10-11-1995 Minutes~. Arthur S. Warren, Vice Chrm.
Mr. Harry G. Daniel
~tr. Lane B. Ramsay
County AdMinistrator
Utilities
Assr. County Attorney
~S. Marilyn Cole, E×ac.
Asst. to County Admln.
Ms. Faith L. Davis,
Clerk tu the Board
Mrs. Doris R_ DeH~rt,
Assr. Cu. Admin.,
Intergovern. Affairs
Depu=y Co. A~min,,
~anagement ~er~ices
~r, Russell Harris,
County Ombudsman
Mr, John R. Lillard, Dir.,
Airport
Me. Nary Leu Lyle~
Dir.~
Mr. James McKinnell,
Dir., Transportation
Mr, Richard M. ~cElfish,
Dir., Env. ~nqineering
Hr. Kenneth Parterre, Dir,,
Public Affairs
Hr. Francis M. Pirate, Dir,,
Col. J~ E. Pittman, Jr.,
Police Department
Oir., ~udge~ &
Mr, M. D. Stith, Jr.,
DeDu=y CO.
Community Development
Sr. ~re~erick Willis, Jr.,
Mr. M~Hal~ called %h~ regularly scheduled meeting to order at
3:05 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
~otio~ of Rt. Warren, ~eeonded by Dr, Nicholas, the Bo~d
approved the minutes of S~pt~mber 27, 1995, a~ submitted.
~ote: Unanimous
Mr. Ramsey introduced Mr. stegmaier who stated Chesterfield hag
Office cost estimation network that has been established to
provide reliable estimates Of the co~t of proposed federal
mandates on local government~. Me noted under current ~e~eral
law, the cost of any new mandate cannot exceed $5~ million
nationwide. He further stated thi~ is a special honor for the
county and Budget Department staff and reflects Che~t~rfield's
reputation for excellence in financial management.
There was b~ief discussion relative tot-his limit aDDlylng only
to pro~ose~ new mandates and does affect e~isting mandate~.
Mr. Daniel stated he would like to know whether the County tax
bills are showing the portion of citizens tar dollarm that are
goin~ fc State and federal ~andates and if so, he would 1Xke to
eec this effort continued. ~ cc~mended staff for their
effor=s.
~. BOkRD CO/4~I~E~ REPORT~
There were no Board Committee Reports at this ti~e.
4. REOU~8TS TO PO8TPONE AOTION, EHER~N~Y ~I~ION~, OR
C~%/q~ IN T~E ORDER OF_~RENT~TION
On nutiou of ~r- Warren~ seconded by D~. Nicholas, the Board
added Item 8.B.14.~ Transfer of Midlothian Distrlc~ Three Cent
Road Punds to the Pelic~ Dep~rtm~nt to cover cost of uniform
police services for the Village of Midlcthian Day F~stival to
follow Xtem ~.B.i~., Acceptance of Boundary Line Survey of
Chesterfield/Pewhaten Boundary Line and Authorization to Subnlt
~u circuit court for A~roval and, ~dopted the agenda, as
amended.
his s~rvice to %h~ County, an~ wished him well in his
po~ition at the Richmond ~nternational Airport.
Aviation Servics~ for the Chesterfield County Airport
April, 1991; and
~HEREAS, due to M~. Lillard's initia~iYes, the A~rport
received over $5.6 million in federal and State grant funding;
W~ER~AS, under Mr. Lilla~d's leadership~ major
improvements haws been ma~e to ~he Airport including upgrading
airfield electrical vault; construction of a taxiway and
si~es; and installation cf perimeter fencing and
at the Airport as well as other projects; and
95-620
Airport Master Plan; development and implementation of the
Airport Regulations and Standards; privatlzation of ssrvioe
fnn~ti0ns to a Fixed Base Operator (FBD); and successfully
operating the Airport as an enterprise fund; and
WH~AS, blt. Lillard successXully initiated reduction of
the aircraft tax ~ate to be more competitive with other
localities; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Lillard uensis~antly provided quality
customer service when working with external custom,rs by
successfully negotiating w~th Airport tenants and adjacent
p~op~rTy own~r~ on issues impacting th~ Airport; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Lillard received the Virginia Department of
Aviation Award for his commitment to t~e Capital Improvement
Program; th~ Federal Aviation Administration ~astern Region
Award in appreciation of bi~ many accomplishments; and has
served on the Doard of Directors of the Virginia Airport
Operators Council for tbs past four years; and
WHeReAS, Mr. Lillard has been a dedioated~ bard working
e~ployee wh~ has performed his duties to the highest de~ree cf
~refessienalis~ and in which ~he Board of SuDervisor~ will miss
his diligent service.
NOW, TH~R~ORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
C0~nty Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes ~r. 3ohm R.
Lillard for hi~ d~dioated servloe to the County and extends
their best wishes in his n~w position as Deputy Director o~
Aviation Services at Richmon~ Internat~onnl Airport.
A/~D, S~ IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of thi~
resolution be presented to Mr. Lillard and that %hi~ re~olution
be par~nan~ly recordeo amonq the papers of this Board of
Supenvi~ors of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Vote: Ununimous
Mr. ~c~ale presented the executed resolution to Mr. Lillard,
expressed appreciation for his ssrvioe To the County, and
wished him well in hi~ new position as Deputy Director a% the
Richmond International Airport.
Mr. Lillard eklpressed appreciation for the recognition and for
the opportunity to manag~ thm County Airpor= and stated he will
miss his ssrvice with the CounTy.
Mr. Daniel wished Mr. Lillard m~oceas in his new pomition.
WORK SESSIONS
Th=re were no Deferred Items at this t~me,
~, NEW BUSINESS
8.A. STRSETLIGHT INSTALLATION COST A~ROVALS
On motion of Mr. McHale, second by Mr. Warren~ the Board
approved the following streetlight installatien cost approvals
in Bsrmuda Magisterial DisTricT:
Bradley Bridge Road, from the intersection of Brander~
Bridg~ Road, southwest to within 500 feet of the vicinity
of its intersection with Lewis Road, twenty lights to be
installed on the ~×i~ting poles
Ho ¢O~t to install lights
N. Enen Church Road, {~ ~he vicinity cf 12700, on the
existing pole
No coat to install lights
ADOPTXON O0 REBOLUTION RECOGNIZIN~ M~S. F~ARGU~RITE
FRIB~D ~HRISTIAN FC~ HER SERVICE TO CHESTERFIELD
COUNTY
On motion of Mr. Warren, ~e¢ond~d by Dr. Nicholas, the Board
adopted the fellewin~ resolution:
~EREAS, Mr~. ~arguerite F~iend Christian spent 41 year~
as an educator, 40 of those in Chesterfield County, including
supervisor; and
WHEREAS, Mre. Chri~tian~= first asslg~ment as supervisor
was for all schools for black s%udent~ in the County and, after
integration, that assignment expanded to include many ether
schools; and
WHEREAS, Mrm. Christian wa~ in~tru~en=al in obtaining
federal ~un~s ~o impl=ment the Head Start Program for
preschoolers in the County and was vital in organizing the Non-
Graded and Title I Programs in the County; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Chris~ian~a educational career was
characterized by outstanding leadership in the County and
throughout ~h¢ SCare, ~aving served as chairperson of the Third
Distr~ct ~uper~isory Grasp a~d Vice chairperson of the
Richmond-Petersburg H~pe~viaory Grou~, aa well as on various
local, ~tate, and national curriculum eo~mittees and as the
firat black m~mber of the Virginia c0~ittee of the
cotillion of Southern Association of Colleges and Schools~ and
~R~$, Mrs. Christian has had mn extremely positiv~
and religious o~qanizations; and
WH~S, ~. C~istian has b~n devoted, kind,
family; and
l~ng contributions to education by the Chesterfield County
~blic S~hools through the n~ng of the new elementa~ school
in t~e Enon area =he "Mar~eri%~ ~. chri&tian Elementary".
County 5oar~ of ~upervi~or$ publicly r~co~n~ze~e cut.tending
contribution~ of ~s. Marguerite Friend christian to
Vute: Unanimous
On motion of ~r- Warren, seconded by Dr. Nichulaa, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
modified the exicting state Enterprise Zone regulations which
allow~ Chesterfield county to be eligible for ~ultiple zone
decignatiunc~ and
opportunit~e~ available to the Coanty for industrial
WHEREAS, our existing zone is limited in available
indumtri~; and
W~REAZ, the majority of the land area ~ropceed for
and we de not believe the new zone will appreciably compete
would include portiona of the J~ffer~on Davi~ Highway south of
the e~i~tin~ ~one and inaorporate those industrial areas within
NOW, THER~FOR~ B~ IT R~S0LV=D, th~= the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors hereby aoknowledqe~ that
Chesterfield County is applying for an enterDriae zone and
autho~iz~ th~ County Adminietrator to prepare and eubmit the
appllcatlon for the enterprise zone designation an behalf
ON ~OUNTY PROPERTY
0~ motion of ~r~ Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, th~ Board
approved th~ designation e£ a conservation easement on county
property and authorized the County Adminimtrator to e~e=ute the
necessary decla~atiun.
vote: Unanimouc
8.B.4. ~PROV~ OF ~TILiTY CONT~ACT FOR RO~LIG BROTH~E~,
On motion of ~r. Warren~ seconded by Dr. Nicholas~ the Board
approved a utilities contract for Pohllg Brothers,
Incorporated, C~n~ract Number 95-0153. as follows~ which
project includeE the extension of ~ L.F. of t~lve iPuh water
line and authorized the county Administrator to execute any
necessary docummnts:
Co~tractor:
Contract Amount:
Fountainhead, L.L.C.
