through a Char=er amendment versus general law; the loss of eamh pro~f~rs if an impact tax bill were ~o be approved; the Bom~Builders' Association position on said bill versus the County's pesi=ion on sa~e: the rationale of the square footage approach; the availability o2 more options provided by general law ~han a char~er amend/Bent; ~he imp=c= uf ~he ~ro~osed bill on credit~; the Boa~d~ p~viou~ action on in,pact fe~; etc. Mr. Daniel ~tated he felt the bill as written is difficult to absorb a~/sr modify and, since there is an item on =he ~v~nin~ 91-5 01/09/~1 ag~nd~ related =o charter changes that ~ncludes impact fees, should make known his position On the matter and ask that the General Assembly carry over the bill for a year. Mr. Micas indicated he would attempt to contact and advise Delegate Watkins of the Board's p~eference. On motion ~f Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. ADptegate, the Board went into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended~ regarding the condition, acc/uisition a~d use of real property for pu~tic purposes for school facilitiem. vote: Unanimou~ On motion o~ ~lr. Applegate, seconded by ~r. Daniel, the Boar~ ado9ted the followinu resolution~ WHE~SEAs, the ~oard of Superviscr~ ha~ thi~ day adjourned iRto Executive Session in accordance with a formal vote o~ the Board~ and in accordance With the provisions of th~ Virginia Freedom of ~nforma~ion Act~ and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom o~ Information Act effective July 1, 1989, provides for certification that such Executive Session was conducted ~n confo~ity with law. NOW, ~ERK~, BE IT RESOLED that the Board of Cowry S~pe~isorm does h~reb~ c~rti~y %hat to the best of each m~sr~s ~ledge, i) only p~lic business matters law~ull~ exe~t~ fr~ open meeting re~ir~en[s under th~ Pruedom of whi=h this certification applies, sad ii] only such D~lic business matters as w~re i~entified in the Motion by which the Executiv~ S~sion was convened were heard, discussed considered by the BOard. ~o me,er disse~ts f:~ this certification. ~. Daniel - ~. Mayes - Aye. ~. A~Dlegate - Aye. Mr. Sullivan - 4. DINNER The Beard recessed a= 5:4~ ~.m. Italia Restaurant for dinner. (ESTI to travel to the Boils 5. IN~O~ATION Mr. Currln intro~ueeC Chief Robert Department, who gave the invocation. 91-6 01/09/91 6. PI-~DGE OF ~T-n~GIANCE TO 'r~ I~AG OF Tn ~NITED STA~S (F Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of On motion of Mr. Currin, seconded by ['Tr. Applegate, the approved the mine%es ef December 12, t990, as amended. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S ~S Ramsey stated there were no County Administrator Mr. Applegate introduced Colonel Joseph Pittman, Jr. and members of the DAR~ Program and read a letter ~rum ~r. David Trebour, President of I{aley-Pontiac~ from whom he pr~$ente~ a contribution in the amount e~ $2,580 to ~e u~ed for the program. 10. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE ACTIOn, ~CY ABD.I..T~._QNS .O~ C.~AN~S IN 'r~ OP~ER OF 2P. ES~NTATION 0a mo=ion of ~vir. Curria, seconded by Mr. Applegat~, the Board deleted Ite~ 13-A+, Req~lest for Permission to Construct a Driveway Within a 25 Foot Right-of-Way Know~ az Rivsrview Rea~ frem Mr. Barney McLaughlin; moved out of sequence Item~ 15.C.1, Appropriation of $46,100,000 General Obligation Bon~s and Interest; 15.c.2, Appropriation of $1,000,00~ County Funding Withheld; and 15.C.3., ~roo~a$ for School Site selection, to follow Item 12; ~oved o~t Of seqUenCe Item 15.E.4., Re£ez Or,innate to Planning Commission te Amend Certain Cheeterfield Co=nty Code Provisions Relating to the Effective Date of the chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, to be discussed following Item 14.E. a~ prier ~0 Item 14.F.; and adopted the agenda, as amended. 11- P~SOL~TION$ AND ~PECIAL on mo=ion of %h~ Board, the foll~in~ resolu=io~ Was ~, ~s. ~a~ Jo L~, representing the Clov~r Hill Magisterial District, has nerved as a dedicated and ~althful me,er of uhe Chesterfield co~it~ Services Beard since her ~, ~r~. L~ ha~ ~rv94 with distinction aa Chai~ ~or two terms during her appoin~ent and is no longer eligible fez reappoin~ent to the Co~ity Services Board; and ~, ~rs. L~ has for a n~er of years, ~m an serving in various capacitiem on a n~er of mental health related c~ittees a~d o0alitioas both local and statewide; W~EREAS, Mrs. LtLX is recognized ae a prominent leader and articulate spekesperson ior ell Human Services programs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of supervisors hereby expresses its sincere gratitude and appreciation to Mrs. Macy Jo Lux for her de~ieate= ce~nitment and significan~ contributions in provision cf quality mental health, mental retardation and substance abuse services to the citizens of Chesterfield County. AND, ~E iT FURTHER R~S0LVED, that a copy of this resolution be formally presented to Mrs. Lux and that this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Applegate presented the executed resolution to Mrs. LUX and recognized Fir. Lux; commended her for her commitment and zignifioant contributions to citizenz of the County; and stated she would he missed by her friends and ll.B. FJ~T %9~ST P~-~P~ ~ IN~TOR ~A%~[NC-~ ~ FOR WOODLAKE BE]/~G F~COGNIZED -l'~u~ "BE~T PLANNED IN AMEW/~A /1~ 1998" On motion of the Board, the followin~ reeelutio~ was adopted: WHEREAS, Woodlake, in Che~terfiel~ C~unt¥, has been chosen eke "Best Planne~ Con~uni~y in America for 1990" by the Urban Land Institute; and WHEREAM, The Urban L~d Institute, est~lishe~ in 1936 as a non-pro,i= research and education organization, begaR i~ 1979 to honor develo~ent project~ through an awards for excellence pr~gr~; and ~AS, A national panel of judges selected Wo~lake based on innovative and a~ord~le housing, financial success, a eon~ern for the enviro~ent, marke~ acceptance, sales ~E~AS, Woodlak~ baa ~== !,800 housin~ ~its with 2~500 additional ~its planned on 1,500 acre~, which includes te~iS eo~rtb, bike trails, an ~phithcatur, a shopping cee%er and two el~entary school~; a~d ~E~AM, Woodl~e was developed ~y East West Partner~, Sea Pinea Co~oration, th~ original deueloper of Brande~mill; and ~E~AS, woodlake is a joint venture of Investo/ Savings Ba~k a~ East W~st Partners. NOW, TK~FO~ B~ IT R~SOLV~, that the Chesterfield Co~ty Board o~ Sug~rvisors congratulates East Wear Partners~ Investor ~avings Bank and the Woodlake Co~it~ in p~ayi~g a major rul~ in th~ development o~ Woodlake and ~or ~t~ being 1990." Supezvi$oz~ here~y expresse~ its appreciation for ~he 91-8 01/09/91 distinction and credit this rs0ogni~ion has brought to Chesterfield County. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Appleqate presented the executed resolution to Mr. ~. Clem Carlisle, Senior vice President of East West Part,ers oi Virginia, and recognized Mrs. Carlisle. Resolutions were presented also for Z~vestcr Saving~ Bank and Mr. Gary Fenehuk, President of East West Partners of Virginia, who were not in attendance. He commended those involved for their role in the develol~ment of Woodlake and for the distinction and credit this reco~ition has brought to Chesterfield County. ii-C. ~SOLUTt~KECOGNIZLNGMR. C. F. CI~3~IN~ JR.~ CHAII~, On motion of Mr. S~llivan, seconded by Mr. Applegate, Board adopted the following resolutien: W~EP~AS, Mr. C. F. "Sonny" Ceftin, Jr., Supervisor representing Bermuda District, serve~ as Chairman of the Beard of supervisors in 1990, demonstrated exemplary leadership, courage and insight %n dealing with many issues faulng the County; was responsive to the needs of its citizens whilm maintaining the quality c~ life at an economically acceptaDle level; an~ dedication of the highest caliber to promoting Chesterfield as a progressive and well ~anaged governmental entity throughout the Region, State and Nation; and WHEP~EAS, Mr. Cartings dependability, integrity an4 ~xpe:%ise have been recognized net only by the Board~ the Administration and County residents, but als0 st=~e and na:ional officials, through his active involvement and co~itmunt to such groups as th~ Ricb~o~ ~egional ~lanning District Commissicn~ the Courts Committee; the Capit~l Aras Training Con~orti%L~; the Appomattox Basin Industrial Dav~lopmenf Corporation; the crater Planning District commission; t~e social Services Board; the Virginia MunloiDal League's Community and Eoonomfc Development Committee; the He~ricus Foundation, as well as ethers; and mere recently being appointed to the Executive Board Of the Virginia Association Of Co~nties; and ~BREAM, Under MI. Currin~s chairmanship, the County confronted challenges and de~n~ds placed upon i< k~3 p~oviding leadership i~ the continuing development ~f Henricus Historical Park, particularly in accfairing ~uads for the development of a scenic entrance road; assisted in location ef site for the proposed Eton Library; provided leadership establishin~ a separate Private Industr-f Council for the Capital Area Truining Consortium to a~$~re significant representa=ion f=cm Chesterfield County in policy development and program implementation; the chesapeake ~ay Preservation ordin~_~ca was adopted; the Cash Proffer Program was implemented; more than ~,955,000 sq,/are feet of new uommercial/in~ustrial spaae was added; an additional 100 miles of water and ~ewer lines was a~ded to the utility system; an ad hoc Beard Recycling Committee was formed and aompl~te4 r~port to the Board of ~upezvisors outlining key and strategic decisions and steps necessary to implement County-wide recycling; the Courts Building project was completed and officially dedicated; an Airport ~anagement S~udy was completed for the chesterfield County Airport to provide strategic operational and financial directions past the year 2000~ a $1.8 million repair contract was substantially completed ~t the closed Chester Landfill ~o under~ake cap reDalr and leachers/maths/la recovery systems; and further, the County successfully placed two bond sales in February and 91-9 01/09/91 ~uv~mber at ¥~zy ~omp~itive rates maintaining its "Aaa" bond rating~ ~OW, TKF.