12-09-1992 Minutes~OARD OF /~UPBRVT~0R~
}ir. Ratty G. Daniel, Chairman
Mr. A~thur S. Warren, Vice Chrm.
Mr. ~4ward B. Barber
Mr. Whaley ~. Colbert
Mr, J, L. McBale, III
Mr, Lane B. Ramsey
County Administrator
Mc. Barbara ~annett, Dir.,
Off/ce OX Youth
Ms. Marilyn E. Cole, Exec.
A2~t. to Co. Admln[
Mrs. Doris R. DeHart
A~t. Co. Ad~i~.,
Legis. Sve~. and
Intergovern. Affairs
Mr. William D. Dupler,
Building Official
Chief Robert L. Eane~,
Fire Department
Mr. Michael Golden~ Acting
Mr. Bradford S. H~umer,
Deputy Co.
Mr. William H. Howell,
Dir., General Services
M-r. Themae E. Jacobaon,
Di~., Planning
Mr. Louis Laesit~r, Dir.,
Internal Audit
MS. Mary Leu Lyle,
Dir., Accounting
Mr. Rober~ L. Masden,
Deputy Co. Admin.,
Human Services
Mr. Jacob W. Mast, Ur.,
Dir., Nursing
Mr. R. Joh~ McCracksn,
Dir., Transportation
~r. Richard M. HcEl£ish,
~r. Steven L. Kicas,
County Attorney
Mrs. Paulin~ A. Mit6hell,
Dir., New~ & Public
In£0rma~ion se~vicee
Ms. Theresa M. Pitts,.
Clerk %~ the Board
Mr. James J. L.
Dir., Budget & Management
Mr. M. D. Rtith,
Deputy Co. Admix.,
Community DevelcDment
Mr. David H. Welchons,
Dir., utilities
Mr. Frederick Willis, Jr.,
Dir., Huhan Resource Hgt.
Mr. Daniel called the regularly ~eheduled meeting to o~der at
~:00 p.m. (~ST).
92-969 12/9/92
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Ramsey introduced Ms. Mary Leu Lyle, Director of
unqualified opinion indicating the Connty'~ financial
statements are presented fairly in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. She further ~tmted there were
~ssitive results ~cr ~he General Fund for 1992, rsviewe~ the
increase in the undesignated fund balance and noted there were
four bond issue~ this year -- one rela=ing to the 1988
of $4.6 million.
Lybrand for their efforts in preparing the audit.
When asked~ M~. Lyle ~tated the projeet~ ~noluded ~n the 1988
Bond Referendum were currently ~ein~ completed.
3, BOA~D COI'~ITTEE RBPORT~
M~. Daniel ~tated this wo~ld be hi~ l~t me,ting as Chairman
of the Board ef Supervisors and expresss~ appreciation ts his
fellow Board members for their support throughout the year in
addressing the issues presented. 5e further stated he felt
the County has made tremendous progress and he would support
Mr. Warren for the chairmanship for 1993. ~e ex, reseed
appreciation to the County Administrator for his job
performance during th~ Da~t year and presen=ed him wi~h a
Christmas gift from the Board.
Mr. Ram~ey ~xpressed appreciation to the Board for their
suppo~ d~ng the year and for Als Christmas gift.
MT. Barber e~ressed appr~ciation to ~taff fo~ att~ndinq h~
"First Monday" constituent~ meeting in which the tobit
di~cu~sion had been solid waste i~ue~ and noted he
interest/no collateral t~es of loans fo~ n~e i~p~ovema~ts to
Mr. Warren ~tate~ he ha~ =he oppor=uni=y ~o meek wi~ a cub
scou~ troop from ~e Brandermill area and had met with
ru~i~nt~ of ~rovi~ence CreW, Brandon and sola~ II
4, REOUESTS TO ~O~T~0~AC~ION, ~ERGENCY ADDITIONS OR
moved Item 14.A., Resolution Recognizing ~. Na~an W.
Building Inspection Dependent to i~ediately follow this
it~; r~plao~d ~em ~.D.11., Award uf contract to s.
Rock/Estubrook Corporation for Lighting of Base~ll/Softball
Fields a~ ~anche~ter High sohool; replaced Item
Re~e~ts fo~ Bingo/Raffle Pe~its; and replaced Ttem,
9~-970 12/9/92
Request Permission for Board of Bupervisors to be the
Applicant £or a Rezoni~g Request for In~tallatlon s~ the swi£~
Creek Tributary M0~it0ring Statio~s and, adopted the agenda,
as amended.
Vote: Unanimous
1~ R~O~LT~MR. NAT~NN. B~T~E~. BUILDIN~ IN~P~ION
~. ~pl~ intr~uced ~. Na~a~ W. Butler and stated
Butler has provided approximately ~irty-one year~
service to t~e Co~ty.
~E~s, ~. Nathan W. Butler has provided ~i~ty-one
years of ~=llty ~ervice to the citizens of Chesterfield
Cowry; and
~E~S, the ~esterfield Co~ty Board of Supe~isors and
~ervic~; and
~E~S, Mr. Butl~ wa~ employed as ~ Electrical
Inspector in HorrOr, 196t =nd through his willin~es~
accept new responsibilities and his ability to work with and
supervise mtmff~ he ha~ been the Chief Electrical Inspector
and Senior Elec~ical ~lan R~view ~ngi~er;
~$, t~o~gh his many ~ear~ as an inst~ctor
Advanced Eleotrloal Theory and The Nati0~al Electrical Code
th~ El~=trical Apprenticeship Pr~ram at Ric~on~ T~uhnical
Center, h~ i~ affeotionatel~ kno~ us fu~er to many
~S, Mr. ~utler ha~ a~tively ~erve4 on
professional co~ittee~ i~cluding the virginia Building and
Code 0ffi=ial~ Region 6 Electrical C~u co~itt~m;
Inter~tional Association of Electrical Inspectors-South~n
Section, Code ~anel No. 2 Advisory Co~ittee; and
Resolution~ Co~itt~ of the Virginia Chapter Of
~E~, ~. Butler has ~ersonally sought to ke~p
electrical contracting and design industry info--md of changes
s=minur~ for the industry; and
~ERE~, ~. Butler responded to after b~si~e~s
emergency calls from %he Polic~ and Fi~e Departm~nt~
compen~ation for several year~.
NOW, TH~EPORE BE IT RESOLED, that the Chesterfield
Co~ty Board o~ Supe~isor~ publicly reco~izes ~. Nat~n W.
Butler and extends on behalf of its m~ers and ~e citizen~
of Chesterfield County their appreciation fo~ ~is sm~i=e to
~D, DE IT ~THER ~SO~V~, that a cody of
resolution be presented to ~. Butler and that this
be pendently recorded ~ong the papers of this Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Vote: Unan~mou~
~. ~utl~, ~a~ed him for hi~ dedicated s~ice to the
92-971 12/9/92
county and wished him well in his retirement.
$, WORK ~E~BIONB
5.A. N~RBIN~ NOME TRANSITION CONMITTEE REPORT
Hr. ~a~den ~tated the Boa~d previously authorized ~taff to
proceed on the design of the new Nursing Nome in an effort to
meet the requirements for a Certificate of Need of Approval.
He further stated She process to obtain the Certificate of
Need was nearly completed and stuff was reco~ending adoption
of a resolution establishing a ~ealth Cen~er commission and
for mtaff to be directed to receive citizen input on the
issue. He them introduced members of the Nursing Home
Transition Committee who were present.
~r. Robert Kaplan~ Chairman of the Kur~ing ~ome Transition
Committee, expressed appreciation for the ~upport by staff ~n
providing management to the Nursing Home. He stated the
care was delivered to the reeidents in a ~uality fashion. ~e
reviewed t~e Committee's r~commendatien to develop a plan for
the transition cf the ~ursing a~me Xor private ownership; the
plan halpinq to maintain or enhance the quality of long-term
care available for the citizens cf the County; the current
~tat~ of the Nursing Home in terns of finances, stability and
operations; other nursing home operations an~ organizational
~truetures; establishing a principal criteria to procure the
expansion without the necessity of long-term alliance upon or
adverse impact to the County's credit rating; and the
Committee's recommendation for the County to move forwar~ with
the pri~ati~ation of the Kursing ~ome in order to be
compat~t~ve ~n the chain of today's health care environment.
He ~tated the Comm~ttee'~ report wa~ ba~d on a umanlmou~
decision and they felt the dominant theme to guide the
tra~iti0~ of the Nursing Ho~e would b~ to ensure the existing
level of quality oa~e i~ protected a~d enhanced and for the
plan for expansioa of the facility an~ utilization of the
Kealth Center Co, lesion maintaining the safe. healthy and
cfflcient physical environment which presently exists at the
Nursing Hone. He then reviewed the history of the Nursing
Home and expansion of the facilities to meet the needs of the
patients~ the quality of leaderzh±p sk±lls displayed by the
~ta£S at the Nurelng Home; the creation of a health center
ee~mi~ion~ the Nursing Home being recognized as an academic
~eriatri~ medical center; and communit~ support and
involvement of the Nursing ~o~e thr0ugk voluntary advisory
hoarde. He stated the Committee wee recommending the review
and validation of the proposed expansion b~ing the b~sinees of
the Healt~ Center Commisaion and noted the Committee had not
examined the plans for th~ expansion or reviewed the financial
£easi~ility study. He revlewa~ the Co~ttee adclrm~e~ng
structure and financial issues inoludimg obtaining a tax
exempt statue or being designate~ a charitable corporation =o
enable financing b~ing issued through the Industrial
Develoument Authority and the iesuancm of revenue ~ond~. He
then reviewed the Committee's reco~unendatlon for the creation
Of the Health center commlss~on and its responsibilities
de,ignored toward the well-being of the Nursing Nome.
