02-26-1992 Minutes26, 1992
Harry G. Denis1, Chairman
Staff in Attmnda~ce:
M~. ~arb~ra Bennett, Exec.
Asst. to Co. Admin./Dir.,
Mr. Ri~l%ard Cordle~
Chief Robert L.
Firs Departmsnt
Mr. Bradford $. Mammer,
Deputy Co. Aclm~n.,
Managsmsnt
Mr. Willi~u~ H. Howell,
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobsen,
Dir., Planning
M~ntal H~alth/Retard.
M~. Nary Leu Lyle,
Dir., Accounting
Mr. Robert L.
Deputy Co. A~in.,
Mr. R. John
Dir.,
~r. Richar~ M. MoElfi~h,
Dir., Env. ~ineering
County Attorney
Mrs. Pauline A.
Dir., News & ~llc
Info~ation servioe~
Col. U. ~. Pittman, Jr.,
Polioe Department
MS, Theresa ~. Pitts,
Acting Clerk to ~e Board
Mr. William D.
C~ief, Dev. Review,
Planning
Mr. Richard F.
Deputy Co. A~n.,
Celerity D=velopment
Mr. J~s J, L.
Dir., Budget &
~r, M. D. sti~ Jr.~ Dir.~
Park~ &
Mr. Davi~ H.
Dir., Utilities
Mr. Frederick Willis, Jr.,
Dir., ~an R~our~
Nr. Danls~ called ~he regularly scheduled meeting to order at
3:10 p.m. (EST}.
On motion of Kr. Colbert, seconded by Mr, ~cHale, the Beard
suspended its rules to ~do~t the ugenda a~ pre~sntsd since it
was not in sequence pe~ the Soard's udopted Rule~ of
Procsdure.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. Colbert and ~r.
Absent: F~. Warren.
1.A. ~RUA~Y 12, 1992
On motion of Mr. Colbert, seconded by Hr. McHale, the Beard
1.B. F~UARY 14 - 16. 1942
On notion of Hr. Colbert, seconded by Mr. ~eHale, tho Board
approved the ~i~tea of February 14 - la, 1992, aa amemded.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Ba~be~, Mr. Colbert and Hr. McHale.
1.C. FI~RUAttY 19, 199~
On motion ~f Mr. Colbert, ~econded by Mr. Mc~ale, the Board
approved the minutes of February 19, 199~, a~ ~ubmitted.
Ayes: Ma. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. Colbert and Mr. McHele.
Absent: 14r. Warren.
~. CO~[l"f ~D~IINEBTRATOR'S CO[Pq]~PS
Mr. Hammer ~tated tho Municipal Yreasurer's Association ef the
United et~t~ and Canada ha~ 9resanted the County with an
As~oeiatlon's Certification of Excellence A~ard for developing
a written investment policy and introduced ~r. Richard ccrdle.
Mr. Cordle expren~d appreciation %o his staff and to l~rs.
MeG~ire, the previous T~ea~re~, for their effort~ in
receiving this Award. ~e noted ~he County wa~ the flr~t
locality in Vi~qinia bo earn such an honor.
Hr. Barber stated he had attended the Taxicab Advisory Board
me6ting in which eonei4eration of an ordinance to obtain
taxicab d~i~ars in the metropolitan area had been discussed.
He noted he had al~o recently taken a tour of the Lucy Curt
Hursln~ Home.
Mr. KcHale stated ha had attended a meeting with the Endustky
Council and ha~ di~c~sed County issue5 with them =uuh a~ the
budget and total quality management in gene=a!. He noted he
had received a briefing on the Reynolds printing plant which
Mr. Daniel ~tated ~e had attended the Capital Region Airport
Co~ni~io~ in whicll t_hey had formerly extended an offer to
fill the position of Executive Directo~ for the Airport.
~. I~Q~ESTR TO POrTIerE ACTION. EMI~k. GEN~Y ADDITIONS OR
_.~..~ES IN T~OPJ)~ROF PI~ESI~TATION
On notion of Mr. Colbert, seconded by Mr. ~c~ale, the Board
moved Item 8.A., Recognition o~ Captain Willis J. Bradley,
Jr.~ Crate~ Planning District Commismlon to b~ h~ard after
Item 12., Pledge ef Allegiance; added Item ~.B., Adoption of a
Re~ol~tion of Sale for February ~6, ~992 Water and Sewer
Revenue Bo~d ~efunOing~ Series 1992 to follow Item 5.,
Resolution Recognizing the ~reater Richmond Chapter of The
92-124 2/26/92
American Red Cre~ on it~ 75th Anniversary; and added Ite~
7,B.16,, Approval of Issuance of Revenue and Refunding Bond~
7.B.15., Acceptance cf TWO ParGels of Land Along' Turner Rood
from Star Enterprise and, adopted the agenda, as amended.
Ayes: Hr. Daniel, ~r. Barber, Mr. Colbert a~d Mr. McMale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
Mr. Musden stated the American Red Cross waf dedicated to
essential medical appolntm~nt~ for the elderly and haadioa~pe~
within the County and introduced Mr. John Harvey, a volunteer
On motion of the Boar~, th~ followin~ resolution was a~spted~
W~EREAS, the Greater Richmond chapter o~ the American Red
Counties ef Chesterfield, aanover and ~enrioo and the City of
humanitarian organization which provides relief to victims of
members of the Armed Forces, veterana, and their £amilies and
military personnel on acti¥~ d~y with their families at home;
W~EREAS, the~er~an ~ed Cro~s provides emergency relief
earthguake~ and i~d~strial accidents and assistance includes
emergency shelter, food, clothing, counseling, referral and
emergency financial aid; and
drivers provide transportation for needy handicapped and
nutrition sites; and
Red Cross provide training course~ in CPR, Pirst Aid, Health
Education, Water SaSety and KIV/AIDS ~duoation; and
with a professional staff, ar~ providing the services that
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
Richmond Chapter of the A~arican Red Cross on its 755h
Ayes: Mr. Oaniel, ~_r. Barber, ~r. Colbert and Mr,
92-12S 2/2d/92
Absent: Mr. Warren.
Mr. Daniel presented the executed resolution to ~r. ~arvay and
expressed appreciation to the American Red Cross for the
services its provides and to its volunteers.
5.A_ .P~ESOLU'r~OH OF S~3~E FOR manRtrA~f 2~j__~9.9~ W~A'~u~ ~
RI~JENI~EI~ONDI~EFUNDING~ SERIES 199~
Mr. Ha~er stated th~ County had ~old $19,770,009 of water and
sewer refunding bond~ at a true interest cost of
percent to a~ ~dar~iting syndicate le~ by Davenport and
Company. He further stated staff wa~ requesting the Board to
approve ~e Re~olut~on of Sale and Fourth Supplemental Bond
Re~olution for the Wat~ and Sewer Rerunding Bonds, Series
1992. H~ noted ~e revenue bend rating had been upqraded by
Standard and Poor's to "~" and Houdy'~ Investors Service tu
On motion of ~. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board
adopted the ~ollowing
CCITT OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA
FORTH SUPPLEMENTAL BO~ ~OLUTION
AUTHORIZING ~D PROVIDIN~ FOR TM~ I$$U~CE, SALE AND DELIVER~
OF $19,770,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIP~ ~O~T OF WATER ~D SEWER
REVE~ ~F~DING BONDS, SERIES 1992, OF THE CO~TY OF
CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA
"Co~ty"), adopted a re~ol~tion, entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE
BO~ OF SUPERVIS0R$ OF TH~ CO~Y OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA,
AUTHORIZING THE ISSU~CE OF WATER AND S~ R~ENUE BONDS
SEC~ITY OF THE HOLD~S THE~OF" (hereinafter referred to as
"COWry of Chesterfield, Virginia, W~ter ~nd Sewer Revenue
~E~S, O~ J~ly ]4~ 19S5~ the Board adopted a
AU~ORIZING ~D PROVIDING FOR THE ISSU~CE, SALE ~D DELI~RY
OF $10~000,000 AGG~GATE PRINCIPAL ~O~T OF WATER ~ SEWER
R~ BO~S~ S~IES 1985A, DATED AS OF AUGUST 1, 19g~, 0F
TMR CO~Y OF CHESTERFIE~, VIRGINIA" (herelnaftmr referred to
a~ the "First Supplemental Bond Rezolutio~"), authorizing the
t~anc~ of the County of ~e~t~rfield, virqin~, Water
~EREAS, ~e Bo~d ~az d~te~ined that it
~dvlsmble for ~e County to authorize the issuance, sale and
to the Bond Resolution ~n ~e a~grega%e principal ~oun~ of
$19,770~000 to be designated as ~e "County of Chesterfield,
Virginia, Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bond~ ~ries
1992" (hereinafter d~fined a~ th~ "1992 Bonds"); and
~S, it is contemplated that the proo~s of the
1992 ~on~s, together wi~h other awailable ~oney~ of t~e
Co~ty, will be applied to refund and ~¢~as9 in advance of
~hmir stated ~turit~ $16,839,0~0 aggregate p~incipal amount
of the 1985A Bonds matting on Nov~r ~ in e~ch of the years
1996 ~hrough 2000, ~o~ inclusive, on Nov~be~ 1, 2003 and on
Nove~er 1, 2010 (hereinafter d~fined a~ the "Refunded Bonds"
or the "Refunded 1985A Bonds"), and in con~ection therewith
dated as of February 15, 1992 (hereinafter defined a~ th~
2/26/92
~'Escrow Deposit Agreement~), by and between the County and
Crestar Bankt Riehmond~ Virginiat as E~crow Agent; and
Wq~EREASi On October 9, 1991, ~he Board adopted ·
reeolution, entitled "A RESOLUTION OP TH~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COURTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, APPROVING THE
REPU~DIN~ OF T~E COU~T¥~$ WAT~ AND SEWER REVENUE BONDS,
SERIES 1985A~ DATED AUGUST 1~ 1985 ~D ~T~ING ON NOV~
NO--ER 1~ ~0~0 ~ A~HORIZING THE CO~TY ADNINtS~TOR ~D
OTK=R CO~Y OFFICIOS TO SEEK THE ~PROVAL' OF T~E STATE
COUNCIL 0N LOCAL DEBT W~TH RESPECT TO THE ISSU~CE OF
15.1-227.46 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA 19~0, ~D T~R "SUID~LINE$
~C~ DEBT" ADOPTRD BY T~ STATE C0~CIL ON ~ DEBT
T~ERE~DER", approving ~e refunding of ~e Ref~ded 1985A
Bond~ in advance of their stated maturities and authurlzlng
the County A~n~trator and other appropriate officials
on Local Debt (the "State Council") and to seek the approval
of the State Council of tk~ i$$uanoa of ~e 1992 Bonds
refunding bonds pursuant to Section 15.1~227.46 of the Code of
virginia, 1950 (~e "Virginia code"); and
~R~s, on october 16, 1991, t~e state council
adopted a r~molution approving the issuance of the 1992
as "refund~nq bends" pursuant to Section 15.1-227.46 of the
Virginia Code; and
be publi=he~ in The Bond BUy~T, a financial journal published
in the City of New York, New York, a ~ary Notice of sale
the 1992 Bond~ (~he "sugary Notice of Sale"), and caused
be prepared and distribute~ to pros~ectlve Durchaser~ oS
1992 Bonds a Preliminary Offioial Stat~ent, dated February
Notice of Sale, dated Feb~a~y 19, 1992 (the "Detailed Notice
of Sale") an4 an official ProDosal FO~ (the
Proposal Fo~"), all relating to the 199~ Bonds; and
~EAS, th= Sugary Notice of Sa!~ and ~ D~tailed
No%ice of Sale provide~ that =~aled Dropo~als for the purchase
of ~e 1992 Bond~ would be received by cr on b~half of the
County at the ~ester~i~ld County Admini~ation Building,
Room 5~2, 9901 Lori Road, ~terfield, Virginia, ~til
A.M., E.S.T., on W~dnasday, February 26; 1992, at which time
and place all sealed propo~al~ Wo~I~ be pub!ioty opened; an~
received, ~ach ~ccompanied by a certlfi~d or ba~ treasurer's
incorporated ba~ or trust company and payable unoon~itionally
=o =he County of ~st~rfield, Virginia, the' names of the
bidder= submitting eaoh $~Qh prODQsal and the "True
~ost" to the County computed in accordance with the Detailed
Name u~Bidder
Davenport & co.
Dillon
Smith Barney
Merrill Lynch
6~213011~
6.2888949%
6.2416457%
92-127
WH~Iq~AS~ after the consideration of all such
proposals, this ~oard of 2upsrvlsors finds that (a)
& Company (the "Purchaser") i~ a responsible bidder; (b)
the pro, seals received, the proposal cf the Pure,baser (the
"Proposal") &s the proposal to purchase the Bonds at the
lowest "Tr~e Interest Cost" to the County, eo~puted by
doubling the semiannual interest rate (compounded
{gebrua~ 15, 1992) and to the price bid, excluding interest
best propomal received, is in accordance with the
of Detailed Notice O~ Sale, and should be
NOW, TH~FORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BO~
SUPERVISORS OF ~E CO~TY OF CHEST~FIE~, VIRGINIA:
DEFINITIONS
SECTION 1.1. Definitions. Unless the conte~ shall
u~ed in this Fourth Suppl~ntal Bond Re~olution ~hidh
defined in ~tiole I of th= ~ond Resolution shall, for the
purposes of this Pourth Supplemental B0~d Re~olution, hav~ the
r~mp~c~ive ~eaning~ given to ~hem in the Bond Resolution.
meaning, the fOllOWing te~s shall, for all purpomem of the
~on~ Re~olu=ion an~ OS any cer%i~icate~ resole=ion or other
i~st~unt ~endatory thereof or supplemental ~ereto
Resolution) and for all purposes of any open,on or in~tru~nt
meanings, wi~ ~e following definitions to be equally
applicable to bo=h the ~ingula~ and plural fo~s of such terms
by the Board on J~ly 24, 1985, entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE
BO~D 0F SUP~VISORE OF ~E COUNT~ 0P CH=ST~FIa~D, VIRGINIA,
AUTHORIZING T~E ISSU~CE OF WATER ~D SEWER ~VENUE BONDS
THE CO~Y OF CHESTERPIELD, VIaGINIA, ~D PROVIDING FOR THE
SEC~ITY OF T~E ~OLD~R9 THEREOF".
"~.~crow A~ent" ~hall mea~ Creater Dank,
virginia, as ESOZOW Agent under the Escrow Deposit Agreement.
Deposit Agreement, dated as of F~bruary ~6, I99~, by and
"Fon~h__Sapplementa~ Bond R~no~uhlon" ~hall mean
t~is FO~=~ Su~91emental Bond Resolution.
~1992 Bo~ds" shall mean th~ Bo~ds a~thorizad by %his
Fourth Supplemental Bo~ Re~olution and issued under the
Re~olutiO~ and ~is Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution at any
time Out,tending.
"1~6 Code" mhall mean th~ Internal Revenue Cod~ of
1986 and ~e regulations promulgated by the United
D~partment of tke Treasu~ ~ereunder ~ro~ time to time.
"Official Statement" shall mean the Official
92-125 2/2S/92
"Preliminary- official Statement" ~hall moan tho
~roliminary official Statement of the County, dated February
"Re u dod Bonds" or "Refunded ~9~.~A Bonds~ shall
moan the $16,830,000 aggregate principal amount of County of
Chesterfield, Virginia, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series
1985A, dated August 1, 19S5 and maturing on November 1, 1996
through 2000, both inclusive, on November ~, 2003 and on
~svember 1, 2010.
"Trustee" shall mean Signet Trust Company
Bank of Virginia Trust Company) as Trustee u~der
Resolution.
(formerly
the Bond
Unless the context shall clearly indicate e~h~rwlso
or o~herwise require (i) all references in thi~ Fourth
Supplemental Bond Resolution to the Bond Re~olutio~ (without
spooifying in sush references any partlsular article or
section of the Bond Re~olutio~) ~hall be to the ~ond
Resolution as amended and supplemented; (ii) all references by
number in this Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution to a
particular article or s~ction Of t~e Bond Resolution ~all be
to the article er soctlon sf that number s~ the Bond
Resolution~ end i~ snch article or sectio~ ~hall ha~e b~n
amended or supplemented, to sash article or section as so
amended and supplemented; and [iii) all references by n~ber
in this ~eurt. h ~u~plsmontal Bund Resolution to a particular
article ur section of the Fourth ~upple~ental Bond Resolution
~hall be only to the article ur section of that nltntber of thio
Fourth Supplemental Bond R~ol~tien.
Whenever used in this Fourth Supplemental Bond
"hereof", "hereunder", and other words of similar import,
refer to this Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution only and to
this Fourth Supplemental Bond Renol~tie~ as s whole and no= to
any particular article, section or subdivision hereof; and the
other words of s~milar import, refe~ to tho Bond Resolution as
a whol~ add eot to any particular at, isle, section or
subdlvls~on thereof.
