The URL can be used to link to this page

12-14-94 Minutes HTNUTES ~. $. L. MoRale, III, Chairman ~. A~thur S. War~en, Vice Ch~. Z4r. =dwar~ S. ~arber ~. Har~ G. Daniel DT. Freddie W. NiColas, Sr. ~. Lane B. Ramsay cowry Administrator 94-92~ 1994 Staff in Attendance: Office on Youth ~. Craiq S. Bryant, Dir., Utilities MS. Marilyn E. cole, Exec. A~t. to County Admin. Mr. Richard cordle~ Mrs. Doris R. DeHar=, Assr. Co. Admin,, . Legis. Svcs. and Int~rgovern. Affairs Mr. Will,am D. Building official Chief Robert L. Fire D~partm~nt Mr. Michael S. Gold=n, Dir., ~ark~ and Mr. B=adford $. H=mmer, Deputy Co. Admin., Hr. H. Russell He,mis, County Ombudsman Mr. Thomas E. Dir., Planning ~r. H. E~ward James, Dir., Mr. LOU~S G. La~siter, Dir., Internal Audit ~r. John R. Li!lard~ Dir., Airport DN. Butt Lowe; Dir., ~ental ~ealthCRetard. Ms. Mury Lou Lyls, Dir., Accounting Mr. Robert L. ~asden, Deputy Co. Admin., Human Mr. R. John uir,, Transportation ~r, Richer6 M. HcElfish, Di~, E~V, E~qi~eering ME. ~ary R. MoLa~an, Dir., Economic Development Mr. Steven L. Micas, County Attorney Dr. William Nelson, Dir., Health Mr. Kennet~ Pe~rutte, Dir., Public Affairs Mr. Francis M. Dir., General ~ervices CO1. J. ~. ~ittman, Jr., Police Department M~. Theresa M. Pitts, Clerk to the Board Mr. Jeme~ J. L. ~te~aier, Dir., Budget & Management Mr. M. D. stith, Jr., Deputy CO. Ad, in., Community 12/14/94 ~. ~rederick Willis~ Jr.t Dir.~ Human Remou~oe Mpt. Mr. ~Hale called the regularly ~cheduled meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. On motion of Mr. Warren, se~ndsd ~y Mr. ~ar~er, the approved* tke minut~'o~ N~vemb~r'17~ 1994-~- as su~mltted. Vote: Unanimous 1.B. NOVE~ER 22# 19~ O~ motion of ~. Warren, seconded by Mr. ~arb~, ~hs Board approved the minutes OS November ZZ, 1994, as ~ubmitted. Vote: Unanimous approved the minutes of November 29, 1994, as submitted. 2- COUNTY ~DMI~I~TRATOR'S Mr. Ra~sey introduced ~r, Curdle to brief the Board on the County's financial investments, Mr. Curdle stated the status of the County's investment portfolio is managed ~y the Treasurer's Office and that re~entty Orange COUnty, California, engaged in the use of levsraged and derivative ue=urities in their inveetm6nt portfolio in the hopes of reaping huge speculative gains. He further stated Orange ~ounty issued multiple millions of dollars of debt solely for the risky investment and am a re~ult billion dollars of lost public funds. He stated a~ Treasurer of chesterfield county and as tho custodian charged with the investment Dor~folio does not contain any of ~ ~peculatlve, derivative instrumentu aS those held by Orange County a~d that Ch~st~rsield County's s~ra=e~ has been one whi~ a/lows the County to aggressively manage its fundm with ~e focu~ being on %he ~rotectiun of principle, liquidity, and maximized earn~ngm. He further stated this strate~ has continued protect the County's public fund~ while netting interest gains to th% County that consistently mUt-perfoTm~e 91-day Treasury Bill Yield and the Doaoghue'm Money Fun~ Average (two nationally'recognized measures ofinvemt~entperfo~amcm). stated Chesterfield County's Tremmurer'm 0ffi=e w~s one of the firs~ in the s~ate to develop a written inve~tm6nt policy and procedures m~nual which ensu=es the effective management of day-to-day investment activities with ~he objective b~inq to consistent with constraimt~ impo~d by ~af~ty objectives, cash flaw considerations, and the la~ of th~ Commonwealth of Virginia that restrict ~e placement of p~lic funds. He further stated he will continue to ensure the conservative, and uncompromis~d integrity in carrying out the ~/~/~ responsibilities of the Treasurer. Mr. Warren expreooed appreciation to Mr. cordle for his efforts and conservative appreach in fiscal managemen~ and indicated the C~unty is Gna of eight jurisdiction~ in the State and one of twenty-seven jttrisdictiens in the country that has a Triple A bond rating. Dr. Nicholas arrived at the meeting. There was brief discussion relative to a statement being insludsd in seth cf the Districts constituents maillnq list~ which would reflect this briefing and the Tr~asur~r'~ office receiving phone Gallo from citizens regarding this i~ue. Mr. Ramsay then introduced Mrs. cindy Satterwhite andM~. Nine Myers, of Coopers and Lybrand, to present the Board with the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the County. Mrs. Satterwhite presented a briefing on the County's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report i~cluding the kulquallfied audit opinion and noted an additional paragraph has been added to the audit opinion that indicates there is a new accounting ~tandard ~elating to th~ financial reporting entity. She briefly ~eviewe4 ~he financial section of the Report an~ expressed appreciation to the Accountin~ Department for prsparin~ the Report. ~r. ~cHale inquired ~ ~o wh~Bh~r the ~rao%ice in Oran~e County, C~lifornia, was addressed d~ing the a~dit proceas. Budg~g ~n~ Au~i~ Oo~i%te~ earlier to~ay and he feels the Accounting Department hms comtinued %o make an outm~mndin~ work effort. He further orated he feel~ t~e oo~ents expressed by are inve~te~ wi~ely an~ accounted for. Mr. Ramsay then introduced ~. Masden to brief the Board on ~ recent recoqnitlon of the Office on Youth~ that the A~ual Youth Need~ S~po~ium ha~ b~n selected by the P~actioes G~ide to C~ild~e~s P~o~ams. He further ~t~ted only improv~ se~vioes to children an~ families. ~. Ramsay the intru'duced ~. ~a~er %o up,ate the Board on the ~. Hammer stated cons%rue%ion of the LaPrade and Ettriok/~toaca Bran~Librarlas are on schedule; that LsPrade that the Ettriok/Mato~ca Branch Library is anticipated to open by Janu~ l~,. 199~. When ~sRe~, he ~t~t~d con~ru~ion mt ~idlothian Branch Library im on ~chedule inmludin~ par~in~ ici There were no Board Committee Report~ at t~io ti~e. 4...,_~OUESTB TO POSTPONE ACTIONJ BM~RG~OY ADDITIONS, OR CHA/qG~ IN T~E O~nEm O~ PReSeNTaTION Action, ~mergency Additions, o~ Changes in th~ O~de~ cf Presentation. Chief P~t~ran~tate~'Of~icer J&me~. Cnm~bel~1 is r~iring f~om the Polic~ DepartR~nt and is unable to ba present =o receive the resolution; however, he would accept it on behalf of On motion of the Board, the following r~olu%ion wa~ adopted: of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; an~ in ~he capacity o~ Dispatcher, Petrol O£fi~r, and D.A.R.E. officer; and model; has provided elementary students with th~ to01~ to "~ay has provided students with the tools to build self esteem through the D.A.R.E. Program; and will mi~s o~ficer Campbell's service. Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Mr. McHale presented the executed resolution ~o Chief Pittman who will present the resolution to officer Campbell at a later $.B. RECOGNI~IN~ ~EOiA~ PO~IO~ OFFI~ERROY L. VAUGH]kN~. Chief Pittmun introduced Office~ Roy L. ve~an and stated officer vaug~an' has ~een a special Police o~ficer for ~e County for ~pproximutely twenty years. He e~p~e~ed appreciation to or~icer vau~nan £or ~is ~edioated service to the County. 94-926 WHEREAS, ~. Roy L. Va~han will reti~e from th~ Special Police Unit of the Chesterfield County Police ~epartment on ~anuary 3, 1995; and WBER~A~, Mr. Vaughan has provided over twenty-seven years of guality service to the citizens of chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, ~r. Vaughan has faithfully s~Tved the County in the capacity of Special Police officer and Captain of the Special Police; and WHEREAS~ Mr. Vau~han bas used hi~ t~e~e~d0~s insight in huhman relations for the benefit of the Police Department and the County; =nd WHEREAS, ~ir. Vaughan has cem~andad the Special Police Unit of Chesterflsld County a~d has d~rectly impacted the safety of e~r citizens by ~einq invol~e~ i~ several ~p~cial police assignments, aosistin~ in the arrest cf several criminal ~uopacto throughout Chesterfield County and saving ~axpayers of the County thousands of ~ellars by serving ac a WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss ~r. Va~gBa~o BOW, TH=R~FOR= ~ IT RESOLVED, ~hat the chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes Mr. Roy L. Vaeghan and extends, on behalf cf its me,bars and the citizens of Chesterfield County, their appreciation for his service to the County. AND~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED~ that a copy of this resolution be presented te Mr. Vaughan and that thio resolution be permanently ~eoo~ded a~ong the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous Vaughan, e~preooed appreciation for hi~ servfoe to the County, and wishe~ him well in his retirement. 5,C. RECOGNI3IN~ DIBTRICT CHIEF BRUCE V, VECCRIONI, ENON chief ~anes in~roduced Dis~rio~ chief ~ruse V. Vecchloni County un4 his service will ~o miooe~. On motion of the Board, the following resolution wac adopted: WHEREAS, Distrlct Chief Bruce V. Ve~chloni joined the Enon Volunteer Fire Depar~m~n~ in 1969; and W~REAS,.Distri¢=.Chief Ve¢¢hioni has.been Dis~rict.¢hief c~ the Snort VolUnteer Fire Department since 1985, during which tiaa he has taken pride in recruiting high quality volunteers officer~; and WHEREA$~ under District chief Vecchicni's Enon Volunteer Fire Department has achieved the distinctive honor of being Volunteer Fire Company o~ the Year for twelve consecutive years, through such factors as vol~nnteer time to emergencies; number of veluntemrs responding to calls; n~umber of voIunteer training hours; and f~re prevention and 94-927 12/14/94 community service related programs ~ffered each year by the department7 and fire rescu~ boat and due ts his in~iqht, Fireboat 6 was designed and purchased for fireflghtlng and water rescue; to respon~ to Chmst~rf~eld County's shorelines on the James and Appomattox Rivers us well as La~e Chesdin and the Swift Creek Reservoir; and is stationed at the Enon Volunteer Fire Department as of August 1992; and W~EREAS, under Di~t~ict Chief Vecohioni~ direction, the ~non volunteer Fire Department has provided invaluable fire and emergency medical se~is~s- to th~ c~t~zenm~ &~d~ ~ndustry-in Emon, thereby enhancing the quality of life for Chesterfield and leadership throughout his me/~berehip with the ~non re~elutlsn be presented to District chief Vecchioni and that this Board of Supsrvlosrs of Chesterfield County, virginia. hr. MoHale presented the o~scut~d re~olution ~o District Chief Veochiuni, accompanied by members of his family~ expressed SESSIONS BXTENSION OF WATER/WASTEW~TER TO SERVE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DE~ELOPHENT AND REOUIREME~Z FO~ FUTURE ~$IDENTI~L Mr. stith st=tod at the July 27~ 1994 Board meeting, ~r~. Su~an Matthews, a County citizen, requested the Board to consider changing th~ current e~t~n~ion policy and the BoaTd then direote~ s~aff to review the county'~ current policy and to report to ~he Board any reco~ndations regarding =~is i~sue. ~. Bryant ~ated ~r~. ~tthew$ requested the Board to consider changing the County'~ current policy for extensions o~ wastewater to s~rve existing homes ~erv~d by ~eptic systems, amme=mment dimtrlctm and consider p~oviding funding for %hess types of projects. ~e further stated at that time, staff was proposed by Mrs. Matthews; ~ staff was also directed to that in 1989 funding for extensions to existing development that a policy was initiated to us~ assessment di~trfct~ for other avenue available to citizens who wanted extenmionm to stated mn assessment district can be created by a ~ajo~ity vot~ 94-928 12/14/94 cf the Board; that 60 percent of landowners may petition t e Board to create an assessment district; that the assessment m~y be paid over a ten year period; and that property owners net required to connect to water or sewer lines at the time installation. He then introduced Dr. Nelson to brief the Boa~d on the number of wells and septic systems in the County. ! recorded ~ubdivisien$ and that of the 15,000 septic approximately 11,000 are within recorded subdivisions. He then reviewed the numbe~ of septic systems that have been in,tailed since 1PS9 and noted that of the ~eptie ~y~temm in,tailed bmtwe~n 1976 Hud 1989, State regula<{ons plus requirement applied and that of the septic ~y~temn in,tailed before 1976; only state regulations applied. He stated the~e is an average of 10~ major conventional repairs a year a~d noted one to two homes per year require non-conventional repairs. ~r. B~yant then reviewed the cost to provide service o being wastewater at a cost of $150 million and water being ~t s east of $12~ million; extension optionm with County funding being assessment districts and a petition process; funding alternatives including increasing general tax rates~ increasing ~tilities user Zees; increasing utilities connection fees; ~ow projects are prioritized. He t~en ~eviewed conclusions aRd reeenl~endations, based on utilities cuetomer pe~sp~o~ive stuted it is the individual's choice to purchase a house benefit from e~ten~ions; that funding wo~ld ~eqUire an increase in user fees or connection fees; that assessment districts ~00 percent of cost are absorbed by property ow~er~ ~rv~d; a~d tha~ no County fun~ing should ~e allo~a~ed %swards of wastewater/water to existing development. failure rate of septic systems in the County; whether Stcneheng~ Subdivision has experienced septic system failures; and the process taken to repair the systems. When aeked, Mr. Micas stated that under the Building Code, t property owner ha~ a two year warranty, therefore, the he~e builder is responsible for any septic tank failures during that There was brie~ discussion role=ire to who:her a petition n been ~b~itted to create an assusument district in Stonehenge Subdivision. · Kr. Ramsay clarified there are two ways to create an assessment district including the Board creating a district without an agreement by the homeuwn~ra or the homeowners petltlonin~ t~a Board to take action on =he assessment district. When asked, M~. Bryant stated 60 percent of Stsnehen district. J ~Ir. ~ices stated State law rm~uirss ~hat if un mxt~nsion a parcel of land and the property owner has the ability to use a~essment district, therefore~ the County cannot remove from an aseem~ment district if their property is benefited the ex'tension, without a change to State law. 12/14/! M~. Warren stated i~ petitioned, the Beard could addrass the ~ituation in Stonehenge ~ubdivision and tk¢ pkOCeSo would not require 60 percent participation by the homeowners. Mr. NcHale clarified the proceed would require a majerity vets There was brief ~iscussion relative to the impact of property Yal~s if e p~operty o%nser dees net w~sh to tie into an extension line. ~r. Barber stated he would ne~d to hau~ information the impact of property values for those property owners who do no~ wish~,~e. ps,tie,paten.in the extensio~ bafoTa he weald b~ comfortable with approving a petition. Mr. Warren directed staff to submit information to the soard regarding the impac~ on property values as i~ relate~ t~ extensions. There was brief discu~io~ relative to the Chesapeake Bay and requirements to upgrade septi~ County funding to selve this sit,atica, however~ he will continue to look for alternatives. He further s~ated he the system should previde som~ flexibility that Will permit the 100 percent participation. westewater for future residential develepment an~ sta~ feels the current practice prcvide~ reasonable flexibility; sufficient to avoid future problems; and would recommend changes to the pelicy, time would be to request creation of an assessment ~istrict. ~r. Daniel stated in the pa~t he has been outspoken on new zoning building on septic tanks, ~iting occurrences such as there ~re many older oep%id systems in the County that will durin~ %h~ u~oeming budget process. ~r. ~arber stated he feels the intent of this particular issue i~ similar in nature to the shrink/swell soil issue and ex~resssd concerns relative to the County's cost in Board during ~he budget process and s~ated if the Board extensions, some type of process will need to be developed. ~r. Jacobsen stated consideration of an amesdme~t to th~ 22, !994 ~eard meeting. He presented a brlef, overview of th~ i2/14/94 There was brief discussion relative to the area designated for development over the next twenty years ~'n~ tha~ area being three time~ as much land moss as i~ necessary for anticipated development in the next =wenty years. Y~. Jacobson stated the Planning commission recommends approval and staff recommends approval of the P.l.an only if Zonim~ Case 95SN0161 ie aDprnved. Men asked, ha stated the additional development area in the Plan amendment increases the twenty to thirty year development area by approximately five percent. Dr. Nicholas stated when the Southern and We~ternA~ea Plan wa~ approved b~ the. Board, the Board stated the Plan would be reviewed and amended as necessary to adapt to ~ew situations and opportunities as qrewth occurs. ~s further stated he feels the situation has arisen for the Plan to be amended as the ~ill accrue many benefits. ~r. Warren conCUrred with the co~ment$ expressed by Dr. approved an amendment to the Southern and Western Area Plan, an element of the ceunty'~ comprehensive Plan a~ outlined by staff. Naym: M~. Barber. On motion of Dr. Nicholas, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board deferred consideration of a member to serve on the C~mmunity services Board, representing Ma{ceca District, until January 21, 1995. Vote: Unanlmou~ ~.B.Z. DIS~ILITIES SERVICES BOARS On motion of Mr. Mc~ale, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board deferred consideration of a member to serve on the Disabilitie~ ~ervic~ Board, representing Bermuda District, until such time as staff makes a recommendation. Vote: Unanimeus 7.~.3. M~YMONT ~OUNDATION After brief dis=u~ien, un metlun of ~r. ~arber, s~oDded by Mr. ~cHale, the Board au~Ds~dad it~ rules at this ti~e to allow simultaneous nomination/aDDoin=ment.of a member to ~erve on the ~aymont Foundation Board of Directors. Vot~: Una~i~o~ 94-931 ~2/~4/94 OR motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Daniel, th~ Board appointed The Honorable Freddie W. Nicholas~ sr.~ representin~ the county at-large~ to serve on the Maymont Foundation Board o~ Directors, whose term is effective January 1, 1995 and will expire December 31, 1995. Vote: Unanimous ?.B.4. SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE On motion of Mr. McHale, ~coud~d by ~r. ~arber, the ~oard deferred consideration of one member representing Bermuda Distr.iG~,and.~one-.membe~.~represen~ingMidl~thia~.Di~trict t~. serve on the Solid Waste Advisory Co~ittee until January 11, 1995. 7.~ STREBTLIGHT I~ST~LL~TION ~OST APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by ~r. Barher~ the Board approved a etreetlight installation c~st approval for Fa/~ey Court, vicinity of 800-801 at end of cul-de-sac, in Clover Hill Magisterial District, in the amount of $~,749.~9. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Hammer state~ the Airport ~aster Plan is before t~ Board for final approval to be used as a plannin~ document and is updated every ten years. He further stated any project noted in =he Plan will come to the Board~ ~hrough ~h¢ public hearing and planning process, for approval. ~e stated the Plan is a guideline to determine whether the County ha~ completed long-range pl~inq effort~ necessary to plan and develop for the orderly construction of the County's general aviation facility. He further state~ b~ ha~ recently been and due to t~a mequeet for deferral, the consultant i~ not considered. jeopardy if the Plan is not approve~ at Phis ti~e. Mr. Hammer stated there is a possibility that two ~rojeets Gould he at risk if the Plan is not approved today, Mr. Daniel inquired as to whether the hoard Goul~ approve would not bo at risk. Mr. ~ammer stated the Board could defer T_~e Plan until January, 1995 to hold a public hearing Administration.(FAA)..that~apprmvaL..has been~eferr~d..pending would not review the county'& grantm prior tn the Board no req~/irem~n% to schedule a publis hearinq. cone~rn~ regarding the Plan, however, c~tlzens should be allowed the opportunity to provide input into the Plan. 94-932 12/14/94 Mr. Daniel then made ~ motion for thc Board to defer consideration of approval of tho Airport Master Plan and to sot tho date of January 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearin~ to consider approval of the Airport Master Plan. Dr. Nicholas seconded the ~otion. Discussion, comments, and questions ensued relative to the high intensity lighting for the main runway and an easement request loeatsd at the intersection of Route 10 and Ironbridge Park being the two projects at risk if the Plan is not approved in January; the Ceunty'c Instrunent Landing System also being at risk if the Plan is not approved; and whether a~y projects Would be at risk if tho Plan is net approved until ganuary. Kr. Daniel stated he feels this issue should have boon considered by tho Board prior to today's meeting and ha at risk. Dr. Nicholas suggested the Beard defer the metion~de by Mr, Daniel until la,er in the meeting to allow an opportunity for ~taff to contact the FA~ to determine if the January 11, 1995 dats im acceptable for the Board to consider approving the It was generally agreed to defer action on the motion made by Kr. Daniel for ~he Board to defer consideration mf approval of the Airport Master Plan at thi~ time and to ~t th~ dat~ of January 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider approval of the Airport Nester ~lan until after Item ~0., Rsports. 