Hr. Danlel inquired if the process moved forward for
priva~izatian cf the Nursin~ Home, whether the Committee felt
the citizens of the County would receive equal or enhanced
health care services at a reasonable ee~t. Mr. Kaplan stated
the Committee felt the oi=izen~ would receive equal or
enhanced curren~ health care services at a ~easonable cost as
the establishment of the Health Center Commiseion would be
under the authority of the Board of supervisors a~d the
92-972 12/9/92
committee felt privatization of the Nursing Home would not
only enhunce servicem but bett~r meet the changing need~ of
privatlzatlon of the Nursing Home as it related tO staffing;
the current level of recruitment and retention of
the process for implementation of the privatizatlon including
the setting of a public hearing to receive citizen input; end
Mr, Daniel ~tate~ he felt although a public hearing was not
re.ired, the Board should hold a public hearing to receive
citizen input on the privatizatiun of t~e Nursing ~ome. He
Committee for its report and stated he felt the committee
Transition Committee for their report and stated in addition
to the Committee continuing with its work, he felt the
cs~itte~ could bec'expanded to include additional members.
Mr. McHale stats~ he ~elt the Committee hsd presented a good
report and the County should enEure that citizens would
continue to receive high q~ality care at the Nursing Home. He
further ~tated he also felt a public h~arin~ should be held to
receive citizen input on the issue.
on this issue and exeressed appre0iation ~o the Committee for
financing issu=s ss it related to the County issuing
revenue obligations and whether it would have a~ impact on the
county's bond rating.
Wt. colbert also e~pre~se~ appreciation to the Nursing Home
Mr. Daniel ~tate4 d~e to the upcoming General Assembly session
and the scheduling of meetings for the Board, he felt the
Board should include a~d~ng an item to ~h~ County's
legislative packet addressing amending the cotillion Act to
a~reed to iu¢lude adding an item to the County's legislative
more modern a99roaeh to the Health Center Commission
On motion of ~r. MeHale, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board set
the date of January 13, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. for a public bearing
to con~ider the e~tabli~hment of the Chenterfi~ld County
(It is noted a copy of the report submitte~ from the Lucy corr
Nursing Home Transition Committee &s fi~ed with the papers of
this Board.)
9~-973 ~2/9/92
PEHFO~ANCE AUDIT
Mr. Hammer stated Ms. Cynthia Satterwh~te and Mr. Harold
Martin of Coopers and Lybrand would present an overview on t/~e
p0rformanoe audit repor~ on the Building Inspection Department
and introduced ~E. ~att~rwhlt~.
M~, Satt~rwhite expressed appreciation to th~ Board and staff
identify oppo~unities for improvement. She reviewed
sco~e of the perfo~ance audit including the operation of
Departm=nt and ~e inspection proces~ as it relates %o new
$ingle-family residential dwellings; the int~rr~lation~hips
departm~t~ involved in ~e inepection Dr==ess and
approach u~ed for data collection including applicmble laws
a~d Fe~lations and pollci~s and procedures and the oolleotio~
then rewlewed the analy~is performad by Coopers & Lybrand
~ncluding inte~iewing me,ers of th~ Board of Supervisors,
an~ ~el=~t~d ~t~ff an~ k~y management perso~I of oth~r
builder~, homeowner~ and oth~r localities' ~n~p.ct~on
depar~nts and audited a sampl~ of reoent inspections, she
noted Coopers & Lybrand hired Building 0Sficials and Code
Administrators (BO~) to a~i~t in auditinq a ~ple of recent
building inspections to determine if inspection~ were
introduced ~. Ha=ol~ Ma~in.
Mr. Katie Dresente~ an overview of the observations and
toe--end'ti=ns contained in the written perfo~ance audit and
atate~ he rmc~iv~ full co=peTs=ion from Co~nty ~taff.
~ewiewed ~e audit'~ find~ng~ smd r~co~ndation~ including
the m~ssion, objectives ~nd mandated power~ of ~e Building
Incpe=tion Depa~ent and stated a gap exists between
~itizens' p~cept~on of the Departm~nt'~ m~on and
define4 mission of the Departm~t as it relate~ to the
Depar~ent ~n~pecting for substantial as opposed to strict
cumBlian=e wi~ the C~e and inspeQting for ~ality
wor~anship. He stated Oooper~ E Lybrand ~eoo~end~ the
Depar~ent re-~valuate and ~efine its current mission and
co,ami=ate the mimmion to ~e public. He ~tated t~e
of th~ Building ~nspection Department ha~ not been clearly
d~fined and coopers R Lybrand ~eoo~ends ~e Department
maintain a 9rofes~ional and independent working relationship
with builder~. He ~h~ reviewed m~agement policies,
procedu~e~ and ~aotioe$ ~nd st~tc~ certain policies,
b~n impl~ented on a timely basis. He state~ Cuu~ers &
Lybrand reco~e~d~ ~= doc~entation of policies, procedures
and local 9ru=tlces an~ the developmen~ and implementation of
p~ocedure~ to ensue timely imDl~entation of maw Code
remitments. He then reviewed organizational
issues and stated in the pa~t, t~ere ~a~ been a lack of
=uordlnatiun an~ o~unioation between the Building Inspection
Depar~ent and o~ departments such as Planning and
Enviro~ental Engineering within ~e Co~ity Develo~ent
Division wi~ no single depar~ent ~ing a~igned the
responsibility for en~oroing zoning/subdivision conditions.
~e stated Coopers & Lybrand recommends interdepartmental
meetings be held to include supervisors and staff and a single
department be assigned the re~ponslbillty of enforcing
zoning~subdivision conditlsns. Be then ~eviewed human
resource management issues including the finding that the
inspection staff fores was p~eviously inadec/uate to ~andle
workload and, specifically, a time study from 1981 through
1992 indicating the n%~er of re~identiul/com~ercial
inspections performed and noted the County e~erlencmd a
cen~truction boom in the late 1980's. Re stated the current
inspection staff complement is adequate to =nsure substantial
compliance with the Cods~ Re further stated in the past,
training prowided to inspection sta~ was sufficient only to
satisfy certification requirements and noted additional
training is now being offered. He further stated coopers &
Lybrand race,ends that if the County redefines the Building
Inspection Department's mission to ensure stricter code
e~plianee, staffing needs should be readdreesed. ~e then
reviewed the building inspsstion process and related processes
and operations including the imDrovemeot~ initiated by the
County to strengthen the inspection process; emphasis of
inspections to ensure that basic construction a~ syst~ are
in su~stnntial compliance with Code; the delay of certain
inspections until l'ater pha~es of the construction process;
and the Department net documenting or tracking complaints by
homeowners, builder~, or inspmctorz. He stated ~oopers &
Lybrand ~ene~ende the CoUnty consider requiring stricter
compliance with cede provieion~ a~r~slng ~uallty of
wor~manshi~; reasserting the ti~ing of inspections; and
creating a new department or hir~ ~taff to address consumer
protection and construction q~ality. ~e then reviewed
information technology issues including the efficiency of the
current system; the haekleq of maintenance requests;
current system , ~rovlding limlte~ management/performance
reporting capabilities; and the lack of a plan to address
long-term system nneds of the Department. He stated Coopers &
Lybrand read,mends the Department arrange for additional
staffing to address the. need for ehsrt-te~m system support;
improve syste~ reporting ~apabilities; and develop a strategic
in~erma~ion ~y~s plan. He then reviewed financial
munugement issues including the Department adopting a balanced
~u~get far Fi~=al Year ending June 30, 1993; the budget
including the addition of six ~taff already in place
add,ess anticipated workload; and the adoption of an increase
in permit fees to offset additional easts, He stated Coopers
& Lybrand recommends the Department continue to monitor
projected resource requirements and related funding needs and
use the county's a~thority to increase permit fees if
additional resources are required to e~pport increased
workloads.
Mr. Daniel inquired w~ether Coopers & Lybrand uncovered
evidence of impropriety, gross negligence or gro~
irregularities or less than e professional atmosphere within
%he Building Inspection Department. MS. Satter~h~te stated
Coopers & Lybrand found ~o evidence or indication of any
illegal acts.
F~r. Daniel stated the county had utilized a professional firm
to conduct the performance audit and he felt Coopers &
Lybrand's recommendations would assist the Ce~ty in
its Building Inspection D~partment. ~e further stated the
County Administrator would be directed to distribute the
~eport within the c~unlty to, the building, development~
business and citizen/civic organization sectors in an effort
to provide the community an opportunity ts provide input into
9~-975 1~/9/92
Mr. McHale stated he had supported the performance audit of
%he Huildlng Inspection Department due tn noncerns expressed
from citizens and inquired if there were any acts or omissions
on behalf of tither the Bourd of Supurvisors er County
management or staff during the audit which would cause. Coopers
& Lybrand to be concerned about their ability to render s fair
and impartial analysis of the Department. Ms. sattez~white
state4 Coopers & Lybrand was saCisfie~ it had received the
fell cooperation of all involved.
~r. McEale expressed appreciation to staff for their
cooperation during the audit and their efforts to improve the
building inspection process and image with the citizens.
Mr. Berber stated he felt the focus of the process should be
fur the Building Inspection Department to work with home
builders on behalf of homeowners and the County has attempted
stated he felt the issues have evolved from the construction
growth the County s~erisnced in the 1980's and indicated the
rec~endatione ef Coopers & Lybrand for the enforcement of
zoning/subdivision conditions and the assessment of staffing
levels in the Building Inspection Department would a~sist in
improving the operation of the Department.
for.substantial compliance but would need to be readd~essed if
the love1 of inspections increased.
~_r. Barber stated he felt there was a line between minimum
standards the County could legally enforce and workmanship
standards and the County has the responsibility of satisfying
the hom~owne~ ~hen purchasing a ho~e. He inquired if the
County's buildlng permit fee was comparable to fees charged by
Virginia Jurisdictions surveyed. Ms. Satterwhite stated it
was difficult to compare fees as each jurisdiction uses its
ovrn methodology in determining the fee, however~ she felt the
County was in the low to middle range and meted other
localities charge fees which the County carrently does not
charge.
The~e wa~ brief discussion relative to the types of fees
charged by other localiti~ ~ueh as a fee ~0r immuing
ee~rtificates of occupancy.
M~. Barber ~tated ~e felt t/%e performance audit had ~rovided
the County with a valuable tool in evaluating its ssrvioes and
the County should eousider addressing each dupartment with a
similar review.