W.E. Duke and Sons~ Incorporated
~atimated To, al - $78,959.50
95-623 10/11/95
Total Estimated County Cost
Additionn] Work (Cash Refund)
Estimated Developer Cost
Code: Cash Refund
Dimtrict: Dale
Vote: Unanimous
$76,789.50
5B-572W0-E4B
~UT~ORIZATIO~ ~OR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR T~ ~CUTE
On motion uf FL~. Warren! seconded by Dr- Nicholas, the Board
authorized the County Administrator to execute a subordination
agreement for Housinq Office Mortgage Downpayment and Closing
C~st Assistance Program for a home improvement loan to be made
by Transamerica CrediL Corporation to Ms. Myrtle G~il
8.B.6. ~WARD O~ CO14TRACT TO J,K- TXMMONS. INCORPORATED ~OR
contrac~ with J.K. Timmons, ~nocrporated, in the amount of
$550,690~ for the Public Safety Training Facility at Erich, (It
is noted fundm for the contrast ar~ available in the 9reject,)
8.B.7. SET D~TE~ ~CR PUBLIC H~ARIN~
OOUNT¥ OF ~HESTER~IELD~. ~78, AS A~ENDED, BY ADDING
SECTION ~0-?.1 REL~TIN8 TO T~E ~NA~T~ORTZED R~MOVAL
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by D~. Nicholas, the Bu~rd
set the date of ~evemb~r S~ 1995 at 7:00 p.m. for a public
hearing tm con~iden an ordinance to amend the Code of the
County of chesterfield, 1975, as a~end~d, by addlng Section 10-
7.1 ~elating to t~e unauthorized removal of recyclabl~ ~atarfal
from recycling containers.
¢0UN~Y OF OHE~TERFIELD, ~978, AS A~TO~D, BY ~DDIN~
~ECTION8 ~.1-~7~.~ ~74.~ AND ~!9,.~2 AND ANENDIN~
~ KEENACTI~ ~ECTIOm~ Z1.1-272, ~.~-~75,
~1.1-~74, ~1,1-275, 21,1-~76, 21.1-~78, ~ 21.1-281
On motion of ~r, Warren, seconded by Dr. NiColas, the Board
set the date of ~ovember 8~ 1995 at 7:~0 p.m. for a
hearing %o c~n$ider an ordimano~ Co ~e~d th~ Code of
County of C~este~field~ 1978~ a~ amended~ by adding
~1.1-~71.1, ~74,1, and 27~.] an~ amending and r~enact~ng
Sections 21,1-272, 21.1-273, a~d 21,i-274~ 21.1-275;
21.1-27~, and 21.1-2sl relating to site plan
Vo~e: Unanimous
~.B.7.e. TO CONSIDER AMENDIN~ THE COUNT¥~.a_C~MPREHEN~IVE PLAN
TO I~CL~IDE Th-~ PUBLIC ~ACiLITIE~ PLAN
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board
~et the date of November 8, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. for a public
hearing to consider amending the County's Comprehensive Plan to
include the Public Facilitie~ Plan.
Vote: Unanlmou~
8.B.8. REOUESTS FOR BINgO/RAFFLE PEP~ITS
on mo%ion of Mr. Warren~ seconded by D~, Nicholas, the Board
approved a raffl~ p~rmit for Evergreen Elementary 9ohoel PTA
for calendar y~ar 1995.
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
dire~tion~ fro~ this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of =he roads in North oaks, section A, Bermuda
District, and
~ereus, the Resident ~ngineer for the Virginia Department of
Tranaportatien has advised =he Director cf Environmental
~ngineerin~, the str~ts in North Oaks, Section A, Rermuda
District, meet the requirements established by the Subdivision
~tr~et Recui~e~.s of the Virginia Department Qf
Transportation, and
Whereas, the County end the Virginia Department of
Transportation have entered into an agreement, recorded in Deed
detention/retention facilities in the County.
Therefore, upon consideration whereof, and on mo~ien of Mr.
in North Oaks, ~ectlon A, ~ermu~a District, be an~ they hereby
are established as public roads.
~d be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Transportation, be aD~ is hereby requested to take into t~e
virginia, and ~he Department'~ subdivision street Requirements,
t~e following:
Nome of ~tre~t: Oakside Drive L~ngth: 0.15 mile
Frem: limits of Section A., 0.15
mile south of Centralia Road~
State Route 145
To: Centralia Road, State Route
145, 0.06 mile west cf Peet
Morn DrivQ~ ~tate Rout~ 1997
Guaranteed Right-of-Way of variable width: 50 - 90 feet.
Frem: Oaksids Drive, 0.04 ~ile
~outh of C~ntralla Road~
State Route 145
To: Permanen~ cul-de-sac,
0.05 mile east of Oaksids Drive
Guaranteed Right-of-Way width: 50 feet
Length: 0.0~ mile
95-625
Name of Street: Oakside Circle
From: Oakside Drive, 0.10 mile
south of Centralia Road,
State Route 145
To: permanent cul-de-sac,
0.0~ mile east of 0ak~ide Drive
Guaranteed Right-of-way Width: 50 fee%.
Name of Street: Oakdell Drive
From: Oakside Drive, 0.04 mile
south Of Centralia Road,
State Route 145
limits cf Section A,
mile southwest of Oaksid= Drive
Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: S0 feet.
From: Oakdell Drive, 0.0S mile
southwest =f oekside Dxive
To: permanent cul-de-sac, 0.03 mile
northwest of Oakdell Drive
Guaranteed Right-of-Way width: 50 feet.
Name of Street: 0akd~ll Court
From: OR,dell Drive, o.os mile
southwest of Onkside Drive
permanent cul-de-sac, 0.03
mile southeast of Oakdell Drive
Guaranteed Right-of-Way Width: 50 feet.
Name of Btreet: oa~ center Drive
From: Oakd~ll Drive, 0.18 mile
southwest of Oakside Driv~
To: Oakside Drive, 0.14 mile
mout~ of Centralia Road,
state Route 145
Guaranteed Right-of-Way width: 50 feet.
Length: 0.03 ~ile
0-19 mil~
Length: 0.03 mile
Length: 0.03 mile
Length: 0.22 male
This request i$ inctusiv= uf t~e adjacent slop~, ~ight
~ietunce, clear acne and designated Virginia D~partm:nt of
Transportation drainage easements indicated on the develo]Yme~t
Dlat.
This section of North Oaks is re~orded as follows:
Section A, Plat Be0R 74, Pages 6 & ¥, January ~4, I991.
On motion of ~Ir. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the ~oar4
authorized the County Administrator to execute Chan~e Order
Number One (Final) with G.L. Howard, Incorporated, for a
deduction of $20,526.40, for t~e Merri~dale Subdivimion water
Line ~ehabilitati0n project. (It i~ noted the original project
congtruction cost was $257,559.Q6 and with t~i~ change order,
the final construction cost is $237,03Z.66.)
Vote: Unanimous
95-626
S.B.10,b. NUmBeR FIVE ~UR THE JAH~KE ROAD WATER LINE,
Ft{~EE II FROJECT
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Er. Nicholas~ the Board
authorized ~he County Adminis=rator to e~cute Chanqe Order
Number Five with G.L. Howard, Incorporated, in the amount of
$40,378, for the Jahnke Road Water Line, Phase II Project. (It
i~ neted funds for thi~ project are available in the current
Capital Improvement Budget.)
Vote: Unanimous
authorized =he County Administrator ~o execute Chanqe Order
Number Five (Final), for a deduc~io~ of $~1,D~9.22, for the
(It is noted the original project cunstructlon cost was
construction co~t
E.R.10.~. N~A~BER NI~E FOR THE MIDLOTHI~N LIBP-%RY EXF~/~EION
~ROUECT
On ~otion Of ~r. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Bear~
authorized the County Administrator to execute Chang~ Order
Num]~er Nine wi=h T.E. Blackstone, in ~he amount o~ $40,469, for
t~e Midlothian Library Expansion Pro~ect. (It is noted fund~
for this Chan~e order are available in ~ne pruje=h.)
Vote: Unaainous
8.B.11. AU~BPT~N~ES OF ~RCEL$ OF L~/~D
Virginia General Partnermhi9 and authorized the County
copy of ~he plat is filed w~th the papers of this Board.)
TRUSTEE
On motion of Mr. War~en~ ~e¢onded by Dr. Nioholas~ ~he Board
accepted, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a parcel
of land containing 4.65 acres for South Happy Hill Road from
Oliver b. Rudy, Trustee, under a e~rtain trust agreement dated
March ~9~ 1993 and des±gnawed as the Stoney Glen West Trust,
and authorized the county Admini~=ra~or to execute
necessary deed. (It is ~oted a copy of the plat is filed with
the papers of this Board.}
95-627 10/11/95
REOUBBT8 FOR PERMIEEION
MINNIE E, ELLIOTT TO EXTEND A ~NIVATE ]TATER
approved a request from Me. Kinni~ $. ~lliott tc extend a
Little creek Lane, subject to the execution and recordation of
an a~reement acceptable to the County Attorney. (It as noted
a cody of the pla= is ~iled with the paper~ of this Beard.)
Vote: Unanimous
8~.12.b. MR. KENNY LUNBQUIST TO ~A~ ~ DECK ENCROACH ~I~IN
AN EXISTING SIXtEeN ~OOT SEWER F~EBMB~T
on os=ion o~ Mr. Warren, s~oonde~ by Dr. N~chelee, the ~oard
approved a request from Kr. Kenny Lundq~iet to have a deck
sn~roaah within an existing sixteen foot sewer easement,
~ubject to the execution ~f a license aqreement. (It i~ noted
a sopy of the plat is filed with the paper~ of this Bo~rd.)
6.B,12,¢, TN~VID~NC~ CREEK ~8~O~I~TES TO
On motion o~ F_r, WarreD, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board
approved a request from Previdence Cres~ Assesiate~ to
llQ00 West Providence Road~ ~ubject to the ex~cuti0n of a
licenue agreement. (It is no~ed a¢opy of the vXcinity sketch
is filed with the papara of this Board.)
Vote: Unanimous
~.E.la. A~CEPTANCE OF EOIFRDAR~ LINE SURVEY O~ CEEBTERFIEL0!
~O%~H~T~N BOUNDS%NY LINE AND AUTHORIZATION TO ~UBNIT
TO CIRCUIT COURT ~OR ~PPROVAL
on motion of Mr. W~rren, seconde~ by Dr. Nic~olae, the ~car~
accepted the boundary line survey of Chest=rfiuld/POwhatan
Boundary Line and authorized the County Attorney to submit th~
Eurvey to Circuit court for approval.
Vote: Unanimous
transferred u~ to $1,000 £rom ~he ~idlot~ian Distri¢~ Three
uniform police eervlceu ~cr th~ Villag~ 0~ Kidlothian Day
Festival.
Vote: Unanimous
95-628 10/11/95
9. ~RIN~R OP ~!TI~NS ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS OR CLAIMS
There were no Hearings of Citizens on Unscheduled Matters or
Claims scheduled et this =ime.