ARTICLE ~I
AU~ORIZATION OF I~UA~C~ AND APPROVAL OF SALE OF 1992 BONDS
SECTION 2.1. Authorization of__Issuance of
Bond~. (a) For the pnrposes of providing fUndS (1) for the
deposit into the De~t Ssrviue Reserve Fund held by the Trustee
of the amount specified in S~ctio~ Z.6(b) of this Fourth
Supplemental Bond Resolution, and (ii) for the deposit with
the Escrow Agent under the ~erew Deposit Agreement of the
amount specified in sectlen 2.6(c) of this FoUrth Supplemental
Bond Resolution for application, together with other &vailanle
moneys of tho Ceunty~ to refund in advance Of their stated
maturities and defeame th~ Refunded Bonds, there a~e hereby
authorized to be issued~ and shall be issued, under and
secured by tho Bond Resolution, insluding this Fourth
~upplsmental Bond Resolution, an issue of Bonds in the
aggregate prinsipal amo~n~ of $19,770,000, to he designated a~
the "County of Che~terfield~ Virginia, Water and Sewer Revenue
ss the "1992
(b) Th~ details of the 1991 B~nd~ S~ forth in tile
Detailed ~otics of sale are hereby ratified, approved und
confirmed. In aCcerdanc~ with the provisions of the
Eosolution, ~he De,ailed Notice of Sale and the Proposal, the
199~ Bonds shall b~ dated February 15, 1992; shall be issued
in fully registered form; shall be in the denomination of
$5,000 or any integral multiple thereof;, shmll be nul~berod or
92~129 ~/26/92
lsttsred, or both, as shall be determined by the Trustee,
thereto; and shall mature and become due and payable on
~ovember 1 in each of the years and in the principal amounts,
and shall bear interest from their date, payable on November
1, 1992 and semiannually om each November 1 and May
thereafter, at the rates per annam, as follows:
Prin=ipal Interest Principal In=srsmt
Year Amo~D% ~ yea~ Amount Rate
1993 $220,000.~0 5.~50% ~002 $1,150,000.00 5.90~%
~997 $080,000.00 5.250% ~006 $1,465,000.00
1998 $920~000.00 5.250% 2007 $1,560,000.00 6*375%
1999 $975~000.00 S.BS0% ~008 $1;65~,000.00
2000 $1~030~000.00 5.600~ 2009 $1;765,000.00 6.375%
~001 $1,055,00Q.O0 5.759% 2010 ~1,850,000.00
(O)(1) The 1992 Bonds maturing on and after
November I, 200~ shall be subject to redemption at th~ option
of the County prior te their stated maturities, from moneys on
deposit i~ t~e Redemption Fund created and established by the
Bond Resolution or from uther available moneys of the County,
on or after November 1, 2002, in ~hele at any time or in part
on any interest payment date, upon payment of the following
redemption prices (expressed as a percentage of the principal
amount of 1992 Bonds to be ransomed], together with the
interest accrued on the principal amount to b~ redeemed to th~
date fixed for the redemption thereof:
Redemption Dates
(Both Dates Inclusive)
Newsier 1, 2002 to October 31; 200~
November 1, ~00~ to 0etcher $1, 2004
November 1, 2004 and thereafter
Redemption Prices
(Percentage of
Princiual Amount)
101
100
(ii) Notice of the redemption of any 199~ Bonds
shall be given by first class mail, postage prepaid, in
ascerdance with th~ provisions of Section 6.5 of the Bond
Resolution.
(iii) If lens than all the 1992 Bonds of a
maturity are to be redeemed, th~ ~99~ BOn~$ of s~oh maturity
to be redeemed shall be ss%coted se provided in Section 6.4 of
the Pond Resolution.
(iv) Any redemption of 1992 Bonds shall have the
effec~ as is provided i~ Section 6.6 of the Bond Resolution.
(d) subject to the provisions of section 2,3
h~reof, prinoi~a! of each 1992 Bond shall be payable to the
reglaberad owner thereof at the principal office of the
Trustee upon presentation ~4 $~rrender of the 1992 Bond, an~
interest on each 1992 Bond shall be paid by the Trustee as
thereof as shown om the book~ of registry maintained by the
Trustee a~ Registrar for the 1992 Bonds, as cf the fifteenth
(15th) day of the calendar month next precsding each interest
payment date.
(e) Subject to the Drevisions of section 2.3
hereef~ the t992 Bonds shall be exchangeabl% for other 1992
Bonds in fully regis~ere~ form, all as provided in Section 3.3
of the Bend Resolution. The 199~ Bonds may contain such
variations, omissions and insertions as are incidental to such
differences in their numbers, denominations an~ fOAqBS.
92-130 2/26/92
(fi The Trustee is hereby appoints~ as the
Registrar and the Paying Agent for the 1992 Bends.
eECTIO~ 2.2. AD, reval of Sale cf 1.~2 Bondg; Good
Faith Checks. (a) The Proposal is hereby accepted by the
County and the sale cf the 1992 Bonds to the Purchaser
hereby approved.
(b) The good £ai~h checks of the
bidders shall be returned forthwith. The good faith oheek of
the Purchaser will be deposited by the County and the proceeds
thereof credited againmt th~ p~rchase price due for the 1992
Bonds upon their delivery or retained ag and for liquidated
damage~ in tko event the Purchaser fails to aocept ~elivsry of
and payment for t~e 1992 Bonds in accordance with the
eECTIO~ 2.3. ~x~oution an~ Form Of 199~ Bonds:
Boek-Entr¥-Onlv Svstem. (a) The 1992 Bonds shall be executed
and authenticated in the manner and with the effect set forth
in Section 3.i0 of the Bond Resolutlon.
(b) The 199] Bondm ~hall b~ iesuable in the form,
deBo~inatio~s a~d ~atu2rities and with the interest rat~s and
redemption prov&~iens specified in Section 2.1 of this Fourth
Supplemental Bond Resolution.
(c) CUSIP identification numbers ~all b~ printed
on the 1992 Denis, but such numbers shall not be deemed to be
a part cf th~ 1992 Bc~ds or a part of t~e cent~uct evidenced
thereby and no llabillty shall hereafter attach to the County
or any of the officers or aqents thereof becuuse of oU on
account of ~uch CU$I~ identification numbers.
(d) The 1992 Bonds shall he issued~ upon initial
i~s~anee, i~ fully registeLed form and registered in the
York~ New York ("DTC"), a~ registered owner of the 1992 Bonds,
and immobilize~ in =he cus=sdy of DTC. one fully reqiste~ed
1991 Bond for the principal amount of ~&ch maturity shall be
rsgiatere~ to Cede & Co. Beneficial o~/~ere of 1988 Bonds
shall not receive ~hysical d~livery of 199~ Bonds. Individual
purchases of 1992 Bondm may be made in 'booR-entry form only in
D~incipal amount~ of $5,000 and integral nultiples tharuuf.
Principal, Dre~i%l~, if any~ and interest payments on the
Bonds shall be mad~ to DTC or its nominee as registers4 owner
cf such 199~ Bonds on the applicable payment date.
Transf~r~ of principal, premium, if any, and
interest p~irmen~s to the participants of DTC, which include
sscur~tle~ brokers and dealers, han~, trust companies,
clearing corporations and certain o=her o~ganizablsns (the
"Participants") shall be the ~euponsibility of DTC. Transfers
of principal, premium, if any, and in~erest payments ts
beneficial owners of the 199~ Bonds by the Participants is the
responsibility of the ~articlpants and other nominee~ of
hencflciul owners. The Trustee shall notify DTC oS any notice
required to be 9ives pursuant to the Bond Resolution, as
supplemented by this Fourth Supplemental 80~ Resolution, no=
less than fifteen (15) oaleniar days Drier to the date upon
which such notice is required to be given; provided t~at the
failure ts provide s~ch notice to DTC shall not invalidate any
action taken or notice given by the Trustee hereunder.
Transfers of ownership interests {n the 1~92 Bonds
shall be made by DTC and arm Participants, acting as nominees
of the beneficial owners of the 1992 Bonds, in accordance with
rules ~pscifi~d by DTC and its ~articipants. The Trustee
makes no assurances that DTC, its PartioipaBts ur other
nomin~s of t~e beneficial owners of t~e 19~2 ~onds shall act
in aucordance w~th such rules or on a tinely basis.
92-131 2/26/92
(e) Replacement 19CZ Bonds (the "Replacement 1992
Bcnd~") ~hall be i~eued dlreetlyto beneficial cwner~ cf 1992
Bends rather than to DTC, or its nominee, but only in the
(i) OTC datsrminem not to continue to act as
(ii} The Trustee has advised DTC of its
det.rmination %hat DTC is incapable of discharging its
duties; or
(iii) The Trustee has determined that it is in
the best interest of the beneficial owners of thc 1992
Bo~de Mot to continue the book-entry syste~ of transfer.
Upon occurrence of the events described in clause (i} or (ii)
above the Trustee shall attempt to locate another qualified
sesuritie~ depository. If the Tru~t=~ fails to locate another
qualifled securities d~posi~ory ~0 replace OTC, ~he Trustee
~hall execute and deliver Replacement 1992 Bunds substantially
in %he form set forth in E~hibit A attac~ed ~ereto to
~articipants. Tn the event the Tru~te~ mak~ th~
determination noted in clause (ii) or (iii] above (the Trustee
undertakes no obllgat~on to ~ake a~y iBvc~tigation to
determine the occurrence of any event~ that would per, it the
Trustee to make any such determination) and has made
pre~islons to not~fy the beneficial owners of 1992 Bonds by
mailing an app~oprlate notice to DTC, the Trustee shall
execute and deliver ReplAcement 1992 Bonds substantially in
the form ~et forth in Exhibit A attached hereto to any
Participantm makieq a re~ue~t for such R~plat~e~t 199~
The Trustee shall be entitled to rely on ~he records provided
by OTC as to the Participants entitled to receive R~placement
Certificates. Brin¢ipal of and premium, if any, and interest
on the Replacement 1992 Bonds shall be payable as provided in
Section 2.1(d) hereof, and such Replacement 1992 Bands will be
transferable and ~xchangeable in accordance with Sections
through 3.6, inclusive, of the Bond Ee~nluticn.
(f} ~e 1992 Bonds mhall be in substantially the
form set forth in Exhibit A attached
SECTION 2.4. Approval o~ ~orm of Escrow DePosit
Aureement and ~erns, Conditions and P~ovisisu~ Thereof:
~M~utlon and Delivery of Egcrow DePosit Acreemant:
A~oolnt~ent of Escrow A~ent: Authorization of Subscrlption~
for SLOe; B~i~naticn of Refunded Bonds ~o~Redemptlen.
The form of the E~crow Deposit Agreement pre~s~t~d to and
filed With the minutes of the m%shing of =he Board a~ m~ioh
this Fourth S~pplemental Bond Rs~Olution is being adopted, a
copy of the form of which i~ sttac~ed ~o this Fourth
supple~eetal Bond Reselutie~ as Exhibit B, and the
conditions and provisions thereof, are hereby approved,
ra~ified a~d confirmed by the Board, and the County
Administrator and the Deputy counny A~ministrator, or either
of them, is hereby aut~oriu~d and directed to execute and
de~iv~r to the ~scrow Aqen~ the ~soruw Deposit Agre~ent
such form, together with such chang~ am shall be approved by
th~ County Administrator and ~he Deputy County Administrator,
or either of them, upon the advice of counsel (including the
County Attorney and Bond Counsel}, such approval to be
O0~clu~ively evidenced by their exec~tio~ thereof. The
Trustee is hereby a~thorized and directed to wit/%draw from the
Debt Service Fund and the Debt Service Reserve Fund and
transfer to ~he Escrow Agent ~or deposit into the Escrow
Deposit Fund the amount~ r~quired to b~ deposited therein from
sourses other t~an proceeds of the 1992 Bonds.
92-132 2/26/92
(b) The appointment of Creater Bank am Escrow Agent
under the Escrow Deposit Trust A~feement is hereby approved,
ratified and oonflrmed by the Board.
(c) The COunty Administrator ~nd the Deputy County
Administrator, or either of them, are hereby authorized to
execute, on bohal£ cf the county, suDssriptione for United
States Treasury Obligations State an~ Loc~l ~everr~ent
Series, to bm purchased by the Escrow Agent from moneys
deposited in the 1992 Escrow Deposit Fund created and
established under the Escrow Deposit Agreement. Such United
States Treasury Obllgatlon~ State an~ Local Government
series so purnhased shall be held by the Eso~ew Agent under
and in accordance with the previsions of the Escrow Depoait
Admlni~trator, Or either of them, ars hereby au~horlzed to
execute, on behalf of the County, the instruments required to
other investment contemplated by the Escrow D~posit Agreement.
(d} The Board hereby designates the Refunde~
the D~ovisions of Section ~(b) of the Escrow Deposit
SECTION 2.5. Official Statement= Cert~ficat
Concernin~ Official Statement~ Ratification. (a) The Chairman
~f the Board cf Supervisors a~d the County Administrator are
hereby auth0ri~ed and directed to execute and deliver to the
Purchaser an Official Statement of the County, dated February
24, 1992, relating to the 1992 Bonds (the "official
States, ant,,), in substantially the form of the ~r~li~i~ary
off,elm1 Statement, presented to the Boa~d at the meeting at
which this Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution i~ being
a~op~ed, after the same has been completed by the insertion of
the ~at~ritie~, interest rates, end other details of the 1992
corrections as the Chairman of the Board cf Supervisors and
the County A~mlnletrator, based on the advice of the COunty's
financial advisors and legal ¢oun~l (including the County
Attorney er Bond Counsel), deem necessary or appropriate; and
the Board hereby authorlz~ the 0fficial statement and the
information contained therein to he ase~ by the purchasers in
connection with the ~ale of th~ ~992 Bon~s. The Preliminary
official statement is "deemed final" fo~ purposes cf Rule
15e2-12 p=omulgated by th~ Securities and Exchange Commission
pursuant to the Securities Exohe~qe Act of 1934. The County
Administrator, the Director of Acoountin~ and the County
Attorney are hereby authorized and directed to ex, cute on
behalf cf the County and deliver to the Purchaser certificates
in substantially the fe~m referred to in the Offisial
Statement under tko caption "certificates Concerning Official
(b) T~e action of the Coua%y Administrator, the
Deputy county Administrator and other officers and
Of the County in causing to be published the $~ry Notlca of
and in causinq to be prepared and di~trib~e~ %he Preliminary
official Proposal Form relating to the 199~ Bo~ds, and the
ratified and confirmed by =~e ~uard. All actions and
proceedings heretofore taken by the Board, th~ Co~ty
Administrator, %he Deputy County Admln'istrator and the othe~
officers, employees, agents and attorney~ of the County in
SECTION 2.6. ApDllcation of Proceeds
shall bs applied as follows:
(a) an amount e~ual =o the accrued interest cn the
1992 Bonds from February 15, 1992 to the date of the
delivery thereof and payment therefor shall he deposited
with the Trustee in the Debt Service Fund in accordance
with the provisions cf the Bond Resolution and applied on
November 1, 1992 to the payment of the interest payable
(b) an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the
with the provisions of the Bond Resolution and Section
(c) the amount required to be deposited into the
E~crow Deposit Fund to provide for the refunding in
advance of their stated ~turities and defeasance of the
R~funded 19~5 Bonds shall be deDosi=ed wit~ the Escrow
Agent under the Escrow Deposit Agreement and applied,
(d) the balance of the proceeds of the i992 Bonds
shall be deposited with the Treasurer of the County and
applied to the payment of the costs o~ issuance of the
Bond Resolution. In acccrdanue with section 5.11(c) (1) of the
suffered by a Fund or Account held by the Trustee or the
BOnds du~ to the investment thereof shall be deposited into
the Construction Fund for credit to the Construction Account
4.3(b} cf the Bend Resolution shall be delivered with reger~
to the 19S5 Expansion,. and (ii) thereafter shall be deposited
County to comply with the arbitrage rebate requirements of th~
SECTION 2.8. Conditions R~cedent to Delivery of
the delivery of such Bonds prescribed ~n sec=ion~ 2.4 and ~.5
upon receipt by the Trustee of:
(l) a copy of this Fourth Supplenental Bond
Resolution authorizing the ~992 B0nd~, ~ertified by the Clerk
County, by which or pursuant to which the terms of the
Bonds are speoiZled, which Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution
~e~aul~ exists in the palrm~t of th~ principal of or interest
and premium, if any, on any Bond, aD~ that all mandatory
the terms the Bond Re=slutish or any ~upplemental
(2) a Bond Coun~el'~ Opinion to the effect that (i)
this Fourth ~upplemental Bond Resolution has been duly and
lawfully adopted and i~ in full force and ~ffect; (ii) the
Bond Re~olution h~s been duly and lawfully adopte~ By the
County and is valid and binding upon, and e~forceabte against,
the County (~XOept to the extent that =he enforceability
92-134 2/26/92
thereof may be subject to judicial discretion, ~o the
of the sovereign police powers of the co~monwsalt~ of Virginia
and the constitutional powers cf the united states of America
and to valid bankruptcy, insolvency,, reorganlzatlon~
moratorium and ether laws affecting the relief of debtors);
(illI the Bond Resolution ~reate~ the valid pledge which it
purports to create of the Revenues and of mcney~ and
securities on deposit in any of the Funds established
hereunder subject to the application thereof %0 the purl~oses
and on the eondlt±ons permitted hy the Bond Resolution; and
(iv) upon the execution and delivery thereof, the 1992 Bonds
will bav~ been duly and Yalidly au=heri=e~ and issued in
accordance with the Bond Resolution;
(3) a written order as to the delivery of the 1992
an Authorized officer of the County;
(4) a Certificate of the Director of ~udget that
th6 199~ Bonds are issued in compliance with the provisions of
~tic~ 7-11(e) of the ~ond ~selution, which certificate
shall be accompanied by an Accountant's Certificate confirming
the calculation~ ~et forth i~ such Certificate of the Director
cf Budget with respect to the amounts of Revenues, Operating
E~penses, Debt Service and Debt Service/Additional Bonds; and
2.5 of the Bond Resolution, an executed original of the EsCrow
Deposit Agreement, which contains ~nstruotions as to
payment of redemption cf the Refunded Bonds, together with
lnetructlone a~ to the giving of notice of redemption of the
Refunded Bonds.