~Lr. Colbert inquired whether the County could inspect the
quality of workmanship in its inspection process. Ms.
Satterwhite stated the County could only ~nforce the standards
of the Bnilding cede and standards relating to the quality Of
workmanship is a Judgment issue.
Mr. Warren stated he Xel~ coopers & Lybrand ~ad done an
excellent job and i~ple~e~tation of the recommendations such
as the development of a complain= tracking system, dooume~nting
local practices to ensure consistent enforcement of the Code,
the use of a checklist during tbs inspection process, citing
and documenting all Code violations to ensure the rights of
ho~own~rs are protected and t_he training o£ inspection staff
would assist the Cou_~ty in improving its building inspection
process, ae further stated t~e County is ~urrently meeting
Code ~eq~ir=m~nts and the reco~endatiens would enhance the
process and he was in agreement with the report being
distributed among the varieu~ sectors within the community.
He notsd the County could address the issue on its County
"C~ll-Xn ~how" and at the various constituents meetings hsld
by the individual ~upervisors.
M~. Daniel i~st~ueted the County Administrator to initiate the
distribution e£ ~he performance audit report to the various
sectors within the community, to review the report prior to
for staff to report to the Board on the process of
implementing the recommendations.
Mr. MoHale stated thi~ initiative was a total quality
management effort by the County and he felt an objective
review should be undertaken to address each depart_ments~
processes and procedures and requested a copy of the internal
perzormanoe audit schedule for each department.
(It is noted a copy of the Building Inspection Department
Performance Review Report is filed with the papers of this
Board.)
directed the County Administrator and staff to address various
force of County employee~ had boe~ appoints4 by the Co~ty
A~inistrator to work with the Building In~pection
to detains the ~easibility of implementing assistance
~nlt~ativ~s. H~ introduced Mr. Bernard Schmelz, te~ leader
Mr. R~se~ introduced me.ers of %he ta~k force who were
~r. $chm~!z stated the task ~orce has studied the fea~ibillty
of the Co~ty providing an ombudsman, engineering
an~ legal a~istanc~ to residents of the County whose home~
have been affected by ~hri~/swell ~oi1$ and ~ ~tu4y
~%aff or as a contractual service. ~ ~urther stated staff
the problem with an ~stt~te of costs ames=fated with
revlew~ the study undertaken by the task Sorc~ an~ their
rec~endationm including the d~ties of the o~ud~ma~
~peciflcally, the ro~ of the O~d~a~ to
c~icatio~ between'the involved ~artiem in re~olv~n~ the
noted ~e task force reco~end~ the o~bud~an ~ established
a~ a Staff position r~ortiag to ~e Deputy County
A~in~trator fo~ Co.unity Devel0~ent. H~ then reviewed the
duties of the en~ine~ and, specifically, ins~moting an~
dete~ining ~e nature and e~emt of structural damage to
single-family ~wellin~s 4us to shri~/swell soils and
the e~tent o~ damage, a reco~en~ repair, an e~imata of
cost for desig~i~g a re~air, and a pr~limina~ estimate of the
cost to re. ir ~h~ damage. K~ noted the task force
~e engineerlng services ~ provided ~der contract and made
available to those h~eowners with st~tural damage %~ their
foundations. He then reviewed legal assistance d~ties.
to ~e residents, the =onsultation being a~ ~e expose of the
County for ~he purpos~ of obtaining a ~i=ten reco~endation
parties from whom l~ga} redr~s may be available. He stated
~-9~v ~/~/~
a contractual agreement with several attorneys who pra=tlcs in
the eisa. He then reviewed the cost of implementation and
funding sources for the rscommsndatlons and staked all cost
and revenue projectiqns were preliminary estimates and
adjustments to fhe~e estimates would be made at the end of
March based on actual activity and necessary adjustments would
be addressed in the proposed F¥94 budget. He stated in order
to implement the outlined reoe~en~atiens, ntaff wan
public hearing to consider a proposed ordinance change
establishing a temporary surcharge of $125 on residential
building permit fees with the ordinance including a
provision terminating the ~urcharge on December 9~, 1993;
establishment of an application fee of $50 for
applying for the engineering and legal assistance progrmm;
authorization for creation of an ombudsman pesition;
authorization' for staff to enter into agreements for
engineering and legal services; appropriation of funds,
contingent on a~optien of the proposed ordinance; d~r~cting
staff to men{tot the applications for assistance and
potential cost of repair~ an~ disposition of cases; and the
AoX/st 1~ 1993,
Discussion, comments a~d q~esti~ns ensued ~elative to the
duties e~ the engineer and wBether ~e engineer would perform
specifi= design work; the duties of the luwyer and wh~th~r the
lawyer wo~td actually file the lawsmit$; and whaler
homeo%n~ers would be able to retain the lawyer for court
representation.
Hr. Colbert stated he ~elt the duties of the lawyer should
exclude any .type of court representation.
Discussion, co--eats and questions ensued relative to the
proposed salary for the position of %he ombudsman; the
ombudsman ponition being designated a staff position an~ the
length of service for the position; the duties of the engineer
in providing a report for a recommended repair but not
actually designing the solution for the repair; the extent of
the engineer's role in re=ommending the solution; and whether
the attorneys D~oviding services would be precluded fro~
acc~ting business generated from their consultations with
M~. Micas stated the .contract could provide for additionul
business or for ~he preclusion o£ additional b~siness and
there could be a difference in the cost of the services.
stated the contract Zee was a policy decision.
Di~¢~ssi0~, co,meats and ~uestlons ensued relative to whetter
the inclusion er preclusion of additional business would
comfraot; whether the legal servlce~ could ~e provided by the
County instead of being contracted; whether the engineering
analysis would generate the rang~ Of exposure the County was
e~De~encing a~ it related to damages attributable to
shrink/aw611 =oils; and if the race,ended ~o%%~t by the
engineer would be the ~aximum exposure accepted by the county.
Mr. McHale stated he was c~nccrncd about the duties of the
l~gal adwi~or and, specifically, the legal a~vieor being able
to pz~t~cipate in £utu~e court action and indicated he felt
t~e legal advisor should m~ke such a ~e¢ision r~ther th~ the
92-978 12/9/92
Far. Barber inquired as to thm basis for the r~commendatlon of
the proposed ~rsh 30, 1993 ~ate as the window of opport%mity
for the County to receive applications. Mr. Schmelz stated
the ~eadline would '~rov~e an opportunity for citizens to
apply and would allow 'staff to perform '~e ~eoe$~ar~ work
within the fim~al oon~t~aint~ of th~ County d~ing ~e year.
~. Ba~be~ stated he was concerned abo~t ~e proposed deadline
a~ oiti~n~ have e~re~ concerns about ~e w~nduw of
opportunity to receive applications being a date in which all
citizens e~erlencing 9roblems related to shrink/swell ~oi1~
could apply,
~. W~ren stated he was also concerned about the propose~
deadline for receiving applications zinoe the public hearing
wo~%d not b~ set ~til January and would limit the tim~
citizens woul~ have to make application to th~ County. He
fur~er ~tated he f~lt the availability of the pr~ram shoul~
be publicized.
Th~r~ wa~ brief discussion retati~e to the antiuipated number
of cltizen~ who would ~ke application to ~e coun=y for
e~tlmate~.
~. ~m~y ~tat~ the aaroh ~9, 1993 deadline date Xor
~taff to ~ake th= necessa~ adjus~ents prior to adoption of
application deadline date provld~ng the flexibility iB making
the declslon-~klng au~ority of ~e ~Qard; an4 =he propose~
~aln~ for the o~udsman position.
Mr. McHale s~ated he 'would not ~ comfortable with any
for citizens to m~e appl~cati0n to the County fo~ a~istance
and be felt it Shoul~ be ~derstoo~ that after the defined
th~ Co~ty, ~ further stated he also felt ~ availability
of ~e pro,am mhould be publicized to citizens.
Mr. Daniel mta=ed the Board would ad~e~s setting ~e p~bli=
hearing to consider increasing the residential fee under the
~onsmnt agenda and clarified the public hearing pro=e~ would
After brief d~ou~io~, On motion of ~. McKale, second~ ~
~r. Colbe~, th~ ~oard authorized the Co~ty A~inistrator to
initiate the p~0oess for creation, recruitnent mhd rete~tto~
of an o~udsman ~osition whu~e focuz will ~ assistance to
citizens in ~=solving shri~/swell ~o11 ~d other construction
relate~ issue~.
Vote: Unanlmou~
Mr. R~sey stated staff would proceed wi%h n~gOtiating the
proposed ~gineering Contracts prior to the Boar~ ~eeti~g on
Janua~ 13, 1993, w{~ naid contractz ~ing contingent upon
~. Daniel expressed mDpreoiation to the tas~ force for their
........ ~ J.~_L ....... [ ....... J I .........
reqommendations are filed with the papers of this Board.)
AUTHORIgATION ~OR THE PLANNING D~TMENT TO ~EPARE AN
UPDATED ~ ~OR THE ROUTE 360 CO~/~IBOR BETNE~
Board authorize the Planning Department to prepare an updated
Courthouse Road. Re further stated this project was not
currently identified as a high priority project due to current
staffing levels and resouross would not be availaSle until
After brief discussion, Mr. Daniel and ~r. Warren made u joint
mo=ion, seconded by ar. Barber, for the Board to authorize the
Planning Depa~nent to prepare an u~dat~d plan for t~e Route
3~0 corridor between chiDDenham Par~ay and Courthouse Road.
There was brief dis~ssion rela=ive ~o whe=h~ the funds would
be appropriated from other identified projects with higher
priorities if Ubs re.est was approved and the Board a~eed
that $61~000 ~hould ~ appropriated fbr FY93 ~d $~9,000 for
FY94 in or~ to allow ~e Planning Department to undmrt~e
Mr. Daniel called for ~ vote on th~ join~ motion mad~ by him
au~orize the Planning Departnent to prepare an updated plan
Co~ouse Road. (It i~ noted excess debt se~ice funds w~ll
Vote: Unanimous
e~tabli~h a local d~abilitie~ ~e~vioe~ beard to provide input
w~th physical' and ~en~sry disabilities. He further stated
st~£~ was recommending the creation of a disabillties services
the board would be charged with m~klng available a report with
a si~-y~ar projection of local ssrvi~e nesd~ and prioritie~ by
Mr. Daniel ~tated he felt membership to the board ~hosld be
representation for the entire County.