%~FORE BE IT R~$OLV~D, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors does hereby rmco~nlze and applaud the untiring efforts and eon~ultment cf excellence displayed its 1990 ~, BE IT FUR~ ~MOL~D, that the Board of Supervls~rm ~oe$ ~eze~y p~esen~ ~r, C. F, "Sony" C~rin, Jr. with a plaque inscribed as fellows: BO~ OF SUPERVISQ~ J~Y, 1990 TO DEC~ER, 1990 A2es: Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appl~ate, Mr. D~iel and Nr. ~mtention: Ms. Currin. pla~e and golf shoe~ to ~. Currin and co~nded h~ ~or his appreciatio~ for ~he cooperation ~d untiring efforts of the past year in accomplishing the m~y achievements outline~ =he resolution- There were no hearings of citizens on unscheduled matters or claims. Mm. Sullivan state~ he was elected earlier during the me.ting today to serve in the capacity as Chairman for t991, which he considered an honor and privilege; however, hm ~tated he was somewhat incapacitated and asked that Mr. Currin chair the zemainder of the meeting. I5. NEW BUSINESS t5.C. ~ Timoth~ Bro~, Smhool Board me.er, premented a m~ary Con~idur a~thorizin~ th~ appropriation of the remaining ~ount of $41,600,008 in accordance with the Option A situatlo~ but would be appreciative cf a schedule that would school. Dr. Davis was also present. ~re wa~ Bua~d di~cu~io~ =ega~di~g the feas~ility of ~king a decision at thi~ ~e that would ~in~clal~ enc~er future to allow =he school Board/A~inistration to proceed with at 1mast securing a bi~ for the Alberta Smith school, which would permit the Cowry the cpport~it~ ~o continue to stay ~reast within the cowry, to ~tudy avail~l~ options, and to sell bonds within ~ earlier ~imefr~u %his year, if events were to chan~e to pe~it such action. 91-10 01/09/91 lW~r. Apple~ate requested the School board and Administration ~eriou~ly move forward with a recommendation regarding their study fox yea~ rou_~d school programs. On motion of Nr. Daniel, ~eonde4 by ~I. ~ayes, the Board deferred indefinitely the appropriation of $41,60~,000 ~eneral the School System to proceed with the preparation of bid packets for a con%tact on the Alberta $. Smith s~hocl; and directed stuff to c~ntinue to stay abreast of and monitor the overall economy, the econemi~ eit~ati0~ withi~ the County, to study available options, and determine wha~ f~ture actio~ may be relative to the sale of bend~ as events develop in the Vote: Una~li~oos 15.C.2. ~ROPRiATION OF $1~0~_~00 Nr. T~0thy BXOW~, School Board me,er, presented a ~ary ~he re~est for an appropriation of $1,GOo,o90 Cu~tM ~undlng for the FYPl School Budget that was withheld from the appropriation approved in April, 1990, ~here was bri=~ ~is=ussion relative to the necessity ~or thiB ~appropriated ~o~t of f~dinq being re~ested. Mr. Bro~ sta~ed staff would withdraw the appropriation of $l,0OO,00O coun=y funding wit~eld O~ motio~ of MX. Dani=l, second=d by ~. Appl~gate, the Board appzopri~tion o~ $L,0~8,000 County f~ding for the FY91 School April, i990. Mr. T~othy Hr~n~ Schoct Board me,er, presented an overview of the policy r~garding Pro,ess ~or School Site Selection, indicating no funding actio~ w~ necessa~ until such time the School Boar~ was prepared to identify D0t~ntial ~ite purchases. There was Board discussion regarding consideration being given to entering into dim~O$$iO~S with m~ers of =he real estate c~nity which could potentially lead to negotiations ~or future purchases of DroDer=y for school site~; investigating the feasibility of obtainin~ site ~l~ction process suftw~e and discussing s~e with ~rofessional ~irms for the County and/or the School Syst~; support the ~roa~ss for School Site selection~ that the Rese~e ~or ~ture Capital Project fund~ was the mech~ism by which necessary f~ds to ~h~ school 5yste~ could be provided ~or evaluation, appraisal, etc. rather than the est~lis~ent oi additional acco~s; and referral of the suggested listing of specific school sites to th~ Liaison Co~ittee 2or f~ther 0n motion o~ Mn AD, legate, seconded by ~. sulllu~, the Board re~erred to the L~aiaon Co~itte~ the entire issue involving tho Process for School Site Selection, as s~itted by the School Bo=rd. Vote: Unanimous 13. DEFERRED I-r~ 13.B. Mr. Currin stated that at tho De=ember 12, 1990 ~oa~d meetin~ he had nominated ~. Linwood Carrol to serve on the Personnel Appeals Board~ however, Mr. Carrol re~st~d his n~= wi~h~a~ from nomina~io~ for appoln~ent to th~ Personnel kppuul~ B0ard. ~. C~r~n stated he regretted ~. Carrol's decision but woul~ hon~r his re,est ~nd with~ew his from nomination due to the controversy s~rounding his rests. ~. ~icas stated the Board would now vote O~ the ~o~i~ation of Dr. willi~ E~oad$ to s~rV~ On the Persons1 ADpeals Board. There was discussion r~lative to ~=ferral of the nomination that me,ers of the Board who wished to meet with Dr. could do so. Mr. Ma~es stated he felt Dr. E~onds rests stood on it~ own merit and it was not necessary to d~fer the appoin~ent. After further discussion, it was O~ ~otio~ O~ ~r. Currin~ seconded by ~. Su!liv~, resolved to defer appoin~ent of Willi~ ~ond~ to serve on =~e PeEsonnel Appeals Board arrange to meet with h~, if desired. Vote: Un.animou~ Mr. A~Dlegate requested =hat the rules be suspended to bring forward an item out of sequence for action at this On motion o~ Nr. Applegate, seconded by Plr. ~a~ss, the Board suspended its rules to allow discussion o~ Item 15.E.l., Street Light Installation Co~t Approvals, out of sequence. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by ~r~ Hayes, the Board moved out o~ sequence Item t5.E,l., Street Light Installation Co~t ApDrovsl~. Vote: Unanimous 15.E. CO~91UNITY DEVEIXlPMENT ITEMS 15.B.1. S~ LIGHT INSTALLATION COST APPROVALS On motion of Mr, Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved the costs for street tigh~ installation at the foll~win~ i0oati0~a: Adkins Road and Ronaldton Road, Clover ~ill Distrist, chsryla~ Road and Francil Drive, Clover Hill District, $958.08: 3. Cherylann Road amd Viokil~e Road, Clover Mill District, $672.00; and 4. 3700 ~arvette Drive, Dale District, $947.00. vote: Unanimous 13.B.2. RKVEAq~E POLIC~f AND INFRA~THU~'£UbO~ MRRn$ C(H~4t'I'I'~E Mr. Sullivan stated he was not prepared to submit his nominations for the Revenue Policy and Infrastructure Needs Coramittee at this time and requested same be deferred until review the mix of the group. After some discussion, it was Og ~OtiOn of Mr. Applegate, ~eoonded by ~r. Sullivan, resolved that the Board not close structure Needs Committee; that the names of additional nominees be submitted at the January 23, 1991 meeting; that the rules be susper~ed at the January 23, 1991 meeting to allow simultaneous nomination/appointment any new nominee~; a~d that the following ~ersons be nominated ~t this time to serve on the Revenue Poli~y an~ Infrastructure Committee and who~e formal &pp©i~ents will also be made January 23, ~aqisterial Districts: Dr. ~uey J. Dattl~ (M~o~Qa District) Mr. James D. Wright (Clever Hill Bistrict) Mr. Charles Quaiff (Dalm District) Mr. Oliver D. Rudy (Bermuda District) Midlothian Distxi¢~ (To Be Submitted by Mr. sullivan 1/23/911 Pdchmond H0~eBuilders: Mr. Bob LuiDertz Chest~x~iel~ C~unt~ Bu~n~m Coun~il~ Mr. Willis Blaekweod School Board: To Be submitted 1/23/91 Financial Industry: Mr. C, T. Hill Dr. ~dward Whitlow Mr. Sullivan will sttbmit nominee on 1/23/91 Neighbozhoo~Organizatlons: Ms. Katherine Condylas Mr. Sullivan will submit nominee on 1/23/91 Manufacturing Industry: Mr. RudolDh F. Janis, Jr.