SECTION ~.9. Covenant as to ComPliance with 1986
Code. The county hereby covenants and agrees to comply with
the provisions of Sections 103 and 1~1-1§0 cf the 1986 Code
applicable to the 1992 Bunds throughout the term of the
Bond~.
SECTION 2.10. Creation of ~99~ Debt $~vice Reserve
Account in D~bt S~rvice ReserVe Fund: Amendment of Definition
of "Debt Service Re~rv~ R~~ ~ffeotive W~en 1985A and
1985B Bonds Are NO Longer' outstanoin~. {a) There is hereby
~reated and e~tablished in the Debt Service Reserve F~nd
by tl%e Trustee an account designated es the "199~ Debt
Reserve Account". From the proceeds of the 1992 ~cn~e
~eq~ired to be deposited into the Debt Service Reserve Fund
the 1992 Debt Service Reserve Account a~ amount equal to ten
percent (10%) u£ the proceeds of the 199~ Bonds deposited into
the Debt Service Reserve F~nd. The 19SS Debt Service Reserve
Account shall he available only tO pay Deb~ Serwloe on the
1992 ~onds.
(b) Effective at ~uch time no 19S~A Bonds or 1985B
~ends are Outetend~n~ under the Bond Resolution, clause (i) of
the first sentence of the definition of the ter~ "Debt Service
Reserve Requirement" in the Bend Resolution is hereby amended
such that. with r~pect to .any Series of ~cnde whloh bear
interest at a fixed rate, the Debt Service ReserYa Requirement
(10%) of the proceeds of such Series of Bond~, and (ii) the
maximum amount payable in any current or future Fiscal Year
for the puym~nt cf Debt Service on ~uch Series of Bonds.
ARTICLE III
KISCBLLANEOUS
SECTION 3.1. Fourth $~pRlemental Bond Resolution is
a "Supplemental Resolution" Uoder.-.the ~ond Resolution; 1992
Bonds Are "Bond~" Under the Bond Resolution. (a} This Fourth
Supplemental B~nd Resolution is adopted pursuant to Sections
2.4 and 2.5 and A~tiele VIII of the Bond Resolution.
Fourth Supplemental ~ond Resolution (1) supplements the Bond
Re~olution; (2) is hereby found, d~tmrmined and d~clared to
meaning of the gusted word~ as defined and used in the Bond
Resolution; and (3) is adopted pursuant to and under the
authority of the B0~d R~$olution.
(b) Th~ 1992 Bonds are hereby found, determined and
declared ts constitute and to be "Bonds" within the me~ning of
th~ quoted words as defined and used in the Bond Ze~olutlon.
Tbs 1~2 Bonds ~hall be entitled t.o t~e b~nefits, security and
protection of the Bond Resolution, equally and proportionately
wit~ any other Bonds heretofore or hereafter i~ued
thereunder; shall be payable from the Revenues on a parity
with ell Bonds heretofore Or hereafter issued under the Bond
Resolution; shall rank peri passu with all Boner heretoIere or
hereafter i~ued Under the Bond Resolution; and shall be
equally and ra~ably secured with all Bends heretofore or
hereafter i~ued under the Bond Resolution by a prior and
paramount lien an~ charge on the Revenues, without priority or
distinction by reason of series, number, date, date of ~ale,
date of issuance, date of 9~eouticn and aut~entlcation or data
of delivery; all as im more fully ~et forth in the Bond
Resolution. It is hereby further found, dete~l~ined and
declared that no d~fault exists in th~ pavement of the
principal of or interest and premium, if any, on any Bond
issued under the Bond Resolutlon and that all mandatory
redemptions~ if any, of Bonds required to hay% been made under
the terms of the Bond Resolution or any supplemental
Re~olutlen have been made.
SECTION 3.2. Filin~ ~f__~hls Fourth Supplemental
Bond Resolution with Circuit Court. The Count~ Attorney be
and hereby is authorized and directed to file a copy of thi~
Pourth ~uppl~mental Bond Resolution, eerti£ied h~ the clerk cf
the Board to he a tr~e' and correct copy thereof, with th~
Circuit Court of the County e~ Chest~r£1eld, Virginia.
SECTION 3.3. Bffec~ of Article and Section Headings
and Table of Conten~. The headlh~ or titl~ of artiole~ and
sections hereof, and a~y table of contents appended hereto or
copies hereof, shall be for convenience of reference only and
shall not affect the meaning or ~o~struotion, interpretution
or effect of this Fourth Supplemental Bond Resolution.
Z~CTION 3.4. Bffeotiveness ~ This Fourth
SunDlsme/ttA1 Bond Re~olut%~n. Forth Supplemental Bond
Resolution shall be effective from and after the
horace by the Board.
Ayes: Mr. Danlel~ M~. Barber, Mr. Colbert and M~. MC~&le.
Absent: Mr, Warren.
6. WORK S.~SSlON
o ]F~93 B~DG]~T
Mr. Steg~aierpresented an overview on the FYP~ Budget
including the schedule uf meetings from the presentation of
the County Administrator's proposed budget through the Board
of supervisors a~cpticn; the guidelines for developinq t~e
Budget such as funding increase~ in Debt s~rviee of
approximately $2 million, fundin~ Reserve for future capital
improvements and the proposed tax rat~ to r~maln th~ same.
Ne outlined the guidelines for dsveloplng departmental budgets
SUch es no layoffs of existing full-tlme permanent e~ployee~,
no de=teases in service levels of the County's most critical
programs and funding a ~ percent salary' in~rease for
92-136 2/26/92
funds; the division, of general fund exg~nditures by category;
general impact; the implications for departm~t~ in me,ting
~udget guid=llnem such as re-evaluating procedures and
priorit±e~; fundinq implication~ in State' bu~ge% bills; and
the analysis of ~he Co~issiun on Local Government Fiscal
Dise~ion, comments and questions ensued relative to the
the County's fiscal stress level to allocate funding; whether
the county, could apply~ the formula to increase its appurent
stre~ by incr~a~in~ apparent local revenue wlt~out additional
applied when using the formula.
was to remain the eame, he felt public input ~hould be
received prior to t~ Board making a decision eD the Budget.
N~. Daniel indicated the Board WO~ld b~ holding a public
hearing regarding t/la Budget on April 1, 1992 and citizens
desiring input into the precoss could dc ss at that mea~ing.
7. A. APPOINTTD~T$
On ~otion of ~r+ McH~le, seconded by ~r. Barber, th~ Board
Se~ioes Citizen Board, repre~entinq Bermuda District, whose
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, ~r. Barber, Mr. Colbert and ~. MCHale.
Absent: ~. Warren.
?.A.~. AII~pORT ADVISORY BOARD
on motion of /~r. NoHale, seconded by Kr. Daniel, the Board
appointed/reappointed the following person= in the designated
dlstrlct~ to ~eI~;e on the Airport AdVi~Or~ Board, whos~ terms
are effective immediately and will expire February 14, 1995:
Mr. Richard ~. King
Mr. Rsqer BuJ~ns
~r. ~elvin shaf£er
Mr. Samuel B. Thoma~
Mr, W. B. "~ill" ~handler
Clover Hill
Dale
Nateaca
Midlothian
Ayes: ~r. Daniel, F6C. Barber, ~r. Colbert and Mr. ~c~ale.
Absent: F~r. Warren.
After brief discussion, on' ~otion of Mr. Barber, seconded by
Mr. Colbert, the Board authorized th~ County A~inistrutor to
execute a cont~a~t .with Delta As~ociate~ to p~r~o~
engine~rin~ services for a period of three year~ -- fiscal
9~-I37 2/26/92
years 199~, 199~ .and 1994 -- for the chesterfield County
Ai~pert contingent upon allocation of federal funds. (It is
noted the contract will bn negotiated annually.}
Ayes: Mr. Danielr Mr. Barber/ ~r. colbert and M~. McHale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.~.~. SCHOOL BOARDgP~ANTFUNDREVISIONS
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the Board
accepted the change~ a~ indicated below in the Instruction
appropriation category in the School Board Grants Fund:
A. F¥1992. Preschool Inoantive approved the additional
federal grant award of $~4,0~0 and inGreased the
Instrue~ioo appropriation category by a like amount in
the School Grant~ ~und.
B. FY1992 PLg~-l~a Speclal ~ducatlon - approve~ the
increased federal ~rant award of $381,1~8 and
approprlat~d a like amo~n~ to the In~tructlon
appropriation' catagoz-y in the School Grant5 Fund.
further, the Board approved the following appropriation
And,
a~J~stments:
=ran%
FY1992 Preschool Incentive'
(federal f~nds)
FX1992 PL94-142' Special Education
(federal fund~)
Total Instruction Apprepriat~on Increase
Amount
$ 54~060
$435,~98
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Kr. Colbert and ~. MeHale.
Absent: Mr. War=eh.
on motion of ~=. ~arber, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the Board
ace=pied $61,50~ in ~tate and federal fund~ fro~ the
Abus~ Services and appropriated $~,~00 i~ ~ta%~ Chapte~
increased ~ental Health/~ental R~tardatiun/S~bs%ance Abuse
provide ~pport se~ice~ to f~ilie~ who maintain a family
m~mb~r with a mental disab~llty in the ho~e~ to purchase child
day care se~ices for children wi~ special needs while their
~arents ara working or receiving job-relatsd training; and to
s~io~s and ~ers~mten= mental illness mo that
affordable ho~tng oan be se~ed and maintained. (It
n0t~ and anticipated t~at the direct charge~ associated wi~
Cowry p~=hasi~g, ~ayroll and accounting functions will be
a~roxlmately $I,70~ and although program funds are not
budgeted for th~ 00$t$, they will be ~illR~ to ~/~/SA.
f~{s ar~ not available withi~ th~ depar~ent by year-en~, the
Aym~: MT. Da~iel~ ~. Barber, ~. Colbert and ~r. McHale.
2126/92
On motion of ~. Barber, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the
authorized an advertisement for tax ordinances for the April
1, 199~ public hearing on the FY93 proposed budget to
the proposed tax rates as follows:
Real Estate $1.09
Per~onal Property Tax $3.60
Personal Property Tax for
of res=ce ~u~ and volunteer
fi~e departments and auxiliary
Machinery and Tools
Air~lane
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.B.7. .~gT DATE FOR A l:'l~f, ffC HF-AR.tXG TO ~NSZD~ ~
~ ~D. BY ~G 8E~IONS 12--39.1 ~__12-138
A~ter brief dlscus~ion, on mo~ion of Mr. Barber, ~econded by
~. Colbert, the Board set the date of ~rc~ ~, 1992 =t 7:00
~.m. for a public hmaring to =on=i~er an ordinano~ to amend
the Code of the County of ~e Ch~u~erfi~ld, 1978, as
by amending seution~ 12-39.~ and 1~-138 relating to business
license taxation of flea market=, craft ~how~, trade ~hows and
itlneran~
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, ~. Bar, er, ~. Colbert a~d Mr. McHale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.B.8. STATE~OADACCE~TANCE
Thio day the County Bnvironmental ~ngineer, in ac=ordanc~ w~th
directions from this ~cerd, made report in writing upon his
examination of Brookfor~ Road in ~ portion of Clarendon,
~ection T, Clover ~ill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Barb~t
in a ~or~ion of Clarendon, Section I, Clower H~ll D~trict, be
and it hereby i~ e~tabti~hed a~ a p~blic road.
and b, it fur~er re~olved, that the Virginia bepartment of
Tran~portatlon, b~ and i% hereby is re~ested to ta~e into the
Secondary System, Brookfor~st Road, beginning at ~e
intersection with Quisenberry street, State Rout~ 2114, und
goin~ westerly ~.0~ mile to end a% the intersection wi~h
Brookforest Road~ Clarendon, Section J. Aguin, Brookfor~st
Road, b~qinning at the inter~ection with Q~i~nb~rry Street~
state Route 2~14, and goin~ easterly 0.04 mile to end at the
inter~ctlon with Brookforest Road, Clarendon, section J.
distance, clear zone and deEi~ated Virginia D~partm~nt of
Thi~ read ~rves as acces~ for Clarendon~ Section J,
unre~trlcted r~ght-of~way of 50' ~ith necemma~y ea~nt~ fo~
cut~, fill~ and drainage for this roa~.
92-139
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. Colbert and Mr. McHale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Brookforest Road and Br0okforest Terrace in
Clarendon, Sectioa J, Clover Kill District.
~pQn consideration whereof, and on motion of Fir. ~arber,
seconded by Mr. Colbert, it is resolved that Brookforest Road
and Brookfore~t Terrace in Clarendon, sec[ion J, clover Hill
District, be and they hergby are established as public read~.
And be it 'further resolved, that th~ virginia Department of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take i~o tho
Secendar~ 8y~te~, Brookforest Road, beginning at existing
Broekforest Read, Clarendon, Section I, State Route number to
be assigned, and going westerly 0.04 mile to end at
Breokforest Read, Clarendon; section K. Again, Hrookforest
Road, beginning at ~xistlng Brookfere~t Road, Clarendon,
Section I, 'State Route number ts ba assigned, and qolng
easterly 0.0~ ~il~ to the inter~c~ion with Brookfores~
Terrace, then cnntinulng samterly 0.05 mile to end in a
temporary turnarou~ easement, and Brookforest Terrace,
beginning at the intersection with ~rookforest Road and goin~
southerly 0.1] mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
Thi~ request is inclusive of the adjacent ~lope, sight
distance, cleat zone and designated Virginia Department cf
Transportation drainage easements.
The~e roads ~ervs 2S lots.
And be i~ further reaolved~ that the Board Of S~pervi$ors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Transportation an
unrestriuted right-of-way of ~0' with necessary easements for
cuts, fills and drainage .for all of th~ne roads.
This section of Clarendon i~ recorded as follows:
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. Colbert and Mr. McHale.
Absent:' Mr., Warren.
This day the ~ounty Environmental engineer, in ascordance with
directions frc~ this Board, ~ade report in writing upon hi=
examination of West ~r0videnoe Road, W. Providence Court,
Prov~dsn~e Creek Ridge, Providence Creek Road and Providence
Cree~k Court in ~rovidenos Creek, Seonieu A, ~lover Hill
Upon consideration whereof, and o6 motion of Mr. Barber,
seconded by ~Ir. Colbert, it is resolved that West Provldenom
Road, W. Providence Court, Providence Creek Ridge, Providence
Cr~k ROad and Providence Creek Court in Previdemo~ Creek,
section A, Clover Hill District, be and they hereby arm
e~tablishsd as publi~ roads.
And be it' further re~elved, t~at the Virginia Dep~tment of
Transportation, be and it hereby ~ request~ to t~ke into the
Seoo~ary system, West Providence Road, beginning at existing
Wsxt P~ov~dence Road, Stat~ RO~t~ 67S, and going westerly 0.03
mile to the .intersuction with W. Providence Court, th~n
continuing .westerly '0.04 mile to the inte:sectlon with
92-1~0 2/26/92
Providence Creek Road, formerly ~rovid~n~ Creek Ridge, smd
Providence Creek Road, then continuing westerly 0.06 nile to
Court, beginning at the intersection with W~st Providence Road
and going moutherl~ 0.05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac;
beginning mt the intersection with West Providence creek Road
to ~n~ at Providence Creek Road, Providence
Providence Creek Road, beginning ut the intersection with West
Creek Ridge, and going southwesterly 0.05 mile, then tRr~ing
and going south- easterly Q.1Q mile tO %be intersection with
and going easterly 0.13 miler then turning and going
northeasterly 0.23 mile, then turning and going northerly 0.05
mile to end at the intermection with West ~rovidenoe Road,
State Route 678; and Providence Creek Court, beginning at the
intersection with Previd~n¢~ Creek Road and going
This request is inclusive of th~ adjacent ~lope, sight
distance, clear zone and designated Virginia Department of
Transportation drainage
guarantee~ to the virginia Department o£ Transportation an
cu~s, fills and drainage for all of these roads.
Thi~ day the Co~ty Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
direction~ from this Board, made report in writing ~pon his
e~amination of s~gar Creek Way in Suga~ Creek, Rha=e
Matoaca District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Barber~
seconded by Mr. Colbert, it is resolved that Sugar Creek Way
in Sugar Creek, Phase 2, Matoaea District, be and it hereby is
established as a public roa~.
