The URL can be used to link to this page

1987-01-28 PacketDATE• JANUARY 28 1987 t'EgTERFIELD COUV_ry CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 238 AGENDA COURTHOUSE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HARRY G. DANIEL, CHAIRMAN DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES. VICE CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT RICHARD L. HEDRICK COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TIME. e • . Page 1 Invocation at 9:00 a.m. Reverend Malcolm Hutton, Pastor Oak Grove Baptist Church Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America Approval of Minutes County Administrator's Comments Z5. Board Committee Reports 6. Requests to Postpone Action, Emergency Additions or Changes in the Order of Presentation 7. Resolutions of Special Recognition A. Chesterfield County Employee -of- 1 the —Year for 1986................................. ............ C. Ms. Rose Scudder, Outstanding Volunteer Service..... 4 D. South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA for Providing Aquatic Facility 6 for County's "Adaptive Aquatics" Program.......... E. "Clean Businesses of the Month" for Portion of 1985 and 1986...................... 9 8. Hearings of Citizens on Unscheduled Matters or Claims o Claim For Water Damages by Joyner 11 and Company Realtors ............................... 9. Deferred Items A. Appointment of Board of Supervisors Member to Planning Commission and Its Relationship to Resolution Concerning the Proper Involvement of Board Members in Zoning Process ................................. 16 B. MEDIC Contribution .............................•••• 18 C. Appointments............ ..................... 19 M In El Board of Supervisors Agenda Page 2 10. Public Hearings 11. New Business Page A. Chester Landfill Geotechnical Study ................ 21 B. Confirmation of Previous Appropriation to County Museum....... 23 C. Set Public Hearing Date to Consider Ordinance Permitting Local Enforcement of Building Maintenance Code as Portion of Uniform Statewide Building Code ................. 25 D. Community Development Items 1. 1986-87 Rural Addition Projects ................ 28 2. Request for Reduced Speed Limit on Ruffin Mill Road ............................ 32 E. Consent Items 34 1. State Road Acceptance .......................... 2. Change in Authorized Amount and Custodian of School Board's Petty Cash Fund ...................................... 40 F. Utilities Items 1. Request from Homeowners on Jean Drive for Establishment of Reduced Sewer Connection Fee ................... 41 2. Consider Condemnation Proceedings for Water Easement for Buford Road Water Line Project 44 a. Ms. Martha K. Neate........................ b. Ms. Peggy M. Hill .......................... 48 3. Consent Items a. Sewer Contract for Woodlake Trunk Sewer, Phase V............................. 52 b. Sewer Contract for Victorian Square Shopping Center, Route 360................. 54 C. Deed of Dedication Along Courthouse Road from Trustees of the First Congregational Christian Church, United Church of Christ— ................. 56 d, peed of Dedication Along Warbro Road from Mr. and Mrs. Randolph K. b�ii.vel.y...........'..... '...... ............. 59 n M Board of Supervisors Agenda Page 3 F. Utilities Items (continued) Page 4. Reports ....................................... 62 G. Re orts........ ...oeoe,os0000�. 64 I �d & �S.•12.00 Noon Lunch at �y 2.►-3 CJC� H. Request for Mobile Home at 2:00 p.m. 865171 - Marion Bibb, Bermuda District 1 �cCR I. Requests for Rezoning 1. 865141 - Karen Abse and Guy Spiller, Clover Hill District 2. 865151 - Thomas F. Beck, Bermuda District 3. 86SI44 - Sovran Bank, N.A., Trustee for Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A., Matoaca District 4. 865155 - William R. Bradley, Midlothian District 5. 865157 - Parker Oil Company, Matoaca District 6. 865159 - Dwight M. Myers, Midlothian District 7. 865162 - Dewey L. Hurley, Sr., Clover Hill District 8. 865165 - Magnolia Investment Associates, Matoaca District 9. 865166 - James R. Grubbs, Jr., Clover Hill District 10. 865167 - Roper Brothers, Inc., Clover Hill District 11. 86S168 - Marco Investment, Inc., Matoaca S� � c 12. 875006 - P . Bermuda District 13. 875013 - Chesterfield County, Midlothian District 14. 875002 - Dick Strauss Suzuki, Inc., Clover Hill District 12. Adjournment MEETING DATE; SUBJECT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: Keep Chesterfield Clean Awards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation recently received State recognition and awards for Chesterfield County's litter prevention program. The awards were: Distinguished Service Award - Keep Virginia Beautiful, Inc. Award of Excellence - Division of Litter Control With the Award of Excellence came five road signs to be placed in each magisterial district. ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO O SIGNATURE: PREPARED BY: Ltv—�z COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 19 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER; 7.B. SUBJECT: Recognizing Mr, Oliver C. Graves, Jr. as Outstanding Citizen COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION. Mr. Mayes has requested adoption of the attached resolution. PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES # NO Ca SIGNATURE: — OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 001 RECOGNIZING OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENTS OF MR. OLIVER C. GRAVES, JR. WHEREAS, Oliver C. Graves, Jr., a combat veteran with four battle stars while serving in the United States Army, and who returned to employment at Bellwood in July, 1946 where he retired in 1979 with 33 years of service; Oliver joined the National Guard 176 Infantry Combat Team in 1948; and WHEREAS, in October 1950, Oliver joined the, Volunteer Fire Department of Chesterfield County, Chester Station Number 1; Oliver is still in the Fire Department where he became President of the Board of Directors and Chaplain for the Department and paid volunteers; and WHEREAS, in 1956, Oliver joined the Auxiliary Policeman of Chesterfield County where he was promoted to Executive Officer and Captain, and in 1975, Oliver was made a special Policeman with all police powers. Oliver's present position in the Special Police is Lieutenant, Public Relations Officer; and WHEREAS, Oliver is Deacon in his Church, Second Branch Baptist Church, where he was Chairman of the Board for two years. Oliver is a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legion and was a member of the Board of Directors of the Chesterfield County Fair Association representing the Matoaca District 1981 - 1984; and WHEREAS, in 1986, Oliver was sworn in as a Deputy Sheriff for Court Room Security, Chesterfield County. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisor hereby recognizes Oliver C. Graves, Jr. and acknowledges the good fortune of the County to have such an outstanding public servant as one of its citizens. Im CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 7.A. SUBJECT: Recognition of the Chesterfield County Employee -of -the -Year for 1986 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Departments were requested to nominate one can- didate to represent the department for the Employee -of -the -Year for 1986. Selection criteria was performance on the job during the calendar year 1986. Candidates names were submitted to the Incentive Awards Committee, which in turn, selected the one candidate whose performance and individ- ual contribution to the mission of the department set him or her above his or her fellow employees. There were eleven names placed in nomination: Ms. Tammy Dickenson . . . . . . . . Accounting Mr. Bruce Dove . . . . . . . . . . Parks and Recreation Mr. Lance Elwood . . . . . . . . . MH/MR Services Ms. Vicki Foutz . . . . . . . . . . Police Ms. Doris Hancock . . . . . . . . . Treasurer Major J. W. Mutispaugh . . . . . . Sheriff Mr. Roy D. Patrick . . . . . . . . Fire Ms. Lana Roach . . . . . . . . . . Budget Ms. Ann B. Shepherd . . . . . . . . Nursing Home Mr. Robert A. Talmage, III . . . . Utilities Ms. Janet M. Tiernan . . . . . . . Library All candidates will be at the Board meeting to be recognized for their accomplishments. The Employee -of -the -Year will be announclad at that time. PREPARED BY:E)�Frederick ,Jr. Director, Human Resource ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO Management SIGNATURE: 00 _ .l C UNTY ADMINISTRATOR SW of the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS of CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINLA RESOLUTION DESIGNATING LANA A. ROACH CHESTERFIELD COUNTY EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR FOR 1986 WHEREAS Lana A. Roach has been nominated by the Department of Budget and Management as a person possessing those qualities of superior performance and dedication to excellence in public service required of a recipient of this coveted award; and WHEREAS during almost eighteen years of County service, her contributions to the County's nationally recognized financial planning process have been immeasurable as she has displayed remarkable initiative in meeting the challenges faced by the department since its formation in 1977; and WHEREAS her consistently outstanding and meritorious performance reflect her ability to manage huge volumes of detail without errors, maintain a courteous and efficient manner in stressful situations, and further develop her skills and education to meet the challenges of changing times and technology; and WHEREAS her contributions to county, corr.ffurnity and church activities have exhibited the same dedication to excellence and service which have marked her professional career; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors hereby recognize the loyalty, superior performance and dedication of LANA A. ROACH by naming her as the Chesterfield County Employee of. thE! Year, 1986. Harry G. Daniel, Chairman Jesse J. Mayes, Vice -Chairman G. H. Applegate CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 7.C. SUBJECT: RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ROSE SCUDDER FOR HER OUTSTANDING VOLUNTEER SERVICE TO CHESTERFIELD COUNTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: It is requested that the attached resolution be adopted by the Board of Supervisors to be presented to Mrs. Scudder by The Honorable Jesse J. Mayes at the Social Services Meeting on February 10, 1987. ATTACHMENTS: YES NO 0 PREPARED BY: ryve— wa,)144� Asst. County Adm. for Budget and Staffing SIGNATURE: 7�90- 00 5 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR �rrrr' n RECOGNIZING OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENTS OF MS. ROSE SCUDDER WHEREAS, Ms. Rose Scudder for more than fifteen years has served the County of Chesterfield and Department of Social Services by serving as a volunteer on the Chesterfield -Colonial Heights Christmas Committee; and WHEREAS, through the years Ms. Scudder has faithfully and unselfishly given herself to the positions of Christmas Secretary; Chairman, Christmas Mother and Christmas Center Chairman; and WHEREAS, Ms. Scudder has exhibited her dedication to helping those in our community who are in need at Christmas time and throughout the year. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County recognizes and honors Ms. Rose Scudder for her service to mankind and to this County. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28. 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 7.D. SUBJECT Resolution commending the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA for providing an aquatic facility for the County s Adaptive Aquatics" program. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board is requested to approve the attached resolution which commends the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA for their continuing support of the Parks and Recreation Department's Adaptive Aquatics program. For over five years, the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA has provided the Parks and Recreation Department with a facility in which to host "Adaptive Aquatics," a modified swimming program for the disabled citizens of Chesterfield County. The program has served approximately 300 disabled youth and adults during this time and has had a very positive impact on the quality of their lives, as well as on the lives of their family members. It also provides a positive and rewarding experience for numerous youth from the United Methodist Family Services. Without this support of the YMCA, this important. service to the disabled citizens of Chesterfield County would not be possible. PREPARED BY. Millard D. Stith, Jr. ATTACHMENTS: YES I? NO 0 00 - G SIGNATURE: IMA7 'ObbUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Department requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution commending the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA for their donation to the County's Adaptive Aquatics program. 00�`� `%0 Resolution Recognizing the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA For Its Generosity and Goodwill Towards the Disabled of Chesterfield County Whereas, the Special Populations Section of the Chesterfield County Parks and Recreation Department functions to provide therapeutic programs for the disabled of Chesterfield County, and Whereas, the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA has generously donated both time and facilities to assist the Parks and Recreation Department in its efforts to serve these ^ems, and %4 /. AO Whereas, the development of the department's adaptive aquatics program would have been impossible without this YMCA support. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Supervisors does hereby recognize the YMCA for its generous contribution. Be it further resolved that the Board of Supervisors does hereby express its sincere appreciation and gratitude to the South Richmond/Chesterfield YMCA for its goodwill towards and community concern for the disabled citizens of Chesterfield County. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Clean Businesses of the Month COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: 7.E. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation initiated a new program this year called The Clean Business of the Month. Each month a county business was cited for exemplary appearance and practices in regards to litter control and prevention. To select the business a criteria checklist was used which included items such as parking lot appearance, availability and maintenance of trash receptacles and dumpsters, public area appearance, and overall litter free appearance. The following businesses were awarded a wooden plaque and a large metal outdoor sign stating that they were the clean business for a particular month: December 1985: Poppell Toyota -Mazda January 1986: Sycamore Square February 1986: Ukrops, Bermuda Square March 1986: Hancock's Meadowbrook Shell Station April 1986: Central Fidelity Bank, Ettrick Branch May 1986: Lucky's of Brandermill July 1986: Burger King, Courthouse August 1986: Western Sizzlin, Beaufont Mall September 1986: Cloverhill Tire and Auto October 1986: Enon Child Development Center November 1986: Commonwealth Emergicenter December 1986: Ironbridge Animal Hospital ct�� PREPARED BY: &Ir_� Suzan Craik ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Businesses of t Month `" January 12, 1987 Page 2 These businesses are to be congratulated for setting such a fine example for other Chesterfield County businesses. A plaque listing each of the businesses will be presented to the Board. 001 o MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 8' Claim for Water Damages at 2531 Dorel Lane by Joyner and Company Realtors COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: U SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: H. Richard Bower, Jr. of Joyner and Company Realtors has submitted a claim for water damage which occurred in a house located at 2531 Dorel Lane. (See attached map). The house, which was vacant with the water service turned off, was under contact for sale. In response to a telephone call requesting renewal of water service, two Utilities Department employees turned on the water on May 30, 1986 at approximately 1:00 p.m. About 45 minutes later, Bower called the Utilities Department and said that extensive water damage had occurred in the house. In response to Bower's call, water service was turned off later that day. Bower's has requested that the County reimburse Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company for $2,743.66 in damages covered by Nationwide. Bower claims that County employees did not check whether the plumbing valves were open before turning on water service and, therefore, he believes the County should cover the loss. (A copy of Bower's letter is attached). (Continued) S"::��---4kc- PREPARED BY: Steven L. Micas County Attorney ATTACHMENTS: YES NO D 0011 SIGNATURE: C UNTY ADMINISTRATOR LM M Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 We have reviewed this matter in detail with the Utilities Department. County employees do not, prior to turning on water service, enter homes to make sure that the homeowner's plumbing valves are closed. The employee who turned water service on at 2531 Dorel Lane, however, specifically recalls observing the water meter for several minutes to be sure that it showed no flow of water beyond the minimal amount customarily associated with the fill up of pipes, commodes, and water heater tanks. This procedure is routinely followed by Utilities Department employ- ees. The employee's compliance with the normal department practice which would preclude any water damages is supported by the fact that no claim comparable to this one has been made with respect to a service connection performed by the employee during her five years with the County. Additionally, the County employee who received the call requesting renewal of water service says she always advises applicants who request that water service be turned on that they should check to be sure all valves are closed in the house. In this case there is no evidence that the County was at fault in any way. Rather, our inquiry shows that the County employees turned on water service and then monitored the flow for several minutes in an effort to protect against any possible overflows. The homeowner and his real estate agent, who knew that the home had been "winterized", were in the best position to verify that all plumbing fixtures were turned off prior to placing an order for renewal of service after having been in- formed of the importance of making sure the valves were closed. Recommendation: Since there is no evidence that the County was responsible for the water damages, we recommend denial of this claim. In addition, the defense of sovereign immunity would be a complete bar to any legal action in this matter even if any proof of negligence by the County existed. cdll047:85Cl6 0012 O9r aD a — _. SO I ' q itCTC'TUxr OPO_'�°Q w '�P s �2V�¢Q SW• _ TUp C AN R ' CT pOv P OBRI C• a r u / !°•Owre.. ow A'9/DGE R GA N Ci U RG �O o $: R9 aO c45ty c P 0'Vi o •ec,. >f c s o r Nl`�r1Vn^, r Q Q CC JGIN� 8 17 60 �J LAN � PROS, ° E a+oo aNP�K j U N� rown a MIDI TH141Y �j(. �� t a i Mc ALD LA e I E3 W ^ A t'M0 a UT L 1V TROUT �lOv _ Pc- 3; pR S ' •p AVIS MU5 T4 NG Q. "ao..rNE (4cNP ELEM SOH DR G �d o wpppAa ¢ c t v �P n� op a Sry4 NN ON -Qov.OENCE MARTH4/EN r0 o1 O SCM•E rn OR cr p �/v ..... .rcor .._ a RD [ J w \ �� Y 4 `C` 'Q� 9c ,�/L' •i. Cabo GOL! COURSE g o 2 n STRLA RG o •�°°��AROT N o u Arne 'LF, b•n'! ♦ x .,T Rfi� y .. .. w A' a 3 fLL A Gt. '1'4� p0� p;C" .y C G 1"i � Q 3'' S n `5• _ .S a05 0d 9 C•`1.� H !/ �� 09 �J� 9D '^ � Y r o ,CI ,. �. CNPEN Q/ avE.� PONPL TON W ,.�JpD oo eCC M`�`G `HQpN_ J 0 oe b O a RO A. DA c. c^ CT I �p i+ FC P a0 O Q •2` - c C PREY,M _ ^R-r _� A q 4��L p0 M 'a ` u Y AA29 cr0 YCRNDOR �1\� i yp i•` 1�P 0.J .qo o \ �01 W P -nICA yJaQ• Q�� 00 7�6 Oi p � R TO - ¢'oq `dy AKINS Qi JZ r v,a0 0� ate' fn r"i '1cDAEp 4y C a T -p Ph .? ,\\ F� G\PO 3 ~ NEHSOh :,pOS,y A I ~P 3a5P? wM,;f'R SS N �p� •�•1' f `P �' *4"'A �rG 4y� p .�. 1�J` �•7P BJ SCOrF q0 ,qp ,aV: vFgrr XER o ^ ��.1 dun e R �t oA a a GSSPF c '. maw r� + �9, O Z 4Q S ,KP L\i\ (7. 4M5 GAT 00- LA it>; ur �'q"` o4� .t P \.00 9 FO v, RD i cr 1 t`O c �w q r <� C c Q Gla a^ V o(� cq • cR� v' c f RD 41,oreo. 40* \ �\u GPROIr ~ J A r' i N �• 1 G_ 9. O r Y Q 1 cp Q 1 O I O'B g,ln sh.r• Re' �coP a FY PO L5 0.91 �Er.A• / I ( �.A J BR OAOS Tn G`�• F� xn y < a I PAIS ET - t T' \ Q E wEs `T a(y✓ 0.20 y�ALMSLEY Zv n. Y <r ° ' u P �� 't<< W%} 5 to er. cP 4Ary /1pJ S �.o RAM LOCH SANIF c aq , \� •f °D ,9oz.J / Of KrNGucS(E i �J �411'a,, +' i 649 y h M 2 O� Tµ / O r 1pC �, •Ai yl Y ti 000 / Q` An / 9 f� -.p4 Greporys Pone ^^ Y ONE y` rry ¢ wFPO^/A CT CT ` /\�� F�•�c` o p SI:,pL CCU - C' / 0 z a x py lYN OALE r t � W Nf _ 'ram — 9v'% pO per,' O 0 \ \ 01/ 7 o .O /\ �� s a V^P C/P.lk .X,•pOD L DING LA 4Q ap PPJ AD 0 �y M•a• \\ K G NAyCy p0 = •e"wMr`' '\ OUTPOST CIR. i .G VA, ' \\ UETT O Q O,P 9s C CTi A \ — — plpe� ICE \j\'\' PPU PO r"mi^iy ~ihZ a = p CA SGER IP►•Ea ' N D 4 ( �, J 4c t• � 649 r �'l 5 \ r' `1 l 's q !� p'( RSQUppEDp NDrnel CLAIs �j', NwavR ap Nrr� A0 V0.� cN•.`° o . P s �'O _ " ��..^ r Atti 1 4 '9. l Aoer & Compang Rezors' July 11, 1986 Steven L. Micas, Esquire County Attorney Chesterfield County Post Office Box 40 Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 RE: 2531 Dorel Lane Dear Mr. Micas: I am writing this letter to you in order to make a claim to the County for water damages that were caused to the subject property. I am a real estate broker and the seller's representative for this property. It was under con- tract and going to settlement on May 30, 1986. This property was vacant while it was for sale. I had winterized the plumbing system and had the water turned off. On the 30th of May, an employee of the Chesterfield Utility Department went to the property to turn the water on for the new owners. Contrary to the policy of his department, this individual did not check to make sure that the valves were not open on the plumbing fixtures in the property. The property was winterized and all valves were open. After he turned the water on and left, the property was flooded and caused considerable damage. It was discovered around 3:00 that afternoon by the purchasers who were doing a walk-through inspection just prior to their settlement of this sale.. Needless to say, the settlement did not take place on that day. I spent the next 30 days repairing the water damage that was done to the property and the closing did not occur until July 1, 1986. Per Jack Waters instructions, I am enclosing a record of the monies that were spent on this property and am asking that the County pay the expenses incurred by the negligence of its employee to my client, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. I submit the following charges together with statements or letters verifying them: A. A bill from Servicemaster in the amount of $1,739.67. This bill covers removal of the carpet padding, extracting water from the residence, the removal of debris and wet insulation, treating for odor and mildew, pro- viding blowers to dry out the subflooring, the cleaning of the carpeting, repairing the vinyl in the kitchen, reinstalling the carpets and new pad- ding, and the replacement of the insulation under the house. 0014 2720 Enterprise Parkway • P0. Sox 31355 • Richmond, Virginia 23294.804/270-9440 1091'er & Companu Realtors ` Steven L. Micas, Esquire July 11, 1986 Page Two B. A bill from Westover work under the house bill was $122.40. "40 c Air Conditioning for the reinsulating of the duct - that was ruined by the water. The amount of this C. Two bills from Virginia Power. One is for $10.64 which was the amount of electricity used for the additional 30 days of service while we were making the repairs. The second is for $15.00 for the reconnection of service which had been transferred to the new owner for the May 30 set- tlement. D. A bill from Tate & Hill, Inc. for $81.25 for the inspection of the elec- trical system and the furnace. This was done because water got into the ductwork and drained into the furnace. E. Per the enclosed letter from Robert F. Pannell, Esquire, the attorney who closed the sale for the purchasers of this property, you will note that because of the delay of settlement and the changes in the financial markets, my client incurred an additional expense of.$674.70 (1 point based on the amount of the purchaser's loan). The day that we were going to close, May 30th, the FHA point commitment was at 31ia%. Because of the delay of 30 days, the FHA points were at 4z0% on July 1, 1986, thereby in- creasing the cost to my client. F. Referring to the same letter, you will note that Bob Pannell charged an additional $100.00 for his services because of the delay. All documents had to be redrafted and the closing statement redone. The total cost of all the above statements is $2,743.66. This represents the actual amount of money that my client lost as a result of the damage to the property and the delay in settlement. I trust that this matter will be taken care of as soon as possible. Please contact Jack Waters in the Utilities Department for any particular questions you may have regarding the failure of the County's employee to follow depart- ment guidelines on reconnections. If you have any questions about the charges above, please contact me for further explanation. You should make the check payable to my client, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company. Please forward same to me for delivery. All of these bills have been paid to the contractors from the seller's proceeds at closing. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Since ely, X, H. Richard Bower, Jr.� HRB:JR/amc Enclosures nOI cc: Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company MEETING DATE: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Consideration of the appointment of a member of the Board of Supervisors to the County Planning Commission and relationship to 1984 Resolution Concerning the Proper Involvement of Board Members in the Zoning Process. (Minutes 84-565-6) COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The appointment of a member of the Board of Supervisors to the County Planning Commission is requested by the Planning Commission. This has been past practice up to 1984 when the Resolution Concerning the Proper Involvement of Board Members in the Zoning Process was adopted. The Board of Supervisors decided that the appointment of a Board Member to the Planning Commission was not consistent with this adopted Resolution. If the Board agrees that this appointment is beneficial, the resultant action should be the appointment of one member of the Board of Supervisors to the Planning Commission, adoption of an amendment to the aforementioned Resolution (as attached) , and appropriation from General Fund Balance of $2050 which represents five -twelfths of the annual cost of $4920. ti- PREPARED BY: ,e�' Thomas E. Jac son Director of Planning ATTACHMENTS: YES IJ NO ❑ SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cm M OWN - of MCI', 1 :I' ",•' Crl'In 1 1 046) J iJ Chesterfield County, as a rapidly growing and urbanizing locality, will be experiencing increased property development to meet the expanding residential, commercial and industrial needs of its citizens. As development momentum accelerates, greater pressure will be placed on individual members of the Board of Supervisors to become involved in all aspects of the zoning process. At the same time, it is of paramount importance that the Board recognize and respect the administrative and advisory functions of County staff and the Planning Ccmmission in the zoning process. It is particularly critical that members of the Board of Supervisors, understanding the legislative and policy making function of the Board, do not interfere or become involved in zoning issues until such issues are properly before the governing body. Both before and after the filing of a zoning application, staff members of the County Planning Department meet with developers to insure conformance with County ordinances and policies. Through this process, the County staff endeavors to promote overall zoning and planning policies adopted by the Board. After staff review, the Planning Commission, as an independent advisory body established pursuant to Section 15.1-437, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, considers the application in a public hearing, and makes a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, based on the comments and concerns of the developer, County staff, and the public and on the overall zoning policies and practices of the County. Involvement of Board members in either of these initial phases of the zoning process tends to limit the ability of County staff to successfully negotiate and resolve developer concerns, and of the Planning Commission to make meaningful recommendations to the Board. Premature involvement can also unnecessarily create delay, uncertainty and instability in the orderly processing of applications which tend to affect public confidence in the zoning and application review process. Furthermore, involvement of Board members in a zoning case prior to a decision by the Planning Commission, is inconsistent with the clear policy statements, adopted in January, 1984, not to interfere in the administrative activities of the County administration and staff but instead to dedicate its efforts toward the formulation of general legislation and policy. Therefore, be it resolved by the Board that it shall be Board policy that no individual member of the Board shall become involved in a zoning case until the Planning Commission has made its recommendation on the case. Prior to action by the Planning Ccmmission, members of the Board shall not discuss the particulars of the zoning case with the developer nor attempt to direct the activities or decisions of County employees or Planning Commission members concerning the outcome of the case. Members of the Board shall not direct the activities of any County staff member relating to a zoning case before the Board except when acting as a Board consistent with general law and County regulations. These restrictions shall not be to prevent the member of the out to serve as a a AG2JA120/lb coI� 19 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER: c SUBJEhesterfield's Contribution to Metropolitan Economic Development Council COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On November 26., 1986, the Board considered a request by the Metropolitan Economic Development Council for approval of additional MEDC funding. The additional amount requested was $33,824. The audio record of the meeting does not clearly indicate that the Board appropriated the money. However, the minutes reflect the appropriation was made. There has been concern expressed by several Board Members that they did not intention to appropriate funds from the General Fund; rather that it be absorbed in the Economic Development Budget. After reviewing the Economic Development Budget, staff finds that this additional amount cannot be absorbed. If the Board wishes to fund MEDC they must appropriate said funds from the General Fund Balance. Board Action Necessary 1. Affirm the appropriation of $33,824 from the General Fund balance for the additional contribution to MEDC; or 2. Not fund MEDC for the additional amount; and 3. Formally confirm/amend minutes of November 26, 1986 to show Board's intention. PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES 0 NO SIGNATURE: �. • TCO NTY ADMINISTRATOR 19 n CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS DRUG ABUSE TASK FORCE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 9.C.1. Two representatives from Dale District should be nominated to serve on the Drug Abuse Task Force. PREPARED BY. ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO $1 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0l9 29 F2 MEETING DATE: SUBC CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 9.C.2. Board of Directors of the Convention and Visitors Bureau COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Metropolitan Richmond Mr. Robert E. Brittle was nominated at the January 14, 1987 meeting to the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Richmond Convention and Visitors Center. Formal appointment should be made at this time. Appointment would be effective July 1, 1986 for a one year term expiring June 30, 1987. PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES 0 NO SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Chester Landfill Geotechnical Study COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: ll.A. This item requests Board approval of the selection of Schnabel Engineering Associates to conduct the ground water study at the Chester Landfill for a fee of $35,000 to be funded from $60,000 appropriated by the Board on October 22, 1986. Proposals have been solicited, received and evaluated for conduct of a study of the ground water in the vicinity of the Chester Landfill which was closed in September, 1985. The evaluation committee made up of representatives of General Services, Health and Purchasing Departments reviewed all 15 proposals, interviewed six firms and recommends Schnabel Engineering Associates of Richmond as the best qualified firm to conduct the study. PREPARED BY. �d ATTACHMENTS: YES ❑ NO SIGNATURE: OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0 .; - 2 - E5 The evaluation committee has negotiated a fee of $35,000 with Schnabel to conduct the study over a 180 day period and present findings and, if necessary, recommendations for remedial action. Engineering design plans for any remedial action required would constitute a second phase and a separate fee would be negotiated with Schnabel and brought back to the Board for approval, should design plans be necessary. The fee for phase one would be met from the $60,000 previously appropriated by the Board from which sufficient funds will remain after payment of mandatory connection fees for citizens in the area. Board Action Required 1. Approve the selection of Schnabel Engineering Associates for conduct of the ground water study at a fee of $35,000 plus $5,000 for contingencies. 2. Approve the selection of Schnabel Engineering Associates for any follow-up on engineering design work which may be necessary at a fee to be negotiated. 3. Authorize the County Administrator to enter into a contract for the above work with Schnabel Engineering Associates. 002�? MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987. 11.B. ITEM NUMBER: Confirmation of Previous Appropriation to County Museum COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests a confirmation of a previous appropriation of $33,333 to permit the Chesterfield County Museum Committee to complete a book on the history of Chesterfield County. On December 8, 1982, the Board approved a $50,000 appropriation to the Chesterfield County Museum to commission a local author to write a history of Chesterfield County and directed that the funds be placed in the Museum's Donation Account for this contract. On February 9, 1983, one-third was transferred to the Chesterfield Museum's Treasurer for the production of 50% of the history book's manuscript by the original author engaged to complete the project. Since that time, the manuscript has not been completed to the satis- faction of the County Museum and a new author, Dr. Louis Manarin, author of the recently published history of Sir Thomas Dale has been engaged to complete the project. (more) PREPARED BY. ATTACHMENTS: YES 0 NOf SIGNATURE: �W_ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0023 cm R Agenda - County Museum January 28, 1987 Page 2 The remaining balance of $33,333 reverted to the General Fund balance at the end of fiscal year 1983. The County Museum requests that $33,333 be reappropriated to complete the project under the leadership of Dr. Manarin. Budget and Accounting Comments General Fund balance is $7,069,208; therefore, use of $33,333 for this request would leave a balance of $7,035,875 in Fund Balance. James J. L. Stegmaier, Director Budget & Management Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board appropriate $33,333 to the Museum's Account for expenses associated with the history book. BSH.ajc.agenda.3. 0024 w MEETING DATE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.C. SUBJECT: Set Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of an Ordinance Permitting Local Enforcement of a Building Maintenance Code as a Portion of the Uniform Statewide Building Code COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Set Date of February 25, 1987 at 9:00 a.m. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Currently under state law the County's Building Official is required to enforce Volume I of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code ("VUSBC") regulating new construction. Effective October 1, 1986, localities were given the option to enforce Volume II of the VUSBC regulating the maintenance of existing buildings. Since 1983, the Building Official has been authorized to inspect existing structures for proper maintenance in accor- dance with VUSBC. However, if, upon inspection, a problem is discovered, hecan only encourage the owner to remedy the defect. He cannot compel correction unless the problem is so severe that the lives or health of County residents other than the occupants of the building are endangered. (Continued) PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES NO O Steven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE: 0025 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR n n Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 Under Volume II of the VUSBC, referred to as the Building Maintenance Code, localities are given the option to provide their building officials with authority to ensure that existing buildings are properly maintained and are not permitted to deteriorate to an unsafe condition for the occupants. Although the Building Maintenance Code, if incorporated into the County Code, would allow VUSBC standards to be enforced in all existing buildings, the County's Office of Building Inspection, consistent with current practice, would not inspect owner -occupied single- family dwellings and would continue to handle inspections on a complaint basis. Therefore, the only change in the office's current program that would occur as a result of the attached ordinance, would be to give the Building Official the legal authority to compel, rather than merely encourage, compliance with the building code in an existing structure. Since the Building Official already has personnel on his staff to perform inspections on existing structures, no addition- al personnel will be required if the attached ordinance is adopted. Furthermore, he has discussed the ordinance with the building community which has raised no objections to its adoption. The City of Richmond has already adopted the Building Maintenance Code and at least forty other localities, including Henrico County are preparing to present similar ordinances to their governing bodies. cdll048:85Cl6 0026 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ARTICLE I, CHAPTER 6 OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED BY ADDING SECTION 6-2.3 AUTHORIZING THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE VOLUME II OF THE VIRGINIA UNIFORM STATEWIDE BUILDING CODE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended by adding Section 6-2.3 as follows: In addition to the authority otherwise granted by this chapter, the building official shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of Volume II of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, 1984 edition, or as may be amended, known as the Building Maintenance Code. cdl1051:PC �� " CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: 1986-87 Rural Addition Projects COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 11.D.1. The Board is requested to establish priorities for Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) rural addition projects. BACKGROUND: Virginia statutes enable VDOT, upon request of the Board, to set aside funds for the construction of new roads and upgrading of certain subdivision roads. VDOT's policy limits the use of these funds to the actual construction of the roads. All other costs, such as, design, right-of-way acquisition and utility adjustments must be paid from other than VDOT sources. In the past, the Board has chosen to fund these costs from the General Fund Reserve. VDOT currently has $177,000 designated for rural addition projects ($27,000 carried forward from the completed Warbro Road project in FY86 and $150,000 allocated in FY87). (Continued on Page Two) PREPARED BY: --dN �G R. J. McCracken Director of Transportation ATTACHMENTS: YES ® NO 0 SIGNATURE: /&-- COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0 M Board Agenda Item 1986-87 Rural Addition Projects January 28, 1987 Page Two A list of the rural addition requests which staff has received from citizens and/or the Board is attached. "Ballpark" costs for each project are provided. Detailed plans must be prepared and/or updated before precise estimates can be developed. Projects requested but determined ineligible by VDOT are also shown. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The Board could advise VDOT that no rural addition project is requested for FY87. The funds currently designated for rural additions could be transferred to another project in VDOT's six year plan or carried forward to FY88. 2. The Board could designate a project(s) for a rural addition. Staff could be instructed to develop more precise estimates prior to a final Board decision on the project. No funds have been designated in the County budget for rural additions. If this alternative is selected, Nestor Road should be given consideration since it is nearly constructed to VDOT's standards now. With minor improvements, the road could be upgraded so that it would be accepted for maintenance by VDOT. Treely Road should also be given consideration. Staff has received a petition signed by over 200 citizens supporting the Treely Road improvement. RECOMME 4DATION : Staff recommends that Alternative 1 be adopted and that the Board advise VDOT that the rural addition funds should be transferred to other projects within the six year plan. If the Board wishes to continue rural addition projects, staff recommends that Nestor Road and Treely Road be given consideration. I,- 0 I-i q 41 rd 1.1 U rd rtf td 4-) A as 0 rd U b� q .r{ 0 4J W IA a) •r4 4J 0 q 4J q t3l La 41 U) U I i< 0 0 0 0 0 0 q p, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 OB 3 a;q 44 r-I C4 cV o IV o rl a) 0 -H w 4J .g +p� .4 wN a 0 Q�404� �d L 0 l� 41 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o O o 0 q N O N O O u1 D fa CT (1)14 4J q v " 41 b �zwa b b O 4-, a •d " q N 0 0 IX m A b rd 41 u b4J rd 0$ O PS ,d U (d r�1 4) b 50 N 4J En q �, 0 a �0 z w H �0 w b td 0 Ix +J " a) 3 0 E+ al u1 q " rd m a ro ° 0 �d >1 'd rtJ a4 a° x O �U a �J 4J a r. b b0 4) m44 " >0 1 " 0 H T1 O ro q ai 0 rd 4-4 a 4J ro N O 0 0 A� a) O U q q 0 O rd d 10 'rd .C., r-I tT rd 0 � " 34 En b b w U � rd al 0 3 q 44 0 0 rd 4J 4J A. rz En N U a) En 0 En a 0030 o U Q Cl)e J Y ��/ U J J U 1[ p p p Q W w U ` - a, p Q O � ::D UJ U- cr) LLJI 0 0 W cr c O � O W .J 0 cca y°- ' i Z w o o W� 20 =U �� a J ' Z p GJ �J D O V !♦ <� J ^ z ! w 0 O W = • r` M- CY W M . W0 Y Q ' MVN. • /l1dON = ••' 1 .• � I y 1 "L a' W s" b rt•rrs, s•. t ..♦•LL ♦ O �� t • t Q 0`� .1 p cr - LLJ_ c_ o Q x Z = 300 U) LLI py ►. �• Z It V i Ld j w , _J P� 0031 f/ _,, MEETING DATE: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.D.2. SUBJECT: Reauest for reduced speed limit on Ruffin Mill Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mr. Dodd has received requests from citizens to reduce the speed limit on Ruffin Mill Road (Route 746) from Interstate 95 to Enon Church Road (Route 746). RECOMMENDATION The Board is requested to adopt the attached resolution asking VDOT to reduce the speed limit along that portion of Ruffin Mill Road. ATTACHMENTS: YES Lei NO O SIGNATURE PREPARED BY: RV J. McCracken Director of Transportation COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR n CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At the regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors held at the Courthouse on January 28, 1987 at 9:00 a.m. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County has received requests from citizens to reduce the speed limit on Ruffin Mill Road from Interstate 95 to Enon Church Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to reduce the speed limit along that portion of Ruffin Mill Road. Vote: Certified By: Joan S. Dolezal, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 0033 s CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11•E. 1. SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: CLOVER HILL DISTRICT: Sachems Head, Phase One Whitestone, Section 3 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT: The Boulders Midlothian Village PREPARED BY:�lrn� ATTACHMENTS: YES 6 NO ❑ SIGNATURE AL= 0034 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 129 In MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Environmental Engineering SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance - Sachems Head, Phase One MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 WATER WILLOW DRIVE: Beginning at the intersection with Lucks Lane, State Route 720, and qoing southerly to the intersection with Reed Grass Lane, then continuinq southwesterly to the intersection with Wood Saae West and Wood Saae East, then continuing southeasterly to tie into proposed Water Willow Drive, Sachems Head, Phase Two. REED GRASS LANE: Beginning at the intersecton with Water Willow Drive and going easterly to a cul-de-sac. WOOD SAGE WEST: Beginning at the intersection with Water Willow Drive and going northwesterly to a cul-de-sac. WOOD SAGE EAST: Beginning at the intersection with Water Willow Drve and going southeasterly to a cul-de-sac. SACHEMS HEAD PHASE ONE N � C fi -i L An/r O -`_---- G r � to TNts F'Roy=CT v 0 0 D aEar7o �qV 003! �Ir+` ` wo MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Environmental Engineering SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance - Whitestone, Section 3 MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 GRINELL DRIVE: Beginning at existing Grinell Drive, State Route 3337, and going northeasterly to end in a cul-de-sac. WHITESTONE , SECTION 3 �a � r w y -r4T6 E a) O U 0 n MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Environmental Engineering SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance - The Boulders MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 CHINABERRY BOULEVARD: Beginning at the intersection with Midlothian Turnpike, State Route 60, and going northerly to the intersection with Boulders Spring Drive, then continu- ing northerly to the intersection with Boulder Springs Drive, then continuing northeasterly to the intersection with Boulders Lake Drive, then continuing northeasterly to tie into future Chinaberry Boulevard. BOULDERS SPRING DRIVE: Beginning at the intersection with Chinaberry Boulevard and going westerly to tie into existing Chinaberry Drive, a private road. (Continued on next page) THE BOULDERS 0 m State Road Acdeptance - The Boulders January 28, 1987 Page 2 BOULDER SPRINGS DRIVE: Beginning at the intersection with Chinaberry Boulevard and going northwesterly to end in a dead end. BOULDERS LAKE DRIVE: Beginning at the intersection with Chinaberry Boulevard and going westerly to end in a dead end. 0038 M 15 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Environmental Engineerig SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance - Midlothian Village MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 VILLAGE MILL DRIVE: Beginning at the intersection with Midlothian Turnpike, State Route 60, and going southerly to a temporary turnaround. MIDLOTHIAN VILLAGE a �a N 3 L) S , �� rt jH�s PRo�E�T/ w 04 k d C O �O V GO CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA 11.E.2. MEETINGDATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT Change in the Authorized Amount and Custodian of School Board's Petty Cash Fund. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION *- On July 23, 1980, the Board of Supervisors authorized Mr. Robert Lux, Business Manager, to be custodian of a School Board petty cash fund in the amount of $1700. As a result of Mr. Lux's retirement in December, staff requests that the Board name Mrs. Betty Lord, Food Service Supervisor, as the custodian of the fund, and increase the authorized amount to $2000. The fund is used to establish change funds in school cafeterias and the additional $300 authorization will be used when needed to establish change funds in new facilities. PREPARED BY. Mary fLye, ector Accounting Department ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO Q SIGNATURE: ,�9A 0 0! COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 11.F.1. MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Consideration of a request from the 16 howeowners on Jean Drive, to reduce the sewer connection fee from $2500 to $1700. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Utilities Department recently completed a sewer project (No. S83-66C) extending public sewer service to residents along Friend Avenue, Reymet Road and Jean Drive. Staff has received a request from the residents to reduce the sewer connection fee from $2500, now set out in the Utility Ordinance, to $1700. Staff has reviewed the request and offer the following comments: On May 25, 1983, the Board authorized the Utilities Department to perform a survey of the residents along Reymet Road and Friend Avenue to determine which residents would agree to connect to public sewer. The residents along Reymet Road and Friend Avenue were sent agreements which, if signed and returned, obligated them to pay the connection fee of $1700 if public sewer became available. On July 27, 1983, the Board of Supervisors was presented with the results of the survey and authorized staff to design the sewer lines and to solicit cost participation from owners of undeveloped property. PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES */ NO D SIGNATURE: ZIV/0041 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 Due to State procurement requirements for soliciting professional services, staff was not able to secure the services of an engineering firm to design the project until January 11, 1984 at which time the Board of Supervisors authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary engineering agreement. During succeeding months Staff worked closely with the engineering firm to establish the best route to extend sewer to those residents along Reymet Road and Friend Avenue. Three alternatives were studied and in May or June of 1984 Staff selected the route along Jean Drive. The alternative selected was based on two factors. The first was that service would be available to the existing homes along Jean Drive. Secondly, this alignment of sewer better served two large properties from which Staff believed cost participation could be obtained. The sewer connection fee at that time was $1,800. From June of 1984 until August of 1985, Staff proceeded with design of project and made numerous contacts with the Reynolds Metal Company and the Trustee of the J. Louis Reynolds Estates property to obtain a commitment for participation in the cost to extend sewer to their properties. Staff was successful in obtaining participation from the J. Louis Reynolds Estate and Reynolds Metal has paid their connection fee. On September 25, 1985, the Board of Supervisors authorized construction and awarded the sewer project to the lowest bidder. The sewer connection fee at that time was $2,500. Staff has notified the existing residents along Reymet Road and Friend Avenue that did not sign contracts that they may apply for sewer service by paying a connection fee of $2500 if the application is made within 30 days, the fee in effect at the time the contract was awarded. Residents of Jean Drive have inquired about the connection fee for their property and advised the fee would be $2500, the same as the fee for the residents on Reymet Road and Friend Avenue that had not signed contracts. Recommendation: Staff recommends the request for a $1700 connection fee be denied for the following reasons: 004:? M M Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 3 1. Both bond covenants and the County's Utility Ordinance require the Board to uniformly impose the applicable connection fee at the time application for a connection is made. The Board has consistently adhered to that policy in situations at least as compelling as this one in every district. Any deviation from that approach would severely compromise the County's ability to collect uniform connection fees while at the same time jeopardizing compliance with bond covenants. 2. If the sewer had been extended along the originally proposed route, sewer would not have been available to the residents along Jean Drive. Future service for Jean Drive would then have become a separate project and a survey would have been conducted at the rate in effect at the time of the survey, either $2500 or $2750. In addition, 70% participation would be required. Jean Drive residents now have a choice of whether they connect or not. 3. The purpose of the survey is to determine how many residents will obligate themselves contractually to connect to public sewer, not to guarantee a lower sewer connection fee. District: Bermuda Recommend Approval n04;3 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.F.2.a. SUBJECT: Authorization to Proceed with Condemnation of a Water Easement for Buford Road Water Line Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION *- Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation of a water easement across the property of Martha K. Neate. On January 14, 1987, the following offer was made by The Right of Way Office to the owner listed below for the purchase of a water easement for Buford Road Water Line Project, Martha K. Neate $370.00 Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made and since the contract for the installation of the water line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with condemnation on an emergency basis. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner to try and reach an agreement. (Continued on next page) PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES 09 NO O SIGNATURE: 0044 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR n Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on January 29, 1987, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. District: Midlothian Recommend Approval 0045 %w '1100 a.x ■ ILIAlp / MATCH L r. co p IV 71°2 Q�eB Q ." toze o Y� ADAA� ES ' M 18-03-f1)_23. O b D.B. 821- pa 430 c -� 40 / N 730 9 Ts, CH,4RLE3 N. 3 HCEEN off 8p0�8,22' E .43p _ ty �' 4d' v M main ' � 8U T Wf ~ LLO %R ti $818ADAME' �"ZPA 1� O „ � 295 J pi j 28 L NBso � �Q N 69049'4i" E ms ; ��ALTx 0F. . .� X p a�w o p �' J y T. Coll'co 2 CY z a W�. da PLAT c0 M47t v F w n CI aF 15' WATERLINE W EASEMENT A MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT 6� C.HESTERFIELD -COUNTY V�WIA g�� 0046 ffATE ROILI'M 666 A. .. 9;'ALE: 1 s 100 ; 1 CIVIL G�1 MV A- tN1A J� CHI pp 4° \F4 eNH4 M �<,• 2 RICNMOND QF<�ti` p 4gkw4y 3 e° l T � ' ROBERT EARL O /gHE�POVE PO p�9 a° / p0 ... `�� 0 PO t 47 �a\a°a M R I C N M 0 N D N W' j ®,-4 MO GPI RDP Op ?F Op Og9IY Z\\\ eJRPUNO\E Pk o 3 O't' r c♦p 3 �� P�v \GpN A RV O 0 L i.,ADJor 3 Q23 OpN OAP CHFL'IFOR o w� wQ a I MB. a E 6K y t,O a 220 c t CTv m POLK 9 PFFNOC RO >-' o p KR a P P eoN aw c K '0Op IFul u V Z¢ O O OR 4M o0 O lLCM p CO m O O p Dp coc4 Ty o O P \ ERN cwe9r• O 4'^a MONT n N C W RDD Oa C? O 1.1 egogNIMsAlwqV Ka\N0 gENEISp po0OO OS 0 USH BRENTFORD DR NZ O QE-PPCPDEN gToORD 2w U RD FZNooP q'tioQ ( O RY = , 0i u O 4VIGNON (\� ;� °AEfGen SEvIw LE SOUTHERN 'V OUAKEa O a0 m ZOR pl L\� yQ• oGKNW \NGtON 2N\ O RD OTO RO < P �� 1< �\ HIT TaN Ck4- AY 9 pw[ �v 0 p9G j't DR W Lane �Q ,?} 10 0• 4 0 o o �. o �\ o N'y94r p�Pq may? ?O O 4 q PO Q RO a An Poll BON P VIEW G ` \ 101 0 paM ti Q \ O,MgON JIi O T EST � ? �¢ 4 CL a W ' f •� C ps�,t�i,j \ r �' ¢ROJ 0 CT ?V RO 09h ?w, oHp V ET OR r0 EpU DET v 9 A t °t \ i "b V i i D ST ST c A mp p0 T eELL i \` n RECEPTIONDIAGNOSTIC 8 24 '� n' GEM LIpN i Op (`v M a0 Opp 'c 1 8 v a � kfT r A. (CENTER ;TaE ENT RO o 6 ° JAHNKE S TR ezo EPIC RC RO a J\ 9,P EPIC RD \ O y o r L ?Hoa �� r +• �` 4% y�MM �\ Y F wN o O SO�it 2 p VQ W e o WEG \ SPRMG AV 30 O vY QO BON AIR SCHOOL - SOP 4E FOR GIRLS Ep C?O Q o a 4t.. 1 4°roe ? t s4'F o3P 4y r b S T O cep ST 4 JS I PP 14 �O = PANE ° / y0 ,C FS N a� �E ° R � f0 b GS ^off o ROBIOUS HALL i 6 - o SHOPPING j ci $ f ""ONE o w° CENTER z o ¢ �r HARMAO OR O C O9 WMI ►.� o0 0�30 Z RD a '►G 2m SG7• �¢� OIMOC QA'!J�T ASHtON ► n `PM°' $ 9 S, F "1 Q ¢ qF OR K •JOCT n a < ILA O K��SS P ER �Pwf i 1/ y NOV oRI• (QJ / m D a 0P O Tp O I=q=F=Oi °y! 04k N o k�CCnlfil/d 4' lyT4,1, / • RUING 7O `PET 1Evv �� SHAS7A RD I + S ? L4 W /Rdu 'trial OONACHY OR 0,9 4 CPP 10 �\ eP,TF IELD � O./ STATE 4 VF 9=` DR N POLICE A pQ BUFO CT PO E MF T� Po �yq yr�r �k 0 44. 3° I v9 co 00 a v ble C UFORD SHOPPING ,} �'fF P may' ci JO O\ ,1 So o i O o u FO CE • IA �O`I tq0 TUK ORO Z4, y?o?o 00Ogam R �Za '"o ¢ .: �.. ri _ w NGAT NO OC'R TS ?Pt ao o . \n a s°O _ ..� �i► '^i 1.... MEETING DATE: SUBJECT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.F.2.b. Authorization to Proceed with Condemnation of a Water Easement for Buford Road Water Line Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation of a water easement across the property of Peggy M. Hill. On January 14, 1987, the following offer was made by The Right of Way Office to the owner listed below for the purchase of a water easement for Buford Road Water Line Project, Peggy M. Hill $220.00 The owner has made a verbal counteroffer in the amount of $3000.00. Since staff feels this offer to be excessive, and since the contract for the installation of the water line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with condemnation on an emergency basis. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner to try and reach an agreement. (Continued on next page) PREPARED BY. ATTACHMENTS: YES EJ NO ❑ SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on January 29, 1987, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. District: Midlothian Recommend Approval P14� m m AIgTCH � f Nh t � / cc V '� J Imo_ $ 4 to O �qi boa io C� c�y H OAKS DRIVE a$ Irv.02$ N� w co q I 4r h� h _ N 7400Z E p N6p h'?NLTH 0 .o �mm _a 1 670g9�23 � � 3 �l N 6t'�22'sq"E WASE, WNCAN 0., JR. 18 - 07-(1).50 Ll a 1639 PG. 1 '= QIOAw.��N— Way N m i 't°o, �N anAr 4w 91 — A C Jeffroy T. Collins 0. • O F x*9* 15'WATERLINE EASEMENT MIDLOTH IAN DISTRCr CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA v,� c DM 2 nr err i�iry • �. icr n wccrY4e R I C H M 0 N D ROBERT EARL CI 4 / ; NE • w F V / c ° W W 2 N G v \9A,Ap roq m = 0 0 lay OQ BECK, s B m y cai i a° p MqM R s p00 zDR 3u1 3 rCl ooASMAN = i Q yRDo �L D4' PNT Pa o AQO RD N 92C j �a° RD FCLOR 4 zs z RY SEVI. LE SOUTHERN W, ,< k�iYe��N T� ytiv g0C/<q Vl.. g "+r7 4Sp CP1o'P c,Q �Ga\�. O 8 (V O ~ 11�CENTER yy, ,a � �O O C• o zpa-2 C. r• IZ`iryP< tcE�O� t q ? ,� �q �• q4 BON AIR <y • Rso� a O NN T \ SCHOOL FOR GIRLS 718 Q O \ � OGG, fp� Oa ROSIOUS HALL r I i9 6 v SHOPPING ° CENTER °� AR or W O•i3 Z RD co � r Q¢Q 01 QMd1f 3 $ AsNTON ► i J TGt C pMOCR K ��Ct m w S1 Off? l4 NA NGO o kICWMfiI/d M 4,1, / • REDI NG' `1yt AV - /ndusfrio/ Y OONACHv ELl Poi* / P ,W r1ry ' p0 SOP t q I LI 9 0 B�C F• 2 M O OCa'�S ret +o J CN/Pp 401, eNHa M �R P aPC tiF : gRkW4Y t /SHEAR P�E RO 9p `�\ NGHPM RO R° � Q� •o° PO t' � 6 P B P� v�r° R I CR H M 0 N D O RDP °e P QQ.004k. 2\\� gORaVN°�E tiP i >r e'4v CND<' Jor� 3 P3 GpNO O�0. tRD % 6> ) CNE R'FORD D S E R T ^:� Q � HILL A'O P o A\/ E 1\ a 7 P• � c i i BENOE.yEER G� \ ��'K St CTo Y1 n GREENOCIRO 678 p f Alw c A p .cnl p <O in o 0 7 °a IN N KEN v N N NEVIS OR 9 �ucE SO��NER �wr R0 BE '< pa�EP 8RENTFORD DR PZ EN St FLOP G1pN Np�`O>N oti� o; o � A y " _ \` C AVIGNON QUAKER O Y RD LA Gµ P`N N°tON 2 O t0 RD POTANG A oRe ��r RO G 3r DR \ ore 2 A KSPUR oP VIEw ? o^ c RV. Da 9 n LBON 2 GQ o \` po P D ND O N VIESt <; C Z o c� �\ r ti W °NP V Et OR f0 Il BEAU DET v a q t Sloe P M St St G+ LA. PQ Mt BEO v� GE �, R ' f tREV IL0.pPN u .a 686 9G op R c NT RD JAHNKE —.01 i E cz t Roo t RD 4'�L,y •p 6q EPI EPIC RO \,C �C en,N•c £ J�E'A SpaMV ti� 30 A• `,Out PO I Q�v'F > o r 1 �F�vfT 3Pr 4N r Q, r t 44 HE ° CPS 'Fc^ 9 V•E P p•l � S N 'Y O OF O< pRPO 9 00. / LTG <� p p, O 9 NE LP o EttP sc G%C Ow Pt 4 A 4 Q N ; op f,i. 6 N \ o g 7 4 na P� yaj a Oa=A=F=�`AER I- t Oq 1I SHASTA RrD� C' I �P�pQ'• ep(FIEp KD 0 MMONS� 0� 57ATE �\ OPOLICE 9 �A FI � 20 rPn? 'pZ°0. 