3. 4. 6. 7. 9. 20. 23. 8.B. ~O~UNITY DEVELO~MEN~ ~L0CK ~RA~T, STREETLIGHT PROJECT. ~HASB I approved tho following Community De¥olcpment Sleek Grant - Ettriok Area Streetlighting, Fhaso I, streetlight installation co~t approvals in Me,ceca District: Brickhouse Drive, vicinity of 20914 Cullege Parr Avenue, between 20200 an~ 20216 Colleg~ Park Avenue, vicinity of DuDuy Road an~ Loyal Avenue Helena Circle and Trojan Dr~ve ~elena Court, in bulb of cul-de-sac Drive Jarrett Circle~ end of cul-de-sao Loyal Avenue, vi=inity of 20201 Loyal Avenue, vicinity of southwest corner of lot at 20235 Oakland Avenue, pole ~1332B Piedmont Avenue,.pole..UO Piedmont Avenue Pieclmont Avenue Piedmont Avenue Piedmont Avenue Pie~ont Avenue Piedmont Avenue Piedmont Avenue polo UO 43 pole U0 ?845 vicinity of 19801, Dole UO ~0 vi=inity e£ 19Sll ~ 19S15, polo UO 447~ vicinity of 19S~0, Dole UO 41 vicinity of 19901, pole UO 5511 vicinity of 19919, existing pole River Eoad an~ Trojan Drive, turn light to face ever Trojan Drive SaCks Lane, vicinity of 4306 '~asha Court, vicinity of 12/14/94 25. Sasha Court, vicinity of ~0908 ~e~ond Avenue, pole ~UP 44 27. Ssccnd Avsnue, vicinity of 20823, pole #$H34~ 2s. Second Avenue, vicinity of 20909, pol~ S~ 9 Second Avenue, vicinity cf 21017, pole ~UF 38 31. Sheffield Place, pole #g27C sheffield ~laoe, pole ~S27D 33. Sheffield Place, ~ole ~827P 34. sheffield Place, pole #g27G 35. Sheffield Place, pole #827H 37. Sheffield Place, pole ~JK254 38.. Sparta~Drlve, vicinity o£ ~t309 ~9. Totty Street, approximately la9 feet from with Court Street, 9ole #eH 91~ 40- Truth ~rive, vicinity of 20910 e.~. STRSETLI=HT INSTALLATIOK cos~ A~PROVAL~ On motion of Mr. MoHale~ eeconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board approved the following streetlight installation co~t approvals in Bermuda District: Vogt Avenue, in end of =al-de-sac Coe~ ~e in,tall light; (Due to health~ safety, and welfare reasons) * Percival Street, existing Dele in cul-de-sac No coat to install light (Due to health, safety, and welfare reasons) ~ Intersection of Rivsrs Bend Boulevard and No cost to install light Vote: Unanimeu~ On motion of Nr. Daniel, second=d by Mr. Barber, the Board approvsd ~he following etreetlig~t installation approvals in Dale District: ~otchkiss Court and Pine Orchard Drive Pine Orchard Drive and stonington Cour~ 9in~ Orchard Drive and St. Annas Court Pine Orchard Drive and Shelton Court ~Dd of ~in~ Orchard Drive Single oo~t to in,tall all five lights: $3,125.78 Vote: Unanimous 8.D. 1. ADO~TIO~ OF R~SOLUTIONS On motion of ~r. ~arber, seconde~ Dy D~. ~ieholas, the ~oar~ adopted the following r~solution: ~oard of Supervisors is to the citizens of the County; and WI~EREAS, Chesterfield County is commlttod to roglonaL programs that b~nefit and enhance the quallty of llfe for all WHEREA$~ chesterfield has been a willing participant in affedtimg our region and to identify ways to reduce the economic burden on localities in the metropolitan Richmond area; and ~EREAS, the spirit of cooperation is threatened by recent public statementa about annexation aBd commuter taxes; and ~qER~AS, statements about armexation and tom,muter taxe~, as well as regional government, serve no useful purpose other than to divide th~ rsgion and hamper a long history of progress in ~he region; and ~EREAS, th~ Board of Supervisors ~nanimously adopted an Open Letter to citizens on June 23, 1993 supporting continued regional cooperation, but opposing annexation and com~uter taxes and adopted another statement on January ~6, 199~ opposing the establishment of a regional government. KOW~ THEREFORE BE IT tAESOLVED~ that the. C~esterfield County Board of supervisors reaffirms its position in opposition to any attempt to mudify O~ eliminate Chesterfield County's immunity from annexation and to the i~pooition Of commuter taxes on County citizens and that the Board, ut its A~D, BE IT FURTKER RESOLVED, that the Board bellev~ without the necessity for regional goverrhment~ or uncontrolled bureaucracies and uncertain costs to County on motion of Mr- Barber, ~oaonded by Or. Nicholas, the ~oard adopted the following resolution: WHEP~EA$~ virginia Cooperative Extension ie a ~oint program ef the federal, state, an~ local governments in Universities~ and W~REAS, Virginia Cooperative Zxtensiun oontribu~us ~ignificamtly to th~ quality of lif~ and economic development of the Commonwealth of virginia; and W~EREAS, the educational programs and services of Virginia' Cooperative Extension. are available . to, ay=fy status, race, age, or any other consideration; and Department of Planning amd Budget cited Virginia Cooperative Extension as a major player in prevention and early WHER~A$~ the programs ~nd services of virginia Coo~erative Extension ar~ ~ellv~r~d ~o residents via local agents and volunteers; and 94m935 11/14/94 WHEREAS, since 1989, Virginia Cooperative E×ten~ion has lost 60 extension agents atatewlde; and WHEREAS, Virginia Teoh's 1995 budget amendment reques5 represents a restoration of funding to the levels necessary to allow existing programs to continue; and ~E~AS, if this funding is not restored, an additional 45 Zxtension ~esitions will be lost, and ~9 in the A~ric~l~r~ E~D~ri~nt Station; and ~HEREAS, virginia Cooperative Extension ~nd Research have suffered a 22 percsnt Gens~al Fund reduction sino~ 19~0; and" ~{ER~A~, hare in Chesterfield, staff has been redua~d by 50~ since ~gZ ~e to state fun~ing cuts. NOW, THEREFOR~ ~ Z~ R~SOLVED~ that t~he chesterfield Count~ Board of Supervisors formally endorses Virginia Taches 1995 B~dget A/~end~ent re~ues: s~ $2,89~,QQ0, wit~ $1;SQQ,Q~Q for Cooperative Extension an~ $1~8,00~ for the Experiment Station. A_ND~ BE IT FI/~THER RESOLVED, that Virginia State university's ~neral ~und ~upport for Cooperative ~xtension De maintained a~ current levsls. ~.b.2. AUTHORI=ATiON~ o~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR · .D.~.&. ~X~C~TE ~EEHENT WITH ~ENRICO BED SPACE IN ¥OBTH GROUP KOM~ On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. ~ioholas! the Bea~d authorized the County Administrator to e~ecut~ an agreement between Chesterfield and the County of Hsnrioo~ in & for~ a~se~able to ~hs County Attorney, for a maximum of four bed spaces on a temporary basis while they p~ou~e access ts facilities located in Hsnrico County in ~e County's Youth Group Home, which agreement obligates Eenrico County to pay a per diem rate determined by ~he Commonwealth for services at the Youth Group Some in addition to paying ri=ossuary p~r the agreement i~ filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous granting oS drainage and access easements by the Capital Incerporated.~. (It'i~ nstad~a, ccpy~of~he.~lat~ is..filcd~with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous 94-936 12/14/94 MRDICARR PLAN WIT~ TRIGON BLUR CROSS AND BLUE On motion of Mr. Barber~ seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board authorized the County A~minlstrator to execute a con~rao= for the co%hnty's Supplemental Medicare Plun, effective January 1, 1995, with Trigon Blue Cross and slue shiel~ of Vlr~in~a, subject to approval a~ to form by %he County Attorney. (It ~s nc~e~ the new cen~ract is a nontinuat~en of the sane plan with the same provider. The proposed new rates have not bean finalized, but they are prejeoted by Mercer, Incorporated to increase ~-5 percent. This will result in a n~t increase cost te the General Fund of $18,000 for FY95 whioh will hove to be absorbed.) 8.D.~,.~.,.,_BXE~E,,_SPRCIAL PROJRCT ASREEMENT WTT~ ~RNTRAL PROCESSING OPERATIONS On ~otion of ~r. Barb~r~ ~econded by B~. Nioholas~ the Board authorized the County Admlni~trator to ~xecute a sp~ial project agreement between th= Central virginia Waste Management Authority (CVW~LA) and participating lecaligios fer a wood Waste Processing Recycling Program. (Tt is noted the FYO~ budget includes $~0,000 for oentractual s~rvioee in ordxr to fund thc existing wood and brush recycling program and this action will allow far the County's continued participation in the Wood Waste Recycling Program and will give CUW~iA the County's approval to renew the current vendor contract which i~ due to e×pir~.) ~.D.3.a. TO INOREASR THE COMKU~ITY DIVERSION SRRVIC~S (CPI) On motion of ~r. Barb~r~ ~econd~d by Dr. Niehoi~$, th~ appropriated an additional $25,800 received from the State Vep~rt~ent of Corrections for the Community Diversion Services (CDI) F¥95 budget. (It is noted the increased State grant canner be used to reduce the County's support OS CPI Program because the local cost covers it~m~ which are disallowed by the Department of criminal Justice service~ (DCJ~) ~uch as progra~ ~xpenses for certain classes of cf~enders and merit raises given by :he County to employees. The increase in the grant is to be u~ed to fund, for the entire year, three anthorize~ full-tlne pesltiona which the original grant had only funded for six months and to provide counseling and inpatient and outpatient drug abuse treatment for more offender~.) Vote: Unanimous On motion of ~r. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board appropriated $7~ £rum ~he ~idlothian District Three Cent Road F~d for the purohame a~d installation of "Children Playing" signs on Larkspur Road. 12/i4/94 8.D.3oC. TO pUROHASS A~D INSTALL m~0 MOTORI=ED VEHICLES ~LLOW~D ON PROPERTY" ~I~NB approved $175 from the Bermuda D~st~ict Three Cent Road Fund for the purchase and installation of six "~o ~otorized Vehicles Allowed on ~roperty" ~ign~ for Cennty property located off Great Branch Drive. Vote: Unanimon~ On motion of ~r. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board apprcpri~te~ $~0,000 from the Industrial Park R~serve Account to conmtruct an A~rport Malntsnance Equipment Facility, which funding will be repai~ by the Airport over a m~ven year period. ~RIC~N DIH~BILITIEB ACT IHPROVEME~TS On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. N~oholas, the Bear~ (ADA) improvemen%~ for Virginia State University banmball ~WA~D OF ~N~INEERING DESIGN CONTRACT TO J. K. TIM~ONS AND ASSOCIATES FOR 9TOEEHEN~$~PHA~E III. D~AINA~ authorized the County Admlni~trator to enter into a ¢on=rac~ $19,9~0, for the design of construction planm an~ associated work and appropriated $~1,000 from the Route ~0/Rout= 147 Drainage District Account for the design o~ $~onahenge Phase ~5. (It is noted funds are ~vuiluhl= in th= ~U~C~t Drojeot budget.) Vote: Unanimous Mr. Micas disclosed to the Beard that his Children swim for the Poseidon Swim Club, ds=lured a conflict of interest under from the meeting. On motion of /4r. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board for calendar year 1995. vote: Unanimous ~r. Micas returned to the meeting. 9.D.8. REQUESTS FOR BINGO/RAFFLE PER~ITS On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded Dy Dr. Nicholas, the Board approved the following bingo/raffle per~±t~ for calender yea~ ORGANiZATIO~ Kiwanis Club.of Chester James River Lions Club ~nigh~s of Colum~s-Counoit Chevau~ Voiture ~i~-citlee civic Assooiation, Incorporated Vet~ran~ of Foreign Wars Saint Edward Epiphany School Home Thomas Dale Ban~ Boosters ~iohmond club o£ th~ Deaf Central Virginia Council for the Blind ~anchester-~ichmond Lodgo 599 ~idlothian sigh school Sand Boosters B~andemmill Lions Club Voke: Unanimous TYPE Bingo/Raffle Bingo~Raffte Bingo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle B~ngo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle Bingo/Raffle Bingo Singo Bingo Bingo/Raffle Raffle Bingo/Raffle Raffle Ruffle Bingu 8.D.9. REQUEST FOR FIREWOREE DISPLAY On motion of Mr. Barber, ~ond~d by D~. Nicholas, the Buar~ approved a fireworks display to be held at the Chesterfield Fairgrounds. on Becemb~ 31, .1994,. [rai~ date. of December ~1, 1995)! subject ~o conditions required by =he Fire Department. This dry the County Environmental Engineer, i~ accordance with directions from thi~ Bourd, made report in writing upon his examination of th~ roads in HamDstead Place, sss%ion 1, Bermuda Dimtrict, and 94-9~9 Whereas, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Depart2~ent o£ Transportation has advised tho Director of Environmental Engineeringr the streets in Hamp~tead Place, Section l~ Subdivision Street R~uirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and Whereas, the County and the Virginia Departmen~ of ~a~sportation have entered into an agreement, recordsd in Deed Book 2453~ Page 405, January 21, 199~, for all stormwater ~etention/r~t~ntlon facilities is'.~the.County. Therefore, upon cen$1~ration whereof, and on ~otion of Mr. Barber,' seoonded"by BP. Nicholas,. i~.isres~lYe~.~hst.the roads in Ha~pstead Place, Section ~, Bermuda District, be and they hereby are e~tabli~hed as public ruads. Ahd be it further re~olvsd~ that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and is hereby requested to take into the Secondary System~ pursuant to Section 3z.l-a~9, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, the following: Name of Street: South Eappy Hill Road Length: 0.17 mile To: the intersection with Dld E&mpstead Lane Guaranteed Right-eS-Way width: 90' feet. From: the intersection wi%h South ~appy ~ill Road TO: the intersection with Old Hampstead Court Guarant~d Right-of-Nay Width: 50' feet. Name of Street: Old Hampst~ad Ceurt Length: 0.06 mile From: the intersection wi~ O1~ Hampst~a~ Lane TQ~ the int~r~ection with Wra~ood Avenue Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: 50' feet. N~me of Street: Wraywood Avenue Length: 0.0~ mil~ From: the int~rsecClon with O1~ Hampstead Court north TO: ~he cul-de-sac ouarantesd Right-of-Way width: ~0' fe~t- ~ame o~ street: Wraywood Avenue Length: 0.18 mile Guaranteed Right-of-Way Wide: 50' fast. N~e of Street: ~iqhpa~ge Way Length: 0.12 mil~ ~ame of Street: ~ridgeSo~ Court Length: 0.85 mile Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: ~0' feet.. Thi~ request i~ inclusive of ~e adjacent slope, ~ight Transportation drainage easements indicated on ~e developmen~ plat, These roads serve 68 lots. Thi~ ~ectien of ~ampstead Place i~ recorded az follows: Section l, Flat Book 72, Pages 39, 40, & 41~ August 31, 1990. Vote: Unanimous Thi~ day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board~ made report in writing upen his examination of the roads in Point of Rocks Estates, S~ction l, Bermuda District, and %Thames, th~ R~sidnnt Engineer for the Virginia Department ef Tran~pertation has advised the Director of Environmental Engineering, the ~treets in Point of Rocks Estates, Zeetion 1, Be~7~da District, meet~ the ~eq~i~e~ents established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and Whereas, the County and the Virginia Department of ~ransportation have entered into an a~reem~nt, reoerded in Deed Book 24S3, Page 40~, ~anuary 21, ~994, for all z~ormwater detention/retention facilities in tho county. Therefore, upon oen~ideratien whereof, and on motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. ~icholas, it is resolved that the reade in Pein= of Rooks Ee=u=es~ Section 1, Bermuda District, be and they hereby are established as public road~. And be ~t further resolved, that the Virginia ~epa~t~en% o~ Transportation, be and is hereby requested to take into the Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, the following: Name of Street: Loren Drive From: State Route 745~ Enon Church Road Tu~ dead end stub Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: 60' feet. Name of Street: Tray~ick Drive ~rom~ the int~r~otion wi~h Loren Drive To± th~ cul-de-sac Guaranteed Right-of-Way width: 50' feet. ~ame o~ Street: T~aywic~ Drive From: the intersection with Lor~n Drive t~e intersection wi=b and dead ending across Bermuda Avenue Guaranteed Right-of-way Width: 5~~ feet. Name of Street: Shale Place From: the intersection with Loren Drive To: the cul-de-sac Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: 50~ feet. Name of Street: Shale Court Prom: the intersection with Loren Drive To; the Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: 50' feet. Name of Street: Santell Drive ~rom: the intersection wi~h Loren Drive To: the cul-de-sac Guaranteed Riqht-o£-Way Width: ~0~ feet. ~ame oS Street: Santell Drive From: the intersection with Loren Drive TO: a dead end ~tub read Cuaranteed Right-of-Way Width: $0' feet- 94-941 Length: 0.]$ mile Length: O.10 mile Length: 0.13 mile Length: 0.03 mile Length: 0.07 mile Length: 0.us mile 12114194 Length: o.z3 mile N~e of Street: Bermuda Avenue To; the intersection with Santell Drive ~uaranteed Right-el-Way width: 50' feet. Frs~: B~rmuda Avenue To: the cul-de-sac Guaranteed ~igh%-of-Way Width: 50' feet. Name of Street: Tral~iok Court, Length:I 0.04 mile To: the cul-de-sac Thi~ r~qu~t im inclusive of the adjacent slope, eight distance, clear zone end designated Virginia Department of development 91at. follow~: This day th~ County Environmental =ngineer, in with directions from this Board, made report in writinq upon ~i~ e~amination of the reads ~n Gilrltchle, Section Hatcaea District, and Transportation has ~dvi~ed the Director of Environmental sngineering, the streets in Gilritchie, Se~tlon ~, Matoaca Dimtrict, m~ets the retirements established by the subdivieion Street ~e~irements of the Virginia Department of Whereas, the County and the virgini~ Departmen~ etor~wa~er ~etention/r~tention faeilitiem in the County. roads in Giiri~chle, Section ~; ~atoaea District, be and they hereby ar~ established a~ public roads. And be it further r~olved, that the Virginia Departmen~ of Transportation, he and is hereby requested to take into the virginia, and the Department'e S~bdivi~ion ~treet Requirements, the following: Prom= existing. Gitritchie. Drive,$tate. Route.4$20: Guaranteed Right-of-way width~ 50' This request is inclusive of the adjacent ~lepe, ~iqht distance, clear zone and designated Virginia Dspartment of Transportation drainage easements indicated om the development plat. ~hese roadm serve 29 lots. Th~s sest~en of Gilri~uhle is reoordo4 as £ollcws: Section 2, Plat Bock 77, Pages 69 & 70, February 2, 1992. Vote: Unanimous This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with directien~ from thi~ Board, made report in w~itinq upon his examination of the roads in Woodland Pond, Section S, Matosca District, and Whereas, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the ~irectcr of ~nvirenmental Engineering, the ~treet~ in Woodland Pond! Section 8, Matoaoa District, meets the recf~irements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of th~ Virginia Department of Transportation, and Whereas, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation ha~e entered into an agreement, recorded in Deed Book 2453, Pa~e 485, January 21, 1994, for all ~tormwater detention/retention facilities in the County. Therefore, upom consideration whereof, and on motion of Mr. Barber, ~econded by Dr. Nicholas, it ~ re~olved that the roads in Woodland Pond, Section $, Matoaca District, be and they hereby ore established as public roods. And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Transportation, be and is hsreby requested to take Intu the Secnndsrl; System, pursuant to Section 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and th~ Department's S~bdiviaion street Requirements, the following: Name sf street: Woodland Pond Parkway Length: 0.~6 mile Guaranteed Right-of-way Width: 70' feet. Name o~ street: Avocet Driv~ Length: ~.3~ mile To: tho cul-de-sac ~uaranfeed Right-of-Way Width: ~0' fs~t. From: the intersection of Avocet Drive This request i~ inclusive of the sdjasent slope~ sight distance, clear zone..and designated. Virginia Department of development plat. Thane roads ser~= 3~ leto. Thio osctios of woodland Pond is recorded as follows: sec%ion 8, Plat Book $0, Pages 66, 67, & 68, March ~3, 1993. Vote: Unanimous $.D.11, A~RoV~L OF OONTR~TB B.D.11.a. PUl%CHASE OF pARC~L~ OF L~uND AND ASSOCIATED EASEMENTS ALONG WOODS EDGE ROAD FROM ~iR. JOH~ W. ROBERTS on Motion of Mr, ~arb~r, ~=onded by Dr. ~icholas, the Boa~d approved a coatract~ in the amount of $1,546.00, for the purchase of parcels of land and agsoclated easements ~loug Woods Edge Road from Mr. John W- Robert~ ~n conjunction with the ~on-~arrowgate Elementary School Project and authorized neoeassry dee~. (It is noted a copy o~ th~ plat is filed with the' papers' o~ this~Boar~'.'} Vote: Unanimous 8.D.11.~. WITH SML ~TE}U{OUSE TO (Y$~I~tDE UTiLITIeS 0~ motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. Niohola~ ~he Board a~prove~ ~ contract wi=~ M~L Mys~emhouse, in the amount of $Z~0,44~, to upgrade the Utilities Eleotronic Dooumen= Managmment System. (It is no~md this ~rojec~ ~ill be funded from the current Utilities Department operating budget.) VOte: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Barber, secondsd by Dr. Nicholas, %he Board approved the purchase of a parcel of land containing ~.432 Genito Road (State Route 604) and Waterccve Road (State Route 2978), in the amount of $30d,000~ as the site for the Centerpointe Fire Station (Fire Station ~16) add authorized agreements, and deed, subject to approval by the County Attorney. (It is noted a dopy of the plat is filed with the ~apers o~ this Board; funds, in the amoun~ of $2,314,800, are available in the project budget; and ~taff w~ll asses~ th~ difference in costs once construction bids are received.) Vote: Unanimous 8.D.