Aed be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Transportation, be and i% hereby is requested to take into the
Secondary System, Sugar Creek Way, beginning at the
intersection with Evergreen East Parkway, State Ro~te 3970,
and goin~ southwesterly 0.O9 mile, t~en ~urning sn~ going
southerly 0.~3 mile~ then turning and going southeasterly
milo, then turning and going southerly 0.O~ mile to tie into
e~i~ting sugar C~e~ way, Stat= Re=ts muter to be assigned.
Thi~ request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, sight
distance, clear zone and desi~ated Virginia Department of
Transportation drainage easements.
This road serve~ as accenn to ~lti-fa~ily property.
And b~ ~t further resolved, that the Bear~ of Supsrvlsors
guarantees to the virginia Department of Transportation an
unre~triuted right-of-way of 50~ with necessary easement~ for
cuts~ fills and drainage for this road.
This phase of Sugar Creek is recorded as fello'ws~
Phase 2. Plat Book 69, Page 76, February 8, 1990.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. Colbert and Mr. EcKale.
Absent! Mr. Warren.
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from thi~ Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of King Catton Lane and King Cotton Court fn
Timb~rmill West, Matoaca District.
Upon consideration whereof, ~nd on motion of Mr. Barber,
seconded by Mr. Colbert~ it is reselved that King Cotton Lane
and King Cotton Court in Timbermill West, ~atoaca District, b~
and they hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved! that the Virginia Department of
Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the
secondary .sy~tem~ King Cotton Lan~, b~ginning at existing King
Cotton Lane, State Route number to be assigned, Glen Tara,
Section 5-A, and going southwesterly 0.12 mils to end at the
intersection with King' Cotton CoUrt; and K~ng Cotton Con.t,
beginning at the intersection,with King Cotton Lane and going
southeasterly 0.04 mile to ~nd in a cul-de-sac. Again, King
Cotton Cou~t, beginning ~t the inter~ection with King Cotte~
Lane and ~eing northwesterly 0.07 mile to end in a cul-de-sac.
This request is io~luslve of the ad)scent ~lope, sight
distance, clear zon~ an4 designate~ Virginia Departnent of
Transportation drainage easenents.
These roads ~erve 24 lots.
And be it ~urther ~e~olved, that the Board of Supervisors
guaran%ee~ to the virginia Depart. man= oS Transportation an
unr~trioted right-of-way of ~0' with necessary easements for
cuts, ~ill~ and drainage for all of the~e roads.
Timbsrmill West is recorded as follows:
Plat ~oa~ 7~, Page 87, July 19, 1990.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, Mr. celbert and M~. MoHale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.B.9.~GREEM~T FOR M~INTENANCR OF A ~T~ D~NAGR
On motion of Mr, Barber, ~econd~d by N~. Colbert., ~e Board
authorized ~ County A~inistrator to execute an Agme~ent
~n~gem~nt ~ac~ice ~a6ility with wilton DeveloDmen~ C~pany,
th~ ~evelope~ of Lon~eadow, With ~= County ' s only
involvement being to a~ure the Maintenance Agreement is
followed by th~ ~er as approved by the County Attorney.
Ayes: ~. Daniel~ ~. Ba~, Mr. Colbert and ~. ~cHale.
?.B.10. AGREemenT FOR ]4~IN~{ANCE OF A STOI~FAT~ DRA~N~
S¥ST]~ AND BB~T ~ANAG~{ENT PI~A~TICE FACILITY F~
AS~OT FO~F-~ T
On motion 'of 'M~. Barber, seconded by ~r. Colbert, the Board
authorized ~hs County AOmi~istrator to execute an Agreenent
for Maintenance of a Stormwater Drainage Eystem and Best
92-142 2/26/92
4eveloper o£ Ascot ~uru~t, with'the County's only involvement
owner as aDDroved by the.County Attorney.:.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel~ F~r. Barber, Mr, Colbert and Mr. McHale.
Absent: Pit. Warren.
~anagement Practice Facility with William ~. Duval,
involvement being to a~ure the Malnt~nance Agreement
followed by the owner a~ aD~rov6d by ~e County Attorney.
~nt: ~. ~arren.
7.B.12. CONv~¥~NC~ OF ~A~S TO_.%~I~INTA ~I~CT~I~ ~
On motion of ~r. Barber, seconde~ by ~. Colbert~ ~e Board
authorized the Chai~an of the Boar~ an~ the County
A~inistrator to execute two eam~mnt a~eemen=~ with virginia
Electric and ~ower Company to in,tall buried oabl~ and
overhea~ cable to u~grade s~rvioe at the chesterfield County
Air~ort and Industrial Park, subject to Federal Avia~io~
Administration ~nd Virginia Department of Aviation approval.
this Board.)
Ayes: ~. Daniel, Mr, Barber, ~r. Colbert and ~. Morale.
~sent: ~. Warren.
7-8-13. A14]~ND~T~ TO ~O]~I~ACTS S88-~2~D,...SSg-141D ~ND
~. Colbert, the Board approved an amendment to Contractz
~sg-l~gD, ~g8-~41~, and W~-24~D for a portion of th~
C~nterPclnte Development a~d au~orized the Co~ty
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, ~. Barber, Mr. colbert and ~. McHale.
~ent: ~. Warren.
7-B-~4-__~C~T~.NCE OF A PA~CELOFLANDAI~NGH~TL~
On ~otio~ of ~. Barber~ seconded by ~. Colbe~, ~e Board
accepted, on behalf of th~ County, the conveyance of a parcel
cf land containing .091 acre along Kull Z~ee% Roa~ from
=nterpri~e and authorized ~ County A~inlstrator to execute
th~ hecessary deed. (It i~ noted a oopy Of th~ Plat is filed
w~th the paper~ of ~his Board.)
92-143
On motion of ~. B~rb~r, ~econded by Nr. Colbert, th~ Board
aooept~, on behalf of the county, ~e conveyance of two
parc~l~ of land -- one containing .06~ acre and one containing
.013 acr~ -- along Turn~m Road and ~ull Street Road from Star
~terprise and au~orized the Cowry Administrator to execute
the necessa~ de~ds. (It is n~ted c~pies ~f the Plats
filed with ~e papers of this
Ayes: ~ Daniel, ~. Barber, ~. Colbert and ~. Mc~mle.
BY T~P~3I~PORTS
On motion of Mr, Barber, s=cond~d by Mr. Colbert, the Board
adoDte~ the following resolution:
Approving I~uanc~ of the
Peninsula ~orts Authority of Virginia
Hoalth system Revenue and Refunding
{Riverside ~ealth Syst~ Project) Series
OF THE BO~D OF S~ER~ISORS
OF ~EgTg~IELD CO~TY, VIRGINIA
~ER~AS, the Penlnmula Ports Authority of Virginia. whoso
prlnclpal bu~in~ addre~ is 825 Diligence Drive, suit~
N$~or% N~w~, Virginia 23606 (th~ "Authority"), has conducted
a joint public hearing, after not~ce, on February 19, 1992,
date within sixty (60) days prior to the da~e of the adoption
of this Re~otution, on behalf of the Au~ority, Gloucester
cowry, ~ath~wm Co~ty, Isle of Wight County. thm To~ of
S~ithf~eld, E~e~ COunty, Chesterfield County, the To~ of
Wes~ Point, the City uS Virginia Beach and ~e City of
News, on the plan of financing of Riverside ~ealthcare
Assucia~ion, In=. ("Ri=~r~ide Healthcare"), whose principal
business address i~ 606 Denblgh ~oulevard, Suite ~01, ~e~ort
New=, virginia ~3602, Riverside Hospital, Inc, (th=
"Hospltal"), ~hose principal business addres~ is 500 J. clyd~
Morris BQ~levard~ Ne~ort N~, Virginia 23601 and c~tain of
all of which are not-for-profit 'virginia corporations which
Code of 1986~ a~ ~e~ded (the "code"), and ~xempt from tax
und.r ~eotion ~01(a) of the Coda (culleu~ively,
for the issuance of the Authority'~ H~alt~ System Revenue and
Refunding Bonds in an amount not to exceed Ss~.000,000
"Bond~") to assist Riverzide in (a) financing (1) the
of certain medical and o~h~ equipment supportive
~n~i~en~al ~o ~e health care f~ctions of th~
including, without limi=a=ion, operating room
laboratory~ heart Cath~terizat$cn, computer ~nd radiation
Hospital (3) ~e construction of a ~ree-stor2 building to
house a ~W energy plant an~ a~ini~tra~ve offioe$, all to be
located at o~ ~ea~ ~e ~ite of the Hospital; (b) reflnaneing
(1) the H~ical Facilities Revmnue Note (Riverside Heal,caMe
As~oclatio~, Inc.} Series of 1985, i=~u~d hy th~ A~thority in
19~5 in ~e original a~greqat~ principal amour of
(the "Series of 19B~ Bonds"), (~ the Medical
Revenue Not~ (Riverside Heal,care Association, Inc.) i~ued
by th~ Industrial Development A~thorlty of Gloucester County,
Virginia (the "Gloucester Authority") in 19S7 in the original
aggregat~ p~incipal ~ount Of $12,2~0,000 (~e "Series
Bo~d$'~), (3) the Hospital Refundin~ Revenue Bond~ (Riverside
92-144 2/26/92
Bonds (Riverside Tappahannook ~0epital) Series 19~9B, issued
by the Industrial Develnpment Authority of Essex County
"~s~ Authority") in 1959 fn the original aggregate principal
amounts of $7,575,000 and $3,72~,000, reepectively, (toget/~er,
the "Series 19S9 Bonds"), and (4) the variable Rate Demand
Revenue Bonds (Virginia Beach Convalescent Center
Series 1990, issued by the city of virginia Beach Development
Authority in 1990 in the original aggregate principal amount
of ~2~700~900 (the "Series 1990 Bonds"); {¢) funding a reserve
fu~d for th= Bonds; and (d) financing certain interest
and other expanses inolu~ing issuance costs incurred in
cormection with the issuance of the Bond~;
W~R~AS, the Serle~ i~S~ Bond~ were i~sued to finance,
among other ~hings t~e aequisition~ construotien and equipping
of a wellnes~ and fitness oe~er located at 11621 Rebimus
Road, Midlothian, Virginia 23113, in Chesterfield County,
Virginia (the "County")', mhd owned by Riverside Wellnese and
Fitness Centers# Inc. (an affiliate of Riverside Healthcare);
and
~P~F~%S, Section ~47 (f) of the Code D~ovldes that the
governmental .unit having juri~dictionove~ the ~rea in which
any facility finance~ with the Droeee~s cf Private activity
WEER~AS, certain of the facilitie~ being r~flnanced with
the proceeds of the Bonds (the "Facilltiss") are located in
the County, and the Board Of Supervisors of the County (the
aboard") constitutes the hlghemt elected ~oYerr~ental unit of
the County; and
WEEREAS, the Authority ha~ requested the Boa~ to ratify
the publio hearing and approve the issuance of the Bonds
the plan of financing to comply with $~otion 147(f) of the
Code; and
WI~EREAS, a copy of the Authorlty~s resolution approving
the issuanc~ of the Bonds, subject to terms =o be agreed upon,
(the "Authority Resol%tion"), a record of th~ public hearing
and a fiscal impact statement haye bmen filed with the Board;
BE I~ R~$OLV~D BY T~E BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
C~ESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
i. The ~eeitals made in the firs= and secon~
clausee to this Resolution are hereby adopted as part of the
this Resolution.
~- The Board h~reby concurs in the joint public hearing
held on its b~hslf by ~he Authority On February 19, 199~, and
the publicmtion cf notice thereof.
3. The Board hereby oencure in r/~e A~%hority Resolution
adopted by the Authority on February 19, 19~, a Copy of which
i~ attache~ hereto.
4. The Board hereby approves the ioeuance of the Bond~
by the Authority for the benefit of Riverside, %0 ~he
reguire~ by Section ~47(f] of the Cedo.
~. Concurrenne i~ the joint public hearing, concurrence
in the Au.thorlty Resolution, and approval a~ t~e immuance of
~he Bomde and ~h~ plan of financing do net constitute an
endorsement to s pregp~ctive purchaser Qf ~he Bonds of ~he
creditworthiness of the Facilities or of Riverside, and~ as
required by Virginia law, =he Bonds shall provide that neither
t~e commonwealth of Virginia nor any political subdivision
ther~c£, including the County ah4 the Authority, shall be
obligated tn pay the bend~ ar the interest thereon er other
co~ incident thera~s except fre~ ~h~ revenues 'and
pledged therefor by Riverside, and neither the leith and
C~edlt no~ the taxing power of the Commonwealth or any
political subdivision thereof, including the County and the
Authority, shell be pledged thereto.
6. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
Income Tax Regulations Section 5£.103-2(f)(1], this Resolution
shall remain in effect for a period of one year from the date
of its adoption.
7. The Countyt Including its elected representatives~
dis¢lai~ all liability for any damage to Riverside, diree: er
consequential, resulting from the Authority'e failure to issue
the Bonds for any reason.
8. Thi~ Resolution ~hall take effect i~u~ediately upon
its adoption.
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Sarber, Mr. Colbert and Mr. Mc~ale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.B.4. Ai~PRO~ALOF OFFICE ON YOU'r~A~
Mrs. Bennett ~tatnd th~ Office on Youth and the Youth Services
Citizen Board had been crea~ed to advi~e th~ Board on i~ua~
related to youth and due to chan~eE of the Department of Youth
and Family Services, r~quired an adjustment in the Office's
Re~olutlon of Fermation and by-laws and repasted the Board
~pprove these chang~.
After brief dt~ous~iun, on motion of Mr. Barber, ~econded
~r. MoHale, the Boa~O adopted the following r~olution:
~R~S, it is the philosophy of ~ Department
Cor~ion~ tha~ d~linquency ~revention is a prcce~ of
th~ n~w Department which ~hall handle delinqu~oy prevention
and the Del~n~ency ~ravention and You~ Development Act
provides funds for the operation cf co--unity-based
delinquency prevention programs; and
~=REAS, the Board of S~p~i~ors, on b~alf of =h~ Yout~
ha~ a~¢ept~d 'the Virginia D~lin~ency Prevention ~4 Youth
Development Act Gra~t to e~tablis~ 5n Office o~ Youth; and
~ER~S, this grant . car~i~z ~p~cific rules and
structure a~d .relationship of'~ Youth Service~ citizen 8card
to the Office on Youth; and
~ER~S, the grant sets m~nimum s=andard~ regarding
~stablis~ent, co~puoition, ' responsibilities, minimum and
Citizen Boa~d;.and
~E~A$, one of ~e ' main responsibilities of
Cotillion is Uo pre,are b~ennially, a comprehensive plan
ba~ed o~ a~ objective assessmemt of the ~o~nity'~ needs an~
resources for ~evmloDing, coor~inating and evaluating you~
~ervioe$; and
established s~nce 1978, a~d to date has ~epresentation from
each magisterial dis~ict in ~e fo~ Of tWO a~ult members
m. youth member from each high ~chool in Chesterfield County;
amd
92-146 2/26/~]
W~R~A$, the Board of Supervleors roeegnlzes the nee~
an effective and active Board to address youth i~sue~; and
W~EREAS, the Youth services Citizen Board is a~ advisory
group and has responsibility for pre~ram~ and policies
affecting youth development.
NOW, TKEREFOR~ B~ IT ~SDLVED, that the Youth Services
Citizen Board, establlsha~ by a resolution of.the chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors and which is in aooordance with
Sections ~6-29 through 66-~5 of %he Code of Virginia~ shall
derive its authority from and be ac%minimt~red by said Board of
fupsrv~sorm; that the Youth Services citizen Beard shall
continue to have two adult ~embers from each ~agistarlel
district, appointed by the mupe~isor of that dimtrict, and
whose te~ of appoin~nt shall be for ~hraeyearm, with
ter~ e~pi~inq in staggered years.
The You~ s~icem Citize~ Board shall have as
majerity u~ i~ memberm =~tiz~nm who ar~ not ~pl~ed
governmental service agenciem and who ar~ no= electe~
government officialm. At least on~ me, er shall be below
y~a~m Of age. T~ yeuth memberm mhmll metre one-year te~s,
an~ may be re-appointed to serve an additional te~ provided
they are still attending high S~Ool. NO title, position or
agenoy shall D~ appointed to a pcsit~on on the You~ Servicem
Citizen hoard.
~D, BE IT F~THER RESOLVED, that the You~
Citlzen Board ghall eleot its o~ officers, establish ~tm own
by-laws, and shall ad~re~s and remolvm any oondi~ions which
keep the Beard of supe~vfso~u and Office on Youth from being
in ¢omplianoe wi~ ~e minim~ standards of the Virginia
Delinq~e~oy P~UVention and Yonth D~v~lopm~t Act
~rograms, and shall ~erve in an advimory capacity r~arding
the ~upervi~ion and a~inistratlon of the Off'ce on Youth.
And, fur~er, the Board approved ~e Youth Me,ices citizen
Bylaws is filed wi~ the paper~ of the Board.)'