~ Ph.D. Mr. sulliv~a will su~mit nominee on 91-1~ 0i/09/9~ Mr. Glen White Mr. Sullivan will s~b~ib nominee oa 1/23/91 There was brief discussion regarding a letter submitted from Janual~ 23, 1990 for determination as %0 whether or no% to 14. FUBLIC~ING~ 14.A. TO C(~STDER ~n~ REAL ESTATE AND PERSONAL PROR~Acrf TAX p~lic heari~q to consider a re~e~t from th~ United Network for Or,an Sharing (~OS~ for real estate and perso~l property tax exemption. Mr. steve Baril, r~presenting the United Network for Organ history and purpose and outlined its various functions and acco~lia~ent~. as he felt approval of the re.est would result in ~ increase in the n~er o~ organizations d~siring to becom~ t~ ~t. ~. Sullivan stated he felt there should be encouraqement this %~e organization ~at serves all h~anity an4 tha~ wa~ an asset to the c~unity~ On motion of Mr. Sulliun, s~cond~ by ~. Applegute, the Board adoptmd the following WHEREAS. United Network for Or.an Sharing (~OS) is a non-~ock, non-pro~i~ corporation which operates th~ National Organ procurement and Transplantation Network e~vi~ioned Congress in 1984 and maintains ~11 data relevant ~d necessa~ for an ongoing ~valua~ion of the ~linical and scien=ific s~atus of organ transpl~ts in the United States; ~S, ~OS ~ns parsonal property located in th~ Midlo~hia~ Di~ziot of Chesterfield c~y in its c~rent o~ices located at 1100 Boulders Parkway. Suite 500. Ric~ond, Virginia; and ~S. The real and 9~rsonal property used exclusively foz charlt~le and benevolent purposes by a OXg~ization shall be exert ~rom t~ation as authorized Article X, S~otion 6(a)(6) O~ the Constitution of Virginia, upon action by the General Ass~ty of Virginia and so long as such organization is operated not for pro, it and ~h~ so exempt is used in accordanc~ with the purpose rom whic~ the ~, The Boar~ of SupsrvisoIs of Chesterfield Vix~i~ia has considerud the following ~c~or~ befor~ the 91-14 01/09/91 adoption of this resolution in support of the tax exempt status of uNos as follows~ 1. That UNOS ±s exempt from federal income taxation 1986; and 2. Thnt no current annual alcoholic beverage license for serving alcoholic beverages has been issued by the virginia Alcoholic Beverage control Board to L~GS for use on ~he organization's proPerty; and 3. That ne director af bTios is paid any compensation for service in such position with the organization. No o~iccr~ a~ t%qOS ~e paid any compensation by u~os except for receive ten,enable o~mpensatien as full time employees of ~NOS; and 4. That no part of the net earnings of UN0S inures to the benefit of any individual. Almost one-half of the income to £uud the services provided by UNOS is generated by an ~clusive ~ontra~t with the federal government and contributions; and ~ublic; and 5. NO part of the activities of U~OS involves on propaganda or otherwise a~temp~ing ~o influence legislation. UNOS do~s net participat~ in, or intervene in, any political campaign on Deha!~ o~ any osndi~ane for office~ and 7. UNOE has no rule~ regulation, policy or practice which discriminates on the basis of religious conviction, race, color, sex or national origin. THEReFOrE, BE IT RE$OLV~D, by t_he Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County az follsws~ 1. That this Board support~ the request of United Network for Organ Sharing for exemption from taxation of its real and personal property pursuant to Article X, Section 6(a)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia and the provision~ of Chapter 36 of Title 59.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and %hat such exemptien should be categorized as charitable and benevolent. 2. That tbs County A~ministrator ie ~ireoted to forward a certified copy of this reselution to the members of the General Assembly representing the County of Chesterfield with the request that the proper legislation be introduced in the General Assembly to achieve th~ purposes of this resolution. ~. The effective date of this resolution shall bo January 9~ 1991. 14.B. TO CONSID~i~ TH~ REAL ESTATE A~D PK~qONAL PROPK~Y TAX EX~TIONRE~IEST OF (~gT~j~,~nAL'£KKNATIV~S~ INC. ~r- ~icas stated this ~te ~n~ tim~ ha~ been ~dv~rti$~ ~or public hearln~ to consider a re,est from Chesterfield exemption- Mr. Vince Burgess, Treasurer o~ Chesterfield Alternatives, Inc., presented a brief s~opsis of the organization's histo~ and purpQs~ and outlined i~s various functions and accomplishments. No one ~ame forward to speak in ~aver of or against the mat~r. On motion of Mr. Applega%e, eeconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board adopted the following resolution: ~ER~5, Ckesterfiel~ Alternatives, Inc. is a non-stock, the mentally handlcap~d ci~iz~n~ u~ Chesterfield County; and ~B~AS, Chestsrfield Alternativss, Inc. ~wns ~rop~rty lo~ated in the Dal~ District of Chesterfield zn its c~r~nt u~ices located at 4105-4107 stella Court, Rio~ond, Virginia; and for charit~le and benevolent purposes ~ a ~ticle X~ Section 6(a}(6) of the Constitution o~ Virginia, such organization is o~rat~ ~Ot fOE DEofit and the s0 e~pt is used in accordance with the purpose for which the organisation is clasaifi~d; and ~E~, The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield Virginia has considered the foll~ing factors be~ore adoptio~ 0f thi~ regclution in support o~ the tax exempt s=atus o~ chesterfield Alternatives, Inc. as 1. ~at chesterfield Alternatives, Inc. is e~mpt fro~ Inter~l Revenue Cede of 1986~ and 2. ~at no current annual alcoholic beverage license for serving alcoholic beverages has been issued by the Vizqi~ia Alcoholic Beverag~ control Board to Chesterfield Alternatives, Inc. for use on th~ organlzm~ion~m pr~per~y; and 3. That no director of Chesterfield Alternatives, Inc. i$ pai~ a~y oo~penmation for se~ice in such p~sition with th~ 4. That no part o~ the n~t earnings o~ Chesterfield Alternativem~ Inc. inures to the benefit o~ any individual; and 5. Chesterfield Alternatives~ Inc. provides services othe~ise att~Dting to influence legislation. Alternatives, Inc. doee nob participate in~ or intervene in, any political s~pai~ on b~l~ o~ any candidate for D~lic o~ice~ and 7. Chesterfield Alternatives, Inc. has no rule, repletion, policy or practice which ~iscrimin~tes on the Chesterfield Cu~ty as ~ullow~: 91-16 01/09/91 1. That this Board suppor:s the request of Chesterfield Alternatives, Inc- for exemption from taxation of its real and personal property pursuant to Article X, Section 6(a~(6) of the Constitution of virginia and the provisions o£ Chap=er 36 of Title 58.1 of the Coda of Virginia, 1950, as amended, aAd benevolent. 2. ~q]ut the County Administrator is directed to fo~ard a certified cody of this resolution to the me~lbcrs o~ the General Assembly representing the County of Chesterfield with 5he request that the DrcDer legislation be introduced in the General Assenfoly to aehigve the purposes of this resolution. 9- The effective date cf this r~solutiun shall be Jaenaz-~ 9, 1991. 14.C. ~ ~SIDF21 T'~US CXH~V]~Y~C~ OF 3.47 AC/{I{~ AT ~ 1~ ~ ~T~II~E ]t(k%D, APPI~OXI~IATT~Y 75 ~' ~ OF THE IBx~BCTI~ OF WH/'r~%~K ~RAC~ ~ V!~INIA PII~E Mr. Sale stated ~hi$ ~a~e and ~ime had been advertised for a p~llc hearing to consider the conveMaace of 3.47 + acres ~he Airart Industrial Park to Tru-Part ~anufactu~in~ Corpo/ation~ No one c~e forwar4 to Spe~ in favor of or against Industrial Park, at $55,8~0 per acre, which parcel is located betw~ua Furt~e Plasticm and WATS Partn~r~hi~ and approximately 270 feet on whitepine Road, approx~at~ly 75 ~eet south o~ the inUerzection of ~iteb~k Terrace the purpoae of relo~ation/8~ansion of their exi~tin~ chairm~ of the Board to execute all necessary doc~nt~ to complete said conveyance. (A copy of said plat i$ filed with ~he papers of this Board,) FIRths..1978, .~I~4]~IDEDr BY A~)ING ~;~-zl(~ 4-33 OF Mr. Micas s~a~e~ this ~t~ and t~e had been advertised for a p~lic hearing to con~ider an ordin~D~ ~o ~ t~ ~h~ C~un~y o~ Chesterfield, 1978, as ~nded~ relating to bingo g~es and raffle~. ~e ~Oted ~hu Board adopted said ordinance on an ~ergency basis at its Septe~er 12, 1990 m~ting and, in aocord~ce with State law, ~s~ on a pe~anent basis at this time. Mr. George Beadles voiced oDDo~ition to the propoS~ 0n motion of Mr. sullivan, seconded by Mr. Ma~es, th~ Beard adopted the foll~ing ordin~ce: ~O~IN~CE~ ~ ~DE~ ~=~v~.~, 1978, 91-17 Chesterfield Cottnty that :he ¢o~e of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, ss amended, is amended by ~m~ndin~ sectie~ &-33 as follow~: Sec. 4-33. Audit fee. Every ozpanization &ubhorized to conduct bingo games =n~ raffles pursuant to this article shall pay an a~dit fee e~al to two percent of the ~ro~ receipts which an or~an~zation ($2,000.00~ fo~ the ~si~ate~ ~epozting period, such audit mean~ the total ~o~nt of money r~ceived from bingo, instant bi~go, and za~fl~ 0pera~ions before the deduction o~ a~ens~s or prizes. Such audit ~ee shall be dete~ined ~y the gross with the in~e~nal a~dit depar~ent on or before Nov~er L of Mr. Micas stated this date and time had been advertised to consider prupoae~ amendments to th~ Ch~ter£ield County Charter and he briefly e~lained same, n0tinq that the language of the Char~er amendments can be mQdi~ie~ ~tez the public hearing by the Beard and ~he General Assembly is not bound by the language that ia ultimately approve~ by the Board. Ms. Meg Donov~ voioe~ Support ~or ~ffactivu i~paet fees winhout leopholea~ indicated she ~iews impact fe~s as a mechanism of partially addressing problems presented by growth and services not keeping up with the growth; ate:ed she ha~ rec/ues=e~ but been =~able to obtain copies of either Delegate Watki~s' draft bill cz the co~ty's draft ~en~ent on negotiations au r=uSon~ fox being un~le to obtain the hearing was legal but felt it WaS question~le because of ma~er. Mr. ~eorge ~eadles e~resged concern that there may be versions o~ the proposed chaxter ~an~ent and/or legislative bill regarding impact fe~; that he felt ~pact ~e~s would mere complex and detrimental than cash ~ro~fers; ~d suggested either cash pro~ers and/or ~pact fees. There b~ing no one else to address the proposed charter ~en~nt regarding ~paut leer, ~. Curri~ ~ou~ht ~he matter before the Board- a~n~ano~ r~arfiinq thi~ mat%e:; ~=at~4 he re1= im~a~t f~ were an important issue and one t~t could hav~ great consequen=es for the Coun=y; ezpressed concerns r~garding the verbiage and other specific ~rtions of the ~act fee 91-1S 01/09/91 l~gi$1ation introduced at ~he General Assembly this day; that even though they disagreed on the language of th~ bill, felt DeleGate watkins was acting in the best interests of