~ctions of the County; whether the re,est c~ld be deferred
On motion of ~. Daniel, s~conde~ ~ ~. Wa:r~n, th~ Boar~
1993.
9]-980 1~/9/9~
Vote: Unanimeus '~
After brief di~u~io~, on motion of F~. Mc/~ale, seconded by
~r. Warren, the Board aDDroved the followinq streetlight
installation cost approvals in the designated Districts with
sa~d funds to he expended fr~m ~he ~esignated Die=riot Street
Light Accounts:
BERMUDA DISTRICT
* Int~eection of Chippenham Parkway and Strathmore Road
near Salem Street
Coat to in,tall light: $341.00.
CLOVER HILL DISTRICT
* Intersection of Newstead Drive ~nd Provincetown Drive
Cost ko install light: $2,567.00.
* Int~rsectlcn o£ Provincetown Drive and Ruthere Road
Co~t to in,tall l%ght: $232.00.
COSt ~0 install light: $25S.00.
Cost to install light:
* Intersection of Courtheuse Road and Daklns Drive,
~o~t to install light: $3,7G0.00.
Intmrsectlon of Iron 8r~dga Road an~ Irongate Drive
cast to in~tall light $964.00.
~,D.~. ADOPTION OF RE~OLUTION ~FA~ING THE CENT~h~J~ LIBRA~Y_.TWN
"2~_L~IE_~. ELMORE BUILDINg#
Om motion of ~e Board, ~e following resolution Was
~R~Z, ~. Ei$i~ S. Elmore served the citizens
C~e~terfi~ld county and the Co~ohwcalth of Virginia for ~ny
year~ ~rough her volunteer work on n~eruus bour~s
~ER~S, ~s. Elmer. d.mon~trated ~e highest q~ities
of citizenship in servinq ~a interests of d~advanta~ed
children, familie~ and elderly and gave ~$elfi~hly of her
time ~ough ~emb~ship on t~e Capital Ar~a Agency on A~ing
and various c~itte~u of the United W~y of Greater RiQ~ond;
~eights Bourd of Social Service~ from ~98~ to 199O an~ as
chairman o~ this Sourd, was instrunental in o~ganizing the
Chesterfield ~n Service~ Coalitio~ which has
Dubli= library develo~ent in the County; and
92-981
WHEREAS, Mrs. Elmore ~erved with distinction on the
GovernOr's Advisory committee for Child Abuse and Neglect from
WHEREAS, Mrs. Elmore's outstanding community efforts and
dedicated work on behalf of others led to various honors
including the Governor's Award for Volunteering Excellence~
recognition by-the Senate of Virginia, and induction into the
Chesterfield County senior citizens Hall of Fame; and
WHEREAS~ Mrs. Elmore served on the County Charter
committee appointed by the Board of ~upervisor$ in 1986 and
wa~ instrumental in urginq t~e county and tAe General Assembly
to adopt the County Char~er f~rm of Government for
Chesterfleld County in ~987.
NOW, TI{EREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Boar~ of Supervi~or~ hereby ~nanimeu~]y endorsee nmeing
the Cen~_ral Library in ~emory of Mrs. Elsie S. EImore.
AND, B~ IT F~RT~4ER R~SOLVED, thmt a copy of this
resolution be presented to Mrs. Elmere's family and t~at t/%i~
resolution bo permanently recorded among the paper~ of the
Beard Of Supervlsor~ of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Vote: Unanimous
6.D.2. A~PROERIATION O~ II~TEEEST EA]tNINGB ON
CERTIFICATES OF P~I~TIOIP~TION. BERIES OP 19B~. TO PAY
AR~IT~AGB REBATE ~ DEBT
On motion of ~. Barber, seconded ~ ~. Mcgale, the Board
$76,~8 of arbitrage rebate and $~24,804.21 in debt service.
Vote: Unanimous
~,D.$. APTBOPRIATIO~ OF FY93 SUPTLF~E~TAL GOMPENSATI~N BOARD
FUN~IN~ FO~ THE SHERIFF~S OFFICE
On motion of ~Lr. Barber, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board
appropriated $192,632 i~ FY93 supplemental state compensation
Board funding to the ~heriff'~ Office as follows{ part
equipment - $25,117. (It i~ noted theme funds were made
available to the Sheriff's Office with the ~nderstandi~ these
moneys arc available for e~mnditure du~ing =he c~ren% ~imcal
year only and ~pe~t f~Rds Will not Curry over to the next
t~ese f~ds to hit= eight additional part-time p~so~el to
decrease ~e
vote: Unanimous
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. MOHalk, tho Board
from $loo,ooo to $116,s~?; approve~ expansion of T/%~ Pr6trial
of celeniat Heig~ts~ an~ a~rove~ ~iring a part-time ~mpleyee
to serve Colonial Neights. {It i~ noted thi~ request pesos
approval notification fr~m Colonial Heights ~or funding the
92-98~ 12/9/9~
$16,857 is available for apprepriation to the FY93 Community
Diversion Incentive Program Pretrial Grant Budget.)
Vote: Unanimous
approved tho follewing- planned ~mendments to modify the
County's ~ppleme~tal r~tirememt plan to allow the maximum use
of portfolio investment manaqers:
with one or more investment managers instead e~ or in
defined in Section 1,07 and 1.13 cf the plan,
respectively.
2. To provide authority and conditions for %he selection and
of the plan.
3. To establish such trust, custodial or other appropriate
Federal Internal Revenue Code for the purpose of holding
To e~tabli~h, subject to terms of existing contracts, the
a~tho~ity with th~ Trustees to terminate exi~tin9 Inmurer
5. To prohibit the- Trustees ~rom directly inveetinq plan
6. To establish the terms and conditisnm f~r Trustee
discretion to establimh investment qoals and objectives
and asset allocation stratn~ies.
facilitat~ and implement the purposes of this resolution.
Vote:
THE PRO~I~Ii~OR FYi4
/~r. McHale, the Board approved continuation of the presen~
ourbslde recycling program and w~ll consider expanding the
program as part of the FY94 budget process. (It is noted a
copy of the expansion alternative~ for the Cu~b~ide Recycling
Program is file~ with the ~apers uf this Board.)
Vote; Unanimous
92-983 1~/9/9~
~G~EEMEN~ yOR yM~D IrA~TE CO~08TZNG B~F~ZN TNE
0n ~otion of Kr. Barber, ~econded by Mr. McHale, ~e Board
authorized an amen~ent to the Speoial Pr~jeot s~rvice
Agreement for yar~ waste oomposting between ~e Cen~al
virginia Waste ~naqement Au~o~ity ~nd Ch=~tarfi~ld CO~ty,
subject to approval by the Cowry Attorney.
Vo~e=
DONATION FOR A CHESTER VILLAGE ~EA DESIGN STUDY,
P~. I
On motion of ~r. Barber, meconded by Mr. McHale, the Board
appr sl~riated funds
~e~terfield Village ~oun~tion and apgropriated $25,000 (for
a total of $50,000) in order to finance the preparation of
funds in the amount of $25~000 to cover ~ County'~ mat~ for
Bermuda District ~ree Cent Road P~d and $~3~000 in fund~ are
from the Co~t Building lease/pu~ohase.
S~NCTUARY 8I~N8 ~OR NUGU~ ~N~ RO~
On motion of Mr. Barber, ~econded by ~. Mc~ale, ~e Board
appropriate~ $100 from ~ Hidlo~an District Three Cent Road
Fund to ~e Midlo~ian Garden CI~ to assist in the purchase
of bird sanctuary signs for ~enot sprinqs Road. (It is
d~ignatlon of Huguenot Springs Road as a bir~ sanctuary.)
Vote: Unanimous
less, located on Falling Creek and a~jacsnt to Providence
future gresnway area an~ authorize~ the Ceun=y Administrator
to execute the necessary deed.
AWARD OF OUN~RAGT TO Rs ~O~K/EST~BROOK CORPORATION
FOB ~I~HTIN~...~F BB~BBALL/BOFTB~LL FIELDS ~T
~CHE~T~ H~GH 8~HOOL ~ ~E~T~IDDLE ~
On motion of ~. ~ber, ~e~on~ed by Mr. ~cHale, ~e Board
aw~ded a contract %o S. Ro~/~stabrook Co.oration, i~ the
a~ount of $161,000 less two percent for pa~ent made wi~in
tw~ty days, for lighting of ba~e~l]/~of~all field~ at
~anchu~ter High S~ool and Man,ester Middle School. (It i~
noted f~d~ for ~is projects were appropriated ~ro~ ~e
Claver Hill Spo~ Complex a~ th~ Oc~ob~ 14, 1992 Board
1~/9/92
'1
meeting.)
Vote: Unaninous
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by ~r. MoHale, the Board
upproved the following bingo/raffle permitm for calendar year
OB~-Z~TION
Beach Com~unlty Grange
Cavalier Athletic ClUb
St, Augustine Parish
Mancheoter Athletic Association
Virginia Deerhunte~'o A~oeiation
Central Virginia Couneii of th= Blind
Midlothian High School
Loyal Order of
~anchester/Richmond Lodge
Thomas Dale Music Booster Club
James River Lions Club
TYPE
Bingo
Bingo
Bingo
Bingo/Raffle
Raffle
Raffle
Raffle
Bingo/Raffle
Raffle
Raffle
Bingo
6.Do14. STATE RO~D
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
dire~tion~ from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Jolly Lane and Jolly Place in Cedar Run,
Upon consideration whereof, an= on mu=ion o~ Mr.
seconded by F~. MeHale, it is resolved that Jolly Lane and
Jolly Place in cedar R~, B~rmnda District, be an~ t~ey ~e~eby
ute e~tublished us public roads.
