Loading...
03-25-1987 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS NINUTES March 25, 1987 Supervisors in Attendance: Staff in Attendance: Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Chairman Mr. Jesse J. Mayes, Vice Chairman Mr. G. H. Applegate Mr. R. Garland Dodd Mrs. Joan Girone Mr. Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator Mr. Stanley Balderson, Dir., Econ. Develop. Mrs. Doris DeHart, Legislative Coord. Mrs. Joan Dolezal, Clerk to the Board Mr. Bradford S. Hammer, Asst. Co. Admin. Ms. Alice Heffner, Youth Svcs. Coord. Mr. William Howell, Dir., Gen. Services Mr. Thomas Jacobson, Dir. of Planning Mr. Robert Masden, Asst. Co. Admin. for Human Services Mr. R. J. McCracken, Transp. Director Mr. Steve Micas, Co. Attorney Mrs. Pauline Mitchell, Dir. of News/Info. Services Mr. Lane Ramsey, Asst. Co. Admin. for Budget and Staffing Mr. Richard Sale, Asst. Co. Admin. for Development Ms. Jean Smith, Dir. of Social Services Mr. Daniel called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. (EST). 1. INVOCATION Mr. Daniel introduced Mr. R. Garland Dodd, Bermuda District Supervisor, who gave the invocation, in the absence of Reverend Neil Myers. 2. PLF. DGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF ~ UNITED STATES OF The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was recited. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3.A. MARCH 11, 1987 On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved the minutes of March 11, 1987, as amended. Vote: Unanimous 3.B. MARCH 18, 1987 On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the minutes of March 18, 1987, as submitted. 87-170 Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel stated, since Mr. Dodd had announced he will not be seeking re-election to the Board of Supervisors, he wished to express appreciation for Mr. Dodd's time and service given to the County and commended him for his stabilizing influence on the Board. He stated Mr. Dodd will be deeply missed by his friends, colleagues, and constituency. Mr. Dodd expressed his appreciation for the opportunity to have worked with a fine staff and Board. 4. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS 4.A. ABIDCO - INTRODUCTION OF NEW DIRECTOR AND WORK PROGRAM Mr. Dennis Morris, Director of the Crater Planning District Commission, was present and introduced Mr. Sean J. Vargyai, the Director of Economic Development for the Crater Planning District Commission, who is responsible for the Appomattox Basin Industrial Development Corporation (ABIDCO) work program. Mr. Vargyai stated ABIDCO recently adopted a three year work program consisting of program areas with a general work direction to provide a regional information and intelligence system, provide regional promotion and marketing, serve as the vehicle for coordination within the region, provide selected regional, retention, financial and special programs, and serve as a vehicle for grantsmanship. He presented a brief overview of the current operation of the Appomattox Basin in Virginia and presented the Board with a statistical profile addressing information relative to population, taxes, income, labor force and wages, quality of life, finance, utilities, transportation, retail marketing data, advertisement of Chesterfield County resources and ABIDCO in a regional economic development publication, the Crater Development Company, the Procurement Assistance Center, the Business and Industry Directory, and an executive summary concerning economic adjustment strategies in the Appomattox Basin area. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the efforts of all those involved with ABIDCO and stated he felt the ongoing programs will be most beneficial to Chesterfield County and the entire region. Mrs. Girone stated she felt the statistical profile was well organized, extremely attractive, and well presented. Mr. Mayes stated he felt ABIDCO is well organized, well led and the organization has enthusiastic plans for the future which are anticipated to be very successful. Mr. Dodd stated he had hoped ABIDCO will be successful in achieving similar results in the southern portion of the County as had MEDC. Mr. Vargyai stated he feels strongly that the ABIDCO region has tremendous poten- tial for economic development and growth, there are indications of promise in that direction and he anticipates that the program will generate a cooperative effort. 4.B. MODEL COUNTY GOVERNMENT DAY PREPARATION Mr. Masden recognized and introduced Ms. Lee Chase and Ms. Alice Heffner, coordinators of Model County Government Day activities. Ms. Chase briefly outlined the Model County Government Day program and introduced approximately seventy (70) students who would be participating in that program on May 6, 1987. The students introduced themselves and identified the position in government which they will be assuming. Mr. Daniel presented Ms. Chase with an executed resolution declaring May 6, 1987 as Model County Government Day and stated the Board was looking forward to participating with the students in the various activities. 5. BOARD COMMITTEE REPORTS Mrs. Girone reported she attended a Highway Department meeting at which a film on the Route 288 project was shown and it was 87-171 announced that informational meetings will be conducted by the Virginia Department of Transportation on April 6 and 7, 1987, at the Midlothian Middle School, Route 60, from 3:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m, which will be open to the public. She stated Harland Bartholomew and Associates, Inc., the consultants for this project, will be present to answer questions and provide information and may be contacted at 323-0622. She stated the Department will initiate the selection process with these informational meetings, at which twelve (12) corridors will be identified; in early 1988 the impacts will be identified for the alternatives and, hopefully, by the spring the selection will be narrowed down to three (3) corridors for the road; public input will be taken again at this point; and a final environmental impact statement should be available by summer of 1988, whereby the Highway Commission can vote on the corridor selection. She stated Chesterfield County's position is that the Route 288 corridor be moved further west out of the Walton Park/Salisbury/James River West corridor. Mr. Mayes reported he represented the Chairman of the Board at the Virginia Department of Fine Arts meeting, at which he was presented with artwork from Mr. Jack Zale, a student from Matoaca High School. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation, on behalf of the Board, for the artwork which would be appropriate- ly displayed within the Courthouse Complex. 6. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE ACTION, EMERGENCY ADDITIONS OR C~ANGES iN xn~ ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of the Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board accepted a revision to Item ll.D.3., VDOT 1987-88 Primary Allocation Hearing; and adopted the agenda, as amended. Vote: Unanimous 7. RESOLUTIONS OF SPECIAL RECOGNITION 7,ao MRS. VIRGINIA C. GORDON, UPON RETIREMENT AS CHESTERFIELD COUNTY REGISTRAR Mr. Hammer recognized and introduced Mrs. Virginia C. Gordon, County Registrar, who has served the County for twenty years and in her capacity has been a loyal and conscientious employee who will be missed. Mrs. Gordon introduced Mr. Marshall Driskill, a former member of the Board of Supervisors, who applauded her for her leadership, direction and dedicated service to the County. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Mrs. Virginia C. Gordon will retire as Registrar from the Registrar's Office of Chesterfield County on April 1, 1987; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Gordon was appointed by the State Electoral Board in July 1967, and was made a General Registrar in 1969; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Gordon provided twenty years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield and the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Gordon was instrumental in the 1968 Richmond/ Chesterfield annexation process which required many long hours of service to the residents of Chesterfield and received a letter from the Editor of the Richmond Times Dispatch recognizing her efforts; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Gordon was actively involved in the development and installation of computer assisted registration and precinct reporting, with an active roll of 81,223 registered voters served by 40 voting precincts; and 87-172 WHEREAS, Mrs. Gordon provided the leadership and direction to establish a modern, efficient and effective Countywide registration system; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will deeply miss Mrs. Gordon's diligent and dedicated service. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Mrs. Virginia C. Gordon and extends on behalf of its members and citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mrs. Gordon and this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Daniel commended Mrs. Gordon for the personalized care by which the Registrar's Office operates and extends to the public and presented the executed resolution to Mrs. Gordon. He introduced Mrs. Gordon's daughter, who was also present. Mrs. Gordon expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to have worked with the County and for the recognition bestowed upon her. She introduced Mrs. Gilly Bland as the newly appointed County Registrar. 7.B. REVEREND JOHN E. LEONARD, CHURCH OF THE EPIPHANY Mr. Applegate recognized and introduced Reverend John E. Leonard, Pastor of the Church of the Epiphany, who has accepted the position of principal with the Norfolk Catholic High School. He stated Father Leonard has been very active not only in his religious community but also outside his parish and will be missed by the citizens of the County. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the Reverend John E. Leonard, founder of the Church of the Epiphany in 1979 with 300 families, has provided the leadership necessary to encourage the growth of the church to 1500 families; and WHEREAS, Reverend Leonard reached beyond his church by negotiating the first spiritual covenant between Central Baptist Church and the Church of the Epiphany, and assisting in the resettlement of more than 150 refugees in the area; and WHEREAS, Reverend Leonard is well-known to the young people in Chesterfield through his church youth programs which minister to more than 400 members, and further, that his services as a baccalaureate speaker in the County high schools will be sorely missed; and WHEREAS, Reverend Leonard has served outside his parish for two consecutive terms as President of the Diocesan Presbyterial, the chief advisory body to Bishop Walter F. Sullivan, and is serving a five-year post as Consultor to the Bishop; and has acquired a reputation for being a key pastor in the Diocese of Richmond which contains 131,000 members. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes the outstanding services Reverend John E. Leonard has provided in Chesterfield, not only in his religious community but to the citizens of the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board congratulates Reverend Leonard on his new assignment as Principal of Norfolk Catholic High School and extends best wishes for another successful ministry. 87-173 Vote: Unanimous Mrs. Girone presented the executed resolution to Reverend Leonard, expressed appreciation for his contributions to the Church and the County and congratulated him on his new assignment. Reverend Leonard expressed his appreciation for the honor bestowed upon him. 8. ~ARINGS OF CITIZENS ON ~NSC~E. DU~.RD MATTERS OR CL~TM$ There were no hearings of citizens on unscheduled matters or claims. o OF UTILITY LINES TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEFERRED ITF~$ PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER GUIDELINES RELATING TO EXTENSION Mr. Daniel stated the public hearing to consider guidelines relating to the extension of utility lines to promote economic development was deferred from the last meeting. Mr. Sale stated the Board requested the preparation of guide- lines to further define Sections 20-1.31(c) and 20-1.44(c) of the County Code relating to the extension of utility lines which promote the economic development of the County. He stated the guidelines recommended in considering financial participation in the extension of utility lines to encourage economic development are: the project developer agrees to match the County contribution on a three-dollar County:one dollar developer ratio; the estimated increased property tax revenue above tax revenue that would be received if the property developed low density residentially will offset the County's cost of utility extension within three (3) years of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; the project developer agrees to post a performance bond to repay County costs for utility extension if the proposed industrial development does not occur as proposed within two (2) years and resultant tax revenue does not occur within three (3) years of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy; and the eligible economic development users include all uses permitted in the M-l, M-2 and M-3 zoning districts except mobile homes and professional offices. He stated staff met with representatives of the Chesterfield Business Council to review the suggested guidelines and they suggested deletion of reference to tax revenue that would be received from residential development in item "b" in order to simplify the formula, which is indicated as follows: be the estimated increased property tax revenue above tax revenue that would be received if the property developed low density residentially will offset the County's cost of utility extension within three (3) years of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. He stated staff has no objection to the recommended change. Mr. Daniel stated, there being no one present to speak for or against the matter, the public input was closed. Mr. Dodd stated he has received various comments and questions as to whether or not these guidelines could be applicable in all cases. He stated the County does need some type of terms and 87-174 conditions by which staff can be guided in making decisions relative to the extension of utility lines to encourage economic development within the County and these guidelines provide that guidance. He stated these guidelines are just that - guidelines - and can be amended if necessary. Mr. Mayes stated he felt these guidelines are a step in the right direction toward the development of the County and felt certain there may be amendments before there is a final document. Mr. Applegate