Ayes: Mr. Danlel, ~. Barber, ~. colbert and ~r.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
Mrn. Bennett intreduced Reverend Robert sawyer who presented
an overvie~ Of the Youth Needs Assessment Report a~d Stated
the report had taken approximately one y~ar to oomplete by the
Youth Services Citize~ Board. He further stated the
assessment would assist in the developmsn~ of a six year plan
for the youth of the County and requested the Board to endorse
the Report.
On motion of F~r. Barber, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the Board
e~dorsed the Youth Needs A~e~ent Report for the office on
Yeuth. (It is noted a copy of the Report i~ filed ~ith the
papers of t~ Board.)
Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Barber, ~r. Colbert and F~. KCHale.
.8.......DEFERRED IT~NS
On motion of ~r. Barber, seeen~e~ by Mr. McHale~ the Beard
deferred consideration Of nominations to the Solid Waste
Committee, repr~sentlng Clover Hill and Midlothian District~,
until March 11,
92-147 2/26/92
................................ J L ......... ~ I
Aye~ Mr, Danlel~ Mr. Barber~ ],Ir. Colbert and Mr. ~c~ale.
A~en~: Mr. Warren.
9.
On motion of Hr. Barber, 'seoonded by ~. Colbert, the
accepted the follow±mg report~:
~. Ram~y pr~nt~d th~ Board ~i~ a stat~ report O~ the
General Fu~ ~alance; Rese~e for Futur~ CaDi~al Projects;
School ~oard Agenda.
~. R~n~ey ~tate~ ~ Virginia D~partm~nt o~ Tran~por~a=ion
has fo~ully motified the County of the acceptance of the
foll~ing roads in=o the Sta~e seoondary
SAG~OOD - ~SE 3 ~-- (Effective
Route 2972 (Sagewood Roa~) - From 0.02
Northeast Route 321~ to Route 3~52 0,08
Route 3852 {Sageb~o0~ ROad) - From 0.15 mile
Northeast ,Route 2972 to S.2~ ~ile ~outheast
Route 3853 (Sagecre~ Court) - From ~out~ 3852
to 0.94 mile North Rout~ ~a~2. 0.04
Rout~ ZS54 (Sagecre~ Circle) - From Route 3852
to 0.03 mile South Route 38S~
Route 3855 (~aqebrook court) - ~om Route 3852 to
0.04 mile south Route 3852 0.04
S~RIN~ T~ - $~ZON C
Route 4719 (Pointer Ridge Road) - From 0.01 mile
North Rout~ A718 to Route 4721 o.os
SPRING T~CE - S~ION D
Route 4719 (Poi~t~ Ridge Road) - ~rom Route
to 0.06 mil~ North Rou%e 4721 0.06
Rou~e 4721 (Pointer Ridge Terra,a) - Pron Route 4719
to 0.07 mile Northwest ROUte 471~ 0.07
~ED~ CLIFF - S~CTTON$ 1 AND 2
Rou~ 4939 (Cedar Cl~ff Road) - FTO~ Route 4943 to
0.52 mile Wes~ Route 494~ 0.~
Route 49~5 (cedar Cliff Court) - From Routm
~o 0.03 mile ~outhw~st Route 4939 0.03
RO~=~ 4941 (Cedar Cliff Terrace) - From Route 4939
to 0.07 mile ~outhea~t Rout~ 495~ 0.07
Route 4942 (~i~ory ~le~ Road) - From Rout~
to 0.03 mile Nor~ Route 4939 0.03
Route 4943 (.C~dar Cliff Drive) - From Route 4939
to Route 4930 0.05
Route 4932 (~in C~dars Road) - From Route ~9~0 to
92-148 2/26/92
Routs 4935 (Cobble Glen Court) - From Route 4932 to
0.09 mile North Route 4932
FOXWOOD
Route 4933 (Fok-~ood Road) - F~O~ Route 4932 to 0.21
mile Southwest Route 4932 0.21 Mi
~/4~N CEDARS AND A PORTION OF CEDAR CLIFF - SECTION 2
Route 4932 (Twin Cedars Road) - From 0.16 mile South-
west Route 4930 to
Routs 4936 (Twin Cedar~ Terrace). - From Romt~ 4932
to 0.04 mile South Route 4932
Route 4937 (Twin CllXf~
to Route 4939 (cedar Cliff
Route 4938 (Twin Ceda~u Court) - From Ro~ta 4932
to 0.06 mile South Ro~te 4932 0.06 Mi
~RE¥~IRLD ~LA~ - S~CTIONS 1 AND 2: SANDY G3~K$ LAUREL EPRIN~;
PRESTON PLACE - SECTIOW
Route 4944 (Stonuy Cre~k Lane) - From Route 4930
to 0.05 mile We~t Route 4930 0.0~ Mi
Route 4950 (Sandy Oak Road) - From Route 4930 - South
~o Rou%e 4930 - ~ortb 0.37 Mi
Route 4951 (sandy Oa~ Court) - F~om Route 4950 to
0.04 mile South Route 4950
Route 4952 (Sandy Oak Terrace) - From Route 4950
to 0.04 mile East Route 4950 0.04 Mi
Route 4954 (Greyfield Drive) - From Route 4930 to
Route 1559 0.20 Hi
Route 49~4 (Laurel Spring Roa~] - From Route 4930 to
0,12 ~ile So~th Rout~ 4930
Route 4955 (Laurel Spring Court) - From Route 49~4
to 0.13 mile southwest Route 4954 0.13 Mi
RouLe 4956 (Greyfi~ld Place) - From Route 4954 to
0.04 mile West Route 49§4 0.04 Mi
Route 4957 (Stoney creek court) - From Route 4930
to 0.04 ~ilu Northwest Route 4930 0.04 Mi
ROU=e 4950 (Stoney Cree~ Terrace).E From Route 493~ to
0.04 mile Southeast Routo
Route 49~0 (Stoney Cre~k Farkway) - From Route 144 to
0.01 mile Southeast Route 4950 - ~outh 0.57 Mi
OAK SPRINGS - {Rffective
Route 2954 (Huntgate Woods Read) - F~O~ 0.01 mile
West Route 4~0 to 0,4§ mile We=t Route 46D0 0.44 Mi
ROCK ~L%RBOUR
Route 4328 (Rock Eerbour Road) - From Route 3600 to
0.55 mile Northwest Route 3600 0.$$
ROUte 975 (Battery Dantzlor Road) - From Route 785
to 0.1§ mile W~t Rou~e 785 0.15 Mi
EEATE~RIDGE - SECTION
Ro~te 1825 (Marbleridge Road) - From 0.0~ mil~
Wes~ R0ut~ i~Z! to 0.17 mile West Route 1421 0.14 Mi
92--149 2/28/92
Route 3271 (Royal Crescent Drive) - From 0.04 mile
Route 3268 (Royal CreScent Wa~) - From 0.04 mile
Route 4309 (Gates Mill Road) - From Route 3600 to
0.21 mils Northwest Rou~e 3600' 0.21 Mi
Route 4313 (Gates Mil~ Court) - From Route 4309
to 6.12 mile North Route 4~09 0.12 Ni
$OUt~h Route 4309 to 0.08 mile Nort5 ROUte 4309 0.16 Mi
STONEHENGE - SECTION J
Route 2575 (Rothburg Drive) - ~rom 0.03 mile Northeast
Route 2561 to 0.04 ~ile Northeast Route 2561 0.01 Mi
S~D~TONE RIDGE - (Effective'l-15-92%
Route 5000 {Sandstone Ridge Road) - ~rom Route 433~
to 0.28 mile Southwest Route 4337 0.2~ Mi
Route 5001 (Sandstone Ridge Court) - From Route 5000
to 0.05 mile Ngrthwest Route 5000 0.05 Mi
Route $002 (Sandstone Ridge Terra~e) - From Route
5000 to 0.14 mile South Route 5000 0.15 Mi
~BES~%~UT BLUFF
Route 5000 (Chestnut Bluff Read) - From Route 4337
to 0.32 ails North Route 4337 0.32 Mi
Route 5003 (Orchard Grove ~rlve) - From Routs 5000
to 0.82 mile No~thweat Route 5000 0.02 Mi
Route 5004 (Chestnat Bluff Terrace) - From Route
5000 to 0,16 mile North Route 5000 0.16 Mi
Noute 5005 (Chestnut BluSf Place) - From Rou~a 5000
to 0.09 mile North Route 5000 ~.09 ~i
Route 5003 (Orchard Grove Drive) - From Route 5006
to 0.10 mile Southeast Rout~ ~006 0.10 Mi
Rout~ ~006 (Orchard Grove Lane) - From Route 4337
to 0.15 mila Northeamt Route 4337 0.15 Mi
Route 5007 (Orchard Grove Court) - From Route 5006
to 0.~ ~ile Southeast Route 5006 0.05 Mi
MISTY GL~ - (~ffective 1-16-9~]
Rou~m 3126 (s=erlinghea~h Drive) - From 0.03 mile
$ou~east Route 3124 to Route 4374 ~.01 Mi
Route 4370 (Gable Way) - ~om 0.83 mile Southeast
Route $1~4 to 0.07 mile Southeast Ro~te Z124 0.04 Mi
B~ - SECTION C
Route 4~92 (Corryvi110 Road) - From ROUte 2331 to
0.09 mile Northwest Re. tm 2331 0-09 Mi
Route 4293 (Krommridgm Road) - from 0.07 mil~ North-
,'!
we~t Route 4297 to 0.03 nile Southwest Route 4292 0.25 Mi
to 0.04 mile Northeast Route 4293 9.04 Mi
Route 4296 (Kr0ssbrifl~ court) - From ROUte 4293 to
0.07 mile Northeast Route 4293 0,07
Route 4297 (~leepyhill Road) - From Route 4293 to
Route 4298 0.20
Route 4298 (Providence ~rrace) - From Route
to 0,11 mile South Route 67S 0,1I Mi
Route 4293 (Kros~ridge Road) = From 0.03 mile South-
west ROUte 4292 ~e 0.14 mile Southwest Route 4292 0.11 Mi
Route 4294 (Krossridge Circle) - From Route 4293 to
0.04 mile Northwest Route 4293 0.04 Mi
SADDLE HILL - (~ffective 1-17-92%
Route 5008 (Saddle Hill Drive) - Fron ROUte 4337 to
0.25 mile Southeast Route 4337
B~O~LACE - S=CTIO~ 1
Route 1244 (Bar~ow Place) - From 0.22 nile East
Route 1247 to Route 123s 0,17 Mi
Route 1~38 ($~ouegate Road) - From 0.08 mile South
Route 1239 to 0.24 ~ile South Route 1939 0.16 Mi
T~E A K - SECTION 2
Route 3650 (Playground Drive) - From 0.01 mile south
Route 3651 to Route 3653 O.12 Mi
Route 3653 (L~isure Terrace) - From 0-03 mile West
Route 3~50 to 0.os nile East Route 3650
Ef active 2-7-92
Rout~ 1Ad3 (Ramona Avenue) - From Route 1405 to
Route ~790 (~aywood Street) - From Ro%te ~409 to
Route 1420 O.07 Mi
Mr. Sale presented the Board w'ith a report o~ the developer
water and sewer contracts executed by the County
Adninistrato~.
Aye~l Mr, Daniel, Mr. Barber, ~hr, Colbert sn~ ~4r. ~uHale.
Absent: Mr. Warren.
7.B.5. i~QUE~T FOR R~-AFF~3~TION OF 'r~ION ~
It was indlcate~ ~h~ ~oard n~eded to ad~ress I~ 7.B.5.,
re~ast for re-affirmation of the mission and me~er~hlp of
the D~g and Alcohol ~use ,Ta~k Force an~ nomination of new
m~ar~, p~ior t0 ~ecessing for dinner.
been established %o a~v~=m the Board on s~stance abuse issues
and ~taff Wa~ reqU~ting re-affi~ati0~ 0f the Ta~k Force's
mid,ion and membership. She introduced Dr. Clinton Pettus,
Dr. Pettu~ intuo~ced me~rs of the Drug and Alcohol Ab~se
Task Force who w~re present and ~tated t~e Ta~k Force was
currently preparing in~ormatiQn regarding preyeD=ion programs,
D~ivata a~d p~blic, within ~he County and an overview of local
tax supported Drograms relative to drug awareness, prevention
and intervention. Me further reviewed the selection o~
~e~bership to the Task Force and requestpd the Board to
re-affir~ the mission and membership of %he Task Force.
Mr. Daniel stated in the pas=, appointments to the Drug and
Alcohol Abuse Task Force had b~en ~ade by the Chairman and
noted he felt .these appointments should be considered Dy =~e
entire Board.
~en a~ked~ Mrm. Bennett stated m~ership to the Task Force
included rmpresentatives from each district as well as the
County at-large.
Mr. Daniel indicated additional names to serve on the Task
On mo=ion of ~. M~ale. seconded by ~. Colbert, the Board
reaffi~ed the mission and m~mb~r~hip Of th~ Drug and Alcohol
Abuse Ta~K FOrCe and nominated the following per~ons to ~erve
on the Ta~k Force, who~e formal aDpoin~n=s will be made at
Mrs. Helen Fitch
Mrs. Bobbie Gerold
Mr. Patrick Jarra=t
Dr. Clinton ~attu~
Mrs. Bertle ste~l
~. walter N~nary
Mrs. Carolyn Stud~ar~
Absent: Er. War~en.
(It is noted a co~y of the ~988 Report of Public Hearings and
lnitial ~in4ing~, the 1~1 Sugary of PRIDE Survey Results and
Board.)
on monion of Mr. Colbert, seconded by ~r. Barber, the Board
recessed at 4:~0 p.m. (EST} to the Administration ~uilding,
Room 502, for dinner. .
Absent: ~ir.. Warren.
Mr. Warren arrived at th~ me~tin~.
Mr. Daniel introduced Reverend Will~a~ ~. White, Pastor of Bon
Air United Methodist Church, who gave the invocation.
92-152
12- PI~EDGE OF ~J~LEGIANC~ TO WE FLAG ~F '~= ~IT~ ~TATE~ OF
Boy Scout Troop ~45 l~d th~ Pledge of Allegi~n~ to th~ Flag
of th~ United S~a%~ off.atica.
Mr. Ha~m~ introduced Captain Bradley and stated the Board
would be recognizing him for his six year~ of service to the
Crater Planning District Conunission with a Pcw~er Plate.
~r. Daniel expressed appreciation to Captain Bradley for his
~ix years of service, representing the County at-lar~e~ e~ the
C~ater Planning District Commission and presented him with
Board for the opport~ity to serve on the Co~ission and for
the recognition bestowed u~on
~.~Y ~L
~ ~%oke~ stated ~e Harro~ate ~lementary School Parent -
Tmacher~ A~ooiation was concerned with the status ~f the
conditioning/energy conservation 9reject a% ~e school, she
e~ressed appreciation to the Bourd for their sin=ere interest
in attempting to resolve ~elr concerns by addressing
available funding for these t~s of projects
through the 19~$ ~on~ Referenda. S~e further stated the
County's Council on PTA's had adopted a resolution
19S8 Bond Referenda; that' the resolution
~urty-nine ~TA's from every dis~iot withi~ the County;
they felt ccnst~ctlon 'promi~es from the 19~8 Bo~ R~eren~
mhoul~ b~ fulfflled; that she felt although ~ere were many
important needs w~thin the county, that the chilean required
a ~afe and healthy ~vironment in which to learn; that ~ey
felt th~ ~oard realized the i~ediate action need~ to address
th~ situation and expressed appreciation to the Board for the
opportunity to address this
Nr. Daniel stated ~e County Administrator had been instructed
to re~pond to Ms. Stoker outlining the proce~ the Board
M~. Stoker r~a~ an~ submitted to %~ Board~ on behalf of
Dunkum~ the President of ~e County Council on PTA'S,
re=elation regarding the air =onditioning/ener~ consolation
re~uemted he be allowed to add.ess the Board for ten minute~
instead of five a~ permitted under Hearln~m of Citizens on
Mr. Daniel stated the Rules of Procedure adopte~ by the ~uard
permitted citizens a fiv~ m~nute time l~mlt only.
Mr. Kamas e~ree~ed appreciation to the Board for the
opportunity tO address his concerns and stated ho felt the
~uildin~ Code had not been enforced properly and the system
had not adequately protected homeowners within .the County. He
from the 1980's regarding soil conditions and foundations and
stated he felt the system had failed to address these issues
at that time; that he questioned the State and the county'0
administration of thig iggue and gubmlttod copio~ of tho
documents to the Board.
Mr. Daniel instructed the County Ad~ini~trat0r and the County
Attorney to review the documents su~ittsd and to repor~ their
findings to the Board.
13.C. ~. T~C~AM G. CA~. P~EG~INGTOM~C~'ORPORATION
order to repre~t Tomac Co~oration~ pos~tlon
~hat Mr. Earnes had recessed a ~ettlement from Tomac
Corporation but they had not been provided an opportunity to
visi~ ~he ~i~e in ~uestion; and t~at t~ey felt t~e allegations
Board a copy of his
14. P~BLTCHEA~IN~
There were no public hearings schaduled.