And be it further resolved~ that the VirgiBia Department of
Transportation, ~e and it hereby is requested.to take into the
Secondary ~yntem, Jolly Lane, b~ginning at the western end oS
ex,sting Jolly Lane, State Ro~te lS56, and going westerly 0.05
mile to the intersection with Jolly ~iaee, then cantinu~n~
westerly 0.05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; and Jolly Place,
beginning at the intersection with Jolly Lane an~
northerly 0.10 mile to end in a cul-de-oac.
This req~/e~t is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight
distance, clear zone and ~e~i~nated Vlrgln~a Department of
Transportation drainage easements+
The~e roods s~ve 19 lots.
And be it further reselved~ that the Board of supervisors
guarantees to ~he Virginia Department of Transportation an
unrestricted right-of-way of 50' with necessary easements for
cuts, fills and drainage for allof these roads.
Cedar Run is recorded as follows:
Plat Book 64, Page 53, December 19, l~SS.
Vote: Y~animous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board,. made report in writing upon his
eEamination of Hanlin Creek Parkway, Bermuda District.
Upon sonsideration whereof, and on notion of Mr. Barber,
seconded by Mr. McHale, it is resolved that Ramlin Cre~k
ParKway, Bermuda District, bc and it h~reby is established us
a public road.
And be it further resolved, that ~he virginia DeDuzd:men~ of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the
Secondary System, Hamlln Creek Parkway, beginning at the
intersection with Chester Road, State Route 145, and going
easterly 0.31 mile to end in a temporary turnaround.
This request is inslusive of the adjasent slope~ sight
distance, olear zon~ and d~signeted Virginia Dep~r~nent of
Transportation drainage easenents.
This road serves as access to adjasent commercial properties.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the virginia Department of Transportation a
variable 60' to 80* ~nrest=ioted right-Of-way with necessary
easements for cute, fills and drainage for this rea6.
Kamlin cree~ Par~way is ~eorded as follows:
Deed BOO~ 2164, Peg~ 292, July 8, 1991.
Deed Book 1163, Page 56~, July 2, 1991.
Deed Sock 2163, Pages 549 through 552, Jhlly 2, 1991.
Veto:' Unanimous
Thi= day tho Coun=y Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board~ made report in Writing upon
examination of Rockridge Road, Chipstead Road, Chipstead
Plaoe~ Chip~tead Ceurt~ Rookridge Court and Roskridge Place in
~i~den Valley Estates, Section ~, Bermuda District.
Upon Consideration whereof, and on motion of ~r. Barber,
seconded by M~. MeHale, it is resolved that Rockridge Read,
Chipetead Road, Chipstead ~lace, Chip~tead Court, Roekridge
Court, and Rookridge Place in Hidd~ Valley Estates, Section
p~blio roads.
~d be it f~e~ ~esolved, that the Virpiniu Depur~ent of
Transportation, ~ and it hereby is re~este~ to =axe into
Secondary System~ Rockridge Road, bmgi~ing ut Roc~idge
Nidden Valley Estates, Section 2, gtate Route muir to
assigned~ and going north~ly 0.05 mile to the inter~ectlon
with Chipstead Road, ~en continuing northerly 0.07 mile
then continuing northerly 0.~3 mile to t~e i~tersectio~ with
9~-986 I2/9/9~
chi~atead Road again, then continuing northerly 0.03 mile to
end in a temporary turnaround; Chipstead Road, beginning at
the intersection with Rockridge Road and going easterly 0.08
mile, th~n turning and going northerly 0.15 mile to the
intersection with Chipstead Pla=e, then continuing northerly
0.05 mile to the intersection with Chlpstmad Court, then
turning and going westerly 0.10 mile to end at
intersection with Rockridge Road; Rockridge Place, beginning
at the intersection with Rookrid~e Road and going
northwesterly 0.03 mile, then turning and going northerly 0.14
mile to end in a cul-de-sac; Rockrldge Court, beginning at the
intersection with Roekridgo Roe~ an~ going southeasterly 0.04
mile to end in a col-de-seer Chipstead Place, beginning at the
intersection with Chlpstead Road and going westerly 0.05 mile
to end in a cul-de-sac; and Chipstead Court, beginning at the
intersection with Chipstead Road and going northwesterly 0.03
mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight
distance~ clear zone and designated Virginia Department of
Transportation drminage easements.
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation
unrestricted right-of-way of ~0' with necessary easements for
e~ts, fills a~d drainage for all of these roads.
This xection of ~idden Valley ~states is recorded as follow~:
Section 6. Plat Book 66, Page 11, .April 18,
This day the Connty Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made re9ort in writing upo~ hi~
examination of ~ewbys Wood Trail in Newbys Wood, Section
Dale District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of F~r. Barber,
seconded by Mr. McHale, it is resolved that Nswbys Wood Trail
in Wewby~ Wood, S~t~on D, Dale Di~trlc~ be and it hereby is
established as a public road.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Transportation, ~ and it hereby is requested to take into
Secondary system, Newby~ WOOd T~ail, beginning at existin~
~ew~ys Woo~ Trail, state Route 3~S5, and going
0.14 mil= tO end i~ a t~mporury turnaround.
This request is inclnsiYe of the adjacent ~ope, sight
distance, clear zone and designated Virginia Department of
Transportation drainage
This road serves 9 lets.
And be it £~rther re~olved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Vlrgi~ia Department ef Transportation an
unrestricted right-of-way of ~0' with necessary easements for
c~t~, fills an~ drainage for t~is road.
Section D. Plat Book 72, Page 72, Sept~_mber 19, 1990.
Uote: Unanimou~
92-987 12/9/92
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from t/~is Board, ma~e report in writing upon his
examination of Maple Brook Drive and Maple Brook Court in
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. ~arber,
seconded by Mr. McHale, it is resolved that Maple Brook Drive
they hereby are established as puhli~ roads.
And be it farther resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Transportatien, be and it hereby is requested to take into the
Secondary System! Maple Brook Drive~ beginning at the
intersection, with Lakebluff Parkway, State Route 4~37, amd
going easterly 0.04 ~ile to the intersection with itself and
Maple Brook Court, then turning and going southeasterly ~.X2
mile, then turning und going southwesterly 0.84 mile, then
turning add going westerly 0.07 mile, tb~n turning and going
northerly 0.14 mile to end at the intersection with itself and
F~e Brook Court; and Maple Brock
intersection with Maple Brook Drive
8.06 mile to sn~ in a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the
distance, clear zone and d~ignated
Transportation drainage easements.
These roads serve 36 lots.
Court, beginning at the
and going northeasterly
adjacent slope, eight
Virginia Department of
A~d be it f~rther resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation an
urn~estricted riqht-of-way ef 50' with necessary easement~ for
cnt~, fills and drainage for all uf these roads.
Maple Brook is recorded as follows:
Plat Book 68, Dago~ 4 & 5, September Zl, 1989.
This day the County Environmental ~nglneer, ~n accordance with
~ireotions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
e~aminatlo~ of ~owell ~rove Road, P~well Grove Drive ~d
Powell Grove Terrace ~n Powell Grove, Matoaoa District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Barber,
~oonded by Mr. MoHale, it i= re~olved that Powell ~rove Road,
Powell .G~ove Drive and Powell Grove Ts=race in Powell Grove,
~atoaCa District, be and they hereby are established as public
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to taka into th=
Secondary System, Do,ell ~rove Road, beginning St the
inter~e¢~ion with Lukebluff Parkway, State Route 4337, and
geimg westerly 0.04 mile to th~ intersection with Powell Gro~e
Drive, then continuing westerly 0.05 mile, then turning and
going northwesterly 0.06 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; ~ow~ll
Grove Drive, beginning at ~ho in=ersootlon with ~owoll Grows
Road_and going northerly 0.~4 mile, then turning and going
northwesterly 0.~2' mile to the intersection with PowelI Grove
Terruce, then continuing northwesterly 0.08 mile, then turning
an~ going northerly 0.04 mile %o end in a cul-de-sac; and
Powell Grove Terrace, beginning at the intersection with
Pow=ll Grove Drive an~ goln~ northeasterly 0.03 mile, then
t~rni~g &Rd ~O~g northerly 0.04 mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
12/9/92
This request is inclusive .of the adjacent slope~ sight
distance, clear zone and designated Virginia Department of
Transportation drainage e~s~ments.
Th~se reeds serve §0 lots.
qumrnntees to the virginia Department of Transportation an
fiats, fills a~d d~ainage for all of these roads.
Powell Grove is recorded as follows:
Plat Book 69, Pages 15 & 16, December 4, 1989.
~.D.~. REF~ TO THE PY~N~NG
AND ~ECO~F~NDATION, AN 0~DIN~CE TO ~HE CODE O~
~E~ING ~ ~ACTIN~ ~EGTZON~ 21.1-229.4 ~ 21.1-
ZZg.$ ~TIN~ TO ~EBAP~KE B~Y PR~BER~TI~N
On me, ion of Mr. Barber~ ~econded by N~. McHale, the Board
ref~rr~ to the ~lanning co~ission, for =~eir review and
reco~datlon~ an ordinance to ~end the Code of the County
of Chesterfield, 1975, as amended, by ~en~ing and reenacting
Se~tion~ ~1.1-2~9.4 and 21.1-229.5 relatlng to Chesapeake Bay
~R~VICBS R0R BE~VICES...RELATEB TO T~E COMPLETION OF
authorized the Co~ty A~inistrator to execute a contract
between the County and 09den Envi~o~ental ~er~ service~, in
the ~ount of $39~,996.1~, to provide s~ices relating to the
completion of the Nstional Pollutant Dis~harqe Elimination
System Part II Pe~it Application ~evelopment and ancilla~
Drainage Capltal Improvement Account to f~d =he pr~ram.
~UILDING PE~T FEES TO DEF~Y ~R ~BT OF
O~ ~otioH Of ~. Barber, ~co~ed by Nr. ~cHale, the Board set
th~ 5ate of January 13, 1993 at 7:00 p.~. fo~ u p~lic hearinq
to consider an ordinance increasing the residential building
pe~ft fees to defray ~e co~t of foundation po~ inspections.
wore: Unanlmou~
92-989 12/9/92
........... r~.l! I UL ] .[ ,.I ....... d ............... I. I .