inquired as to the impact of these guidelines on financial obligations. Mr. Sale stated funding will be included in the Utilities Department Capital Improvements Program in the future. Mr. Applegate expressed concern that the development community is being asked to pay its full share through building permits, planning fees, etc., and this particular change may be contrary to that request in that they are being asked to pick up the full cost of future development and now the County is subsidizing for the purposes of economic development. Mr. Daniel stated he felt these guidelines provide for an investment rather than a subsidy in that they are based on the premise that payment would be returned within a specific period of time in terms of tax revenue. He stated there could be a perceived inconsistency in policy; however, unlike building fees, many building fees are projects not considered as contributing to economic development while this policy as set forth is very straight forward and enhances economic development. He stated if a project would not enhance economic development and provide a quick payout then the governing body would not participate in that fee structure. Mr. Applegate expressed concern that only industrial development uses are specified (i.e., M-l, M-2 and M-3). He stated he had understood that there would be a broader spectrum of development included, not just industrial development. He stated he felt expecting the performance bond to cover the development in a short period of three years is very shortsighted and he foresees developers requesting extensions for repayment, as they do with water and sewer lines at the present time. Mr. Daniel stated these guidelines would have to be administered strictly and the key is that the estimate of the increased property tax revenue above tax revenue that would be received if the property developed low density residentially will offset the County's cost of utility extension within three (3) years of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Applegate inquired if the ordinance, as amended, provides for the possibility for a developer to petition the Board to extend the period of time in which the repayment is to be made. Mr. Micas stated the guidelines can be amended or provide for special circumstances if they exist. It was generally agreed to amend Item "c" by deleting the word "industrial" from the proposed guidelines. Mr. Hedrick stated, when it was previously discussed whether or not to restrict these guidelines to industrial development or to broaden the spectrum, the general consensus was that the County was obtaining currently a fair amount o'f development in the office/commercial classification and the area in need of strengthening was the industrial classification. He stated the existing tax structure indicates proportionately lower taxes in the industrial categories and the State allows discretion in the industrial categories because it is considered that its chief function is to serve as a catalyst for growth which will generate other development around it to service that industry. Mr. Applegate inquired if office/commercial development payback to the County is higher than industrial development. Mr. Hedrick stated it is not. Mr. Applegate inquired if the County 87-175 would benefit more to serve commercial developments, such as shopping centers, etc. Mr. Hedrick stated shopping centers do pay substantially more. Mr. Daniel stated the County is taking a proactive position toward tax contributors rather than revenue absorbers and this paper directly addresses efforts to attract tax contributors and those that can have a quick return on that investment whether it be industrial, commercial or office development. He stated the actual decision as to who will or will not participate will depend on the interpretation of those analyses and the bonds. He stated the criteria is in place to cover any of that which Mr. Applegate brought out and he would have no problem in supporting the paper. Mr. Micas stated some subsections may have to be rewritten to comply with the intent and expand the policy to include commercial/office development. He stated staff will bring the revision forward to the Board as soon as the modifications are made. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adopted the following guidelines, in considering financial participation in the extension of utility lines to encourage economic development, with the reservation/understanding that if a tremendously large industry were to come to the County and did not meet the stipulated criteria, the Board could amend these guidelines accordingly, if they so desired: So the project developer agrees to match the County contribution on a three-dollar County:one dollar developer ratio; the estimated increased property tax revenue above tax revenue that would be received if the property developed low density residentially will offset the County's cost of utility extension within three (3) years of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; the project developer agrees to post a performance bond to repay County costs for utility extension if the proposed industrial/commercial/office development does not occur as proposed within two (2) years and resultant tax revenue does not occur within three (3) years of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy; and de the eligible economic development users include all uses permitted in the M-l, M-2 and M-3 zoning districts except mobile homes and professional offices. Vote: Unanimous 10. PUBLIC HR. ARING$ o PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF 2.5 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND AT THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK TO MR. AND MRS. GEORGE A. KCRAGET Mr. Sale stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider the conveyance of a 2.5 acre parcel at the Airport Industrial Park to Mr. and Mrs. George A Kcraget. ' There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents for the sale of a 2.5 + acre parcel (at $25,000 per acre), on the southwest corner --of Virginia Pine Court at the Airport Industrial Park to Mr. and Mrs George A Kcraget. ' ' 87-176 Vote: Unanimous 11. NEW BUSI~ESS ll.A. CHANGE ORDERS AND FUNDING FOR DATA PROCESSING, HUMAN SERVICES AND COURTS BUILDINGS Mr. Hammer stated Board approval is requested for change orders and funding for the Data Processing, Human Services and Courts buildings as follows: 1.) approve all change orders over $10,000 for Processing and Human Services buildings; the Data 2.) authorize the County Administrator to accept low bid of $57,287.60 and enter into a contract with Castle Equipment Company for installation of a storm drainage system in the vicinity of the Data Processing Building; 3.) approve change order #2 to the Moseley Henning Architectural design contract in the amount of $134,148 for the new Courts Building; and 4.) appropriate existing investment earnings of $353,031 for the following: the Human Services Building, in the amount of $288,031 and the Data Processing Building, in the amount of $65,000. Questions and discussion ensued relative to changes affecting the final cost of construction and/or design of these three (3) structures, which included correction of a drainage problem near the Data Processing Building ($65,000), the finance purchase of a mechanical file system for the Department of Social Services ($60,000), restoration of the contingency account for the Human Services Building ($228,031) to cover the known change orders plus any further unanticipated changes; the requested use of interest earnings for these actions; the intended use of interest earnings to offset the debt for projects; the feasibility of funding these projects from the Capital Improvement allocations; State requirements to retain hard copy files and the time periods involved for retention of those files; the benefits of utilizing automated files and microfilming versus mechanical files; interior design services, i.e.,the design and layout of modular furniture; specialized consultants to assist in the technical review and ordering of the security system for the Courts Building, etc. It was generally agreed there were issues that needed further review/study. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board deferred consideration of the change orders and funding for the Data Processing, Human Services and Courts Buildings until April 8, 1987, with instruction that prior to that meeting staff will meet individually with the Board to resolve concerns about this request. Vote: Unanimous 11 .B. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH AIRPORT APRON EXPANSION PROJECT Mr. Hammer stated Board approval is requested to proceed with the Airport Apron Expansion Project, which will allow the Airport to double its present apron and tie down capacity. He stated the County has received notice that the Federal Aviation Administration has approved $350,100 for this year as the Airport Improvement Program #04, Airport Apron Expansion Pro- ject, which action will require a 5% COunty match of $19,450 in conjunction with a State match of the same amount. He stated the FAA is also authorizing the use of $72,700 unexpended from 87-177 last year's overlay project which includes previously appro- priated County and State matching funds. Mr. Applegate inquired why the $72,700 was not expended last year. Mr. Hammer stated the County did not utilize those funds last year because the expansion projects for all eligible expenditures had been completed, however, the County was advised the $72,700 would be available for future eligible projects. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the contract with Delta Associates, previously selected as engineers; authorized the County Administrator to solicit bids for the project and to enter into a contract with the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; authorized the County Administrator to submit an application for Federal and State funds and enter into a contract with the Federal and State government for the expenditure of said funds; and appropriated the Federal ($350,100), State ($19,450) and County ($19,450) funds for the Apron Expansion Project, with the local share to be expended from the Airport Industrial Park account and authorized the application of $72,700 unexpended funds from the ~03 project to the Apron Expansion #04, which funds for the project total $461,700. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Hammer recognized and introduced Mr. Chip Harrup, a student from Lloyd C. Bird High School who is one of the youngest, licensed pilots utilizing the Airport facilities. ll.C. APPOINTMENTS ll.C.1. YOUTH SERVICES COMMISSION On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board nominated the following members to serve on the Youth Services Commission, whose formal appointments will be made April 8, 1987: Midlothian District: Ms. Elaine Carr Matoaca District: Ms. Lois McClellan Ms. Barbara W. Jernigan Mr. Applegate stated he would defer nomination of a representative for the Clover Hill District at this time. Vote: Unanimous 11.C.2. KEEP CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CLEAN CORPORATION On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board nominated the following members to serve on the Keep Chesterfield County Clean Corporation, whose formal appointments will be made April 8, 1987: Midlothian District Bermuda District Matoaca District Dale District Clover Hill District Vote: Unanimous Mr. Warren Dieterich Mrs. Marilyn Kim Mr. William Harris Mrs. Alma Smith Mrs. Ann Belsha 87-178 11.C.3. MEMBERSHIP FOR THE ECONOMIC ADVISORY COUNCIL Mr. Sale stated in January 1986, the Board of Supervisors adopted an Economic Development Program, a feature of which program established the creation of an Economic Advisory Council. He stated the purpose of this Council would be to provide advice and recommendations on further development of the Program, provide service as ambassadors to interact with Economic Development clients and prospects, provide assistance in influencing and lobbying for positions which enhance Chesterfield's economic well-being, and serve as a conduit/source for generating prospective businesses and industries. He stated staff is recommending that Council membership consist of eleven members - one member from the Industrial Development Authority, one member from Administration/Development and nine members of Community Business Executives (2 of whom should be appointed by the Business Council). Mr. Daniel stated discussions with Board members indicate a need to consider suggestions for member participation on this Council, such as the inclusion of a Board member and Legislator, as well as assuring that the business community is the focal point with their participation. He stated he felt the participation of Administration and/or staff would be better served in providing the technical assistance the Council would need rather than in terms of voting membership. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the concept of an Economic Advisory Council, with members to serve as ambassadors to interact with Economic Development clients and prospects, provide assistance in influencing, identifying and recommending appropriate legislation that would enhance economic development, and serve as a conduit/source for generating prospective businesses and industries, with membership to include one (1) legislator, one (1) Board member, one (1) Industrial Development Authority member, and nine (9) members from community businesses, with the utilization of staff participation/support to be derived from the Department of Economic Development Office. Vote: Unanimous ll.D. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS ll.D.1. APPROVE AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO EXTEND UTILITIES ON REYCAN ROAD On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved a construction contract for water line extension to Reycan Road at the Airport Industrial Park and appropriated $21,870 ($19,879.65 for the contract and $ 1,987.97 for 10% contingency) from the Airport Reserve Funds to provide the water line extension and transferred funds to the Department of Utilities (account # 5H-5835-725E) for project management. Vote: Unanimous ll.D.2. 1986-87 RURAL ADDITION PROJECTS It was generally agreed to defer consideration of this item until later in the meeting. ll.D.3. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1987-88 PRIMARY ALLOCATION HEARING Mr. Sale stated Board approval is requested for a statement regarding Chesterfield County's primary road construction needs, which needs will be addressed at a Virginia Department of 87-179 Transportation public hearing on March 27, 1987, at the Richmond District Office. Mr. Daniel stated he requested modifications to the statement, which included the status and funding source of the road projects currently underway and the inclusion in the list of projects for the widening to six (6) lanes of Chippenham Parkway from Powhite Parkway to 1-95. Discussion ensued relative to the County's position on site and sound barriers, participation by the City of Richmond on the cost of site and sound barriers, the Chippenham/Laburnum Connector, the reasons for the delayed status of Route 288 construction from Route 360 to Route 10 and Route 10 to 1-95, particularly when $30 million in funding is being provided by the County; the need to relieve traffic congestion on Route 60, Jahnke Road, Chippenham Parkway, and Hull Street Road; completion of the Meadowville Interchange, in conjunction with the construction of 1-295 and its impact on area development; etc. Mr. Daniel directed the County Administrator and staff to compile, within the next week, a report regarding Route 288, to be discussed with the Board individually, so the Board's concerns regarding Route 288 can be directly addressed to the Highway Commission, the Gubernatorial level and legislative delegation because delay of this construction cannot continue. It was suggested that the assistance of Congressman Bliley and/or Senator Warner may be helpful. Mrs. Girone stated she agreed with the statement except that it does not mention the widening of Chippenham Parkway and questioned if an alert could be added that this is a serious problem. She stated it should be in conjunction with the Parham/Chippenham Connector project. Mr. Daniel stated inclusion of this item could be made referencing the necessity for widening of Chippenham Parkway from 1-95 to Powhite Parkway from four (4) to six (6) lanes. Mr. Dodd stated time is of the essence in completing the Meadowville Interchange in conjunction with the construction of 1-295 and such wording should be included in the statement. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adopted a statement to be made at the Virginia Department of Transportation public hearing, scheduled for March 27, 1987, at 10:00 a.m., at the Richmond District Office, relative to the allocation of construction funds and updating of the Six Year Improvement Program for Interstate, primary and urban road systems. (A copy of said statement is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.D.2. ll.D.4. 1986-87 RURAL ADDITION PROJECTS AND APPROPRIATION FOR FUNDING OF SIDEWALKS ON HOPKINS ROAD On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board combined Items ll.D.2., 1986-87 Rural Addition Projects (Nestor Road and Treely Road in Matoaca Magisterial District) and Item ll.D.4., Appropriation for Funding of Sidewalks on Hopkins Road; reduced the scope of the Hopkins Road sidewalk project; appropriated $50,000 for the construction of a sidewalk on only one side of Hopkins Road; further appropriated $50,000 for the Nestor Road and Treely Road rural addition projects, with funding for both projects to be expended from the following sources: $71,510.52 to be transferred from the completed Iron Bridge Recreational Access project; $24,680.72 to be transferred from the completed Manchester High School Access project; and $3,808.76 appropriated from the Dale District Three Cent Road Fund. (It is noted $53,000 funding was originally requested for the Rural Addition Project and will have to reconciled against the $50,000 appropriation from the above listed sources.) 87-180 And further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has conducted a public hearing on the Hopkins Road widening project; and WHEREAS, the project's current design includes sidewalks on both sides of the road; and WHEREAS, the combination of the widening of Hopkins and the pedestrian traffic between the adjoining elementary schools, churches, shopping centers, and community recreation associa~ creates a unique situation wherein sidewalks should be considered; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has asked the County if it desires to have sidewalks included in the Hopkins project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to include sidewalk on the west side of Hopkins Road from Meadowdale Boulevard to Beulah Road, also connecting with the existing sidewalk on Beulah Road near Beulah Elementary School. Vote: Unanimous ll.D.5. RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE ROUTE 10 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THROUGH CHESTER On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved and adopted a statement supporting the Route 10 improvement project through Chester, by either the through town alignment or the one way pair system. (A copy of said statement is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.D.6. CHANGES IN STATE SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM ON HOPKINS AND BEULAH ROADS Mr. Daniel inquired if property owners on Hopkins and Beulah Roads were notified of the changes in the State Secondary Road System, which include abandonment of 0.04 mile of Beulah Road, discontinuance of 0.49 mile of the old location for Beulah and Hopkins Road, and addition of 0.51 mile of the new locations for Beulah and Hopkins Roads into the State Highway System. Mr. Sale stated the property owners had not been notified. Mr. Daniel requested that staff notify all property owners in this area of these actions and ensure there is 100% agreement among the citizens to accept these changes. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board deferred consideration of changes in the State Secondary Road System on Hopkins and Beulah Roads until April 8, 1987. Vote: Unanimous ll.E. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT ITEMS ll.E.1. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF RIGHT OF WAY ON TURNER ROAD Mr. Sale stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider the conveyance of a parcel of land to the Virginia Department of Transportation along Turner Road. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the 87-181 conveyance of right of way along Turner Road to the Virginia Department of Transportation, which conveyance is valued at $5,396, and is being made in conjunction with the Turner Road improvement project. Vote: Unanimous ll.E.2. POSITION AUTHORIZATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT STUDY Mr. Sale stated the Board is requested to consider position authorization in accordance with the Utilities Department Management Study for the positions of Assistant Director for Finance/Administration, Principal Utilities Engineer and Financial/Rate Analyst. He stated these positions are a direct recommendation of the Utilities Department Management Study and are needed to implement the Study recommendations. He stated these positions can be funded for the remainder of FY87 wi- the current budget allocations. He briefly explained each position and its role within the Department. He stated the creation and staffing of these positions will provide the staff resources necessary to reorganize the Department in a format more conducive to a management approach that includes more delegation and team management. Mr. Dodd voiced support for the recommendation as he felt the present Utilities administration is spread very thin. Mr. Mayes stated that he supports the recommendation in general, however, job descriptions would have a bearing on whether or not he would support the paper as presented. Mrs. Girone expressed concerns relative to the need for a work session to discuss the ramifications of the management ~tudy. She stated this study was a major study for the County which has major recommendations that will dictate significant changes in management philosophy. She stated it is difficult to determine if the study is cost effective or appropriate and she felt the issue should be deferred until after budget discussions are completed and the Board has had an opportunity to study it. Mr. Daniel concurred. Mr. Sale stated the Utilities Department has initiated a rate study and having the two financial positions (the proposed Director of Finance and Administration and the Rate Analyst) on board to participate in the rate study would be most beneficial. He stated it is anticipated that the rate study will be brought to the Board for consideration for an authorization and appropriation within the next month. Mr. Hedrick stated several months ago staff forwarded the Board a letter and a copy of the management study for its perusal and comment. He stated the letter indicated staff would proceed with implementation of the study recommendations, one of which was the recommendation for these positions, unless objections were expressed. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board deferred consideration of the Utilities Department Management Study until April 8, 1987; and instructed staff to make the necessary arrangements for a working lunch/work session at 12:00 noon on April 8, 1987, to resolve concerns and discuss the ramifications of the study. Vote: Unanimous ll.E.3. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC WATER IN STAFFORD PLACE SUBDIVISION On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the Utilities Department to proceed with a project to install public water in Stafford Place Subdivision, which estimated cost of the project is $110,000 and will be 87-182 funded from the FY 86-87 Capital Improvement Budget, Water Line Extensions to Existing Subdivisions. Vote: Unanimous ll.E.4. CONSENT ITEMS ll.E.4.a. AGREEMENT WITH VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR ADJUSTMENT OF UTILITIES ON TURNER ROAD On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute an agreement, on behalf of the County, with the Virginia Department of Transportation for the relocation of utility lines during the construction of Turner Road, which agreement is subject to approval of the County Attorney. It is noted that the Virginia Department of Transportation will pay most of the cost of water relocations (80.13%), with County costs being funded by transferring $245,000 from 5B Fund Balance to W86-178CD for water relocation costs. Sewer relocation costs of $100,000 were previously approved and appropriated by the Board from the 1986-87 extension funds. Vote: Unanimous ll.E.4.b. APPROVAL OF EASEMENT TO VEPCO AT BUFORD ROAD WATER PUMPING STATION On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents granting an easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 20 foot easement across property at the Buford Road water pumping station. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.E.4.c. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG BUNDLE ROAD FROM CONTINENTAL LAND SALES, INC. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a 30' strip of land along Bundle Road from Continental Land Sales, Inc. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.E.4.d. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG WARBRO ROAD FROM H.W. BLANKENSHIP AND SONS, INC. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the conveyance of a 5' strip of land along Warbro Road from H. W. Blankenship and Sons, Inc. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Vote: Unanimous ll.E.4.e. REQUEST TO ENCROACH ON COUNTY EASEMENT FROM MR. NICHOLAS J. MAILO On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved a request from Mr. Nicholas J. Mailo for the encroachment of a proposed security brick wall and brick walkway (surrounding an in ground pool) on an existing County Easement 87-183 across Lot 1, Block Q, Winterfield Section, Salisbury. Vote: Unanimous ll.E.5. REPORTS Mr. Welchons presented the Board with a report on the developer water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. Mr. Dodd disclosed to the Board that he is a member of Kingsland Baptist Church, which is listed as a contract under reports of developer water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. He stated that he wished the record to reflect that the Board is only receiving the report and not taking any action on this item. ll.F. REPORTS Mr. Hedrick presented the Board with a status report on the Schedule of School Literary Loans, District Road and Street Light Funds, General Fund Balance, Road Reserve Funds, General Fund Contingency Account and Capitalized Lease Purchases. Mr. Hedrick stated the Virginia Department of Transportation has formally notified the County of the acceptance of the following streets into the State Secondary Road System: ADDITIONS LENGTH Treemont Subdivision - Section C Route 2862 (Piels Road) - From 0.10 mile north of Route 2868 to a south cul-de-sac 0.15 mi. Route 2868 (Green Cedar Lane) - From 0.04 mile east of Route 2871 to 0.03 mile west of Route 2884 0.24 mi. Route 2878 (Alms Lane) - From 0.03 mile west of Route 2883 to Route 2868 0.15 mi. Route 2877 (Alms Court) - From Route 2877 to a west cul-de-sac 0.03 mi. Route 3073 (Emory Oak Lane) - From 0.03 mile north of Route 3068 to a north cul-de-sac 0.16 mi. AFTON SUBDIVISION - SECTION 7 Route 2750 (Sara Kay Drive) - From 0.02 mile west of Route 2839-S to 0.04 mile west of Route 2839-N Route 2813 (Creasman Drive) - From Route 2750-S to Route 2750-N 0.29 mi. 0.14 mi. COURTHOUSE WOODS - SECTION 1 Route 3154 (Husting Road) - From 0.09 mile west of Route 3155 to 0.03 mile west of Route 3158 Route 3158 (Nott Lane) - From 0.02 mile south of Route 3154 to a north cul-de-sac 0.05 mi. 0.15 mi. BERMUDA GARDENS - SECTION C Route 833 (Kackberry Road) - From Route 698 to 0.03 mile east of Route 2488 Route 2488 (Starpine Lane) - From 0.10 mile north of Route 834 to Route 833 0.14 mi. 0.06 mi. 87-184 ADDITIONS ASHLEY GROVE - SECTIONS A,B&C Route 3480 (Sunnygrove Road) - From Route 649 to an east cul-de-sac Route 3481 (Copperpenny Road) - From 0.03 mile south of Route 3480 to 0.05 mile north of Route 3482 Route 3482 (Copperpenny Terrace) - From Route 3481 to a northeast cul-de-sac Route 3483 (Copperpenny Court) - From Route 3482 to 0.13 mile southeast of Route 3482 LENGTH 0.29 mi. 0.18 mi. 0.23 mi. 0.13 mi. ll.G. MEET WITH MODEL COUNTY GOVERNMENT DAY STUDENTS AT AT 11:30 A.M. The Board recessed at 11:30 a.m. to meet individually with their representatives for Model County Government Day. Reconvening: ll.H. LUNCH - LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS AT MAGNOLIA GRANGE Mr. Daniel called the meeting to order at 12:15 p.m.; introductions were made of those present and lunch followed. Ms. Virginia Arnold, Chairperson of the Finance Committee for the League of Women Voters, expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the Board to discuss concerns relative to the proposed budget. Discussion and questions ensued relative to growth, future population projections, growth standards, personnel and salaries, the school budget and its impact on the overall County budget, the exploration of alternative sources of revenues, the use of the General Plan as a guide to development and the necessity for a Master Plan, the need to increase the County tax base revenues, the feasibility of a public transportation study and its advantages/disadvantages to the citizens, etc. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the League of Women Voters to discuss budget concerns. He thanked those present for their concern and efforts on behalf of the County. He stated the Board of Supervisors has never conscientiously cast negative votes on issues of public health, safety and welfare and they will give every consideration and make every effort possible to meet the needs of and to serve the people. Ms. Arnold reiterated appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the Board and stated she hoped such meetings would continue in the future. The Board recessed at 1:50 p.m. to travel to the Courthouse. Reconvening: iI,I. RE~T*FOR MOBILE HOME PERMIT 87S048 In Bermuda Magisterial District, RAMESH C. PATEL requested a 87-185 mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property fronting the east line of Jefferson Davis Highway opposite its intersection with Kingsdale Road, and better known as 9401 Jefferson Davis Highway. Tax Map 81-12 (1) Parcel 29 (Sheet 23). Mr. Tom Jacobson stated staff recommends approval of this request, subject to standard conditions and noted that the Zoning Ordinance requires the existing mobile home on this property be removed, unless other zoning approval is granted. He stated, in addition, staff recommends that the Board advise the applicant to look upon this request as a temporary dwelling and, if approved, it may or may not necessarily be renewed. Mr. Ramesh Patel stated he would prefer to retain the existing mobile home in that it is occupied by a maintenance employee who resides on this site. He stated he intends to occupy the second mobile home himself. Mr. Dodd stated the Zoning Ordinance permits only one mobile home to be parked on property for the use of the owner or manager of the business being conducted on the site and there is concern that if more than one mobile home is permitted to be parked on the parcel a park-like environment will develop. He stated he did not have a problem with approving the request but cautioned the applicant that to start a mobile home park would require complete zoning and plans. Mr. Patel stated he did not intend to locate any more mobile homes on the site. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved this request for a period of five (5) years, with the understanding that a limit of two (2) mobile homes can be parked on the site and subject to the following standard conditions: The applicant shall be the owner and occupant of the mobile home. No lot or parcel may be rented or leased for use as a mobile home site, nor shall any mobile home be used for rental property. Only one (1) mobile home shall be permitted to be parked on an individual lot or parcel. The minimum lot size, yard setbacks, required front yard, and other zoning requirements of the applicable zoning district shall be complied with, except that no mobile home shall be located closer than 20 feet to any existing residence. No additional permanent-type living space may be added onto a mobile home. All mobile homes shall be skirted but shall not be placed on a permanent foundation. Where public (County) water and/or sewer are available, they shall be used. Upon being granted a Mobile Home Permit, the applicant shall then obtain the necessary permits from the Office of the Building Official. This shall be done prior to the installation or relocation of the mobile home. Any violation of the above conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the Mobile Home Permit. Vote: Unanimous Mr. Jacobson noted the applicant should contact the Planning staff to determine if there are other legal procedures/require- ments to be met prior to placing the second mobile home on the site. 87-186 ll.J. REQUESTS FOR REZONING 86S145 In Matoaca Magisterial District, JOHN E. HAMILTON, JR. requested amendment to Conditional Use (Case 78S204) relative to the transfer of landfill operation rights and extension of time period of operation. This request lies in an Agricultural (A) District on a 40 acre parcel fronting approximately 800 feet on the west line of Taylor Road, approximately 1,600 feet south of Hembrick Road. Tax Map 123 (1) Parcel 13 (Sheets 35, 36, and 37) . Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions which includes a time period extension of five (5) years. He stated an amendment to Condition 1 has been requested to allow the Conditional Use to be transferred into the name of Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. at such time that the property is transferred, which would allow Mr. Horace Hines, II, the existing landowner, to continue to operate the landfill under the existing Conditional Use until the property is sold. He stated staff recommends amendment to Condition 1, per the addendum. Mr. John Hamilton, Jr., representing Taylor Road Landfill, Inc., stated the conditions as recommended by staff were acceptable, including the addendum. Mr. Mayes inquired as to the impact of the change when the property ownership is transferred to Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. Mr. Hamilton stated Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. has entered into a contract to purchase the subject property from Mr. Horace Hines, II, who is presently operating under his permit which is issued to Triple H Enterprises and does not transfer with the land. He stated once the transfer of the Conditional Use to Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. is approved by the Board, the applicant must apply to the State to obtain an operating permit, which could take several days or weeks. He stated the applicant is requesting to transfer the Conditional Use permit effective upon transfer of the title to the property so that Mr. Hines can continue to operate the debris landfill until the actual transfer occurs. Mr. Mayes inquired what would happen if the Board were to wait until the ownership is clarified before approving the request. Mr. Hamilton stated the applicant would still have the same problem, as the State will not issue an operating permit to Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. unless the appropriateness of the Conditional Use has been approved by the Board. Mr. Micas stated the issue before the Board is the land use and ownership issues, etc., must be resolved by the applicant and owner. Mr. Robert Staples stated the area is undergoing residential development and he opposes any escalation of the landfill activity. He stated he feels the operation will not be effectively monitored relative to content, drainage, etc.; will impact the area traffic pattern; damage the road surface; and adversely impact the value of area properties. He expressed concern that the operation will be significantly escalated to the point it will generate noise pollution and impact the tranquility of the neighborhood. Mr. Applegate stated that denying this request will not minimize or improve the existing conditions. He questioned if the landfill is licensed as a sanitary or debris landfill. Mr. Jacobson stated the site is a landfill as defined by the Zoning Ordinance but is restricted as to the types of material that can be deposited. Mr. Hammer stated the site is a landfill operation which accepts demolition debris, including stumps, construction material, etc., and is not a sanitary landfill which accepts normal domestic waste. He stated, if the landfill 87-187 is accepting domestic waste, it would be incumbent upon citizens to file a complaint with the State Waste Management Department, who would handle the matter as a permit violation. Mr. Daniel stated the issue before the Board is the zoning and land use decision for the subject property, not legal disputes. Mr. Mayes stated his primary concern is that there is a landfill located where it may not belong and that the site is possibly being used for purposes other than those for which it is licensed. He stated he would like to defer this issue for sixty (60) days in order to visit the site and investigate the situation. Mr. Hamilton stated, to his knowledge, there have been no complaints filed with the State Waste Management Department, State Health Department, County, etc., relative to the dumping of sanitary debris at this site. He stated Taylor Road Landfill, Inc. does not intend to install a chipper at this site at the present time. Mr. Mayes stated he would like to review the contract as to operating procedures for this site. Mr. Dodd noted that this case has been deferred previously for ninety (90) days and asked if Mr. Mayes would amend his motion to a thirty (30) day deferral. Mr. Mayes stated he would amend his motion, however, he felt the Board must ensure that when it approves landfill requests they will be properly located, operated, maintained, etc. - otherwise there will be significant problems. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board deferred consideration of this request until April 22, 1987. There was discussion as to how the deferral would affect the applicant, the responsibilities of the County to insure the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, etc. Mr. Mayes questioned if staff could assure him that the existing landfill is operating in accordance with the conditions of zoning set forth, that those conditions are not being violated and that action has been taken to ensure that the conditions will not be violated. Mr. Jacobson stated he could not reassure Mr. Mayes' as to these concerns at the present time. Vote: Unanimous 86S158 In Bermuda Magisterial District, DAVID A. BANTY AND GEORGE P. EMERSON, JR. requested rezoning from Agricultural (A), Residential (R-15), and Community Business (B-2) to Convenience Business (B-l) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions on a 4.6 acre parcel fronting approximately 408 feet on the north line of West Hundred Road, approximately 1,150 feet west of Meadowville Road. Tax Map 117-11 (1) Part of Parcel 24; Tax Map 117-11 (2) Riverbend, Section A, Lot 11; Tax Map 117-12 (1) Part of Parcel 20; and Tax Map 117-12 (2) Riverbend, Section A, Lots 12, 13, and 14 (Sheet 33). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions, which conditions are consistent with the spirit of the proposed major arterial overlay district requirements. He stated this case was deferred at the Board's last zoning meeting to permit Utilities staff to be present to address Condition 16. Mr. Jeff Collins, with Charles C. Townes and Associates, P.C., representing the applicants, stated the applicants accept the conditions as recommended by staff, with the exception of Conditions 2 and 16. He stated the applicants accept the Planning Commission's recommended Condition 2 relative to the buffer along the northern property line. He stated the applicants have discussed Condition 16 with Utilities staff and 87-188 are agreeable to extending public sewer based on these discussions and an understanding that the Utilities Department will recommend to the Board, at the time the applicants come in with offsite sewer, that a direct cash refund for the full amount of that offsite sewer that is eligible under the present rebate program be provided. He stated the applicants have also worked out an agreement with other landowners in this area that the remainder of the offsite sewer costs will be shared, based on the acreage of the property involved. Mr. Bill Wright, sewer design and construction engineer for the Utilities Department, stated staff met with the applicants to discuss this issue and agreed, based on the amount of offsite extension required to reach the subject site, to recommend to the Board that a cash refund be provided to the applicants for that portion of the sewer that is eligible for refund. He stated the reason for the recommendation for a refund is basically due to the large bore under Route 10 that will have to be completed to extend sewer to the proposed site. There was no opposition present. Mr. Dodd noted that he was now prepared to support staff's recommended condition 16, with the understanding reached between the applicant and the Utilities Department. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Charles C. Townes and Associates, P.C., dated December 23, 1986, and the revised Textual Statement, dated December 29, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) A thirty (30) foot buffer shall be maintained along the northern boundary of the site. This buffer shall consist of landscaping, having a sufficient initial height and of a species which will provide year-round screening. Other than utilities which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, and a fence, if desired, there shall be no facilities permitted in this buffer. A landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Plan- ning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (CPC) In addition to Convenience Business (B-i) uses, the fol- lowing Community Business (B-2) uses shall be permitted in Building "C," as depicted on the Master Plan: A. Health clubs B. Print shops Also, in Building "C," individual stores and/or shops shall be permitted a 1,200 square foot exception to the 12,000 square foot limitation. Pads "A" and "B" and Buildings "A" and "B" shall be limited to those uses permitted in the Convenience Business (B-l) District. (P) Signs shall comply with the requirements of the Special Sign District for shopping centers in a Convenience Busi- ness (B-l) District. Landscaping shall be provided around the base of all freestanding signs. Sign colors and style shall be compatible with the architectural style of the buildings. Prior to the erection of any signs, a complete sign package depicting these requirements shall be submit- ted to the Planning Department for approval. (P) (Note: sign.) This condition would permit only one freestanding 5. Yards. The following yard requirement shall apply: 87-189 (a) Setbacks along Route 10. Ail buildings and drives shall have a minimum seventy-five foot setback from the proposed right-of-way of Route 10 as indicated on the Chesterfield General Plan, as amended. Parking areas shall have a minimum one hundred foot setback from the proposed right-of-way of Route 10. The parking area setback may be reduced to seventy-five feet when parking areas are located to the side or rear of buildings. Within these setbacks, landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Condition 10 (f). (b) Front yard. The front yard setback for buildings, drives, and parking areas shall be a minimum of forty feet from River's Bend Road. (c) Side yards. The side yard setbacks for buildings, drives, and parking areas shall be a minimum of thirty feet. The minimum corner side yard shall be forty feet. One foot shall be added to each side yard for each three feet that the building height adjacent thereto exceeds forty-five feet or three stories, whichever is less, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. (d) Rear yard. The minimum rear yard setback for build- ings, drives, and parking areas shall be fifty feet. One foot shall be added to each rear yard for each three feet that the building height adjacent thereto exceeds forty-five feet or three stories, whichever is less, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Permitted Variations in Yard Requirements. The required minimum yards may be reduced with the provision of additional landscaping: (a) Setbacks along Route 10. The required setback for buildings and drives along Route 10 may be reduced to fifty (50) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C." The required setback for parking areas may be reduced to fifty (50) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C," and when such parking areas are located to the side and rear of buildings. (b) Front yard. The required front yard setback along River's Bend Road may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C." (c) Side yard. The required side yard may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (2), "Perimeter Landscaping B." (d) Rear yard. The required rear yard may be reduced to thirty (30) feet with the provision of the buffer described in Condition 2. Utility lines underground. Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. This requirement shall apply to lines serving individual sites as well as to utility lines necessary within the project. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropriate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the archi- tectural elements of the site plan. (P) 87-190 10. Loading areas. Sites shall be designed and buildings shall be oriented so that loading areas are not visible from the adjacent residential property to the north or from any public right of way. (P) Driveways and parking areas· Driveways and parking areas shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or other similar material. Surface treated parking areas and drives shall be prohibited. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian traffic. (P) Landscaping Requirements. (a) Purpose and Intent. A comprehensive landscaping program for the site is essential for the visual enhancement of the Corridor; and to protect and promote the appearance, character, and economic values of land along the Corridor and surrounding neighborhoods. The purpose and intent of such landscaping requirements is also to reduce the visibility of paved areas from adjacent properties and streets, moderate climatic effects, minimize noise and glare, and enhance public safety by defining spaces to influence traffic movement. Landscaping will reduce the amount of storm water runoff and provide transition between neighboring properties. (b) Landscaping Plan and Planting Requirements. (i) A landscaping plan shall be submitted in con- junction with site plan review. (2) Such landscaping plan shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances, and clearly delineate all existing and proposed parking spaces or other vehicle areas, access aisles, driveways, and the location, size and description of all landscaping materials. (c) Plant Materials Specifications. (1) Quality. Ail plant materials shall be living and in a healthy condition. Plant materials used in conformance with the provision of these speci- fications shall conform to the standards of the most recent edition of the "American Standard for Nursery Stock," published by the American Association of Nurserymen. (2) Size and Type. (a) Small Deciduous Trees. Small deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature crown spread of greater than twelve (12) feet. A minimum caliper of at least two and one-half (2 1/2) inches at the time of planting shall be required. (b) Large Deciduous Trees. Large deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature crown spread of greater than thirty (30) feet. A minimum caliper of at least three and one-half (3 1/2) inches at the time of planting shall be required. (c) Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shall have 87-191 (d) a minimum height of five (5) feet at the time of planting. Medium shrubs. Shrubs and hedge forms shall have a minimum height of two (2) feet at the time of planting. (3) Landscaping Design. (a) (b) Generally, planting required by this section should be in an irregular line and spaced at random. (c) Clustering of plant and tree species shall be required to provide a pleasing composi- tion and mix of vegetation. Decorative walls and fences may be inte- grated into any landscaping program. The use of such walls or fences, when having a minimum height of three (3) feet, may reduce the amount of required plant materials at the discretion of the Director of Planning. (4) Tree Preservation. (a) (b) Preservation of existing trees is encouraged to provide continuity, improved buffering ability, pleasing scale and image along the Corridor. Any healthy existing tree may be included for credit towards the requirements of this Condition. (d) Maintenance. (e) (1) The owner, or his agent, shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all landscaping materials as may be required. (2) Ail plant material shall be tended and maintained in a healthy growing condition and free from refuse and debris at all times. All unhealthy, dying or dead plant materials shall be replaced during the next planting season. (3) Ail landscaped areas shall be provided with a readily available water supply. The utilization of underground storage chambers to collect runoff to be later used to irrigate plant materials is encouraged. Installation and Bonding Requirements. (i) Ail landscaping shall be installed in a sound, workmanship-like manner and according to accepted, good planting practices and procedures. Landscaped areas shall require protection from vehicular encroachment by such means as, but not limited to, wheel stops or concrete or bituminous curbs. (2) Where landscaping is required, no certificate of occupancy shall be issued until the required landscaping is completed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. When the occupancy of a structure is desired prior to the completion of the required landscaping, a certificate of occupancy may be issued only if the owner or developer provides to the County a form of surety satisfactory to the Planning Department in an amount equal to the costs of the remaining plant 87-192 (f) (g) materials, costs. related materials and installation (3) Ail required landscaping shall be installed and approved by the first planting season following issuance of a certificate of occupancy or the bond shall be forfeited to the County. Arterial Frontage Landscaping. Landscaping shall be required along Route 10 within the required setback and shall be provided except where driveways or other openings may be necessary. The minimum required landscaping for this setback shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping B" below. Perimeter Landscaping. Landscaping shall be provided at the outer boundaries or in the required yards, except where driveways or other openings may be required. The minimum required landscaping for all outer boundaries of any lot or parcel shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping A" below. There shall be different landscaping requirements as identified herein, which shall be provided as follows: (1) Perimeter Landscaping A. (a) At least one small deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At least one medium shrub for each twenty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. (2) Perimeter Landscaping B. (a) At least one large deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At least one small deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) At least one medium shrub for each fifteen lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. OR: (a) A minimum three (3) berm, and foot high undulating (b) Perimeter Landscaping A. (3) Perimeter Landscaping C. (a) At least one large deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one'evergreen tree for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. 87-193 11. (b) At least one small deciduous tree for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) At least one medium shrub for each ten lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. OR: (a) A minimum four (4) berm, and foot high undulating (b) Perimeter Landscaping B. (h) Landscapin~ Standards for Parkinq Areas. (1) Interior parkin~ area landscaping. (a) The parking area(s) shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior land- scaping for each space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten feet. With the provision of this landscaping, parking space size may be reduced to 9.5 x 18 feet or 185.5 square feet. (b) The primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Each required landscaped area shall include at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition. The total number of trees shall not be less than one for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be land- scaped with shrubs and other vegetative material to compliment the tree landscaping. (c) Landscaping areas shall be reasonably dispersed throughout, located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required land- scaped area. (2) Peripheral parking area landscaping. (a) Peripheral landscaping shall be required along any side of a parking area that abuts land not in the right of way of a street such that: A landscaped strip at least ten (10) feet in width shall be located between the parking area and the abutting property lines, except where driveways or other openings may be required. Continuous hedge forms or at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition, shall be planted in the landscaped strip for each fifty lineal feet. (p) Ail exterior lights shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line of any adjoining residential district or Route 10. Lighting standards shall be of a directional type capable of 87-194 12. shielding light source from direct view. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunc- tion with final site plan review. (p) The architectural treatment of all buildings on the site shall be such that no building facade (whether front, side, or rear) will consist of architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Route 10. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and de- signed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Detailed renderings depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Commission in conjunction with schematic plan review. (P) 13. In conjunction with schematic plan review, an overall access plan shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Transportation Department for the area north of Route 10 from Harbour East Development to the proposed River's Bend Road. The developer shall grant cross easement(s) to allow access to adjacent properties to the west. The exact location of cross easement(s) shall be determined at the time of schematic review. (T&CPC) 14. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, 100 feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Route 10, shall be dedicated to and for Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted. (T) 15. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Route 10 for the entire property frontage. (T) 16. Public sewer shall be used. (U) 17. Prior to, or in conjunction with, final site plan review, a utility easement shall be dedicated along Route 10 to accommodate construction of a parallel force main. The width of the easement shall be determined at the time of site plan review. (U) Vote: Unanimous 87S008 In Midlothian Magisterial District, COLSON AND COLSON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY requested Conditional Use Planned Develop- ment to permit a convalescent/rest home and bulk exceptions in a Residential (R-15) District on a 3.8 acre parcel fronting approximately 302 feet on the west line of Twinridge Lane, approximately 280 feet north of North Providence Road. Tax Map 18-15 (1) Parcels 4, 5, and 32 (Sheet 8). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions and acceptance of proffered conditions. Mr. Dick Jeffress, with Savage and Company Realtors, representing the applicants, stated the recommended conditions were acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Clifford Curry, Architect, dated November 5, 1986, and the Textual Statement submitted with the application shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 87-195 Public water and sewer shall be used. Public water and sewer shall be extended from Fairwood Drive to serve the site· (U) The developer shall provide an accurate account of the drainage situation, showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and the sur- rounding area. The developer shall submit a construction plan to Environmental Engineering providing for on- and off-site drainage facilities. This plan shall be approved by the Environmental Engineering Department and all neces- sary easements shall be obtained prior to any vegetative disturbance. The approved off-site plan may have to be implemented prior to clearing. (EE) Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed, and around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, thirty (30) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Twinridge Lane, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, an additional lane of pavement shall be constructed to VDOT standards along the entire property frontage. Also, prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, curb and gutter shall be installed along Twinridge Lane from the existing terminus of curb and gutter south of the site northward across the entire length of the property frontage. (T&EE) Within the required fifteen (15) foot parking setback along Twinridge Lane, trees and shrubs of sufficient height and density shall be planted to minimize the visibility of parking areas from Twinridge Lane. Any loading areas shall be screened from view of Twinridge Lane and adjacent properties. Prior to rough clearing and grading, a con- ceptual landscaping plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) A seventy-five (75) foot buffer shall be maintained along the western property line. In addition, all parking shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the western property line. With the exception of utilities which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, pedestrian walkways, and passive recreational uses, there shall be no other facil- ities or other improvements permitted within this buffer area. Existing vegetation within the buffer shall be supplemented with landscaping to minimize the view of driveways and parking areas. Prior to rough clearing and grading, a conceptual landscaping plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. A detailed landscaping plan shall be sub- mitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) The parking area(s) shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior landscaping for each space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten feet. The primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Each required landscaped area shall include at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition. The total number of trees shall not be less than one for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs and other vegetative material to compliment the tree landscaping. Landscaping areas shall 87-196 be reasonably dispersed throughout, located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required landscaped area. (P) 10. Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the architectural elements of the site plan. (P) 11. Ail buildings shall utilize materials similar to those described in the Textual Statement. Architectural treat- ment of building facades (whether front, side, or rear) shall not consist of architectural materials of inferior quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. The intent of this requirement is not to preclude the use of different materials on different building facades (which would be acceptable if representa- tive of good architectural design) but rather, to preclude the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might adversely impact existing or future development causing a substantial depreciation of property values. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Twinridge Lane. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) 12. Exterior lighting shall not exceed a height of fifteen (15) feet and shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining Twinridge Lane and the adjacent properties. Lighting standards shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with site plan review. (p) 13. One (1) freestanding sign shall be permitted along Twinridge Lane to identify the use. The freestanding sign and all other signs shall be as regulated by the Zoning Ordinance for Office Business (0) Districts. (P) 14. Parking shall be based upon a ratio of one (1) space for each two (2) units. (P) 15. In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Planning Commission shall grant schematic approval of the Master Plan, subject to the conditions stated herein. (P) And further, the Board accepted the following proffered conditions: The landscaping plan required for the buffer along the western property line shall be submitted to the owners of Lots 6-A, 7-A, and 2-B of Bon Air Hills Subdivision by the developer for their approval prior to rough clearing and grading. Said plan is to include trees at least three (3) inches in diameter and proportioned eighty (80) percent evergreen and twenty (20) percent hardwood. The developer shall make the necessary application to vacate Ontario Drive prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, and furthermore, agrees to the vacation of Ontario Drive. 87-197 Vote: Unanimous 87S009 In Midlothian Magisterial District, FRANK L. HEREFORD requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Community Business (B-2) of 1.1 acres, and to Office Business (0) of 1.4 acres with Condi- tional Use Planned Development, plus amendment to previously granted Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 83S188). This request encompasses a total of 5.2 acres, fronting approximately 500 feet on the east line of Courthouse Road, approximately 380 feet south of Midlothian Turnpike; also fronting approximately 300 feet on the west line of Branchway Road, approximately 270 feet south of Midlothian Turnpike. Tax Map 16-12 (1) Parcel 29 and Tax Map 17-9 (2) Avon Estate, Lots 9, 10, and 11 (Sheets 7 and 8). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. Mr. Glen Moore, representing the recommended conditions are acceptable. applicant, stated the There was no opposition present. Mr. Applegate expressed concern regarding the ingress/egress onto Courthouse Road as the existing traffic conditions in this area are a major problem. Mr. McCracken stated the exact location of the entrance will be determined during the site plan review process. Mr. Applegate expressed concern that the proposed entrance, as indicated on the Master Plan, would increase traffic flow and congestion onto Courthouse Road. Mr. Moore stated this portion of the Conditional Use Planned Deve- lopment is already approved and permits access onto Courthouse Road; however, the applicants would be willing to work with the Transportation Department on the location of that entrance. Mrs. Girone indicated that she felt concerns regarding the ingress/egress for the proposed use could be resolved during the site plan review process. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Office Business (0) and Community Business (B-2) with Conditional Use Planned Development on a 2.5 acre tract, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Richard Shank Associates, P.C., dated January 5, 1987, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) Uses permitted in the Community Business (B-2) tract shall be as follows: Ail O, B-i, and B-2 uses Wholesale trade with retail sales as an accessory use Cocktail lounges and dining halls Office warehouses Indoor recreational establishments Veterinary hospitals, excluding outside runs. (P) Uses permitted in the Office Business (O) tract shall be as follows: Se Ail O, B-I, and B-2 uses Wholesale trade with retail sales as an. accessory use Office warehouses. (P) Parking shall be calculated based on 4.4 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The request parcels 87-198 may be considered one (1) zoning lot for the purpose of calculating parking and setback requirements if the tract is subdivided and sold to different entities. If the request property is subdivided and driveways and parking areas are to be used in common by the tenants located on the property, cross easement agreements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. Upon approval, the cross easement agreements shall be recorded. (P) (Note: Should any parcel be subdivided or sold without an approved cross easement agreement, parking and setback requirements will be calculated individually and separate from the original request parcels.) Signs shall be as regulated by the conditions for the adjacent Office Business (0) and Community Business (B-2) property (Case 83S188). Signs shall be regulated as though the subject site is part of the adjacent commercial/office complex. Specifically, the following requirements shall apply: One (1) freestanding sign, visible from Courthouse Road, not to exceed 100 square feet in area, shall be permitted identifying this development and the tenants therein. One (1) freestanding sign, visible from Branchway Road, not to exceed fifty (50) square feet in area, shall be permitted identifying this development and the tenants therein. Individual buildings shall be permitted one (1) freestanding sign each, not to exceed five (5) feet in height and an area not to exceed ten (10) square feet. These signs shall be positioned and located so that they are not visible from Courthouse or Branchway Roads. These signs shall be similar to each other in size, shape, and material. de Building-mounted signs shall be permitted provided they do not project above the roof line and the aggregate area of the building sign, plus the indi- vidual building freestanding sign does not exceed 0.5 square feet for each one (1) foot of building frontage. A site directory sign may be permitted provided it does not exceed a height of eight (8) feet, an aggre- gate area of thirty (30) square feet, is not visible from Courthouse and Branchway Roads and does not create a traffic obstruction. Signs may be illuminated, but may be luminous only if the signfield is opaque with translucent letters. Directional signs (entrance/exit, etc.) governed by Zoning Ordinance requirements. shall be Prior to erection of any signs, a comprehensive sign package to include colors, materials, and typical designs shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (P) Public water and sewer shall be used. Public water shall be extended to connect with the existing public water line in Busy Street. Prior to site plan submittal, a schematic sewer plan, showing general locations and depths of sewer lines, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Util- ities Department. (U) The developer shall provide an accurate account of the drainage situation showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and the surrounding area. The developer shall submit a site construction plan 87-199 to Engineering and VDOT providing for on-site and off-site drainage facilities. This plan shall be approved by the Engineering Department and VDOT, and all necessary easements shall be obtained prior to any vegetative disturbance. (EE) Minimum finished floor elevation on all buildings shall be a minimum of one (1) foot above the flow of water over Courthouse Road during the 100 year storm. Site grading shall be such that no building is within five (5) feet of the inundation limits of the 100 year backwater of Court- house Road. (EE) The development and drainage design of the project shall not cause the previously approved hydraulic grade line of the drainage system for Chesterfield Commerce Center to be elevated. (EE) 10. A paved lining shall be constructed along those portions of the existing temporary earth channel which is located on-site or within the existing recorded County drainage easements. (EE) 11. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed along the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. (EE) 12. Prior to the release of a building permit for any site with access to Courthouse Road, a minimum of sixty (60) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Courthouse Road, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) 13. Prior to the release of a building permit for any site with access to Branchway Road, thirty (30) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Branchway Road, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) 14. An additional lane of pavement, curb, and gutter shall be constructed to VDOT standards along the entire property frontage of Courthouse Road prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for any use with access to Courthouse Road. (T) 15. An additional lane of pavement, curb, and gutter shall be constructed to VDOT standards along the entire property frontage of Branchway Road prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits for any use with access to Branchway Road. (T) 16. Access shall be as regulated by the conditions for the adjacent Office Business (O) and Community Business (B-2) property (Case 83S188). Specifically, access shall be regulated as though the subject site is part of the adja- cent Office Business (0) and Community Business (B-2) property (Case 83S188). Specifically, the following re- quirement shall apply: one (1) access shall be permitted to Courthouse Road and one (1) access shall be permitted to Branchway Road. The exact location of the access to Branchway Road shall be approved by the Transportation Department in conjunction with final site plan review for any site accessing Branchway Road. (T) 17. Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the architectural, elements of the site plan. (P) 18. Structures shall be similar to those depicted in the elevations submitted with the application. Architectural 87-200 treatment of building facades (whether front, side, or rear) shall not consist of architectural materials of inferior quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. The intent of this requirement is not to preclude the use of different materials on different building facades (which would be acceptable if representative of good architectural design) but rather, to preclude the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might adversely impact existing or future development causing a substantial depre- ciation of property values. No portion of a building con- structed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or public roads. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 19. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining any public roads and adjacent properties. Lighting shall be of a directional type capable of shield- ing the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) And further, the Board approved amendment to a previously granted Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 83S188) on an adjacent 2.7 acre tract, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Richard Shank Associates, P.C., dated January 5, 1987, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 1 of Case 83S188.) In conjunction with the approval of this request, Condition 4 (a) of Conditional Use Planned Development 83S188 shall be eliminated. (P) (Note: This condition 4 (a), which granted exceptions to side yard setbacks, is no longer necessary with the inclu- sion of the property addressed by Request I.) Parking shall be calculated based on 4.4 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The request parcels may be considered one (1) zoning lot for the purpose of calculating parking and setback requirements if the tract is subdivided and sold to different entities. If the request property is subdivided and driveways and parking areas are to be used in common by the tenants located on the property, cross easement agreements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. Upon approval, the cross easement agreements shall be recorded. (P) (Note: Should any parcel be subdivided or sold without an approved cross easement agreement, parking and setback requirements will be calculated individually and separate from the original request parcels.) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 5 of Case 83S188.) The developer shall provide an accurate account of the drainage situation showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and the surrounding area. The developer shall submit a site construction plan to Engineering and VDOT providing ifor on-site and off-site drainage facilities. This plan shall be approved by the 87-201 10. 11. 