~3. REOUEET TO OUITO~TM DRAZN~GE EASEMENTS ACRO~S PROPERTY oWNeD BY HILL DEVE~0~NT nS~OC~TR~, LTD. On motion of ~r. ~arber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board a~tho~il~d t~a c~airman of the Bo~rd ~nd the County A~nistra~or to execut~ a quitclai~ deed ~o vauat~ two across ~he property of ~ill D~velopm~nt Assooiate~, LTD, is noted a copy of the plat is filed with ~e papers of Board.}. Vot~: Unanlmou~ 94-~44 12/14/94 ' i MR. JOHN L. IRVIN FOR A CONCRETE FAD TO ENCROACM WITHIN AN EXISTING WATER AND EEWER EAZE~EET Oh motion Of MM. B&~ber~ seconded by D~, Nicholas, tho Bourd approved a request from ~s, Doris I. E~erton and ~LT. John L. I~Vi~ fO~ a concrete pad to ehc~0aoh within an existing 23 foot water and sewer easement across a part of Lot 3, Providence Farms, subject to the execution of a llcen~e agreement. (It is noted a copy cf the vicinity sketch is filed with the papers of this Board.) 8,D.15. AUTHORIZATION TO E~EROISE EMINENT DOMRIN ACROB~ PROPERTY OF VIRAM CORPORATION FOR ~COUI~ITIO~ OF WAT~ A~D CONSTHUCTION EABRMENT8 FOR JAHNKE RO~D On ~otion of ~r- Barber, secoode~ by Dr~ Nicholas, th~ ~oard authorized the County Attorney to proceed w~Th eminent domain pursuant to Section 15.~-2~S.1 of the Cod~ of Virginia for 12 foot wide tempo~a=y conutruction easements for ~e Jahnke Administrator to notify th~ owner by certified mail on December 15, 1994 of the County'~ intention to take ~osseasion of the easement. (It is noted a copy of the Vote: Unanimous 8.D.16. ACCEPTi%~CE OF PARCELS OF L~-ND ~.~.l~.a. ~D~OINIR~ T~ NO~T~ RIGHT OF WAY OF ENON ¢~R~H ROAN~D EXTENDING NORTHE~Y TO THE TER~INU~ OF DE'UPA ORCHARD L~NE FROM ~R, 0LIVER D. RUBY. of land containing 6.577 acres adjoining the north right of way o~ =non church Road (~tats Route 746) and extending Route ~2~) from oliver D. Rudy, Trustee, under the provisions designated.as the Ramblewood Trust Agreement, and authorized is noted a cody of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) ALONG GOODRS BRII~E ROAD FROM ROTC ~HOLEBALE CORPORATION On motion of Mr. Barber, ~e¢on~ed by Dr. Nicholas, the Board accepted, on behalf cf the County, the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.079 acr~ along ~oeden Bridq~ Road (State Route 1668) from RCTC Wholesale Corporation, A Virqinia Corporation, and authorized the Couety Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is noted a cody of the plat is file~ with the papers of this Vote: Unanimous 94-945 ~2/14/94 On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.033 auras along Proposed West Koger center Boulevard from Consolidated 9alee Company, Incorporated and authorized the County Administrator to execute th~ necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimou~ 8. D. 16. d. ALOEG WILLIS ROAD FROM KCDO~LD ~ S CORPORATION On motion of l~r. Barber, seconded Dy Dr- ~icholas, the Board accepted, o~ behalf of the county, the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.I14 acres along Willis Road fro~ ~=Donald'~ Corporetion~ A Delaware Corpora=ion and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is note~ a copy of the plat is filed ~ith the ~apera o~ this Board.} ~ONSIDERATION .O~ CL~I~ BY MR~ HARRY DELOI~N FOR LOSE CHESTERFIELD CO'INIT ~IEPORT ~r- ~i~ha~l Chernau, Assista~t County Attorney~ stated Mr. ~arry Delolan has leased a hangar at the Chesterfield County Airport ~ince 3uly~ 1990 and claims that on August 25, 1991~ his hangar had been burglarized and an aircraft engine tools, valued by him at $57,542.72, ~ere stolen. ~e further ~tated there wa~ nc evidence of fsr~ed entry on the ha~ger, however, Mr. Daloian feel~ the County is liable because the County ~eld duplicate keys that were kept in the Airport office and were accessible by other individuals. He stated the County Police Department investigated the matter and the County also made a claim for Mr. Deloian's isms with its insurance carrier at the Airport which was denied. further mta~e~ the insurance earri~r denied the claim becaume under the lease, Mr. Deloian was responsible for security of the hanger and al~o bee~Bs~ th~ County im immune from claims of this natu~e~ ~e stated staff recommends denial ef ~r. Daloian's claim b~cau~e no ~vidence of County negligence which ~ould have oa~sed Mr. Delolan'a loss was found and even if such evidence axle%m, the County i~ immune from liability for this type of claim~ and the clai~ ie beyond applicable statute of limitations. He further stated Deloian has receRtly s~bmitted additional information sta~ing his inventory of tools came from working on plane~, being an auto mechanic, machinist, and welder and hevln~ an Associates Degree in electricity and electronics. We then introduced Mr. Deloiam. Mr. Deloian stated he has leased a hangar at the CuUnty Airport siDoe 197~ not 1990; that he ~as. informed by th= County Attorney's Office that the statute on limitations on his claim i~ five y~ars; that he feels the County is responsible for his loss; that the County Air~ort demands unrestricted access to hangars; that key~ to the hangar~ were not put under protection; and that thmfte had taken place two to thr~e y~ars prior to his hangar being burglarized. He further stated the hangar ~ae not broken into, hut was entered through the lock on the door; that the 94-946 Airport Manager knew the combination te his hanger; that whoever burglarized his' hanger had access to the hangar; that he put additional locks on his hanqar; t~at until be gave the Airport Kanager the combination to tho lo~k, he had no problems; that he hal offered to settle with the County to no avail; an~ tha~ he %eels the County should assume some responsibility for him loss. 14hen asked, ~ir~ Miea~ ~tated thim is a specific request for a claim, thmrmfsra, the Board needs ts take action on consideration of the claim at this time. Nr- Daniel.stated_ h~ doe~.not feel, as an elected official, that he can act as judge and jury on this claim. ~e further stated citizens have secured a mechanism that assures their dollars are not paid on unsubstantiated claims and he has no recourse but to deny the claim to allow Mr. Deloian to proceed with other legal remedies for see~ri~g some redress. ~ Daniel then made a motion~ seconded by Mr. Warren~ for the ~oar~ to d~ny a claim by Mr. ~arry Deloian, in the amount of $57,5~2.72~ for loss of an aircraft engine and tools from his hangar at the Chesterfield county Airport. accepted the following reports: N~i Ramsay presented the Board with a report on the developer Y~. Ramsay presented the Board with a status report on the ~eneral Fund Dalan¢~; Re,eryc for Future Capi~l FroJect~; School Board Agenda. 8.~. ~PPRO~q~L OP ~IRPORT ~8TBR PLAN (continued) ~r. Hammer stated staff has contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and ~ns FAA has agreed to delay review of the grants until after a public heuring by tabu Board on January 1I, 1~. He further stated the FAA will not held any County grants nt risk until after that date. ~r. Daniel restated his motion, ~aster ~lan and to set the date of Janua~ 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider approval of the Airport ~aster Plan. Mr. Barber. ~irected .staff.to inform, him of~any~out~tan~ing concerns or community issues pMior to t~e pubIic ~earing. M~. Daniel concurred with ~r. Barber's request. 94-947 12/14/~4 ~r. ~cHale called for the Vote on the motion made by Mr. Daniel, seconded by D~. Niehola~ for the Board to defe~ consideration of approval of the Airport ~aster Plan mnd to set the date of January 11, 1995 at 7:QQ p-m~ for a public hearing to consider approval of the Airport Master Plan. (It Board.) 8.D.~.b. ]~DOPTiON oP RSEOLUTION OPPOSIN¢ ~ ~DKBNT TO ~NTFO~I4 S~&TB~IDE BUILDIN~ CODB RESTRICTIKG ~r, Micas stated a proposal has been ma~e to the State Board of ~ou~ing to red~oe the ability of localities to enforce the requirements of the uniform Statewide building Code (USBC). ~ further stated under current law, the county can ~n£orce and criminally proseou=a for violations of the USBC within one year of issuance of the Certifioate of Occupancy or within two years o~ The data of th~ vlolation. He stated the proposal being pra~ented to ~he State ~oard of Housing would eliminate the ability of the ~oard to criminally onus the Certificat~ of Occupancy has been issued and i~ the Certlf~cate o~ Occupancy has been issued, it would end th~ ability of the County to subsequently enforce violation~ of the Code. ~a further a~ated the proposed resolution opposes a~y change that would eliminate the ability of the County to language be added to the lest two paragraphs of the r~duce the ~im~fra~ for criminal p~o~cutions of USBC violations and ~at ~taff has no objection ~o the ~en asked, hm stated the outcome of the reaolution would be for a certificate of Oocupancy not be i~uud until all violations are ~d~res~ed to the s~tisfaction of the inspector. He ~ubmitt~d a copy of ~he amend=d ruu01ution to ~hm Board. Mr. ~arber ~ad~ a motion, seconded by ~. Warren, for the ~oard to adopt the ~end~d r6z01ution opposing an amendnent t~ the Unifo~ statewid~ ~uilding Code restrictinq criminal prosecutien of ~iolation~ of the Building Code. Ther~ was brief discussion relative to the inten= of resolution. Barber, ~econded by ~. Warren, for th~ Board to a~opt the following WHER~S, the Virgiuia Unifo~ Statewide Building Code ("USBC") was adopted for the ~urpose of ~nsuring safety ~o ~ife an~ property from all hazard~ incident to building d~i~n, const~ction, u~e, rapalr, removal, or d~olition by ~tablishin~ minim~ standards for construction; and ~R~AS, the Co~ty.. i~ u~pou~ible:...fo~ enforcing the ~inim~ construction standards of the U~C and to ~hose ~nforc~m~nt responsibilities, is au~ori~ad the U~BC when violatlons are discovered ~ithin one year afte~ a certificate of u~e ~nd occupancy ha~ b~an issued for building that is in vlolation of tke USBC, and no more than 94-948 WHERRAg, certain effort~ are being ~&de to a~end the USBC %o reduce the time frame for pre~ecuting violations of the USBC by Dreventinq the County f~em o~iminally pro~ecuting vielatlons of the ~$BC commltted hy the builder of a utructure that is in violation of the UStC at any time aftxr a certificate of use and occupancy has been issued for the structure; and W~L~A~, any ~nendnent to the U~BC that reduce~ the time frame for criminally 9romecutln~ violations of tbs USBC or otherwise obtaining complianc~ with the USBC would negatively affect the county's ability to effectuats the purpose of the U~BC. ~OW, T~ERE~O~E ~E ~T RES0LV~D, that ~he ~oar~ of Supervisors of Chesterfield County oppe~es any amendment to the USSC that would reduc~ the time frame for criminally prosecuting violation~ of the USBC or otherwise obtaining compliance with the U~BC. 3. BO~RD COMMITTEE Mr. Barber stated his next "~irst Monday" constituents meeting will be held JanuaTy 9, 1995 with the topic of discussion b~ing legi~latlv~ items. 11. DINNER on motion of ~. Ba~be~, seconded by M~. Daniel, the Board recessed to the Admini~tratlon Building, Room 502, for dinner. Vote: Unanimous 12. INVOC~TION Mr. ~cHal~ introduced Reverend Ed Stransfi~ld, C/easter Baptist Church, who gave the invocation. 13. PLEDGE OF ALLEGI~iNCE TO ~HE ~LAG OF THE U~ITED GTATES OF ;~HERIC~ Mr. Benjamin W. DeHaven, Troop 860, and ~r. ~ieha~l ~anafea, Jr.,. Troop ~27, lad the ~ledga uf Allegiance to ~ha Flag of the ~nited ~tates of ~erica. X4. RESOLUTIONR AND SPECIAL RB~OSNITIONS RE~O~NI~I~ ~RNI ~OM~ONENTS~ IN~. WITH THE "BUSINESS A~RE~IATIONANDRE~OGNITIO~ ~W~RD" Mr. MoLaren introduced Mr. Willie Rau, President~ of EP~I Components, ~ho was present to receive the r~solution. On motion of the Board, the following re~olution wa~ adopted: WHEREAS, th~ ~terfi~ld County Boa~d of 8upe~vi~o~ · ~established u ?Business Appreciation nad Recognition Award" to recognize .~xlsting buslnesse~ within %he County ~at contribute %o th~ County's ~oonomy an~ it~ citizens; an~ ~EREAS, E~I Components, Incorporated has recently celebrate~ it~ tenth a~iv~r~ary in Ch~terfiel~ County; and 94-9~9 12/14/94 WHEREAS, ERNI components, being a German/Swiss owned company, e~tabli~h~d all of its U.S. manufacturing and sales operations in Chesterfield County; and W~R~A~ through ERNI Components' business of the products manu£actured in chesterfield to companies throughout the world, it h~$ helped promote County aea location for international companies; and kq4F~qEAS, ERNI Components has demonstrated visionary leadership by recently expanding ,intO a~ new 50~O00 square foot facility in the River's ~end Bu~ine~ Center and thus f~rther promoting the industrial opportunities available in Chesterfield' w~ile" demon~tratlng, the compatibility ~ of industrial a~d residential uses; and WM~REAS, EPd~I Co~pODent~ has increased their e~ployment from l0 people in 198~ to Il0 in 1994 and has aggressively hired a diverse ethnic an~ mu!ti~racial workforce; and W~R~$, ERN~ Components has been recognized for product companies ~ro~nd the world including Si~mens~ Bo~ch, Texas WHEREAS, ERNI Components has demonstrated environmental sensitivity and has been recognized for design and location excellence by the James River Soil and Conservation Distrlot. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield appreciation on behalf of the County to ERNI Components, Inoorperate~ ~r their contributions over t~ many y~ar~. AND~ B= IT FURTHER R~SOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors ~xpre~es its appreciation to EP-NI Components for their contributions by recognizing them as the 1994 medium business recipient of the Chesterfield County Business Appreciation and Recognition Award. Vote: Unanimous Mr. McHal~ pre,anted the executed resolution an~ an engraved plaque to Hr. Ram and expressed appreciation for their contributions and business leadership in t~e County ~ation. Mr. Ram expressed appreciation for th~ recognition and support given to ERNI Components by ~he County. On motion of the Board, the Iollowing resolution was ad~pted: WHEREAS, the ~oy scouts ~£ America was incorporated by ~Lr..William:D. Doyce..on February, 8, 1910;.~andr pro~ete citizenship tralni~g, personal development, ~n a ~ide variety of fields, serving in a leadership positiun ~n a troop~ carrying out a service project beneficial to hie oomm~nlty, baln~ aotlve in the troop, demonstrating 94-950 WHEREAS, Mm. Benjamin w. De/~aven, Troop 860, sponsored by Woodlake United Methodist Church, has. ao~omplished t~ose high stundurds of com~itm=nt and has reached the long-~ought goal of Eagle Scout which is received by less than two percent of those individuals entering the Scouting movement; and W~EREAS, growing through his experiences in S=outlng, learning the les~cns of responsible ci%izenshlp, and priding himself on the great accomplishments of his County, Benjamin is indeed a member of a new generation of prepared young NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, t~at the Chesterfield ' the good fortune of the County to have ~uch an outstanding young man as one of its citizens. Vote: Unanimou~ ~r. McHale pre~ented the executed re~olution to.Mr. DeHav=n, accompanied by ne~bers of his family, congratulated him on his outstanding achievement, and wished his well in his 14.B.~. ~tR~ MICHAEL R. MEN~FEE~ ~., TRO09 9~? On ~otion of the Board, the following re~ol~tion was adopted: Mr. Willla~ D. Boyce on Peb~uary 8, 1910; and WHEREA$~ the Boy Scouts of America was founded to promote citizenship training, personal development, and fitnes~ of individuals; and W~EREAS, after earning et least-twenty-one merit budges in a wida variety u~ fialds, serving in = laadership ~osiaiun in a troop, carrying out a s~rvice project beneficial to him spirit, and living up to the Scout Oath and Law; and ~EREAS~ Mr. Michael R. Menefee~ Jr.~ Troop 927, those high standard~ of co~itment and hue reached the long- percent of those individuals entering the ~couting mordent; ~EREAS, growin~ t~ouqh his ~xDeriences in Scouting, l~arnlng the lessons of responsible citizenship, and priding himself on the qreat ascompl~ent~ of his County~ Michael NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County. ~uard of. Supervisors. hereby, extends its ~on~atulations ~o Mr. Michael R. M~nefee, Jr. and acknowl=dg=s ~he ~QOd fur%un~ of ~h~ County to have such an Vote: Unanimous ~r. Morale presented th~ ~xecut~d resolution to ~. Nensfee, accompanied by n~bers of his family, congratulated him on hi~ outntanding achievement, and wished his well in his future endeavors. L2/14/94 OP CHEZTERFIELD COUNTY ~. ~tith introduced Hr. Wilton Johns, coach of =he clover Kill Cawaliers Girls High school Tennis T~am~ and members of the Team, who were present to receive the resolutions. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: Wa~R~, partlclpatlon"in high school ~port~ hag long been an integral part of Chesterfield County'~ educational WHEP~AS, the 199~ Clover Hill Cavaliers Girls High school Tennis Team ~inished Zhe season with a 16-2 record; and W~R~A$, the Clover ~ill Cavaliers Tenni~ Tea~ Non the 1994 Dominion District, Central Regional, and state ChampienshiD~ to jain in the ranks of current AAA State Champions; and commended by their opponents for their outstanding sportsmanship during the Virqinia High School League Ste~a W~REAS, the citizens of Che~ter£i~Sd County continue to support the inter~chola~tio activity programs for students. HOW, T~EREFOR~ BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield ~ill Cavali~r~ Girls High School Tennis Team for its outstanding representation of Chesterfield county. AND~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Boar~ of Super¥isor~, on behalf of the citizens of Chesterfield County, does hereby commend the Clover ~ill Cavaliers Tennis Team for their commitment to excellence in the classroom and on the cou~t and ex~rsma their best wishes for continued ~r. Warren pre~nt~d the executed resolutions to Couch Joh~s amd members of the Team, eXl~rsssed aDpreciation for their r~pr~sentation of Chesterfield County, and congratuluted the~ on their outstanding achievements. Coaoh Johns expressed appreciation for th= recognition. RECOGNIZING ~OCO~NOCK VALLR~ YOUTH SOCCER LEAGUE THEIR OUTSTANDING BEEYI~E TO YOU~K IN THE coLr~T¥ Mr. Golden introduced M~. Lee Hinadakis, President of ~oGos~ock Valley Youth Soccer League, Who ~a~ present to reoaivs the resolution. on motion of the Board, the following ~esolu~isn was adopte~ donated in excess c~ $~0,000 tc Chesterfield County over the past ~i~ years for field improvements; end 94-952 12/14/~4 W~EREAS, the Pocoshock Valley Youth Soccer League has successfully hosted the Columbus Day Soccer Tournament for from several east coast states and Canada, compete in tournament games on soccer fields in chesterfield County; and celebrated their fifteenth year of successful programs on outstanding service to the youth of Chesterfleld County. Vote: Unanimous M~. Warren presented the executed resolution to Mr. Minadakis and expressed appreciation to the League for holding their activities in the County and for their support of the County. Mr. Micadakis expressed appreciation for the recognition and 15.R. TO ~ONSIDER TEE CON~EY~CE OF RI~T OF WRY ~ Mr. Stith stated this date amd ti~e has bsen advertised for a public hearing to consider the conveyance of right-of-way and easements at Huguenot Park, On motion of ~r. Darber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board approved the conveyance of a 0.035 acre parcel of land, together with a t~mporary easement~ to the Virginia Department of ~ighways and an easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for underground and ov~rhea~ electrical service; and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the easement agresment. (It is natsd a copy of the plat is filed with th~ paper~ of thio ~oard,) lB,E. TO CO.SIDER TEE CONVEYANCE OF LEASES OF REAL PROPERTY OP~P~TION OF FOOD CONCESSIONS EYV~A~IOUS CO-S~ONHOEED ATHLETIC ~SOC%~TIONS ~ LEAGUES Mr. Masdsn stated this date and time has boon advertised for a public hmaring to conEid~r th~ conv~yanm~ of leane~ of real property at various pa~ sites amd athletic complexes for operation of food concessions ,by various co-sponsored athletic asso¢iation~ and leagues. ~e further stated the fee be increased from tsn to twelvs psreent of gross ~receipts, with a two percent discount for payment~ mad~ by December 31 of each year. Ho stated staff recommends approval. When a~ked, he ~tat~d the ~arks and Advisory Committee reco~mend~ approval of the There was b~ief discussion relative to the recommendation to increase the lease fee from ~en to twelve No one camo forward to speak in favor of or against this On motion of Mr. Warren, se=~d~d by Dr. ~icholas, th~ Board approved the conveyance of leases of real property a~ the following park citoc and athletic complexem for operation of food concessions by various co-sponsored athletic associations and leagues: ~ociatiou Bensley Athletic Chester Youth Sports Booster~, Inc. Chesterfleld-Baseba~Clubsl Chester£ield Ba~ahatl Clubs, Inc. Chesterfield Youth ~oftball Assoc. Enon Athletic ~ttri0k Youth Sports Assoc. Narrowgate Athletic Huguenot Little League Matoaea Athletic A~oc. Vote: Unanimouc Coma!ex,Park B~n=ley Park Ooyne Par~ Rock~oodPark Ironbridge Park Youth Baseball Complex Bird Athletic Complex Point o£ Rocks Park Ettriok Park Harrowga~e ~ark Rcbiou~ Athletic Complex Matoaoa Pa~k Ironbri~ge Park Adult Softball Complex Woodlako Athletic Complex I~,C. TO CONBTDER THE FOLLOWIN~ T~X EXEMPTION REOUE~T~: 1§.C.1. ALTEP. NATIVE O0~fl%~NITY PROPERTIES, ~5.C.2. PREZTONWOOD PBOPKRT~ES, I~OR~ORATED lB.d.