COUNTY OF C~F. STE~ZELD~ 1978~ ;u~ ~(ENDED, BY
2~.L-280 RELATIN~ TO FIL~.~~, FR~ESSING ~
~ROVAL OF KITE PL~Ng
On motion of ~r. ~arber~ m~co~ded by ~r. MoHalk, th~ Buar~ ~t
the dats of January 13~ 1993 at ?:00 p.m. for a public hea~ing
to c~n~ider an ordinance to amen~ the Code of the County of
Chesterfield, 1978~ a~ amended, by a~e~di~g a~d reenacting
Se~tlons 21.1-272 through 21.~-2S0 relating ~o filing,
p~ocessi~g a~d approval of site plans.
S,D.1S. REOUEST PERMISSION FOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO BE THE
APPL~%N~ ~OR ~ R~ONIN~ RE~U~T FO~ TN~T~?J,~T~OM OF
T~E SWIFT CREEK TRIB~TART NONITORIN~ STATIONS
On motion of I~T. Barber~ ~ecend~d Dy Mr. McHale, t~e Boar~
approved a re,est from mtaff for the Board of Zup~imors to
De t~e applicant for ~e conditional use and variances
necessary for ~e installation of ~e ~wift creek Tributary
Monitoring Station~; appointed Mr. David M. Wml~on~, Director
of the Utilities Department, for such a99licationm; and waived
the filing of disclosure for such filings.
Vote: Unanimoum
S.D.~9. REQUEST FOR PERMISSION FRO~ IRO~BRI~GE BAPTIST
FOR A ~N_~.,~NC~OACN WITHIN~NE=ISTING SIXTEEN
FOOT S~R E~EM~NT
O~ ~Oti0n Of ~i~. Barber, seconded by ~. McHale, the Board
approved a re~t fro~ IroDbridge B~p~ist ~rch for a sign
to ~n~roa~ within a ~i~een foot ~ewe~ ea~ent ~ubje~t to
v~clnlty sk~t~ i~ filed wi~ the paper~ of thi~ Board~)
Vote: Unanimou~
6.D.2~. ~CCEPTA~CE OF PARCELS OF LAND ALONG NOR~H SPRING R~
accepted, on behalf of the County, t. he uonvsyance o£ Q.839
spring Run Roa~ (Route 7~1) an~ 0.382 acres adjacent to the
Associates, L.P. and authsrizsd the County Administrator to
execu%~ thc necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat
Vote: Unanimous
.6. D.1~. , gT'RERT N~J~I~ t'RA~R
the development of Walmart and Sa~s Warehouse on Nidlethian
Turnpike ~nd has been requested to r~name Whltten Parkway to
Walmart Way. Me further stated although the rec~uest was not
in conformance with County pollcy, Whltten Brothers wa~ not
looa=od at that ~ite and since Walma~t would be located t~ere,
he felt this par~ic~lar request was appropriate under the
circuI~tancss.
92-990 12/9/92
Hr. sarber made a motion, seconded bY Mr. Col~eZ~, £or the
Board to aDD,cvs Changing the name of Whitten Parkway to
walmart Way.
Hr. Mc/{ale stated he felt these ty!0em of requests should
conform to County policy and ~Xpressed concern relative to the
Hr. Daniel stated although he was in agreement with the
comments exprss~od by Mr. McHale, if the name was net changed
it would re~a~n Whltten Park-way. He ful-~her stated the Board
should consider addressing the everall street name pollcy at
After brief discussion, ~[~. Daniel called fo~ the Vote on the
motion made by Mr. Barber, ascended by Mr. colbert, for tho
Board to approve changing the name of Whitten Parkway to
Walmart Way.
Ayes: Mir. Daniel~ ~r. Warren~ Mr. Barber and Mr. Colbert.
7. DEFERRED IT~B
?.A. BTR~BTLIG~T INSTALLATION ~OST APPROVAL
After brisf discussion, on motion of Mr. MCHal¢, ~econded by
Mr. Warren, the Board deferre~ the ~treetlight ins=alia=ica
cost approval for the intersection Of Roland View Drive and
Roland View Terrace, in the Bermuda Magisterial bls~ric%,
until ~aroh 10~ 1993 i~ an uffort to resolve the ~asement 'and
safety concerns associated with the request.
On motion cf Mr. Mc~ale, seconded by F~. Barber, the Board
$~pended i~ r~le~ to allow simultaneous nomination/
appointment at thi~ tine of a representative to ~e~e o~
Co~unlty Services Bour~ repacks=lng Clovar Hill District.
Vo~e: Unanimous
On mo=ion of Mr. Warren~ 6eoo~ded by ~, Colbert, the Board
simultaneou~ly nominated/appointed ~, Har~
repre~entinq Clove~ Hill District, to se~e on ~e Co--unity
Service~ Board, whome term is effective Janua~ 1, 1993
will expire January 31, 1995.
7.B.2. ~AY~oI~FO~ND~TION
O~ ~otio~ Of Mr. M~HalO, s~cended by Mr. Barber, the Board
~uspended it~ r~los to ~llow ~imultaneous nomination/
appointment at this time of a representative to ~erve on tho
~aymsnt F0und~tion representing the County at-large.
On ~otlon of }Ir, ~arbor, seconded by M~. colbert, the Board
mimultaneously nominated/reappointed the Honorable Pamela
Wcmack to serv~ on the Maymont Foundation, representing the
12/9/92
will ~pire December 31~ 1993.
Vote: Unanimous
There were no Kearings of citizens on Unscheduled Ma~ters or
claims scheduled at this time.
Mr. Ramsey presented the Board with a report on the developer
water and ~ewer qontracts executed by the County
Administrator.
District Road and street Lig~ Funds; Leas~ Pur~ases; and
has formally notified the County of the &oceptanee o~ the
following roads into the State
P~ED' S BLUFF - ~ffe~ctJ~ve~l~2~2)
0.2~ mile M~st Route ~7~ 0.23 mi
Rout~ 984 (Walkers Cove Drive) - From NCL Colonial
Heights to 0.17 mile Nurth~¢L CS!Chis1 Heights
i~A~0N~PARK - (effective 11-13-9~]
Vote: Unanimoum
EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSU~NT TO SECT/ON 2.1-344fA)(?). C~
OF VIRGINIA, ~9~, AB AHENDED, I~OR ~ONSU~T~TION WITH
~E OF ~E BUgINE99~ I~REgT IN ~IHG ~ TO
on motion of Mr. MCHal~, ~oonded ~y M~. Colbert, the Board
s~$p~nded its rules et this time to =mend the agenda to add to
Item lO.~ a~ additional Executive Session for discussion of
the condition, acquisition or use of real property for public
purpose relating to the extension of 288 pursuant to Section
2.1-344(A)(3) Co~e of Virginia.
Vote: Unanimous
On motion of ~lr. aeHale, seconded by 1~'. colbert the Board
moved Item 10., Executive ~eicn pursuant to Section 2.1-
~44(A](?), Co~e of Virginia, 1950, as amended, for
consultation with legal counsel ~egarding the acquisition of
1~/9/~
real property for public purposes; and, pursuant to Section
~.l-3~(A)(1), d~scu~ion eoneer~ing the expansion of an
of the business' interest in expanding ~ursua~ ~0
2.1-344(A)5; a~d, an Executive Session for discussion of the
condition, acqui~itlon or use of r~al property for publio
2.1-344(A)(3), C~e of Virginia, to follow Item 16,
for Mobils Home Permits and Rezcning.
Vote: Unanimous
DINNER
~otien Of Mr. Colbert, seconded by l~r. Barber, the Beard
reoe~ed to the A4minis~ra%ion ~uilding, Room 502, for dinner.
~. INVenTION
l~, Daniel i~t~odu~ed R~V~rend Carl Cosslett, ~astor
Trinity United Methodist Church, who gave the invocation.
the United States of ~erlca.
R~$0LUTIONS AND 8PZCZA.L RECOGI~'Z~Z01,;8
BO~D
two y~ar~ a~ th= adult m~bmr, reDresentln~ Be~nda District,
on ~e You~ Se~ice~ Citizen Board and has made many positive
contributions ~o the Board.
On motion of the Board, t~m following re~olution w~ adopted:
~$, =~e government of Chesterfield Coun=y is able to
serve its =itizens ~st ~rough the cooperative combination of
County who has devoted his career and volunteer ti~e to the
bette~ent o~ others; an~
~S, ~. B~gg~ has volunteered f0~ man~ years
esDe=ially to e~an=e the ~uality of life for young bla~ m~n
in ~e ~esterfi~ld co.unity; and
~s, a~ a hat.al exte~io~ of ~. Briggs' interest
in th~ well-being of young Deo91m in the co--unity, ha has
qenerously g~ven cf h~s time to se~e as a me~r of the You~
~ality of life for all young p~ople in ~esterfield County;
and
c~unity~ s~rvic~s to youth and families through his efforts
with ~e citizen Board.
appreciation to Nr. James Brigge for his on-going ~erviee to
the community, for his ~tronq commitment to the quality of
life for all our citizens and, particularly, for his years of
service; representing Bermuda District, on the Youth Services
citizen Board from May, 1990 to November, 1992.
Vote: 'Unanimous
Mr. McHale presented the executed resolution to ~r. Briggs and
expressed appreciation for his service, representing Bermuda
District, on the Xouth services citizen Hoard.
RECO~NI2TN~ MR. J~CK b. NOWEr JO~N T~fL~R dOMMUNIT¥
~OLLE~B LO~ BO~D
Mr. Stith stated Nr. Jack D. Huw~ has r~pres~nted the
at-large on the ~ohn ~ler Co,unity College ~cal Board since
1~84 and has ~mrved am Doth ~airman and vice chai~an during
that tim~.