10. REPORTS
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Hoard
m=¢epted the following reports:
A rapor~ on Devmloper Water and Sewer Contracts and e statu~
repo~t ON the General Fund Balance; R~s~rv~ for Future Capital
Projects; Distrio% Road and street Light Funds; Lease
P~chase=; and School ~oard Agenda.
XX. DINNER
On motion of Mr. Barber, eeconded by ~r. MoHale~ the Board
r~c~ss~d to the ~dm~ni~tratlon ~uilding~ Room 502, for dinner.
12. I~T~OCATIO~
Mr. James McKinnell gave the invocation.
Mis~ Jennifer A. Hilliar~, Troop 397, led the Pledge
Allegiance to the Flag of t~e United states of America.
of
~r. McKinnell introduced M~. Sandra J. Sit-more, Ch~s~er~ield/
Colonial ~eights Christmaa Mother 1995, who was present to
receive th~ r~olution and pre~en~ a repor~ on plans for t~is
ct~r±stmas season.
O~ motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
W}{~R~AS, most families in Chesterfield County enjoy peace
and he,pin,ss daring ~he Christma~ Holi~ay~; and
WHeReAS, there ara many children, elderly, and less
fort~nat~ ~ho de not have the means to enjoy this special time
o~ year; and
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Christmas
Conu~ittee has ~ucces~fully provided food, gifts, and clothing
to many citizens in the past~ and
W~EREAS, ~m. Sandra J. Sizemere has been elected
~ri~tma~ Mot~her for 1995 and reque~t~ ~upp0rt uf all the
citizens of Chesterfield County to ensure
fortunat~ may enjoy this ~po~ial season o~ the year.
NOW, ~R~FOR~ ~ IT RESOLVBD, that the Ches=srfi~ld
County Boa~d of Supervisors hereby ~eoognizes October 12, 1995
as "Christmas Kother Day" and urges all citizens to support
~is worthy endeavor.
iO/li/95
christmas Mother CoMmittee for their successful uf£O~ts in past
years and e~tonds their best wishes for e successful 1995
Vu~e: Unanimous
Mr. ~oHalo preeenbed the executed resolution to Mm.
and expressed appreciatio~ of the Christmas Mother Committee
for their efforts in ensuring these people less fortunate e~joy
the Christmas season. Ee then pre~onted her with a check, on
behalf of cheetorfiel~ County, to be used towards the christmas
~oth~r Program.
~. ~izo~ore o~preesed appreciation for t]%e recognition and for
the check and stated it has bees a privilege to work with the
Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Christmas Committee in hel~ing
those families less fortunate to enjoy the Christmas
She stated to-date, the co~itte~ ha~ sponsored 181 families,
nine fo~ter children, and nine elderly individuals. She
entered into the record a copy of the Co~ittoo'e budget,
C~istmas center schedule, and a statistical report for the
past several years.
On motion ef the ~o~rd, th~ following resolution wa~ adopted:
WHEREAS, the Girl $cout~ of the United states of ~erica
is an organization serving over 2.6 million girls and was
founded to p~omote ei~isen~hip training and personal
WHERE~S, after earning four interest project patches, the
Career Exploration Pin, the ~enior Girl Scout Leadership Award,
tho Senior Girl Scout Challenge, and designing and implementing
a Girl scout Gold Award project; and
W]{EREA$, the Gold Award is the highest achievement award
i~ Girl Scouting and symbolize~ ~ut~ta~ding accomplishments in
girls aged 14-17 or in grades 9-12 and is receive~byless than
6 percent of those individuals entering the Girl Sco~ting
WHEREAS, Miss Jennifer A. Hilliard, Troop 397, sponsored
high standards and has teen honored with the Girl ~oouts of the
United States of America Gold Award by the Commonwealth Girl
Scout Council Df Virginia; and
WHEREAS, ~rowing through her experiences in Girl
priding herself on the great accomplishments of her County,
WOW, TK~EEORE BE IT ~LESQLVED, that the chestgrfield
tu ~iss JenniSer A. Millia~ en~ acknowledges the good fortune
its citizens.
Veto: Unanimous
1D/11/95
Mr. McHale presented the executed resolu~isn to Niss Eilliard,
a~oompani~d by members of her family, cenqratulated her on her
outstanding achievementr and wished h~r well in he~ £u~ure
~e. Hilliard expressed appreciation for the recognition and
stated she has teen a part of girl ~oouting for ten year~ and
landscaping the property cf the Church sire in which she is a
15.A. TO CO~SIDER A/~ ~4ENDME~T TO THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
THOROUghfaRE PLaN ~ND CEE~T~R VILLagE ~,
O~ THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTy COMPREHENSIVE P~.
CONSIDER DELETION OF, OR ~LT~TI~S TO, THE HOPKINS
ROAD E~ENSION ~D T~E E~ST~WEST
~r. ~cCracken s~a=~d this ~ata an~ =im~ ~as been advertised for
a public hearing to consider an amendment to the Chesterfield
County Whoroughfare ~lan and =he C~a~t~ Village Plan regarding
the Hopkins Road ~xtenslon and the Ea~t/We~t Collector.
factors relating to Hopkins Road E~t~nsion, ~Decifically,
Supports Attachment C which was =onsidered by the ~lanning
its intersectio~ with old Lane south for its entirm length and
tracks to Chester Road.
th~ propOSP~ road and that he is opposed to the Thoroughfare
Plan a~ ha fe%i& it i~ unf~i~ to the landowners and
~e further stated that he agrees the County is in need ~f new
concerned about the intersection that would be created at the
railroad tracks; that th~ County does not D~e~ any additional
underpass at Hopkins Road under the railroad tracks.
Mr. G.E. Miles reviewed recommendations of the Chester Advisory
~e stated that the Committee was reEtricted in their review
~OU~Of Cen~ralia Roa~, ~owever, t~eir ~eco~endation provided
an adequate road n~twork that went around the railroad crossing
~nd ut~lizefl right-of-way that was already available. He
further stated that he supported constructing a~
nnd~r the railroad tra~s and submitted a copy of a map to ~ach
=onslderation t~ the reco~endations of the Committee.
Mr. Paul W. Jenkins statmd that he ~upDQrt~ Attachment C which
deletes the Hopkins Road Extension from th~ Thoroughfare Plan
underpass will be n~ded in the future.
Mr+ MoHale noted Attachment C that the ~peaker~ h~d been
r~ferring to in their co--eats was considered by the Planning
was now Aatachm~nt B.
~r. Wayn~ virag s~a%ed he represen=ed a~proximately
co~unities regarding this issue several years ago; that the
i~ue~ ~n thi~ ar~a; and that they feel Attachment C is a
feasible solution for this area, He further stated they were
concerned about havin~ Hopkin~ Road paralleling Chestur Road
and they feel Attachment C addresses that issue and allows
traffic to go into Chester properly.
There being no one else to address bhis i~ue, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. McHale presented an overview of his recommendations
regarding Hopkins Road which includes an alignment of Hupki~
Road to conform to the recommendation of the Chester
Commlttea when tho existing ThorouGhfare Plan was adopted;
~spkins Road ~×ten~ion from Centralia Road to the abandoned
railroad would be a 70 foot wi~e collector road; ~opkins Road
Extension £ro~ the abandoned railroad to Route 10 via Centre
Street ~hsll conform to the Chester village Green Plan and
subsequent zoning~ ~opkin~ Road Eh-tension from Hooff Avenue to
Route 10 be downgraded from a ~0 foot wide major arterial =oa
70 foot wide collector road; and del~tiso of ~opkins Road
south to the proposed road along the abandoned railroad bed
from the Thoroughfare Pi.an. Re suggeste~ that Hopkins Road
~Kton~ion between Old Lane and Contrails Road b~ deleted and
that a connection of ~op~ins Road to ches~e~ Road ~e added to
%he Thorsu~hfare ~lan as outlined in Attachment B. He stated
at the proper time he will make a motion supporting this
rscommenda~ien.
Mr. Barber arrived for ah~ evening session of the meeting.
Mr. Daniel stated he does not have a problem with the
construction of an underpass on Hopkins Road and tha~ he
the underpass is tbs solution for ~opkins Road at this time.
He further stated he will support the motion made by ~r.
McHale, however, he does not feel the underpass will be b~ilt
anytime soon due to other highway priorities.
On ~otion of Mr. McHale, seconded Dy Mr. Daniel, ~e Board
amended the Chesterfield County ThorouGhfare Plan and Chester
Villa~o.P1B~, clements of the Chesterfield County Comprehensive
Plan, as it relates to dsie%icn of, or al%ernativ~ to, the
5opkins Road ~xtension and the E~st/We~t Collector which
includes an alignment of Hopkins Road Extension to conform With
th~ original recommendation of the Che~ter Advisory
that Hopkins Road E~tenslon ~rem Csntralia Roa~ to
abandoned railroad would be a 70 foot wide collector ~oad; that
Hopkins Road E~tension from t~ abandoned railroad ~o Route
via dentre Street shall conform to the Chester Vitlug¢ G~een
Plan and suboe~uent zoning; tha~ ~opkins ~ead Extension from
Ecoff Avenue to Route 10 b~ downgraded from a 90 foot wide
major arterial ~o a 70 fcc% wide collector road; that
Road Extension be deleted in tho Goyns Park/Ecoff Sohool area
fron Route l0 south to the proposed road along the abandoned
railroad bed and from Old Lane to Centrslia Road; and that a
new connection of Espkins Road to Chester Rued, as outlined in
Attachment B~ be added to the Thoroughfare Plan.
Vote: Unan~mou~
95-632 10/11/95
1B.B. TO ~ONSID~R ~J]OPTION OF A ~E~OLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
COUNTY
F~T. Steg~aier stated this date and time has bee~ adver~is2d for
a ~ublic hearing to consider adoption of a r~olution
authorizing the County to contract a debt and issue its ~eneral
obligation s~hool bonds in the principal amount of $25,175~000
and anticipated inters~t ~arnings in the amount of $~4~,~7 for
~he purpose of financing the costs of capital ~chool
improvement projects in the County.
There was brief discussion relative ~c various elementary
schools that will benefit from the sale of th~ bond~ by
9re¥iding them with renovations and gymnaslum/cafeter~a
additions.
D~. Nicholas ~hated the new Chester area high school land
purchase/~esign project is located in the ~a~oaca Dis~riot.