the citizens of Chesterfield; etc. Supervieor~ supports General Assembly action to extend impact fee authority to Chesterfield County, provided that =he Board reserves the right to submit revisions to any impact fee introduce4 at the 1991 General Assembly session, Mr. Daniel stated he p~r~onally supports the concept of impact t~es as they relate to the 90,000 + residential lots that escape~ the cash proffer policy implermsntation; that he had bill; that he felt it inappropriate to COnduct a public hearing on a matter without a presence:ion in its summary with the pros and cons of the points and its L~pact on tho Count~ aa the bill is currently written and that the public should involved in the process; that he could support Delegate Watkins' e~orts to acquire impact fees for the County if it makes a difference and ie beneficial to the County; and year to support impact fees for the Co%mty which he felt were aa~ are sor~ty needed; %hat he s~pported Delegate Watkins' sffo~t~ (not the bill) in attempting to obtain imps~t fees th~ County; and ~slt i% incumbent upon the Board to ma~s a d~cision on mm~act fees and take the appropriate action. ~r. Applegate stated he supported ~r. sullivan's ~otion as read by ~r. RamseT; that no funds had yet been collected via the cash proffer procesS; a~d he ~elt the counny wools be better served With impact fees rather than cash proffers, Mr. Currin stated he felt the County need~ impact fuus~ that the efforts being taken are done se in the beet interests of tho citizens and the Cou~t~; a~d that hu felt Delegate Watkins would welcome all input from the Board and citizens of the County. Mr. Sullivan me~e a motion, seconded by Idr. Appleqat~, that tho ~oard of supervisors supports General Assembly action to extend i~Dact fee authority to Ch~ster£ield County, that the Board reserves the right to submit reui~±ons to any impact fee bill introduced a% tile 199i General Mr. Daniel suggested amended verbiaqe to the motion that the Board of Supervisors supports the ~n~ral AsseJ~bly action e~tend impact fee authority to Chesterfield CountF. Although the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors has not formally ~oard ~essrve~ the right to submit revisions to any impact bill introduced at the General Assembly session today and any subseq~lent day of ~ha session. ~r. Applegate concurred. On motion of Mr. Sullivan~ seconde~ by ~r+ Applogate, b~ it resolved that the Board of Supervisors ~npports the General Assembly nation tO extea~ impact fee authority to Chesterfield County. Although the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors has ne~ formally endorsed (HB - 1254, Chesterfield Charter - Tax 91-19 01/09/91 It was ~enerally agreed to reooss for five (5) minutes. Mr. ~icas briefly outlined the proposed churter relative te au~horiza~io~ to block a seeonda:~ public road which has become hazardous due to over-utilization. Mr. George Beadles stated he felt the current policy of ~aid decislo~s being made by the Virginia Department of Transportation was sufficient and expresmed concern that if this amendment were approved that it be a very lengthy There ~ein~ ~0 one else to address the issue, brought the matter before the Board. Mr. Sullivan ~xpresaed concern regarding hhe impact of this matter and stated he would rather see the Board in the position of making such decisions rather than it b~ handled through a Charter amendment. On motion of ~r. Daniel, ~econde~ by 9Ir. Applegats, the Board approved the proposed charter amendment requesting authorization for ~he Board of su9~rvisors to block a secondary p~llc road which has b~come hazardous du~ to over-utilization. A~es: Mr. Ceftin, ~. Applegate, Mr. Daniel ~d Nays: Mr, Sullivan, ~r. Micas briefly outlined the proposed charter amendment ragardin~ ~ermission for Chssterfi~ld to automatically i~c0~poxatud state meter ~uhicle violation ~mendme~ts within the County code. ~r. ~eorge ~eadles voiced opposi%ion ~o the proposed amendment as he felt passing such legislation weul~ be t~kin§ away one more authority of tbs Board of supervisors. There b~ing no one ~tse to address the issue, Mr. Currin brought the ma~er before the Boar~. on m~ien of Mr. sullivan, seconded b~r. ~ayes, the Boar~ for chesterfield to automatically in¢orPezaaed state motor vehicle violation amendmentm within the County Code. Vote: Unanimous 15.B.4. R~ O~DINANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION CK~TAIN C~ST~RFI_~3?:D C(K~fY CODE PROVtSi0~S ~.~T/~G TO U~U~EFFECTIVEDATEOF 'r~mCHESAFEAKEBA¥ PEESERVATIC~ACT Mr. Micas stated ~r. Cuzrin has re~=sted that ths Board to ~=ovlde for ~ effs~tive dat~ of DecaYer 1, 1991 and noted ~iannin~ Co~ission. Discussion, ~estions and co~ents e~sued relative to referring said ordinance to the P~an~ng Co~is$ion %o addr=ss 91-20 01/09/91 only the section regarding the effective date versus the entire ordinance; the inclusion of other ~urisdictions that impact the Chesapeake Bay ~=t are not required to comply with the requirements of the State's Chesapeake Bey Preservation Act~ a recent court ruling invalidating the legal obligation of local governments to adopt the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act ~tandards by September 20, 1991; the ra~ifieations of adopting ordinances with implementation plans scheduled for sometime a~ter December, 1991; whether or n~t referrlng sa~d ordlnanoe to the 91anning Commission was intended to op~m dialogue on the entire ordisance for obtaining additional information, iDput and permit pGopte an oPPOrtunity to voio~ ~h$ir opinions: that the current ordinance remain in e~iect until such ~ime as the Planning Commission forwards a address only a modification of the implementation data of said and Daniel indicated that if the matter were referze~ to the avenuez of com~unioation aa~ in,ut e~lored and more dlalo~u~ permitted and that they did not feel the Planning should he redirected to consider only a portion of the ordinance. Mr. Currin ma~e a motion, seconded by Mr. APPlegate, to date of the Chesapeake Preservation Bay Act, with discussion 1991. Ayes; Mr. currin and Mr. Applegate. ~ay$: ~r. Sullivan, Mr. Daniel and F~. ~r. Daniel mad~ u motion, seconded by Mr. Mayas, to d~fer until January 23, 199~, referral %o the ~lanning Commission o~ an ordinance to amend certain Chesterfield County Code prevision~ relating tu ~he effective date of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. ~r. Sullivan made a substitu=e mo%ion %0 re,er to the Planning Commission an crdin~ee tO ~meB~ ~ertain Chesterfield County Code provisions relatin~ to the effectiv~ date of the Chesapeake Day Preservation Act, ~or ~urther discussion and review and recommendation to t~e Board. Mr. Daniel withdr~w his motion and Mr. Mayas withdrew his second. ~r. Daniel suggested an amendment to include ccnaideration of events re~ardlng same that transpire during ~he General Assembly session. Mr. ~ica~ suggested consideration to provide for an eff~t%ve ~ate sometime after Dec,er, 1991. Mr. Sullivan amended his motion, seconded by Mr. Ma~es, to refer to the Planning Commission an ordinance ~o amend coz=alu Chesterfield Ceunt~ Code provisions relating to th~ effective date e~ the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, to D~uvide for an effective date some time after Dec~r~ber, 1991 and to include coaaideration of the events that transpire during t~e General A~embly session re~arding same. A~¢~; Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Appl~gate, Mr. D~iet ~nd Mr. M~yes. ~ays: Mr. Coffin. 91-~1 01/09/91 14.F. TO ~ID~R T~ UP~K SWIFT ~ ~I~N, AN ~ TO 14.~. TO ~ONSTD~R AN ORDTNANC~ TO A~ND T~ COD~ OF T~E CO%~T~ OF ~'£~FI~-~r 1978~ AS A~DED, BY ADDING -~KCTION$ 21-224 .r~u(O~ 21-228 AND S~-z~ 21.1-2~9.1O '~U~ 14.H. ~ ~SID~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ C~ OF ~ ~ ~RG ~K~IO~ 20-43 ~ ~ ~INO gE~ 20-63.1 Mr. sale seated this date and time had be~n advertised for a public hearing to consider the Upper Swift Creek Plan, an amsndment to the N~rthern Area Land Use and Transportation sewer cu~eotions in the Upper swift Creek Water~he~; and briefly outlin~ each item, minutes or no more than one hour total dlucussion o~ the UDDer Swift Creek Plan. Mr. Tom Jacobson explained ordinances rmlating tc Upper Swift Creek Watershed and ~. Philip ~alsey~ repr~aenting the Upper swift Creek p~oposed Upper Swift Creek Plan and suggest~ ~en~ents that the runoff D~rfor~nc~ standards of the wa~er quality ordinance should match those of the Co~t~-wide Chesapeake Ozdinanue~ that %he phasing rsc~endations should should be addressed. to s=and (approximatel~ t2 ~erson~ stood). She ruco~endud that ~h~ C0un=y adoD= a non-degrada=ion policy for support monitorin~ projects, phosphorus r~duc~ion and EnViro~nt, addre~$~ t~oh~ical ~spects o~ the 91~ and the replacing ~h~ propose~ r~o~ perform~ce sta~dard~ wi~h a density ceiling of 1.G to 1.8 dwslling ~it~ p~r Ac~e and ~0 to 70 years. 