Qn motion of the soard, the following resolution was adopted:
~s, The John Tyler Cu~uni~ collage Local Board
acts in an advisory capacity %o ~e State Board for Co~uni~
operations of John Tyler Co~unlty Collegm am may ~ delegated
~S, The John Tyler Co.unity College Local Beard
se~ms as a liaison between the State Board for Co~unlty
Coll~ges and ~e county and city gover~ent~ in ~e College
service area, helps to promot~ an =ducation program of high
~ality, encourag~ oo~uni~ participation in progra~
~ER~S, ~. Jack D. Howe has served on ~e John Tyler
Cc~uni~ college Local Board, ~ep~e~e~ting ~a~terfield
County, since November, 1964;
~=R~S, ~. ~owe ~e~ed on th~ Local Board as Chairman
from May, 1990 to July, ~99~ an~ as Vic~ chai~an from
S~pte~beF, 198~ 5o July, 1990.
NOW, TH~O~ DE IT ~SOLV~ ~at the ~esterflel~
Chesterfield while serving on the Uo~ ~ler Co--unity College
re~ol~tion be appropriately prepared and pre=anted to ~. Jack
Vote: Unanimous
Co~ty st-l~ge~ on the Jo~ Tyler Co~ity College Local
14.D. ~ECOG~SINGI~i~. SF.,~N~OI'~S C~OWNUPOW ATTAI~N~
~ OF ~GLE SCOUT
~n mo%ion of the B~ard, ~e following r~solution wa~
~ER~S, Th~ Boy Scouts of ~erica was in~Qrporate~ by
~. William D. Boyoe on F~b~ary 8~ 1910~ and
~E~S~ The Boy Scouts of ~e~i~a wa~ founded to promote
citizenship training, personal development an~ fitness of
individuals; and
~E~S, After earning at lea~t twenty-one merit badges
in a wid~ variety of fle~m, s~ng in a l~adership po~it~on
co~unlty, ~ing activ8 fn the troop, demonstrating scout
spirit and living up to the Scout Oath and Law; and
~E~$, ~. ~ean Thomas Cro~, Standstill Church. Troop
has re~ed the long-~ought goal of Eagle Scout which
received by l~ss than two percent of tho~e individuals
entering the Scouting movement; and
~AS, Growing ~rough his e~eri~ncp~ in Scouting,
indeed a member of a new-gene~ati0n of D~epured yo~g
of wh~ w9 can all ~ very proud.
NOW, ~EFO~ BE IT RESOLVED, ~a~ ~he ~ester~ield
Co~ty Board of Supervisors h~reby extends its con~a~ulatlon~
to ~, Sean Tho~s Cru~ an~ uc~owl~qes the good fortune of
vote: Unanimous
acoompanied ~memburm cf h~s family, an~ =Qngrmtulated him on
his outstanding a~iev~m~n~.
){rs. Mitchell introduced ~4r. Steve Norment who was present to
accept the resolution on behalf of the Committee of Candles
and Lightm.
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
W~F~AS, the City of ~io~on~ i~ ~ponmorlng a Metro
Festival of Candles a~d Lig~ts in anticipation of at.acting
a~ractions decorated ~or th~ holiday ~eason; and
~E~S, Chesterfield County business 9ersons have a~ke~
for the Coun~y'm participation in thi~ femtival event; and
~E~S, t~e carillon in Byrd Park will be lighted for
t~e first y~ur of ~e Festival; and
~E~S, plans are b~ing made to light ~m bridges acros~
NOW, TH~R~FOR~ B~ IT ~OLVF~D, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors endorses the ¢0noept of a ~estival
of Cendle~ and Lights and encourages citizens of Chesterfield
County, both private and commercial, to p~ticipate in the
holiday celebration of the Metro Festival cf Candles and
Lights.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Barber pre~ented the executed remolut~on to Mr. Norm~nt.
Mr- Normen= expressed a~preoiation in accepting the resolution
and =tared th~ F~stival wo~l~ provide a~ opportunity t~
increase tourism within the Oonnty.
~4,F, R~CO~NI~IN~ K~B. JOX D. BEAYE~, CLERK TO TH~ BOARD OF
On mo%ion cf %he Board, the following resolution was adopted:
~ER~S, ~s. Joy D. Beavers ha~ diligently and
faithfully served ~e o~rent Board of Supe~isors a~ Deputy
Clerk from the begi~ing of their term~ of office in Janus,,
199~; anU
~ER~, ~. Beaver~ ha~, ~nce bet ~nit~al
with th~ Cuunt~ on June 1~, ~PS~, served the citizens of
~a~%~rfiald County in t~6 offic~ of th~ clerk to ~e
Court, the County Airpo~, the Department oS Utilities and the
0ffioe of the Clerk %o ~e Board of supervisors; and
of Bupe~isors to ac=ept a ~Q~ition with ~e Clerk of
~S, ~s. Beaver~ ha~ been a dedicated, hard working
professionalism; and
~S, ~. ~eaver= ha~ compiled th~ minuto~ of
Boar~ of Supervisors wi~ accura~ and dedication.
NOW, T~FORE BE IT ~SOLV~, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors will miss ~s. Joy D. Beavers
new po~ition a~ Deputy Clerk in the Circuit Court Clerk's
Vote: Unanimou~
~. Daniel pre~ented the executed Fesol~tio~ to M~S,
expressed appreciation ~or her ~ervice a~ Deputy clerk
Beard of Supervisors, a~d e~e~ded their ~est wishes tc her in
futur~
Mr. H~er stated thi~ date and t~ ~a~ been advertised f0~ a
~ublic hearing %o consider an amen~en~
to appropriate $2,857,730 f~o~ th~ Re~erve for ~ture Capital
ProJ~=~ for a jail ann~ building.
92-996
There being no one elee to addre~ this issue, the public
hearing was ¢lo~ed~
There was brief dlmcummion relative tc the electronic
a~raignment of prisoners and whether funds designated had
previously been earmar~o~ for other projects.
On motion of Mr. colbert, meoonded by Mr. Barber, the Board
appropriated $2,857,730 from the Re~erve for Future capital
Projects for the jail annex project and awarded the
construction contract to K.B.$. Inc., in the amount of
$2r~88.730. (It is noted the County will request the State
Department of Correotlona construction coot reimbursement --
m~xi~in~ amount Of $900,000 -- once the jail construction
reimbursement mo=atorlu~ io lifte~ by the General A~sembly.)
V0te~ U~a~imou~
~O~NTY OF ~T~BFI~LD, 19~ A~ ~E~ED, ~TIN~ TO
BUILDI~ ~T~D5 T~T ~R~I~O~ TKE IN~T~TI0~
IN CONSTRUCTION
~. Micas stated this date and time ha~ been ~ve~is~d for a
p~lio hearin~ to consider an ordinance relating to building
standards ~at provld~ for the in~tallatlon of water
conservation d~vic~s and low con~ption fixture
~e ~e~lations a~e adopted by ~e State.
No one came forward to spe~ ~n favor of o~ against deferring
~is p~lic hearing.
On motion of Mr. Mc~ale, seconded by Mr. ColbertF ~he Board
deferred the public hearing to con~ider an ordinance amending
the C~e of the County o~ Chesterfleld~ 1978~
ins~allatlon of water conservation dev~ce~ and low
fixt~es in const~ction un=il ado~tlon of the re~ulation~
Vote:
15.C.2.
15.O.3.
CHARTER
~OT ~ORE TH~N TWO FEET. ~R~ ~0~
TO ~W T~ ~IBP OF POLICE T0 ~OI~,,~E.~,~
~i~ CO~R0~ W~D~ ~ DEPUTIES
· O PE~IT T~E O0~Y TO INOORP~TE ~S TO THE
MOTOR V~IC5~
ADDITION;~L ACTION BY T~E B0~%RD OF BUP~VISOP~
Mre. D~Hart stated this date and time had been advertised for
a public hearing to ccn~ider amendment~ tc the County Charter
to allow the Director of Planning to ~rant varlan~e~, not more
than two feet, from local zoning and/or subdivision
~a~ir~ments; t~ allow the Chief of Pcli~a to appoint the
County's Animal Control warden and deputies; and to permit the
County to incorporate change~ tc the motor vehicle coda into
the county oode without, additional action by the Board of
plans for single-famil~ residential and the appropriate
wording to incorporate changes to the No:or Vehicle Code into
the County Code without additional action by the Board of
Supervisors.
There bsin9 no one else ts address these amendments, the
public hearing was closed.
On motion of Mr. ~c~ate, seconded by ~{r. Colbert, the Board
agreed to request the following Charter changes:
1. Amend the County Charter tc allow the Chief of Police to
appoint the animal control supervisors and officers.
2. Amend the County Charter to all0w the Planning Director
to ~rant variances (~p to two feet) from local zoning
and;or subdivision requirements.
Amend the county charter to permit the County to
incorporate changes to motor vehicle code into the County
Code without additional action by the Board of
Vote: Unanimous
15.D. TO ~ONSIDER~%N ORDiNaNCE TO VA~TE ~ PORTION OF ~ TEN
~. Sti~ stated th~ data and t~me ha~ ~m adve~t~ed fo~ a
p~bli¢ h~aring to con~id~r an ordinance %0 vacate u portion of
a ten foot ~ewer eas~ent within Five Forks Village
Subdivision, Phasm I.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. colbert, the Board
adopted the following ordinance:
("G~TOR") vacatms to DAVID D. ~DEN, ~. and C~tSTY A.