Hr. Louis Lo,Could stated hs supports this bond issue ~nd
inquired as whether there is a referendum requirement regarding
~he i~uancs of such bonds.
There being no one else to address this ~ssue, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. Barber made a motion, secoH~ed by ~r. Warren, for the Board
to authorize County officials to execute the necessary bond
issuance and sale of $26.175 million General Obligation School
Bonds, Series 1995C and appropriation of $2~.175 million in
bond proceeds and $84S,237 in interest earnings and
authorization of County officials to exs~ut~ %he necessary bond
sale agreements.
Mr. Stegmaier stated under ~he State Code the County can i~sue
general obligation deb~ by approval of the voters, however, for
scheol construction specifically# the County can issue general
obligation d~bt to the V~SA without voter reXeren~um. When
asked, he stated the sale of ti%ese bonds will not have a
negative affect on the county's propoee~ ~ond re£er~ndum
scheduled fo~ next year and stated this bond issue is
consis=en: with the county's Sinanoial polioies, %he long-term
plan for the issuance of debt which h~s been approved by the
~o=rd e£ Supervisors and ra~ing agencies, mn~ with the County's
projection that shows the County can aff6rd this level of debt
within the existing tax rates.
Mr. Daniel stated when the ChaTter was originally draft, it was
drafted witch the prerogative that the Board could issue debt,
without regard to voter apprsval~ huwever~ the public a~c~nd~d
~pon that thought process and made it cl~ar that any type of
borrowing would have voter approval. He ~fsted he supports
this paper, hut, feels legal scholars, out~ide of the County
need to review the enti~e Charter, specifically, as it relates
to how the County can borrow money in the future.
Dr. ~iQhola~ stated h~ has so objection to bringing in
conflict re~ardin~ this issue; and that he supports this issue.
Nr. Barter stated he was prepare~ to support the paper,
however, he is confu~ed about the question that ia being
addressed.
Mr. Daniel stated he made the state.eAt because he felt it Was
time to clarify the issue because hQ f~el~ the language in
Charter gives the perception that the County cannot borrow
unless it gets voter approval; that he has the full intention
of supporting this issue~ and that he only feels that
clarification is needed to safeguard this issue in the future.
~r. Ramsay ~ta~ed that this debt is legal under the current
County Charter; that the County does have outside
that review the County's bond issues; and County bond attorney=
have ~ndor~ed this debt. Ee further ~tated the CoRnty charter
requires the County ts follow general law in issuing debt and
that there i~ no problem with issuing thi~ debt.
%men asked, Mr- Chernau stated the County Attorney's Office is
not familiar with any conflicts r~garding this issue-
Mr. MoHale stated ne supports this issue based on competent
out~idu councll reviewing this bond issue and the COUnty's own
attorney's endorsing t~is dab~.
Mr. MoHale called for the vote on the motion made by Mr.
~arber, ~eeonded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to authorize
County officials to execute the necessary ~on~ sale agreements
and to ~dopt ~he following re~olution:
RESOLUTION AUTHOR!ZINC T~ ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED
$~6,175,DS0 GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS
OF TE~ COUNTY OF CHESTeRFIeLD, VIRCTNIA~ Z~RIES 1995C,
TO BE SOLD TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY
AND PROVIDING FOR THE FORM AND D~TAiL~ THEREOF
~MZR~A~, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the
County of Chesterfield, Virginia (the "County")~ has dotermined
tha~ it i~ nuca~uary and expedient to borrow not to e×ce~d
$26,175,~00 and to issue its general obligation school bonds
~or the purpose of financing certain capital projects for
school purposes; and
WHEREAS, the County held a public hearing, duly noticed,
on October 1~, 1~S5, on t~e issuance of the Bon~$ (~s defined
below) in accordance with the requirements Of Section 15.1-
227.$.A, Code of virginia, 195Q (the "virginia code"); and
WHeReAS, the School Board of the County has, by
resolution, requested the Boar~ to uuthoriue tbs issuanoe of
%he Sonde (as hereinafter defined) and consented to th~
i~uence of the Bonds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF C~STERFI~LD, VIRGINIA:
A. AKthomization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds,
BoArd hereby determinem that it is advisable to coat, act a debt
and issue and sell i~s g~nerai obligation school bonds in an
aggregate principal amount not to exceed $26,~75,000 (the
"~ands") £or the purpose of financing certain capital projects
for school purposes. T~e Board her=by authoris~s the issuance
and sale OZ the ~onds in t~e £orm and upon the terms
established pursuant to this Resolution.
sale Of tBe Bonds. It is determined tn be in
the beat interest of the County to accept the offer of the
Virginia Public School Authority (the "~£A") to purchase from
the County, and to sell to th~ VP~A, the Bonds at par upon the
terms established pursuant to this Resolution. The Chairman of
the Board, th~ County Administrator and such officer ar
officers uf the County as either may designate are hereby
authorized and directed to enter into a Bond Sale Agreement,
dated as of october 17, 1995, wit21 the VPSA providing far the
sale Of the Bunds to the VPSA in substantially the form
submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is hereby
approved (th~ '~ond Sale Agreement"). There is hereby
delegated ts the officer Or officers of the County executing
the Bund Sale Agreement on behalf of the County authority to
specify iN the Bond sale Agreement as exeCUted and delivered to
the VPSAthat the aggregate pr~nnipal amount of the Bonds to be
aeld to VPSA shall be in an amount less then $1~,17~,000, in
which case the Principal Installments sst forth on Schedule I
attached hereto shall be uppropriately reduced.
C. Details of the Ponds. The Bends shall be dated
designated "General Obligation ~choel Bonds, Series 1995C";
S~all ~ear interest ~rom ~he data of delivery thereof payable
semiannually on ~ach January 15 and July 15 beginning July
1996 (each an I'Intarast Payment oatell)~ at thz rates
established in accordance with Section 4 cf this Resolution;
and shall ma%urn on July 15 in t~e yea~s (each a "Principal
Pa~ent Date") and in the amounts set forth on ~ehe~ula
at~ached hereto (the "Principal Installments"), subject to the
provisions mE Section 4 of this Resolution.
D. ~nterest Rates and Principal Installments. The
county Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to
~rovlded that each interest rate shall be ten cns-h~dredths of
one percent (Q.!0%) over the annual rate to be pa~d by the VPSA
for th6 corresponding principal payment date of the bonds to be
issued by the VPSA (the "VPSA Bonds"}, a portion e£ the
proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bonds,
provided further that ~he true interest ~ost of the Bonds does
bet exceed eight percent (8%) p~r annum. The Interest Payment
Dates and the Principal Installments are subpect ~o sha~ge at
the request of the VPSA. Th~ County Administrator i~ hereby
authorized and directed to accept changes in ~he Interest
Pa~ent Dates and the Principal Installments at the reque=t of
the ~]PSA; provided that the aggregate princi~s1 amount of the
Bonds shall not exceed the amount authorized by this
Resolution. The execution and ~llvery of the Bonds a~
described in section $ hereof a~all COnClUsively evidence such
interest rates es~ahlishe~ by the VPSA ~nd Interest Payment
Dates and the P~i~cipal Installments recreated by the VPSA as
havin~ bean so accepted as authorized Dy this Resolution,
E. Form of the Bonds. For a~ long as the VPBA is
the regi~tere~ owner of the Bonds, the Bonds shall bs in the
for~ of a single, temporary typewritten bond substantially in
the form a~taohad hereto as ~¥~ibit k. On t~enty (2o) days
written notice from th~ VPSA, ~he County shall deliver~ at its
expense, the Bonds in marketable form in denominations of
$5,000 and whole multiples =hereof, as requested by the VPSA~
in exchange for the t~mporary typewritten
F, Payment: ~avin~ Aqenr and Bond Registrar. T~e
following provisions shall apply to th~
For as long as the VPSA is the registered owner
of tJue Bonds, all sayment~ of Drlncipal, premium, if any, and
interest on the Bonds ~hall be made in immediately available
funds to the VPSA at, or before ll:O0 A.M. on the applinsble
95-635 10/11/95
Interact Payment Cate, Principal Payment Data or date fixed for
prepayment or redemption, or if such date is not a b~sine~s day
for Virginia banks ar for the Co~onwealth cf virginia, then at
or befora 1i:00 A.M. on th~ business day next preceding such
Tnterest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date er date fixed
prepayment or
(2) All overdue payments of principal and, to the
axtent permitted by law, interest shall bear interest at the
applicable intarest rate or rates on the Bunds.
creater Bank, Richmond, Virginia, is designated
as Bond Re~istra~ and Paying Agant for the Bonds.
~aDsvmant or Redemption, T~e ~rinoipal
Installments of the ~onds hsl~ by the VPSA coming due on or
before ~uly 15, ~00S and the definitive Bonds for which
Bands held by the VPSA may h= exchanged that mature on or
before July 15, 1005 are not ~ubjact to prepa~rment or
redemption prior to ~heir stated maturities. The ~rincipal
Instaltmenta of the Bonds held by the VPSA meming due altar
July 15, 200s and th~ definitive bonds for which the ~eed$ held
by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature afte~ July 15~ 2006
ara subject to prepayment or redemption at the option Of the
County prior to their stated maturities in whole oF i~ Dart~
any date on or after July 1~. ~QQ6, upon payment o~ the
prepayment or redemption pric~s (expressed as percentaqes of
Principal Installments to b~ p:epald ar the principal amount of
the B~nds to be redeamed) set f~rth below plus uce~ed interest
to the data eat for prepayment or re, emprise:
Dates ~rices
July 15, 2006 to July 14, ~007, inclusive
~uly 15, ~007 to July 14, 2008, inclusive 102
July 15, 2008 to July 14, 2009~ inclusive 101
July 15, 2009 and ther~a£ter ....... ~00
Provided~ however, that the Den~s shall not be subject to
prepayment or redemption prior to thair stated maturigics as
de~crlb~d above without firgt obtaining the~ritten con,eat of
the registered ewner of the Bonds. Notice of any such
prepayment er redemption shall b~ give~ by th~ Bond Registrar
to the registered owner by regietered mail not mare than ninety
(PO) and not less t~an sixty (aU) days before the date fixed
for prepayment or redemption.