15. P~90~ESTS ~OR
In Dale Magisterial Dis~rist,
~ezonim~ from Agricult~al (A) and Co~nity Business (B-~) to
Co~uni~ ~u~ine== (C-3). ~ denmity of su~ amendment will
be controlled by zoning condlt~ons or 0r~inance standards.
~m ComDr~n~ive Plan designate~ the p~ope~ty fo~ office and
light co~erclal ume- This re,est lies on 6.0 acres fronting
a~proxi~t~ly 1~140 feet on t~e east line of Iron Brldgc Ruud,
Mr. Js~ob~on preseBt~ a s~ry of ca~ 91SN0199 a~ ~tated
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded Dy Mr. MoHale~ ~e Board
deferred Came 91SN~199 ~ntil Mmy ~7, 199~.
Vote:
In ~ermuda Magisterial District, J~ V. DANIEL~
~ezo~i~g from Residential (R-7) tc Neighborhood Bu~in~
of 2.7~ acres plus a Conditional Ume %0 pernit a fast food
restaurant on 0.76 acres of the 2.73 acre tract.
of arch amen~ent will ~ con~rolled by zoning conditionm
Ordinance standards. The comprohen$iv~ ~lan ~emignates the
property for ~eig~orhood colorseal u~e. This request fronts
approximately l~ feet O~ the north line of West Hundre~ Road,
approximately 140 feet we~t of Ecoff Avenue, almo front~
approximately $02 feet on the west lima of ==off Av~num,
92-154 2/26/92
northwest of the intereeotion of these roads. Tax Map 115-10
(1) Parcel~ 2 and 3 (sheet 32).
I~r. Jacobsen presented a summary of Case 9~0~47 and stated
~r. MoHale had requested a %hirty day defe~ral~ ·
Kr, McHale stated he hsd requested the deferral to provide an
opportunity for the residents in the area to review the
recjuest end address their concerns.
There was opposition present, Mr. Daniel stuted since ther~
wa~ opposition =o the request~ it woul~ be placed in its
regular sequence on the agenda.
In clover Hill Magie~erial District, P~R P~ITT]~r J~.~
(C-3). The density of nu~h am~ndmen% will be oontr~lle~
zoning oo~ditions or Ordinance- mtanda~d~. ~ Comprehen~iv~
Plan de~i~ate~ the property for ~o~eroial use. This
lies on 7.24 acres fronting approximately &20 feet on the east
line of T~rner Road, approximately 820 fe~ south
Midlothian Turnpike. Tax ~p 19-13 (1) Pa~c~l 31 and Tax Map
29-1 (1) ~arc~l~ 22 and 23 (Sheet 9).
~. Jacobsen prmsented a sugary of Case 91SN0305 an~ s~a~ed
Transportation Plan. He fur~er s~a~ed ~e Planning
co~ission and staff ~eCo~ended approval ~n~ acceptance of
the proffered conditions.
~. ~ill Wal=on~ representing the applicant~, stated the
reco~endation was acceptable. There wa~ no
~resent.
On ~ot~on of ~. Warren, seconded by ~. COlbert, ~e Board
approved Case 91~WO~0~ and accepted the following
oondi~ions:
1. Prior to obtaining a building pe~it, one of the
follow~ng ~hall be accomplished for fir~
A. The owner, develope~ or assignee(s) shall pay to the
oo~ty $150 per 1,000 ~quare feet of gro~
ar~a adjusted upwar~ or d~ward by ~e
percentag~ that ~e Marshall ~wift B~ilding Co~=
and the date of p~en~. With ~e approval of
county'~ Fire Chieft the owner, develcp%v
assignee(s) shall receive a credit toward
suppr~ssioD eye%em not otherwise r=quired by law
which is included as a part of the d~velopment.
OR
B. Th~ O~er, developer 'or assigauu(m) ~hatl provide a
fire ~uppression system no~ o%h~ise required by
law which the County's Fire Chief
substantially ~educes the need for County
otherwise necessary for fire protection.
Applicants agree to accomplish A or B prior ~o
a buildin~ Dermi~.
2. Prior to ~ite plan approval, forty-five (45) feet of
right of way on ~e east side of Turner Roa~
from the centerline of t~at part of ~rn~r Road
92-155 2/~6/92
immediately adjacent to the property shall be dedicated,
f~ee and unrestrlc%ed, to and for the benefit of
chesterfield county.
Access to T~rner Road shall bs limited to one (1)
entrance/exit; provided, however, that at time of site
plan approval the Transportation Department may grant no
more than one (1) additional entrance/exit to Turner Road
subject to the requirements of Section 21.1-257 of t_he
Zoning Ordinance. The exact location of this access(es)
shall be approved by the Transportation D~partment.
Vote: Unanimous
In ~armuda Magisterial District, T~OMAS SEORDAS regusste~
rescuing from A~iculturaI (A) to Co~unlty Business
~e ~en$i~y of- such am~ndmen= w~ll ~e Cont~ollad by zoning
conditions or Ordinance %tandard=. The Comprehensive 91an
~e~i~a~es the property fo~ c0~ercial use. This request
on a 5.1 acre parcel fronting approximately, 75~ f~% on
east lin~ of Intecstate 95, approximately 100 f~et no.th
of these reads. Tax Map 116-8 (1) Parcel SS (Sheet
th~ reque~ ~onfo~d to th~ Eastern ~e~ Land U~ an~
~e proffered
~ere was opposition present. Mr. Daniel stated mince
wa~ opposition to the request, it wo~ld be plac~d in
In Eidlothlan ~agi~terial District, JO~$TON-W/TJ.T~L~/{ITED,
W~OLLY-OWR]~ ~UBSID~Y OF ~SPIT~ ~TION ~F
requested amendment ~o a previously .gran%~ conditional
(cage YTA~51) relativ~ to own~ship, architectural style and
contac]led by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards.
Comprehensive Plan de~ipnate~ the Droparty for light
mo~erciaI and office u~. .This request lie~ in Agricultural
(A), Co~unl~ musine~m (B-2) and office susiness (0}
District~ on a 33.9 acre parcel fronting approximately ~$0
feet on the north l~ne of Midlo.~hian ~rnpike~ also fronting
~pproxi~ly 2,300 fe~t on th~ ~a~t lin~ of Johnston-Willis
Drive, approximately 270 feet on ~he w~t line of
Johnst0n-Willim Drive, and ap~0ximately 670 feet on the south
line of Early s~B~lers Road and located at the intersection of
~eme roads. Tax Map 17-6 (l) Parcel 9 (Sheet 8].
~. Jacobsen presented a s~ary of Case 91SM01i~ an~ stated
~e request ~onfo~d to the Nor~ern ~ea Land U~e and
~anmportation Plan. ~ f~ther Stated the Planning
Co~ission an~ ~taff race. ended approval ~ubject to
conditions.
reoo~endation wa~ acceptable. There was opposition pre~ent.
~. Daniel stated ~inoe there was opposition to 'the
it would be placed in ~t~ regular sequence on the agenda.
92-156 2/26/92
Mr. Daniel instructed staff to reorder ~hs Agenda and address
those requests with little discussion first, as follow~, oases
91SN0247 (A~ended)
Tn ~ermuda ~agi~terial DistriCt, 01%~ES V. DANX~L~ reguested
rezening from Resldent~al (R-7) to Neighborhood Business (c~2)
of 2.73 acres 91us a Conditional Uso to permit a fast food
of such amendment will be controlled by zoning oon=i=iuns er
property for noighborhoo~ oo~ereial use. This resumer fTents
approximately 140 £ee~ west of scoff Avenue, also front~
northwest of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 115-10
(1) Parcels 2 and 3 (sheet 32).
Mr. Mc~ale had requested a thirty day deferral to Drov~de an
Mr. Colbert disclosed to the Board the= he owned property
conflict of interest pursuant to th~ Virginia comprehensive
Conflict of Interest Act, und e×sused himself from the
meeting.
Mr. Daniel diselcued to th~ Board that he was net r~lated to
the applicant.
Mr. George Beadles steted h~ felt the residents in t~e area
had received adequate notification of ~lle ~eqU=st und it
should be heard prior to a decision bslng made to defer.
~r. A1 ~lllott stated he was a resident OS =he area and the
application had not o~iginally requested a conditional use to
deferred Case 91ZN0~47 ~ntil ~arch 25, 1992 to provide an
opportunity for the residents in the area to review th~
92SN0103
In Dermuda Ksgi~terial District, T~ONAS ~0~ requested
rszontng from Agricultural {A) te Com/~unlty Business (C-3).
The d~nsiny Of such amendment will be oontrolled by zoning
condltlon~ or Ordinance s~andards. The Co~prehenslve Plan
desi~nates the property fo= C~r~ersiul u~e. This request lies
ena ~.1 a~r~ parcel fronting approximately 785 feet on the
east line of Interstate 95, approximately 100 feet north e~
West Hundred Road, and ~ecate~ nc~-~heast of the ~nterse~tlon
~t~. Jaeobao~ presented a s~ary of Caae 9]SN0103 and stat~
the r~e~t co~fo~ad ~o ~he Easte~ A~ea Land Use and
Transportation Plan. He fur~er Etated th~ Planning
~2--1§7 2/26/92
the proffered conditions,
~Lr. Thomas Skordus stated the recommendation was acceptable
and reques=ed the Board to give favorable consideration to the
request.
Far. Barber excused himself'from the meeting.
Far. John Smith stated although he was not opposed tc the
zoning of the property, he was very concerned about the
drainage.
M~. Barber returned to the nesting.
M~. Daniel ~tated the applicant would be restricted from
obtaining a building permit until drainage =onoerns were
adequately addressed.
Mr. Wesley Cunningham stated he was also concerned as to the
drainage problems in the area.
Mr. Skordas stated hie property was downstream ~rom Mr.
SNith's proOertY and, therefore, he did not feel the request
would impact t~e ~ralnsge concerns e~pr~ssed.
On motion o~ Mr. M~J~ale, seconded by Mr. Colbert, the Board
approved Case ~2SN0109 and. accepted the following proffered
conditions:
1. Prior to ehtaininq 5 b~ildinq permit, one of the
followihg shall be accomplished for Sire protection:
A. The owner, deYeloper or a~ignee(~) shall pay ts the
County $150 per 1,000 ~quare feet of gross floor
area adjusted upward or dow~lward by the sams
percentage that the Marshall swift Building Cost
Index inur~ased or decreased between June 30, 1991,
and the date of payment. With the approval of th~
County's Fire chief, the owner, developer or
a~ignee(s) shall receive credit toward the required
payment ~or ~e.coete of any fire suppression system
not otherwise required by law which is included as a
part cf the development.
OR
B. The owner, developer or assignee(z) z~all p~ovida a
fir~ suppression system not otherwise require~ by
lam which the Count¥'~ Fire Chief determines
sub~tantlally reduces the nee~ far county facilf=ies
otherwise necessary for fire protection.
unless mitigating road improvements, satisfactory to the
Transportation Department, are oons~rnote~ by the
developer~ developnenT ~bell be limited to uses that
generate tra~Xi~ equivalent to a 250-room hotel.
Vote: Una~inous
In ~idlothian.Magisterial District, $O~ST~N-W~=L~ 2~X~T~, A
~eq~usted amendment to a prevlou~ly grante~ Conditional Us~
(Case 77AI51) relative to o~ership, architectural style and
controll~d by zoning oonditionm or Ordinance standard~. The
Comprehensive Plan d~ignat~ the propm~y for light
commercial and office uses. Thim request lie~ in kgrlcultural
(A), Co,unity Busines~ (B-a) and O~ics Business (0)
Di~tri~t~ on a 95.9 acre parcel fronting appro~imaP~ly 330
feet on the nor=h l~ne of ~idlethian Turnpike, al~n fronting
approximately 2,300 f~et on 'the east line of Johnston-Willis
Drive, apprc×ima~ely 27~ fo~t on the west line of
Johnston-Willis Drive, end approximately 670 feet on the south
line of Early Settlers Road and located at =he intersection of
these roads. Tax Map 17-6 (~) Parcel 9 (Sheet ~).
Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case
Transportation P~an. Me further state4 ~e Planning
Co~ission and ~taff re~0~e~ded ~pprovul subject to
o~n~itions.
~. N. Leslie saunters, r=~r~enting ~e applicant, stated the
r~co~enda%ion wam acceptable.
~. George Beadles stated he felt J0hDnto~-Willi~ Hospital
currently h~d ~nadequate parking fac~litie~ and the
feasibili/M of a Chree story parking deck should be evaluated.
B= further stated he fait a condition should
~ece~sary at site plan r~view, for the parkingrequlrementz to
b~ addrassed by the applicant to ~ceed ~e n~er o~ parking
Kr. $aun~er~ stm~ed the proposed n~ber of parking spa~es was
~r. Barber noted the request was to locate a women's facility
· t Uohn~ton-Willi~
on motion of ~. Barber, seconde~ by Mr. Warr~, the Board
approved Case 9~SNOll8 subject to the following conditions:
1. ~is Conditional Use shall be for the purpoEe of the
=on~truction an~ operation of a 40G-bed general hospital
and related facilities, including doctOrS' office~ and
~ch a~ medical shop~, pha~acie$ a~d
(NOTE: Thi~ conditio~ ~upersedes Conditio~ i of Ca~e
77A151 for the r~t property only.)
2. ~e architectural style of thiz
=umpatible with the existing Johnston-Willis Hospital
facility. (P)
3. Except as stated ha~e~n, development shall confor~ to the
(NOTES:
Conditions 2 and 3 supersede Conditions Z and 5
of Case 77A1§~ for the request property only.
~xcept a~ noted h~rein, all other condi~ion~ of
Came 77A151 remain in effect.)
vote: Unanimous
It was generally agremd %o recess for five m~nstes.
Re=unvening:
92-159
.................... J .............. J L
In Xidle=hian Magisterial Dis=riot, HH~ requested rezoning
from R~sidential (R-i~) to Con~unity Business (C-~) with
Conditional Uae Planned Development on 5.62 acres and from
Agricultural (A) of 5.17 a~r~ and Residential (R-l$) of 1.6
acres to Regional Business (C-4} w~th'Conditional Use Planned
Development, plus amendment tc Conditional Use ~lannad
zoned 0ffi~e Business (O) and Convenience Business (B-l). The
density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning
conditions or Ordinance standards~ The Comprehensive Plan
designates the property for office, office business, office
Dark, mixed use, and high densit~ residential usa. This
1,50o feet on the north and south lines o~ Ja~ake Road, at its
line of Chippmzlham Parkway. ~ax 'Map ~1-5 (1) Parcel 10; Tax
Map 11-9 (1) Parcel 2; Tax Map 11-13 (1) Parcels 15, 16, ~1
Block A, Lots 1 through lC, BloCk ~, Lots 1 through SA; ~look
M~. B~verly Reger~ Planning Administrator, presented an
Coauniasion and staff reco~u~ended approval subjec~ to
conditions and acceptance Of t~ proffered conditions. She
noted since the Planning Commission and Board of supervisors
additional proffered uondltlon ~tatlnq that ~he proffered
condltlon~ w~re valid o~ly if the mppllc=nt was in agreement
density north and south of Jah~e Road.
~e residentz an~ ~ey felt ~e project wa~. r~ady to ROVe
forward. H~ ex~rems~ appreciation ~o staff and ~e Planning
Council, stated they supported ~='r~quest; ~at they felt ~
progect would be in th~ County's be~t i~terest; that they felt
favorable consideration to the request.
was an attorney;.~at he f~lt ~ project was unique an~ w0ul~
be in th~ best interest of t~e Co~ty; that he felt ~e
applicant had attempted tO r~a~ agreement~ wiun the resiuents
in a~dressing thuir concerns; and ~hat the project ~culd be
beneficial to all ~ent$ o~ %h~ couhty.
~. Albert J. ~er, Jr.' ~tated h= was a resident of County and
was involve~ in r~=~itlng industrial development to the ~ea;
92-160~ 2/26/92
i I
that he empported the req/lest and he felt the compromise
reached would be benefioial to all.
Mr. Run Figg, .representing Pooons Civio Association, ~tated
that they felt economi~ development wus extremely important to
the County and they had assis=ed in the Moorefield project;
that they had t~ied to explore and expand the strength~ of
various projec=~ in the area and felt the oo~u~unity should
wo~ closely with the developer; that the proposal wa~ for the
highest and Best use of the property; ~hat the proffered
conditions ~u~itted were more than adequate a~d, ~erefore,
~. Clarke Plaice ~tated they had invested a lot ~f plannlng
~n~ bmr4 work into ~e proj~o~; tha~ the Drojec= as proposed
met or ~ceeded all, Co~ty ~iteria for ~milar ~Se~ and
oonforme~ ~o ~k~ g~nerul ~lan; ~a: tho proposal off,red major
the a4ditional retail s~uare footage was essential
attractin~ high quality development; that th~ project was
unique and h~ felt ~a d~cision by the Board ~ho~ld b= based
~. Ji~ ~itehead stated he was ~ resident of the Co~ty and
has been involved in ~imilaT projects in the Dust; t~at he
felt the project represented significant revenue to the
county~ that ~e felt the request wa~ needed and would b~
the Board to give favcrabl~ consideration to ~e
Mr. Joe Cros~ ~tated he wa~ a re~ideDt Of James City Cowry
and ~eu on their Industrial Development Au~ority~ =hat he
ha~ a~isted in various planning projects in oth~r areas and
states and without economi~ developm~t opportunities,
would increase; that counties in %he area are, in r~gional
oompegition ~ur e=onomlc development project~; that the
request would g~erate over ten million dollar~ a year in new
taxes; ~hat it was a ~ignif,ioant OppOrtunity for th~
and the looation was essential i~ or,er fox the mall
mu:~ae~; that %h~ County was ~n competition with the Cit~
Ric~ond for the project; that th~ re,est would draw other
offices nationally and internationally; and he felt it would
e~ance ~conomic development in the cowry for ~e fu~e.