91-22 01/09/91 it was generally agz~sd to recess for ten (10) minutes. Mr. Clem Carlisle reeomended eliminating the phasing recon~nendatioas, retaining the required use sf public water homes on ~ot~ of two or more a~res~ and asserted that this $ystemr Mr. Joe Tennant state~ that whatever was to be adopted should Mr. Daniel stated he wished the record to reflect that Mr Tennant was also employed by Philip Morris bus neither ef them had a supervisor/s~bordinate relationship and that no conflict permit exceptions %o re, ired use of p~lic sewer, m~ing the ~ffeotiv~ date of the water ~ality ordinanoe oonfo~ to the Plan and continuing use of the Powhite/Rou~e 288 Plan. until ~uch t~e that ~taff could prepa=e an anaty~i~ of the co~nts for tho Th~ Beard concurred tha~ several issu~s/~estions had been olos~d th~ 9~lic h~arings on and d~ferred ~%i! February 13, 1991 consideration of the Upper Swift Crook Plan, and ordinances to ~end the Cod~ of the cowry of Chesterfield, of the p~lic co, eats/concerns presented and to Vote: Unanimous 15. N~N BUSII~I~SS 15.A. APPROVAL OF PURC~%SE OF LAND 15.A.1. SIT~ ~OR ~HE REAMS ROAD FIR~ STATION On motion of ~r. Applegate, s~conded by Mr. Daniel, the Board Road 1,~50 feet south of its intersection with Reams Read in the amount oi $113,970 for the iuture construction site of the Reame Read Fire Station, with station oons~ruetien Drojeote~ gl-23 01/09/91 fund~ ih the amount of $125,000 were approved in the 1988 Bond Referendum for said p~chase.) Vote: Unanimous 15.A.2. S~'£~- FOR A PUBLIC FAr. Currin disclosed to the Board that he ow~s a portion of one of the mites located Adjacent to the ~bject property which was eonsidere~ for purchase for this prc~ect, that one of his a~entm has had previous discussions with the land owner regarding said site and the lan~ cwn~ had indicated his intent to pay hi~ agent a commission when he sold the subject property; declarsd a ~onfliot of interest pur~-q% ~o Virginia Csmpreh~s£ve Conflict of Interest Act and excused himself from the meeting. on~ of th~ situs ~ooated withlu sloss proximity to the subject property; after disoussio~ of tho matter wi~h the Attorney fel~ he was ~¢omfortable in voting on this matter and d~clared a potential con~lic% o~ i~terest pursuant te the himself from th~ FL~. ~mner presented a st~m3ary of the proposal fo~ the purchase cf a site for a p~lic ~afety training ~eutex, which property is located on the west side of Allied Chemical Road, between the James River and State Ro~te 10. H~ stated, during a site selection process, this site ranked number on~, based On three competin~ ~itee. When a~ked, Mr. Micas indicated the proposed sits appeared to be located a s%ffioient distance from Philip Morris that Daniel did net hav~ a conflict of Discussion, qu~stion~ and comments ensued relative to the financial ramifications of purchasing this site an~ its potential impact on pcssibly raduci~g the counteraction t~meframe schedule for two schools in the Midl0thian District and one in the Matoaoa District; whether or not there would be any detriment in the delay of this purchase; Mr. Han~er indica=ed there are o~her prospects inter6eted in purchasing this site and he did not indicate that he would not exercise his prerogative to sell it. Mr. Daniel ~tated the p~0po~ed paper concerned the purchase of a site for a p~blic safety training center but if school issuas wcr~ bein~ intarjucted into the diacussion, than Mr. participate in the discussions. On motion Of Mr. Daniel, ~cOnd~d by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved a contract to purchase 147 acres, located on the west side of Allied Chemical Road between the James River and State Route l0 for a public mafety trai~ing cente~ facility, ~or a total cost of $1,617,000.00, from ~r, Jack D. Shoesmith, which contract is subject to the dedication of 51 acra~ and approval b~ the Plar~iag Co,famish aad Board of ~ups~vimors of tko conditional use permit for the eenshructioo of the said c~tsz~ and authorized the County Administrator to execute the County. (A copy of said c0ntraot is filed with ~he papers of this Board.) Ayes: ~r. Daniel, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. 91-24 0i/09/91 Mr, Currin and Mr. Applegatu returned to th~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~ece~ded by ME. ADDlegate, the Boar~ approv~ an increase in landfill tipping fees for used tires brought te the NoEthern Area Landfill to be effective Februaxy 1, 1991 as follows: Individual tizus Truck Loads Tires on Rims - $ .7~ - $70.0~ per ton - $ 5.0~ - $ B.0~ ~sch And further, the Board appropriaEed $8,500 in revenues and expenditure~ to corex additional fees received and uxl0cnsus ~or the remainder of FY-91. Vote: 15.D. CO~EBT I~ 15.D.l. S~ DA~ FOR P~rSLIC 15.D.l.~. TO CONSIDER on motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, the Board set the date of February 13, 1991 at 6:~ p.~. fcra public hearinq to consider an ordinance exempting the United Netwerk for Organ Sha~ing from bu~ine~ license taxation. Vote: Unanimous AND 'x~ CENTRAL ~TRGINIA WASTE On motion of Mr. Sullivan, s~ccnded by Mr. Currin~ the Board set ~hu date of January 23, 1991 at 9:60 a.m. for a public hearing to consider an agreement between Chesterfield Co~t~ and the Central Virginia Waste Ma~age~le~t k~thority for a ~ilo~ Curb~i~e Recycling Program. Vot~ Unanimous IS.D.l.c. TO C~NSIDER AN ORDINANCE A~ENDIN8 '£~ CODE OF 'l~ ~0F ,C~ST'~.,F~R?~r 1978~ AS ~KD~ BY aM~D- INGANDPd~ACTIN~ SECTION 14~1-14 0n motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by ~. ceftin, nhe Board set the dat~ of February t3, 1991 at 6:30 p.m. ~or a p~lic hearin~ to ~on~ider an ordinate to ~e~ the Code County of Chesterfield, 197g, as ~endmd, relating ~o umlawful parking of motor vehicles. i5.D.1.~. TO CONSIDER 0~DINANCE P~ATING TO '£~ RKFUNU OF On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin~ the Board ~u~ the date of February t3, 1991 at 6:30 D.m. ~er a Dublic 91-25 01/09/91 hearing to consider an ordinance erroneously assessed taxes. relating tu refund of 15.D.2. ~ FOR ~AI~Tza~ANCE OF STO~ WAT~ DRAINA(~ SYSTEMS AND B~T ~NA~NT ~RAC~ICE FACILITY i5.D.2.a. EVE~GI~EN ~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, the Board authorized the CohZaty Administrator to execute a Storm Water Drainage Systems and Best ~anagement Practice (BMP) ~a¢ilities ~aiatenance Agreement with the Evergreen Lake A~sociation, Inc., A Virginia Corporation, wi~h ~he understanding that the Ceunty'~ only involvement is the assurance that th~ ~aintenance Agreement is to be followed by the association. (A copy of said Agreement is filed with the pepers of this On motion of ~r. ~u!!ivan, seconded by Mr. Cur=i~, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execut~ a ~torm Water Drainage systems and Best ~anago-.ment Pra~tle~ (B~) Fa~ilitie~ Maintenance A~reeme~t with the developer of S~erford, S~c:ion '~A", with the ~nd~r~a~i~ that =he county's only to be followed b~ the developer. (A copy of ~aid Agreement is filed with the paper~ Cf this Board.) i5.D.3. STAT~ ROAD ACCEPTANCE This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from ~his ~oard, made report in writing upon his examination of White~iuu Road, Redpine Road and greenpine Road in Chesterfield County Industrial Park, Section B on Chesterfield County Property, Dale District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of F~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, it is resolved that Whitepine Road, Redpiae Road and Gr~enpin~ Road in Chesterfield county Industrial Park, section B on Chesterfield Count~ Property, Dale District, be and ~hey here~y are established aa pu~li~ And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is r~c/uest~d to take into the Secondar~ System, Whitepine Road, beginning at ~xistin~ WhiteDine Road, State ROUte 701, 0.O4 mile northwest of the i~tersectio~ with Reycan Road, State Route 7F7, and going nsrthwestert~ 0.22 mile to the intersection with Redpine Road, then continuing northwesterly 0.24 mile, then turning and ~oing southwesterly 0.14 mile to the intersection with ~reenpine Road, ~hen turning and going westerly 0.10 mile to end at proposed Whitepine Road, Midlantin Business Center~ Redpine Road, begir~niug at ~he into=see=ion with whitspins uection with Gree~pine Road; and, Greenplne Road beginning at the intersection with whitepi~e Read and going southeasterly 0.27 mite to end a~ the intersection with Redpine Road. 91-26 01/09/91 This reguest is in01usive of the adjacent slope, sigh~ distance and designated Virginia Depurtment of Transportat~e~ drainage easements. Those Roads serve as access to adjacent commercial properties. And be it further resolved, that the Board Of Superviser~ guarantees to the Virgiu_[a Department of TraAspor~ation a 60' right-of-way for all of these roads except Whitepine Road, which ha~ a 70' right-of-way, all as shown on a pla= by Austin Brockenbrough and Associates dated December 14, 1990, a copy of which is attached to thio resolution. This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with direetion~ from this Board, made report in ~-riting upon examination of Lucy Corr Court on Chesteriield County Property, Dale District, Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, · ecen~ed by Mr. C%rrin, it i~ ~e~lve~ that Lucy Cor~ Court on Chesterfield County Property, Dale District, be and it hereby i~ e~tabli~h~d a~ a public road. And bo it further reaslvod, %hat tho Virginia Department of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into thc secondary Syste~, L~e¥ Tort ~o~rt, beginning at =ho inter- section with Courthouse Road, State Route 2099, and going southerly 0.34 milo, then turning and going easterly 0.22 mile ts end at the intersection with proposed Lucy Corr Court. This request is inclusive of the adjacent ~ope, dista/%ee a~d de~i~/lated Virginia