~EN, (husband and wife} ("G~T~"), a portion of a
Phase I, Dale ~agfstarial District, Chesterfield County,
Virginia, as shu~ on a plat thereof duly recordm~ in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County
~ER~S, ~otts, ~inter an~ Ammociatem, P.e.,
~e Board of Supervigors of Chesterfield County, Vi~inla
Zubdivi~ion, ~hase I, Dale Magist~ial District,
Coon%y, villein more parti~larly sho~ on a plat of reoo~d
in th% Clerk's Office of the Cir~it Court of cai~ Co~Bty
Plat Boo~ 73, Pa~es 1-6, dated Deco.er 5, 1990¢ made
petitioned to be vacated i~ more fully de~crlb~d a~ follow~:
A p~rtlon of a 10' ~ewer ~a~ent across ~t 67, Five Forks
village Subdivi~i~n, Pha~e I, Dale DistriCt,
Virginia~ a~ ~ho~ on a plat thereof by Putts, Mint~ and
Associate~, P.C., 4ated October 6, 1992, a co~y o~ which
9~-998 12/9/92
W~tE~L~AS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15,1-
and,
WHEREAS, no public necessity existz for the continuance
of the portion of easement sought to be vacated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF S~PERVISORS
OF CNESTERFI~L~ COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
That pursuant to section 1§.1-482(b) of the Code of
Virginia. 1950, as amended, the aforesaid portion of easement
bs and is hereby vacated.
This Ordinance ~hall be in full fares and affect in
accordance with section 15.~-482(b) of the code of
19~O, as am~n~d, and a oer~ifle~ ¢o~y of this Ordinance,
to~ether with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no
sooner than thirty days h~raafter in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant to
Section 15.1-485 or the e r Vi t ia, 1950~ as amended.
The e££e~t of this ordinance pursuant
is to destroy the fores and ef£ect of the re=ording of the
~ortien of the plat vacated. This o~di~an~e ~all v~t fee
simple title of the portion of the easement hereby vacat~d in
the owner Of Lot 67, Five For~ Village Subdi¥i~ion~ Phase I,
free and clear of any right~ of public
Accordingly, thi~ Ordlnanse ~hall be indexed i~ th~
of the County of Chesterfield as grantor and David D. Camden,
Jr. a~d christy A. Ca~de~, (h~sband and wife), or thai=
Vote: Unanimous
requested a Hobile Home Permit to park a mobile hame in a
Heavy industrial {M-2) District. The density o£ the proposal
is approximately 2.17 units/acre. The Cam~rehensive Plan
de~ignate~ the property for general industrial use. This
pre~erty fronts the east llne of Haven Avenue, approximately
355 feet south of Bellwood Road, and i~ in the vicinity of
and ? (Sheet 25).
In ~ermuda Magisterial ,Distri=t, DO,IS ~AM~RI~H~ requested a
Mobile Home ~ermit to park a mobile home ia a Heavy Industrial
(M-3) District. The density of the proposal i~ approximately
property for general industrial use. This property frontn the
~ellwood Road, and is better known aa 8321 Haven Avenue. Tax
Nap 68-13 '(2) Bellwood Estate~, Lot 5 (Sheet
Kr. Peele presented a s%~mm~ry of Cases 925N012~ and
and mtated mtaff reoo~mended denial of Case 92SN0123 and
approval of.Ca~e 93SN0151.
92-999
.......... 1JLJLLIll I. ,]-~l., L ..... [ I L .......
Mr. William Hambright, representing both requests, stated his
mother has had her mobile home at this location for the past
twenty years; that he has owned the mobile home adjacent to
her fo= approximately one year; that he has a permit for a
well and septic tank to be in,tailed; and that the mobile
Ms. Beadles expressed Concern relative to mobile homes being
temporary versus permanent and stated he was opposed to mobile
homes in g~eral.
Mr. ~ambright stated the s~ptlc tank has not been installed
although the land has been perked in preparation for the
installation of a septic tar~. He ~ubmltted into the record a
copy of tbs sewage disposal system construction permit for the
mobile home.
Mr. ~c/~ale stated he has received one letter in opposition to
the request. He further stated ha philosophically supported
the recommendation by staff simce the proposed area would
Ham~right to reside near his mother ~ue to her age.
On motion of ~r. Mc~ale, seconded by Mr. colbert, the Board
approved Case 92SN0123. for seven (7) yearm, subject to the
following standard conditions:
1. The appllsant shall be the owner and occupant of the
mobile home.
Ko lot or parcel may be rented or leased for use as a
mobile he~e site, nor shall any mobile home be used for
rental property. Only one (1) ~obile home sha~l be
pe~itted to be parked em an individual lot or. parcel.
3. The m~ni~u~ let si~e, yard setbacks, required front yard,
and other zoning requirements cf the applicable zoning
district shall be complied with, except that no mobile
home shall be located closer than 20 feet ts amy
existing residence.
4. NO additional permanent-type living space may ~e added
onto a mobile home. All mobile hames shall be skirted
bat shall not be placed on a permanent foundation.
5. Where public (County) water and/or ~ewer are available~
they shall ~e used.
6. Upon being 9ranted a ~ebile Home ~ermit~ the ap~llcant
shall ~hen obtain th~ necessary permits from the Office
o£ the ~uildlng OfflolaI. This shall be done prior to
the installation or relocation of the mobile home.
7. Any violation of the above conditions .shall
for revocation of the ~obile ~eme Permit.
Vd%m: Unanimous
On mo%ion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Colbert,
be grounds
the Board
approved dase 93sNe151 for seven (T) years~ subjeot to the
fellswing standards conditions:
1. The applicant shall be the owner an~ occupant of the
mobile home.
2. No lot or parcel may be rente~ or leased £or use as a
mobile ~ome site, nor shall any mobile home be used for
rental property. Only gae (1} mobile home shatl be
pe~itted to be parked om an individual lot or parcel.
3. The minim%%~ lot size~ yard eetbacka~ ~equired front ya~d~
and other zonlng requirements ~of the applloable zoning
district shall be complied with~ exempt that ~o ~obile
92-1000 12/9/92
hame shall ha locate~ closer than 20 feet to any
existing residence.
4. No additional permanent-type living space ~ay be added
ante a mobile home. Ail mobile homes shall be
but shall not be placed on a permanent foundation.
5. Where public (County) water and/or sewer are available,
they shall be used.
&, Upon being 9~antad a Mobile Home Pel~mit. the applicant
shall then obtain ~hm necessary ~ea-mlts from the Office
of ~a Building Official. This shall be don~ prior
the installation or relocation of th~ mobile hom~.
7, ~y violation of ~he above oonditions ~haI1 be grounds
for revogation of the Mobile ~o~e Pe~it.
Vo~e: Unanimous
~e~ter Presbyterian Church, who were present at the meeting
~d Dot,d ~e Troop wa~ ~arning its citizenship an~ co~uni~
merit
In Midlethian Magisterial Dis~rict, SOUTHLAKB .ASSOOIATES
requested rezoninq from General Bnainess (B-3) to General
~usinoss (C-S). The density cf ~uch amendment will be
ComDrehensiYa Plan ~aslgn~%eo the property for general
approxima=ol¥ 226 fs~a on the south line of Midlothian
Turnpike, approximately 13~ feet west of Seuthlake ~oulavard.
Tax Map 1~-1~ (4) south sixty~ Block A~ Lots 1 and 2 amd Part
Mr. Peele presented a su/umary of Case 93SN0~30 and stated the
r~que~t. ~e noted th~ reqUeSt con£ol~ed to bh~ Northern Area
Oliver D. Rudy, Esquire, representing the applicant, stated
the recommendation was aooeptable. There was no oppoai=ion
appraved Case 93gN0130,
Vote: Unsnimsus
10. EXEuurX?E SESSION PURSU;~T TO SECTION 2.1-344(~)(7), CODE
OF VIRG~NIA~. 1950, AS.A~ENDBD3 FOR ~ON~ULT~TIO~ WITH
FOR PUBLIC P~POSEB: ~. P~SU~ ~ ~ON ~.X-
EXISTING B~IHR~ ~E Re PR~IOUS ~O~C~E~ ~S BEEN
~CTZON 2.~-344(~)5~..,,.~ F~ DTBCU~SION OF THB
~O~ITION, ~QU/RITION O~ U~E O~ ~ PROPERTY ~K ~UBLIC
P~SE H~TIN~ TO' ~E E~TEN~ION O~ ~88 9~8U~ T0
0n motion of Mr. Colb~r=, ~oon~d by ~r. sarber; the Boar~
went into Executive ~em~ion, pursuant to Section ~.1-
$44(A)(7), C0~e of Virginia, 1950, as amended, for
consultation wi~ legal counsel regarding the ac~i~itlon of
real D~oDerty ~or public p~po~es; and, pu=suant to Section
~.I-~(A)(1), d~cu~ion concerning the e~ansion of an
exlat~ng ~siness where no prevlou~ announcement has ~en made
91-1001 12~9/92
................ ,-~JLJ [![ I i_..] ........ [ ........ I I
cf ths business' interest in expanding pursuant to Section
2.1-344(A)5~ and, for discussion of the condition, acquisition
or use of real property for p~blio p~rpos~ relating to the
extension of 288 pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) (3), Cede of
Virginia.
Reoonvening:
On motion of Mr. McHale~ seconded by Mr. Warren~ the Board
adopted the following resolution:
W~EREAS,'the Board of Supervleors has this day adjourned
into ~×~cutive Session in accordance with a formal vote of the
~reedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act
effective J~l~ 1, 1989 provides for certification t~at such
~xeoutivo Session was ~onduoted in conformity witch law.
NOW, ~l~FO~d~ ~ IT RE~O~VED, tha~ thm Board of County
Snpervisor~ does hereby certify that to the best of each
member's knowledge, i) only public business ma~ters law£ully
exempted from open meeting requirement~ under the ~reedo~ of
Information Ao~ were discussed in thm ~xecutive Session to
which this certification applies; and ii) only such public
business matters as were identified in the Motion by whloh the
~xeeutive Session was convened were heard, discussed or
considered by the Board. No member dissents frnm this
certification.
The Board b~ing polled, the vote wa~ as follow~:
~r. ~¢~al~: Aye,
Hr. Barber: Aye.
Mr. Colbert: Aye.
~ir. Warren: Aye.
Hr. baniel: Aye.
On motion of Mr. ~c~al~ ~eoonded by -Mr. ~arb~r, the Board
a~journed a= 9:30 ~.m. until December 10~ 1992 at 7:15 a.~. to
Kings Korn~r Restaurant at ~h~ Chesterfleld County Air, crt, to
meet with'Citizens for Responsible Goverll~ent.
vote: Unanlmoue
12/9/92