~. RI~B RUN TER~CE P~OPERTIES, INCORPO~TED con~ider tax exemption re~es~ fo~ Alternative Properties, Incorporated; Pre,renwood Properties~ Ee f~rther statmd each of the grOUp~ are non-profit organization~ which o~erat~ in Ches~erflel~ County and own real estat~ that i~ u~ed for the residential purpose of oaring for mentally disabled cltiz~ns within ~he CouDty. stated under ~e Virginia Constitution, the General Assembly cannot consider a tax ex~D~ion reque~ un~il t~e request has been =on~f~ered, after a public hearing, by the guve~ning bod~ of the locality in which ~h~ organization is looate~. ~e not~ e~ch of the properties pay annual taxes in the ~anqe of $~50 to $950. Retardation/S~stance Abuse Services, ~tat~d these propertie~ are Rff~llated with Chesterfield Alternatives and currently o~erate fiftesn home~ for the Mental Health D%Dartment. further stated the groups provide ~e home and %h~ Co~ty's Mental 5ealth Department provides the staff and he supports hearing was On motion of ~. Warren, meconded by Mr. Barbe~ ~e Board RESOL~ION SUPPORTING T~ D~SIG~ATIO~ OF PRQPERT~ ALT~ATI~ CO--TrY ~RO~RTI~S~ INC. AS EXERT FROM T~TION BY ~E GENiaL ASS~L~ OF VIRGINIA WI~EREAS, Alternative Community Properties, Inc. is a non-stock, non-profit corporation which provides long-term care services to patiantm in their homes; and WHEREAS~ Alternative Co,unity P~ope~ties, Ino, is in the process of purchasing real property located in chesterfield county, Virginia; and W~IEREAS, the real and personal property used ~xclu~ively for charitable and benevolent purposes by a ~lifying o~ganization ~hall b~ ~e~pt fro~ taxation a~ a~thori~ed by ~icle X, Section 6(a) (6) of ~he Con~tltutlon of Virginia, upon ac%ion, by ~e General Ass~ty of Virginia and ~o long as such organization i~ operated not for ~rofit and property $o exempt is used in accordance with the p~ose for ~ER~S, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield Csunty, Virginia has considered the following factors before the adoptiom of this resolution in support of ~e tax eYempt status of Alternative Co~unlty Properti~s~ Inc- as follows: I~ Alternativ~ Community Prop~rtles, Inc. is exempt 2. No current annual alo0~oli¢ b~v~ra~ llo~n~e for serving alcoholic bxveroges has been issued by ~e Virginia Alooholio ~ev~rag~ control ~o~rd to Al~=rnative Co--unity Properties, Inc. for ume on the organization's property. 3. NO di~CtO~ O~ officer of Alternative Co--unity value of the services perfo~ed in such position with th~ con, oration. 4. NO part of the net earnings of Alternative Co~nity Properties, Inc. inure~ to ~he benefit of any individual. 5. Alternative Co,unity Properties, Inc. prevides services for the common good of the public. 6. No part of the activiti~ of Alternative Community Properties, Inc. involves carrying on propaganda or othe~ise att~mpt~nq to influenc~ l~qi~lation. ~h~ oorporation does not participate in~ or intervene in~ any politioaI campaign 7. Alternativ~ Co~uni~y Properties, Inn. has no rule, regulation, ~olicy ur pructic= which discriminute~ on the basis of religious conviction, race, color, ~ax or na~ional origin. 8. Lest year the above mentioned property generated $982.Q0 in County real es~a~s tax. THEREFORE, be it resotve~ by the Board uf Supervisors Chesterfield County aa fellows: ,. 1. Tha~ this Board support~ the request of Alternative Co~uni~ Prop~tie~, Inc. for exemption from taxation of its real~ and p~r~onal property pursuant to ~tiole X, 6(a) (6) of the Constitution of Virginia and the provi~ion~ chapter ~ of Titl~ ~$.1 of the Code o~ virginia, 195Q, amended, and that s~ exemption should be categorized charitable and benevolent. 2. That the County Administrator is directed to ~orward a certified copy o~ thi~ re~olution to the m~mb~r~ of the General Assembly representing the County Of Chesterfield with the request that the proper legislation b~ introduced in the ~n~ral Assembly to achieve the purposes of this resolution. 3. The effective date of this resolution shall be DeCember 14, 1994. vote: Unanimous adopted t_he following resolution: RE~OLUTION ~UPPORTING T~E DE~I~ATION OF PROPERTY CF PRESTONWOOD PROPERTIES, INC'. AS EXEMPT FROM TAXATION BY TME GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA WKEREAS~ Pre,renwood ~roperties, Inc. is ~ non-stock, non-profit corporation which provides long-term Care ~ervices to patients in their homes; and WEEREA$, Prestonwood Properties, Inc. is in th~ proc~n~ of purchasing real property located in Chesterfield County, Virginia~ and W~EREAS, the real and personal property used excluslvely for charitable and benevolent purpose~ by a qualifying 0rganizat~en ~hall ~e exempt ~rum taxation ns authorized by Article X, Section 6(a) (~) of the Constitution of Virginia, upon action by the General Assembly c~ virginia and sc long a~ ~uch organization is operated not for profit and the property so exempt is used in aocor~nnce with the purpose for which the organization is classified; and WHEREAS, the Doard Of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, virginia has con,±dared the following factors before the adoption of this resolution in auppczt of the tax exempt ~noome taxation ptursuant to Section 501[c) of the .Internal Revenue Code of 1986. serving alcoholic beverages has been issued by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to Prestonwoo4 ProDsrties, Ino. for u$~ on the organization'~ property. ~. No director or Officer o£ ~re~tonwood Properties, Inc. is paid any sempensatlon in excess of the value of the services performed in such position with the corporation. 4. No part of tk~ n~ ~arDing~ of Pre,renwood Properties, Inc. inures to the benefit of any individual. 5. Pre,to,wood Proper~ies~ Inc. previ~e services for the common good of.the.public~- 6. ~o part of the activities of ~remtonwood Properties, Inc. involv6s carrying on propaganda or otherwise att~pting to influence legislation. The corporation does not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office. 94-~56 12/14/94 7. Prsstc~wood Properties, Iac. has no rule, rsgulatlon, policy or practice which discriminates on the basis of religious conviction, raoe~ color, sex or national origin. 8. Last year the above mentioned property generated $89~.5~ in County r~al estate tux. THEReFORe, be it resolved by the Board of Snpsrvisors of chesterfield County as follows: 1. That this Board supports the re~uast of Prestonwmod Properties, Inc. for exemption from taxation of its real and personal property pursuant to Article K, section 6(a)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia and the provisions of Chapter 36 of Title 58.1 of the Code of virginia, 1950j as amended, and that such exemption should be categorized as charitable and benevolent. 2- That the County Administrator is directed to the General As~nbly representing the County of Chesterfield with ~he request ~hat the proper legislation be introduced in the General A~embly to achieve thc purposes of this resolution. December 14, 5994. Os ~otlon of Mr. Warren, ssconded by ~r. Barber, the Board RESOLUTIO~ SUPPORTING TKE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY OF RIDGE RUN TERRACE PROPERTIES, INC. AS EXEMPT FROM TAXATION DY T~E GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, Ridge Run Terrace Properties, Inc. is a nun- stock~ non-profit corporation which provides long-term care ~rvi~ to pati~nt~ in their ho~es; process of pttrcha~ing real property located in Chesterfield county, virginia; and for charitable and b~nevolent purposes by a qualifying Article X, Sectio~ 6(a) (6) of the Constitution of Virginia, a~ such organization is operated not for profit and the property so exempt is used in accordance with the purpose for which the organization is classified; and Co~ty, Virginia has considered the follow~ng factors the adoption of this re~olution, in support of the tax exempt stat~s of Ridge R~ Terrace Properties, Inc. as follows: · 1.. · Ridge Run T~rrace Prop~rti~, Ind. i~ exempt f~om f~deral income taxation pursuant to section 501(c) of the ;Internal Revenu~ Code of 1986. ~. No current annual alcoholic beverage lic~ns~ for serving alcoholic beverages has been issued by the virginia Propertie~, Inc. for use on the organization's property. 94-957 12/14/94 3. NS director or officer of Ridge Run Terrace ~op~rti~g, Inc. is paid any compensation in excess of the value of the services performed in Such positlen with the corporation. 4. Ns part cf the n~t earnings of Ridg~ Run TerraCe Properties, Inc. in~re~ te the benefit of any individual. 5. Ridg~ Run Terrace Properties~ Inc. provides ser~iee~ for the common good of :he public. s. Ne .part of ~he activities of Ridge Run T~rrace prop~rtieg, Inc. involves carrying en propaganda or otherwise attemptlnq.-~o-.isfluance...legista~ien.- The.oorporation...do~. not parti¢ipat~ in, or intervene in, any political campaign on he,half cf any candidate for public office. 7. Ridge Run Terrace Properties, Inc. has no rule, rsgulstlon, policy or practice which discriminates on the basis Of r~ligiou~ conviction, race, color, sex or national origin. $. Last y~ar the above mentioned property generated $992.99 in County real oster= tax. THEREFORE, be it re~olved by the Board of Supervisors of Chsster£ield County as follow~: 1. That this Board ~pp~rt~ th~ request of Ridge Run Terrace Propertie~, In~. for exemption from taxation o~ real and personal property pursuant to Article X, Sestien 6(a) (~) cE the Constitution of Virginia and the provisions of amended, and that each exemption should be sategoriz~d as charitable and benevolent. 2. That the County Admlnistratsr is directed to forward a certified copy of this re,elation to the members of the ~sneral A~sembly representing the County of chesterfield with the request that the proper legislation ba introduced in re~olution. 3. The effective date of this resolution ~hall De~smbeT 14, 1994. Vote: Unanimous PRO8P~tM 1~. stith ~tated this date and t~e has ~ean advertised to consider the 199D-96 Transportation Enhancement Program and noted the Program has been previously reviewed by the ~oard. l~r. George Beadles stated he is Drive Dike Lane Project; that th~ bike trail will pass in front of hi~ house; that he feels the County should stop agsigtings~bdiYisions;.*and:that.~meketree~:$ubdivision, s~Outd be required provide matching f~nds. Mr. Lou Lombard mtated Woodluke is paying a good portion of the cost for the Woodlake Bike Trail Project and he is in favor ef the bike trail ~nd any other envi~0ra~en=al enhancement in Matoaca District. There being ne cna else to address thi~ i~ue, the public 94-958 12/lg/Pg There was brieff discussion reletive to the Falling Creek Greenway Project which will construct a linear park along Falling Crees from Ccgbill Road to the Historic Iron Work~ site located between Routs 1 and Interstate 95. Project is an s×cellant project and will benefit the entire County. Me ~urther stated he ~eels the package in its entirety is excellent and that the Smoketree area was specifically designated for the Bike Trail Project due to the tremendous amount of traffic generated in the are~. He stated he supports the package. Mr. Warren the~ ~ade a ~otion, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, for the Board to approve the DroD0sed F¥9~ Enhancement List and forward the List to the Richmond Metropolitan Planning 0rgani~ation and the virginia Department of Transportation ~VDOT) for approval and to authorize staff to enter into enhancement ~rojeot construction and/or design agr=ement~ with VDOT, cansultant~ and/or contractors, subject to approval by the County A=torney's Office. Vote: Unanimous adopted the following resolution: ~EREAg, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Boar~ (OTB) construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that the local governing body r~quast, by resolution, approval of proposed enhancement NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors cf Chesterfield County requests the CT~ to establish a project to provide phase one of the landscaping proposed for Route 10 from the Courthouse Co~lsx to Chester Road~ AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Hoard hereby agrees, to pay 20 percent of the total estimated cost of $80,000 for planning, design, right-of-way, and con~t~uctlon Courthouse Complex to Chester Road~ and fihat~ if the Bo~d subE*quently elects to cancel thi~ Project, the County Chesterfield hereby agrees to reimburse the virginia Department o~ ~ransportatien for the total amount aZ costs expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified O£ e~eh vote: Unanimous On motion cf Mr. Warren, ssaon~ed by Dr. Nicholas, the Board adopted th~ following resolution: W~EREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transpcr~atlon Board (OTB) construction allocation procedure~, it is Dece~ary that the local governing body request, by resolution, approval of proposed enhancement projects. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Chester£ield County r=quests the OTB to establish a project to provide ~ike lanes On Smoketree Drive. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby a~ree$ ta pay 20 percent of the total estimated cast $?0,000 for planning~ design, right-of-way, and construction of the Smoketree ~ike Lane Project, and that~ if the Beard ~ubsequently elect~ to cancel this Project, the County of chesterfield here~y agrees to reimburse t~e Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of the ~4-959 12/14/94 oost~ expended by the Department through the date the Department is notified of such cancellation. On motion o~ ~r. Warren~ ~econded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board adopted the followlnq resolution: WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Board (OTB) construction, allocation procednre~, it is necessary that the local governing body request, resolution, approval of proposed enhancement projects. · NOW~ THEREFORE~ sE I~ RESOLVED,. that. th~ Board,.of Supervisors of Chesterfield County re~/ests the OTB to establish a project to provid~ Woodlake bike trail additions. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby agrees that 20 percent of the total estimated cost of $94,750 for planning, de=ign, right-of-way, and construction of the bike trail additions will be paid by the Woodlake ConYmunity A~oaiation~ and that, if t~ Board subsequently el~ct~ to cancel this project, the County of Chesterfield hereby agrees the Association will reimburse the virginia Department of Tran~portatlom for the total amount of the costs e~pendsd by the Department through the date the Department is notified such can~ollatioD- Vote: UnanlmQu~ On motion of Mr. Warren, s~conded by Dr. Nicholas, th~ Board adopted the following resolution: ~HEREAS, in accordance with cemmonw~alt~ Transportation Board (OTB) construction allocation procedures, necessary that t~e local governin~ body request, by NOW, THE~FOKE ~Z IT RESOLVED, tha~ the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield Coun=y requests the OTB msta~lish a ~roject to document and int~rDret a mu/ti- jurisdictional Virginia Civil War Overland ~nd Metropolitan Richmond Convention and Visitor's Bureau. AND, B~ IT FURTH~ RESOLVED, t~at ~e Board jurisdictional project. On motion cf Mr. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nioholas~ the Board adoDted the ~:11owing resolution: W~EREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Board (~B) construction ~llocntion procedures, it necessary ~a= =he local governing body request, by resolution~ approval of p~Op0sed enhancement projects. NOW, THEREFORE. BE. IT.. RESOLVED~ that, .the Board. of Supervisors of c~es=erfield county r~s the OTB to establish a p~oject fo~ t~e Falling ~eek Greenway Chesterfield Coon=y. ~D,' BE 'IT ~THER RE~OLV=D, ~at th~ Bo~rd h~r~y a~ees to pay 20 percent of the total e~ti~at~d co~t of $250,000 rot plamning, design, right-of-way, and const~=~ion for ~ ~alllnq Cre~k Greenway Project, and that, if the Boar4 subsequently eleu~s ~o cancel this Project, the County of Chesterfield hereby agr~ to r~inbur~e ~e Virginia 94-960 12/14/94 Departmenf of Tre~$pO~tatio~ for the total am0~nt of the costs cxpsn~ed by th~ Department through t~e ~at~ the Department is notified of such cancellation. Voter Unanimous On motion of Mr. Warren, ~econded by Dr. Nichola~ th~ Board adopted the following resolution: WEEREAS~ in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that the local qovern~ng body request, by ru~olutlon,, approval of proposed enhancement projectm. NOW, THeREfORE B~ IT R~S0LVED, that the ~oard of Supervisors of Chesterfield County reque~t~ the CTB to establish a project for the Eppington ~istorio Park in Chesterfield County. A~D, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the. Board hereby agrees to pay 20 percent of the total estimated cost o~ $250,000 for planning, design, right-of-way, and construction Board subsequently elects to cancel this Project, the County of chesterfield hereby agrees :o reimburse the virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of the Department in notified of such cancellation. Vote; QDa~i~ou~ On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, in accordance wi~h Commonwealth Transportation Sear~ (GT~) construction allocation prooedurss, it is necessary that the local governing body request, by NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of supervisors of Chesterfield County requests the CTB to establish a project for the Clarendon Graenway in Chesterfield County. ARB, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby egress to pay 20 percent of the total estimated cost of $75~000 for planning, design, right-of-way, and construction for the Cla~e~de~ G~eenw&y Pre,eot, and that, if T~e Beard ~uhn~qu~ntly elects to cancel this Project, the County of Chesterfield hsreby agress to reimburse tho Virginia D~partmeDt of Transportation for the total amount of the ~o~t~ e~pended by the Department through the date the Department i~ notified of such cancellation_ Vote: Unanimous (It ia ncte~ a copy of the F¥96 Enhancsment Projects are filed with the papers of thi~ Board.) 