~. ~xecution of the Bonds. The Chair~a~ Or Vio~
chairman an~ the Clerk or any Deputy Clerk of ~he Board ara
authorized and directed to execute and dalive~ the Bond~ and to
I. Pledge c~ Full Faith and C~edit. Per ~he prompt
payment of ~he principal ef and premium, if ~ny, and the
interest on ~he Bunds a~ thu same mhall become due, the full
faith and credit of the County ar~ hereby irre¥ocably pledqed,
and in each year while any of the ~onds shall he outstanding
there shall be levied a~d Collected in accordance with law an
annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County
subject to local taxation sufficient in amount to provide for
thc paymunt cf the principal e~ an~ premium, if any, and the
inter,st on the Bonds a~ such principal, premium~ if an~, and
interest shall become due, which tax shall he wi~hou~
limitation as to rate or amount and shall be in addition ta
other taxes autharized ta be levied in the County to the extent
other funds of the County are not la~fully available and
approprla~ed £ur such purpose.
95-636
Arbi~re~e. The Chairman of the Board~ the County
designate are hereby authorized and directed to ~xecute
each setting forth the expected use and investment of the
necessary in order to show complianae with th~ provisions of
the Internal Revenue Code of ]98S (the "Code"), and applicable
regulations relating %0 the exclusion from gross income of
intmrest on the Bonds end on the VPSA Bonds. Th~ Boa~d
covenants on behalf of the County that (i) the proceeds from
the issuance and sale of the Bonds will be invested and
expended as sst forth in such Certificate as to Arbitrage and
such Us% of Proceeds Csrtificat~ and that t~e County shall
comply with the other cevsnant~ and representations contained
t~e~einf and (ii) th= County shall comply with the provisions
of the Cede so that interest on %he ~ond~ an~ on the VPSA Bonds
will remain excludable from gross income for federal income tax
purposes.
Board hereby determines that it is in the best interests of the
County to authorize and direst the County Treasurer to
participate in the State Non-Arbitrage ~rogram in
~ith the Bond~- The Chairman of the Board, t~e county
Administrator and such officer or officers of the county as
either m~y designate are hereby authorized and directed to
ex-cuts amd duliver a Proceeds Agreement with respect to the
deposit and investment of proceeds of the Bonds by and among
the County, the other participants in the sale of the
Bonds~ the VPSA~ the investment manager and the depository,
~ubstantial!y in the form submitted to the Board at
~eeti~q, which fo~ im hereby approved.
Board, the County Administrator and such officer or officers ef
directed to execute a continuing Disclosure Agreement, as
forth in Appendix F to the Bond Sale Agreement, setting forth
the reports and no~iss~ ts be ~iled by ~he County and
containing such covenants u~ may be necessary in order to show
compliance wi~h the provisions of ~e securities and
Commission Rule 1502=12.
M. Filin~ Resolution. Th~ appropriat~ officers or
agents of the County are hereby authorized an~ directed
cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the
Circuit Court Of the County.
officers, employees and agents cf the County are bermby
aughorized to take such action as they or any one of ~hem may
con~id~r n~cmmsary or desirablm in connection w~th the
and sale of the Bonds and ~ny such action previously token is
hereby ratified and confirmed.
O. Effective Date. This R~sclution shall take effect
immediately.
The ~ndersi~ned clerk of the Board of supervisors of the
County of Chesterfield, Virginia~ hereby certifies that the
foregoing constitutes a true and correct extract from the
minutes of a meeting of the Board of Supurvisors held on
0etcher 11, 199S, and of the whole thereof so far as applicable
certify that such meeting was a regularly scheduled mest~n~
that, during the consideration of the foregoing resolution, a
95-637 10/11/95
WITNESS MY HANQ and the seal of ~he Board
Supervisor~ ef the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, thiS__
day of , 1995.
Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors
County of Chesterfield, virginia
Rate
Prinoipal
Payment Principal
~Julv 155 Due
1996 $1,318,000
1997 1,510,000
1998 1,318~000
1999 1,310,000
2000
2001
2002 1,310,900
2004
2006 1,Z10,000
2009
2010 1,3t0r000
2011 1,3G5,000
2013 1,305,000
2~15 1.305.000
EXHIBIT A
(FOP/{ OF TEEPOP~%RY BOND]
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOHOOL BOND
Th~ COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA (the "Co~ty"), for
value receive~, hereby acknowledges i~self indebted and
pro~i~ t~ pay to th~ VIRGINIA P~rBLIC B~HOOL AUThOrITY the
9rinclpal amoun~ of TWENTY-SIX MILLIO~ ONE ~NDRED SEVENTY-FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($26,175,080}, in annum] inmtall~entm in the
amounts set forth on schedule I attached hereto payable on July
15, 1995 and annually on each July I5 t~ereafter to and
including July 15, 2015 (each a "Principal Pa]ghent Date"),
together with i~te~eSt from the date of thi~ Bond on the unpaid
installments, payable semiannually en January 15 and July l~ of
each yeur, commencing on July 15, 1996 (each mn
Payment Date"; to~ethe~ with any Principal Payment Da~e~ a
"Fuym®nt Date"), at the rates per annum set forth on Schedule
I attaohe~ hereto, ~u~jec~ to p~eDayment or redemption as
herelnaft~r provide~. Both principal of and interest on
Bond are payable in lawful money of the united State~ cf
For as long aa the Virqinia Public School Authority is
re~iatered owner of thi~ Bond, crsstar Bank, Riohmomd,
Virgln~a, as bond registrar (the "Bond RegistrarlI), shall make
ail payments of Drlncipal, premium, if any, and interest on
this Bond, without the presentation or surrender hereof, to the
¥1rg~nia Public School Authority, in immediately available
funds at or before I1:00 A.M. on the applicable Payment Date or
dado fixnd for prepayment or redemption. If a Payment Date or
date fixed for prepayment or redemption is not a business
for bar,ks in the commonwealth of Virginia or for the
Commonwealth of Virginia, then the payment of principal,
premium, if any, or interest on thi~ Bond shall be made in
inmediately available fondu a= or before ll:O0 A.M. on the
business day na~t pre~ding the scheduled Payment Date or date
fixed for prepayment or redemption. Upon receipt by the
reqint~r~d owner of this Bond of such payments of principal,
prem~un, if any, and in,ernst, written aoknowled~ment of the
receipt thereof =hall b~ given promptly te the Bond Regintrar,
and the County ~hall bo fully discharged of i~ obligation on
t~is Bo~d to th~ ext~nt of th~ payment so node. Upon final
~ayment, thin Bond shall be surrendered to the Bend Registrar
for cancellation.
The full faith and credit of the County ar~ irrevocably
p~edged for ~he ~aymsnt of the prinsipal of and th~ premium, if
any, and interest on this Bond. The resolution adopted by the
Board of Supervisors authorizing the issuance of the Bonds
provides, and section 15.1-227.2S of tho Code of virginia 1950,
requires, that there shall bu levied end collected an annual ad
local taxati0~ sufficient to provide for the payment of the
principal, premium, if any, and lo%crest on thin Bond as the
same shall become due, which tax shall be without limitation as
to rate or amount and shall be in addition ~ all other ta~ss
authorized to be levied in th~ County to tho ~xtent other funds
of the County ar~ net lawfully available =nd appropriated for
~uch purpose.
Thin Bo~d in duly authorized and i~sued ~n compliance with
and pursuant to th~ Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, including the Public Fin~nae A~t of 1991, Chapter
5.1, Ti%l~ 15.1, code of Virginia 1950~ and resolutions duly
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County amd the
School ~oard of the County to provid~ funds for capital
projects for school purposes.
This Bond may be exchanged without co~t at th~ office of
tho Bond Registrar for an equal aggregate principal amount of
bonds in definitive form having naturitien and bearing
at rato~ oorrnzpond~ng to the maturities of and the interest
rates on the installments of principal o~ this ~ond
unpaid, issuable in fully registered form in deneminati0ns Of
$§,000 and whole multiples thereof. On twenty (20) days
written not±~e from t~e Virgihia Public School Authority, the
County shall deliver, at its expense, this ~ond in marketable
form, in exchange for the temporary typewritten Bond.
Thin Bond in r~gist~ed in the name of Virginia Public
school Authority on ~ooks of the County kept by the Bond
Registrar, and the transfer of this Bond may be effected by th~
registered owner of this Bond only upon due execution of an
assignment by s~eh registered owner. Upon receipt of such
assignment and the surrender of this Bond, %he ~cnd ~egistrar
shell exchange this Bond for d~finitiva Bonds as hereinabove
provided, euo~ definitive ~unds to ~e reglsterad on such
regintration books in the name of the assignee or assignees
named in such assignment.
The principal installnents of this Bond coning due on or
before ~uly I~, 2006 and the definitive Sends for which this
Bond may be exchanged that ma~ure on or before July 15, 2006
axe not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their
stated ~aturities. The principal installments of this Bond
95-639 10/11/95
coming due after July 15, 2006 and ~he deiinitive Bonds for
which this Bond may be exchanged that mature after July 15,
2006 are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of
the county prior to their stated maturities in whole or in
part, on any date on or after July 15, 2006, u~n~ payment of
the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages
of principal installments to be prepaid or the principal amount
of the Bonds to be redeemed) se% forth below plus accrued
interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption:
Dates Prices
Uuly 1~, 10O~ to ~uly 14, 2007, inclusive 103%
July 15~ ~0Q7 to July 14~ 2008~ inclusive 102
July 15. 200~ to July 14, 2009, inclusive
July 15, 2009 and thereafter ........ 100;
Provided, however, that the Bo~ds $~all ~nt be sub,eot to
prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities ss
described above without the prior written consent of
registered owner of the Bonds. Notice of any such prepayment
or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the
registered ewu~r by registere~ mail not more than nln~ty (90)
and net les~ than ~i~ty (&0) days before the date fi~ed for
prepayment or redemption.
Ail sots, conditions and thinqs requ~ed by
Constitution and law~ of the Contmonwealth of Virginia to
of this Bond have happened~ exist and hmve been performed in
du~ ~im~, form and manner as so require~, and thi~
together with all other indebtedness of the County, i~ wit~hin
every debt and other limit prescribed ~y the Constitution and
law~ of the COmmOnwealth of Virginia.
IN NITEESS~EREOF, the Board of Supervisors of the County
of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, to be signed by its
chairman or vice-chairman, its seal to be affixed hereto and
attested by thm signature of its Clerk or ~ny of its Deputy
Clerks, and =hls Bond to be dated __~ 1~5.
COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD!