~r. Robert B. Niller stated he has been a resident Of
County for the Da~t twenty-four yea~z; that ~e supported the
opportunities for the urea; ~at the increase in r~ve~e
the project ~ould b~ u~e~ to enhanc~ the $ohool Syst~ and,
therefore, requested ~e Board to give favora~e
to th~
supported the cements expressed; that th~ proje¢= Was unique
ms ~t would generate approximately eleven million dollars in
revenue and would have no impact on the school system;
~chool Syste~; that the proj=ct woe14 enhance the County and
if denied, would go to anothe~ area such as the City of
request in the b~t intereot of ~e entire County.
~. Fred Conti stated he supported the co,cuts e~ressed and
he felt the Co~ty nee~ed to inve~t in i=~ fu~ur~ and.
therefore, requested th~ Boa~d to give favorable con~ideratio~
to th~
9~-161 2/26/92
Mr. Lyadall Dunning stated he felt the request would greatly
benefit the ohildren as well as the elderly and~ therefore,
requested the Board to move the project forward.
Mr. ~ark Vonin stated he was a resident of the County and a
small businessman; that he supported the comments e×pre~sed;
that he felt commercial grawth was important to the well being
of the COUnty; that he supported the request and expressed
appreciation tc all involved for their hard work in reaching
Mr. Nike McClaskle stated the County needed to msYe forward in
its propTess Of commercial development; that the impact of the
request would be positive; that the conditlune submlt~ad
regarding thc buffers and noise attenuation were adequate;
that the County we~14 benefit as the request would generate
revenue and employment and~ therefore, rec/uested the Board to
give favorable ¢o~ideratlon %o the req~Aest.
Mr. Ed Pareha stated he was a resident of the County and had
twenty years experience as aa urban planning specialist; that
he supported the eommen~s expressed; that he felt the project
would be an asset to the County and was needed; and that it
was consistent with the geal~ Of the County for long range
planning.
Ms. Mary Cottlngham ~tated she was a resident of the County
and resided in Brlghtnn Green Subdivision; that Brighton Green
had been involved with the coe~truction of Powhite Parkway and
they felt Crestwood Farm~ Subdivision ~hould work with the
developer-for this request and, therefore, requested the Board
to give favorable con~ideTatien to the request.
Ms. Rennle Marshall stated she was a resident of the County
and supported the com~ent~ expressed regarding the expansion
of the commercial tax ba~e} that'the shopping mall would be a
convenient loeatlsn and was needed in the County; that abe
felt the Co~t~ty needed the resources which would be generated
by %he project o~her than its revenue; that the Drojeot would
generat~ em~lpyment as well as send a positive message to
other businesses to locate within the CeuntyA that she did not
want the County to lose thi~ opportunity and, therefore,
requested the Board to give favorable consideration to the
request.
Mr. Jack Ry~n stated he was a resi4ent of the County and
looal businessman; that he felt the project would
the construction an~ ~esig~ industry; that the project would
benefi~ the community and~ therefore, requested the Board ts
give favorable cea~ideratlen to the request.
Mr. Al Simon stated he was a resident o~ the county and
resided in Brighton Green SUbdivision; that he felt th~
project would benefit the Co%h~ty and would be a good neighbor
and, ~herefore, requested the Board to give
consideration to the request.
Mr. Larry Walter~ stated he was a reai~ent of the Coon=y; that
he felt the project would greatly benefit the con~tru=tlon
~ndu~try and ~en~rate tax revenue and~ thersfore~
the Board qive favorable consideration to the regue=t.
F~. Harry Watson stated he ha~ been a re~de~t Of the
for the 9a~t twenty-two year~ and a businessman within the
County; that he felt the pro~ct was greatly needed and woul~
generate employmen= as well as revenue and, therefore,
requested the Board to give favorable consideration to the
~equost.
Mr. Harry Za~n stated he supperted the project as it would
generate employment.
92-162 2/26/92
supported the request; that he felt the project would be
n~pressed and, thereforet requested .the Board to give
favorable consideration to the request.
Mr. David Williams stated he was a resident of the County and
a licensed eleotmioian for twenty-two years; that the
construction indumtry had been aegatively impacted due te the
decline in the economy; that he had been unemploysd for seven
months and felt the County needed solutions to the problems;
that this project would generate construction jots am well as
create permanent employment andw the~efore~ requested the
Board to give favorable consideration to th~
Mr. John ~regory stated he was a renid~nt Of the County and an
unemployed eleetrisiaa~ that when the Arboretum was originally
proposed to the citlzen~ they had been concerned but the
neighbors had attempted to work with the developer of the
Artoret~ and al~h0ugh ~ome cf the neighbors were still
opposed to thi~ request, he felt the Bourd should decide the
request in the best interest of the entire County.
Kr. John Cogbill submitted letters to the Bo~rd from the
General Contractor~ of Virginia, the c~e~terfield County
=oonomio Developsent Direot0r, Delegate John C. Watkins and
Senator Robert E. Russell, Sr.; and ~r. Larry E. Walton; that
this request would generate numerous job~ that it was
estimated the developer would pay ever $4 milllon in permit
fees; that the revenue projected which would be generated by
this request wa~ $9 to $11 million; that they had worked with
the reeident~ in the area and had reached an agreement
therefore, requested the Board to give favorable oonsideratio~
to the re~usat.
Mr. Jsy S~nire~, representing residents of Crestwood Farms
Subdivision, stated an agreement had been reached between the
nsighb0r~ and the applicant; that conditions would be imposed
on the developer to less~n the impact cf the request on the
Subdlv~slon; and requested the applicant accept the conditlon~
prior to th= deeieion cf the Board.
Kr. George Beadles stated he was a rssldent of the County and
although an agreement had be~n reached, he felt the request
should be deferred for thirty days to carefully consider the
proffers and conditionz; that he felt the oth~r area malls in
the area would be unable to comp~t~ with the proposed
smd, therefore, requested the Board ~o deny the
l~r. Michael Rowe stated he wa~ a resident of the County and an
adjacent property owner; =hat he felt the area designated
Sub Area II was wetlands and would not be buildable; that ha
was uencerned as to the wildlife and civil war trenches in the
area; that he wa~ concerned as to the noise l~vel and
headlights from mowhite Parkway traffic; that : h~ felt
propo~d buf~er~ were not adequate; ~a~ he fel~ the request
would decresse the val~e of properties in the area andw
therefore, requested the Board to de~y the
~r, Saul Wrenn stated he has been a resident of ~restwood
Ps~ Subdivision for thirty years; that he was not opposed to
the request but was 'concerned about the proposed buffer; that
he felt the buffer should protect the neighborhood from the
traffic noise; and that he felt the request would decrease the
Value of the property in the area,
~tr. Bob Tartan stated he was a resident of the county ~nd was
concerned abou~ t~e increase in traffic; t~at he was concerned
about the impact the request would have on the roads in the
ares and, specifically, ca~ accidents and, therefore,
requested the Board to deny the request.
Mr. Walter Hallam stated he felt approval of the request would
destroy %he natural environment and have a negative impact on
Crestwcod Parne Smbdivi~ion; that hs was concerned about the
increase in traffic; that Crestwood Farms Subdivisien was a
~tBble community and one of a few havens for bi~dB and should
remain as it is; that he felt birds have suffered displacement
due to Powhite Pa~way and many more would be lost by the
impact of this request; and that he would like to see ~/ue
property be used for a State or County park.
Mr. Don t~ruwald stated he wa~ a resident of the County and
that the original zoning s~ the propsrty had been completely
changed; that the Planning Com~isslon had to impo~e conditions
not offered by thm applicant; ~hat he did not feel approval of
the request protected hi~ property rights or was good
planning; that in the future, t~e county should set aside
sites to become more competitive in attracting comneroial
development and requested the Board to consider the original
· oning cf the property.
Mr. Dan Gecker ~tat~d he was a resident of Crestweod Farms
Subdivision and had been involved im th~ ~egotiat~d
s~ttl~ment; ~hat he was not opposed to the agre~ent and the
Crestweod Far~s ~eigtlborhood took development within the
county very seriously; that he felt there was fear from
residents about the opsration of County government in general;
tha~ he rett in the future, the County should consider
different methods in planning for growth. ~e ~xprmssed
app=eoi~%ien ~o Mr. John Easter, the Planning Commission
representative for ~idtothian. Bimtriet, a~d the C~estwocd
Farms civin Association and stated he felt so,unity
associations did not have' the resources available to voice
opposition to devsloi~ment such as this and the County should
consider appointiDg a~ official to represent community
ase0oiatlons in these tlrpea of issues. ~e re~uested the Board
to approve the preposed agreement.
M~, Louise Ellis, President of =he ~istorical society of Ben
Air, stated she felt the request would impact the hi~torlc Ben
Air area; that she was concerned as to the traffic study
conducted on the roads in the area; that the BO~ Air area had
he~n designated as an ~is~erlc landmark and h~stcrlcal area;
that if Buford Road were ever to be wi~ned, it would not neet
the criteria of the Ben Air Plan; that they felt there was a
need to protect the historical area in the future and,
therefore, ~eq~ested the Board =s deny the request.
Mr. Don ~nmieeig mtn=ed he agreed with the comments expressed
by Mr. Gecker; that he was al~o a resld~nt o~ the Crestwood
~a=ms Suh~iviaion; and requested the Board to consider the
inpact the request would hav~ on Crestwood Farms in the
future.
Mr. Ken Bra~mer stated he was a resident cf Crestwood Farms
subdivision; that he supperted th~ proposed compromise and
noted they had attempted to reach a cempremize which Would
protect the area by increasing the buffers and no~e
attenuation; that he was still concerned as to the future
~mplieaticns of t_he request and, therefore, he felt the
conditions agreed upon should be enforced by the County.
Mr. Larry Pelvert ~tated he Was a resident of the Southa~
nelgh~orhood; that he felt the project would greatly impact
t_he roads and neighberheed~ i~ the area; that he felt if the
request wa~ approved, the County should e~ill ~eep ~uford Road
and Jahrnke Road a~ two lanes and th~ speed limit should be
reduced to 3~ mph; and that consideration mhould be given to
closing the Jahnk~ Road exit permanently.
Mr. Keith Dohogne stated he was a resident of the area; that
he felt the density was too highs that he was concerned as ts
92-164 2/26/9~
th~ huffmr~ and th~ anticipated increase in the traffic; that
he felt the traffic concerns had net been adequately addressed
and, sp~oi£i=~lly,, th~ increase in traffic far Jahn~e an~
Buford Reads~ that the ~equeat would be in direct competition
with othe~ mall~ in the area an~ would r~duoe their revenue;
that t~ere were ~umerous Vncancie$ for office spade within tho
County; and r~quosted the Board defer the request for thirty
days.
~s. Virginia Wrenn state~ she had sent each Board ~e~ber a
letter outlining h~r oono~rno; =ha= ~he was concerned as to
the impact the request would have OR the Ben 'Air historical
srea~ =ham s~e supported the comments expressed by the
President of Ben A~r ~isterioal Society; and requested t~e
~, Pam James stated she was vice President of the Ben Air
Historical Society; that they felt if Buford Road was widened,
the homs~ in the aras would not be able to handle the
traffic; and requested th~ Board to consider the i~pact these
Subdivision; that he felt tho compromise should net have been
reached at the last minute; that he felt the location of the
wer~ vacant ~ites available within the County and the shopping
the roads in th~ area; and requested ~he Board ~o deny the
proposal.
Association, stated they had reached an agreement with the
applicant and had achieved a more insulated buffer; that th~
request woul~ i~pa¢: the neighborhood mignifioantly and the
Civic Association had attempted to protect the neighborhood;
that they supported the ~rc~omal a~ agreed to by the applicant
=aster, the Plannlng Commisnion representative for MidlOthian
Cra=tweed Farm~ Subdivision be recognized and it was noted
approximately fifty people were present from the Subdivision.
Mr. Cogbill ~tated h~ agreed with Mr. Garnett~s co~menta~ that
community and the County; that they have t~ied to protect
their rights; that a traffic study had b~en done and the
applicant would be installing approximately $~0 million in
project to succeed; and that they would attempt to be a good
neighbor. He =~ad into the record a resolution from the
Chesterfield County Council on PTA's and stated the appllcant
that time and although the regue~t had not bc=n ready to be
decided pr~vlou~ly by th~ ~eard, he ~elt the process hud been
worked through. He further stated he fslt the applicant and
the citizens had come togethe= ho roach an agreement which
would ultimately benefit th~ entire County.
Crestwcod Farms Suhdlvi~ion residents and stated he wonld be
92-165
appreciation to Mr. John Easter, the Plan~ing ¢0mmi~i0n
representative for Midlo~hian Die,tlc%, for his parti~ipatlon
throughout ~he process and to Mr. Bill Garnett, President cf
the Crestwood Farms Civic Association. Be further stated the
formula used in 1985 for addressing traffic ~esd~ had
adjusted and, therefore, the request woul~ not increase the
traffic in the area. He stated although the agreement reached
had been one ba~e~ on quality, he had concerns rogar~ing the
process of tho~e who de not have the resources available ts
voice opposition to d~velopment such as this.
Mr. Colbert commended the citizens in the area for their
participation and involvement in the process and in reaching
an agreement. Ha expressed appreciation to F~r. Gar~et= for
his representation of the r~sidents in Crestwood
Mr. Warren also expressed appreciation for th~ participation
and involvement of the community and to Mr. Easter. ~ stated
~he decision was an e£Sort by all in allowing the buslnes~
co~/~u~ity to gr~ and pro,per and to balance the need for
acunomlc and commercial growth within the Ce~nty.
Mr. McHale stated he had visited the site and had stayed
things had progressed. He further stated the citizens and the
applicant had come together to form a trust and great risk had
been und~taken by al~ tho~e invcl?ed. He indicated hu felt
each request should be be=ed on it~ own me~it~ of ~ea~en,
and law.
Mr. Daniel submitted into the record a ~tate~ent in support of
the request ~igne~ ~y members of the Legislative Delegation.
He noted the Board of Supervisors had a weekend work
plam~ and it was the intent of the Board, to strengthen the
~uldel~nae for existing land use plans.
~4r. Bar,er inquired if the 'applicant accepted the conditions,
Mr. Cogbill state4 the applicant did accept the sonditions.
On motion of ~r. B~rber, ~econdad by ~r. ~cHale, the
approved Case 91SN0249 subject to the following
1, The following conditions notwithstanding, the Textual
Statement, ~ated ~svember 5, 1991, as amended
14; 1991, November 19, 1991, and NovaTiber ll, 1991, with
=mhibits AA, BB, CC, DD and ~=, shall be considered the
~aste~ Plan. (P)
(NOTE: This condition sup~rsede~ Condition I of ~ase
2. A 150-foot buffer ~hall be provided along the western
boundary of Sub-Area I, measure~ north an~ east of the
northeast corner of Tax Map 11-9 (2) Crestwood
Section D, Block B, Lot 33 and o~ntinulng south ts the
Pewhite Parkway right of way. A seventy-£iv~ (75) foot
buffer s~all be provided slang the r~maining western
boru~dary of Sub-Area I- These buffers shall be subject
to Article ~, Division 4~ Sections 21.I-~26, 21.1-227
Ia), (b), {e)~ (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and 21.1-22~
t~o Chesterfield Co~nty Zoning Ordinance adnDte~ April
1l, 1989, as amended, except as ~odi£ied h~reln.
Within these buffer~, prior to construction (other than
residential improvements to the existing residence
located on Tax Map 11-13 (3) (A) {A) Lot 1) in Sub-Area
I, a ~inimum eight (8) foot high wood f~nce shall be
installed and maintained bM ~ba owner/developer. Th~
exact treatment of the £ence shall be approved by the
Planning C~i~ien at th~ time of ~c~emati~.plan review.
The fence shall be ~o closer than 37.5 -feet to the
western property b~u'~d~ry. '
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the existing house on Tax
Map 11-13 (3] {A) (A) LOt 1~ msy be u~ed fe~ office use;
however, so long as the. building i~ used for single
family residential purposes, the fence shall be located
to the east of the building; if it is used for e~fiee use
the fence shall be located to the west of the building.
At the request of developer, the r~quirements (including
location) for the Seato shall' b~ modified by t/3e Planning
Commimsio~ at the time ef site or schematic pla~ review
if noise barriers or other measures, which accomplish the
~creenln~ ~oumd atte~atio~ and security measures u£ the
required'fence are provided.