94-961 12/14/94 1~.B.1. ~M~NB SBCTIO~ 6.7 TO INCLUDE THE COUNTY ~DMINISTRATOR ON THB COMMITTEE ~HICH RECOMMENDS ADHINISTR~TOR APPOINTS T~.BSRESSOR AMEND SECTION ~.1 TO PROVIDE FOR T~E. SPECIAL SHO~L~ A V~O;~NCY 0CC~/R Dt~TN~ ~ BOkRD SCHOOL BC~D 15.B.5. ~/~E~ THE CF~%RTBR TO PR~IDE THAT ALL ELECTIONS FOR COU~TY SDFERVI~0R8 WOULD BE ~r. Hicas stated this date au~ ti~e ha~ been advertis6d to con~i~er proposed charter amendments an~ briefly r~vlewed e~ch amendment -- appointment of chief of Police; appointment 0~ a Board of Supervisors member should a v~cancy during a Board te~; revisin~ the ~ro~ess ~or appointing sQhoul Board ~emb~r~ to conform wi~ ~e approval by referendum the election of ~chool boar~ m~mb~r~ an~ providiu9 that all elect~onm for County suparvi~or~ would be "non-partisan." He further ~tn~ad the Ccunty~ amen~nts are approved by the General Asse~ly after County hold~ a Dubl~c hearing. He stated the S~te Beard of ~lectlons r~oo~nd~ two change~ to the Charter relating to filling a vacancy of a Board member in t~ event a Occurs in the sam~ year as an election year~ the Bo~rd wo~ld Drovide for an appointment, in a limited circumstance, the va=ancy occurred during an election y~ar and to provid~ for the mame ~pecial election process for a vacancy in %h~ School Board. He further ~tated staff recommends that if th~ ~oard adopts the charter amendment to provide for a special ~l~c~iun u~ a Board of Supervlsur~ m~mb~r should a vacancy occur during u Board term, it al~o adopt the two proposed a~ke~, he stated including the School Board in the same the Board has discretion to e/pa~d the special elec~i0n provision ~ include school boards. Mr. Warren clarified that amending the ~arter to that th~ County Administrator appoints t~e Real Assm~sor woulg be putting that praters under management of the a~ini~tTation. Mr. McHale inquired ~$ to th~ County'm options relating to non-par~isan elections. Mr. Mioas sta~ed in order for %he G~neral Assembly to consider Churtur amen~e~ts~ t~e Beard mRs~ either hold publi~ hearing or have a referendum on the issue. ~r. Warren zee%ed the issue o~ ~ re~er~n~ hag not been ~. McHale clurified there ure two methods in ~hich the Board ~. Daniel ate=ed the only issue advertism~ is a public hearing on mon-parti~an elections and he feels if the issue of a refarand~ is an option, it should bm advsrtised for 94-9S2 12/14/94 When asked~ Mr. Micas stated the Board could decide to hold a referendum without a public hearing. ~e further stated the Board has advertised for a public bearing at this time. ~Lr. William Davenportr Commonwealth's Attorney, stated he is elections for County supervisors would be non-partisan; that there have bean partisan elections for over 200 years; and that the current process clearly defines the views of the different parties. Senator stephen Martin stated he feels the prlnclp]es a~d philosophies .of gevemnment, and positions of parties are evidenced in c~eeds, platforms, campaigns, and public Dervioe. Ne further stated government cannot make citizens mere free, but can only restrict liberties; that to amend the citizens the opportnnity to vote for candidates from the party of their choirs; that citlzsns would be limited to only one of the existing options they currently h~v~; and that he encourages citizen input. Be stated citizen referendums are good if evidence of p~blic inter=st exists, however, he feels this particular item has v~ry little public interest~ that referendum~ cost taxpayers a significant amount of money; and requested ~he Boar~ not approve t~is amendment. Delegate Samuel Nixes stated he feels the primary criteria in making the decision regarding non-partisan elections should be whether or not this change will further thc process of democracy. Ke further ~tat~d citizens have the righ~ to vote and as votars~ have the right to ~eek and receive a party a party nomination amd he feel~ th~s proposal, if enacted, wcul~ be contrary to ~ho pre~s of democracy. He further stated the purpose of legislative bodies in a democracy is to resolve conflict and to set public policy and thst it is the duty and responsibility of ell elected officials to do so. Mr. George Beadles stated he feels the Board should receive sufficient public interest before holding a referendum and he does not feel non-partisan elections will chants anything. ~s. Ellen .Nau~ Chairman of the Chesterfield County Republican by the Chesterfield County Republican Committee requesting the Board to oppose the charter amendment which provides that all elections for County supervisors would be non-partisan. She t~en recognizs~ approxi~atsly 100 persons who were present at t/~e meeting in opposition to the chan~e. sub~itted a cody of the reso~utlon into =he resor~. Mr. Timothy Brown stated he opposes the Charter amendment which provides that all elections for County ~upervi~ors would be non-partisan. ~e further stated ha feels the Board must ~ecide whether the Charter amendment will add value to the election process, en~urs bettsr leadership~ and increase consensus on issues and that a non-partisan system will among candidates, will become more complex.. Me stated he feels there must be sn election system that provides citizens .the ability to discern a candidate's profile and without =he · .tsmplate~ of ~the mainstream political parties, take on greater importance and influence in local elections; intensifies the nas~ for special interest group endorsements; that he does not feel a change in the election process will achieve better leadership and e non-partisan system' will not increase consensus on issue~; and that if the Board decides 94-963 to amend the Charter, it should be by r~ferendum. FLT. Bob olean stated he sUppQrte non-partisan elections far Board of Supervisors members; that he ~ecently attended a party meeting in which oonnents ware expressed in which he did not agree with and which caused him concern; that he feels County citizens want democracy and the County needs candidates who will run without party baggage; that the County needs a public who wil~ vote on candidates they feel will do the best job and not because they belong ta a .particular party; and:that he feels, non-per,lean eleotion~ is a way to re~tor~ ~lectorlal power back tO Co~ty citizens. M~. Philipee~ Burcalter ~tat~d citizens ~ant~ ta~ be. infor~ed. and the best way to accomplish that is :brough pa~ty elections; that he feels it is important for citizens to be involved; and he opposes the Charter amendment which provides that all ~lecti0ns for County Supervisors would ba parti~an~ Mr. Gary ThompsOn ~tated he is opposed to the Charter amendment which provides that all ~lections for County Supervisors would be nan-partisan; that anyone involva~ in elections will ~ecom~ partisan over time: that pa~ti~an politics should nut get in the way of good government; and ara ~nanimoum, which ha fa=la ~eD~eeent~ good government. ~ur%her ~%a%ed he is Chairman of the Bermuda District Republican Party~ that he supports anyone W~o wi~hes to run as a party person; ~ha% he feels partisan elections often limit the choice of ¥ote~, however, the currant system ma~imlzea voter choices; and requests4 ~s ~oard not to approve the proposed Charter amendment. Mr. Wayne 0sborna stated he feels citi=en~ ~hauld have $ ~oiee in voting at the local level and indicate~ he is opposed to th~ Charter ~mendment which provides that all elections for County Supervisors Wu~ld ba non-partisan. Ms. Fays Palmer abated ~he is sppose~ to the charter amendment which provides that all elections for Supervisors would be non-p~r:iaan. She ~urther state~ ~he unsure of thm purpose for the chan~e; that government b=ginu at the local level: that party affiliations give of candidates' leaningn on i~ues; that individual rigkts are the: non-partisan elections do not bring about unlt~. ~. Joshua Lief s~ted he feel~ parti~an politics a~a a that non-parti~an elections.have fa~lad; that he feels most people feel vote~ participation is good: ~hat h~ feels par~y elections are crucial to aOcountability; and ~at California holdm non-partisan elections and s~eclal interest the overall result Of ~o~-Dartisan elections would be lower voter turnout, la~ of knowledge about candidates, suppression of debate, and middle-of-th~-roa~ ~oli~ius and re~sted the Board not to approve ~e proposed Charter ~. Bob D~ sba=ed he is satisfied with th~ elections are in ~e best interest of %he county, therefore, ~. Jay Contu stat~ h~ does not feel bin tax money ~hould be u~ed for promoting political part,es and their affiliation; realm a~en~ing the C~arter to provide that all ml~ctions for 12/14/94 County ~pervisors would be non-partisan would open up the process and mate it more fair; that he does not need a political party to screen, limit, and dedide thc best choice of candidates for him; and that he f~els party politics should be removed. Mr. Charles ~unn stated he feels the party system is a screening process and the Charter amendment relating to non- partisan elections for Board of Supervisors members is not necessary and requested the Board net to approve the change. Mr. Bill ~a~Zi ~tated he feels the proposed Charter which would provide that all ~lection~ for County Supervisors would be non-partisan would disrupt the current party system; that he does mot feel there are any chert or long-term benefits fo~ the citizens of the County by =his ehan~e; that he feels the current political system lend~ itself to good government and maximizes citizen involvement and input at the local level; that he ~s opposed to the amendment as he it would benefit a select few at th= expeuse of the majority of County citizens; and re,carted the Boar~ not to approve the proposed change. Ms. Kathy Kingery expressed concerns relative to the Charter amendment which provides =hat all eleotion~ ~cr county Supervisors would be non-partisan; that she is concerned about =he School System; that there is no need for =he change; and that she believes the majority of citizens would he opposed to the proposed Charter ameriwest. Mr. Dennis Oakes stated he supports the Charter amendment whic~ provides that all elections for County Supervisors would be non-partisan; that he is a new resident of the County and ha~ Spent approximately ~wenty year~ in govern~ent~ that he feels party labels distort the process and obscures the qualities of leadership; and requested the Board to support the proposed Charter change. Mr. sonny Currim stated he feels if the Charter amendment which provides that all elections for County Supervisors would be non-partisan is pas~ed, it would he taking away the rights of County citizens, ae indicated he feels the current system i~ working well and should not be changed. Mr. Leu Lombard stated he does not feel the Board should appoint a member, under any circumstances, to t~e Board Supervisors and he feels it is u constitutional right for citizens to express memberships in poliuical parties. Mr. David Johnson stated Ae ia opposed to the Charter amendment which provides that all .elections for County supervisnr~ would be non-par:isdn; that he feels the change violate~ the rights of citizens; and that the current ~y~ten is working well~ therefore the change is not ~r. Charles Bowman s~ated he does not feel the Board could have made a better selection far the Mateaca District Supervisor seat, however, he supports amending the Char=er to provide for a special election of a Board' of Supervisors member should a vacancy occur during a Board term. He further~stated~.non-parti~an elections will have conflicts, but.~ore~candidates will run; ~that non-parti~an elections opens up the. process; that hc feels there should be equal ~laying fields; and that the County does not need party label~. Mr. Fred Carreras, chairman cf citizens for Rsspcnslble GOverDm~nt, read into t~e record a resolution adopted by the co~ittee requesting the Board add to its legislative program an amendment to thc Charter provfdfng for non-partisan elections for Board of Supervisors members. He further stated he feets consistency is the only thing inconsistent in Mr. Jim Daniels stated he is speaking on behalf of t/~e charter amendment to provide that all elections for County Supervisors would b~ ~o~-partisan. ,. He. further stated economics, public uafuty, general servlc~s, ~ducatlon, etc. are neither republican or democratic issues~ but a responslbili%y;- that he £eel~. this issue deserves, further. debate; and that he doe~ not feel the ~oa~d Of Supervisors should decide on this issue ~t this time, but for the issue to be ~ubmitted to the citizens, in the form of s referendum, in the Fall of 1995. M~. Scott Fi~her~ a member s~ Citizens for Responsib~ Government, ~tate~ he feels the issue i~ th= matte~ of a diffusion of power; that in local government, officials need to concentrate on issue~ and not party politics; and that he to see what candidates ~tan~ for and r~qu~ted the Board not to approve the Charter amendment which provides that all elections for County Supervisors woul~ be non-partisan. which provides that all elections for County Supervisors woul~ be non-partisan is passed, it will encourag~ citizens individuals from running for o£fice, Mr. w. S. Cornea indicated he does nut £eel the current approve the Charter amendment which provides that all elections £or County Supervisors would be non-pa~ti~an, Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation ~c everyone for their recently encouraged to at=end a committee moating at which the General Assembly for the amendment to pass. ~e further stated he feels it has b~en made clear this evening that there is not sufficient Duello interest relating to.amending the Charter to provide that all elections for County supervisors would be non-partisan and he had spoken in opposition of the Board holding s publi~ hearinq on this issum. He stated the County is recognized as one of the best a need ~or this type of chants. He fur~/~er stated he feels cornerstone o~ ~ublic ~ig~ts and t~at t~e proposed change County, therefore, ho dues not ~up~0rt t~e proposed change. a democratic controlled group and that local i~ue~ are the 15,000 signatures received to put the question of elected holding a referendum cn this issue as he feels citi~en~ should look at the issnes and vote for the person rather than partisan politics at the local level. ~e stated he feels the Board would be judicious in placing the non-partisan election question on a referendum and that a referendum would cost very little if done at the next general election. He further stated he feels the Board should ask citizens what they want a~d i~disated a member of the Legislative Delegation infor~ed him that if the Board passed the Charter amendment, he ~id not feel it would be submitted to the Senate. He stated he is ~reparad to make a motion for th~s ~uestion to be placed on a referend~ at the appropriate time. Dr. Nicholas.. stated the .is~u~ relating to amending the Char~er to provide that all elections for county Supervisors would be non-parti~an arose at a breakfast meeting with citizens for Responsible Government. He further stated he is not in the political arena and will de the best job he can while serving e~ t~e Board. He stated the Board ~et ~ith several members of the General Assembly regarding this issue and did not receive any opposition about heldin~ this public h~arlng; that D~l~gat~ John Watkins ha~ indicated he would feel obligated to submit a bill to the General Assembly if the majority of the Beard passed a bill regarding this issue and he feels if the Board pa~es this amendnent, it would be be f~tile fo~ t~e Board to sand this amendment to the Generel Assembly as he ~as discussed this issue wi~h several members of the General Assembly he is ucquainted with and they do not feel it would pass. ~ stated he i~ oenoerne~ a~out placing thi~ issue on a referendum becaus~ the Board, at their meeting with the ~egislative Delegation, did not address the referendum in general. ~r. Warren s~a~ad he does not support the Charter amendment which provides that all elections for County Supervisors would be non-partisan as he feels the current ~yste~ wor~s well, ~e further stated h$ i~ prepared to make a motion to that intent at the appropriate time. After brief discussion, on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board adopted th~ following Chex%er amendments to be taken to the 1995 General A~sembly and Elections: A~ministrator on the committee which recommends tbs appointment of t~e Chief Of Police. 2. Amend Section 6.1 of the Charter to specify that the County Ad~inist~ato~ appuints the Real ~sta~e Assessor. 3. A~en~ Section 3.1 of the Charter %o Drnvide for a ~pecial election of a Board of Supervisors me~ber should a vacancy occur during a Board term. 4. Amend Section 8.1 of 5he County Charter to rsvi~s the process for appointiDg $ohool Board, membprs to conform with the approval by referendum the eleotion of sensor Vote: .,, Unanimous Nr. Warren.made a motion for the Board to reject Item $., amend the Charter to provide that all election~ for County Dr. Nicholas seconded the motion made by Mr. Warren. ~r.~McBale stated he is familiar with non-partisan elections End he feelu a non-Dartisa~ election process allows for strong local government. Me further stated he does not feel it would be prudent for the Board to send thla issue ~o the General Assembly, however, he feels there is potential for £~rth~r d~scussion on this issue in the future. Me ~tated he feels a non-partisan election process ~orks and the issue should be placed on a referendum to allow the opportunity for public input. There was brief dlac~saien relatlv~to..whether.a motion would b~ in order to ~ehedule a E~ferendum for the 1995 Nove~ber election if %he currant motion is not passed an~ rejection of the. Charte~.amendment at this tine not. precludlng~.the.Bu~d from add~essing this issue at a ~ubse~uent Board meetin~ until August, 199~ in which the~e would still be sufficient time to schedule this issu~ for a referendum. Mr. ~cBale called for the vote on t~e mo=ion ma4e by Mr. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, for the Board to reject Item §., amend th~ Charter to provide that all elections for Mr. Daniel in, lusted he is not agr6sm~nt with the issue being addressed again aa he deem not feel bringing forward the Mr. McKale clarified it is a point of privilege for Board Mr. Barber clarified it would De his intention for bh~ Board to consider plasing the issue of non-partisan elections on s 0HESTERFiELD. 19?B, ~ AK~NDED, B~ADDIN~ A BALL~S ~. Micas stated this date and time ha~ be~n adv~tised to ballots. Me further stated the 1994 General Asse~ly pa~sed legislation..%hat.giv~,local governments.greater.flexibility in s~uling ~l~ct~on officers for the Central Aboe~tee election officers to work a portion of tbs day on ~lection ordinance. ~en ask~, h~ stated ~e ordinance is consistent with ~oo~endations of the Stat~ Electo~ial Beard. No on~ came forward to speak in favor of or agaimst this 94-968 1~/~4/~4 On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINA/~CE TO AIq~ND~"~E CODE OF TN~ OF CHESTERFIELDt 1978, AS AMENDEDj BY ADOPTING SECTION 7.1.-1.1 RELATING TO SCHEDULES OF ELECTION OFFICERS TO THE CENTRAL ABSENTEE VOTING DIS~{ICT BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of chesterfield County: (1) That Section 7.1.-1.1 of the Code of the County of read as Section 7.1-i.1 - Same -- Schadulinc of election officers aseiqned to the.cegt~l...absentee voter district. The County Registrar may provide that the offiGers of election for the central absentee voter district may he assigned to work all or a portion of the ti~ that the district is open on election day subject to the following conditions: ~ection ~4.2-115 of the Virginia Code to represent the b. ~o ef~ieer, political representative, or other candidat~ representative shall lea~e the district after any ballots have ~een counted until the Dolls are closed and the count for the district is completed and reported. (S) That this ordinance ~hall become effective immediately upon adoption. Ayes: ~r. McHale~ Mr. Barber, Mr. Daniel~ and Dr. Absent= Mr. Warren. i$.~. TO CONSID~ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND TH~ CODE OF CHESTeRFIeLD. 1978. AS ANENDED. BY AKENDIN~ AND DEP~RTMENT Fhr. Warren returned to the meeting. ~r. ~icus stated this date and time has been advertised fur a public hearing to consider ~n ordinance relating to allowing the Police DeDartment to retain unclaimed ~roDerty for use ~y the Police Department. He further stated the County Code currently authorizes the Chief of Police to advertise and sell at public auctions all unclaimed personal property held for over sixty days with the proceeds from the public auotion~ b~ing deposited in the County'~ ~eneral Fund. He stated the proposed a~endment ~ives the c~ief Of Police option of retaining and. using such ..property for luw enforcement purposes, provi~e~ that in his opinion, re~ention of the property is a ~0re economical alternative than purchasing a similar item. There was brief discussion relative to how this ordinance is different from,drug a~ forfeiture. No one came forward to speak in favor of or against this There was brief disollssion relative to th~ estimated proceeds from the auction being designated as a reven~e ~tem in the Police Department's budget. On motion of ~r. Barber, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board AN ORDINANCE TO A/~ND THE coDO~ TEECOUNTY OF CHASTE ELDt 1978, AS AMENDED, ~ D~ND REENAC~IN~ ~ECTIO~$ 2-~, 2-54 ~/~D ~-55 RELATING TO T~ RETENTION AND U~E OF ~NCLAI~LED BE IT ORDAINED by t~e Board of supervisors of Chesterfiel~coun%y: -~ ' (1) That Sections ~-~2, ~-54 and ~-55 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended and reenacted to read as fellows: Sec. 2-52. W.hen ~al~ authorized. Whenever unolai~sd personal pre~erty has been in the day~, the oh±al of police may (1) caus~ the property to be sol~ at public auction, or (ii) retain the property far use in the police department. ~ec. ~-54. Presal~ prior to the sale or retention for use of uny unclaimed items the chief of police shall ~ak~ reasonable attempts to notify the rightful owner of the properny, obtain from the commonwealth's attorney in writing a ~tatemen~ advising that the item is not needed in any criminal presses%ion, a~d cause to bs publlsh~d in a newspaper of g~neral circulation in this locality once a week for two (2) su¢ocs~ive weeks, notice that there will be a public display ~D~ ~ale of ~nolaimed personal property. S~ch property, including pro~erty selected for retention, shall be d~$cribed generally in the notice, to~ether with the date, ti~e end place of sale and shall be mad~ available ~or ~ublie viewing at th~ ~ale. Sec. 2-55. Disposition of T~S c~i~f o~ police shall pay £ro~ the proceeds of sale the costs of advertisement, removal~ storage, investigation as tc ownership and li~ns, and publishing notice of sale. balance of the funds shall be held by the chief of police los the owner an~ pa~ u~cn satisfactory proof of ownership. Any unclaimed item retainsd for usa by the poli~e shall property of the County and shall be retained only if, in opinion of th~ chief of police, there i~ a legitimate use for the property hy ~he a~ency and that reten~isn of the ite~ a more economical alternative than purchase of a similar or equivalent item. If no claim has been made by the owner for the proceeds of ~uch sale within sixty (60) day~ cf ~he sale, the re~ining funds shall be deposited in the general fund of the. countyund, th¢.retained,.property may.