Department of Transportation Property. And be it further resolved, that the Board of SuDer¥i~ors guarantees tu tho Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' plat b~ J. K. Timmona and Associateo, P.C. dated November 27, 1990, a copy of which is attached to this resolution. This day tho Count~ Envirc/ame~tat E~gi~eer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing Upo~ his examination of Cedar Cliff Drive, Cedar Cliff Road, ~ickery Glen Road~ CeAar Cliff Terrace an~ Cedar Cliff court in c~dar Cliff, Section 1 and ~, 5~atoaca District. UDO~ consideration Wh=reof, and on motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Carrie, it iz resolved =ha~ Cedar cliff Drive, Cedar Cliff Road, ~ickory Slea Road, Cedar Cliff Terrace and Cedar Cliff Court in Cedar Cliff, Sections 1 and 2, Matoaoa District, be and they he~ehy are established as public And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Depar~men~ of Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Cedar Cliff Drive, beginning at thc inter- seotlon with Stoney Creek Parkway, State Route nun~er to be asoign~, and going westerly 0.0~ mile to the intoroection with Cedar Cliff Road; Cedar Cliff Road, beginning at the interssotion with Coda= Cliff Drive and going northwestsrly 0.87 milo, then turning and going westerly 0.01 mile to the intersection wi~h Hickory Glen Road, then continuing westerly 0.04 mile to the intersection with Cedar Cliff Terrace, the~ 91-27 01/~9/91 ~ntla~ing westerly 0.02 mil~, %h~n ~urnin~ and going southerly 0.06 mile, then turning and going southeasterly 0.03 mile to the intersection with cedar Cliff Court, thor continuing southeasterly 0.06 mile to the i~t~rsection with Cedar cli~ Road. Again, Cedar clif~ Road, beginn±n~ at the intersection with cedar cliff Drive and going southerly 0.06 mile~ ~hen turning and ~0ing wes~e~l~ 0~09 mile to the i~te~- seetio~ with itself, Cedar Cliff Road, then turnin~ and going southwesterly 0.0~ mile to end in a cul-de-sac; 5ickor~ Glen Road, beginning at the intersection with Cedar cliff Drive, and going n~rtherly 0.03 mile to end at a dead end; Cedar cliff Terrace, heginninq at the intersection with Cedar cliff Road and going southeasterly 0.07 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Cedar cliff Court, beqinnin~ at the intersection with Cedar Cliff Road and going ~outhwesterly 0.05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. Thi~ regue~t i~ inclusive of the adjacent Slope, sight distance and designated Virginia Department of Transportation drainage easements. These roads serve 76 lots. And be it further resolved~ that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a ~0' right-of-way for all of th~se roads. These sections of Cedar Cliff are recorded as follows: Section 1. Plat Book 60, Pages 36 and 37, February 9, 1988. section 2. Plat Book 63, Pages 37 and 98, October 6, 1988. This day the County Enviror~ental Engineer, in accordance wish directions from thi~ Beard, mad~ report in writin~ UDO~ his examination o£ Stoney Creek Parkway in Greyfield Pla0~, Sectio~ 3, ~atoaca District. Upon consideration whereof, an~ o~ motion off ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, it is resolved that Stoney Creek Parkway in Greyfisld Place, Section 3, Matoaca District, be and i= hereby is established as a public read. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Departmunt Transportation, be an~ it hereby is requested to take into secondary System, Stoney Creek Purkway, beginning at existin~ Stoney creek Parkway, sta~e Route number to be assigned, and going southeasterly 0.LB mile to the intersection with Oak ~ollow Road, then continuing southeasterly 0.S4 mile, then turning and going easterly 0.22 mile tO end at ~ha inter- section with Harrowgate Road, State Route This rec/uest is ~ncluslve of the ad~aoent slope, sight distance and designate~ Virginia Depart_munt cf drainage easements. This road serves 20 lots, And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department sf Transportation a 50' to 70' variable width right-of-way for this Vote: Unanimous 91-28 01/09/91 This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing UpOn his examination of west shore Road, West Shore Court and w~t ~hore Lane in West Shore, Clover Mill District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion uf Fir. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. gurrin~ it is resolved that we~t Shore Road, West Shore Court and West shore Lane in West Shore, Clover Hill DistEict, be ~/%d they are established as public roads. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Secondary System, West Shore Road, beginning at the intersec- tion with Woodlake Village Parkway, State Route 3608, and goin9 northerl~ 0.05 mile to the intersection with West Shore Court, then oontinuin~ northerl~ ~.06 mile to the intersection with West Shore Lane, then continuing northerly 0.~7 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; West Shore Court, beginnin~ at the to end in a cul-de-sac; and West Shore Lane, beginning a~ the intersection with West Shore Road and goin~ easterly mile, then turnin~ and goin~ northerly 0.06 K~le to end This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight guarantees to the V~¥ginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of these Vote: Unaru~mous This day %he County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his examination of Weatherbuzy Place in Weatherbur~ Section Midlothian District. Upon consideration whereof, a~ O~ motio~ Of ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Currin, it is resolved that Weatherbur~ Place in Weatherbury, Section 1, Midlothian District, be and it hereby is e~tablished as a public road. And be it ~urther re~elved, that the Virginia DeDartment of Secondary System, Weatherbur~ Place, beglrn~in9 at the inter- section with Genito Road, State Ru=te ~04, and going northerly 0.05 mile, then turning and going northeasterly 0.32 mile, =hen =urning and going easterly 8.07 mile, the~ t~r~i~g and going southeasterly 0.08 mile to end in a cul-de-sac. This recgaest is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Virginia DeDsr~ment of Transportation drainage Thi~ road serves 15 lots. And be it further resolved, that the Board cf Supervisors g~larantees to ~he Virginia De~&Tt~ent of T~ansportation a 5~' right-of-way for this road. This section of Weatherbury is recorded as 91-29 01/09/9t Section 1. Plat Book 54, ~age$ 48, 49 and 50, september 18, 1986. This day the Co~nty E~virenmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Boa~d, made report in writing ~Pon his examination o~ Ridge Point Drive, Ridge Point Road and Ridge Point Court in Ri4ge Point, clover Hill District. Upon considers%ion wharenz, and en motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~econded by ~r. Curtis, it is resolved that ~dgs Point Drive, Ridge Point Road and Ridge Point Court in Ridge Point! Clover Hill District, he and they hereby are established as public roads. And be it f~zthor resolved, that the virginia Department cf secondary S~stem, Ridge Point Drive, beginning at the intex- section with Woodl~k~ Vill=ge Parkway, Phase VI, Sta%~ ~oute number to be assigned, and going southeasterly ~.04 mile to tke inter~ection with Ridg~ ~ois~ Road, then continuin~ southeasterly 0.O7 mile, then t~ninq and going northerly 0.04 mile to the intersection wi~h Ridge Point Court, then continu- ing northerly 0.04 mite to end in a cul-de-sac; Ridge ~oint Road, beginning at the intersection with Ridge Point Drive and going southerly 0.05 mi!e, then turning and going southeaster- ly 0.04 mile tO Grid in a eul-de-sae~ and Ridge Point Court, beginning at the intersection with Ridge Point Drive a~d goin~ northwesterly ~.05 mile to mhd in a cul-de-sac. This request is inclusive Of the adjacent slope, sight distance and designated Vir~iDia D~psr~me~= of Transportation drainage easements. These roads ~erve 46 lots. A~d be it 9urther received, that the Hoard ~ gupervi~or~ guarantees to the Virginia Department o~ TransDortation a 50' right-of-way for all of these roads. Ridge Point is recorded as follows: Plat Book 61, Page~ ~ and ~, Apzil 27, 1955. Vote: This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this ~oard, made repor~ in wri=in~ upon hi~ examination of ~rove Forest Road and Gr~ue Forest Court in ~rove Forest, Clove~ Hill District. U~on consideration whereof, a~d oR motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by ~r~ Curtis, it is resolved that ~rove ~cres~ Road an~ Grov~ Forest Court in ~rove Forest~ Clover Hill District, be and they hereby are ~st~l~she~ as p%Lbiic roads. And be i~ further re,elveS, ~hat the Virginia Department ~ranspertation, be and it hereb~ is req~est=d to take into the ~e¢ondary System, Grove Forest Road, beginning a= =he in,er- section with Woodlake Village Parkway, Phase VI, State RouSe hoarser to be assigned, and going ncrthwesterlF 0.0~ mile to the i~tsrzeetio~ with G~ove Forest Court, then ~orthwes~erly 0.06 mile, then turning and going northerly mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Grove Forest CoorS, beginning at the int~rseotlen with Grove Forest Road and going north- 91-30 ~1/09/91 This re~uemt i$ inclusive of the adjacent ~lope, sight distance and designated Virginia Dep~r=ment of Transportation These roads serve 41 lots. guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation a 50' right-of-way for all of these roads. Grove Forest is recorded as follows: Plat Book 61, Page~ 23 and Z4, April 27, 1988. 