Further, 'e~cept a~ ~tated herein, th~ road system
necessary to access Powhlte Parkway may encroach in~e the
buffers provided ~uch encroachment COmes ne cle~e~ than
seventy-five (7§] feet to the western property boundary
and provided noise atte~ation devices acceptable to t~e
Planning and Transportation Department~ are provided. At
the ti~e Of site or schematic plan review, the Planning
Commission shall allow the road system necessary to
access Powhite Parkway to ~ncroach further into the
buffers provided such encroachment somme ne closer
fifty [50) feet to the western property boundary and
provided noise attenuation devices acceptable ts the
Planning Commission are prcvlded. Noise attenuation
devices shall be ~erm~tted within th~ buffer.
(NOT=S:
a. Th~ road system necessary to a~¢~ ~owhlte Parkway
may encroach into .'the re~[uired buffer only as
necessary to achlev~ acceptable road alignments in
mccordance with the Transportation Department and
VDOT standards. 0~ee acceptable alignment is
5chiaved, the road mu~t be located outside the
required buffer.
b. 0sly those noise a~tenuation devices necessary to
achieve the criteria mpecified in Condition 4 will
be required.)
A ~ransltioa and low rise zone cf ~00 'feet shall be
provided adjacent to the western property line of
In that portion oS the 200 foot transitie~ and low rise
zone, south of the c~nterline of ~itt'ingto~ Drive,
buildings shall he remtrintnd ~o office uses and
customary accessory use=, with the exe~ption that the
a~sting he,se o~ Tax Map 11-13 (3) (A} (A) Lot 1 may
also be u~ed a= a single family residence. The roofto~
elevation of off,ce b~ildings shall not exceed the
chimney elevation of the existing house lo~ated on Tax
Nap 1~-t3 (3) (A) (A) Lot 1. Roof-top elevatlons shall
be exclusive oS mechanical eguip~emt and associated
screening devices for ~uch mechanical equip~eD~, within
sixty (60) days of thn approval of this request, the
owner/d~veloper shall provide verification of chimney
elevation of the e~i~ting house.
In that portion of t~e ~00 foot transition and low rise
zone north of the centerline of Whltting~on Drive, uses,
requirements and limitations shall be as set forth in
Textual Statement for the transition and low rise zon~
plus parking associated with the umes permitted in the
92-167 ~/2~/9~
mixed use zone shall also be permitted; and the height cf
any buildings ~n this portion of the transition and
rise zone shall be limited to three (3) stories or
forty-five (45) feet, whichever is less provided,
however, that mechanical equipment and associated
screening devices for such mechanical equipment shall not
he included in the building height restrlotiens.
Further, the area in Sub-Area I lying between the 200
foot transition and low ri~e zone and the north/south
road shall else be a transition and low rise zone.
Except .as stated herein, uses, requirements and
limitations shall be as set forth in t/~e Textual
Statement for the transition and low rise zone plus
parking ass0oiated with the uses permitted in the mixed
use zone ~hall als0 be permitted. ~eights for buildings
located within this portion of the transition and low
rise zone shall be governed by Condition 13. If
developer =~quests modifications to the uses,
requirements and limitations, specified herein for this
portion of the transition and low rise zone, 'the Planning
Commission may modify such in accordance with the uses,
requirements and limitations of the mixed use zone at the
time of schematic or site plan approval provided that
adequate buffering, screening, land use compatibility and
transition ars anhieved.
within Sub-Area I, south cf the centerline Of Whittington
Drive, facilities' shall be designed such that traffic
from roadm and parking areas doe~ not generate noise
levels above 6~ ~IBs for more than six (6) minutes during
any hour (65 dBeLI0(hl), betwee~ the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 10:00 p.m., measured at the western property boundary
at the point closest to the source of noise. During all
other times, facilities shall be designed such that
traffic f~o~ roads and parking areas doe~ not generate
noise levels above 55dBa for more than six (6) mlnutas
da~iug any hour (55 dBaLlO(h)}, measured at the western
property boundary et ~hs point closest to the source of
Within Sub-Area I north of'the cent~rllne of Whitti~gtc~
Drive, facilities shall be designed such that traffic
from roads and parking areas does not generate noise
levels above ~5 dba for mo~e t~an six (6} minutes during
any hour (~ ~BaL10ih)), measured a~ tho western property
In ccnjunntien with site plan or tentative zUbdiVision
plan ~ubmimslon for any ~avelopment within sub-Area I, a
noise study acceptable to tbs Planning Depa~cment, which
predicts the noise generated by traffic from roads and
parking areas within this Sub-A~.ea, and. which provides
for the phasing of noise attenuation as necessary to
ach/eve ~l~e criteria outlined herein, shall ba submitted
to the Planning be~artment ~er approval. The
owner/developer ~hall he re~Don~ible for the installation
of any impr0vementm indicated by the study necessary to
achieve the noise levels ~pecified herein. The noise
level~ specified herein are exclusive of ambient
background noise.
At the request of the o~ner/d~veloper, the Director of
Planning at the time of schematic, site plan or tentative
· ~ubdivision plan submission for any d~veloP~ent within
Zub-Area I may modify ~he method of quentifyinq the noise
environment (the noise descriptor) o~tlined herein
9rovi(bsd such modification achieves the intent off the
criteria ~pecified herein.
92-16~ 2/26/92
this Amendment, tho words '+chesterfield. Count2 zoning
11, 1985, as amended and as modified by this Conditional
Use Planned Development; except for Sub-Area III-B, that
portion of sub-Area I to be r~zoned to C-4, and
multi-family residential, all of whic/~ shall be re~ulated
By t~e C~hesterfield county Zonin~ Ordinance adopted April
12, 1989, as amended and a~ modified by this conditional
use Planned Development.
6. In conjunction wi~h 'schematic plan submission, an
illustrative conceptual plan shall be submitted for
approval, depicting b~ilding~, and parking areas at the
maxlm~m approved densities. (P)
7. The architectural treatment cf all buildings shall comply
with Section 21.1-248 of the Chester£ield County zoning
ordinance, adopted April 12, 1989, as a~/%ded.
8. All required setback areas shall be landscaped and/or
comply with tree preserve=ion requirements in accordance
with Emerging Growth District ~tandard~ of the
Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance, adopted April 12,
dietrict~. (~)
9, Where any residential building is proposed on the
developer's property within 1,000 feet of Powhite Parkway
or Chippenhan Parkway, prior to any site plan approval
for any such residential buildings or tentative
subdivision approval fur any such residential buildings#
if required by the Transportation Department, a noise
impaut study in accordance with Federal Highway
Administration Noise Abatement Criteria with
modifications as the developer may deem appropriate
provided the sams shall be submitted to, and approved Dy,
tho Transportation Department. Within such area, the
study shall identify the need for ~eiso attenuation, if
any, for the residential buildln~ in the d~velopment
adjacent to Powhite Parkway or Chlppenham Parkway. The
developer shall be responsible for implementing any
r~quir~d ~itigation measures. Prior to any final check
plat approval or prior to any ~ite plan approval for any
residential use for any residential building within
feet of Powhit% Parkway or Chippenham Parkway, a phasing
plan for the resulted mlti~ation measures shall ne
submitted to~ and approved by, th~ Transportation
Departm~n=. Upon request of the developer, the Planning
Co~m~ission may modify the requiremeDt$ herein. (T)
hsadliqhts oS vehicles travelling along any portion of
the road system n~ces~ery to acces~ Powhit~ ~ar~way which
is located within .250 fee~ of the western pMeperty
boundary from projecting direetly into the win~ows of
e~isting residences located on adjacent prop~tiss to the
west or-Sub-Area I. such i~prov~%~ may include, but
shall not b~ limited to buffering, fencing, topographical
features, sad noise attenuation devi~e~. Such
~mprovements may be phased as necessary to achieve the
=rlteri~ outlined herein. The exes= improvements shall
be approved by the Planning Co~mlssion through the
schematic or site plan review process.
ii. Site plans for any development in SUb-Area I shall be
submitted to the Planning Commismi0n for review and
Residents' A~oeiation and property owners adjacent to
the required western buffer in Sub-Area I of the ti~e
92-169
date of the Planning Commission's consideration of any
~ite plan in Sub-Area I. (CPC)
The developer shall notify the property owners udjuc~nt
to the require~ western buffer in sub-Area I of the time
end date of the Planning Commission's consideration of
any schematic plan in Sub-Area I. (CPC)
13. Except as provided in Condition 3, heights of buildings
shall be as permitted by Chesterfield County Zoning
ordinance, exuept that officeI hotel and multi-family
buildings may be built to a maximu~ height of twelve (12)
storie~ or lZO feet whichever is less. In the mixed use
zone and ~hat portion of the transition and low rise zone
lying 200 feet off the western property boundary,
building~ ~ay be built to the heights illustrated in
and low ri~e zone, increases in building heights shall
allowed by the Plashing Commission threugh schematic 0r
site plan approval, but only if ~e Planning Co--lesion
dete~ines, on the basis of u study provided by th=
owner/developer, that ~he lin~-of-~ight visibility ~S a
higher building, as viewed from Crestwood Farms
substantially broken by high story vegetation or o~er
[NOTE: This oondltlon supersede~ the Textual Statement,
Condition
For that ~Qrtlon of the property zoned
Bu~ne~ (B-l), all exterior liqht~ ~hall b~ a~ranqed and
in,tailed so that the direct ur reflected illuminatlun
does not exceed 0.5 foot ~a~dles above background
measured .at the western property bo~dary of S~-Area I.
Lighting ~tanda~ds shall be of a directional typ~
of shielding the light source %rom direct view from any
a~joi~ing residential district or public right of way.
(NOTE: Pru~ertles zone~ C-3 and C-~ are subject to
lighting standards of Chapter ~1.I, Z~ct~on
And, luther, the Bomrd accepted the following proffered
=on4it~on~:
1. The transportation pla~ dated Norther 7~ 199~ su~itted
with the application shall be uon~id~red the mamter road
~lan~ Approval of the transportation ~la~ by the County
does not imply that ~e County gives final approval of
any ~artlcul~ road alignnent o~
2. The ma~im~ density of thiz d~v~lop~ent shall be: in Sub
Area I 1,400,000 gross ~are fee= of retail (not to
exceed i~190~900 ~o~ leasable S~are f~t cf r~tnil),
~60,000 s~are feet of general office, 60~ hotel rooms
an~ 450 apartm~t~; f~ Sub Area II ~70,000 square feet of
general Offlc~ and ~00 hotel rooms; an~ in Su~ Area III
50,000 gross s~are feet of retail and 215,000 square
approved by the Transportation Depar~ent. Qgnsities in
Sub ~eas I and II may b~ interchanged D~ovid~d
ac~e~t=bl~ levels of service are provided ~
the Transpor=ation De~aTtme~. This conditio~ shall
statist an~ zoning conditions. Thi~ condition shall
elsewhere in the textual statement and zoning conditlon~.
~e ~ev~!op~ s~all dedicute~ in accordanc~ w~th the
approved phasing plan dencribed in proffe~md c~ndi:i~n 5,
92-170 2/26/92
to the County of Chesterfield, frae and unrestricted, all
additional right of way (or easement~) required for all
proffered condition ¢ 'and in the traffic impact studies
prepared by Dexter R. Williems dated October ll,
November ?~ 1991 and November 20, 1991, and supplemental
traffic impact studies re~uired in proffered condition 5.
complete development of the proposed project, the
developer shall be responsible for the following:
(a) Preparation of read o0ns~r~ction plans for the
following:
i) A collector/distributor ~y~tem as qenerally
shown on the t~ansps~tation plan, dated
Wov~m~r 7, 1~1, such ~yetem including, but
not llm~ted to, east and west bound
oollector/di~tri~utsr roa~s on the Puwhite
Parkway beginning south of the ~ahnke
Road/Powhlte Parkway interohange and extending
nort~ Of the Chippenham Parkway/Pow~ite Parkway
interchange; ~astboun~ and westbound on- and
off-r~ps f~0~ the P0white
colleotor/distribut0r ~oads into sub Areas I
and II; and a loop in the northeast quadrant of
~he Chip~enham Parkway/Pswhite Park-way
su~mlss~on of design plans. The developer may
provide alternatlve road improvements if such
improvea~ents provide acceptable levels of
service as determined by the Transportatio~
Department.
ii) Additional pavement along Jabr~ke Road to
provide: 1) a ~our (4} lane section between
the Powhite Parkway interchange and the
Chippe~ham interchange as shown on the D~xter
R. Williams study dated November ~0, 199t, and
a uontlnuous right turn lane on westbound
Jahn~e Read beginning ~t a transition from the
chippenham Parkway i~tereha~g~ and ending at a
separat% ~ight turn lane from ~ahnke Road
westbound to Pswhite Parkway northbound.
eastbound dual left turn lanes at the
north/south road/Boulders Parkway intersection.
ii~) A ~uur (4) %ane divided north/south road fron
~ahnke ROm~ through the subject property as
generally ~hewn on the transportation plan
dated November 7, 1991.
iv) Traffic signal installation or modification (if
warranted prior to complete development of the
property as ~etermined by the Transportation
Department) and intersection improvement~ on
Juhnke Road, ~suldere Parkway and tho north/
south road, such installation, modifications
and imprevements identified on the
Transportation ~lan dated ~ove~ber 7, 1991 and
in ~he traffio studies by Dexter R. Williams
dated October ii, 1991, November 7, 1991 and
November 20~ 1991~ . and subsequent studies
r~quired in proffered condition S.
v) Traffio signal installation or modification (if
warranted prior to ~omplete development of the
property a~ determined by the Transportation
'Department} on Jahnke Read at the ramps to and
fro~ Ch~ppenham Parkway southbound and at the
ramps to and from Powhite Parkway northbound
and southbound.
approved by the. Transportation Department in
accordance with the phasing plan described
proffered condition 5.
Ih) Construction of the improvements identified in
proffered condition 4 in accordance with the phasing
plan identified in proffered condition 5. Such
constructlun ~hall be in accordance with the
Transportation Department approved road construction
plans outlined in proffered condition
Prior to any site plan ur tentative subdivision plan
approval, whichever occurs first, to the extent affected
by such site plan or subdivision plan, a phasing plan for
the preparation of the developer-pr~pare~ road
construction plans~ required right of way dedications and
road improv~mant~ idcnti~ie~ in proffered conditions
and 4, with ~uppo~tlng t~affic analysie in accordance
with Transportatlen Department regulations and these
proffers, flhall be ~bmitt~d to and approved by the
Access to Jahnke Read shall be limited to the north/south
road and Boulders Parkway. Prior to any tentative
eubdivisien plan approval or cite plan approval,
whichever scc~r~ first~ a plan shcwinM affected portion=
of proposed accesses to Powhite Parkway~ the north/south
road, and 8oulders Parkway shall be ~ubmltted to and
approved by the Transportation Department. Access for
plan.
Access shall be prohibited from the subject property ts
the area north of the railroad tracks, unless a traffic
analysis prepared by the developer is ~ubmitted to and
approved by the Transportation Department showing
acceptable levels of eervice will be provided.
Specific roadway improvements set forth in these
traneportation proffers are required prior ~o
development of the maximu~ permitted density and are to
be constructed in aceurdance with proffered condition 4
and the phasing plan identified in proffered condition
as approved by the Transportation Department. Upon
completion ef each phase, if r~quire~ by the
Transportation Department, roadway improvements required
of the deW~loper shall be ~mcreaged as neceesary to
achieve acceptable l~vele of ~e~vlce or decreased
determined by the Transportation Department, if the
traffic generation rates and distributions produced
solely by this development are materially different from
projections set forth in the traffic ~t~die$ prepared by
Dexter R. Williams dated October 11, 1991, November
1991 and November 2% 1991~ and subsequent studies
required in proffered condition S. If ~atigfactory read
improvements are not provided or committed as detel~minad
by the Transportation Departd~ent for such phase(s), the
Plannin~ co~issicn may reduce t~e permissible densities
levels of service, are achieved as determined by the
Transportation Department. For purposes of
proffers, the study area for traffic studies and
aupporting, traffi~ analyses shall be defined as tho
JalL!LKe Road/north-south road inter~ecti0n, the Jahnke
Road/Powhlt~ Parkway ramp intersections, all
92-172 2/16/92
int~seofions on the north-~o~th road, th~
Parkway/Sub Area III intereectio~, and th~
The property owner an~ applicant in thi= rezonlng case,
pursuant %0 section 15.1-491.2:1 of the Code of Virglni~
(1950 as amende~) and the ~oning Ordinance of
Chesterfield county, for themselves and their
or assigns, proffer that th~ development oS the property
un,er consideration will h~ developed according to the
foregoing proffers if, and only if, the rezoning
and request ts a~nd th~ Conditional Use Planned
Development $~bmit~Pd in case 91S~0249 are g~a~te~ with
only those conditien~ ~greed .to by the applicant. In th~
not agreed to by th~ applicant, the proff~r~ ~ha11
immediately be null and void and of no further force
effect.
On motion of Mr. MeHale, seconded by Mr. Colhert~ tho Board
a~journed at 11:45 p.~. until February 27, 1992 at 6:00 p.m.
at the Kal~ Way ~ouse R~staura~t %0 meet with t~e Richmond
Retail Merchants Association.
2126/92