-b~,.pla~ad, into. uae. by th~ police ~cpar%men~. Any such owner =hall be entitled to apply tc th~ county within z~ree (3) year& ~am =he date sZ =he sale and, if timely application i~ mad~ therefor, the county shell pay the remaining proceeds of the sale or re~urn the property to the owner wi=host intsrent or other charges. No claim shall be made nor any suit, action or pr0eeedin~ be instituted for the recovery of such fund~ or property after thr~ (~) year~ from the ~ate of the ~als. That this ordinance immediately upon adoption. Vote: Unanimous shall become effective A~D REENACTING A~TICLE VIII TO PROVIDE THAT IN CASES OF TIE BIDS ON INVITATTONB TO ~, A PR~PRR~N~R ~ILL BE GIVE~ TO GO0~S= ~E~VX~o ~. Mica~ ~tate~ thls date and time has been advertised fe~ a ~ublic hearing to consider an ordinance relatln~ ~c providing that in ca~ of tie bids on invitations to bid, a preference will he given to ~cuds, services, and construction produced in the Co,Dry, ~e further stated currently, in the event of a tie bid on an invitation ta bid, the County awards the sontract base~ on a chance drawing between the tie bidders. H~ sta~ed the proposed amendment woul~ allow the County, when a tie occurs, to give ~ preference to goods and services produced in t~e County or good~ and services provided by perg0D~ or businesses having a principal place of business in the County~ Th=re wa~ brief discussion relative to the definition of a "tie bid" meaning an exa0t ti~ and local pref~renc~ being ~iven in the ca~e of tie bids. Mr. Charle~ Bowman ~tated he fe~l~ adoption of the ordinance region as opposed to just the County. There being no one else to address this ordinance, the public hearin~ was closed. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN 0RDIWANC= TO AMiD THE CODE OF T~E COUNTY OF CBESTER~IELD~ 1975~ AS A~4=NDED, ~ A~NDING AND REENACTING SECTION 2-4l RELATING TO PREFERENCE FOR GOODS AND SERVIC=S IN TI~E COUNTY IN THE EVENT OF TIE BIDS E= IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That -Section ~-&2 of the Coda of the County of read as follows: Sec. 2-42.. Competitive sealed bidding: urocedure: award- For all contracts that are required to be based o~ competitive sealed bidding pursuant ~e the provisions of sections 2-4S and 2-41 of thi~ article, sealed bids shall be soil=ired by a written in~itation to.bid. ~ublic the i~vitation to bid may, in the discretion of the p~r~haming agent be inserted at l~ast once in a newapape~ of · county-wide circulation. Sealed bids shall also be solicited by sending the invitation tc hi~ to prcspeutivs contractors and by postings, the invitation to bi~ in a public place. Bids shall be based on sp6cifioa~ions, tsr~s, candltionm aed any ~tatement of r~qu~it~ guallflc~tions for potential contractor~, all a~ contained in the invitation to Did. Ail contracts shall be awar~e~ to th~ lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Special qualifications of potential contractors, li~e cycle costing, value analysis a~d any other 94~971 criteria such as inspection, testing, quality, werkman~hip, delivery terms and suitability for a particular purpose may be considered in evaluating bide. Any and all bids may be cancelled or rejected, provided the reasons for suoh Any informalities in bids ~ay be waived, if the bid from the lowest responsible bi~er exceeds available funds, the county may negotiate with the apparent low bidder to obtain a contract price within available fun~m, such negotiation may i~clude but is not necessarily limited %o adjustment of the bid price and changes in-the bid scope ..or requirements in order to bring the bid within th~ amount of available funds. Negotiation shall be conducted by the purchasing agent with assistance from.-~the~ user, department, t~ the case of a tie bid, the County may give preference ts goods~ services, and con~tru=tion produced in the County or provided by persons, firms or corporations having principal places of business in the County. If such choice i~ not available, preference sh~ll then be given to qoods and services produced in the Commonwealth pu=s~ent to ~ctlon 11-47 of the Code of Virginia- If no County or Commonwealth choice ie ertl]able, CHESTERFIELD. 1978, AS AHENDED, BY ADDI~ ~ ~EW public hearing to consider an ordinano~ relating to allowing the County to take corrective action against buildings illegal drug activity ~egularly occurs. He further stated ordinance and permits the Building Official, in conjunutien with the Police chief, bo hake action against buildings used for drug activity and provides for an affidavit and notice procedu=e prier ~e ~ecuxing, e~ otherwise preventing, ~tructure~ used as a place far drug activity. OP C~STERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED, Z~ ADDING chesterfiel~ County: (l) That section 6-~.4 of the Code of the County ef read a~ follows! (a) As used in this section: Affidavit: the affidavit prepared by the locality in accordance with subdivision (b) l a hereof. Controlled substance: illegally obtained controlled substances or marijuana, as defined in ~ 54.1-3401 o~ the Code of Virginia, %9~0, a~ Corrective action: the taking of steps which are r~a~onably expected to be effective to abate drug blight on real property, such as removal, repair or securing of any building, wall or other structure. Drug blight: a condition existing on real property WhiCh tend~ to endanger the public health or safety of r~d~nt~ of a locality and is caused by the regular on ~e property of per~ons under th~ influence of oontrollDd substances or the regular u~e o£ the property £or the purpose of illegally pos~e~slng, manufacturing or dietributing controlled substances. Owner: the recor~ owner of real property. mroperty: real property. (b) Th~ building official ~ay u~dertak~ ourrectiv~ action with respect to property in accordance with the procedures described her~in: 1. The ekief of police shall execute an affidavit, citing this section, to the effect that (i) drug blight exists on the property an~ in the manner therein; (ii) the department has used diligence without affect to abate the drug blight; and (iii] the drug blight con=tltutes a present threat to the public's health, safety 2. The b~ldinq official shall then ~end a notice the lest address listed for the owner on the county's such affidavft, advising that (i) the o~ner has up to thirty days from the date thereof to undertake corrective action to abate th% drug blight described in such affidavit and (ii) the county will, if requested to do so, assist the owner in determining and coordinating ~he appropriate corrective action to abate the drug blight described in such affidavit. $. If no corrective action is undertaken during such thirty-day period, the building official ~hall send by regular Rail an additional notice to the owner of the property, at the address stated in the preceding subdivision, corrective action to abate the drug blight on the property, which date shall be nu earlier than £1~teen (15] days after the date of mailing of the notice. Such additional notice ~hall also reasonably describe the sorrnct~ve action contemplated to be taken by the buildln~ official. Upon receipt of such notice, the owner shall have a right, upon reasonable notice to th~ building official, to seek ~guitable relief, and the buildin~ official shall initiate no corrective action while a proper petition for relief is pending before, a court of ccmDetent, juri~diction.~ (c) If the building official undertakes corrective action with respect tc the property after complying with the provisions of subdivision (b)~ the costs ~nd expenses thereof shall be-chargeable to and paid by the owner of such property celiac=ed. (d) Every charge authorized by this section with which the owner of any such property ham been a~e~ed and which 94-973 12~14/94 wit~ the sane priority as liens for unpaid local taxes and enforceable in the sam~ manner as provided in Articles 3 S8.1-3940 et seq.) and 4 (~ 58.1-3965 et seq.) of Chapter 39 of Titl~ ~8.~ of th~ Code of Virginia. corrective action pursuant to such ordinance, %ho building official shall deem the drug blight abated, shall cease the action without any charge or cost to the owner and shall promptly provide written notice to the owner that the of an action shalt not bar the building official from initiating a subsequent proceeding if the drug blight recurs. (f) Nothing in this ~ectisn shall be construed abridge or waive any rights or remedies of an owner of property at law or in equity. (2) That this ordinance ~hall become effective i~m~dia%ely upon adoption. · ~. REQUE~T~ FOR REZONIN~ In ~atoaca ~aqisterial Oi~trict, DOUGLAS SOWERS request=d rezonin~ from Agricultural (A) to Ree~dsnt~ai {R-~). A single family r~sidentlal s~b~ivisisn with a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet is planned. Residential use of up to 4.~4 units per acre is pe~itted in a Residential District. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for r~si~ential use of 1.51 to 4.0 units per acre. This ]i~s on 54.5 acres fronting approximately 2~10 feet on the sou~h line of Lucks Lane, approximately 110 feet ~ast of Exbury Drive. Tax MaD 37-4 (i) Parcel 6 (Sheet 13). ~r~ Jaoobmon presented a summary of Ca~e 945N0219 and stated the applicant is reques~in~ a thirty-day Mo one came forward to speak in Savor of or against th~ deferral. On motion of Dr. Nicholas~ seconded by Fir, Barber~ the deferred Case 945NQ219 un~il January 25, Vo~e: Unanlmuua GRO~B requested resonlng ~rom Agricultural (A) to ~eneral Business (C-5) of 5.6 acres and from Community Business (C-3) to cone=al Business (c-5) of 5.2 sores. Ihs density of such 10.s acres fronting approximately 64~ feet on th~ w~t ~ine .osborne Road. Tax ~ap 11~-~ ~r. Jacobsen presented a su/~ary of case 9~0119 ~nd stated to a condition an~ acceptance of the proffered oon~i~iun~. 94-974 ~4~. Dean Hawkins, representing =he applicant, stated the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of M~. MOH&le, seconded by M~f. Daniel, the Board approved Case 956N0119 subject to the following condition: A 10O £oot buffer shall be provided along the western property boundary. This buffer shall conform to the through 21.1-228. And, further, the Board accepted the following proffered eonditlons: 1. Public sanitary sewer shall be used for all struGtures or land use to be constructed on this mite. 2. Prior to site plan approval, sixty (60) feet of right- of-way on the west side of U.S. Routes 1 & 301, measured from hh~ centerllns of that part of U.S. Routes l immediately adjacent to the property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. 3. Initialty~ access to U.S, Routes 1 & 301 shall be limited to one (~) entranee/e×it. At the time of site plan review~ a second access to Route 1 & 301 shall be approved by the Tranaportation Department if adequate access separation and site distance can be Dr0vided. The exact location cf these accesses shall be approved by th~ TranaDortation Department. Vote: Unanimous 958N0~4Z A]~D 956~0142 proffer for fire protection services on previously approved non-residential zonin~ ease~ on Tax ~apu 55-1 {1) Parcel 7~ 79-10 (I) Parcels 6 and 7; 15-t0 I1) Part of Parcels 16 and 21; 49-7 (1} Parcel 10; 50-5 (1} Parcel 1; 16-8 (1) Parcel ~; 16-11 (1) Part of Parcel 15~ 135-4 (~) Rivermont Lot 52; 75-2 (1) Parcels 4, 29 and 30; 52-t0 (1) Part Of Parcel 5; i¥-iQ (I) Part of ~arcel 1~; 17-1§ (1) Parcel $; 114-14 (1) Pa~t of Pa~oel 14; 66-9 (1) Parcels 43, 46 end 46; 65-6 (2) Bellwood Farms, Lot 22; 26-1 (1) ~arcel 12; {1) ~arcel 8; 79-15 (1) Parco! 32; 95-3 (1} Parcel 36; {2) Westuver ~arms, Lots ~3, ~4 and ~?; 95-12 (1} Parcel 49 and Part of Parcel 44; 119-~4 (1) Parcel 37 17-16 (1) Parcels 1, 2, 4, ~ and 24; ~-13 (1) Parcels 3, 14, 15, 16, 42 and 43; 9-9 (1) Parcel 9; 97-6 (1) Parcel 67 and Part of Parcel 66; 115-10 (1) Parcels 2 and 3; 11~5 (l) Parcel 10 ; ~1-9 (1) Parcel 2; 11-13 (1) Parc~l~ 15, 16, ~1 and 28; 11-1~ (9) McEinney*s Acrs and six Tenths, ~actlon A, ~leck A, Lot 1~-1 (t) Parcels 5 t~rough 8 and 11 through 14; 19-1 (4) Echo Place, Bioe~ A, Lots 1 .through 16; Block B, Lots 1 through ~A; Blcck C, Lots iA, 1, ~. and.2A; .133rll (1) Parcel t~ 236 (1) Parcel 11; 28-11 (1) Parcel I5; 75-= (1} Parcels il, 13 and 28 and Par~ cf Parcel ~2; 118-14 (1) Parcels 19 and 24; 15-16 ~(1) Parcel 18; 29-1 (1) Parcel 17; 19-13 (1) ~-.lS-15 (1) Parcels 6 and 59; 75-5 (1) Parcel 6; 15-16 Parcels ~, lO;;ll, 12 and 17; 9~-12 (1) Paree~ ~ and ~; ~6- ~ (1) Parcel ~; 46-1 (1) Parcel~ 20 and 21; 116-6 (1) Part of Parcel 102; 79-4 (1) Parcel 25; 40-2 (~) Parcel 117; (2} Kingsland Heig~ts~ Let 8; 49-13 (i) Parcel 12; 49-14 Paroel ~2; 37-13 (1) Parcel 5; 52-7 (1} Parcel ~; 49-13 Parcel 6; 49-14 (1) Parcels 1, 1 and 17; 115-6 (1) Parcel 51; 12/14/94 115-1~ (1) Parcel 40; 15-11 (1) Parcel 43; 45-1 (1) Parcel 18; 9-13 (l) Part of Parcel 10; 16-4 (l) Parcel 16; 68-5 ~arc~l~ 3, ~ and 5; 9=13 (1) Parcml 34~ 73 (1) Parcel 99; 109-12 (1) ParCel 1; 9?-6 (l) Parcels 4 and 60; and 97-10 Far¢~l l~ and Part of Parcel 1 (Sheets 1, 3, 7, 8~ 9~ 13, 14, 15~ 19~ 20, 22, 23, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 41, 42, 43 and Mr. Jacobsen presented ~ summary of Cases 95S~8141 and 955NQ142 and stated the Plannin~ Commission >?and' staff There wac'ne apposition present 14/. Barber clarified this request i~ addressing only commercial and industrial properties and not residential properties. Vote: Unanimous In Midlsthian Magisterlal Die,riot, IOL~ ~. O~BORNE requested re,unPeg from Agricultural (A) to Corporute Office [0-~) with Conditional Use to permit o~ice/warahouses. The density of This request lies on 3.1 asr~s fronting approximately 230 feet on the east line of Branchway Rea~, approximately 100 (Sheet 8). t~ a condition and aceep%an~ of the proffered conditions. Ke noted specific to the p~offered conditions, the access On motion of 14_r. Barber, se¢onde~ by Dr. Nicholas, the Board (STAFF/CPC) A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be provided along the southern boundary e~j~oeDt to Tax comply with Zections 21.1-227 and 21.1-228. the. Board: a¢¢epted..the . following~proffered conditions: Th~ public watt,water ~ystem shall be used. All runoff ~hall be directed to storm water management · detention and/or retention basin(s) w~io~ shall b~ approved by Environmental ~ngi~eeri~g. At a minimum, the fifty (50) year post-developed runoff shall be .stored on-si~e and released at a ten (10) year pre-development rate. 9~-976 12/14/94 3. W~th the exception of tim~erlng to remove dead or diseased trees which h~s been approved by the Virginia state Department ef Forestry, there shall be no timbering until a land disturbance permit has been obtained from the Environmental Engineering Depa~tment~ 5. There shall be no truck deliveries between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Trucks shall be de£ine~ a~ any vehicle exceedin~ 4,000 pounds net weight and two (2) 6. Solid waste e~orage areas ~hall not be serviced between th~ hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 7, There sh~ll be no e×t~rior ~lar~ system(s), $. All property owners adjacent to the entire proper~y and Association shall be mailed no%ice by the owner/devslopeT of site plan sub~ission to Chesterfield County. Prior to flnal site plan approval, th~ owner~de, eloper shall provide the Planning Department with evld~nce of suoh mailing. The architectural treatment, to include materials, color and style shall be similar to that of buildings located either on Tax Map 17-13 (1) Parcel 46 or Tax Map 17-i~ (1) Parcel 55. Warehouse ~pace within each bnilding shall not exceed eighty-five (SS) percent of the gross floor area of the building. 11. All warehouse space within office building~ shall be served by no more than two (E) leading doors or docks. 12. The following O-E uses shall not be ~llowsd: Laboratories In ~idlothian Magisterial Dimtriot~ ROBERT D. BAR~EY requested ruzoning from Agricultural (A) to General Business (¢-~). The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive ~lan designates the proper~y for general commercial uae. Ma~ 16-12 (E) Sunny Dell Acres, Lot Z~ (Sheet 7). Mr. JaooDson presented a summary of Case 95SN0169 and ~tated the Planning Commis~ion;.and ~taf~ recommands..approval and acceptance of a prsffere~ condition. He noted ~he r~ue~t · Plan. ,.He briefly reviewed the area where the property is located. ,~c, ~a~dy ~h~rzer, r~pre~antlng th~ applicant, ~tated the reco~endetion is acceptable. There was no opposition ............. ~ T ................ I ........r--"r .......................... On motion of Mr. Barbsr, seconded by Mr. Warren, ths Board approved Cass 95~N0169 and accepted the followin~ proffered condition: The public wastswater system shall be used for any non- Vote: Unanimous 95~N0170 In C]evsr Hill Magisterial District~ ~HBS~RFI~D ~OARDOF~U~ER¥I~OR~,~equested amendment tc Conditional.uz~ Planned De~elopmsnts (Cases s6Sll? and 8~SN015O) to Dnr~t a fire s~a~ien. The density of such amsndment will be controlled by zonin~ conditions O~ Ordinaries s~andar~s. The Comp~ehenslve Plan designates the property for regional mixed us~. This ~eque~t lie~ in a Light Industrial (I-Z) Distrio~ on ~.4 acres fronting approximately 500 feet on the north line of Genito Read, also frontinq approximately 250 feet on Watercove Road~ and located in the sorthw~st quadran~ of the intersection of these ~oads~ Tax Map 48-1 (1) Parcel (sheet Mr, Jacobsen presented a summary of Cass ~ssM0170 and stated the Planning Commission and ~taff r¢c6mme~d~ approval subject tc conditions. He notsd %h~ request conforms to the Swift Cr~k Land Use Plan. Battalion Chief ~aul ~horter sbabed th~ r~ccmmendation is acceptable. There was no oppc~itlon Dr. Nicholas made a motion~ seconded Dy Mr. Warren, for the Board to approvs Case ~SN0170 subjsct to the fotlewin~ ~onditione: 1. In additie~ to the uses psrmi~ted on the subject pr~psr~y, a fire station shall be pernitt~d. (ROTE: Tkis condition i$ in addition to Condition 21 of Case S6SllT, relativ~ to UEeE and modifie~ Condition allowed on the request property and adjacent proper~y ~o the nort~ and wes~ for ~he suDject property only.) In addition ~o ~he requirements of the current requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for ~uch in Corporate Office (0-2) DistFi~t~. (NOTES: a. ~is condition i~ in addition conditions of zonin9 approval for Camem 86Sl17 ~nd 89SN0158 for the p~operty only. b, All other conditions of Cases 06S117 and 89SN0150 remain applicable.) Mr. Warren~cummende~t~e. Fire~Departmen~fo=~thei~ ~el~c~ion emergency medical technician ~ervice uni~ which will he a tremendous asset to ~he Co~ty. ~. MoHate called for th~ vote on tho motion made by Dr. Nicholas, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to approve Case 95SN0170 subject to ~e following ¢oDdition~: 1. In addition to the uso~ po~itted on th~ ~ject property, a fire station ~hall be permitted. (P) 12/14/$4 (KOTe: This condition is in addition to Condition 21 o£ Case 86s%17, relative to uses an4 modifies Condition 1 of Case g~SN0150 relative %0 the shopping center use allowed on the ~equeet pmoperty and adjacent p~operty to tho north and wemt for the ~ubject property only.) In addition requirements in Corporate Vote; Unanimous to the requiremmnts of the curr~nt fire station shell conform to the of the Zoning Ordinance for such use office (0-2) Districts. (P) Thi~ condition i~ in addition to oondltlong of zoning approval for Cages 85SI17 end 89SN015O for the request property only. All ether conditions of Cases 8~$117 and gg~MOIS0 r~ain applicable.) CORgOR~TION requested resorting from Community Business IC~3) will bm controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance mtande~ds. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property ~arcel 1~ [Sheet 23). ~r. Wi11iam Peele, Chief cf Development Review, presented a and a~eptanoe of the proffered sonditions. ~e further stated the Planning Commission recommends denial due to potential compatibility i~sues with other area uses. He stated since the Commi~slen meeting, the applicant has ~odifiad the proffered conditions relative to transportation Commission's recommendetlen; ~nd that th~ applicant accepts Corridor 91an. %~h~n a~ked, he ~tafed the modified proffered th~n pressDted a brief slide presentation of aras. When asked, he stated th~ one is~u~ ralg~d by the Co~rmi~ion included impaet~ on the area as business and traffic increases if th=se is net adequate right-of-way to make proffered to dedicate th~ right-of-way along both roadways. He f~rthe~ stated ~h~ ~ecend major issue raised was potential compatibility concerns with ~ome of the C-5 uses ae~ other nearby uses and that staff is satigfied that ~i~tinq ordinance standards are adequate to assure compatibility. .Mr. Dean Hewkins, representing th~ applicant, stated staff's · recommendation~&s acceptable. He further ~tatcd ~.e issu~ .of of-way and that h~s been agreed to by the applicant. · ~. M=Hale ~tated he support~ th~ request although he had feel~ this 9rojeo~ will renovate and improve the facade =lon~ 94-979 12/14/94 Jefferson Davis Highway and that the project ~ill have positive benefits on the oo~t~uni~y. Mr. McHale then made a motionl seconded by Mr. Daniel, for the Board te approve Case 95aN0120 and accept the following proffered conditions: 1. Public sanitary sewer shall be used for all structures existing Petal Subway which is served by a newly installed soDtlc drain£ield.. 2. Prior to site plan approval, sixty (60) feet of right- from the oenterline of that part of U.S. Routes 1% immediately adjacent to the property~ exclusive of the area in which the existing commercial site identification sign is located, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted to an~ Sar the benefit of Ch~t~rfleld ~. Prior to site plan approval, forty-five (45) feat of ~ight-of-way on tho east side uS Perrymont Road, Road i~%modiately adjacent to the property, shall of the County of Chesterfield. 