15.D.4. AWARD OFCC~Fi~CTSFORI~O~T~SION~%L~NG!.NEE~NG 'iF. STING SKR~ICES O~ motio~ of Mr. S~llivan, recorded by Nr. Currin, the Boar~ awarded contracts for professional anglneerin~ testing services ~or all tho C~unty's construction projects approve~ by =he 19~g Bond Referendum 9lus tho Youth Croup Home to Virginia Ccotechnical Servic~m, F & ~, In¢,, an~ $okn~b~l, $90,000 and ~a~h Droj~ot will be ohar~ed accordingly.) 15,D.5.a. CC~3R~O~SE ~OAD AND ~UA/J,A~OAD I~'x~TION On motio~ o~ ~r. Sullivan, ~oonde~ by Mr. Coffin, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County B~ar4 of Supervisors has r~oeived a ~etition from oitizens to install a traffic signal at Courthoua~ ~oad (Ro~te 6~4) ~nd Qualla Road (Route 653). NOW, T~R~FOP~ BE IT P~ES0LVED, that the Virginia Department of Transportation ia requested tn perform a traffic signal study at this int~zseotion and install a signal if warranted. 15.D.5.b. ROUT~ 10 A~D ROCK S~RING DP~VK On merle5 of Mr. Sullivan, seconded ~y Mr. Currin, the Bo~rd adopted the following resolution~ W~ERF~S, Citizens have aske~ the Chustexfletd county Board of S~Dervisors to have a traffic signal installed at Route t0 and Rock Spring Drive (Route 22961. ~OW, THEREFORE BE IT P~OLV~D, that th= virginia Depart- ment of Transportation is requested to perform a traffic signal study at ~his intersection and install a signal if Vote: U~asi~Ouu 91-3! 01/09/91 15.D.~. ~'£~ I~ ~ ~l~ DAVIS HIGHWAY On mo~ion of ~r. sulliv~ ~e~ded ~ Mr. Currin, the ~oar~ ~S, Five De~estrlan ~atalities hav~ occurred in on Jefferson Davis ~ighway between Chippenh~ Parkway add ~S, Nine Dedestri~ fatalities have occurred on thi~ Jefferso~ Davi~ Highway as u result o~ th~ residential and co~ercial development patterns; a~ ~S, I~u~iate improvements are needed along Jeffer~o~ Davis to p~e~ent f~ther loss of life. N~, ~E~FORE BE IT ~SOL~, that th~ of T~ansportation to install street lights and ~id~walks along Jefferson Davis Highway between Chi~e~ Par~ay and Route 285, w&th the first ~provements concentrated in ~he be%ween chi~penh~ Parkway an~ Gettings Lane. Vote: On m~uion of ~r. sullivan, secund=d by Mr. C~rin, the Board authorized tho County A~inimtrator to execute a revi~ed Police ~utual Ai~ A~re~en=, which revisions are proposed to clarif~ that (1) police officers of a j~isdictio~ who ~0 a neig~oring juris~iction~s re.est ~or assistance will continue to be o~icers of the respon~Bg j~ri~ictlon for all purposes ~ (2) each j~isdlctlon im responsible for it~ e~ipment and which a~eemea~ inuludes ~e City o~ and the Co~tiem of Henrico and Chesterfield. (A copy of said revised a~re~nt is filed with the papers of this Board.] Vote: 15.D.8. DONATI~ OF ~O~7~ FOR SPECIAL PU~/~OSE PA~K On motion of MI- Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Curtis, :he Board aocepts~ on behalf of the County Parks and Reereatiem Department a donation oB 3.519 acres and a $5,000 oontrib~tioR toward improvements of the site from the Pernbrook Limited Partnership to be used as a special purpose park on Falling ~reek; appropriated the contribution of $5,~00 to the County Capital ~rejects Fund to be used for improvements to said ~ite; and authorized the County Administrator to ex, outs a Deed of Dedication to acquire said parcel and to execute any of said pla= is filed with the papers of thio Board.) 15.D.9. ~IRGINTA ~JI~A~ ~%%NT APPLICATION On ~otion of W_r. Sullivan, seconded ~y Mr. Curtis, the Board authorized the Keep Chesterfield clean Corporation to apply fox ~ Virginia Environmental Endowmen~ Grant in the amount of $38,000 to e~rpsnd the CheSterfield County School Drop Off Recycliu~ ~ro~r~m to reinforce recycling programs for school aqe children in elementary schools as well aa adult citizens 91-32 ~1/09/91 of Chestorfi~ld County; and which grant will be used for the placement of ten (lO) additional ~ecycling bins throughout the County (sites as pet unidentified); and which grant re~lects $1~,000 in matching support fro~ the County in in-kind ~ervioes for coordination of the project and educational through the Extension Service and Keep chesterfield clean Corporation.) 15.D.i0. ~STS PORBINGO/RAFFLE PE~(ITS On motion of Mr. Sulliva~, ~econd~d b~ ~. Coffin, the Board approved re~uest~ from the followinu organizations ~or bingo and/or raffle pe~its for calend~ year 1991: ORGANIZATIONS St. Zdward~EDiphany Home ~chool A~o~iati~n Poseidon Swinging, Virginia Bctlo~ Softball CI~ Ettrick El~entary Teacher Association Cavalier Athletic ClX, Inc. Re~s Road Athletic Association TY~E Bingo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle Bingo Raffle Bingo Raffle Bingo/Raffle 15.D.11. ALLOCATI~ OF FUNDS FOR Sp~SOp~rrm. Of COUNTY'S FII~STAFRIC~NA~E~ICANHISTORYMONTH On moUion of ~. Sullivan, secondsd by ~r. Currin, the Board transferred $5,000 from th~ Matoa~a District T~ee Cent Road ~d ~o the Parks and Recreation DeDar~ent budget to with the sponsorship of Chest~fiel~ Co~ty'~ First African ~erican Histo~ Month ColOration, which project is cultural =elebration in conjunction with the national celebratio~ i~ Febr~a~, 1991 o~ A~rican ~erican Month. (It i~ noted ~aid funds will s~ppl~9~t donations.) 15.D.~2. APPROVAL OF 1991 LEGI~LATIVK ~ROGHA~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, ~eoonded by Mr. Currin, the Board formally adopted the proposed ~991 Legislative Program, a cop~ of which is filed with the papers c~ this Board. Vote; Unanimous ~e~r~. D~niel and Hayes Submitted letters of opposition to th~ proposed program from ~he Richmond Association of Realtors, which letters are filed with the papers of thi~ 91-33 01/09/91 On motion of Mr. Applegatm, seconded ny Mr. Ma~ea, the ~oard adopted the following resolution: ~q{~S, Ne Virginia I~epartment of Transportatim~ conducted a location and design p~blic hearing for the widening of Rou~e ~60 from G~nit0 Road to Courtho~e Road~ and an e~ishing cro~sovmr at the Victori~ S~e/Genito station existing crossover fox ade~ate accaag. NOW, T~ FE iT ~SOL~, that the Cheste%fiald County Board o~ Supervisors r~ests ~OT to reconsider the closing of th~ Viotorian S~r~/Genito Stabio~ crossover. con~der the ~nsttllation o~ a traffic mignal at the ~rossover if i= remains opmn. Mr. Applegate requested an additional resolution be fol%Tarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation reql~esting consideration of the extension of a median in front of the Genito Read entrance into Genit0 Crossing shopping Center, is oenju~lctio~ with the widening of Route 360 from Genito Read to courthouse Road. On motion of Mr. Appleqate, seconded by M_r. Mawes, the Board adopted the following resolution~ W~E~EAS, The Virginia Department oi Transportation conducted a location and design public hearing for the wideaing of Route 360 from Genito Road to Courthouse Road; and W~EREAS, VDOT~s ~reposed design includes ~he extending of a median in front of the C~nito Road entrance into ~enite Crossin~ Shopping Center; and WHEREAS, Businesses located within Gonito Crossing Shopping Center need for the a~oresaid entrance to re, main open to traffic entering from beth the north add the south. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL%~D~ that the Chesterfield County ~eard of Supe~vi~0rs requests VDOT to consider construction of a median break at the Genito Road entrance into Ceni:o Crc=sing Shopping Cen~ar. 15.B.$. RUFFINi~iILLI~DUS'I~tIALPA.~ACC£~S~;~D On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Curtis, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute an agreement between ~he Virginia Department of Transportation and Chesterfield CoUnty enabtin~ the Count~ to proceed with the censtruGtion of a new access roa~ ~o ~he Ruffin Mill Industrial ~ark o~f of Ruffin Mill Road; authorized staff to preueed with advertisement of the read construction project; appropriated $290,000 in anticipated State rei~ursement revenue.; ~d designated expenditures in the amuu/~t o~ $290,000 for said project from the FY-91 operating Dudgeg funds appropriato~ ior the I~dustrial Access Projsots wi~h the understanding that the Industrial Access AeCO%l~t be reimbursed as funds are received from VDOT in accordance with the VDOT/County agreement. (A copy of said agreement ia filed Vo~e: Unanimous S~CTIONA Mr- $al~ ~tat~d thi~ dat~ and tim~ had b~n advertised for a p~lic hearing to con~ider an ordinance to vacate portions an 8 foot alley easemen= in Chath~ s~ivision, seotion A. No one o~e fo~ard to mpeak in ~avor cf or against the proposed ordin~ce. Board adopted the following ordin~ce: ~ O~IN~CE whereb~ the co~ OF CHEStIEr, VIRGINIA, Vacatus to C~ES K. ~T and ~Y W. H~T, (husband and wife), an s~ allay eas~mnt in Chatty, ~ection A, Midlo~hian Ma~isnerial Chesterfield, Virginia, as ah~n on a plat thereof duly re~orded in the Clerk's O~fi=e o~ thm Circuit Court of Ch~mterf~mld cowry in Plat Book 11, Pages 73 and 76. ~, Charle~ K. Hurt and T~rry W. Hurt, petition~ the Beard of supervisoIs of Chesterfield cowry, Virqinia vacate an 8~ alloy easement in Chath~ S~iviaion, ~eckion A, Midlothi~ Magisterial District, Chemter~ield Co~t~, Virqinia more particularly shu~ on a plat of re=etd in the clerk's office of th~ Circuit Court of ~aid Co~ty in Plat Book tl, ~agea 75 aad 76, dated October ~9, 1959, made by J. K. Ti~ns. ~e eas~ent petitioned to be vacated is more demeribed am follows: An 8~ alley eas~ent across LC~ 1 and a ~ortion of Lot 2, Block A~ Chath~ s~ivislom, Section A, Midlothian District, Chesterfield, Virginia, as sho~ on a plat thereo~ by A. G. Narocopo~ & Associates, P.C., dat~ Auguat 2~ 19gh, a copy of w~ch is this O~dinance. ~E~S, notice has been given pursuant to ~ection 15.1=431 of the Cod~ uf Virqinia, 1950, as ~e~6, advartiaing; and ~ER~S, no p~lic n~cessity exists for the continuance of the easement sou~h~ to be vacated. NOW ~FORE, BE IT O~AI~D BY ~ B0~ OF MUP~VISO~ OF C~MT~IE~ CO~, ~at pursuant to ~ec~ion 15.