00 MC*F BUT ORD tir 4'`' 430 II v9 <99 o A V SGFO�� m t U FORD SHUPVING s FO CE 00 n MEETING DATE: SUBJECT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.F.3.a. Approval of Sewer Contract for Woodlake Trunk Sewer, Phase V COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests that the Board approve the following contract: Sewer Contract Number S87-9CD/7(8) 709M, Woodlake Trunk Sewer, Phase V: Developer: Investors Woodlake Development Corporation Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors, Inc. Total Contract Cost: $140,746.00 Total Estimated County Cost: $ 13,328.06 (Refund through Connection Fees) Estimated Developer Cost: $127,417.94 Number of Connections: Extension provides for future connections Code: 5N-2511-997 This project is for the extension of oversized sewer lines to provide capacity to the upstream properties. Staff recommends that the Board approve this contract and authorize the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents. District: Clover Hill PREPARED BY*. Recommend Approval ATTACHMENTS: YES 10 NO O SIGNATURE:— ZOE'- "' OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0053 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.3.b. SUBJECT: Approval of Sewer Contract for Victorian Square Shopping Center, Route 360, Offsite Sewer Extension along Horner's Run COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests that the Board approve the following contract: Sewer Contract Number S87-6CD/7(8) 706M, Horner's Run Trunk Developer: Victorian Square Partnership LTD. Contractor: Piedmont Construction Co., Inc. Total Contract Cost: $109,799.80 Total Estimated County Cost: $ 64,899.45 (Refund through Connection Fees) Estimated Developer Cost: $ 44,900.35 Number of Connections: Extension provides for future connections Code: 5N-2511-997 This project is for the extension of offsite improvements to serve Victorian Square Shopping Center and adjoining properties. Staff recommends that the Board approve this contract and authorize the County.Administrator'' to execute any necessary documents. c+�� PREPARED BY: District: Clover Hill Recommend Approval AT I A%,MN�EWTS'-it51— NO O 0054 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR i • _ ram' ��. .. . i i i Y ••h!� � f r I F s r \ \ 3 O \ � i cis co r \"k !� \ ./' _ • I I• ' Doi • I N I • � •�•�r r I f • lowlw w . .r • ... • • . � i • � � • � 1 •. Tel + • 1 i . J ° IL � � `•ter ��t � �s �._ ° ei " • P a.• "w• yN '� •' yr. ©/.l , • ® •� '� • _ '•) �� 1.11 'YN i .M IMI TY .yili -..1 ,.ram � _ __ _.. _ � • >l r r MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11.F.3.c. Acceptance of Deed of Dedication along Courthouse Road from the Trustees of the First Congregational Christian Church, United Church of Christ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board accept the conveyance of a 20' strip of land along Courthouse Road from the Trustees of the First Congregational Christian Church, United Church of Christ and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. It is the policy of the County to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the Plan 2000. The dedication of this right of way conforms to that plan. Staff recommends that the Board accept the conveyance of this right of way and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. District: Matoaca Recommend Approval PREPARED BY: b- ATTACHMENTS: YES ® NO D SIGNATURE: Xdv- - 0056 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Op �. PD d O O t J� ° i � PPO ?• W 0'[, ` � M,r•s•Ir• IN. ap I.00v '- � •- PO 7 \ 1 I � Esil. ~ � �" ,I,aY' r `V ,- O /• �O ii RD O 91 [ROADS T . aL L r 0.20 WALMSLEY IA MNA • ` j} KIIVGsc v 95,09 ?° J i z , 5 Grtporys Pond �a °P Ciq ct [t Q: �,a.••p4 • P aA� / �� rM• e \ I O � 0 LA 1p p'•'J 'O ` \ O % c MSM�r F ♦ pUTrOST uR. % pl, Et1 a p' �S `--� - 1►E�WL- - ` o/SRoE ` E R p i• Si �►S�� - `� J 0 N s0�/ . ° it •r s t1 649 z' i ODD \ a f� Tt P°cu'RE Norvers qc� *ps b�f• cti, 50 o s s , ■ a R . � C e -y 649 ,.E� 1 0 04 IL ' JACOBS a m ' �� P Ab [L a S YAM RD - - - j� I •. II•[LIN[ - , "tsc +ob o 1 0.>5 RDt BURNETT a, �t O ZS SOUR), (1'u Nq : a%a v 0 649 i 6000 !.4 C.^ �4 ♦a` RD c� 's TP o F .O`er-��oE•oa�° 0 Z r O � FIVE N FORKS 1 �. `��' .° �.0�\O � /' yam• 0 .c 005`7 �. . 1 /Y/0 ' / 8 �.E+ a39. /3 . h 41 � QD Fir3y' Cangzgationc7/ C,hcistian Chc�rct� Do vas To 44 Mo ,o No . 49-150) r7 $u/.sSe t 4 a o N 0 a° O.//O 0 � CoveTiyQus,E ,� ICHAROCO KE CERTir iG;� 1 L• Nv. 5/u P,F T, S'HOIU/IY67 20 ' 67'A51P e_ jkZW' & 7'H& �U,F5T 0058 L n OGOU,e7HDUv�5 e D0 M^TOAcA ,O�ST.elCT Date:10ug ust 28, /98G Scale: I11=50' Job No.: ,e- 25/ • PLANNERS -ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS -SURVEYORS - 501 Branchway Road • Richmond, Virginia 23236.794-0571 MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: ll. F. 3. d. Acceptance of Deed of Dedication along Warbro Road from Randolph Kelly Shively and Carol D. Shively COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board accept the conveyance of a 5' strip of land along Warbro Road from Randolph Kelly Shively and Carol D. Shively and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. It is the policy of the County to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the Plan 2000. The dedication of this right of way conforms to that plan. Staff recommends that the Board accept the conveyance of this right of way and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. District: Clover Hill Recommend Approval PREPARED BY. .,! G ATTACHMENTS: YES 14 NO D SIGNATURE: Z*� 0059 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR J il m 0 m� Rod sp?psa Rod IZA SN'VLYKE��Y Lr Cq;o�0• m SN iVELY 0 g 1779 F'G Z 31 N �Looaf O. 970,9 C TAn 48.7 �� 2p A. 1.4'25 1 I" e= 473.00' Lam= / / 9. 04' % h ��.-- g0A D iT tO� , ,o�� /� - O 5 ST2lP pEv\CATEn TO GHESTEiZF1El.D GOUN�V - 8 W o, PLAT SHOWING A 5' STRIP OF LAND ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF RANDOLPH KELLY SHIVELY TO BE DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD SITUATED ON THE EASTERN LINE OF WARBRO ROAD IN THE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY , VIRGINIA SCALE: 1"=50' JULY 19, 1986 Potts and Minter Professional Land Surveyors 101380 HULL STREET ROAD, MID„ VA. 23113, 745-2576 J.N. 8511-30 060 • • • .aab •v r .A/ enrol Chum Llss ti 1 \ no I \ I r \ 1 0A -• • tw►r� ° 1 0% \ TONIAMAWK ACADEMY �? E po s Iff OR .� 1 \ " 1 � Cy Q 1 7• • wD 1 \wLS _ •V,,, 2 . 1 . .f • • • •1 �� ♦ -- r°r[v y 4 37 ow o 'o� o !SPEEDWAY • ♦ 1 • T'�' °'r ° rril w PUGAP •f'••� 1 STA • �, r4 a • I. WE +OND4Y 1 IY ► „ WAY E/I ! L °rar b q, �` to Flo 1 AREA E • ' wn+'"" [ °R• t �w A 9074 1 rLANOf/i,L N 1 ♦• J t E�•ti w wD LYN► � ryT. a • N / ♦ 1 S g wuow Rr •'� t f •' �, C r 000TNR . '1 1 • • • . r ` ` •,4 : tt oE�•• oM T Y CT 36 •I or • �� o I ♦ 1 .o • I ` ` •••KN et � \. • • VL. 19►A4se \ °� • O o 360 � � j•� '� eoa ' R I lop NY;'-�.1• I i [fit' • • r U' • N R4YIA AD a ��O PECAN ♦ • sy v • 4L�ytNu I � ?J a • • ''L e' • ! R �rpw! e • I LMIW11pi/r, IftnllluY !As► • •� '• •''• • �I •4(Tf` o�Rb `K'�9 M� y�?kf) I PF' i . •; "f•' RIDGE- Tomohorr• r = �' RUN. RO ob 1. w u°� (.•Cr�M gyp(. �q Ey• wo 4 �' /soupRE •r 4y 'O { •• R �t r. �• , �''�'q' Icy . ♦ � �sr ' �°� ' •b s O ry tQ 9 �fltf •R 1 ' �eT o 8 V• ' C. • •• �, 1 i' f o O O • •• ►, Y ttt t w FAMILY ' ♦ 9R 0.10 �^7 • • • d I 1 a 1 � �• • 1• . ?.1 ° CAurtn • w ' • • 1 i • • w i Gi. � i �•� v 653 z t /t MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 28, 1987 ITEM NUMBER: 11. F . 4. Report of Water and Sewer Contracts by Developers COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following water and sewer contracts were executed by the County Administrator: 1. W87-17D The Chesterfield Meadows Matoaca Office Complex Developer: Pioneer Financial Corporation Contractor: Rhyne Contractors Inc. Number of Connections: 0 $11,666.33 2. W87-16D Fast Lube Bermuda Developer: T.L. Haynes Contractor: William M. Harman Contractors Number of Connections: 1 $4,200.00 3. S87-3D Cove Ridge - Phase II Clover Hill Developer: Brandermill - A VA. General Partnership by: Brandermill Management Inc. Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors Inc. Number of Connections: 36 $63,379.00 PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO 0062 SIGNATURE: CO NTY ADMINISTRATOR ► *4w'' M i 4 Agenda Item January 28, 1987 Page 2 4. S87-7D Gregory Sewer Extension Midlothian Developer: J. Marvin and Carolyn D. Gregory Contractor: Best Backhoe and Excavating Inc. Number of Connections: 3 $9,000.00 5. W87-8D Gates Mill Clover Hill Developer: Investors Woodlake Development Corp. Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors, Inc. Number of Connections: 52 $48,609.50 6. W87-12D Chesterfield Manor Water Line Bermuda Developer: T. Harrison Burt Contractor: William M. Harman Contractors Number of Connections: 1 $3,855.00 0063 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA R E PORTS MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 REPORT ON GENERAL FUND BALANCE, GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT, ROAD RESERVE FUNDS, SCHEDULE OF LEASE PURCHASES, SCHEDULE OF SCHOOL LITERARY LOANS, DISTRICT ROAD AND STREET LIGHT FUNDS ATTACHMENTS: YES Ek NO O SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR e C CHESTERFIELD COUNTY GENERAL FUND BALANCE January 21, 1987 Board Meeting Date Description Amount Balance 07/01/86 FY87 Budgeted Beginning $10,322,758 Fund Balance 07/01/86 Add to Fund Balance in FY87 Budget +790,300 11,113,058 07/01/86 Reserve for Future Debt 3,765,500 7,347,558 07/09/86 Debt Service - Reduction of FY87 interest expense due to refunding of the 1981 bonds + 78 400 7,425,958 a portion 07/09/86 MH/MR - Fund critical needs 85,900 7,340,058 07/23/86 Board Miscellaneous - Paint Water 25,000 7,315,058 Tank 08/13/86 Old Stage Road - Waterline extension 37,500 7,277,558 09/24/86 Leaf Collection 116,500 7,161,058 10/22/86 Chester Landfill Groundwater 60,000 7,101,058 Program 01/14/87 Jail Addition Architectural Services 31,850 7,069,208 0065 f w `"0 9 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY STATUS OF GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT January 21, 1987 Date Department/Description Amount Balance 07/01/86 Original FY87 Budget Appropriation $100,000.00 07/09/86 Chamber of Commerce proposal for Richmond SBA 503 Certified Development Co. 16,860.00 83,140.00 08/13/86 YMCA in Chester/Route 10 - Donation 23,501.00 59,639.00 09/10/86 Fire Department - Increase per call paid to volunteers from $1 to $3 29,000.00 30,639.00 09/26/86 Airport - Renovate terminal building 7,500.00 23,139.00 10/08/86 Donations - Petersburg Symphony - additional 5,000.00 18,139.00 11/26/86 Fire Dept. - Paving of 5,500.00 12,639.00 parking lot at Enon Volunteer Fire Station. "66 e CHESTERFIELD COUNTY ROAD RESERVE FUNDS January 21, 1987 Board Meeting Rt. 36 Rt. 10 Date Description Ettrick Chester 05/09/84 Route 36 Ettrick - Appropriated for design contract with VDH&T $ 150,000 10/10/84 Route 10 - Design work for widening through Chester $ 350,000 10/10/84 Route 36 Ettrick - Additional funds for design contract with VDH&T 165,000 08/28/85 Route 36 Ettrick - Transferred General Funds to Ruffin Mill Road project (133,000) 08/28/85 Route 36 Ettrick - Use of Revenue Sharing funds 133,000 03/12/86 Route 36 Ettrick - Reduce Revenue Sharing and add back General Funds 0 03/12/86 Route 10 - Reduce General Funds and add Revenue Sharing Funds $133,000 0 05/28/86** Route 36 Ettrick - Appropriate Reserve funds 2,500,000 05/28/86** Route 10 - Appropriate Reserve funds 1,485,000 Total Project Appropriation 2,815,000 1,835,000 * $4,500,000 was reserved 7/1/84 for these projects. **Chester project loaned the Ettrick project $165,000 5/28/86. f)06t7 Prepared by amounting Department January 21, 1 87 0 SCHEDULE OF CAPITALIZED LEASE PURCHASES Description Major Capital Facilities Lease Purchase: Data Processing, Human Services, Courts Building Vehicle and Communi- cations Mainten- ance Building Subtotal Major Equipment Lease Purchase: Communications Equipment: Microwave System 800 MHz System Mobile Radios - Police Automatic Call Distributors Subtotal Leaf pickup equipment Data Processing equipment Accounting System Original Date Date Lease Lease Lease Outstanding Purchase Purchase Purchase Balance Amount Began Ends 12/31/86 $ 2,106,355 12/85 5,168,170 12/85 14,440,475 12/85 21,715,000 1,000,000 9/82 22,715,000 1,338,333 5/81 2,888,682 10/84 762,170 12/86 189,897 12/86 5,179,082 214,819 12/86 300,705 8/85 250,000 10/84 6/01 $ 1,990,925 6/01 4,884,950 6/01 * 13,649,125 20,525,000 6/90 551,205 21,076,205 4/88 308,204 7/91 2,052,634 6/91 762,170 6/91 189,897 3,312,905 6/91 211,595 8/89 199,298 9/91 178,490 f)068 %W Original Date Date Lease Lease Lease Outstanding Purchase Purchase Purchase Balance Description Amount Began Ends 12/31/86 Fire Trucks 404,912 1/83 12/87 91,745 Voting Machines 132,800 7/85 6/90 99,445 Subtotal 1,303,236 780,573 Routine Equipment Lease Purchase: Microfilm Equipment 75,640 4/85 3/90 52,312 Vehicles: County 29,853 12/84 11/87 10,056 Schools 39,804 12/84 11/87 13,512 Printshop Equipment 52,613 4/84 9/88 14,709 Copiers 23,530 12/83 12/90 12,769 Nursing Home Copier 6,836 9/83 8/88 1,242 Utilities Copier 14,960 7/84 6/89 8,223 Airport: Fuel Truck 22,907 12/86 6/91 22,907 Subtotal 266,143 135,730 TOTAL $29,463,461 $25,305,413 * On September 24, 1986, the Board of Supervisors approved a supple- mental lease purchase for $5,500,000 to increase the financing of the construction of the Courts Building. 11176.9 CA- Prepared by Budget & Mana ement SCHHEEDULE OF SCHOOL LITERAR\ LOANS January 23, �987 Apomved by Board of Supervisors C O N Y E R S I U N �LANCE FY LOAN TO Proect Date Amount Date Amount 1 DE PAID OUT Greenfield & Hatkin» 1919 l,�0.V00 �2/15/79 1,34V`075 87\011. 2060 Grange Hall 3/26/[N 1,000/000 6/1/82 i3OV0,000 800,00 2002 Ha,-: ilgate 3/26/B0 750`000 8/\/81 553`441 415`500 20V2 Swift Creek Jr. 3/26/01 750`V0V 8/U81 53Y.04 4O3,5V0 20102 Pmvideme Jr. 3/26/90 75O.000 5/l/82 627'942 50, 2/40O 2002 Rubious Jr. 3/26/80 75O,V0O 83 566.00@ 48'r 00 2003 Salcm Jr. 3/26/OV 75O,O00 3/1/83 547`760 465`8VO 2003 Namchester 3/26/2O 750,0O0 2/U82 75O`0OO 6O0,0 00 2002 Honacan High 3/26/8O 75�.0V0 5/1/82 52V`53Y 416`000 20V2 Tota} 6,25V,000 5`102`874 4,084`301) Hatu�o [iementary 7/8/8� 000.000 4/U83 1.V0V`0V0 �Q,000 2003 Clover HiD High 7/22/811 �`000,0V0 3/U84 966,854 B7V`30V 20O4 Manoeotpr High 7/22/8� 1,0VV`000 6/i/84 1.000,O00 700/000 20V4 Totai 2`000,0OV l`966.854 1/770.300 8ellwood 1/0/82 �0`0N 3/1/B5 �0,�N ��,�0 2OV5 ��lat |/13/82 �Q/0N ��/15/85 �V,NN 712,�� 20O6 Air 1/13/82 1100V.V00 / 0` 95/NBun 2005 Chalkley �/13/82 60O,0VO 3/\/85 6VV.0VV 570/V00 2005 Crestw000 �/�3/82 6VV/000 3/1/B5 6V0,0O0 570.000 2O05 Curtis �/�3/O2 6OO,000 3/1/85 6O0`V00 57O/0VO 20O5 Davis �/13/92 60V'00011 3/1/85 600`000 570`060 2005 1/13/82 60V`O0h 3/�/85 600`0VV 576,OVO 2005 Bird 1/�3/82 1,00V`0V0 1�/>/84 98V,315 882,0OO 2OO4 Natoaca Hi;h 8/82 1`0O0,00O �1/1/D4 0VO 90011000 '604 Meadowbruok �/I3/B2 500,VOV 1/1/84 500,O00 425`0V0 2VV4 7homa� Da�e l/13/O2 \,000.000 6/�/85 1,0O0/00V 95O,0V0 2005 �otal 8,O5V`OOV 8`83V1315 8`239`500 5. B. Gates 2/24/82 2.00O,O00 9/i/8� 2`0OO,0OV l,800`�OV 2OV4 3pnito Ro�d Elem. 2/24/82 2500V`VV0 9/l/R5 2/0VV.VVV 1`9O0,00O 2066 New Nidlothian Hi�h 2/24/B2 2`O0V,0�0 2/1/B5 2,00V`00V 1,9OV.O00 2VO5 Total 6,0O0`00O 6,00V`VO0 5/6V0,0V0 Ettrick ?/27/83 2,000/0O0 8/1/87* 2,0V0,0O0 2.o00,0O0 2VV6* Gordon 7/27/83 ?5O,01V 2/l/87* 75V.O0V 750,000 OV6* Harmwgate 7/27/B3 75O/V00 BL/87* 750`OV� 75V,�0V 2VO�* Carver Jr. 7/27/83 75O,00V 8/1/87* 756,VVV 75V,OOO 2006* Che�ter Midole 7/27/83 500`VOV 2/87* 50O/OVV 500,000 2006* F. C. Jr. 7/27/83 50O,000 2/1/87* 58V`V00 5OV,0V0 2006* To�al 5/250,V00 5/25V,0O0 5,25C`0�V Hopkins 3/28/84 ,50A`006 6/1/87* 1,500/000 \.5O6`V00 2567* West Prov. Elem. 3/28/84 2`000V0O 6/1/8?* 2,V8V`000 2`O0V 0VV 2OO7* ` ` 03� '' M Hi h onacan g 3/28/84 1 5O0 00V , ` 6/1/B7* 1 5OO �0O ` / � 5O0 O00 , ` 20O7* r*//Q ~ ' �~� �_� �m0 Approved by 8oard of Eqerv\surs C Q N V E 8 S l U N DALANCE FY LOAM TO Pru�ect Date Amuunt Date A Dmunt 1/1/67 BE PAID OUT Ennn hementary 12/12/84 1^500'VVV 6/1/04 1`509`000 1,500.00N 20V7* Has ng 12/\2/84 750/000 6/\RS 750,000 750`000 2007* Watkins \2/12/84 i,000`000 M/87* 1,000`000 110005000 2007* Total 3`250,000 3`250,0O0 3/Z50.000 36V Nest [Am. 2/{3/85 2/V00/NV 6/1/87* 2/VOV`V0V 2`0003000 200R* Enon Bem, Addl. 4/25/85 5001O0V 6/1/87* 500,00V 500,OVV 2007* L. C. Birc 6/26/85 1`50O,00V 6/1/87* 1`500`000 1,500,000 2008* Chester middle M/85 1`500`000 2/1/87* 1`5001000 1/50O`VV0 20O8* Tech Center 6/26/85 500,VO0 12/1/87* 50V`V0V 500.0OV 2008* C\over Hill High 6/26/85 2,000,0OV 12/1/87* 2/000/000 2.0VO`000 2008* Crestwond Elpm. 6/26/85 300,000 12/1/87* 30V`00V 30V,0O0 2008* Davis Elementary 6/26/85 300,000 !2/1/87+ 300`000 300`0V0 200B* O. B. Gates 6/26/85 15500,0OO 12/1/87* 1,5001000 1`500`000 2008* Meaduwbrook 6/26/85 1,000.V00 !2/1/87* 1,000,V00 1`OV0,0VV 2088* Midlothian High 6/26/85 1175V,0O0 6/1/87* 1`750/V00 1`750`VV0 20OR* New Eam. (Central) 6/26/85 2,OV0,O00 12/1/87* 2,V00,V0V 25000.O00 2008* New Eon Beta ) 6/26/85 2,000,000 12/1/87* 2,0VO`000 2,V0V`V0O 2008* New EAm.(36O/Coarthouse> 6/26/85 2.000`000 12/1/87* 2/000,000 2`0005000 2008* 6/26/85 75V000 12/1/87* 7505000 7505000 2008* yroviunce Jr. Hells Elementary 6/26/85 15750.000 12/\/67* 1/750`0VV 1/750.000 2V08* ToK 0,850`000 18`850,000 18585V`V0V Meadowom»k 6/25/86 1`000.0O0 8/1/88* 1,00V,V0O 1^000`000 2009* TOTAL LITERARY LQANS 61,450r000 60,090/10 57,265,750 e a 7 a1 m O 0 1n u r` I*- oo to O to C of N C` m of ra J- L ro CA CP -� rr O to Ol o- in U1 (U m r` � of It J -0 7C) O [` O 10 O In a) O Ln (U 0 m r+ � 3 a1 c O O O 't O O O Ul a1 •,j O O `0 O O O q +' O O co O O O 3 CO 0 0 O 0 0 O LL a , } lL Ci F- Lo O S S- 0 a H r Cl. E J co ¢ o F- 4- w w 4" m Ol r+ N N •0 Q `0 F N UI u co It of — O 03 [n C N O It ' r+ Z ' _0 ra4- C� s- i r` In z ro C ro 14 ' m N O Q O m 4-- O O O U q ro U Q IL O O It O O Q s- ro 0_ Z7 Z7 to - m O m z 4- +' C al Ln L F- -0 O LnLn -" CCD u IL :0 ro -4 ro L- J 0= a' F- O C +' ro a � o a o a o a) q +� O O O O O _0 m � c. L n u i Ui u� N m W >- CL s_ a1 :L o z o r" s � Q a U n O Q ro o i -P Ol L 1-1 -4 .0 CU NO L..Ul ro a1 co 0l In O ro -O a1 a1 > r` .+ m of Q } �° s o Ln r z 4- � L O S- L 'D ri 4-3 ro �- ra O N U 1- co 0, �+ C al '-4 01 U .-q -n m . H ra -4 cu m 4, r •H 3 u ro ra r- L O a1 ro O +' O ro 47 E > al 0 Ln L O -r +' 'O 7 + a1 _-q ro ro ..-r 0 C or 1 ' + 1%W CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA REPORTS 11.G.2. MEETING DATE January 28, 1987 REPORT ON- Services Commission's 1987 Public Forum As part of its grant objectives, the Youth Services Commission is required to provide a Public Forum where concerns about youth can be expressed. Acting on a Board of Supervisors resolution of August 27, 1986 requesting that the Youth Services Commission give priority to substance abuse issues, and on the basis of community and agency feedback regarding critical problems of youth in Chesterfield County, the Youth Services Commission proposes to hold its public forum on the problem of substance abuse. The Youth Services Commission has adopted a novel approach to its Public Forum which stresses student involvement and emphasizes a focus on community conditions that influence substance abuse among youth. The Commission intends to sponsor an assembly program in each Chesterfield County high school. The purpose of the assembly will be to solicit students' perspectives on the problems they feel are most urgent and in need of attention. Through supervised discussion groups, the students will brainstorm about issues of greatest concern and will identify potential solutions. Student representatives, with the help of the Office on Youth and Youth Services Commission, will synthesize the lists of problems and recommendations from each high school into a Master Youth Agenda for Chesterfield County. This agenda and a proposed action plan to address the problems identified will be presented to the Youth Services Commission, Board of Supervisors, and School Board. (Continued on next page) ATTACHMENTS: YES C3 NO SIGNATURE o OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR n In Agenda Item January 28, 1986 Youth Services Commission's 1987 Public Forum Page 2 There are several benefits to this approach for the public forum. First, the Youth Services Commission feels it is essential to hear from youth who encounter the problems and pressures of substance abuse every day. Assemblies will let the students know that their concerns are considered important. Second, student involvement in identifying problems and recommending alternatives will increase young people's investment in implementing solutions and will provide opportunities for students to take leadership on important issues. A third valuable benefit is that the Master Youth Agenda will provide a previously unavailable "data base" of youth concerns and needs to the Youth Services Commission and community agencies serving youth. This information will assist agencies in developing their programming. Combined with feedback from citizens and agencies collected through the Youth Services Commission's community needs assessment, information from the Master Youth Agenda will form the basis of the comprehensive youth services plan for Chesterfield County. In terms of implementation, the Youth Services Commission plans to conduct the high school assemblies during late February and early March. The Master Youth Agenda will be presented to the Youth Services Commission at its March meeting. The Commission will invite members of organizations such as the Chesterfield Action Council, Community Services Board, and PTA, and will publicize the meeting in order to secure attendance of the general public. It is hoped that the Board of Supervisors will provide an opportunity for student representatives to present the Youth Agenda and their recommendations for action. r *AW CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , AGENDA REPORTS s MEETING DATE: January 28, 1987 REPORT ON: Schedule of Work Sessions 11.G.3. A schedule of work sessions necessary for the lst quarter of 1987 will be forwarded to the Board prior to Wednesday's meeting. ATTACHMENTS: YES O NO Mx SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR f y BOARD OF SUPERVISORS R. GARLAND DODD, CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT HARRY G. DAN IEL, VICE CHAIRMAN DALE DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY4 P.O. BOX 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 (804) 748-1211 µfiElllC COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RICHARD L. HEDRICK TO: The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Mr. Richard L. Hedrick, County Administrator�--Ok DATE: January 27, 1987 SUBJECT: Recommended Work Session Schedule The following is a recommended work session schedule for the next three months. Following the schedule are subjects which we would recommend for work sessions during the remainder of the year: DATE SUBJECT TIME NEEDED 2-11-87 I. Budget Work Session: 3 hours a. Overview of Budget b. Current Year c. Revenues d. Target Budgets e. Capital Improvement Program f. Performance Appraisal II. Historic Sites Special I. Budget Work Session 3 hours Work Session a. Departmental Budgets and (Date to be Work Plans determined) b. Other Departmental Issues 1. Community Service Board Annual Meeting Prior to Budget Adoption 2. Social Services Board Annual Meeting Prior to Budget Adoption 3. Library Study - V.C.U. Study 4. School Budget Presentation c. League of Women Voters - The League of Women Voters has requested a work session with the Board prior to budget adoption. IF s The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors January 27, 1987 Page 2 DATE SUBJECT TIME NEEDED 3-11-87 I. Budget Work Session 3 hours a. Review County Administrator's Proposed Budget b. Consider and Approve Tax Rates II. Community Development Items a. R-88 Zoning b. Overlay District Proposals 4-1-87* I. Public Hearing 2 hours 7:00 p.m. a. Budget b. Tax Rates *Note: This will need to be scheduled earlier if Board Members go on overseas recruiting trip. 4-8-87 I. Airport Industrial Park 3 hours II. Street Light Policy With Planning Commission III. Capital Improvement Program 5-13-87 I. Benefits Study Results 3 hours II. Health Care Insurance Issues Dinner III. Annual Meeting with Volunteer 2 hours Fire Chiefs Other work sessions on the following subjects are recommended during the remainder of the year: a. Nursing Home - Meet with Advisory Committee to discuss role of the Nursing Home in long range health care. b. Human Services - Trends in services, future direction, etc. c. Economic Development trends. d. Demographics - Trends and changes in the County's demographic makeup. f 0 ■ n The Honorable Members of the Hoard of Supervisors January 27, 1987 Page 3 e. Public Safety - Trends and issues related to public safety. f. Growth Management - Long range growth issues. g. Utilities Master Plans - Update on progress on master plans. h. Legislative Program 1988 i. MEDC and Contour RLH:res BOARD OF SUPERVISORS R. GARLAND DODD, CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT HARRYG. DANIEL, VICE CHAIRMAN DALE DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT G JOAN GIRONE MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES / MATOACA DISTRICT` CHESTERFIELD COUNTY ` P.O. BOX 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 (804) 748-1211 � NE►E1.D r� u �RG1N�` COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RICHARD L. HEDRICK TO: The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Mr. Richard L. Hedrick, County Administrator DATE: January 28, 1987 SUBJECT: Recommended Work Session Schedule The following is a recommended work session schedule for the next three months which represents changes to the list sent out yesterday as suggested by the Chairman after meeting with staff. Following the schedule are subjects which we would recommend for work sessions during the remainder of the year. DATE SUBJECT TIME NEEDED 2-11-87 I. Budget Work Session: 3 hours 2:00-5:00 p.m. a. Overview of Budget b. Current Year c. Revenues d. Target Budgets e. Capital Improvement Program Special I. Budget Work Session 3 hours Work Session a. Departmental Budgets and 2-18-87 Work Plans 2:00-5:00 p.m. b. Library Study - V.C.U. Dinner at c. School Budget Presentation 2 hours Magnolia Grange 5 : 0 0 3-11-87 I. Budget Work Session 3 hours 2:00-5:00 p.m. a. Review County Administrator's Proposed Budget b. Consider and Approve Advertising of Tax Rates 3 M The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors January 28, 1987 Page 2 DATE SUBJECT TIME NEEDED 4-1-87 I. Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. a. Budget b. Tax Rates 4-8-87 I. Airport Industrial Park 3 hours 2:00- II. Community Development Items 5:00 p.m. a. R-88 Zoning b. Overlay District Proposals III. Street Light Policy With Planning Commission IV. Capital Improvement Program 5-13-87 I. Employee Relations Issues 3 hours 2:00- a. Benefits Study Results 5:00 p.m. b. Health Care Insurance Issues c. Employee Performance Appraisal Dinner II. Annu l Meeting with Volunteer 2 hours :00- Fire fiefs 7:'08--p.m. Other work sessions on the following subjects are recommended during the remainder of the year. The Board will need to indicate priorities for scheduling. a. Long range health care requirements and issues. b. Human Services - Trends in services, future direction, etc. c. Economic Development trends. d. Demographics - Trends and changes in the County's demographic makeup. e. Public Safety - Trends and issues related to public safety. f. Growth Management - Long range growth issues. g. Utilities Master Plans - Update on progress on master plans. h. Legislative Program 1988 The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors January 28, 1987 Page 3 i. MEDC and Contour j. Results of Planning and Utilities Management Studies k. Landfill Management 1. Annu4,,l Mee 'ngs: 1. Co unity Services Board 2. Soci Ser 'ces Board NOTE: 1. Historic Sites item will be handled on regular agenda. f, 2. League of Women Voters will be scheduled under Citizen's Comments on February 11, 1987 or March 11, 1987. COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD VIRGINIA MEMO TO: The H norable Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: La a Ramsey, Asst. County Administrator DATE: January 27, 1987 RE: Duties of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Attached is a list of the duties and responsibilities of the Clerk to the Board. If you have any questions or if I can,,;be of any further assistance, please let me know. Attachment EAF CLASS TITLE: Clerk to the Board DEFINITION: 7412 Under general direction of the County Administrator; per- forms work of considerable difficulty in administering and coordinating functions of the Board of Supervisors; and performs related work as required. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: Maintains the official records of all public meetings of the Board of Supervisors, compiles the agenda for Board meet- ings; attends staff meetings and agenda review meetings; ensures that data systems are operating properly; reviews calendars with Board members; maintains records on budget status; reviews and revises minutes of meetings; researches past County actions for public officials and citizens; prepares the budget and approves payments of Board expendi- tures; supervises the maintenance of filing system for official Board documents; prepares special reports; coordi- nates and supervises all staff work to ensure timely and accurate completion of assigned tasks; such tasks performed by subordinates may include but are not limited to: com- pilation and revision of the minutes for Board of Supervi- sor's meetings; coordinating and advising Board members regarding correspondence received; preparing correspondence at the request of a Board member; advertising in newspapers related to various legal requirements; referring citizen calls; coordinating meetings for Board members; compiling agenda after approved by the County Administrator; updating committee directory; calls agenda at Board of Supervisor meetings and may read Board resolutions at the meetings. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS: Considerable knowledge of County government functions and operation; considerable knowledge of the principles and practices of effective supervision; some knowledge of modern management principles and practices; considerable knowledge of business etiquette and public relations; good knowledge of word processing and information retrieval systems. M M 7412 pg- Considerable skill in supervising the work of subordinates, in establishing a good rapport with public officials and the general public; in office organization, researching informa- tion, and in written and verbal communication. SUGGESTED TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE: Completion of core course requirements for a baccalaureate degree in public administration, business administration, or related field and at least 5 years of experience in general office management including supervisory experience; or an equivalent combination of training and experience. Member- ship in the Virginia Municipal Clerks Association preferred. glatWilrilin Re sewed/Date 3 S M M MOBILE HOME REPORT The Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, on January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m. in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Virginia, will take under consideration the granting of a Mobile Home Permit on the parcel of land described herein. It shall be the policy of the Board of Supervisors that approval of a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on a parcel of land shall be subject to com- pliance with the following Standard Conditions: 1. The applicant shall be the owner and occupant of the mobile home. 2. No lot or parcel may be rented or leased for use as a mobile home site, nor shall any mobile home be used for rental property. Only one (1) mobile home shall be permitted to be parked on an individual lot or parcel. 