4. With the exception of timbering to re~ove deed ur diseased trees which have been approved by the virginia tlmberln~ until a land disturbance permit has been Engineering and ~he approved devices installed. Vote: unanimous LOBLOLL¥ CO., L. P. requested resonlng from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-SS) of 2,170 acres with Conditional Use on facility. A ~ingle family residential subdivision with a minimum lot size of 65,~40 ~quare feet is planned. Residential use of up to 0.6 units per acr~ is permitted in a Residential (R-88) Dis%riot- Based upon the applicant*s proffered oon~ition~, a den=ity of up to 0.25 units per acre could be permitted. The Compr~on~vo Plan designates the watershed and would permi~ isolated eingl~ family residences on lots larger than fiv~ (~) acres.. This reqUeSt Iiez on 2,170 acrs~ fronting in two places for approximately 5,000 feet on the south line of Ivey Mill Road~ approximately 7,OOO 169 (1) Parcel 1; and Tax Map 170 (1) Part of parcel 7 (Sheet~ 46 and 47). the proffered conditions. ~e further stated since the all references end proffered conditions relating to donatin~ this. property ts the Csun=y for a golf course; that tho cash proffers are the full cash proffers aonsistent with Board'e policy; and that there is a change in the Dro~forsd t~e potential County property. He stated the Planning 94-980 12/14/~4 Coi~mission recommends approval subject to a serie~ of proffered conditions and that when this case was recommended to the Commissioni staff recommended denial beoause the pr6possd zoning and land use was not consistent with the Plan. Dr. Nicholas stated hz feels all basic changes requested by a high quality development project and expressed appreciation to the applicant end staff for their efforts in addresming the concerns expressed. Mr. Peele stated·the amended proffered conditions were ~ubmitted by the applicant after the case was advertised, therefore, if the Board wishes to approve the proffered conditions, the Board wc~ld have to amend their procedures. Oliver Rudy, Esquire, representing the appi~eant, stated the applicant has amended its proffered conditions to re£1ect the will of the majority ef the Boa~d. ~e ~eque~ted the Boa~d to give favorable consideration to the request and stated he wo~ld like th~ Beard to give the golf course ao~e additional oonsidera~ion. xhs~e was brie~ discussion relative to the meed for the applicant to obtain a conditional use for a private golf Mr. Daniel inquired a~ to whether all tho zoning could be approved with the exception of the boundary line identified as a golf course and for that portion to be centlnued and would have act on this ea~e as currently ~tyled and dec,de Mr. Leu Lombard seated he feels the Board ~hould provide sufficient acreage per house and e~ressed concerns relative to overdsvelopment in the County. Dr. Nicholas s~ated the average lot size for the 535 parcels in this development is four acres. He further stated the building a school and that there will not be a need for fire station in this area and noted Phillips Fire Station is located within five to ~ix miles of this development. stated' he has no~ received any negative comments about this County staff regarding this development was that it was Southern and Western'Area P18n, however, ~he Board a~Droved with the ~e further stated he did not vote in favor of the Southern this request, as. he feels this, request., is leap-frog development realm into an area designated for development development is an excellent example of a premier planned quality standards, that th~ applisan= is paying full Sash proffers, and that the educational needs have been sntisfied. ~ir. Daniel stated at the last Board meeting he wa~ concerned about the golf course and The applicant has withdrawn al~ references and conditions relating to the golf course. He further grated he is comfortable with the Plan amendment az he does not feel this ie leap-frog development and, therefore, he supports the rec/uest. Ns noted he has received ~ letter from the School Board stating that so school site will be needed in the proposed development. ~. McEale stated he had some previous reservations about the request and has reviewed.the eoonemic~ infornaticn.ralating, to this project. Me further ~tat~d hs is comfortabl~ with the impacts, specifically, that the ~ounty will receive ex~ellsnt value i~. the property it ~ill. a~quire_, fe~_. recF~ationa~. purposes and, therefore, he supports the request. Dr. Nicholas made a motion, seconded ~y ~ir. Warren, for the Bmard ts suspend its rules at this tim~ to accept the' following proffered conditions: 1. .Tho maximum density of this development ~hall be ~5 single family residential lots, ~t the tim~ of re¢~rdmtlon of th~ first subdivision plat, thirty-five [35) feet of right of way on the ~outh side o£ Ivey Mill Road, measured from the center llne of that part of Ivey Mill Road immediately adjacent to the property, shall be ~edioated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield ("the County"). 9. No individual residential unit shall have direct access to Ivey Mill Road. 4. Additional pavement shall be constructed along IVey Mill Road at each approved access to provide left and right turn lanes. Any additional right-of-way (or e~sements} resulted for these improvements shall be dedisated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County. ~ Prior to any final check plat approval, the followin~ i~prove~ents shall be completed or committed ss datelined by the Transportation D~partment. A. Construction of a five (5) foot wide ~hould~r on each ~id~ of Ivey Mill Road fro~ its easternmost intersection wi~n River Road wes~ along its existing paved section (total distance approximately 0.9 mile). B. Improvement c~ Ivey sill Road to an eighteen [18) foot wide paved ro~d, five (5) foot shoulders and six (&) foot wide ditch sections from its existing 'paved sottish w~st to the northernmost property line. C. Dedication ~o and for the benefit o~ the County, free and unrestrioted~ any additional right-of-way (or easement) required for the improvements identified above 6. Prior to final check plat approval of. ~o~e than 236 residential unite~ the following improvements shall b~ =ompleted or committed us determined by the Transportation Department. A. widening of Ivey Mill Road to a twenty (20) fcc% wide paved road from its easternmost intersection with River Road to the northernmost property line. Dedication to and for the benefit of the County, free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way [or easement) required for tDe improvement identified above. 7. The Appllcant~ shall pay the following to the County prior to the tim~ of building permit upplication for infrastructure improvements within the service for the property: A. $~,093 per lot, if paid on er prior to June 30, B. The amount approved Dy the Board of Supervisors net to exceed $5,083 per lot adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and Bwift Building Cost Index between July I, 1994 and July of the fiscal year in which the payment is made if paid after June ~0, 1995. Two Mundred T~n (21~) acres shall be rem~r~md for purchase by the County for public faoilitie~ generally shown on ~he Conceptual Plan. The purchase price ~hall be Fi¥~ HUndred Thousand and no~100 Collars [$$00,000.00) or the F~ir ~arke% value of 210 aore~, at the ti~e of conveyance, whichever amount is the lesser. The reservation, inclu~in~ settlement of ~ald purchase, shall be for a period of one hundred fifty (150) days from the date Razonin~ occurs. The 210 acres shall be Parcels A, B and C, as designated on the Conceptual Plan. 9. Upon request by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot ~id~ ~a~em~nt ~hall h~ granted ~ithin th~ d~velopment to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The exact location and number of easements shall be approved Dy the Department of Par~e and Recreation at the time of the first tentative subdivision or at the time the Prior to the release of mere than lC0 building per, its, the Applicants shall be responsible for extending public water to Area A a~ de~iqnated on the Conceptual Plan. 11. Upon re~aest by the County, but ne sooner than' 150 days after rezoning, the Applicants shall dedicate to and for the benefit Of the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, r_he right-of-way for the road es generally shown on thc Conceptual Plan as bhz Recreational Access Road. ~he exact location and width of right-e£-way for the Recreational Access ~oad shall Be approved by the seventy (70) feet in width plu~ any additional necessary to con~truct the roaB. Bonding for the to construct this Recreational Access Road shall be provided to the County in conjunction with recordatio~ cf any subdivision section that includes access to this road, or as ~eguired by P~effe~ed Condition 12, whichever, secure first.. 12. In the event that the County constructs part of the ~. ~. ~on~truction total~ at lea~t $9~0,0D0, th~ Appli~a~t~ ~ball in -~oonjun~tion with that construction the remaining length of ~he Recreational Access Road. Upon request by ~he County, ~he applicants shall provide a bond or other suroties to the county for ~heir 94-983 12/14/94 13. In the event that the County does not construct the Recreational Access Road, than in that event, the Applicants shall construct and complete said Recreational A¢¢~ Road to VDOT standards prior to the release of the 237th building permit, said construction shall extend said road from the southern line uf Ivey Rill Road ~cuthwardly to the eamter~most boundary cf Area A as shown on said Conceptual Plan. In the interim, Applicants Shall qrant the County easement of access to Area k over, upon and across roads currently in existenc~ throughout the prcject~ .whlch easements ~hall expire upon the construction of said R~r~ational Access Road. Applicants will pay $150 per month for the water used in the flushing of the water lin~ which will be extended from ~addlebrook Road into the proposed dovelopmen~ sa~d flushing being necessary to maintain and pre,eryc the quality of water supply within the development. These paymente shall begin upon the approval o~ th~ first final aub~ivision check plat and continue until the lOOth building permit in the development has issued or untll the County advise~ Applic~nt~ that said ~ir~t occur. Applicants shall have th~ right, to review by the County U~ility Department, to recapture manner in keepinq with health, safety and welfare standards establi~h~d by the County. diseased trees which ha~ been approved by the Virginia Department sf Forestry! ~here shall b~ no timbering the Envirommental Engineering Department and the approved d,vioes installed. through a 17. Any single sa~ily dwelling unit on a 'lot adjacent to Luke Chesdin (Appom~tto~ River Water Authority property} lB. The Applicants shall not eee~ relie~ of the, mandatory u~e of the public water ~ystem. approved for the Appl~s~nt~, there shall be no mass dralnfleld~ permitted. Upon request by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wide easement shall bm granted ~etwean ~arcels A and pedestrian and bicycle ciroulation. The exact location of this easement uhall be approved Dy the Depart~ent cf ~ark$ and Recreation at the time of the first tentative whichever occurs £irst. ~r. Barber clurifi~d ac~isn ~y the ~oard to suspend its rules of susDendln~ the rules. its rules at this time to accept the fsllcwinq proffered conditions: 1. The maximum density cf this develepmsnt shall be 525 single family residential lots. 2. At the time of ~eoordation of the first subdivision plat, thirty-flys (25) feet of right of way on th~ ~outh side of Ivey Mill Road, measured from the center line of that part of Ivey Mill Road immediately adjacent to the property, shall be dedicated free and nnreotricted, fo and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield ("the County"). 3. Ko individual residential unit shall have direct access to.~vey Mill Road. 4. Additional pavement shall be constructed along Ivey Mill Road at each approved access to provide left and right turn lanes. Any additional right-of-way (or' easements) required for these improvements ~hall he dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County. 5. ~rior to any final shack plat approval~ the following improvement~ sh~ll be completed or cemmitted a~ d~tek~mined by the Transportation Department. A. Construction of a fiYe [5) foot wide shoulder on ~ach ~id~ of Ivey ~ill Rca4 £r~m i~s intersection with Rive~ Road west along its existing paved ~eotion (total distance ~oot wide paved rued, five (S) ~oot shuuldsr~ six (~) foot wide ditch sections from its ~xisting paved ~ectlon we~t ts the nsr=hernmost property Dedication to and fo~ the benefit of th~ County, free and unrestricted~ shy additional r~ght-of-way ±dnnt~fied above. 6. Prior to final check plat approval of mere than residential units, the following improvements shall be completed or committed as determined by Transportation Department. Widening of Tv~y ~ill Road to a twenty (~O) foot wide paved road from its sasterrLmost intersection Dedication to and for the benefit ef the County, free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way ~or easement) required for the improvement identified above. 7. The Applicants shall pay the following to the County Drier to the ti~e of building permit application for infrastructure improvements within the service district far the property: A. $5~©83 per lot~ if paid on or prior to June 30, 19~5; or B. The amount approved by the Dcsrd of Supervisors net to exseed $5,083 per lot adpu~ed ~pward by any increase in the ~ar~hall and ~ift ~uildlng Inde~ between July 1, 5994 and July of the fiscal year in which the payment is made if paid after 8. Two Hundred Ten (210) acres shall be reserved for purchase by the County ~or public facilitie~ generally shown on the Conceptua~ Plan. The purchase pride shall be Five ~undre~ Thousand and no/lO0 Dollars ($500,Q00.00) or the Fair Market Valu~ of the ~ifty (150) days from the date Rezoning occurs. Th~ 210 CenneDtual Plan.: 9. Upon request by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wid~,.easemeng~h~llbe-qra~ted., wit~in..the.da~elopment, accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The the first tentative sttbdiv±~ion Or at' the tim~ the 10. P~ier ~o the release o£ more t~an la0 ~uildinq parmit~, U~on request by the County, but no sooner than 150 d~y~ t~e benefit of ~h~ County of Chestsr~ie!d, free and Road, Th~ exact location and width cf right-of-way for seventy (70} feet in width plus any addit{onal easements provided to the Csunty in conjunction with recordation ~f any subdivision ~ectisn that includes acces~ to ~his =dad, or as required by Proffered Condition 1~, whichever occurs firut. shall in conjunotien with t~at eons=ruction construct Applicants shall ~onstruc~ and comRtst~ said release of the 237th building pe~Tmi%, said cens~r~¢tion in=erim, Applicants shall grant the County eam~m~nt cf in exls=ence,,throughout.;~he.,projec~,,whlch shall expire upon the construction of said Rearestional 14. ~Applinants will Day $150 9er month ~or ~he water used in the flushing of the water line which will be from SaddleDrook Read into the proposed development, ~he quality of water supply within the development. first final subdivision check plat and continue until ~4-986 the 100th Duilding permit in the development has burn issued or until the County advises ADplioante that said paynent~ ute no longer required, whicheYar event shall first occur. Applicants shall have the right, to review by the County Utility Department, to recapture and use the flushed water within the development in a manner in keeping with health, safety and welfare standards esta~llshed by the County. 15. With the exception of timbering to remove dead or diseased trees which has been approved by the Virginia Department of Forestryt there shall be no timbering until a land di~t~rbance per, it has be~n obtained from the Environmental Engineering Department and the approved devises installed. 16. Runoff from any ~table area or rid~r'~ ring shall drain through a BMP. 17. Any ~ingle family dwelling unit on ~ lot adjacent to Lake Chasdin (Appomattox River Water Authority property) shall hay= a minimum of 2,8~0 gross ~quare feet. All other single family dwelling units shall have a minimum of 1,900 gross square feet. The Applicants shall not seek relief of the mandatory uae of the public water system. 19. If the use of septic tank and drainfiald systens is approved for the Applicant~, th~r~ ~hall be no dralnflelds permitted. 20. Upon ~equs~t by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wide easement shall be granted between Parcels A and B, generally parallel to Lake Chesdin, to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulati0n. Th~ exact location of thi~ easement ~hall ba approved by the Department of Parks and Reurea~ios at the time of the first tentative s~bdivision Or at the time the easement is requested, whichever occurs f~rst. Vote: Unanimous Dr. Nicholas then made a motion, seconded by ~r. Warren, ~ur the Board to approve Ca~e 95SN0161 ~ubject to the following csndi~iens: CONDITION - ~NTIRE PROPerTY (STAFF/CPC) A 100 foot buffer shall ~e maintained between any residential, lot and any playfield~ courts or similar active recreational uses to include~ but not necessarily h~ Iimit~d to, swimming psol~ and boat marina area~. This buffer shall conform to ~he requirements of Section~ 21.1-227 through 21~1-2~8 of the Zoning ordinance. C0~bITION - FIFTEEN (15% ACRE CONDITIONAL USE AREA PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (STAFF/CPC) Outdoor publio ~peake~ o~ add~e~ systems .~shall not be used between the hours of p.m. and 8:00 a.m., Sunday through Thursday an~ 11:00 p.m. sad ~:00 a.m., Friday and ~aturday. (P) 12/14/94 And, further, for the Board to accept the following proffered conditions: 1. The maximum density of this development shall be 535 single family residential lots. 2. At the t~me of recordation of tho first subdiviei0n plat, thirty-five (~S) feet of right of way on the ~ide of Ivey Mill Read~ m~a~ursd from the canter line of that part of Ivey ~ill Road immediately adjacent to the property, shall be dedicated..free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield ("the County"). 3. No individual residential unit shall have direct access to Ivey sill Road. 4. Additional pavement shall be constructed along Ivey ~ill Road at each approved access to provide le~t and turn lanes. Any additional right-of-way (or required for these improvements shall be dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the ~n~flt of the County. 5. Prior to any ~inal check plat approval, the following determine~ by ~ha T~ansportation Department. A. Construction of a five ~S) foot wide shoulder on intersection with River ~oad west ~0nq it~ existing paved ~ection (total distanc~ approximately 0.9 B. Improv~men~ of Ivey M~11 Eoad =o an eighteen foot wide paved road, five (5) foot shoulders and six (5} foot wide ditsh sections from i~s existing paved section west to th~ northernmOSt property free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way (or easement) required for the improvements identifi=d above. Prior to final ohe~k plat approval of more than 236 completed or co~itted . as deter~ined by the with River Road to t~a northernmost proper~y line. free and unrestric=ed, any additional right-of-way (or easement) required for the improvemen~ identified above. for the property: A. $5,083 per lot, if paid on er prio~ to June B. The a_mount approved by the ~oard of ~up~rvi~or~ not to exceed $5,083 per lot adjusted upward by any increase in the Narsh~ll and 9wilt Building Cost year in which the payment i~ made if paid after June 30, 1995. 8. Two Hundred Ten (~i0) acres shall be reserved for purchase by the County for public facilities ns generally shown on the Conceptual Plan. The purchase price shall be Five Hundred Thousand and no/100 Dollars [$~00,000.00) or ~he Fair Market Value of the 210 acres, at the time of conveyance, whichever amount is =he lesser. The reservation, including settlement cf said purchase~ shall be for a period of one hundred fifty (150) days from the date Rszonlng occurs. The ~10 acres, shakl b~ Parcels. A, B end.C, as designated, on the Conceptual Plan. 9~ Upon requept by the County, a minimum twenty (20) foot wide easement shall be granted within the development to aocemmodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The eXaC~ location and number of ea~ement~ ~hall be approved by the Department of Pa~k~ a~d Recreation at the time of easements are requested, whichever occurs first. lC. Prior to the release of mere than 180 building permits, the Applicants shall b~ responsible ~or extending public water to Area A as designated on the Conceptual Plan. 11. Upon request by the Ceunty, but no sooner than 150 days after reaching, the ApplicantE ~hall dedicat~ to and for the benefit of the County of Chesterfield~ free and u~restricted, the right-of-way for the road a~ generally ~hewn on the Conceptual Plan as the Recreational Access Read. The exact location and width ef right-of-way for the Recreational Access Road shall be approved Dy the County Transportation Department hut shall not exoeed seventy (70) feet in width plus any additional easements necessary to construct the road. ~unding fur the oust to construct this Recreational A~cess Road shall provided to the Coanty in conjunction with recordation of any subdivision section that includes access to this road, or as required by Proffered Condition 12, whichever occurs first. 