VIRGINIA
Chairman of the Board of Supervisorm
COunty o~ Chesterfield, virginia
~SEAL)
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board of Supervieers
County of Chesterfield, Virginia
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned
transfers unto
assigns and
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS~
INCLUDE ZiP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE)
PLEASE INSERT SOCIA3= SECURITY OR OTHER iDENTIFYING NUMBER O~
ASSIGNEE:
=he within
Bond and
attorney to exchange such Bond for definitive bonds in lieu of
which =his Ben~ is issued an~ to register'th~ transfer of such
definitive bond~ on the book~ kept for registraticu thereof,
with fui1 power of substitution in %he premises.
Date=
signature G~arantm=d:
(NOTIC~: $ignature(~) must be
~uaranteed by s ~m~ber firm cf
th~ ~ew York Stock Exchange er
a commercial bank or trust
company.)
Registered Owner
(NOTICE: The ~ignature above
must correspond with the name
of the Regiut=red Owner am it
appears on th~ front of t~is
5end in every par~icular~
without alteration or change.I
Principal
Payment
Dat~ Installment
(July 15) DUe
1996
~997 1,310~000
1999 1,~10,000
~OO~ 1,310,000
~01U 1,310,000
2015 1,305,000
15,O, TO OONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND TEE CODE OF THE
COUNTY O~ CEESTERFIELD~ 1978, ~B A~ENDED, BY~34~q)I~
AND REENaCTInG $~TION 15.1-25 AND 15.1--~ RELATING TO
U/~EASONABLE LOUD NOTSE
Nr. Chernau stated this date and time has been advertised for
a public hearing to consider an ordinance ~elating to
unreasonable loud noise, ~e further e=ated that the ordinance
will address certain issues with regard to loud music and
morning truck nois~ ~nd briefly reviewed the proposed e~anges
to t~e
95-641 10/11/95
Mr- Louis Lombard expresmed concerns relative to the difficulty
in defining nuisance, az %he eurr~nt or~iDanc~ language reads,
in regards to loud noise. He stated he supports the p~oposed
ordinance, however, feels decibel readings should be addressed
in the future to ag~i~t in enforcing loud noise.
~. Mari~ Trainham, owner Trainham Disposal, Incorporated,
~tated he supports the ordinance es it relmtes to ca~ stereos
and expressed eonc~n~ r~lative to hours b~ing proposed for
waste 0ellecti0n vehiol~s to begin their route. She stated
trash haulers schedules are determined with regards to weather,
traffic, and getting to the landfill on ti~e. She a~prassed
concerns relative to trash haulers picking up trash during
heavy traffic and stated trash haulers start early to avoid the
hea~ ~uring the summer an~ ba~ weather durin~ ~he winter, ghm
stated Mr. Hammer has suggested that the haul,rs meet with
County sta~ to try to work oak a feasible time.
When asked, Ms. Trainham stated her haulers do no% normally
begin at 3:00 or 4:00 a.m., however, during the su~er drivers
ds begin their route earlisr due to the heat. She s~ated her
drivers feel that beginning their routes no e~rlier tha~ $~90
a.m. would ~s reasonable, however, during extreme heat
conditions, this time would still be difficult on the drivers.
Mr. Barber encouraged Ms. Trainham to work with County staff to
receipts tax for the license to operate in the County. He
approach to thi~ issue and that trash pick-up is a service tha~
consideration.
Mr. Dick Arthur~ representing the Virginia Waste Industry
the time their haulers arrive and if they dc not arrive during
the importance of th~ m~rvice provided by trash haulers to
when performed during early morning hours.
understands the concerns of tras~ haulers, but woul~ li~e the
route; that he supports an ordinance that would limit the times
that a~ash collection is available~ and that ~eals S:~0 or 6:00
a.m. would be a responsible time for haulers to begin their
rents.
trash hauler in his neighborhood arrives between 4:30 and 5:00
a.m. in the morning, which he feels disrupts ~he entire
tranquility in the neLghborhood and that he would net b~
opposed to o~anging the time to 6:00 a.m.
understands the concerns exprasmcd by citizens and that his
children ba~in arriving. He stated trash haulers operate la,ge
Du~tic. ~e expressed oencerns relative to beginning his runts
no earlier than ?:00 a.m-, specifically, as it relates to
traffic and sanitation asDect~ and ~tated that 7:00 a.m. will
cause problems for drivers and the businesses who receive the
service. Ee further ~=sted hi~ hu~ines~ ~oas begin at 3:00
during early ~orni~g hours. He stated he feels there is much
mo~e to be lest than gained by amending the ordinance relating
to ~efuse or waste collection vehicles.
~en asked, Nr. Vouch stated his business feels it would more
noise in residential areas prior to
and residential customers when addressing the time-frame of
loading or unloading by refu~ or wants oolleotion vehicles.
Mn. Terry Chandler ~tat~d she supports the ordinance as she is
of trash haulers arriving in her neighborhood around 3:30 a.m.
in the morning and stated she feelz 6:0Q-6:~0 a.m. would be
reasonable time for haulers to begin their routes.
There being no one else to address this ordinanoe~ the ~ublic
hearing was ~losed.
F~r. Warren stated he requested this public hearing and, that in
many instances, t~a quality cf life of citizens is affected by
loud noises, however, h~ did nut personally pursue thm ar~a of
There was brief discussion relative to the procedurus used by
%he Police Department in dealing with oo~plaints regarding loud
noise and the number of complaints received by the County
regarding loud noise.
~Fnen asked~ ~ajor Dennis McDonald stated if the County's
current ordinances relating to loud noise were more specific
There was brief discussion relative to Henries County's
position relating ~o a noise ordinance.
Mr. Barber stated after listening to the public input, he
supports amendin~ lamp, age to reflect "the creation of loud and
excessive noise in residential areas before ~he hour of 5:30
waste collection vohiolss, ae requested =he private seotor and
in relations to the 9:~0 a.m. time-frame.
There was brief discussion relative
loud muffler noise from vehicles in garages and penalties
enforced upon citizens who do not comply with the ordinance.
Mr. Daniel emphasized the psnalties that would be enforced upon
tho~e citizens who do not comply with the ordinance and stated
he supports adoption of a noise ordinance,
There was brief discussion relative to the procedure used when
ciDizens violate the proposed ordinance,
Dr. Nicholas stmted since he h~s served on the Board, he has
raoeived only one phone call relating to this issue.
permits the Police ~epar=ment ~o have additional mechanisms a=
their diucreti~n that they can u~e if necessary. He further
stated t~e court system is also a mechanism fe~ adjusting the
needs of purticular situations. He stated he feels comfortable
wit~ t~e ordinance, but feels t~et the revision relatin~ to oar
~tereos ~hould read "The playing, use or operation, or
~armi~ing the playing, use or operation cf any radio, stereo~
tape player~ oompact disc player, loud speaker or other
ol~ctrnnfc device or mechanical e~ui~ment use~ for the
10/11~95
amplification of sound, which is loc=ted Within a motor vehicle
and whleh i~ audlbl~ from outside the motor v~hic]~ at u
di~tans~ of fifty (50) feet or more" to address unusual
circums=anees such as engine noise from oars in garages.
Mr. McHale stated he supports the current ordinance; thRt he
do~ not fe~l that increasing the stringency of the law will
change the behavior of people; that he does not intend to
support th~ propo~d ordinance; and requested the Board to
carefully consider the inpos~tlons that would be placed en
trash haulers if the ordinance is adopted.
Mr. Daniel requested the Board to consider the proposed
ordinance a~d the i~ue relating to trash haulers as two
moderate motionm. ~e further stated he supports the ordinance
as it relates to the loud noise from stereos.
Mr. Warren briefly reviewed the amended language to the noise
ordinance including adding (fl to Section 19.~-25 which would
read "The playing, uss or operation, or permitting the playing,
use or operation ~f any radio, s~ereo, tape ~iayer, compact
di~o player, loud ~p~akor or other electronic device or
mechanical equipment used for the amplification o~ sound, which
is located within a motor vehicle and which im a~dible from
out~ide the motor vehicle a~ a distance of fifty (50) feet or
m~re"/ deleting the language "particularly during the ho~r~
between 12:00 midnight and 7:QQ a.m. in paragraph (a) un,er
Section 15.1-~5; and deleting the language "however, ~his
section shall not be construed to affect the operation of any
automobile radio when ~uch radio i~ installed in an automobile
and operated therefrom under Section 15.1-26,
Mr. ~cHale clarified that MT. W~rren's notion does not include
th~ language in paragraph (g) under S~ction 1~.1-~ which roads
"The creation of loud and excessive noise before the hour of
7:00 a.m. in eonneetion with tho loading or unloading of refu~o
or waste collection vehicles~.
Mr. Warren then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Daniel, for.the
Doard to adopt the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMiD TEE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF CHESTERFIELDI 1978, AS A/~ENDED, BY ~ENDING
AN0 R~F~ACTING SECTIO~ 15.1-]Q and 19.1-~ KE~TING TO
NOISE - UNR~SONABLY LOUD, ETC. - PROHIBITED
BE IT O~AINED by the Board of Supervisors of ~esterfield
County:
(1) That Section 15.1-25. of ~ Code of t~e Coun=y of
Chesterfield. 1978, us amended, is amxnded and reenacted
read as follows:
Sec. 15.1-25. ~oise - Un~easonably Lou~, eto, -
Prchib~ted--~num~ration.
(a) T~e playing of any radio, phonograph or any
instrument in such a manner or with such volume, as %o annoy or
disturb the quiet, Comfort or r~poue of p~ruo~s i~ any
dwelling, hotel or other type of residenoe.
(bl The Reeping of any animal er bird WhiCh, by
frequent or long-continued noise, shall disturb the eomiort and
repose of any person in the vicinity to such an extent as shall
constitute a nuisance.
(c} The crsatlon of any excessive no~e on any street
adjacent to any school, institution of learninq, or court while
~5-~
the ease is in ~sosinn, or adjacent to any hospital, which
unrmasonably interfmres with th~ workings of s~ch institution,
or Which disturbs or unduly annoy~ patient~ in the hospital,
provided conspicuous signs are displayed in such streets
indicating that the same is a school, hospital or
(d) The shouting and crying ~f peddlers, hawkers and vendors
or the rlng~n~ of bells, which disturbs the peace and quiet of
the neighborhood.