3. The minimum lot size, yard setbacks, required front yard, and other zoning requirements of the applicable zoning district shall be complied with, except that no mobile home shall be located closer than 20 feet to any existing residence. 4. No additional permanent -type living space may be added onto a mobile home. All mobile homes shall be skirted but shall not be placed on a permanent foundation. 5. Where public (County) water and/or sewer are available, they shall be used. 6. Upon being granted a Mobile Home Permit, the applicant shall then obtain the necessary permits from the Office of the Building Offi- cial. This shall be done prior to the installation or relocation of the mobile home. 7. Any violation of the above conditions shall be grounds for revoca- tion of the Mobile Home Permit. n *This case was deferred from a previous session by the Board of Supervisors to their January 28, 1987, meeting. A copy of this application is on file at the Planning Department, Development Review Division, Administration Building, Room 203, Courthouse Complex, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. of each regular business day. APPLICANT-It011)i-AGENT MUST BE PRESENT AT HEARING RA Ja es M. Sc iavo Zoning A4ministraltion Manager 3 BSJAN7/JAN28Z . • wo o� ssill b' Cf S' .,1111� \ \ v �P .0 v \ G v i i I I• V • II ', V Q // I• II Y �' I1 V I II I I I I � ••B 2 M PUBLIC NOTICE The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Court- house, Chesterfield, Virginia, will take under consideration the rezoning and the granting of Conditional Uses on the parcels of land described herein. * 41: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, KAREN ABSE AND GUY SPILLER request a Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk excep- tions in an Agricultural (A) District on a 1.8 acre parcel fronting approxi- mately 230 feet on the east line of Ruthers Road, approximately 20 feet north of Provincetown Drive. Tax Map 28-4 (1) Parcel 20 (Sheet 8). * 1: In Bermuda Magisterial District, THOMAS F. BECK requests amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 86SO57 and 86SO94) relative to buffer requirements in a General Business (B-3) District on a 3.55 acre parcel fronting approximately 280 feet on the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approximately 365 feet on the south line of Drewrys Bluff Road, and located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 67-3 (1) Parcel 51 (Sheet 23). 86S In Matoaca Magisterial District, SOVRAN BANK, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR CHOVIA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, N.A. requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-9) to Light Industrial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions on a 152.08 acre parcel fronting approximately 580 feet on the south line of Hull Street Road, also fronting on the northeast and southwest lines of Tomahawk Drive. Tax Map 62-6 (1) Parcels 8, 9, and 12; Tax Map 62-10 (1) Parcels 4, 10, 11, and 15; and Tax Map 62-11 (1) Parcels 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 20 (Sheet 20). 86S155: In Midlothian Magisterial District, WILLIAM R. BRADLEY requests a L-Eonditional Use Planned Development to permit a mortuary service business in a Convenience Business (B-1) District on a 0.5 acre parcel fronting approximate- ly 100 feet on the west line of Buford Road, approximately 330 feet south of North Providence Road. Tax Map 18-16 (1) Parcel 43 (Sheet 8). 86S157 In Matoaca Magisterial District, PARKER OIL COMPANY requests Condi- al Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions in Residen- tial (R-7) and Convenience Business (B-1) Districts on a 1.2 acre parcel fronting approximately 358 feet on the east line of Harrowgate Road, also fronting approximately 125 feet on the south line of Tarris Lane, and located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 132-16 (2) Locust Grove, Section A, Lots 1, 38, and 39 (Sheet 41). �bSt In Midlothian Magisterial District, DWIGHT M. MYERS requests rezon- ing from Agricultural (A) to Convenience Business (B-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit bulk exceptions on a 0.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 103 feet on the north line of Midlothian Turnpike, approximately 650 feet east of Johnston Willis Drive. Tax Map 17-6 (1) Parcel 6 (Sheet 8). *These cases were deferred from a previous session of the Board of Supervisors to their January 28, 1987, meeting. µ ' S 2. In Clover Hill Magisterial District, DEWEY L. HURLEY, SR. requests a Cond tional Use to permit a second dwelling on one (1) parcel of land. This request lies in an Agricultural (A) District on a 13.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 100 feet on the east line of Newbys Bridge Road, approximately 1,150 feet south of Burnett Drive. Tax Map 64 (1) Parcels 44 and 122 (Sheet 21). S165: In Matoaca Magisterial District, MAGNOLIA INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES requests amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 84S178) rela- tive to paving and sign requirements. This request lies in a Convenience Business (B-1) District on a 2.7 acre parcel fronting approximately 230 feet on the south line of Iron Bridge Road, approximately 360 feet east of Beach. Road. Tax Map 95-8 (1) Parcels 40 and 42 and Part of Parcel 46 (Sheet 31). 86 6: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, JAMES R. GRUBBS, JR. requests anzoning from Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-7) to Residential (R-15) on 80.0 acre parcel lying at the southern termini of Briarwick Drive and Amb�leside Drive. Tax Map 50-13 (1) Part of Parcel 3 (Sheet 14). 1/86S167: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, ROPER BROTHERS, INC. requests Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions in an Agricultural (A) District on a 3.4 acre parcel fronting approximately 320 feet on the south line of Genito Road, also fronting approximately 500 feet on Warbro Road, and located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 48-3 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheet 13). 86S16 . In Matoaca Magisterial District, MARCO INVESTMENT, INC. requests repohing from Residential (R-15) to Residential (R-9) on a 1.04 acre parcel ing approximately 290 feet off the southwest line of Sunfield Drive, measured from the point at its intersection with Stigall Drive. Tax Map 63-5 (1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 21). 8 4: In Midlothian Magisterial District, LONDONBERRY CORPORATION requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Office Business (0) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use exceptions on a 3.7 acre parcel fronting approximately 250 feet on the east line of Huguenot Road, approximately 110 feet north of Featherstone Drive. Tax Map 8-16 (1) Parcel 12 (Sheets 2 and 7) . 87SO06: In Bermuda Magisterial District, W.O. GRUBB requests rezoning from Residential (R-7) to General Business (B-3) with Conditional Use Planned Development on a 1.1 acre parcel fronting approximately 245 feet on the north line of Goolsby Avenue, approximately 90 feet east of Collindale Road. Tax Map 53-3 (2) Falling Creek, Part of Lot 7 (Sheet 16). 87SO13: In Midlothian Magisterial District, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY requests amendment to previously granted Conditional Use Planned Development (Case z, 82S031) in a Residential (R-40) District on a parcel fronting the east line of bious Crossing Drive at its intersection with Ambergate Drive, and located in the vicinity of Robious Middle School. Tax Map 8-12 (1) Part of Parcel 3 and Part of Parcel 6 (Sheet 2). 2 )BSJAN7/JAN28A Copies of these amendments are on file in the Planning Department at the Chesterfield Administration Building, Room 203, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. of each regu- lar business day. APPLICANTS AND/OR AGENT MUST BE PRESENT AT HEARING. All persons favoring or opposing the granting of the above requests are invit- ed to appear at the time and place herein stated. Thomas E. Jacobson, Director Planning Department 3 BSJAN7/JAN28A M M ADDENDUM PUBLIC NOTICE The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Court- house, Chesterfield, Virginia, will take under consideration the rezoning and the granting of Conditional Use on the parcel of land described herein. 87SO02: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, DICK STRAUSS SUZUKI, INC. re- quests rezoning from Convenience Business (B-1) to Light Industrial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions on a 1.8 acre parcel fronting approximately 148 feet on the south line of Midlothian Turnpike, approximately 400 feet east of Johnston Willis Drive. Tax Map 17-10 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheet 8). Copies of this amendment are on file in the Planning Department at the Chesterfield Administration Building, Room 203, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. of each regu- lar business day. APPLICANTS AND/OR AGENT MUST BE PRESENT AT HEARING. All persons favoring or opposing the granting of the above request are invited to appear at the time and place herein stated. Thomas E. Jaco son, Director Planning Department BSJAN7/JAN28AA JaattefY-P9s-1984-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 87SO13 Chesterfield County Midlothian Magisterial District East line of Robious Crossing Drive REQUEST: Amendment of a previously granted Conditional Use Planned Develop- ment (82SO31) to remove approximately 4.6 acres from the overall planned development. A County fire station is proposed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION THE COMMISSION DEFERRED THIS REQUEST FOR THIRTY (30) DAYS TO FEBRUARY 17, 1987, PENDING THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DECISION ON THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST TO PERMIT A FIRE STATION ON THE SUBJECT SITE. THE BOARD MUST, THERE- FORE, DEFER THIS REQUEST TO ALLOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reason: A. The requirements of the Conditional Use Planned Development were designed to regulate a 166 acre office, commercial, and residential development. Since the request site will not be a part of the overall development as originally conceived, removal of the acreage from the Conditional Use Planned Development requirements would be appropriate. B. The issues regarding land use, access, buffers, site design, etc. which are addressed by the current requirements of the Conditional Use Planned Development are now being addressed by the Board of Zoning Appeals to permit a fire station through a Special Exception. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: East line of Robious Crossing Drive at its intersection with Ambergate Drive. Tax Map 8-12 (1) Part of Parcel 3 and Part of Parcel 6 (Sheet 2). Existing Zoning: R-40 with Conditional Use Planned Development Size: 4.6 acres Existing Land Use: Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: Utilities; Environmental Engineering; Fire Service; Transportation: General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transporta- tion Plan): DISCUSSION Vacant North - R-40; Public/semi-public South - R-TH with Conditional Use Planned Development; Vacant East - R-40 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Vacant West - R-40 and R-25; Single family residential This request will have no impact on these facilities. Extension of public water and sewer; provisions of erosion control mea- sures and proper drainage; and proper access will be addressed through the Spe- cial Exception and site plan review process. Public/semi-public On November 24, 1982, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable rec- ommendation from the Planning Commission, rezoned the request parcel in conjunction with the rezoning of the surrounding area to the south and east to permit a mixed use development. In conjunction with the rezon- ing, a Conditional Use Planned Development was granted encompassing a total of 166 acres, most commonly known as Belgrade. The rezoning and Conditional Use Planned Development was granted subject to numerous conditions. Recently, the County of Chesterfield has purchased 3.1 acres and is in the process of purchasing an additional 1.537 acres of the Residential (R-40) tract with the intent of developing a fire station. A Special Exception is being sought from the Board of Zoning Appeals to permit the fire station in a Residential (R-40) District. On December 3, 1986, the Board of Zoning Appeals considered the Special Exception, but deferred action until February 4, 1987, to allow the applicant to meet with area property owners and to allow the County to pursue the possibility of purchasing additional property. The present request is to remove the subject parcel from the Conditional Use Planned Development requirements which were primarily designed to address development of the entire 166 acre tract. The issues relative to buffers, access, land use, site design, etc. are now being addressed by the Board of Zoning Appeals. 2 8 13/BSJAN7/JAN28T Staff would, therefore, recommend approval of removing the 4.6 acres of the Conditional Use Planned Development. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/87): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission deferred this request for thirty (30) days pending the Board of Zoning Appeals decision on the request for a Special Exception to permit a fire station on this site. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, and Rowe. ABSENT: Messrs. Belcher and Cowan. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 3 87SO13/BSJAN7/JAN28T BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES November 24, 1982 Supervisors in Attendance: Mrs. Joan Girone, Chairman i'Ir. -Harry G. Daniel, vice Chairman Mr. C. L. Bookman Mr. J. Royall Robertson Mr. Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator Supervisors Absent: Mr. R. Garland Dodd 825031 (Amended) Staff in Attendance: Mr. Stanley Balderson, vir. of Tplanning Mr. Robert Galusha, Personnel Director Mr. James Gillentine, Admin. of Nursing Home Mr. Phil Hester, Dir. of Parks and Recreation Mr. Elmer Hodge, Dir. of Management Services Mr. William Howell, Dir. of General Services Mr. Robert Masden, Dir. of Human Services Mr. Steve Micas, County Attornev Mr. Jeffrey Muzzy, Dir. of Communitv Develop. Mr. Richard McElfish, Env. Engineer Mr. David Reeve, Dir. of Juvenile Detention Home Ms. Jean Smith, Dir. of Social Services Mr. Robert Wagenknecht, Library Director Dir. David Welchons, Asst. Dir. of Utilities Dir. Dexter Williams, Chief of Trans. Plan. Mr. George Woodall, Dir. of Economic Development In Midlothian Magisterial District, MIDLOTHIAN EFTERPRISES requested rezoning from Residential (R-40) to Residential Townhouse -For -Sale (R-TH) of 15.0 acres; and to Office Business: (0) of 45 acres plus a Conditional Use Planned Development encompassing a 166.14 acre tract to permit use and bulk exceptions to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. This parcel fronts approximately 3,700 feet on Huguenot Road, also fronts approximately 2,300 feet on Robious Road and is located is the northeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads and is better known as Belgrade. Tax Map 8-12 (1) Parcels 3 and 4 and T D1 9-9 (1) Parcels 5, 7 and 8 (Sheets 2 and 3). Mr. Balderson stated the Planning Commission had recommended approval of this request subject to certain conditions. He stated further that the applicant had a traffic study prepared which indicated basically the same facts as outline in the Staff Report. Mr. Bryce Powell was present representing the applicant and stated this plan has taken twelve months to develop, that it is a sensitive plan, that there is heavy commercial use to the south. He stated that the home is in excess of 100 years old and their plans are to incorporate the home and magnolia tree -lined drive into their scheme of the development. He stated that it is an internalizing plan and has limited access to Robious and Huguenot Roads. He stated they also plan to phase the development with with improvements scheduled by the Highway Department which is to four lane Huguenot Road. He stated this development may not be a positive influence in the area but they will try to help as much as possible to reduce/eliminate any detrimental impacts. Mrs. Dorothy Armstrong, Chairman and representative for the Heritage Commission, stated that they are pleased to be able to address the Board and request additional considerations of the developer for Belgrade. She inquired what was planned for the immediate area around the house. Mr. Powell stated the site plan had not yet been developed. Mrs_ Armstrong stated that she felt the historical value of the property should have been addressed by staff as well which had not been done. She stated that Virginia is behind other states in recognizing the need for preservation of our heritage by action or laws in the County. She stated that some landscaping considerations should be given to the formal garden in back of the house which includes English boxwoods, the crepe myrtles, the American and Japanese boxwoods, the magnificent holly, the unmarked cemetery, the unique iron fence around the cemetery and the two dependency buildings. She stated she was not overly concerned about the American and Japanese boxwoods as she was the other.items. She stated that the previous owner's will is recorded here in the County and stated also that she was disturbed that there are leaks in the house which could cause deterioration. She stated she felt this should be maintained as an historical site. When asked if this -home were listed with tine -Historical Landmark -Society, she stated that it is listed as a site with historical value but that the property owners have to request that a sign be located there. Mr. Powell stated he was an agent for the developer and that he could not make any concessions regarding the development of the property. He stated that he felt safe in sav_inq that the house, the magnolia driveway and the cemetery would be preserved. He stated but he could not make commitments on special considerations being given to the other specifics. Mrs. Girone stated that she would like funeral homes to be restricted, that if there are any veterinary hospitals that they have no overnight stay and no outside runs and that office warehouses be limited to computer companies. Mr. Powell agreed with all of these requests. r Mrs. Girone stated that the roads and traffic are a major issue as this is a major intersection of the area. She stated that the road through the project will provide access to the community and focal point of this development. She stated that homes, etc. will not enter onto Robious and Huguenot Roads and Huguenot Road will be widened. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board approved this request subject to the following conditions and Mrs. Girone requested that special consideration be given to the two dependency buildings, the cemetery and the large holly tree and english boxwoods: 1. The developer shall provide an accurate account df the drainage situation showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and surrounding area. The developer shall submit a plan to Environmental Engineering providing for on- and off -site drainage facilities to be utilized in the hydraulic engineering of this project. This plan shall be approved by Environmental Engineering prior to the clearing of any land and implemented prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit (Environmental Engineering). 2. The developer shall submit a plan for erosion and sediment control to Environmental Engineering for approval. This plan shall adhere to the requirements of the "Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Second Edition 1980," prepared by the Virginia Soil and water Conservation Commission. This plan shall be approved by Environmental Engineering prior to the issuance of any building permit, and implemented prior to the clearing of any land (Environmental Engineering). 3. All existing homes located downstream and adjacent to the headwaters of Powhite Creek, between the subject property and the Girl Scout Property Dam, shall be protected from a 100 year storm (i.e., finished floor one (1) foot above the 100 year flood plain elevation). A detailed hydraulic analysis shall be submitted to Environmental Engineering for approval to verify the above condition (Environmental Engineering).. 4. Public water and sewer shall be used. The developer shall submit water and sewer plans to the Utilities Department for approval prior to the issuance of any building permit. All necessary water, sewer and drainage easements, as may be determined by the County Right of Play Engineer, shall be granted to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, prior to the issuance of any building permit (Utilities) . 5. Due to the limited capacity of the existing sewer lines, either the density of the development shall be reduced to no more than ten (10) persons per acre, or the developer shall perform a hydraulic analysis which verifies that the sewer line has the capacity to serve this deveiopment'and any additional development of vacant property within the drainage area (Utilities). 6. In connction with submission o.,e first schematic plan, the developer shall submit a plan for construction of roads in the development. This plan shall show the following items of information: A. The proposed collector road, between Huguenot Road and the school access road, as well as the school access road, between the proposed collector road and Robious Road, shall be constructed initially_ as a two (2) lane facility with provisions for future widening to four (4) lanes with a minimum of a sixteen (16) foot median and dedication of adequate right of way. B. Turn lanes, at locations deemed necessary by the Planning Department and the VDH&T, shall be provided along both the proposed collector road, between Huguenot Road and the school access road, and along the school access road, between the collector road and Robious Road. These lanes shall be constructed in conjunction with the initial two-lane construction and the eventual four -lane construction. These lanes shall be constructed to the VDH&T specifications. C. An internal public road network which serves the office and office/retail tracts shall be designed. These roads shall be constructed to a minimum of thirtv-six (36) feet of pavement with curb and gutter, without a median. The width orf pavement shall not include curb and gutter width. Turn lanes shall'be constructed l along the roads at their intersections with the major collector road through the development. These turn lanes shall be constructed to the VDH&T specifications. D. Huguenot Road shall be widened at its intersection with the proposed collector road through the project for the purpose of providing both left and right turn storage lanes for northbound and southbound Huguenot Road traffic. E. Robious Road shall be widened at its intersection with the school access road for the purpose of providing left and right turn storage lanes for eastbound and westbound Robious Road traffic. F. The plan shall reflect all proposed access points along the internal road network into the various tracts of development. .7. The initial two (2) lanes and turn lanes of the collector road, between Huguenot Road and the school access road, and the existing two (2) lanes and required turn lanes of the school access road, between the collector road and Robious Road, shall be conveyed/constructed and.accepted for State - maintenance prior to -the issuance of any occupancy permit. At the time of State acceptance, the developer shall provide sufficient assurances to the. VDH&T to guarantee eventual construction of additional lanes/pavements, as specified in Condition #6. 8 Prior to the release of any occupancy permit for more than ninety-two (92) residential units, or for more than 30,000 square feet of office or business development, or for any mixture of uses which results in an equivalent vehicle per day generation, the collector road, between Huguenot Road and the school access road, and the school access road, between the collector road and Robious Road, shall be constructed as a four (4) lane facility. The requirement for four (4) lanes may be reduced to two (2) lanes upon approval by the County Planning Department if the developer -provides sufficient documentation that restricted access and s future traffic volumes do not warrant four (4) lanes. 9. A public roadway(s) through the office and office/retail tracts as described in Condition 6C, shall be constructed prior to the release of any occupancy permit for more than 30,000 square feet of business and/or office space. 10. Right of way on Robious and Huguenot Roads shall be dedicated according to the most current plan for widening at the time of submittal of the plans specified in Condition #6. This right of way shall be dedicated prior to the release of any building permits. 11. Other than the north/south collector road, there shall be no access to Robious and/or Huguenot Roads. 12. At the time of submittal of plans specified in Condition T6, if it is the determination of the VDH&T that traffic signals are warranted within the frame of this proposed development, the developer shall provide one-half (1/2) the cost of traffic signals, as may be specified by the VDH&T. 13. In the office and commercial tracts, parking areas shall have -at least ten (10) square feet of interior landscaping for every two (2) parking spaces. Each landscaped area shall contain a minimum of fifty (50) square feet, and shall have a minimum dimension of at least five (5) square feet and shall include at least one (1) tree, having a clear trunk of at least five (5) feet, with the remaining area adequately landscaped with shrubs, ground cover or other authorized landscaping material, not to exceed three (3) feet in height. The total number of trees shall not be less than one (1) for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of the required interior landscaped area. Such landscaped area shall be located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required landscaped areas. 14. In commercial and office tracts, a strip of land at least five (5) feet in depth, located between the abutting right of way and the off-street parking areas or other vehicular use areas, which is exposed to an abutting right of way, shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall include one (1) tree for each fifty (50) lineal feet, or fraction thereof. Such trees shall be located between the abutting right of way and off-street parking areas or other vehicular use areas and shall be planted in an area of at least twenty-five (25) square feet with a dimension of at least five (5) feet. The remainder of the required landscaped area shall be planted with grass, ground cover or other landscaped treatment, excluding pavement. All property other than the required landscaped strip lying between the right of way and off-street parking area or other vehicular use area shall be planted with grass or other ground cover. 15. A landscaping plan depicting the requirements outlined in Conditions fi* and Ill shall be'submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan submission. •16. In conjunction with the first schematic plan submission, a sign package for the entire development shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval. This package shall include materials, colors and lighting methods for all signF located within the development. The commercial and office development shall be identified by no more than two (2) freestanding signs, one (1) to be located along Robious Road and one (1) along Huguenot Road. Signs within the commercial and office areas shall be as regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for shopping centers. 17. A maximum of thirty (30) percent of the parking spaces required for specific sites or uses may be reduced to nine (9) feet by eighteen (18) feet, provided that appropriate signage designating their use by compact cars solely is erected. Such reduction and signage shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of schematic plan review (this condition supersedes General Conditions (4) of the applicant's textual statement). 18. Compatibility between the different zoninq districts shall be insured by providing an area to be left in a natural wooded state, not less than twenty-five (25) feet in width within the boundaries of all tracts. Where the area is not wooded and not comprised of sufficient vegetation so as to properly insure land use compatibility, additional landscaping and/or other treatment may be required. A plan for these areas shall be submitted to the Planning Commission in conjunction with schematic plan review. 19. Architectural renderings of all residential, commercial and office structures shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval in conjunction with schematic plan review. The architectural style of the buildings shall be as specified in the applicant's textual statement. 20. There shall be no outside storage permitted in either the Office Business (0) or the Convenience Business (B-1) tracts. 21. Development shall be oriented toward the interior of the property away from Huguenot and Robious Roads. The rear and/or side facades of buildings which are visible from Robious and/or Huguenot Roads or from any internal public roads shall have an appearance similar to the front facades. Architectural renderings shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval depicting this requirement. Further, loading facilities shall be screened from view of Huguenot and/or Robious Roads and any internal public roads. A screeninq plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted for approval in conjunction with schematic plan review. 22. Parking within Tracts 2, 3 and 4 shall be restricted to front and side yards of buildings constructed on these tracts. Parking shall be oriented to the interior of the parcels, away from Huguenot and Robious Roads. 23. Within the Office Business (0) tract, office warehousing shall be confined to computer companies (This condition supersedes, Parcel 3 - 0 Office District (B) Use Exceptions (12) of the applicant's textual statement. 24. Within the Office/Retail tract, funeral homes shall be prohibited. Also, veterinary hospitals shall have no overnight stays and no outside runs. (This condition supersedes Parcel 4 - O Office/Retail District, I. Uses Permitted (81) (82) of the applicant's textual statement. 