~-482(b) of the Code~ of Virqinia, 1950, as ~ended, the aforasaid easement be and herMby vacated. 91-35 01/09/91 This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Seutiu~ 15.1-482(~) o~ the Code of vlr~inia, 1950, a~ ~men4ed, and a certifie4 copy of thi~ Ordin~¢e, together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County~ Virginia pursuant, to section 15.1-485 of ~he Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, The e~eut OX t~is ordinance pursuant to section 15,1-483 is to d~stroy the for~ and effect of the recording of the portion o~ th~ plat vacated. This Ordinance shall vest o~ner cf Let 1 and a portion of Lo: 2, Blnsk A, Chatham Subdivision, Section A free and clear of any rights of public Accordingly, this ordinance s~ll be indexed in the n~es o~ the CO~OF ~ES~IELD, as ~an=or, and C~ES K. ~T and T~Y W. ~T, (husband and wife), or their successors There was brief disoussi~n relative to ~h~ wa~r 18vel of Swift Cr~ak reservoir; whether or not a study regarding the River to Swift Creek h~d been ~dertaken; the design of baffles to be used to raise the level of the reservoir; cost per day to p~p water to the lake; and a re~e~t fr~ the the U~r Swift Creek Advi~o~ Co~ittee to be included in ~y future discussions regarding the design of baffles ur 1S.F.I.b. TO CONSIDER A RESOLo'r~/~ AND ~RDE~ TO AB/tNIX)N A Bit. Sale ~tated ~i~ date and time had been advertised for D~lio hearing to consider a resolution and order to abandon a portion of S~ar ~ad, Route 2~34. NO on~ c~e fo~ard to spe~ in favor of or again=t the matter. On motion of ~r. Mayer, seconded b~ ~r. Applegat~, th~ Boa~d 5dopted the foll0win~ resolution an~ order: ~, by resolution o~ the Chesterfi~l~ County of Sup~rvi~urz ~ate~ June 27, 1963, th~ Boar~ re~ested that ~, ~ r~solu=ion of the Virginia ~par~ent of 1963, $~&r Road, Rout~ 2034, was acceDte~ ~nt~ the ~AS, ~ince July 1, 1963, S~ar ~o~d, Route 2034, has control, ~upe~vi~ion, management, an~ jurisdiction of Vi=ginia Dupar~ent of Highways ~d Transportation; and Supervisors of Chesterfield County abandon a ~ort~on of ~oad, Route 2O34, pursuant to Section 33.t-151 of tho C~e of Virqin%a~ 1950, =~ ~un~=d; and 91-36 01/09/91 ~ov~mber 28, 1990, the required notices of the County's have teen given in that: on ~cember 4, 1990, a notice was posted in at least three places along Sambar Road, Route 2034; and, on December 26, 1990, and January 2, 199~, a notice was cizoulation within :he County; and, un Dec,abet 7, 1990, a notice was sent to the Conmnissioner of the Virginia Department ~E~S, this Resolution and Ordez is entered within ~E~S, the safety ~d welfare of the D~lic would Route 20~4, as a D~lic road~ and Rout~ 2034, u~ u p~lio ro=~ will nut ~ri~ge th~ ri~ht~ of to ~eetion 33.1-151 of ~he ~e o~ Virgiuia~ 1950, as the portion of mecon~ road, more fully described follows, is hereby ~andoned as a p~lic road; A Dortio~ of S~az Road, Rou=u an~ R~ivision o~ Pot=ion B, as shown on a plat prspare~ by Virginia Surveys, dated A~ril 1~, 1977, a ~o~ of Order. $~otion 33.1-1~3 o~ the C~4e o~ Virginia, 1950, as ~ended, shall not r~ain a p~!ic road or crossing. Accordingly, the Clerk of this Board shall ~en~ plat h~r~to attaoh~, to ~he S~aue Tr~s~rtation Co~issioner. The Clerk shall re~e~t that the Co~issionur certify to Uhe County, pursuant to section 33.1-t5~ of the Code of Virginia, 195U, as ~endud, that the ~ove described p~lic use. Vote: Unanimous 15.F.2. CON~T IT~W~ 15.P.2.a. ACflF/~ANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DE.~IGNk'sM.u A~ PRICE CLUB BOULEVA~DFROM~R. R~B~TH. ST~, ~. ~ motio~ of ~. ~=llivan, seconded by ~. ~y~s, the accepted on behalf of the County th~ conveyance cf a ~.371 acre 9ar~el desi~ated as Price Ci~ Boulev~d from Mr. Robert ~. Staples~ Jr., and authorizgd the Co~ty A~inimtra~or execut~ the necessary de~d. (A copy of said plat is filed with th~ ~apers of thi~ Vote; Unanimous 91-37 15.F.2.b. ACCEPTANCE OF r~n OF D]~DICATION l~f~ M~.~tq & W~r.T.S F~ ~OI~IN~ ROAD KKTKN$IO~ On motion of Mr. sutliv~, ~eCondud by ~ir. ~4ayes, the Board accepted on behalf of the Cou/lty the conveyance of S.2 + acres of la=nd for the 5opkins Road ~,xtension from MilOS & W~lls, A virginia ~n~al P~rtn~rship, which d~dication was a r~iru- meet of zoning, in conjun=tlon with Wellington Fa~s s~ivi- necessa~ deed. ( A co~ of said plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) 15.F.2.c. P~T FOR ~s-~I~ TO COUrT.OCT A WA~a~LTNE S~I~ WITHIN AN ~STTNG 50 FOOT R~-0~-WAY OW ROAD AC~X]SS F~Cg~ MASC~ WOODS SUBDIVISIC~ ~ On motion of Mr. sullivan, seconded by ~r. Mayes, the Board approved a request fre~ Mr. Harold L. Robi~o~ fox permission to constrt~¢t a waterline service wi=hie an existing 5U foot right-of-way off Beulah Road, across from Mason Woods $~ivision, subject to the execution of a license agreement. (A copy of said plat is filed with the paper~ Of this Board.) vote: Unanimous LANDSCAPE I/~PROW~NRNTS WTT~TN AN ~ISTING UTIlitY K~ FR~ ~ COAST OIL COP~DfH~%~I~ ALON~ On motion cf ~r. Sullivan, Seconded hy ~ir. Mayas, the Board apDzov=~ a re,est from Eaet Coast Oil Corporation ~or permission to construct a sign and ma]cs landscape ~mprove~ents within an existing utility easy,et along Ironbridg~ Road, which re,est was nscessitat~ by the Route 10 widening project and i~ s~ject to th~ execution of a license i5.F.2.e. REQUEST TO Q~ITCL~IN A ~OKTI~ OF A VARIABLK WIDT~ $~W~ ~AS~T AC~OS$ PROPER~ OWNED BY CO~P~ SHOPP1N~ CE~X~.w~ATVICTOP~AN~UA~K SHOPPING~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by ~r. Mayes, the Board approved a r~quest from J. K. Timmons & Associates, to q~itclaim a portion of a variable width sewer easement acros~ property owned by Compson Shopping Centers Limited Partnership, a= victoxia~ square Shopping Cente~; and authorized the Chairman of the Board and COKnt¥ Administr=tor to exeCUte thc necessary quitclai~ deed to vacate same. (A copy of gaid ~lat is filed with the papers of th/s B0ard.) 15.F.2.f. S~T DATE I~OR ~LIC HE~R/5~ TO C~NSID~ x~ ~- ~ OF A~0~TION 0F Mr. Currin disclosed to the Board that the applicant of the s~ject it~ work~ i~ a real estat~ office with h~ h~ever he than selling; therefore, he does not have a conflic~ interest and he could vote on the~e it,s. 91-38 01/09/91 On motion o~ ~r. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Mayas, th~ Board adopted the following resolution~ I~z~u~TIC~ TO CO~SIDER A RESOL~TIO~ AND ~ ~ur~n~ to S~tion 33.1-151 of the Cod~ of Virginia, 19~0, ag ~mndmd, be it remolved that the Chester~imld County more fully described as follows~ A poztion of state Avenue, Route ~Pg, Chesterfield County, Virginia a~ ~hown on a plat prepara~ Charlaz c. T~nes & Associates, dated Novm~er 3~, 1~9, a oopy of whiuh i$ attaoh~d to thereo~. ~e Clerk shall ~ur~her ca~e to be p~lished and ~andon this portion of state Avenue. l~.F.2.g_. APPROVAL OB WA'£~a( CONTRACT ~OR ~. ~%~S ~OD~T C~RC~r LUC~ On motion of Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. ~ayes, the Board approved th~ following water eontraat and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents: ~9-0892, St. Mark's M~thodist Church - Luok~ Lane~ Developer= Trustees of S~. Mark's Unit~ ~eth~is~ Church Contzact ~ount: Est~te4 Total - $1~,4~7.4~ Total Est~ated County Cost: Water (Oversizing~ (Cash Refund) Wa~ez (Offsi=e] $ 1,650.00 (Refund thio co~eetions) Estimated Developer Cost: Code: (o~slte) Vote: Unanimous $ 9,303.45 5H-57240-898200E 5H-58350-890731E tS.F.2.h. APP~OVALOFAMENDED~FASTEW~r~CO~T~ACTFO~C~EWm~K~. LOTS 4 ~ 5, ~ D, S~ N (D~S ~') On motion of ~. sullivan, s~con~ed by ~z. ~a~es, ~he Boaxd approved the ~ollowlng ~ended wastewat~r contract and Street) Project N~er 90-0A37. Contrac~or~ St~ie E. Lyttle CO., Inc. Total Est~ated County Cost: Wast~water (Offsi%~) $ 2,298.20 (Refund thru co,actions) 91-39 0t/09/91 Ertimated Developer Co, t: $ 7,870.80 Cede: {©ff~ite) 5P-5835O-890733E Vote: Unanlmou~ 15.F.3. Pd~PORTB Mr. Sale presented the Board with a report on the developer wate~ a~d ~ewex contracts exesu~ed by the County Administrator. Mr, Ramsey pre~ented the Boaxd with a status report on the General Fund Contingency Account, General Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Project~, District Road and Street Light Funds, Lease Purchases a~d School Board ~r. Kamsey sta~d ~h~ Vizginia Department o~ has formally notified the County o9 the acceptance o~ the following roads into the S~a~u Se=ondary SPRING TRACE - SECTION B _{E~eo~ive Route ~717 (Whistlers Cove Drive) - From 0.~5 mile Northeast Route 4718 to 0.~5 Mile Northeast Route 4720 0.10 Mi. 4717 to 0.09 mile Southeast Route 4717 0.09 Mi. On motion o~ Mr. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Ceftin, the adjourned at 1:25 a.m. (EST) on January 10, 1990 until a.m. (ESTI on January 23, 1991. Vote~ Unanimous 91-40