(~) T~e us~ of any drum, lou~peak~r~ or uther instrument or
device for the purpose of attracting attention by creation of
noise to any performance, show~ sal~ or display of merchandise.
(f) The playing, use ur operation or permitting the playing,
use or operation of any radio, stereo, tape player, compact
disc player, loud speaker o~ uther electronic device or
mechanical ~quipment used fo~ the amplification of sound, which
is located within a ~cter vehicl6 and which is audible from
outside the motor v~hicle at a distance of fifty (50) feet or
SaC. 1~.1-26. Oame--oeeretion of muoioal devices .in certain
locations and tim~_
It shall be unlawful for any per,on between the hours of 9:00
p.m. e£ any day an~ 7:00 s.m. of =he day following to operate
deMice or other musical device within two hundred (200} yards
of any building of another occupied as living quarters, while
any such musical device is outside of a building,
or while inside a building and having the aperture of its sound
box directed at ~nd within ten (lo) fact ~f an ~utside opening
to the building in which any such musical device is, er while
a loudspeaker ettachment is used in connection with amy such
musical devise and is on the outside of any building~ er while
any such loudspeaker attachment, if inside any building and the
aperture thereof is directed at and within ten (10) ~ee= of any
eutmide opening of the building in whie~ the loudspeaker is
located.
(2) ~hat this ordinance shall become effective immediately
upon adoption.
Ayes: Mr. War~en, M~. Barber, Mr. Daniel, and Dr. Nicholas.
Mr. Barber stated he feels since li~enlng bo the input that
has been expressed by private haulers and citizens, he feels
elimina~in~ service= in residential areas prior to
a responsible time, with staff addressing the exceptions o£
ex,rede weather conditions and the different issues presented
relating to servicing commercial or business entorprises.
Mr. Barber then ~ade a motion~ seconded by Mr. Warren, for the
Board to amend th~ County's noise ordinance to include the
language "The creation of loud and e×Gessiv~ ~eioe before the
hour of 5:30 a.m. in connection with the loading or unlsnding
of refus~ or waste ~ollectien vehisles" and for the private
sector amd County staff ts address the issue of extreme weather
ocndi~iens in relations to the 5:30 a.m. time-frame.
efficiency of trash haulers and stated he feel~ t~e time
limitation, specifically, in bad weather and ex~reme hot
weather, places a burden on t~s haulers. He further stated
th=t only a small number of complaints have been received and
the haularo hay= a tremendous volume of work to ~ccomplish. Ha
stated he will not support the ~est~ietion on ~he ~ime
trash haulers.
Mr. Barber clarified that he directed staff to meet with the
95-645 10/11/9~
of th~ summer and icm in the winter and for staff to report
back to the Boar~,
Mr. Barber withdrew his original motion.
Mr. Barber then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the
ordinance relating to trash hauling activities until November
8, i~ to allow staff %o meet with the privat~ ~ector to
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Barber and Mr. Daniel excused themselves from the meeting.
15.D. TO CONSIDER AN AMENDNENT TO THE FY95~96 DU~BT TO
DEVELOPER COnTrIBUTIONS FOR A TOTA~ OF $525,000
Mr. ~cCracken stated this date and time has been a~vertieed for
a public hearing to consider appropriations to fund industrial
access improvements for the Rivers Bend ~usine~e Cent~r.
No one came forward to speak in favor of or against this
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Dr. Nicholas, the Board
appropriated $450,000 in anticipated Virginia Department cf
Transportation reimbursements and $75,000 in anticipated
developer contributien~ for the cenmtruction of the River's
Ayes : Mr. McHate, Mr. Warren, and Dr. Nicholas.
Mr. ~arber returne~ to the meeting.
¢OUNTY OF 0HESTER~IELD, 1978. ~S /tHEl~b. BY ~HEND!NG
~ECTIONS 2f.1-229,6. 2f.229,8. AND ~i.1-229.9 AND
s~.~-281 RELATING TO ~SRFORF~UWCE, SAFETY, ~ND
~RIT~RI~ ~ DIMENSIONS FOR R~TENTION~J~5 DETE~TION
Ns. Salvati stated t~i5 da~e an~ time ~as been advertised for
a public huarin~ %o conuider an ordinanc= relating to
performance, safe=y, eno Oesign criteria and dimen~ion~ ~or
zatention and detention basins. She further stated this
ordinance was developed by the County's Watershed Hanagement
Committee which is made up of citizens, developers, and
environmental ~roup=. she stated tho Commit~=u met
Commission con~uc%a~ ~our work ~ssions and two public h~aringu
on th~ matter. Sh~ further mtated input was r~c~ived and the
measures were amended to respond to this input and that the
proposal has been adequately researched and was the subject of
much deliberation.
Mr. Louis Lombard stated he does not feel this is a good
ordinance au it r~latem to children and ~at he feels
o~inance doe~ no~ ~ns~e the safety uS small children and
submitted a copy of several chunge~ he im propoming to the
o~dinance C~at would assist i~ e~mu~i~g ~he safety o~ s~all
children.
Mr. Daniel returned to the
Mary
Krsmer, a member of the Watershed Management
stated the Committee has put a lot of work into
95-646 10/11/95
devetop£ng tkis ordinance and that tko criteria in the
ordinance relating tm retention and detention basins ara the
absolute minimum to have reasonable quality and safety ~nr the
ponds.
Dr. Nicholas exc~oed himself from the meeting.
MS. Betty Clap stated a lot of time was spent on the safety
issue when devnloplng the ordinance; that she feel~ the ~afety
issoe has been well addressed; that she feels the ordinance
the Board to ~upport the ordinance.
Dr. Nicholas returned to th~ meeting.
~r- Michael Mollander, a member of the Water~hed
~tated the Committee was very careful in addressing ~he safety
issue and requested the Board to support the
ordinance.
Mr, Thomas Paknrar, a member of the Waternhed Committee, stated
the Committee developed a consensus on the proposed ordinance
and re~uested the Boa~d to sOppo~t the ordinance.
~ners hsinq no one el~e to addres~ thi~ issue, the public
expressed appreciation to the citizens for their input, and
stated this ordinance is a s%ap forward in proteotin~ the
County'm water resource.
Mr. Warren, then made a motion for the Board to adopt
ordinance to amen~ ~hs Co~s of ~ha County of Chesterfield,
1978, as amended, by amending Sections ~1.1-~l~.6~
21.1-229.9 and 21.1-281 relating to retention end detection
Mr. Barber seconded the motion.
Nr. Barber recognized ~s. ~ary Krammr for her efforts and
stated m=ny ~eople have acknowledged the work she has done and
no,ed a citizen studying at Virginia Teoh is using Me.
Mr. Warren stated Ms. Kramer will continue her efforts in this
~nvironm~ntal chang~ and stated VirgiDia Tecb h~s recognized
her work.
Mr. McHale called for the Vote on the motion ~ade by Mr.
Warren, seconded by ~r. ~arber, for the sosrd to a~opt
foltowi~g o~di~ancem
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
SECTIONS ~1.1-229.6, 21.1-~9.8, 21.1-~29.9 AND 21.1-281
RELATING TO RETENTION AND DETENTION BASINS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield
County:
(1) That Section ~1-1-ZZ9,6 of the Co~e of the County of
chestorfisld~ 1978, as amended, is amended and reenacted
re~d a~ follows:
~ec. ~1.1-~9.6. R~seurce manaq~ment area re~utation~.
Any ~, ~gvelop~e~t or redevelopment of land shall meet
the following performance criteria:
(a} No no~e land shall De disturbed than is neossoary to
provide for the desired use or development.
95-647 10/11/95
(bi Indigsnons vsqetatian shall Be preserved te the
~a×i~um ~×tent possible consistent with the rise and d~velopment
allowed.
(c) Land development shall minimize imper!ious cover
consistent with the use or development allowed.
(d] (1) For any use, development er redevelopment,
achieve the follow~ng:
For any new u~e or develcpment~ the
post-development non-point-source
pollution runoff load shall not
exceed the pta-development load.
based o~ the calculated average land
cover condition of the county.
b. Per redevelopment sites not currently
served by water quality best
management practices, ~he existing
non-puint-~ource pollution load ~h~ll
'be reduced by at least ten
p~rcent after redevelopment.
c. For redevelopment sites currently
served by Water quality
management practices, the
pest-development non-pelnt-aouree
pollution runoff load shall not
excee~ the existing lea4.
(2) The following stormwater management options
shall b~ considered to co~ply with the
requirements of subsection
a. Incorporation on the site of best
management practices that achieve the
requi~ed control.
b. Compliance wi~h a locally adopted
regional stormwater management
program incorporating prorate share
pa~rm~ntn pursuant to the authority
provided in Code cf Virqinia~ ~eotfon
19.1-4~5, that result~ in achievement
of equivalent water quality
protection.
Compliance wit~ a state or legally
implemented program of stormwater
discharge permits pursuant to section
402(p} of the federal Clean Water
Act, as set forth in 40 CFR parts
122, 123, 124, and 504, dated
December 7, 19~ and as amended.
d. For a redevelopment site that is
completely impervious a~ currently
developed, restoring a minimum of
twenty (20) percen~ of the site to
vegetatsd open space.
Any maintenance, alteration, u~e or
improvement to an existing struCtUre Which
does not degrade the quality of surface
wate~ discharge, as determined by the
director of environmental engineering, may
be exempted from the requirements of this
decision of the director of environmental
sngineerinq under hhis snbseetis~ may
appeal such decision in accordance with
~0/1~95
the procedures provided in sec%ion
2t.1-275.
Compliance ~ith the r~quircments of
subsection (d) (1) (a) shall be determined
by reference to total phosphorus loads in
stermwater runoff. The post-development
total phosphorus loads in stcrmwater
runoff shall not exceed the following:
a. ~or nonresidential uses and
residential uses at a density greater
khan fsur (4) units per acre located
in areas identified for such uses in
The Plan for Chesterfield, the
post-development total phosphorus
load shall not exceed one-half (0.50)
pounds per acre Der year.
b. For all other uses, the
post-development total phosphorus
10ad shall nat ~xcead forty-four
one-hundredth~ (0-44) p~und per acre
p~r y~ar_
(e) Wh~re the best management practices utilized require
regular er p~riedic maintenanee in order to continue their
functions, such malntenance shall be ensured by ~ maintenance
agreement, bo~d e~ Other assurance satisfactory to the director
of environmental engineering.