25. The above stated conditions notwithstanding, the Amended Master Plan and textual statement (Revised August 3, 1982) shall be considered the plan of development. Aves: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Daniel, Mr. Bookman and fir. Dodd. Absent: Mr. Dodd. R-40 4/�t�HGT,�N l l HILLANNE L 4 • s� . c "f Slfq O � V Q. r W � O J • �ESL1hCC�/ / / � , �f11f1111111�� R L !GATE I II FJS SCHOOLS \I� ��I I Z r 01 I U� =I c �+�11 11.,.f111f/If111M11111�1111111111111f1 rf• ` I � r � � I . I A • 0 ` I R-TH R •' / Oe 0 -40 k �� ` �� ••,, � ENO •••�•• • ' I��.Ittir+r+tar►+ f�f � •••�•, • NVGU,•�'•••• c c • •� . ` • to 4p Wo .�,•�� • �/ 81 S .. �"t �'' ° .�� '' B-�=�AMEND ..�'•� r �. C. U. P D. >` 8-2 RAY ��,'',•. F `, 1 UGUENOT RD.—a 8'75013-1 w Aeteber-21;-1986-GP6 November-26;-+986-96 January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 865141 Karen Abse and Guy Spiller Clover Hill Magisterial District East line of Ruthers Road REQUEST: A Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk excep- tions in an Agricultural (A) District. A television productions studio and offices are planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, AND 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed land uses, properly conditioned, conform to the Turner Road Corridor Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board may impose conditions which ensure a proper land use transition between existing and future office/commercial uses to the north and residential uses to the south. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) rnunTTTnwq (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by Worley Associates, Architects, dated August 11, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian traffic. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 3. Prior to release of a building permit, thirty-five-(35) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Ruthers Road, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Additional pavement and curb and gutter shall be provided by the Transporta- along Ruthers Road, as deemed necessary tion Department and VDH&T. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 5. A single access shall be permitted to Ruthers Road. This to allow shared access shall be designed and constructed with the adjacent property to the north at such time use it is developed for a non-residential use. The Planning Commission may modify this condition at the time of sche- matic plan review. (T&CPC) (STAFF/CPC) 6. Parking requirements shall be based on the following ratios: Office Area - 6 spaces for the first 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, plus one (1) space for each addi- tional 300 square feet of gross floor area Studio Area - 5 spaces per studio Remaining Area - 1 for each employee, exclusive of office and studio employees (STAFF/CPC) 7. The proposed structures shall employ masonry, wood siding are visible and/or glass materials along the facades which facades shall employ subdued to Ruthers Road. All other colors, compatible with the Ruthers Road facade. There shall be no corrugated metal facades unless approved by the Planning Commission at the time of schematic plan review. The architecture shall be such that it provides a suitable transition between existing and future single office/commercial development to the north and Ele- family residential development to the south. to the Planning vations/renderings shall be submitted Commission for approval in conjunction with schematic plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 8. A single freestanding business sign, not to exceed an a height of aggregate area of fifty (50) square feet and be permitted. All other signs thirteen (13) feet, shall be as regulated by the Office Business (0) District shall for Special Sign Districts. All signs may be externally internally illuminated if the illuminated, but may only be (P) signfield is opaque with translucent letters. (Note: Prior to erection of any signs, sign permits must be obtained.) 2 86GI41/BSJAN7/JAN28G (STAFF/CPC) 9. The parking area shall be landscaped so as to divide and break up the expanse of pavement. Parking areas shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior land- scaping for each space. Each landscaped area shall con- tain a minimum of 100 square feet and shall have a minimum dimension of at least ten (10) feet. The remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs, ground cover or other authorized landscaping material. The total number of trees shall not be less than one (1) for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. Landscaped areas shall be located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required landscaped area. Conceptual plans depicting this require- ment shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval in conjunction with schematic plan review. Detailed plans shall be submitted to the Planning Depart- ment for approval within ninety (90) days of clearing and rough grading. Also, ornamental trees and shrubs shall be planted along Ruthers Road so as to minimize the view of parking areas from Ruthers Road. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. The limits of the Pocosham floodplain along the southern property line shall be maintained as a buffer unless amended by the Planning Commission at the time of schemat- ic plan review. Landscaping and/or fencing shall be provided so as to screen the driveways and parking areas from the adjacent property to the south. Detailed plans depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 7TAFF/CPC) 11. The above conditions notwithstanding, all bulk require- ments of the Office Business (0) District shall apply with the exception of the following: A. The proposed building may be set back fifteen (15) feet from the northern property line. B. The proposed carpentry shop may be set back fifteen (15) feet from the northern and eastern property line. (P) (Note: Prior to obtaining final site plan or building permit approval, schematic plans must be approved by the Planning Commission.) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: East line of Ruthers Road, approximately 20 feet north of Provincetown Drive. Tax Map 28-4 (1) Parcel 20 (Sheet 8). 3 86S141/BSJAN7/JAN28G Existing Zoning: A Size: 1.8 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A; Single family residential South - A; Single family residential East - B-2; Office West - A; Single family residential Utilities: 12 inch water line located along Ruthers Road. Use of public water intended. Lies in the Pocosham Creek sewage drainage basin. 15 inch sewer line located along Pocosham Creek which forms southern bound- ary of site. Use of public sewer intended. Environmental Engineering: Runoff flows to Pocosham Creek, into a pond, south of Cloverleaf Office Park, under Turner Road and Cloverleaf Drive, eventually into the City of Richmond. Turner Road, downstream of the request site, has experienced some flooding prob- lems; however, the proposed Turner Road improvement project will upgrade the exist- ing drainage facilities under Turner Road. Until the Turner Road project is completed, the proposed development may aggravate flooding problems. The existing natural drainage channel, between the request site and the pond, is experiencing erosion problems. May be necessary to perform some channel improve- ments along the southern property line. Development must conform to the Zoning Ordinance's Flood Plain Management requirements. Concrete curb and gutter should be in- stalled around the perimeter of all drive- ways and parking areas to facilitate proper drainage. (Condition 2) Fire Service: Buford Fire Station, Company #9. At pre- sent, fire service capability is adequate. Depending on location of existing fire hydrants, may be necessary to install additional hydrant. 4 86P'41/BSJAN7/JAN28G M M General Plan (Turner Road Corridor Land Use and Transpor- tation Plan): Office Transportation: Estimate proposed development could gener- ate approximately 260 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Ruthers Road, which had a 1984 traffic count of 6,170 vehicles per day. Additional pavement and curb and gutter should be installed along Ruthers Road to facilitate turning movements (Condition 4). Right of way should be dedicated along Ruthers Road to accommodate future road and utility improvements (Condition 3). To minimize the number of conflict points along Ruthers Road, access to this site should be designed to allow shared use in the future. (Condition 5) DISCUSSION A Conditional Use Planned Development is requested to allow a television production studio and related offices in an Agricultural (A) District. The facility would offer technical facilities to shoot, edit, duplicate film and video tape projects. The primary products are television com- mercials, programs, and video marketing presentations. The bulk of the filming occurs off site. In addition to the use exception, bulk exceptions to building setbacks and parking requirements have been requested. A fifteen (15) foot set- back is proposed along the northern and eastern property lines. (Condi- tion 11) The request parcel lies within the boundaries of the adopted Turner Road Corridor Land Use and Transportation Plan. The Plan designates the request parcel, as well as the bulk of the property north of Pocosham Creek, for office use. Property south of Pocosham Creek is designated for single and two-family residential. Currently, property surrounding the request parcel is occupied by single family residential land uses with the exception of property to the east, which is occupied by office use. While the requested use is not classified by the Zoning Ordinance as a "true" office use, the subject facility is unique and could be appropri- ately located within an area designated for office use with conditions that ensure a proper land use transition between the existing and future office/commercial use to the north and the single family residential use to the south. (Conditions 7, 8, 9, 10) 5 86S141/BSJAN7/JAN28G The applicants have requested an exception to the required number of parking spaces. Given the fact that the bulk of the operation is con- fined to employees and there is a limit as to the number of clients utilizing a studio, Staff has recommended that the parking requirements be based on a combination of number of employees and square footage of actual office space. (Condition 6) CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (10/21/86): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Belcher, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, and 3. AYES: Messrs. Miller, Belcher, O'Connor, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Cowan Board of Supervisors Meeting (11/26/86): On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board deferred this case for sixty (60) days, at the request of the applicant. AYES: Unanimous The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 6 86 't1/BSJAN7/JAN28G fu Spp RD. _15 - � •«��e��••`` � � is .��eassea++� ,� p •• �(/ eggs C', f, Its a♦♦, - � �� 3. Z\ � _ / arse � - p v .•� : v OWN\pN v B• i M\0\- G v ✓ `'. es�' a ,e • Z _ -� list o � N...g • '•,,,.gees`'' : •```` p tl �ess•e```'•`` \ 5 : _ _s, its eteNU v PROVINCETOWN L)H.-- PROVIDEN(;E GREEN R TH I #- I z c U A - - PROVIDENCE JR. HIGH A • C I 0 B B4 - c: R-7 L c _ S v 5 M V 0: - R-12 VEN: R-7 m m 865141-1 Bevembee-18s-1986-GPG Beeember-i9T-}986-B6 January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S151 Thomas F. Beck Bermuda Magisterial District Southwest quadrant of Jefferson Davis Highway and Drewry's Bluff Road REQUEST: Amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 86SO57 and 86SO94) relative to buffer requirements along the northern and western boundaries where adjacent to Parcels 16 and 62 on Tax Map 67-3. Specifically, the applicant desires to reduce the buffers from fifteen (15) feet and fifty (50) feet to five (5) feet. RECOMMEND DENIAL. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend denial for the following reasons: A. The current buffer requirements along the northern and western boundaries are necessary to project the residential integrity of the adjacent property to the west and afford the residents the ability to enjoy residential lifestyles. A further reduction in the widths could severely diminish any practical affectiveness of a buffer. B. The current buffer requirements are the minimum which the Commission and Board normally require where a use of this nature is adjacent to existing or anticipated residential development. Approval of this request would be inconsistent with past actions. C. A five (5) foot buffer will not accommodate landscaping which is of sufficient height and density to screen the use from the adjacent residential properties. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Southwest quadrant of Jefferson Davis Highway and Drewry's Bluff Road. Tax Map 67-3 (1) Parcel 51 (Sheet 23). Existing Zoning: B-3 with Conditional Use Planned Development Size: Existing Land Use: Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: Utilities; Environmental Engineering; Fire Service; Transportation: General Plan: (Central Area Land Use and Transpor- tation Plan): DISCUSSION 3.5 acres Boat sales and repair business North - R-7, B-2, & B-3; Single family residential, commercial or vacant South - R-7 & B-2; Single family residential or vacant East - B-2; Commercial or vacant West - R-7; Single family residential or vacant This amendment will have no impact on these facilities. General commercial On April 23, 1986, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommenda- tion by the Planning Commission, approved rezoning to General Business (B-3) with a Conditional Use Planned Development to permit bulk excep- tions. A boat sales, service and repair facility is proposed on the request parcel. One of the conditions required that a fifty (50) foot buffer be maintained along the western property line and a portion of the northern property line where adjacent to Residential (R-7) property and more particularly adjacent to parcels 16 and 62 on Tax Map 67-3. Subsequently on June 25, 1986, the Board granted an amendment to the Conditional Use Planned Development reducing the fifty (50) foot buffer to fifteen (15) feet along the western boundary adjacent to Parcel 16 on Tax Map 67-3. See attached Master Plan. The fifty (50) foot buffer along the western and northern boundaries adjacent to Parcel 62 and Parcel 16 on Tax Map 67-3 remained intact as well as the buffer which was required along the southern property line. The current request is for reduction in the fifteen (15) and fifty (50) foot buffers along the northern and western boundaries to five (5) feet. The southern buffer requirement, as originally imposed, is not affected by this request. Property to the west is a stable, well -maintained neighborhood occupied by single family residences. At the time of the original rezoning re- quest, Staff noted that particular attention should be given to imposi- tion of conditions which minimize the impact of intense commercial intru- sion into the residential area. To that end, Staff recommended that a fifty (50) foot buffer be maintained adjacent to the Residential (R-7) property. Within the buffer, landscaping having a sufficient initial 2 86S "1/BSJAN7/JAN28H r'' height and of a species which provides year-round screening was required to be installed. There were no facilities, other than utilities which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, permitted in the buffer area. Because of the intense nature of the proposed use, the outside storage area and the nuisances normally associated with the proposed use, the fifteen (15) and fifty (50) foot buffers, as currently required, are necessary to protect the adjacent residential uses to the west, afford residents the ability to enjoy residential lifestyles, and to establish the western boundary for commercial development thereby minimizing the possibility of further commercial intrusion into a stable single family residential neighborhood. Furthermore, buffers of fifty (50) to seventy-five (75) feet have been required for similar uses where adjacent to residential development. As an example, Martin Chevrolet has 50 to 75 feet of buffer adjacent to Shenandoah Subdivision. Staff would also note that a five (5) foot buffer will not accommodate landscaping which is sufficient to screen the development from adjacent residential properties. Should the Commission and Board wish to reduce the width of the buffers, Staff would suggest that a condition be imposed requiring that landscaping be supplemented with a solid board fence. Further, it is recommended that the fence be placed five (5) feet off of the property line and landscaping be accomplished between the fence and the property line. Following the Board of Supervisors initial action on the zoning, the developer moved boats onto the site and began improvements without the necessary approvals and permits by the County. The Staff noted at that time that, should the developer continue to perform site work without the necessary approvals, it would be necessary to take legal action. The legal action has now been taken and the matter is before the General District Court. At the present time, the developer continues to perform site work without an approved site plan and to occupy the premises with- out a certificate of occupancy. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (11/18/86): Mr. Rowe stated that there is no justification for the granting of this request. On motion of Mr. Rowe, seconded by Mr. Belcher, the Commission recommend- ed denial of this request. AYES: Messrs. Miller, Belcher, Cowan, and Rowe ABSENT: Mr. O'Connor 3 86S151/BSJAN7/JAN28H Board of Supervisors Meeting (12/10/86): The applicant's representative requested a thirty (30) day deferral to allow time to install the required solid board fence along the southern property line of the request site. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred this request for thirty (30) days. AYES: Unanimous Staff (1/13/87): A site inspection revealed that the board fence was being installed along the southern property line. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 4 86F—I/BSJAN7/JAN28H FLOU U •ei eti Rc HAZARD I W • �_ - � ' SHERBpuRNE AREA I ' H R0. � j� 1 ', j j j j; i N f y �11111111/ i URN SMEFE,p E RG = o = 1 1 IUL ; o F' id + • —L RE ; R- 7 - MH _/ i a �Mp az • / • w StMH k0 : - I • - !{y3! N�! flit • B-3 _ 00. C �� ^ ✓ . • le c \ IY : c ' PATTERSON Z lOil a PARK 0'� '•• R g c.�F100 _ .• c o �F 3 _ . p• 158_�_�'�`'�� pp 01 O �� M i y Zo�•B �` p• pV ` •� •e • -• g�UFE Rp, w!!!! .!till/ 1 At ao'ton V _'4 „MM pvE will !'► E `Imp 5 \ : �/ 1 .%.,.-ram + • PD 10 i F 0 �' • � lam` ` x / PARK LEE APTS. ��•�� c t P' • R a" q5 � �� • , pvE • I �1�• ' ' 86SI51 Q�CpTT✓ cq • - 1.''AMEND C.U.PD �_, �E r �. •• SH. 2 i v� fir; � %_ � 1_. • • II a 11/$/t 1\ \i�1r JEFPERSON PAV/S N/QNWAY J i C� pisPLAr AtD9:. Y d enetr�-S—T11 '!{I i ,' rrtirr •O 170.W' l 1 r J • Z in t F• r. \I •� ~s�mN f1 ' 1U t Q O O st V) sr. 5 / sl- r J L_ ► _�ZINC 154, • JEffER50M DAVIS HIGHWAY Uy A�l✓93:'•• Oi vulY 3 •Y J • avws •lr�s N ,..� A � tt�2� L ; Q• � � .. •N+mac 4►Laf 1 r "T --N 41-zs-OO'w 170.W r � n y ! 0 ,s --N 41-25'-00' W I 184.GB' L1 J 4Q a 8G 5ISI 2 i �.PFesem6er-�83-�986-6P6 1Deeem15,er-+6;-+986-GFG dewier}-P8;-11984-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S144 Sovran Bank, N.A, Trustee for Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A. Matoaca Magisterial District South line of Hull Street Road and northeast and southwest lines of Tomahawk Drive REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-9) to Light Indus- trial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions. A retail, office, and industrial complex is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGE 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed zoning and land uses conform to the Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. The Master Plan and Textual Statement incorporate design standards employed by other area major developments such as Brandermill, Gulf Stream, and Tomahawk Partnership. Furthermore, the proposed design standards are representative of those currently being proposed for the "Route 360 Overlay District." The development proposal is, therefore, consistent with area trends. C. The Textual Statement incorporates proffered conditions necessary to assure adequate access and minimize the impact on existing and future area roads. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) rI CONnTTTnNS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The Textual Statement contained in the letter dated Novem- ber 18, 1986, with Schedule A and Exhibits A (Master Plan) dated October 21, 1985, last revised November 18, 1986, and Exhibit B (the Wilbur Smith and Associates Traffic Analysis) with supplemental report dated October 1, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. The developer shall provide an accurate account of the drainage situation for each drainage outfall showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and the surrounding area. The developer shall submit a construction plan to Environmental Engineering and VDOT providing for on -site and off -site drainage facilities. This plan shall be approved by the Environ- mental Engineering Department and VDOT, and all necessary easements shall be obtained prior to any vegetative dis- turbance. The approved off -site plan may have to be implemented prior to clearing. Phasing of drainage facil- ity construction is allowable after approval of the over- all drainage plan for each drainage outfall. (Note: This condition supersedes Textual Statement Sec- tion 21-185 Conditions, C. Utilities and Environmental Engineering, 5.) (STAFF/CPC) 3. If storm water retention or detention is used, then prior to the release of any building permits or dedication of right of way, the ownership and maintenance of the re- tention or detention facility shall be established as the responsibility of private entities. An indemnification agreement shall be submitted to the Environmental Engi- neering Department to save the County harmless of vectors, maintenance, and replacement responsibilities, etc. Upon completion of the construction of the retention or de- tention facility, the design engineer shall certify to the Environmental Engineering Department that the lakes or ponds have been installed in accordance with the approved plan. Maximum permissible release rates on the retention or detention facility, which outflow onto adjacent prop- erties and do flow directly into Swift Creek or Nuttree, shall be such that the capacity of the drainage system on the adjacent property shall not be exceeded and the re- corded 100 year backwater and/or floodplain on such adja- cent property shall not be increased. (Note: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, Section 21-185 Conditions, C. Utilities and Environmental Engineering, 6.) 2 86' ',4/BSJAN7/JAN28I GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Hull Street Road and north- east and southwest lines of Tomahawk Drive. Tax Map 62-6 (1) Parcels 8, 9, and 12; Tax Map 62-10 (1) Parcels 4, 10, 11, and 15; and Tax Map 62-11 (1) Parcels 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 20 (Sheet 20). Existing Zoning: A, A with Conditional Use, and R-9 Size: 152.08 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant, residential , and commercial Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A; Vacant, residential and public/semi-public South - A; Single family residential or vacant East - A; Proposed Route 288 West - B-1; R-9 with Conditional Use Planned Development and A; Vacant and residential Utilities: 16 inch water line located approximately 150 feet west of request site. Use of public water recommended and intended. Lies in upper Swift Creek sewage drainage basin. 30 inch trunk sewer line located along southern property line, and 10 inch truck sewer line located adjacent to south- west property line. Existing trunk sewer lines may not have capacity to serve pro- posed development. May be necessary to make improvements or construct new facil- ities to obtain capacity. A portion of the property drains to Nuttree Creek trunk sewer line located along the eastern bound- ary of the Route 288 right of way. Exten- sion of public sewer from this line is possible. Sewer extension across the Route 288 right of way should be coordinated with VDOT. Environmental Engineering: Terrain nearly level to steeply sloping and, when cleared, has a slight to very severe chance for erosion. Portions of request property are poorly suited for development due to steep slopes or and local flooding. Shallow rock may impede extension of public sewer. There should be 3 86S144/BSJAN7/JAN281 Fire Service: no clearing of slopes which are steeper than 15 percent. Clay soils should be tested for shrink/swell potential. Portion of property drains to the west, through an existing outfall and eventually to Swift Creek. Other portion of property drains to the east, through a channel under Route 288 and eventually to Nuttree Creek. Existing natural swales are experiencing normal erosion. Soils are highly erodable when disturbed. Anticipate potential for accelerated deterioration of natural water courses, due to increased runoff generated by this development plus construction of Route 288. The existing swales and chan- nels must be analyzed to determine if adequate to accommodate increased runoff. May be necessary to acquire off -site ease- ments to make necessary channel improve- ments to accommodate runoff. Concrete curb and gutter should be in- stalled around the perimeter of driveways and parking areas. Drainage should be designed so as not to interfere with pedes- trian access. Clover Hill Fire Station, Company V . At present, fire service capability adequate. Given the proposed height of buildings, additional fire apparatus and personnel will be required in the future. County water flows and fire hydrants must be provided in compliance with nationally recognized standards. General Plan (Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Light Industrial Transportation: The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 25,000 trips per day (2,463 trips in the am peak hour, 3,216 trips in the pm peak hour). Primarily, access will be provided via Hull Street Road, Route 288, and Old Hundred Road South. 4 86`'44/BSJAN7/JAN28I 6 EWJ A traffic analysis has been submitted to document the adequacy of the proposed access system. The development is expected to be completed within 10 to 15 years. In addition to this development's traffic, future "local traffic" and traffic generat- ed by developments further west on Route 360 were considered. To address concerns relative to trip generation rates and distribution of traffic, the developer has proffered that additional traffic studies will be performed to verify the assumptions in the original analyses. If these analy- ses reveal trip rates or distributions which are significantly different at the Route 360/01d Hundred Road intersection than the original assumptions, additional road improvements will be provided or permissible densities may be reduced. The applicant has not proffered a reduction in permissible densities if the trip rates or distributions on Route 288 are significant- ly different from the original assumptions. The analysis indicates that acceptable levels of service (D or better) will exist at the Route 360/01d Hundred Road inter- section and on the Route 288 collector/dis- tributor system. However, current fore- casts indicate that the Routes 360/288 interchange will not be able to accommodate estimated traffic volumes even if this development does not occur. In order to accommodate future "local" traffic and the development's traffic, the ultimate design of the interchange should include a direc- tional ramp from eastbound Hull Street to northbound Route 288 and the extension of the proposed collector/distributor system north through the interchange. These improvements would then accommodate future "local" traffic as well as future develop- ment traffic. Route 360 will also not accommodate future "local" traffic even if this development does not occur. Route 360 will have to be widened to 6 lanes to accommodate future "local" traffic and the development's traffic. These improvements will have to be funded through the public sector with assistance from future developers in the area. The developer of this project has 5 86S144/BSJAN7/JAN281 proffered construction of a collector/dis- tributor system south of the Routes 360/288 interchange. The proffered collector/dis- tributor system would be the first phase of the ultimate interchange plan necessary to accommodate future "local" traffic and the development traffic. The developer has also proffered pavement widening and signal modification on Route 360. In addition, the dedication of right of way through this project to accommodate the future con- struction of a directional ramp at the Routes 360/288 interchange has been prof- fered. If additional right of way is necessary to accommodate the proffered access plan, the developer will be respon- sible for securing such. In conjunction with schematic plan sub- mission, a phasing plan for the proffered road improvements must be submitted to the Transportation Department for approval. These improvements will be constructed as development of the project progresses so that acceptable levels of service are maintained. Proffered conditions allow the Transportation Department to require addi- tional traffic studies of internal roads. The VDOT has reviewed the proposed access plan and granted approval of the concept. Final approval of the access plan is con- tingent upon submission of detailed con- struction plans to the VDOT and the Trans- portation Department. The VDOT's Board has granted the breaking of limited access on Route 288 subject to execution of an agreement between the County and VDOT. Right of way should be dedicated along Route 360 in accordance with the Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. The location of access points to Old Hun- dred Road South Extended (Tomahawk Drive Relocated) will be determined as more detailed plans are submitted. The widening of Route 360 and the improve- ment of the Routes 360/288 interchange must be accomplished to adequately address area 6 860'44/BSJAN7/JAN28I u traffic demands. will insure that is provided to ment's traffic. nT9CTTRgTnN The proffered conditions an adequate access system accommodate this develop - Rezoning to Light Industrial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Develop- ment is requested with the intent of developing a retail, office, and industrial complex. Specifically, a total of 1,400,000 gross square feet of commercial, office, and industrial space is planned. Parcel A, as shown on the Master Plan, is planned for a 350,000 square foot retail center housing various commercial activities to include a 300 room hotel. Parcels B and F, as shown on the Master Plan, would contain various industrial uses and some supporting retail uses in a total square footage of 650,000. The Office Centre District, Parcels C, D, and E, would contain a total of 400,000 square feet and be comprised primarily of office use with some supporting retail uses. Since submission of the original application, the applicants and their representatives have worked closely with Staff to resolve concerns rela- tive to utilities, drainage, traffic, design elements, and land use compatibility. As a result of those efforts, the final Master Plan and Textual Statement incorporate those guarantees and requirements which Staff would normally recommend be imposed through the zoning and Condi- tional Use Planned Development process. Therefore, the three conditions recommended herein will insure that the development conforms to those standards required of area planned developments. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (11/18/86): At the request of the applicants, the Planning Commission deferred this case for thirty (30) days to allow time to revise the Textual Statement to address Staff concerns. Applicants (11/24/86): A revised Master Plan and Textual Statement were submitted. Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. Belcher, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recommend- ed approval of this request, subject to the conditions on page 2. AYES: Unanimous. 7 86S144/BSJAN7/JAN28I Applicants and Staff (12/19/86): An error was discovered in the notification of adjacent property owners. Specifically, three (3) adjacent property owners across Route 288 were not notified of this request. The case has been rescheduled for Planning Commission consideration in January to allow proper notification to occur. Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/87): On motion of Mr. Cowan, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on page 2. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 8 86- '14/BSJAN7/JAN28I 0 LM m RoP SOIL SUITABILITY MAN SG 5 144 -/ • • o 0 0 0 0 • e . w PO p+ O tn In O O 0 fA hr C% .r 10 f -0 wq 0 r/ Ocr .r 07 G N v � 4 06 b ~O 6 pY co, b 4 i ?i ''AA qq00 •, is L ,-� ��• �Q��,,�_ _.. :��;, .• •'yU �`• ,`�..<`�`: �_ ow LL 1 p r�aar� ! vde n ku W ;.�� ij'r''• ' 865144-Z m A/ p O A 41 N O 41 U N r-I r-I O U r. O -r1 41 � U ro •r1 a 44 .H H rA r� ro ro r~ O •r1 U) 4J -H (A R7 r-1 0-:4w 86 5144-3 K Beeembef-46T-i986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S155 William R. Bradley Midlothian Magisterial District West line of Buford Road REQUEST: Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a mortuary service business in a Convenience Business (B-1) District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1 AND 2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed land use conforms to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board can insure land use compatibility and proper land use transition. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the textual statement received September 22, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Other than normal maintenance or cosmetic improvements, no additions shall be permitted to accommodate this use. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 3. This Conditional Use Planned Development shall be limited to the operation of a mortuary service business. Other than viewing by the immediate family and/or immediate friends, no funeral or memorial services shall be conducted on the request parcel. (P) (STAFF/CPC)' 4. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, existing curb and gutter currently in place around the perimeter of driveways and parking areas shall be repaired or replaced, as deemed necessary by Environmental Engineering to facil- itate proper drainage. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 5. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Planning Commission shall grant schematic plan approval of the Master Plan. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: West line of Buford Road, approximately 330 feet south of North Providence Road. Tax Map 18-16 (1) Parcel 43 (Sheet 8). Existing Zoning: B-1 Size: 0.5 acres Existing Land Use: Commercial Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - B-1; Commercial South - B-3; Commercial East - B-2; Office West - B-1; Vacant Utilities: 10 inch water line is located along Buford Road. Use of public water required. Lies in the City of Richmond sewage drain- age area. While there is an existing 8 inch sewer line located approximately 80 feet north of request parcel, the depth of line is insufficient to serve the request parcel. A second trunk sewer line is located approximately 500 feet to the south and could be extended to serve the request parcel. However, given the fact that no new construction is planned, extension of public sewer to serve the proposed use is not economically feasible. Extension of public sewer will require acquisition of off -site easements. Applicant desires to utilize an existing septic tank and drainfield system. Use of the private system would have to be approved by the County Health Department. A preliminary inspection has been performed by the County 2 86�__.,5/BSJAN7/JAN28J Health Department and the existing private system has been found to be functioning properly. Environmental Engineering: Property drains to south and east to Buford Road. Interior drainage to south and along Buford Road is poor. While site has an existing paved parking area, the curb and gutter is in need of repair. Curb and gutter should be repaired or replaced to ensure proper drainage of the site. (Condition 5) Fire Service: Buford Fire Station, Company #9. At pre- sent, fire service capability is adequate. Depending upon location of existing fire hydrants, may be necessary to install additional hydrant. General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Light Commercial Transportation: This request will have minimal impact on area traffic patterns. DISCUSSION A Conditional Use Planned Development is requested to permit a mortuary service business in a Convenience Business (B-1) District. It is the applicant's intention to utilize the existing structure for the mortuary service. The mortuary service would involve the embalming of deceased human beings and transporting the remains to funeral homes. There would be no cremation on the site. There are no alterations to the existing structure or new construction planned to accommodate the proposed use (Condition 2). Other than viewing of the deceased by immediate family, no funeral or memorial services would be conducted on the premises. (Condition 3) The Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan designates the proper- ty for General Commercial use. Property to the north and west of the request parcel is currently zoned Convenience Business (B-1) and occupied by a bank. The property located to the east, across Buford Road, is zoned Community Business (B-2) and occupied by office use. The property to the south of the request parcel is zoned General Business (B-3) and is occupied by a restaurant. Furthermore, the proposed use provides an appropriate transition between the more intensive commercial development along Midlothian Turnpike and office and residential development to the north. The conditions recommended herein also help to ensure a minimal impact on area traffic patterns and surrounding land uses. 3 86S155/BSJAN7/JAN28J CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. Cowan, seconded by Mr. Belcher, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions of pages 1 and 2. AYES: Unanimous The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 4 86 5/BSJAN7/JAN28J PtiP � •� � 1 ., Raw 7 ROCK CREEK PA K NpYFL0Y'E -151. 0 . t R-TH ., o Z� —15 R M - v I V , l o TWIN RIDGE Zc m,OFFICE CONDO = _ a - 11 G , t'�*q \ •fir �,,,• 5 ,• twomm sit �� •M 0 03 BON AIR HILLS '•.;� G :��2 • �,� ^ _ - Its j%j A z - �0 60 WEST = "11 tjti+••' ��•••••''� SHOPPING CENTER t,tE•"• t LLJ t< 1� •'t, (1) I �_ •t � • {�t{}tt�i 1 I ` -/ ' - P • ••aT••'• a �— R TH PE'NN ACRES 11111�1111/ j' UST N l _ - _ 86S155 CURD. i - S H. 8 .r x / spill; DEMCE FOREST Cl ipn Peeeabe*--16T-1996-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S157 Parker Oil Company Matoaca Magisterial District Southeast quadrant of Harrowgate Road and Tarris Lane REQUEST: Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk excep- tions in Residential (R-7) and Convenience Business (B-1) Districts. Renovation of an existing retail facility is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, AND 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. Although the Southern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan desig- nates the property for medium density residential use, a portion of the request site is currently zoned Convenience Business (B-1) and occupied by a commercial use. A reasonable expansion of this use would allow renovation of the existing facilities and improvements to internal/external traffic circulation. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board can ensure quality development and land use com- patibility. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) rnMnTTTnNS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by Charles C. Townes and Associates, dated September 2, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, sixty (60) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of the existing right of way of Harrowgate Road, and twenty-five (25) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Tarris Lane, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T&CPC) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Harrowgate Road, as deemed necessary by the Trans- portation Department. (T&CPC) (STAFF) 5. A fifteen (15) foot buffer shall be maintained along the eastern property line adjacent to Lot 2 of Locust Grove Subdivision, Section A. With the exception of the parking and driveways shown on Lot 39 of the Master Plan, Lots 38 and 39 of Locust Grove Subdivision, Section A shall be maintained as a buffer. With the exception of utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffers, and a fence, there shall be no other facilities or other improvements permitted within these buffer areas. Fur- ther, the dumpster shall be relocated to an area away from the adjacent residential development. The exact location of the dumpster shall be determined at the time of site plan review. A solid board fence, of sufficient height to screen the driveways and parking areas from adjacent residential properties, shall be installed along the western edge of the fifteen (15) foot buffers. There shall be no clearing or grading within any of the buffers. Existing vegetation within buffers shall be supplemented with landscaping to minimize the view of the fence, as well as the building, driveways, and parking areas. A conceptual landscaping plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. Within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading, a detailed plan de- picting this requirement shall be submitted to the Plan- ning Department for approval. (P) (CPC) 5. A fifteen (15) foot buffer shall be maintained along the eastern property line adjacent to Lot 2 of Locust Grove Subdivision, Section A. With the exception of the parking and driveways shown on Lot 39 of the Master Plan, Lots 38 and 39 of Locust Grove Subdivision, Section A shall be maintained as a buffer. With the exception of utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffers, and a fence, there shall be no other facilities or other improvements permitted within these buffer areas. Fur- ther, the dumpster shall be screened from view of adjacent residential development. A solid board fence, of suffi- cient height to screen the driveways and parking areas 2 8t 57/BSJAN7/JAN28K from adjacent residential properties, shall be installed along the western edge of the fifteen (15) foot buffers. There shall be no clearing or grading within any of the buffers. Existing vegetation within buffers shall be supplemented with landscaping to minimize the view of the fence, as well as the building, driveways and parking areas. A conceptual landscaping plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. Within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading, a detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (CPC) (STAFF/CPC) 6. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct, or reflected, illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background, measured at the lot line of any adjoining residential parcel or public right of way. Lighting shall not exceed a height of fifteen (15) feet and 18.5 feet for canopy lighting, and shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A detailed lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 7. Signs shall comply with the Special Sign District require- ments for Convenience Business (B-1) Districts. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 8. Mechanical equipment, including roof -mounted mechanical equipment, shall not be visible from adjacent residences or public rights of way. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 9. The structure, upon renovation, shall be generally as depicted in the pictures submitted with the application. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Planning Commission shall grant schematic plan approval of the Master Plan. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Southeast quadrant of Harrowgate Road and Tarris Lane. Tax Map 132-16 (2) Locust Grove, Section A, Lots 1, 38, and 39 (Sheet 41) . Existing Zoning: Size: R-7 and B-1 1.2 acres 3 86S157/BSJAN7/JAN28K Existing Land Use: Commercial and vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - B-1; Vacant South - R-7; Single family residential East - R-7; Single family residential West - A & R-15; Single family residential or Vacant Utilities: Environmental Engineering: Fire Service: 12 inch water line located along Harrowgate Road. Use of public water required. Lies in Timsberry Creek sewage drainage area. Public sewer not available. Use of private septic system intended. Use of private system must be approved by County Health Department. Property drains to the south to an on -site swale and eventually into a culvert under Harrowgate Road. No on- or off -site drain- age or erosion problems anticipated, pro- vided existing drop inlet and culvert is cleaned out. Off -site easements may be required if improvements to existing out - fall channel are necessary. Concrete curb and gutter should be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. (Condition 2) Chester Fire Station, Company #1. At present, fire service capability adequate. General Plan (Southern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Medium density residential Transportation: Estimate proposed development could gener- ate approximately 991 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Harrowgate Road, which had a 1985 traffic count of 5,885 vehicles per day, and Tarris Lane, which had a 1984 traffic count of 547 average daily trips. The Southern Area Land Use and Transporta- tion —Plan identifies Harrowgate Road as a major arterial with an ultimate right of way width of 120 to 200 feet. Right of way dedication should be in accordance with that plan (Condition 3). The Zoning Ordi- 4 8 57/BSJAN7/JAN28K M In T)TgMTRRMN nance requires an ultimate right of way width of sixty (60) feet for Tarris Lane in commercial districts; however, due to the proximity of the existing building to the ultimate right of way and since Tarris Lane will continue to serve primarily as a residential collector, right of way dedica- tion should be in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance recommendation for res- idential districts (Condition 3). The Master Plan proposes two points of access for this development: one entrance/exit on Tarris Lane and one entrance/exit on Harrowgate Road (Condition 1). Additional pavement, curb and gutter should be con- structed along Harrowgate Road and Tarris Lane to facilitate turning movements. (Condition 4) A Conditional Use Planned Development is requested to of an existing retail facility. Use exceptions have the portion of the site which is zoned Residential exception relative to setbacks have been requested. permit renovation been requested on (R-7). Also, bulk Although the Southern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan designates the property for medium density residential use, a portion of the request site is currently zoned Convenience Business (B-1) and is occupied by a commercial use. A reasonable expansion of this use would allow reno- vation of the existing facilities, thereby improving the current site design from an aesthetic standpoint, as well as the internal/external traffic circulation standpoint. The proposed renovations include remod- eling the existing store, expanding the parking facilities, and improving the gas pump islands. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commission and Board can protect the existing residential land uses on adjacent properties to the east and south. Condition 5 specifically reflects Staff's concern that the use be adequately screened from adjacent res- idential properties. Conditions 5, 6, 7, and 8 are designed to insure that traffic, lighting, signs, and mechanical equipment do not create nuisances for area residents and infringe upon their enjoyment of res- idential lifestyles. It should be noted that the existing use is not adequately screened from adjacent residential properties. Approval of this request with the recommended conditions will not only address these concerns, but will also improve the appearance of the existing site. It should further be noted that the extensive buffers recommended in Condition 5 are designed to preclude further commercial expansion along Harrowgate Road. 5 865157/BSJAN7/JAN28K CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Cowan, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, and 3. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 6 8 57/BSJAN7/JAN28K l_--a • / JNSES v ♦ 00, �� X1 HAPPY HILL RD. � �•., ,,♦ PNG P 1 A ,,,, GARDEN CITY � ��.•`'�� HEIGHTS \ .10 ��.• �';Ci1 �.•`��,' LOCUST GROVE 0: '•10 4 � I, I / 1 / I 5 /10 \\ : A\, \\ : ��''• � `� � 86S157 � .U. P D. C t / � �r�l► two N Ex. 30 R/W TARRIS LANE 0. _. . 10 STR�IP TLY TO THE COUNTY OF T F 2 1 / a 64 TO� srci-i u W G X m $ 0 _ 2 a z cn m m D m z c o ggg 32 - 22 z m ENTRANCE W m Ir ;u S' SIDEWALK cl O Ra el I -A6 i ion HCP I1 A 12.3' O 8' �I L 24 1.0' F/C D I bR/W 1 u w IuL A O �I u 12 t X O I 1 '�I 1 i r— oo o e o �r m O W w q � * �o O 1 , 3 OD 11 N N m O 3 , 1 w - " D c- �v N v N 8G5 15'7—1 w bu ip WA �r �. rim � ~•�+`"�¢� �, �•,.- •jl 1, «a �•1�♦��t'` Roeeabef-"T-198b-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S159 Dwight M. Myers Midlothian Magisterial District North line of Midlothian Turnpike REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Convenience Business (B-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit bulk exceptions. An office/retail facility is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, AND 3. RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE SETBACK EXCEPTION ALONG MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the rezoning and Conditional Use Planned Development and denial of the setback exception along Midlothian Turnpike for the following reasons: A. The proposed zoning and land use are representative of area develop- ment trends and conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transpor- tation Plan. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board can insure land use compatibility and quality development. C. While the Commission and Board have granted exceptions to the fifty (50) foot setback requirement along major arterials in the past, the results of the setback exceptions has not been such that the spirit and intent of the fifty (50) foot setback has been met. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by J.K. Timmons and Associates, P.C., and dated April 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC)" 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 3. Access shall be limited to a single entrance/exit located towards the western property line. This entrance/exit shall be designed and constructed to allow shared use with adjacent property to the west at such time it is developed for commercial use. The exact design and location of this entrance/exit shall be approved by the Transportation Department at the time of site plan review. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Additional pavement and curb and gutter shall be con- structed along Route 60 for the entire property frontage. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 5. Upon request by the County, the owner/developer shall grant an east/west access easement to adjacent properties. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 6. A fifty (50) foot setback shall be maintained along Route 60. Other than signs, and utilities, there shall be no facilities permitted in this setback. This setback shall be landscaped with trees and shrubs of sufficient height and density to minimize the visibility of parking areas from Route 60. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 7. Parking areas shall have at least ten (10) square feet of interior landscaping per parking space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and shall be at least ten (10) feet wide. At least one (1) tree, having a clear trunk of at least five (5) feet, shall be provided for each 200 square feet of required in- terior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs or ground cover. Such landscaped areas shall be located to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks or buffers shall not be calculated as required landscaped area. Prior to rough clearing and grading, a conceptual landscaping plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Plan- ning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 8. All utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for 2 86, 9/BSJAN7/JAN28L M M utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recog- nized and integrated with the architectural elements of the site plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 9. Loading areas shall not be visible from Route 60. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. Architectural treatment of building facades (whether front, side, or rear) shall not consist of architectural materials of inferior quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. The intent of this requirement is not to preclude the use of different mate- rials on different building facades (which would be ac- ceptable if representative of good architectural design) but rather, to preclude the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might ad- versely impact existing or future development causing a substantial depreciation of property values. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Route 60. Mechanical equipment, whether ground -level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 11. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining Route 60. Lighting standards shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these re- quirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 12. One (1) freestanding sign shall be permitted along Route 60 to identify the use. The freestanding sign and all other signs shall be as regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for Convenience Business (B-1) Districts. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 13. Public water and sewer shall be used. (U) (STAFF/CPC) 14 • In conjunctionith a roval of his request, an tyard exception to thew twenty (20)p foot side setback re- P) quirement shall be granted. (STAFF/CPC) 1 In conjunction with the granting of this re the Mast r Commisn shall grant schematic approval of \, Plan,` �l• ject to the conditions stated herein. (P) � c �� 3 865159/BSJAN7/JAN28L GENERAL INFORMATION Location: North line of Midlothian Turnpike, approxi- mately 650 feet east of Johnston Willis Drive. Tax Map 17-6 (1) Parcel 6 (Sheet 8). Existing Zoning: A Size: 0.5 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - 0 & A; Office or vacant South - A; Single family residential or vacant East - A; Single family residential West - A; Single family residential Utilities: 16 inch water line located along south line of Route 60. Use of public water recom- mended. (Condition 13) Lies in Pocoshock Creek sewage drainage area. Trunk sewer line located approxi- mately 400 feet north of site. Use of public sewer recommended (Condition 13). Must acquire off -site easements to extend public sewer. Environmental Engineering: Drains northeast toward Pocoshock Creek. No existing or anticipated on- or off -site drainage or erosion problems. May be necessary to obtain off -site drainage easements. If site is graded to drain toward Route 60, will not be necessary to obtain off -site easements. Concrete curb and gutter should be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas to effect proper drainage. (Condition 2) Fire Service: Midlothian Fire Station, Company #5. At present, fire service capability adequate. Water flows and fire hydrants must be provided in compliance with nationally recognized standards. General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Light Commercial 4 86L 9/BSJAN7/JAN28L M Transportation: Traffic generated by proposed development will be distributed along Midlothian Turn- pike (Route 60) which had a 1985 traffic count of 35,250 vehicles per day. An existing crossover, west of this proposed development, is to be relocated by the developer of property along the south line of Midlothian Turnpike. The relocated crossover will probably align with the western boundary of the request site. Therefore, access should be located near the western boundary and, at the time of site plan review, information should be provided to verify that this access will align with the relocated crossover (Condi- tion 3). There are several parcels to the east and west of the request site which have the potential for commercial develop- ment in the future. Staff has consistently recommended that access to Route 60 be limited. Therefore, the recommended en- trance/exit should be designed and con- structed to allow shared use with adjacent property to the west at such time it is developed for commercial use. (Condition 3) Additional pavement and curb and gutter should be constructed along Route 60 to facilitate turning movements. (Condition 4) As adjacent parcels to the east and west develop, consideration should be given to accommodating vehicular circulation between the sites so as to minimize vehicular movements along Route 60. At such time as properties to the east and west develop for commercial uses, provision should be made to accommodate such access. (Condition 5) DISCUSSION Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Convenience Business (B-1) with Condi- tional Use Planned Development is requested. An office/retail facility is planned. A twenty-five (25) foot exception to the required fifty (50) foot parking setback along Route 60 is also requested. The proposed zoning and Conditional Use Planned Development are represen- tative of development trends along the Route 60 Corridor and conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. While it would be desirable to consider this request in conjunction with the rezoning of adjacent parcels to the east and west lying between Pocoshock Creek and Johnston Willis Drive. The conditions recommended herein address those concerns which would be evident if an overall zoning and Master' Plan 5 86S159/BSJAN7/JAN28L proposal were submitted. Area development trends indicate that the par- cels will eventually develop for commercial use similar to that proposed by this request. In addition, entrance/exits along Route 60 for these parcels can be required to conform to approved plans for crossovers along Route 60 and to requirements for access. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commission and Board can limit the number of access points along Route 60 (Conditions 3 and 4), and require access easements to facilitate traffic movements between parcels. (Condition 5) A twenty-five (25) foot exception to the fifty (50) foot parking setback requirement along Route 60 is requested. Based on past experience, a reduced parking setback along Route 60 would not be desirable. In the past, setback reductions have not resulted in a situation whereby the spirit and intent of the fifty (50) foot setback has been met. Specif- ically, landscaping and/or berms have been inadequate to properly screen parked vehicles. In many instances, landscaping has been poorly main- tained. (Condition 6) An exception to the twenty (20) foot side yard setback requirement has also been requested. Given the fact that adjacent properties are des- ignated for commercial use in the future and that at such time the adja- cent properties are zoned for commercial use, the Ordinance would not require a side yard setback, Staff has supported reduction of the side yard setback. (Condition 14) Conditions 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are similar to conditions imposed on other commercial development along major arterials. These conditions are designed to insure land use compatibility and quality development. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. Belcher, seconded by Mr. O'Connor, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, and 3; and recommended denial of the setback exception along Midlothian Turnpike. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Belcher, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Cowan The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 6 86L )/BSJAN7/JAN28L 11►111�""- {11111111/_�� j/jj1j111 , Z � 1 86SI59 REZ• A TO B-I:/ ic.U.pa iSH. 8 177idlothIdI7 Turnpike — US fia,Me *W dG5159-1 Reeembef-16T-1986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S162 Dewey L. Hurley Clover Hill Magisterial District East line of Newbys Bridge Road REQUEST: A Conditional Use to permit a second dwelling on a parcel in an Agricultural (A) District. The applicant intends to construct a single family dwelling for use by a family member. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGE 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed land use is compatible with existing area residential development. B. Through the imposition of conditions, it can be insured that the single family character of the area is maintained. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. Occupancy of the second dwelling unit shall be limited, exclusively, to guests and/or family members of the prop- erty owner. At no time shall the unit be rented or sold as a separate use. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction indicating the requirement of Condition 1. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 3. This use shall run with the land. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, forty. -five (45) feet, measured from the existing centerline of Newbys Bridge Road, shall be dedicated to the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, for future road and utility improvements. (T) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Fronts approximately 100 feet on the east line of Newbys Bridge Road, approximately 1,150 feet south of Burnett Drive. Tax Map 64 (1) Parcels 44 and 122 (Sheet 21). Existing Zoning: A Size: 13.3 acres Existing Land Use: Single family residential Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North, South, East, and West - A; Single family residential or vacant Utilities: Public water is not available. Lies in the Falling Creek sewage drainage area. Use of public water and sewer is not required for the intended use. The principal dwelling is on well and septic system. The second dwelling will be as well. Environmental Engineering: This request will have minimal impact on drainage in the area. Fire Service: Manchester Fire Station, Company #2 (paid/volunteer). At present fire service capability is good. General Plan (Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Medium density residential (1.51-4.00 units/acre) Transportation: Traffic generated by this proposed dwelling will initially be distributed along a 50 foot wide dedicated, but unimproved, County right of way and then to Newbys Bridge Road, which had a 1984 traffic count of 836 vehicles per day. Currently, this 50 foot wide unimproved County right of way serves as access for three existing homes. The Virginia Department of Highways and Trans- portation (VDH&T) minimum public need for State acceptance requires a minimum of three residential dwellings served by a road. Therefore, this road could qualify 2 86F 7/BSJAN7/JAN28M for State acceptance, provided the road is upgraded to State standards. The County receives numerous requests for upgrading unimproved County rights of way such as this to State standards for State accep- tance. Due to the limited amount of fund- ing for such projects, funds are not avail- able to meet most of these requests. By granting approval of this second dwelling, the County may receive additional requests to provide funding for upgrading the road and thereby relieving the property owners of their maintenance responsibility. The Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan identifies Newbys Bridge Road as a major arterial with a recommended right of way width of 90 feet. Right of way dedica- tion should be in accordance with this Plan. (Condition 4) DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use to permit a second dwelling on the subject property. A principal dwelling already exists on the property and the applicant intends to construct a second single family dwelling to be used by a family member. The applicant's principal dwelling is presently located on Tax Map 64 (1) Parcel 44 (rear parcel), which does not have public road frontage. When the house was built, it utilized Tax Map 64 (1) Parcel 122 (front parcel) together with Parcel 44 as a zoning lot which provided public road front- age. This request proposes a second dwelling to be developed on the front parcel which could again cause the rear parcel to be left without public road frontage if both dwellings were sold off individually. To allow for the development of two dwellings on this zoning lot, a Condi- tional Use has been requested. To maintain the integrity of the existing single family neighborhood and to assure that both dwellings remain under the same ownership, Staff recommends that this use be utilized by family members, or guests, of the property owner and that the second dwelling not be rented in the future or sold off as a separate use (Condition 1) . This condition will also help to ensure that the rear parcel is not cut off from public road frontage along Newbys Bridge Road. To ensure that all future property owners are aware of this requirement, a deed restriction should be placed in all future deeds indicating that the second dwelling is not to be rented or sold off as a separate use and is for use by family members or guests of the owner only (Condition 2). Staff also feels that this use should be transferable and run with the land. (Condition 3) 3 865162/BSJAN7/JAN28M CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on page 1. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 4 86S'"?/BSJAN7/JAN28M I R-12 v 2 CL go 0 U2 NEZINIGy ASHLEY GROVE O -86SI62 C.U. 41; SH. 21 fdo �0,00 U W -t% ✓;i i $.00 - 7. ORES m 3 .ACRES 4 � M , are tj Cj 94 co s � \ %e O• \ N q S J1� ` \ z ' ►S p M •1•,dip �D ) it TM. 646) porn PARCEL IZZ 0� . µ. RFS so G.s _ �M/N,3 s�o• ATM! G4(l) PARCEL 44 0 vl r a Af .a.p04 86 5162-1 E L7A 7W n�� kd&46— 86 5 /6 2 -9? 2 REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S 165 Magnolia Investment Associates Matoaca Magisterial District South line of Iron Bridge Road Reeember-16T-1-986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST: Amendment to a previously granted Conditional Use Planned Develop- ment (Case 84S178) relative to paving requirements. Specifically, Condition 5 of Case 84S178 requires driveways and parking areas to be paved with tar and gravel with the top layer consisting of washed brown pea gravel. Approval of this request would allow paving with asphalt. The request to amend sign requirements has been withdrawn. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION ON PAGE 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed paving design is compatible with the paving design for sites within the Courthouse Commons Complex. B. The proposed paving design will not detract from the architectural or historical character of Magnolia Grange. C. Information provided by the Bank of Virginia, which is developing a portion of the request site, indicates that tar and gravel treatment on areas which experience high traffic volumes will create severe maintenance problems. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITION (STAFF/CPC) All driveways and parking areas shall be paved with asphalt paving similar in design to that used throughout the Courthouse Commons Office and Commercial Complex. (P) (Note: This Condition supersedes Condition 5 of Case 84S178.) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Iron Bridge Road, approxi- mately 360 feet east of Beach Road. Tax Map 95-8 (1) Parcels 40 and 42 and Part of Parcel 46 (Sheet 31). Existing Zoning: B-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development Size: 2.7 acres Existing Land Use: Public/semi-public and commercial Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A & B-1; Office and public/semi-public South - B-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Office and commercial East - A with Conditional Use; Office West - B-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Office and commercial Utilities, Environmental Engineering, Fire Service and Transportation: The proposed amendment will have no impact upon these facilities. General Plan (Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Light commercial DISCUSSION On October 24, 1984, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommen- dation from the Planning Commission, rezoned the subject property to Convenience Business (B-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 845178). The current request would modify Condition 5 of Case 845178 by deleting the requirement that driveways and parking areas be paved with tar and gravel with the top layer consisting of washed brown pea gravel. At the time this condition was imposed, Staff recommended conditions that were designed to maximize the visibility and preserve the character of Magnolia Grange and require that parking areas be designed to enhance the character of the structure. As adjacent parcels have developed, these conditions have served to ensure the integrity of Magnolia Grange as a historically significant site. Further, since the approval of Case 845178, the County has acquired Magnolia Grange with the intention of preserving it as a public facility and historic monument. As a result of these factors, many of the concerns addressed by the conditions imposed with the approval of Case 845178 have been mitigated. Therefore, 2 86 /BSJAN7/JAN28N ; 1, approval of this request will not detract from the original intent to guarantee the preservation of Magnolia Grange as a historically signifi- cant structure. Since approval of Case 845178, the Bank of Virginia has obtained a por- tion of the request site and is developing it for a bank parking lot and drive-thru teller lane. The bank information provided by the bank's engineer indicates that tar and gravel surfaces experience severe mainte- nance problems, such as gravel pile up and potholes. Approval of this request will allow the bank to utilize an asphalt paving design. Modification to Condition 12 of Case 845178 to permit a freestanding sign identifying Magnolia Grange was also requested. Staff has since de- termined that the freestanding sign is permitted without requiring modi- fication to Condition 12. Therefore, acceptance of the withdrawal of that portion of the request would be appropriate. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. Belcher, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recommend- ed approval of this request, subject to the condition on page 1. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 3 865165/BSJAN7/JAN28N „t A NIC B- RT I / MIIH#/o zc s + J : BRANCH'S T TRACE : "- ; (b �� i A� ,gyp♦v � ♦♦♦ • �.` CH'ESTE;4FF LD qo C Cp URTH0USE '•• COMPLEX ++++i B-3 O �— �++� J Q r steel '0� #Bannnunn : �s — O�� gust ? nun /*sa/�..�/ . 11_!,1 mI I PJ ♦ i uc ac. IRON BRIDGE RD. v _ �� : COURTHOUSE it GREEN no. L Via- .0 A • c • C at r G Z //I// ► { �'•' c I ♦♦ 4 SE •• S c 1 1 • • ` 1► COURTHOUSE I II,,II II11 O . �• COMMONS' / "+`♦ '•,�, O o VAC • ♦ Eaf \END GREENYARD �00 P° 1 j GR • 86S165 5 AMEND C.U.PD. SH. 31 lose 1/111/11/1/// /1/11111/ '' R- 40 a'' l ! T CIA, .tC iYO Qp'Y !•/P' K 00,Iro -'.�.i___ •ice-'�'.�� i !i YA/%!/`f1✓� !lA /ANw I Cd/.vsY or �•ea�,,a cs�rrJr.+or<-.I�tc A/A6Mge La' (�,, 6,osus! i .1 I �•,. 1t 11 I i Y A � I ` Y I i JJ � I 1 1 bw p �73� err' REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S166 James R. Grubbs, Jr. Beeembe*-"s-1986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS Clover Hill Magisterial District Southern terminus of Briarwick and Ambleside Drives REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-7) to Residential (R-15). A single family residential subdivision is planned. RECOMMEND APPROVAL. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The requested zoning and land use are compatible with and comparable to area development and adjacent subdivisions. B. The requested zoning and land use conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Lies at the southern terminus of Briarwick and Ambleside Drives and east of Section C, Mayfair Estates. Tax Map 50-13 (1) Parcel 3 (Sheet 14). Existing Zoning: A and R-7 Size: 80.05 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A & R-15; Single family residential or Vacant South - A & R-7; Single family residential or Vacant East - A; Vacant West - R-7; Single family residential Utilities: A 12 inch water line lies at the end of Lynchester Drive. Off -site easements will Environmental Engineering: not be necessary. Public water is recom- mended and intended for use. Lies in the Falling Creek sewage drainage area. An existing 24 inch trunk sewer line connects with a 27 inch sewer line and crosses the southeast corner of this prop- erty. Public sewer is recommended and intended for use. The site is rated fair for the proposed use. The topography on site ranges from gently sloping to moderately steep with slopes ranging from 2-20%. Lower ele- vations are poorly drained while higher elevations along ridge lines are well drained with few limitations. There is a severe chance of erosion in areas with steep slopes, when cleared. At the time of tentative approval, Staff will address drainage for home sites for each lot and erosion control of steeply sloping lots. Site drains to Falling Creek via several tributaries. There are no known on- or off -site drainage and/or erosion problems. Schools: Estimate 74 students will be generated. Lies in Davis Elementary School attendance zone: capacity - 795, enrollment - 633; Providence Middle School zone: capacity - 1,400, enrollment - 1,143; and Manchester High School zone: capacity - 1,500, en- rollment - 1,624. Fire Service: Midlothian Fire Station, Company #5 (paid/volunteer). At present, fire service capability is good. Public water is avail- able; therefore, fire hydrants should be provided for fire protection as per nation- ally recognized standards. General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Medium Density Residential (1.51-4.00 units/acre) Transportation: This proposed development should generate approximately 1,060 average daily trips. These vehicles will be initially distribut- ed through Mayfair Estates and Falling Creek Farms Subdivisions. At the time of tentative subdivision review, Staff will 2 86 6/BSJAN7/JAN280 make specific recommendations regarding providing stub(s) to adjacent properties. DISCUSSION The applicant is requesting rezoning from Agricultural (A) and Residen- tial (R-7) to Residential (R-15) on 80.0 acres. The area will be devel- oped as an extension of Falling Creek Farms Subdivision. The applicant has also applied for tentative subdivision approval in conjunction with this rezoning request. In reviewing this request, Staff considered existing area development (Falling Creek Farms and Mayfair Estates) as well as the recommendation of the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. As was noted above, the Northern Area Plan recommends this area develop at medium density residential standards (1.51-4.00 units/acre). Typical R-15 densities would yield approximately 1.49 units/acre while maximum den- sities would be 2.48 units/acre. The applicant has submitted tentative subdivision plats for review that propose 106 lots. If developed as proposed, this project would yield approximately 0.82 units/acre. This request could possibly yield fewer lots than envisioned by the Northern Area Plan. It is felt that this request is in conformance with the Plan. This portion of Falling Creek Farms is bordered by Mayfair Estates, Section C on the west and by Sections F and G of Falling Creek Farms on the north. Mayfair Estates is zoned R-7 and Section C has an average lot size of approximately 21,000 square feet. Lots range from 19,600 to 25,815 square feet and have an average lot width of approximately 116 feet. The recorded sections of Falling Creek Farms are zoned R-15 and Section F has an average lot size of approximately 35,392 square feet and Section G, approximately 27,443 square feet. In these two sections, lot sizes range from 16,170 square feet to 100,188 square feet. The average lot width is approximately 120 feet in Section G to 167 feet in Section F. It is felt that this request will produce lots that will be compati- ble with these existing developments. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Cowan, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 3 86S166/BSJAN7/JAN280 � Lu�� R-7 w LL T FALLING �Q�,Ptk CREEK r• r �r lb j • 1 86S166 REZ .� A TO R-15 ®R-7 TO R-15 SH. 14 I / • N 7 SOIL SUITABILITY :. 't GOOD El FAIR ® POOR 865166 -1 Beeember-16s-1986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S167 Roper Brothers, Inc. Clover Hill Magisterial District Southeast quadrant of Genito and Warbro Roads REQUEST: Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk ex- ceptions in an Agricultural (A) District. A building material storage and sales facility is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, AND 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed land use is representative of area development trends and conforms to the Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board can ensure compatibility with recently approved development in the area, as well as quality development. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by Charles C. Townes and Associates, dated October 31, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) a (U) (CPC) 2. Public water shall be used, if deemed necessary by Fire Prevention and/or the Utilities Departments. Normal County policy regarding rebates shall apply. (CPC) (STAFF/CPC} 3. At such time that public sewer is extended to within 200 feet of the structure(s), the owner/developer shall extend public sewer to serve the site. (U) (STAFF/CPC) 4. With the exception of the graveled storage area shown on the Master Plan, all driveways, loading and parking areas shall be paved. The storage area may be paved or may be graveled with a minimum of six (6) inches of #21 or #21A stone. With the exception of the paved area to the south of the proposed structure, concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all paved driveways and parking areas. (EE&P) (STAFF/CPC) 5. Prior to release of any building permits, forty-five (45) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Genito Road and thirty-five (35) feet of right of way measured from the centerline of Warbro Road, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 6. Prior to the release of any occupancy permit, additional pavement shall be constructed along the entire property frontage abutting Genito Road. Also, a deceleration lane shall be installed along Warbro Road, subject to approval by the Transportation Department. (T&CPC) (STAFF/CPC) 7. A thirty (30) foot buffer shall be maintained along Warbro Road. A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be maintained along Genito Road. With the exception of access, signs, util- ities, landscaping, and the two (2) parking spaces shown on the Master Plan, there shall be no facilities permitted within these buffers. Buffers shall be landscaped with ornamental trees and shrubs. Outside storage areas shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and public rights of way by either landscaping or fencing. A de- tailed plan depicting these requirements shall be submit- ted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (Note: Outdoor storage areas cannot encroach into required buffers.) (STAFF/CPC) 8. Uses permitted shall be limited to building material storage and sales and a storage yard. There shall be no other commercial or industrial activity permitted on the site. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 9. Signs shall comply with the Special Sign District require- ments for Convenience Business (B-1) Districts. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. The previous conditions notwithstanding, all bulk require- ments of the Convenience Business (B-1) District shall apply. (P) 2 86` 7/BSJAN7/JAN28P (STAFF/CPC) 11. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Commission shall grant schematic approval of the Master Plan. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Southeast quadrant of Genito and Warbro Roads. Tax Map 48-3 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheet 13). Existing Zoning: A Size: 3.4 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A; Vacant South - A with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a contractor's office/shop and yard; Vacant East - A with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a machine shop; Vacant West - B-3; Vacant Utilities: 12 inch water line located approximately 1,200 feet east of site, at Genito Road and South Ridge Drive. Applicant intends to use private well. Extension of public water recommended (Condition 2). Own- er/developer will be required to extend public water to provide water flows for fire hydrants. Off -site easements required to extend public water. Lies in upper Swift Creek sewage drainage area. At present, public sewer not avail- able. Public sewer should be extended at such time it is within 200 feet of the structure(s). (Condition 3) Environmental Engineering: Runoff sheet flows to the north to an existing culvert under Warbro Road. No existing or anticipated on- or off -site erosion or drainage problems. Downstream drainage channel must be analyzed for adequacy. If improvements to the existing downstream channel are deemed necessary, must acquire off -site easements. Concrete curb and gutter should be installed around the perimeter of paved public driveways and parking areas. (Condition 4) 3 86S167/BSJAN7/JAN28P Fire Service: Wagstaff Fire Station, Company #10. At present, fire service capability adequate. Water flows and fire hydrants must be provided in accordance with nationally recognized standards. General Plan (Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Light Industrial Transportation: Estimate proposed development will generate approximately 482 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Genito Road, which had a 1984 traffic count of 5,916 average daily trips, and Warbro Road, which has recently been upgraded and accepted into the State Highway system. Access for this development should be limited to a single entrance/exit on Genito Road and a single entrance/exit on Warbro Road, as generally depicted on the Master Plan (Condition 1). Additional pavement should be provided along the entire proper- ty frontage on Genito Road and along Warbro Road for length necessary to adequately facilitate turning movements (Condition 6). The Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan designates Genito Road as a major arterial with a right of way width of 90 f eet and Warbro Road as a collector road with a right of way width of 70 feet. Right of way dedica- tion should be in accordance with this Plan. (Condition 5) nT9r1T99TnN A Conditional Use Planned Development is requested to permit a building materials storage and sales facility and storage yard (Condition 8). A bulk exception to permit a graveled storage yard is also requested. Generally, the Commission and Board have supported uses with graveled outside storage yards when these yards are adequately screened from adjacent properties. (Conditions 4 and 7) The proposed land use is representative of area development trends and conforms to the Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transpor- tation Plan. 4 86E 7/BSJAN7/JAN28P Conditions 7, 8, 9, and 10 are similar to conditions imposed on recently approved zonings in the area and are designed to ensure quality development. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, and 3. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 5 865167/BSJAN7/JAN28P m o- -- ---- -- I 3 I 3 ,l/l / _ C E Al I T p i cF B3 - i 10 c c ` NTY LANDFILL . W � J �I� n •j n i RIDGE l� i 86S167 C.U.PD. SH. 13 �r o •p �!- ........ •• • ��• cK, z ��' �• a � LZ � � � If 2f •i£ £f 9£ L£ cr � .Ors Q to it Elsll 01 6 B L '9 G► f d I a py 6i Bi •rr . Y;'S.sC.ft ' 25' PROPOSED �. mcoo>4M STOKE' .OFFICE; 12AOO �pM'•. Z "PROPOSED — "� r PROPOSED — T ' WAREHOUSE WAREHOUSE"" r •.e m + n '1 ------- - ----- rn D � vGRAVEL y r A ~ o ASPHALT u ' 'REA ` �. (REST o IOt ORovem ) GRASS AREA flux 865/67-1 M R ADDENDUM 86S167 Roper Brothers, Inc. January 28, 1987 BS Clover Hill Magisterial District Southeast quadrant of Genito and Warbro Roads On January 28, 1987, the applicants and Planning Staff discussed Condition 2 relative to the requirement that public water be extended. The Utilities Department has indicated that, given proposed major developments in the area which will be extending public water to the vicinity of the site, it would be appropriate to amend the condition to require that the applicants connect to public water at such time the line is within 500 feet of the property. There— fore, Condition 2 should be amended as follows: 2. At such time that public water is within 500 feet of the property line, public water shall be extended to serve the entire development and connection shall be made. The County shall be under no obligation to extend water to this development. (Note: Normal County rebates shall apply.) 86S167/BSJAN7/JAN28PP Beeembee-16T-1986-GPG January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 86S168 Marco Investment, Inc. Matoaca Magisterial District Lies off the southwest line of Sunfield Drive REQUEST: Rezoning from Residential (R-15) to Residential (R-9). The property under consideration will be included into lots in the Bailey Ridge Estates Subdivision. RECOMMEND APPROVAL. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed zoning land use conforms to the General Plan 2000 and the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. The proposed zoning and land use are compatible with area develop- ment and adjacent subdivisions in the area. GENERAL INFORMATION Location: Lies approximately 290 feet off the south- west line of Sunfield Drive, measured from the point at its intersection with Stigall Drive. Tax Map 63-5 (1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 21). Existing Zoning: R-15 Size: 1.04 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - R-15; Single family residential or vacant South - R-9 with zoning conditions; Single family residential or vacant East - R-15; Single family residential or vacant West - R-9 with zoning conditions; Single family residential or vacant Utilities: 6 inch water line located along Sunfield Drive, approximately 200 feet north of this site. Use of public water is recommended and intended. Public water will be pro- vided in conjunction with Bailey Ridge Estates. Environmental Engineering: Fire Service: General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): Transportation: DISCUSSION Located in the Upper Swift Creek sewage drainage area. 18 inch trunk sewer line located along the northern boundary of this property. Use of public sewer is recom- mended and intended. Public sewer will be provided in conjunction with Bailey Ridge Estates. Site drains to Swift Creek via tributaries. There are no on- or off -site drainage and/or erosion problems. It appears that a large portion of this property is located in the 100 year floodplain. It cannot be determined at this time if off -site ease- ments will be necessary for the development of this property. Wagstaff Fire Station, Company #10. At present fire service capability is good. Medium Density Residential (1.51-4.00 units/acre) This request will have no impact on area traffic patterns. The applicant is requesting rezoning from Residential (R-15) to Residen- tial (R-9). This site will be incorporated into lots already tentatively approved in Bailey Ridge Estates Subdivision. At the December 17, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, tentative approval was granted for Bailey Ridge Estates Subdivision. A condition of tenta- tive subdivision approval required the applicant to include this site into proposed lots. The property was acquired by the applicant in an attempt to satisfy this condition. However, since the site is zoned 2 86S 3/BSJAN7/JAN28Q 1 Residential (R-15) and not Residential (R-9) as are lots in Bailey Ridge Estates, the applicant would be required to design lots which met the higher Residential (R-15) zoning standards. The existing lots in Bailey Ridge Estates, to which this property will be added, do not meet Res- idential (R-15) lot requirements. Therefore, the applicant has elected to rezone the property to Residential (R-9), which will allow lots to continue to develop at Residential (R-9) standards. Staff is of the opinion that this request is in compliance with the General Plan 2000 and the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan, as well as compatible with all area residential development and, there- fore, recommends approval of this request. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (12/16/86): On motion of Mr. Belcher, seconded by Mr. Rowe, the Commission recommend- ed approval of this request. AYES: Unanimous. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 3 865168/BSJAN7/JAN28Q K C i � O G 6 . W m a J • � Q � m •�I� LA. yo FREDERICK, FARM 2 �l A APq Rk `N � SLR 2 A BAILEY RIDGE ESTATES R- -9 Zc � Zc zc zc A zc U -� ♦ Y •• R-9 ZC 1 ICJ IFTON F �SUNNYBROOK 1 e� 1 e�pP c 86S168 S REZ: R-15 TO R-9 SH. 21 a e January 28, 198T REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 87SO04 Londonberry Corporation Midlothian Magisterial District East line of Huguenot Road REQUEST: Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Office Business (0) with Cann tional Use Planned Development to permit use exceptions. Ar olTfflce. warehouse complex with limited retail sales is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, 3, AND 4. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. Although the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plam &% nates the request parcel for office use, the requested WS&I ex— ceptions for office/warehouses with limited retail sales, vnmldl be compatible with adjacent uses to the north and provide a tramixtI►M between Huguenot Commercial Park and future development to, tle south. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Comm bip- sion and Board can ensure quality development and land usa- exaxm patibility. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOIHi TTAF ' AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLMw IT STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMME MM ) IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plain Rxm-- pared by Bodie, Taylor, and Puryear, Inc., dated (lxcamflDea 2, 1986, and the Textual Statement submitted wvth-+ tie application shall be considered the Master Plan. (E')) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Public water and sewer shall be used. (U) (STAFF/CPC) 3. Drainage shall be designed to flow into the existir&pavvvd ditch, east of the rear property line. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Unless an alternative drainage approach, utilizing the existing 16 foot drainage easement along the rear of Huguenot Commercial Park is devised, curb and gutter along the northern property line adjacent to Huguenot Commercial Park shall be constructed at elevations which are below existing grade. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 5. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas, as well as along the entire northern property line. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 6. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Huguenot Road to accommodate a right turn lane. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, sixty (60) feet of right of way measured from the centerline of Huguenot Road shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) (Note: Based upon the ultimate right of way of Huguenot Road and the Zoning Ordinance requirements that all drive- ways and parking areas be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the ultimate right of way, the Master Plan may have to be revised to conform to the setback requirements. However, if the existing parking area to the north of the site is closer than the required fifty (50) feet, it may be possible to average setbacks, thereby allowing the driveway and parking areas to be closer than fifty (50) feet.) (STAFF/CPC) 8. Access for this development shall be approved by the Transportation Department at the time of schematic plan review. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 9. Within the required fifty (50) foot setback along Huguenot Road, trees and shrubs of sufficient height and density shall be planted to minimize the visibility of parking areas from Huguenot Road. All loading areas shall be screened from view of Huguenot Road and the adjacent properties. A conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunc- tion with final site plan review. A detailed plan depict- ing this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. A thirty (30) foot buffer shall be maintained along the eastern property line. With the exception of utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, and a fence, located along the western edge of the buffer, 2 87" 14/BSJAN7/JAN28R there shall be no other facilities or other improvements permitted within this buffer. Existing vegetation within the buffer shall be supplemented with landscaping and/or a solid board fence so as to minimize the view of driveways and parking areas. A conceptual landscaping plan depict- ing this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) (Note: At the time of schematic plan review, Staff will recommend that some of the driveways between freestanding buildings be eliminated to provide for additional land- scaped areas so as to minimize the amount of building and pavement coverage.) (STAFF/CPC) 11. The parking area(s) shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior landscaping for each space. Each re- quired landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten feet. The primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Each required landscaped area shall include at least one small tree. The total number of trees shall not be less than one for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs and other vegetative material to compliment the tree landscaping. Landscaped areas shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout, located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required landscaped area. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning De- partment for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 12. All utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utili- ty connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the architectural elements of the site plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 13. The structures shall be similar to those depicted in the renderings submitted with the application. Architectural treatment of building facades (whether front, side, or rear) shall not consist of architectural materials of inferior quality, appearance, or detail to any other 3 87S004/BSJAN7/JAN28R facade of the same building. The intent of this require- ment is not to preclude the use of different materials on different building facades (which would be acceptable if representative of good architectural design) but rather, to preclude the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might adversely impact existing or future development causing a substantial depreciation of property values. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Huguenot Road. Mechanical equipment, whether ground -level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an inte- gral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 14. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining Huguenot Road and the adjacent property to the east. Lighting shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 15. Signs shall be regulated by the requirements of the Spe- cial Sign District for shopping centers or similar group of buildings in Office Business (0) Districts. Landscap- ing shall be provided around the base of the freestanding sign. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 16. The uses permitted shall be limited to office/warehouses plus a maximum of 20% of the gross floor area may be used for display of goods and articles for sale in conjunction with office/warehouse use. (P&CPC) (Notes: a. The Zoning Ordinance will require that park- ing be based on a combination of office/warehouse and retail uses. b. Prior to obtaining final site plan approval or building permits, schematic plans must be approved by the Planning Commission.) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: East line of Huguenot Road, approximately 110 feet north of Featherstone Drive. Tax Map 8-16 (1) Parcel 12 (Sheets 2 and 7). Existing Zoning: A Existing Land Use: Single family residential 4 87' 14/BSJAN7/JAN28R �w Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - B-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Office and commercial South - A; Single family residential East - R-7 with Conditional Use; Multi -family residential West - R-7 with Conditional Use; Multi -family residential Utilities: 16 inch water line located on -site. Use of public water recommended. (Condition 2) Lies in Falling Creek sewage drainage area. 10 inch trunk sewer line located east of site. Use of public sewer recommended. (Condition 2) Environmental Engineering: Property lies within the Routes 60/147 Drainage District. A pro rata share of the cost of improvements in the District must be paid prior to obtaining building permits. The subject property is basically flat and, therefore, poorly drained. There is a slight slope toward the rear where there is an existing drainage ditch. It is assumed that the paved ditch will be utilized for the drainage outfall for the entire property. The subject site is adjacent to existing Huguenot Commercial Park which is also poorly drained. Visual inspection indi- cates that the reason Huguenot Commercial Park has not experienced substantial drain- age problems is because the subject site has remained undeveloped. To protect the adjacent property to the north, the curb and gutter design along the northern prop- erty line should be designed such that at no point will the top of the curb elevation be at or above the corresponding point on the existing ground profile. Improvements should be designed so as not to interfere with existing area drainage patterns. (Conditions 3 and 4) Concrete curb and gutter should be in- stalled around the perimeter of all drive- ways and parking areas (Condition 5). May be necessary to obtain off -site easements if existing paved ditch to the east is not 5 875004/BSJAN7/JAN28R Fire Service: located contiguous to this property. Midlothian Fire Station, Company #5. At present, fire service capability adequate. County water flows and fire hydrants must be provided in compliance with nationally recognized standards. General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transporta- tion Plan): Office Transportation: Estimate proposed development could gener- ate approximately 450 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Huguenot Road which had a 1985 traffic count of 21,510 vehicles per day. VDOT has awarded a contract for the reconstruction of Huguenot Road to provide a 5 lane typi- cal section in this area. Additional pavement, curb and gutter should be provid- ed to accommodate a right turn lane for this development. (Condition 6) The Northern Area Land Use and Transnorta- tion Plan designates Huguenot Road as a major arterial with an ultimate right of way width of 120 to 200 feet. Right of way dedication should be in accordance with this plan. (Condition 7) The Master Plan depicts a single en- trance/exit located towards the southern property line. Staff has consistently recommended that access to Huguenot Road be controlled. At such time that the adjacent property to the south is developed for a compatible use, it would be desirable to design an access which could be shared. The shared access could align with Featherstone Drive if located on the adja- cent property to the south. At the time of schematic plan review, Staff will make specific recommendations relative to the location of access and possible shared access. (Condition 8) HILIMILIMIrINII Rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Office Business (0) with Conditional Use Planned Development is requested. Use exceptions are requested to permit an office/warehouse complex with limited retail sales. 6 87- '4/BSJAN7/JAN28R 1�w Although the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan designates the property for office use, the requested use exceptions are similar to those permitted in Huguenot Commercial Park. If the amount of retail is limited, the use exceptions will provide an acceptable transition between Huguenot Commercial Park to the north and future office and high density residential development to the south. (Condition 16) Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commission and Board can ensure quality development and land use compatibility with existing commercial development to the north, residential development to the east and west and future development to the south. Conditions 9 and 10 specifically reflect Staff's concern that driveways and parking areas be adequately screened from existing residential development and that loading areas be screened from Huguenot Road and adjacent properties. The Master Plan depicts two-way driveways between the proposed buildings. A less congested traffic circulation pattern could be accomplished by eliminating some of these driveways and encouraging vehicles to access the proposed loading areas via a drive to the east of the row of build- ings. Further elimination of some of these drives would provide more green space. These details will be reviewed at the time of schematic plan review. Conditions 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 are similar to conditions imposed on other commercial and office developments along Huguenot Road and Route 60. These conditions are designed to ensure land use com- patibility and quality development. CASE HISTORY Applicant (1/20/87): On January 16, 1987, Staff discussed the recommended conditions with the applicant's representative. Amendment to Condition 16 was requested to allow 30%, instead of 20%, of the gross floor area to be used for display of articles and goods for sale. The requested 30% use exception is consistent with the Commission's and Board's past actions on similar mixed use projects. Staff, therefore, recommended amendment of Condition 16 accordingly. Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/87): The Commission indicated that the 30% gross floor area requested by the applicant to allow display of articles and goods was too intense, given the relationship of the site to area residential development. On motion of Mr. Cowan, seconded by Mr. O'Connor, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, 3, and 4. 7 875004/BSJAN7/JAN28R AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 8 870- 14/BSJAN7/JAN28R _ O CC I 4. G. tttttt iltttttttttttt� ■try lttlttttltl ttttt �� c i p ` CI ■ i 41 Of _ - I Rd cCp4CkESTfR o C •��• IO / 'r c� i� � i ■ I • �•I Q • : • \ R-TH - , ■ 14 , 4p J-I kN c tit►ttt� %�� B — 44b��, s •�••,, 46-2 ;HUGUENOT VILLAGE SHOPPING F FAY ` 9L �J fir]' ',,• ^�..�^� CENTER s O .,NN+► BRIARWOOD HE /'') y :•� saa+•'• — - HUGUENOT��,, •••` II — COMMERCIAL PARK: / / 4 5 9P �� HERSTON� R. r _ram P L A, � GR V-A O zc c :c 'T B- / ill R-7 L 87SO04 REZ: A TO 0, , _ C. U. P D. ASH. 2 & 7 / c ' B-2 0 ` I J m m OC Q J Q V e-,y , I !,, A - L" ltnan afar tonpnoni+ 86Soo4-/ m In 38iittei°jF-�9 �-}9$�-6P8 January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 87SO06 W.O. Grubb Bermuda Magisterial District North line of Goolsby Avenue REQUEST: Rezoning from Residential (R-7) to General Business (B-3) with Conditional Use Planned Development. A contractor's office, shop, and storage yard is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 1, 2, AND 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. Although the Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan desig- nates the request parcel for medium density residential use, the proposed zoning and land use is representative of area development trends. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commis- sion and Board can impose conditions to insure quality development and proper land use compatibility. Further, the recommended con- ditions insure that the spirit and intent of the Plan is met by minimizing the impact on existing area residential properties. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) rmmnTTTnNS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by Keith Construction Management, Inc., dated Octo- ber 21, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 3. The developer shall be responsible for improving the existing drainage channel along the western property line in accordance with Environmental Engineering requirements. All necessary drainage easements shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, thirty (30) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Goolsby Avenue, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 5. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Goolsby Avenue for the entire property frontage. This shall include a standard drainage inlet at the low point. (T&EE) (STAFF/CPC) 6. A twenty (20) foot buffer shall be maintained along the western boundary of the property. This buffer width shall be exclusive of any utility easements. The buffer shall consist of landscaping having a sufficient initial height and of a species which will provide year-round screening. The landscaping may be supplemented by a solid board fence or ornamental wall. Other than utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, and a fence, there shall be no facilities located in the buffer area. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (Note: Outdoor storage areas cannot encroach into the required buffer area.) (STAFF/CPC) 7. Landscaping shall be provided along the frontage of the request parcel adjacent to Goolsby Avenue. The required landscaping shall consist of a mixture of ornamental trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Detailed plans depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning De- partment for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 8. Signs shall comply with the Special Sign District require- ments for Convenience Business (B-1) Districts. Landscap- ing shall be provided around the base of the freestanding sign. A plan depicting this requirement shall be submit- ted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with sign permit application. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 9. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct -or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background lighting, measured at the lot line of any adjoining residential parcel or public right of way. Lighting shall be of a directional type 2 87, 6/BSJAN7/JAN28S M M capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Depart- ment for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 10. In conjunction with approval of this request, the Planning Commission shall grant schematic plan approval of the Master PLan. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: North line of Goolsby Avenue, approximately 90 feet east of Collindale Road. Tax Map 53-3 (2) Falling Creek, Part of Lot 7 (Sheet 16). Existing Zoning: R-7 Size: 1.1 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - B-3; Vacant South - R-7; Single family residential and B-1; Residential and Commercial East - B-3; Commercial West - R-7; Residential Utilities: 8 inch water line located along Goolsby Avenue. Use of public water intended. Lies in Falling Creek sewage drainage area. 8 inch trunk sewer line located adjacent to site along Goolsby Avenue. Use of public sewer is required. Environmental Engineering: Site is flat and poorly drained. Runoff sheet flows westerly into a small ditch which forms the western boundary of the site eventually into Grindall Creek. The existing drainage ditch is flat and experi- ences some ponding water problems. The drainage channel probably experiences overflow problems. Existing drainage ditch is incapable of handling storm water runoff resulting from development of site. The ditch is also too high to accommodate a storm sewer outfall at the drop inlet which must be installed when curb and gutter is installed along Goolsby Avenue. The existing ditch should be enclosed in drainage easement. A 3 87S006/BSJAN7/JAN28S profile of the ditch should be made to determine what improvements will be neces- sary (Condition 5). May be necessary to acquire off -site easements (Condition 3). Concrete curb and gutter should be in- stalled around the perimeter of all paved driveway and parking areas. (Condition 2) Fire Service: Bensley Fire Station, Company #3. At present, fire service capability adequate. General Plan (Central Area Land Use and Transporta- tion Plan): Medium density residential Transportation: Estimate proposed development could gener- ate approximately 55 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Goolsby Avenue which had a 1984 traffic count of 1,250 vehicles per day. Addition- al pavement, curb and gutter should be constructed along Goolsby Avenue to facili- tate turning movements (Condition 5). Right of way dedication should be in accor- dance with requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. (Condition 4) DISCUSSION Rezoning is requested from Residential (R-7) to General Commercial (B-3) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a contractor's office, shop, and storage yard. No use or bulk exceptions are requested. Although the Central Area Land Use and Transportation Plan designates the request parcel for medium density residential use, the proposed zoning and land use is representative of area development trends. The prop- erties immediately east and north of the request site are currently zoned General Business (B-3) and have been, or are being developed for commer- cial use. Property to the south is occupied by a mix of commercial and residential uses while property to the west is occupied by multifamily residential uses. In spite of the apparent transition of the area to more intense commer- cial uses, it is important that consideration be given to protecting area residents by minimizing the impact of the proposed zoning and land use on residential lifestyles. The provision of a buffer along the western boundary of the site will afford residents a visual screen of any storage or parking areas (Condition 6). Condition 7 requires landscaping along Goolsby Avenue to minimize the impact of the development on adjacent residences while enhancing the quality of the site. It is recommended that signage, consistent with the requirement of the Special Sign Dis- tricts, be limited to minimize the possibility of sign proliferation and 4 87, 6/BSJAN7/JAN28S the erection of garish structures along Goolsby Avenue (Condition 8). Similarly, lighting should be low level and designed so as not to glare into adjacent residential properties or public rights of way. (Condition 9) The applicant is also requesting approval of the Master Plan as the schematic plan in conjunction with the granting of this request. (Condition 10) CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/87): On motion of Mr. Rowe, seconded by Mr. O'Connor, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 1, 2, and 3. AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 5 875006/BSJAN7/JAN28S O + 11/11 i t� ,•r Ir r O CITY OF RICHMOND 41 J W . G � "i P t 11111f IIIIit1111 ,� J = U G F. DOINOTO AVE. OP t vc ► ♦ a; PATE AVE - ir r m Bill, 0 c m o Itil' `Y < r 1 M c„ M .11 1 . 4 CR. AVE 11111tt11 tl FALLING I I yi I _� I = M R 7 I - , ` FALLING CREEK - I m o + -nrn 70 to 1 I 1 z N 't p GOOLSBY AVE. m M..••.L1111ItIt111111 0 D V _Ilfi s D lJ !� Ifttlnit` m DUPONT rn z s S. N sq � —" SQUARE s a O - �� ?� K WAY •. _ c^ SRAMPT N m / C - 9 cA inatilt1 � 111• DG A CODBILLRO• C M C C EppM fRE y fttt. Me�fM DR. a 9 �� y- RO• • O • • O \ r i r r R i �1) S�1 o O�pOp 187S006 0 ` EA__ '1 O co, 'REZ: R-7 TO B-3 B —2 C. U. P D. e o� _ `1 16 — �1 fllffff111f111ff11f1111fts ono SH. v : D • j -00 r Q 11t=f/ _ It. tll.ltt i J� t11t.t/Ittt.tttt • Itft1 a RT. 150 . m In 'T olino w w 11 N�l � r Ln '9 eyWUJT 8� aLU cu Q �w N W � v = 875006- 1 865006 z �1p` rllr dea�ta��*-88;-��38�-6P6 January 28, 1987 BS REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 87SO02 Dick Strauss Suzuki, Inc. Clover Hill Magisterial District South line of Midlothian Turnpike REQUEST: Rezoning from Convenience Business (B-1) to Light Industrial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions. An automobile dealership is planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGES 2 AND 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposed zoning and land use are representative of area development trends and conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. B. Through the Conditional Use Planned Development process, the Commission and Board can insure land use compatibility and quality development. C. The requested exception to the side yard setback would be in keeping with setbacks applicable to commercially zoned proper- ty. Typically, improvements on commercially zoned property are not required to set back from side property lines when adjacent to commercially zoned property. While the proposed zoning, as well as zoning on the adjacent property to the west is Light Industrial (M-1), the proposed use, as well as the adjacent use, is commercial. Therefore, the requested four (4) foot setback is appropriate. D. In the past, the Commission and Board have granted exceptions to the setback requirement along major arterials, subject to landscaping and/or berming within the setback. (NOTE: THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) CONDITIONS (STAFF/CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan pre- pared by J.K. Timmons and Associates, P.C., revised Janu- ary 8, 1987, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. All driveways and parking areas shall be paved. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be de- signed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) (STAFF/CPC) 3. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement and curb and gutter shall be constructed along Midlothian Turnpike for the entire property frontage. (T) (STAFF/CPC) 4. A twenty-five (25) foot setback shall be maintained along Route 60. Other than signs, access, and utilities, there shall be no facilities permitted in this setback. This setback shall be landscaped with ornamental trees and shrubs. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this re- quirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 5. All utilities shall be provided with underground dis- tribution. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 6. The proposed building shall be as depicted in the ele- vations prepared by Bass Steel Buildings Corporation, dated December 8, 1986. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 7. Exterior lighting shall not exceed a height of forty (40) feet. Lighting shall be positioned so as not to project into adjacent properties or Route 60. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 8. One (1) freestanding business sign shall be permitted along Route 60 to identify the use. This sign shall not exceed an area of 119 square feet and a height of thirty (30) feet. This sign may be illuminated, but shall only be luminous if the signfield is opaque with translucent letters. All other signs shall be as regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for Light Industrial (M-1) Districts. All signs shall be similar in color, design, and lighting. Prior to erection of any signs, a package showing typical signs shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 9. In conjunction with the approval of this request, an exception to the twenty-five (25) foot side yard setback requirement shall be granted. (P) 2 3002/BSJAN7/JAN28U M (STAFF/CPC) 10. In conjunction with final site plan submission, an overall site landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. The landscaping shall be located so as to break up the expanse of pavement between the proposed building and Route 60. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 11. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Commission shall grant schematic approval of the Master Plan, subject to the conditions stated herein. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: South line of Midlothian Turnpike, approxi- mately 400 feet east of Johnston Willis Drive. Tax Map 17-10 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheet 8). Existing Zoning: B-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development Size: 1.8 acres Existing Land Use: Automobile brokerage Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - A; Single family residential and vacant South - M-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Commercial East A; Single family residential West - M-1 with Conditional Use Planned Development; Commercial Utilities: 16 inch water line located along Route 60. Use of public water intended. Lies in Pocoshock Creek sewage drainage area. Trunk sewer line located on adjacent property to the west. Use of public sewer intended. Environmental Engineering: Drains to Pocoshock Creek. No existing or anticipated on- or off -site drainage or erosion problems. Concrete curb and gutter should be installed along Route 60 and around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. (Conditions 2 and 3) Fire Service: Midlothian Fire Station, Company #5. At present, fire service capability adequate. Water flows and fire hydrants must be 3 875002/BSJAN7/JAN28U provided in compliance with nationally recognized standards. General Plan (Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan): General Commercial Transportation: The proposed development could generate approximately 366 average daily trips. These vehicles will be distributed along Midlothian Turnpike which had a 1985 traf- fic count of 35,250 vehicles per day. The adjacent parcel to the west has been developed as an automobile dealership (Dick Strauss Ford) with an access drive to Route 60 constructed on its eastern property line, adjacent to the request parcel. This access drive aligns an existing crossover. Due to the proximity between this crossover and the existing crossover to the west, which aligns Johnston Willis Drive, greater separation should be provided. The cross- over which aligns the access drive should be relocated eastwardly; preferably to serve the larger adjacent Agricultural (A) parcel which is not currently served by a crossover. The Master Plan depicts two points of access to Route 60. The proposed western entrance/exit would be located on the existing access drive for Dick Strauss Ford. The second access to Route 60, as depicted on the Master Plan, will be con- structed in the future to be shared with the adjacent parcel to the east. The exact location of this shared access should not be determined until the adjacent property develops. At the time the adjacent parcel develops, Staff will make recommendations relative to the location of the eastern access and relocation of the crossover. It may be necessary to shift this shared access entirely on the Vaughan property. Additional pavement and curb and gutter should be constructed along Midlothian Turnpike to facilitate turning movements. (Condition 3) DISCUSSION On May 22, 1985, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommenda- 4 S002/BSJAN7/JAN28U tion by. the Planning Commission, approved the rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Convenience Business (B-1) with a Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a restaurant on the request parcel. The restaurant was never developed. The current request is for rezoning from Convenience Business (B-1) to Light Industrial (M-1) with Conditional Use Planned Development. An automobile dealership is planned. Exceptions to the required parking setback along Route 60 and building setback along the western property line are also requested. The proposed zoning and Conditional Use Planned Development are represen- tative of development trends along the Route 60 corridor and conform to the Northern Area Land Use and Transportation Plan. Through the Condi- tional Use Planned Development process, the Commission and Board can ensure land use compatibility and quality development. A twenty-five (25) foot exception to the twenty-five (25) foot side yard building setback requirement for Light Industrial (M-1) Districts is requested. Given the fact that the request site and adjacent properties are either developed for commercial use or designated for commercial use in the future and that the Zoning Ordinance typically does not require side yard setbacks in commercial districts, approval of the requested setback reduction would be appropriate (Condition 9). It should be noted that a similar exception was granted for the adjacent Light Industrial (M-1) property to the west. Also, an exception to the parking setback requirement along Route 60, to permit parking within twenty-five (25) feet of the ultimate right of way, is also requested. In the past, setback reductions have been granted subject to landscaping and/or berms to properly minimize the view of parked vehicles. Conditions 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are similar to conditions imposed on the adjacent M-1 property to the west. These conditions are designed to ensure land use compatibility. Condition 6 will ensure that the proposed structure is compatible with that which exists on the adjacent parcel to the west. Since this is really an expansion of an existing dealership, Staff is of the opinion that a similar building to that which exists to the west is appropriate. If this were an entirely new development, Staff would recommend more stringent conditions relative to the materials utilized on the sides and rear. Schematic approval of the Master Plan is also requested. (Condition 11) CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (1/20/87): On motion of Mr. O'Connor, seconded by Mr. Cowan, the Commission recom- mended approval of this request, subject to the conditions on pages 2 and 3. 5 875002/BSJAN7/JAN28U AYES: Messrs. Miller, O'Connor, Cowan, and Rowe. ABSENT: Mr. Belcher. The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, January 28, 1987, beginning at 2:00 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 6 3002/BSJAN7/JAN28U V I� R 1j1j11111j'11j►••�••r��' 0 �; ? •I.1j1j111j1j11j.1 ` •� OQ. \�,, �� e� �lJ ,♦i 10 10 c AVON PARK P \, ` JOHMS70N WILLIS Z5 FF Ep, � f HOSPITBU AL :,,,,,r.,♦♦ c r op o �1 • JO • z ♦i c 0��+ c C c c B 2 c V c MIDLOTHIAN T RNPIKE A -2x 'rrr�UW ��D►QTinIn11•tirLl�uU1luuii}� - - R1.60 rrrrtrrrrrrnur►rr 4r littsts'll �rrrrur►rCr►V•19 c c 5 r 81 SO02 REZ: B-1 TO M-1 C.U.P D. SH. 8- :go.& I it it 87500 2 - /