12. In the event that the County construct~ part of th~ Recreational Access Roa~ on~ the cost for the construction totals at least $3~0,000, the Applicants ~hall in cenjunc=ion with that construction construct the remaining length of the Recreational Access Road. Upon red, sst by the County, the applicants shall provide a bond or other suretlem to the County for their co~t~ of such construction. 13. In the event that the County does not construct the Recreational Access Roa~, then in that event, the Applicants ~hal~ cQ~tr~et and co, plate said release of the 237th building permit. Said construction shall, extend said ,road from ,the southern line of Ivey Mill Road southwardly to the easternmost boundary of Area A as shown on said Conceptual Plan. In tho interim, Applicants shall grant the County easement of access to Area A ever, upon and across roads currently in existence throughout the project, which easements shall ex, ire upon the oonstructlon o£ said Recreational Access i4. Applicants will pay $150 per month for the water used in the flushing Of t~e water line whie~ Will be a~tended from 8addlebrook Road into the proposed dcveiopment, 94-989 12/14/94 Said flushing being necessary to maintain and preserve the quality Of water supply within the development. These payments shall begin upon the approval of the first final subdivision s~eek plat and continue until the 100t~ building permit An the ~evelopment has be~n i~ued or until the County advises Applieants that said payments are no lcnqer rsquiMed, whichever event shall first occur. Applicants shall have the right, subject to review by the County utility Department, to recapture and u~e the flushed water within the development in a manner in keeping with~, health,~...safet~and~ welfare standards e~tablished by th~ County. diseased trees which bas been approved by the Virginia Department of Forestry, t/sere shall be no timberin9 until a land disturbance permit has been obtaiaed from th~ Environmental Engineering D~partment and the approved d~vices installed. 16. Runoff from any stable area or rider's ring shall drain through a Any single family dwelllng ~nit on a lot adjacent to Lake Chesdin {Appomattox River Water Authority property) mhall have a mlnim%~7~ of 2,s00 gross square feet. ~11 other single family dwelling units shall here a ~inlmum of 1,900 gross spuar= feet. The Applicants sh~ll not seek relief of the mandatory use of the public water 19. If %h~ u~e of ~eptic tank and dr~infield systems is approved for the Applicants, there shall be no mass drainfields permitted. 20. Upon request by =he County, a minimum twenty (20) foot generally parallel to Lake Che~din, to acco~odate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The e~ac= loom=ion uS this easmment $h~ll b~ approved by the Department of su~ivision Or a~ th~ tim~ the eas~ant is request=d, whichever occu~ ~. Mc~ale inquired am to whether ~he Board nmeds ~o include rezoning of ~ golf course in this motion. Mr. Micas stated the Board could include resorting of the qolf oours~ property cT coul~ amen~ the motion to provide for double advertising. initiation of a conditional use request for a private golf ~r. M~als called for th~ vote on the motion ma~e by Dr. Nicholas, seconded by ~. Warren, for the Boa~d to ini%ia~ and double advertise a con~itional use for a private golf co~se and to approve Casa 95SNOlel subject to the following oonditions: CONDITION - ENTIRE ~STAFF/CPC) A ~OO foot b~ff~r ~hall be maintained between any ~esidential lot and any playfields, cuurts or similar active reoreatlonal uses to include, but not necessarily be limited swiping pools and boat marina ar~a~. This Sections 21.1-2Z7 through ~I.l-l~ of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) 9¢-990 ~QNDITION FIFTEEN (15) ACRE CONDITIONAL USE AREA ,FOR PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES (STAFF/CPC} Outdoor publlo speaker or address systems shall not be used between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and ~:00 a.m., Sunday through Thursday and 11:00 p.m. ~nd 8:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday. (P) Aed~ further, for the Board =o accept the ~ollcwing proffered conditions: 1 ...... 5~1e maxim~r~..d~nsity of this deve!opmenh shall be 535 single family residential lots. '" 2. At the time of recordation Of the first subdivision plat, ~hirty-fiYe (3§) feet· Of right of way on the south side'of Ivey Mill Read~ measured frem the center line of that part of Ivey Milt Road immediatel~ adjacent to the property, sh~ll be dedicated fr~ a~d ~reot~icted, to and for tho benefit cf the County cf Chesterfield ("the County*'). 5. ~o individual residential unit shall have direct access to Ivey ~ill Road. 4. Additional psvement mhull be constructed along Ivey ~ill Road at each approved access to provide left and right turn lanes. Any additional right-of-way (er easements) required for the~ improvement~ shall be d~dicated free amd unre~tricted~ to and for the benefit of the County. ~. Prior ts any final cheek plat approval, the f~llo~inq improvements shall be completed or committed ss d%termined by the Transportstion Department. A. Con,traction of a five (5) foot wide shoulder on each ~ide of Ivey Mill Road from its easternmost intersection w/th River Road west along its approximately 0.9 mile). B. improv~ment of Ivey Sill Read to an eighteen (1~) foot wide paved road, five {5) foot shoulders and ~ix (S) foot wide ditch sections from its existing ~aved section west ts %he n0rt~e~nmest property ¢. Dedication to amd~ for the benefit of the County, free and unrestric=ed, any additional r~gh~-of-way (or easement) requlr~d · for the improvements identified above. Prior fo final check plat approval of ~ore than 236 residential units, the following imprevements shall be completed or cc~mitted as determined by the Transportation Department. A. Widening of Ivey Mill Road to,~. twenty (Z0) foot wide paved road from its easternmost intersection with River Road to the northernmost property line. B. Dedisation to and for the benefit of the County, free-and unrestricted, any additionalright-of-~ay '?'(or' easement) required SOt the improvement identified above. 94-991 12114194 7. The Applicants shall pay the following to the County prior to the time of building per~i~ aDplioatlon infrastructure improvements within the service district for the property: A. $5,083 per lot, if paid on o~ p~ior to June 30, 1995; or B. The amount approved by the Board of ~upervisor~ not to excee~ $~,05~ per lot adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall and~ Swlf~ Building. Cost Index between July I, 199~ and July of th~ fiscal year in which the payment i~ made if paid after $. TWO Mundrsd Ten (210) acr~m shall be reserved for purchase by the County for public facilities as price shall be Five Hundred Thousand and no/1OQ Dollars (Ss00,000.00) or the Fair Market Value of the ~10 acres~ at the rims cf conveyance, whichever is the lesser. Th~ roSe--etlon, including mettl~ent of s~id purchase, ~hall be for a period of one hundre~ fifty (lo0) days fr~m th~ 4ate Rezoning occurs. ~ acres shall be Pa=cels A, B and C~ as designated on th~ 9. U~n re~ue~% by tho Co~ty, a minimum twenty (2~) foot wide ~asement shall be granted within the development a~co~ate ~ed~trian and bicycle oiroulati0n- Th~ exac~ location and nu~er of easament~ sh~ll be approved by ~he Departmen~ of parks and Recreation at the time ~e first tentativ~ subdivision or at t~e time the easements are requested, whichever occurs flr~t. 10. Prier %o the release of more than l~o building the Applicants shall be responsible fOZ extending p~blic wa~er to Area a a~ designated on ~a Conceptual. Plan. 11. Upon request by ~e County~ ~ut no ~oo~er =hah 150 days after rezonlng, the Applicants shall dedicate to and uuregtrietad~ th~ right-of-way for the road as generally sho~ on the Conceptual Plan as the Recreational ~oa~, The exact location and width of right-of-way for seventy (70] feet in width plus any additional provided %o the County in conjunction with recordation of mny subdivision section t~a= includes access to this ~oa~, or as require~ by Proffered Condition 1~, whichever occurs first. Oon~tEuction totals at leas~ $350,800, the Applicants shall in conjuuctiou with that construction construct the remaining_ leng~, of. the...Recreational Applicant~ ~h~ll con~truct and ~omplete said 94-992 12/14/94 Mill Road sonthwardly to the easternmost boundary of Area A as shown on said Conceptual Plan. In the interimt Applicants skall brant the County easement of access to Area A ever, upon and across roads currently in existence tb_toughoUt the project, which euscmcnts shall expire upon the construction of said Recreational Applicants will pay $350 per month for the water used in the .£1ushin~ of the water line which will be extended from Saddlebrook Road into the proposed development, said flushing being necessary %o maintain and preservs the q~ality, of water su~p!y within the development. These payments shall begin upon ~he approval of the first final subdivision che~k plat and continue ~ntil the 100th building permit in the development ~a~ been issued or until the County advises Applicants that said payments are no longer required, whishever event shall first Occur. Applicants shall havu th~ right, subject to review by the County Utility Department, to recapture and u~ th~ ~lush~d water within the ~ev~lopment in a manner in keeping with health~ safety and welfare 15. With the e~ceptlen of timbering to remove dead or diseased f~ees ~hi¢~ has bee~ approved by the Virginia Department o~ Forestry, there shall be ~0 timbering until a ]and disturbance permit has b~en obtained from the ~svironm~ntal ~ngineering Department and the approved devices in~tslled. 56. Runoff from any stable ar~a or rider's ring shall drain through a BMP. 17. Any si~gl~ family dwelling uni~ on a lo~ adjacent to Lake Che~din (Appomattox River Water Authority property) shall have a minimum of ~,soo gross square feet. All other siDgle family dwelling units ~hall have ~ minimum of 1,900 gross square feet. 18. The Applicants sh~li not 'seek relief of the mandatory u~ of the publi~ water system~ approved for the Applicants, there shall be nc mass drainfields permitted. 20. upon request by the county, a minimum twenty [20] foot Wide easement shall be gra~ted between Parcels A and B, generally parallel to Lake C~ssdin, to aeoe~xmodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The exact location c~ this easement shall be approved by the Dep=r~mmn% of Parks and Recreation et the time of the first tentative subdivision or at the time the easement is requested, whichever occurs first. Ay~: ~r. McKale, Mr. Warren, Mr. Dani~l~ and Dr. Nicholas, Nays: Mr. Barber. In ~dlothian~ Magisterial D~stri~t, L~WI8 ~. dOM~, ~k. requestedrezoninq from Aqr~cultural (A) to Corporate Office (O-2) wi~h Cenditienal-uue ~e p~r~i~ restaurants, b~nks, and ~aving~ and loan a~so~iation~. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zonin~ conditions or Ordinance stundards. Th~ Comprehensive Plan designates ~_he property for regional mixed use. ?his request lies on 6.5 acres fronting approximately 45~ feet on the east line of ~ugnenot 94-993 12/14/94 Road, st its intersection with Green Spring Road. Tax Map 16-4 (1) Parcels L0 and I5 (sheet Mr. ~oole presented a summary of Case 95SN0168 and stated staff recommends approval and acceptance cf the proffered conditions. He further stated the Planning Commission recommends denial, however, the Contmission Xndi~ated they could support ~pproval of the case if the restaurant use were eliminated from this request o~ if the Board were to accept all proffered conditions except for the proffer relative tO the restaurant. He. stated~'prcffared..condition~l.b, includes the applicant's request for a restaurant, he, ever, the Board has the legal ability to accept all other proffers except for 1,bt i~ ~he,.appticant- eoncu.r~-with the change.~ H~ noted the request conforms to the Bu~uenot/Robious/Midloth~an Area Plan. ~r. Lewis W. Combs, Jr,, the applicant, stated f=om standpoint there is little use te ~e made of the land if it ~ees ne~ include the restaurant. He sobmitted a packet of information to the Board relative to the request. Ms. Cheryl Nit~tro~, representing Windsor ~orsst/windsor Place Subdivision, stat~, they are concerned about the conditional us~ that will allow a restaurant on this proper~y. She noted she has forwarded approximately 100 letters and rempenmes relating tO t~is request to the Boar~. She further etate~ they obj~ot to the request because cf the amount of traffic a restaurant will generate; that a restaurant is not compatible with the established residential neighborhoods; that the County would have little control over the ty!0e of restaurant tha~ would be built on this property; ~h~t ther~ might he the possibility of four restaurants being built on the property; and ~hat they are concerned a~eu~ the precedent this development will set. She stated this section of HugueRot Road protects their neighborhood from development along MXdlothian Turnpike and Robious Road and requested the Board to deny the conditional use that allows restaurants on this property. She further ~tated the neighborhood supports zoning that wcul~ allow for offices and ~r. Joe Bosineau, vic= ~re~i~ent of olde Coach Village Civic Association, stated the Association concurs ~ith the comments expressed Dy ~s. Nitstrem; that they have held several meetings in which z~e~yone has been opposed to t~e project; consideration the welfare of the oiti~en~ of th~ County. Ft. George Wilson etated he is a neighbor of Mr. Co~ and opposed to the re,est. ~s. Betty 8odes mtated she i$ one of tbs landownerm and ~ew up on the property; that they would llke to ~ell m pa~t of the property; ~at ther~ has been no talk of four resta~ant~ on ~e property; and that ~y ~mel this development is an appropriate Mr. CO~S ~tated he resides in the house and is not to t~e ~e~uest; and he feels they have a~ed ~he relating to traffic and noi~. There was brief di~c~ion relativ~ to whether'~e applicant can ensure ~e type of restaurant located on t~e property. Mr. Barber stated if the applicant is willing to accept the zoning wi~ou~ the restaurant, h~ will move for approval of the request, however, if he i~ not willln~ ~o accept t~at 12/24/94 recommendation, he will move to deny the request, ge then inquired ss to whether the zoning without the restaurant would be acceptable tc the applicant. Mr. Combo stated he as th~ request currently stands. Discussion, dommsnts, and questien~ ensued ~elative to the Beard supporting the recommenCe%ion o~ the Die~rlct Supervisor and the Board not being in a position to negotiate the zoning request with the applicant. Mr. Barber again inquired as to whether the applicant is ~illin~to...~ithdraw the restaurant from the request. Mr. Combs stated he would rather lease the restaurant than loose ~he entire There wa~ hrie£ discussion relative to Mr. ~arber attempting to ascertain the applicant's coecurren~e with his recommendation for th& Board to either delete the restaurant or deny the project. Mr. Warren stated his position would be to support the ~lanning Commission~e recommendation for denial or eliminate the restaurant from the request. ~r. Combs stated he will eliminate Proffered Condition Mr. Barber ~de a mot~on, seconded by Mr. Warren, far the Proffered Condition 1.b. and acceptance of the following proffered conditions: 1. Uses permitted shall be limited to those permitte~ in 2 District plus the following: a. Banks and savings & loan associations with or without an outmide public address system, an~ with or without drive-in windows. 2. Ail buildings sh~ll have a Colonial Architectural style compatible wi~h the architectural style of a~jacent buildings. The exact architectural style and materials ~hali be approved a: the time of site plan review. 3. The ~ublic waste wa=er system shall ~e use~. 4. Except far timDerinq approved hy the Virginia State Department of Forestry for ~he purpose of removing dead er diseased tre~m, there shall be ne timber~n~ on the Property until a land disturbance permit has been obtained from the Environmental Engineering Department. 5. Prior to mite plan approval, s~xty (60) feet of right- of-way on the east side of Kaquenot Road measured from th% centerline of that part of suguenet Road immediately adjacent to the pruperty shell be dedicated, free and unr~mtricted, te and for the benefit of Chesterfield county. 6. Direct access to Huguenot Road shall ~e l~mltad tu one (1} entrance/exit. This aCCeSs shall be located the southern property line and shall be shared with the adjacent property to the ~outh. The exact location of this access shall be approved by the Transportation D~partm~nt. ~rlor to site plan approval for dsvelopmen= that includes this entrance/exit, an access easement, acceptable to the Transportation Department 94-995 12/14/94 7. TO provide for am adequate roadway system at the time of the complete d~velopm~nt, the developer shall be responsible for the following: a. Construction of additional pavement along northbound lanes o£ ~g%e~et Road to provide an additional lane ofpavement for the entire property frontage, plus a right turn lane at the approved b. Dedication to and for the benefit of County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted, any additional right of way (or easement) required for the ' improvements~ iden%i£ied, aboue .... 8. Prior to any site plan approval, a phasing plan for required road improvements, as identified in Proffered Condition ?~ shall be submitted to and approved ~y the ~ank, e~vings ~Dd loan, etc., but cannot operate a Y~. Daniel stated he will suppor~ the motion, b~t concerned about health, safety, and welfare issues of continued development in thi~ particular area. Mr. McHale stated he would support ~r. ~arbe~s recommendation and inquired a~ to whether there is any way the Board could defer the request and possibly develop neighbors would ba comfortable with. ~r. Barber stated hs does not feel a restaurant~ under any circums~no=s, would be acceptable. ~r. ~cRale called for the vote on the motion made by ~r. Barber, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the 5nard to approve Case ~55N0168 and to accept the following proffered conditions: 1. Uue~ permitted shall be li~ite~ to tho~ permitted in 2 District plu~ the following: Bar,ks and saving~ & loan associations with or without an outside public addrsss system, and with or without drive-in windows. All buildings shall have a Celonial Architectural style compatible with the architectural style of adjacent buildlngs. The exact architectural style and muterialu shall ~e aDprove~ at the time of uite plan review. 3. The public waste water system shall ba used. 4. Except for timbering approved by the virginia State B~partment of Fore,try for the purpose of removing dead or diseased trees, there shall be no ti~berin~ on the Property um~il a land ~ist~rbance permit ha~ been obtained f~om t~e Environmental Engineering Department. 5. Prior to sits plan approval, sixty (60) feet of right- of-way on the east side of ~uguenet Road measured from the centerline of that part e~ Huguenot Road immediately adjacent to the property shall be dedicated, fr~e and unrestricted, to and for the benefit o£ County. (1] entrance/exit. This acces~shal~ he locatedtowards the ~outhern property line and;~shall ~e ~hared with the adjao~n% property to th~ ~outh, The exact location of this access shall be approved by the Transportation devolopment that includos thio entrance/exit~ an access easement, acceptable ~o ~he Transportation Department shall be recorded. 7. TO provid~ for an ad,gusts roadway system at the time of the complete ~eve!cpment, the developer shall be =sEpon~ible fo~ t~e following: a. Construction of additional pavement along northbound lane~ of 'HuguenOt Road to provide an frontage, plus a right turn lane at the approved b. De~ica%ion Co an~ for the benefit of County Of Che6terfield, f~ee &~d ~nrest~icted, uny udditional right of way (ar easement) required for improv~asnt~ identified above. 8. Prior to any site plan approval~ a phasing plan for requixe~ road improvements, as i~antiXled in Proffered vote: On motion of Dr. Nicholas, seconded by ~n~. Barber, tha Board adjourned at 11:30 p.m. until January 11, 199g at l:OO Lane B. Ramsay ~ County Administrator 94-997