(£) Land upas which agricultural activities ere being
conducted shall have a soil and water quality oonservatie~
plan. such plan shall be based upsn the Field Office Technical
Guide cf the U.S. Department of Agricultur~ Soil Conservation
Service an~ accomplish water quality protection consistent with
thi~ section. Such a plan ~hall be approved by the J~m~ River
soil and wa%er conservation District by January 1, 1995.
(g) Th~ Director of Environmental Engineering may
authorize the developer to utili=e a re~en~ion or detention
basin or alternative best management practice facility to
achieve the performance criteria set forth in subsection (d)
above. In the event that a retention or detention basin is
utilized by the d~veloper, the following criteria shall apply:
(1) outflo~ d~vics sa£e~y m~a~ur~s
a. If a vertical sided weir box is located
within the basin's embankment, a six (6)
fco~ fence or dense vegetative barrier, or
~ combination th=rxof~ shall be installed
as preso~ibed by the Department of
Environmental ~ngineering. If a dense
vegetative be:tier ia utitizs~, it shall
he designed and installed in accordance
with professionally accepted landscaping
practices and procedures. Plans for the
vegetative barrier~ including the size and
description of proposed p%~ut m~terial$,
shall be approved by the Directcr cf
Environmental Engineering, or his
designee. T~e dense vegetative barrier
shall b~ a minimum of six (6) feet in
width. If a fence or vsgetativ~ barrier
is to be established around the entir~
basin facility in accordance with 21.1-
required around the weir box. If a
the principal or emergency spillway and
the concrete weir is greater than ~hree
(3) feet in depth, a pedestrian crossing
10/11/95
or access structure shall be
acromm the weir. A fence Qr Vegetative
barrier, or combination thereof, may bo
mubstituted if the pedestrian crossing is
no~ practicable.
Re:en~ion and detention basin aafe~y
and dimensions
a. The following safety mea~re~ shall be
required for that portion cf each
retention basin which has a mide
above the normal water surface which is
steeper than six to on~ (~:1} over
hoPizontal di~ance o~ ~wen~y (~0) fe~t o~
If th~ retention basin averages four
(4} feet Or less in depth and one
one of the following safety measures
A. a s~fety bench, or
B. a fence which surrounds the
bauin.
(ii.) If %ho retention basin averages
mor~ than four (~) feet in depth
or ~ore than one (1) acre in
fol]swin~ safety ~oasures shall
A. both a oafaty bench an~ an
aquatic bench, er
B. a fence which mu~ounds the
~asin.
b. If a safety bench is used, it shall be
provided at the too of the slope of the
ten (1~) feet wide. The slope acros~ the
bench shall be no greater than ten to one
=. If an aquatic bench i~ used, it ~hall be
placed around ~he perimeter c~ the
permanent pool at the normal water surface
elevation an~ shall ~e no greater ~han
twelve (12) inches in depth and at least
six (S) ~ee~ in width.
If a fence is ume~, the minimum height of
~he fence shall %be six (6) fee~. Tko
barrier. If the f~nce is made of a
vegetative Darrie~, it shall Da
and installed in accordance witk
professionally accepted landsoapin~
practices and procedures. ~lanm for the
vegetative barrier, including the siz~ and
description of proposed plant meterialm,
shall be approved by the Director
Environmental Engineering, or his
designee. If a vegetntive harrier is
used, the property owner or developer
shall previd~ to ~he county a form of
surety for the costs of %he proposed plant
materials, related ~aterial~ and
installation. Provisions for maintenance
~5-650 ~0/ZZ/95
(3)
of and access to the fe~ee or vegetative
barrier shall be included in the ~est
Management Practice easement dedication.
Whenever a retention or detention basin is
located within une hundred (t00) feet of
any dwelling unit, ~chool, child care
library, hospital, public institution,
pede~trian ao~ecs way (i.e.~ sidewalk,
bicycle path, walkway} or similar
facility, the Direote~ of Environmental
Engineering may, at his discretion,
require fencing designed to protect the
public safety.
Xinimum retention and detention basin criteria
The side slopes above the normal water
detention basins shall be no $%ee~er than
three to one (Bt1) (horizontal to
vertical]. Qn a given sits, if the
(3:1) will result in the removal of dense
stabilize the elope, the developer may
Environmental Engineering pursuant to the
provisions of § 11.1-~29.9 to leave the
~lepe in its existing condition.
depth of 3 (three} to 8 Ieiqht) feet to
which have been designed with sections
which exceed eight (~) feet in depth, only
those portions whio~ ara less than 8
(eight) fe~t iU depth shall be included as
Length tu Width Ratio
outflow points in retention and detention
basins s~all be a minimum of three to She
(3:1), length to ~idth ratio. If the
Director of Environmental Engineerinq
determine~ ~hat the site conditions do not
allow for t~is ratio~ a two to one (2:1}
length to width ratio ~hsll be provided.
The length i~ defined as ~he fl0w path
from inflow polnt to outflow point, and is
to be calculated as prescribed by the most
sediment control Handbook. In the event
that the Director of ~nvironment~l
Engineering determine~ that site
conditions preclude achieving a two to one
(2:1) r~tio~ the use of baffles or another
means of lengthening the ~low path shall
95-~51 10/11/95
Retention and detention basinm located
within one hundred [100) feet of or
adjacent to residentially zoned property
or any property used for resides=iai
purpo~, ~chool~, child care centers,
playgrounds, shopping centers, pedestrian
a~a~s~ way~ (i.e., ~idewalk~, bicycle
paths, walkways) or within residential
subdlvisions shall incorporate a minimum
of a fifty (50) foot vegetative perimeter
yard around the basin, measured from the
one hundred (100) year water o~rface
~levation or the downstream toe of the
dam, whichever applies. Under no
circumstances shall a retention or
detention basin be located within a buffe~
required by the zoning ordinance or zoning
conditions.' The perimeter yard shall be
above listed uses.
s. Placement of the Pond Inlet
shall be a minimum of three (3) feet from
the invert-out of the pipe to the bottom
of the pond. If this distance cannot be
achieved due to the depth of the pel'manemt
pool, then a ~ediment forebay shall be
excavated to obtain a depth of three (3)
feet.
~oth~n~ ~untained in ~ubse~tion (g) shall be
construed to authorize the impairment of any vested
rights which exist on (date of adoption).
(2) That Section 21.1-229.S of the Cede of the County of
Chesterfield, 197S, as amended, is amended and reenacted to
read as follows:
Sac. 21.1-229.8. E×emptione.
(el Nen~esid=ntial usaa, which ute not located within
one hundred (100) feet of or adjaeen~ to r~siden=ially
property or any property used for residential purposes,
schools, child =are centers, p!aygreun~s shopping centers,
libraries, hospitals, public institutions or sit, ilar facilities
shall be exempt ~rom the ~rovimiens of sectiens 21.1-
229.6(g] I2)a-e and (3) d.
(3) That Section ~.~-2~9.~ of the Code ~f the County of
Chesterfield, l~TS, as amended, is a~anded and reenacted
read as follows:
Sec. ~1,1-229.9. Exoeutions.
(a) A request fo~ an exception to the r=quirements of
this divisien shall be made in writing ~u ~he director of
environmental engine=ring. It sh~ll identify the impacts of the
proposed exception on wa~er quality, public ~a~ety and o~
Within the resource protection area and, if applicable, this
shall be aocom~llshsd ~hrough the performance m~ ~ water
quality impact assessment which ~ompltes with the provisions of
section 21.1~229.5(Q). In the oases of an exception requested
from the required safety m~asures, such request shall be
supported by documentation which 4emenstratee that granting the
request will not be detrimental to public safety-
95-652 10/11/95
(b) The Director of Snvironmental Engineering shall
Impact Assessment, if required. In making a determination on
the request, he may impose such conditions or require such
the public safety and further the purpose and intent of this
~ivi$ion. ~e may grant the exception if he finds ell of the
following:
(1) Granting the e×~,ption will not confer upon ~he
applicant any special priuilege~ t_hut are
denied by this division to other property
(2) The exception request is not based upon
conditions or
circumstances that
self-imposed. The
the minimtt~ necessary
to afford relief.
(4) The exception request will be consistent with
the purpose and intent of t~ie division, and
not injurious t~ the neighborhood or otherwise
detrimental to toe public welfare.
The request is being made because of the
particular physical ~urrounding~,
to~ographical conditions of the specific
properly involved, or property adjacent to or
within one hundred (100) feet of the subject
property, ur a particular hardship to the owner
will occur, as distinguished from a mere
inoonvenience, if the strict letter of the sub-
section cf thi~ chapter is carried out.
(O) Any pe~son aggrieved by a decision cf the director of
environmental engineering usncerning a requas~ for an e~ception
to the requirements cf this division may appeal such decision
in accordance wi~h the procedures Drovidsd in ss~tlan 21.1-275.
(4) That ssction 21.1-2Sl oS the Code of =he County cf
Chesterfield, 197~, as a~ended, is amended and reenacted to add
Aquatic ~ench, oetentien Basin, Retention Basin, Safety ~ench
and Sediment Forebay.
Aquatic ~ench. A bunch provided ben~ath the pernanent pool and
is normally vegetated with emergent plants and is designed to
augment ~ollutant removal end enhance
Detention Basin. A stormwater management facility which
temporarily impound~ run-off a~d discharges it through a
hydraulic outlet structure t~ a downstream conveyance ~ystem.
Such facilities are often dry between storms and therefore may
Retention Basin. A stcrmwater management facility which
temporarily impound~ run-off an~ incorporates a permanent pond
to re~eve pollutants. The treated stormwater ia discharged
through a hydraulic outlet structure to a downstream
conveyance. These fecilitie~ may be ~efer~ed to a~ "wet
safety Bench. A level or almost lsvel area locatsd a~ the toe
of the slope of %he retention basin immediately landward of a
permanent pool designed to enhance
sediment ~orebay. A ~te~mwater design feature that employ~ thc
use of a smnll ~ettling ar~a near the inlet Of a ~ete~tion
basin which is u~ed to ~ttle out incoming sedlment~ and which
enhances sediment removal for maintenance purposes.
(~] That this ordinance ~hall become effectiv~
immediately upon ad~ption.
Vote: Unanimous
On metion of Mr. Barber, ~econdsd by Dr. Nicholas, th~ Bear~
County Administrator ~
95-65~