12. Engineering Department and easements shall be obtained disturbance. (EE) VDOT, and all necessary prior to any vegetative Minimum finished floor elevation on all buildings shall be a minimum of one (1) foot above the flow of water over Courthouse Road during the 100 year storm. Site grading shall be such that no building is within five (5) feet of the inundation limits of the 100 year backwater of Court- house Road. (EE) The development and drainage design of the project shall not cause the previously approved hydraulic grade line on the drainage system of Chesterfield Commerce Center to be elevated. (EE) The applicant shall construct a paved lining on those portions of the existing temporary earth channel which are located on-site or within the existing recorded County drainage easements. (EE) (Note: Conditions 4, 5, 6, and 7 supersede Condition 7 of Case 83S188.) Prior to the release of a building permit for any site with access to Courthouse Road, a minimum of sixty (60) feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Courthouse Road, shall be dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free and unrestricted. (T) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 9 of Case 83S188.) An additional lane of pavement, curb, and gutter shall be constructed to VDOT standards along the entire property frontage of Courthouse Road prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits for uses with access to Courthouse Road. (T) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 11 of Case 83S188.) Access shall be as regulated by the conditions for Condi- tional Use Planned Development (Case 83S188). Further, access shall be regulated as though the subject site is part of the development on Parcels 9 and 10 on Tax Map 17-9 (2) Avon Estates. Specifically, tlhe following requirement shall apply: one (1) access shall be permitted to Courthouse Road and one (1) access shall be permitted to Branchway Road. The exact location of the access to Branchway Road shall be approved by the Transportation Department in conjunction with final site plan review for any site accessing Branchway Road. (T) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 13 of Condi- tional Use Planned Development 83S188.) Access shall be provided from the subject parcel to the adjacent Community Business (B-2) or Agricultural (A) parcels to the south, as determined at the time of site plan approval. Prior to the release of any building permits, an access easement agreement shall be recorded, subject to reasonable requirements and limitations (in- cluding, but not necessarily limited to, the sharing of maintenance expenses) on the use of such access easement. (P&CPC) Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall~ be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and 87-202 integrated with the architectural elements of the site plan. (P) 13. Structures shall be similar tO those depicted in the elevations submitted with the application. Architectural treatment of building facades (whether front, side, or rear) shall not consist of architectural materials of inferior quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. The intent of this requirement is not to preclude the use of different materials on different building facades (which would be acceptable if representative of good architectural design) but rather, to preclude the use of inferior materials on sides which face adjoining property and thus, might adversely impact existing or future development causing a substantial depre- ciation of property values. No portion of a building con- structed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property or Huguenot Road. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 14. Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining any public roads and adjacent properties. Lighting shall be of a directional type capable of shield- ing the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (Note: Conditions 2, 3, 4b, 4c, 6, 8, 10, and 12 of Conditional Use Planned Development 83S188 remain applica- ble to development.) Ayes: Nays: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Mr. Applegate. 87S014 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, BEXLEY WEST ASSOCIATES requested a Conditional Use to permit a recreational facility in a Residential (R-15) District on a 2.2 acre parcel lying approximately 400 feet northwest of the western terminus of Lockshire Drive. Tax Map 39-13 (8) Bexley West, Section 1, Block A, Lot 31 (Sheet 14). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. No one came forward to represent the request. There was no opposition present. Mr. Daniel stated the request would..be deferred to the end of the meeting to allow the applicant and/or representative to appear. 87S015 In Midlothian Magisterial District, ARTHUR PEMBERTON requested Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use and bulk exceptions in a Community Business (B-2) District on a 0.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 192 feet on the south line of Midlothian Turnpike, approximately 160 feet west of Mount Pisgah Drive. Tax Map 16-9 (1) Part of Parcel 29 (Sheet 7). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval 87-203 of this request, subject to certain conditions. Ms. Carol Rolfe, representing the applicant, recommended conditions were acceptable. stated the There was no opposition present. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc., revised November 21, 1986, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) Uses permitted shall be limited to outdoor sale of seasonal plants, produce, lawn furniture, and Christmas trees. (P) Ail driveways and parking areas .shall be gravelled with a minimum of six (6) inches of #21 or %21A stone. Driveways and parking areas shall be delineated by permanent means (i.e., concrete bumper blocks, timbers, etc.). (P) This Conditional Use Planned Development shall be granted to and for Arthur Pemberton and shall not be transferrable nor run with the land. (P) This Conditional Use Planned Development shall be granted for a period not to exceed three (3) years from date of approval. (P&T) In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Commission shall grant schematic approval of the Master Plan. (P) Vote: Unanimous 87S017 In Matoaca Magisterial District, R. LARRY AND KATIE G. TURNER requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Light Industrial (M-l) with Conditional Use Planned Development on a 7.4 acre parcel fronting approximately 115 feet on the south line of Hull Street Road, approximately 50 feet east of Speeks Drive. Tax Map 49-10 (1) Parcel 9 (Sheet 14). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. He stated, since the Planning Commission's public hearing, the Environmental Engineering and Utilities Departments have met with the applicants' engineer to discuss the recommended conditions regarding on-site detention and extension of public sewer. With respect to on-site detention, he stated, after field inspection and preliminary engineering, it has been determined that drainage can be accommodated without on-site detention; however, if the developer should desire, on-site retention/detention would be acceptable. He stated Conditions 4, 5 and 6 should be amended to allow the developer the option of retaining/detaining on-site and to allow the engineering details of the drainage design to be determined at the time of site plan review, instead of ~s'chematic plan review. With respect to the extension of public sewer, he stated Condition 2, outlined in the Request Analysis and Recommendation, requires extension of public sewer to serve the office located on the northern portion of the property and the office/manager's quarters on the southern portion of the property. He stated, while the applicants have agreed to connect the manager's quarters to public sewer, they feel that the length of a lateral from the sewer line along the sgdthern portion of the property to the office located on the northern portion of the property would be costly and, therefore, have requested that the office located on the northern portion of the property be allowed to utilize a septic tank and drainfield until such time that public sewer is extended from the east. He stated the Utilities 87-~04 Department recommends imposition of Condition 2, as stated in the Request Analysis and Recommendation; however, should the Board wish to allow the owner/developer flexibility, relative to the extension of public sewer to ~erve the office located on the northern portion of the property, Condition 2, as amended in the addendum, would be acceptable. Mr. Edward Willey, Jr., representing the applicants, stated the recommended conditions, including the addendum, were acceptable. He briefly explained a mini-warehouse complex is planned for the subject site which will be built in two phases. He stated the applicants prefer amended Condition 2, as stated in the addendum, to provide flexibility ~relative to the extension of public sewer in that an eight (8) inch line is planned along the eastern border of the property to which the office located on the northern portion of the site could be connected. He stated, until such time as that line is available, the applicants desire to utilize a septic tank and drainfield system. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan submit- ted with the application shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) Prior to release of a building permit for the office located on the northern portion of the property, the owner/developer shall enter into an agreement with the adjacent property owner to the east (i.e., Parcel 6 on Tax Map 49-11) to extend public sewer to serve that building. Until such time that public sewer is extended to serve the office located on the northern portion of the property, the building may utilize a septic~tank and drainfield, subject to approval by the Health Department. The manager's quarters, located on the southern iportion of the property, shall initially be connected to public sewer. (U) The developer shall provide an accurate account of the drainage situation showing existing drainage and the impact this project will have on the site and the surrounding area. The developer shall submit a construction site plan to the Engineering Department providing for on-site and off-site drainage facilities. This plan shall be approved by the Engineering Department that all necessary easements shall be obtained prior to any vegetative disturbance. (EE) If retention/detention is employed, prior to the release of any building permits, ownership and maintenance of the basin(s) shall be established as the responsibility of private entities. An indemnification agreement shall be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Department to save the County harmless of vectors, maintenance, and replacement responsibilities, etc. Upon completion of construction of the facility(ies), it (they) shall be certified by a professional engineer. (EE) If retention/detention is employed, the maximum permissible release rate from the basin(s) shall be determined by Environmental Engineering Department at the time of site plan review. (EE) No storm drainage from the site shall be conveyed onto the adjacent property to the east (i.e., Parcel 6 on Tax Map 49-11). This condition may be modified by the Environ- mental Engineering Department at the time of site plan review. (EE) Ail driveways and parking areas shall be paved with bituminous concrete or concrete. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways 87-205 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian access. (EE) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Route 360. (T) Within the parking setback along Route 360, trees and shrubs of sufficient height and density shall be planted to minimize the visibility of parking areas from Route 360. All loading areas shall be screened from view of Route 360 and the adjacent properties to the west and south. A conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be sub- mitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be maintained along the southern property line. With the exception of utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, re- tention/detention facilities and a fence, located along the northern edge of the buffer, there shall be no other facilities or improvements permitted within this buffer. If retention/detention is located in the buffer, adequate screening shall be provided on either, or both sides, of the facility so as to screen the buildings, drives, and parking areas from adjacent property to the south. Exist- ing vegetation within the buffer shall be supplemented with landscaping and/or a solid board ifence so as to minimize the view of driveways and parking areas. A conceptual landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in con- junction with final site plan review. A detailed land- scaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval within thirty (30) days of rough clearing and grading. (P) A ten (10) foot buffer shall be maintained along the western property line. Except for utilities, which run generally perpendicular through the buffer, a sewer later- al, fences, and/or landscaping, there shall be no other facilities or other improvements permitted within this buffer. Landscaping shall be accomplished within this buffer to break up the expanses of buildings and fences. A detailed landscaping plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropri- ate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the architectural elements of the site plan. (P) The structures shall be similar to those depicted in the renderings submitted with the application. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corru- gated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoin- ing property or Route 360. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an inte- gral part of the building. Elevations depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) Exterior lighting shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line adjoining Route 360 and the adjacent property to the south 87-206 and west. Lighting shall be of a directional type capable of shielding the light source from direct view. A lighting plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) 15. Signs shall be regulated by the Special Sign District requirements for Light Industrial (M-l) Districts. Land- scaping shall be provided around the base of any freestanding sign. (P) 16. The uses permitted shall be limited to office and mini-warehouses. Further, residential use for the manager of the project shall also be permitted. (P) 17. In conjunction with the approval of this request, a twenty-five (25) foot exception along the eastern property line and a fifteen (15) foot exception along the western property line to the twenty-five (25) foot side yard setback requirement shall be granted. (P) Vote: Unanimous 87S018 In Matoaca Magisterial District, BRECK CAINE requested Condi- tional Use Planned Development to permit use (greenhouse and nursery) and bulk exceptions in an Agricultural (A) District on a 14 acre parcel fronting approximately 400 feet on the east line of Baldwin Creek Road, approximately 1,200 feet south of Hull Street Road. Tax Map 73 (1) Part of Parcel 90 (Sheet 19). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended denial of this request, based upon the opinion that the proposed use is incompatible with area residential development, represents an encroachment into an established single family residential area, and the proposed use does not conform to the Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportation Plan which designates the subject property for low density residential use. Mr. Breck Caine explained he is requesting approval to develop the proposed site to provide for retail sales, outdoor storage and display of plants and materials, as well as greenhouses for the propagation of plants and to develop the remaining five (5) acres of the property, which is not a part of the current request, for a home site. He stated he did not feel this development would adversely impact the area. Mr. Foster, Ms. Bonnie Jennings, Mr. Emmett Hudson, Mr. Frederick Lewis, Mr. Robert Houser, Mr. Neil Vaughan, and Mr. Carroll Foster were present to voice opposition to this request and expressed concerns relative to the proposed use being incompatible with the existing area residential development, drainage, buffers, site design features, the impact of the business on adjacent properties, inadequate water supplies in the area, the use and/or storage of pesticides and nutrients and the potential for contaminated water to drain into Swift Creek Reservoir, the generation of additional traffic in the neighborhood, the adverse impact of the business on the peace and tranquility of a residential neighborhood, etc. Mr. Mayes stated he concurred with the Planning Commission's recommendation and did not feel the request should be approved. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board denied this request. Mr. Applegate stated, for the record and for those present in opposition to this request, that even if the current request is denied, the Zoning Ordinance would still permit the sale of goods produced or raised on the property and he pointed out denial of this request would not eliminate the residents' concerns, with respect to the pesticides/nutrients or the lack 87-207 of adequate water supplies. He stated the Zoning Ordinance, by right, does permit the sale of goods produced on the property, including the construction of a greenhouse, hothouse, plant nursery, stand or shelter in an Agricultural (A) District and the applicant is within his legal right to develop his property in this manner. Vote: Unanimous 87S019 In Matoaca Magisterial District, CLOVER HILL CORPORATION requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-15) on a 21.3 acre parcel lying at the western terminus of Singer Road. Tax Map 76 (1) Part of Parcel 13 (Sheets 20 and 29). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mr. Mark Parrott, with Foster and Miller, Surveyors and Engineers, representing the applicant, stated the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request and accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. Lots will be a minimum of 40,000 square feet. 2. Lots will have a minimum width of 150 feet at the building line. Vote: Unanimous 87S021 In Midlothian Magisterial District, SOMMERVILLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 80S092) relative to permitted uses and buffer requirements in a Light Industrial (M-l) District on a 38 acre parcel fronting in two (2) places on the north line of Midlothian Turnpike for a total of approximately 2,200 feet, across from Otterdale Road. Tax Map 15 (1) Parcels 34 and 36 (Sheet 7). Mr. Jacobson stated the applicant has requested that this case be remanded to the Planning Commission for amendment to include setback exceptions. Mr. Applegate disclosed that his company is involved in the sale of the proposed site, declared a potential conflict of interest, pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act and stated he would not participate in the discussion to remand the issue to the Planning Commission. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board remanded this request to the Planning Commission for the amended request to be considered on April 21, 1987. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Mayes, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Abstention: Mr. Applegate. 87S022 In Bermuda Magisterial District, WOODROW WALLER requested rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General Business (B-3) on a 0.6 acre parcel fronting approximately 106 feet on the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approximately 107 feet on the east line of Perrymont Road, and located approxi- 87-208 mately 392 feet north of Willis Road. 16 (Sheet 23). Tax Map 81-8 (1) Parcel Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to a single condition. Mr. Steve Armendinger, with Carrouth and Associates, represent- ing the applicant, stated the recommended condition is accept- able. There was no opposition present. Mr. Dodd expressed concern as to how the applicant is developing this property and the appearance of the site, particularly at the rear. He stated he would like to see improvements, not detriments, in development trends along this corridor. He stated he would recommend approval but with the stipulation that the buffer to the rear of the site be strengthened through the use of a board fence, screening, etc. Mr. Armendinger stated the applicant intends to install a stockade fence on three sides of the property to include the rear border. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved this request, subject to the following condition: A fifteen (15) foot buffer shall be maintained along Perrymont Road. A solid board fence with a minimum height of six (6) feet shall be installed along the eastern edge of this buffer. Also, all outdoor storage areas shall be buffered so as to screen their view from adjacent properties and public rights of way. Other than landscaping and/or fencing, there shall be no facilities permitted in the fifteen (15) foot buffer along Perrymont Road. In conjunction with final site plan review, a plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (BS) Vote: Unanimous 87S023 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, BRANDON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residen- tial (R-9) on a 14.2 acre parcel plus amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 84S118) relative to access on another parcel. This request lies approximately 150 feet off the east and west lines of Sunset Hills Drive. Tax Map 38-14 (1) Parcels 3, 4, and 27 (Sheet 14). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning with acceptance of the proffered conditions and further recommended that Condition 3 of Case 84Sl18 be deleted. Mr. Jim Hayes, representing the acceptable. with J. K. applicant, Timmons and Associates, P.C., stated the recommendation is There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-9); and accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. A minimum width of eighty (80) feet. 2. An average lot width of eighty-five (85) feet. 3. A minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet. Further, the Board amended Case 84Sl18 to delete Condition 3. Vote: Unanimous 87-209 87S024 In Matoaca Magisterial District, CHESTERFIELD MEADOWS SHOPPING CENTER ASSOCIATES, L.P. requested rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Convenience Business (B-l) of 1.5 acres, amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 84S082) on an adjacent 5.5 acre tract zoned Convenience Business (B-l), plus Condi- tional Use Planned Development on the entire 7.0 acre tract. This request fronts approximately 380 feet on the east line of Iron Bridge Road across from Greenyard Road. Tax Map 96-9 (1) Parcel 7 and Part of Parcel 6, and Tax Map 96-13 (1) Parcel 2 (Sheet 31). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions and acceptance of the applicant's proffered conditions. He stated the recommended conditions are consistent with the proposed arterial corridor overlay district standards. He stated an addendum was distributed with a proffered condition regarding right of way dedication along Route 10 and setback condition amendments basically consistent with frontyard setbacks for the existing Chesterfield Meadows Shopping Center. Mr. Willis Blackwood, representing Chesterfield Meadows Shopping Center Associates, L. P., stated the recommended conditions were acceptable, including the addendum. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Clower and Associates, Inc., dated December 16, 1986, and the Textual Statement submitted with the application shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) Except as stated herein, signs shall comply with the requirements of the Special Sign District for shopping centers or similar groups of buildings in a Convenience Business (B-l) District. Through schematic plan review of an overall sign package, the Planning Commission may permit those buildings located within 200 feet of Route 10, that have entrances which do not fron't onto Route 10 (i.e., entrance doors facing away from, or perpendicular to, Route 10), a second building-mounted sign not to exceed twenty (20) square feet in area (i.e., twenty (20) square feet in addition to the aggregate square footage permitted for each individual tenant)· However, only one (1) sign shall be legible from Route 10. A restaurant with a drive-in window shall be permitted a freestanding menu board, not to exceed twenty-five (25) square feet and a height of six (6) feet, provided it is positioned so as not to be legible from public roads. (cpc) The request parcels may be considered one (1) zoning lot for the purpose of calculating parking and setback re- quirements if the tract is subdivided and sold to different entities. If the request property is subdivided and driveways and parking areas are to be used in common by the tenants located on the property, cross easement agreements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. Upon approval, the cross easement agreements shall be recorded. (P) (Note: Should any parcel be subdivided or sold without an approved cross easement agreement, parking and setback requirements will be calculated individually and separate from the original request parcels.) In addition to Convenience Business (B-i) uses, the fol- lowing use exceptions shall be permitted: 87-210 ge Tire store with automotive repair, provided the bays are positioned so as not to be visible from public roads or adjacent properties Restaurant with drive-thru window Health club Print shop Liquor store Veterinary clinic, provided there is no overnight boarding or outside runs Department store An outdoor cafe or patio dining in conjunction with a restaurant which does not have a drive-thru window Building supply with outdoor display and/or storage, provided the outdoor display/storage area is screened from view of adjacent properties and public rights of way. The method of screening shall be approved by the Planning Commission at the time of schematic plan review. (P) Further, one (1) use shall be permitted an exception to the 12,000 gross square foot limitation provided the gross area does not exceed 32,000 square feet. (P) Yards. The following yard requirements shall apply: (a) Setbacks along Route 10. Ail buildings and drives shall have a minimum seventy-five foot setback from the existing right-of-way of Route 10. Parking areas shall have a minimum one hundred foot setback from the proposed right-of-way of Route 10. The parking area setback may be reduced to seventy-five feet when parking areas are located to the side or rear of buildings. Within these setbacks, landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Condition 10 (f). (b) Setbacks along Chesterfield Meadows Drive. The front yard setback for buildings, drives, and parking areas shall be a minimum of forty feet from Chesterfield Meadows Drive. (c) Side yards. The side yard setbacks for buildings, drives, and parking areas shall be a minimum of thirty feet. One foot shall be added to each side yard for each three feet that the building height adjacent thereto exceeds forty-five feet or three stories, whichever is less, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. (d) Rear yard. The minimum rear yard setback for build- ings, drives, and parking areas shall be fifty feet. One foot shall be added to each rear yard for each three feet that the building height adjacent thereto exceeds forty-five feet or three stories, whichever is less, subject, however, to the provisions of Section 21-27 of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Permitted Variations in Yard Requirements. The required minimum yards may be reduced as follows with the provision of additional landscaping: (a) Setbacks along Route 10. The required setback for buildings and drives along Route 10 may be reduced to fifty (50) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C." The required setback for parking areas may be reduced to fifty (50) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C," and when such parking areas are located to the side and rear of buildings. (b) Setbacks along Chesterfield Meadows Drive. The required setbacks along Chesterfield Meadows Drive may 87-211 10. (c) (d) be reduced to thirty (30) feet for buildings and fifteen (15) feet for parking areas and drives with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (3), "Perimeter Landscaping C." Side yard. The required side yard may be reduced to ten (10) feet with the provision of landscaping in accordance with Condition 10 (g) (2), "Perimeter Landscaping B." Rear yard.. The required rear yard may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet with the provision of landscap- ing in accordance with Condition 13; however, at a minimum, landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Condition 10 (g) 2, "Perimeter Landscaping B." (p) Utility lines underground. Ail utility lines such as electric, telephone, CATV, or other similar lines shall be installed underground. This requirement shall apply to lines serving individual sites as well as to utility lines necessary within the project. All junction and access boxes shall be screened with appropriate landscaping. All utility pad fixtures and meters shall be shown on the site plan. The necessity for utility connections, meter boxes, etc., shall be recognized and integrated with the archi- tectural elements of the site plan. (P) Loading areas. Sites shall be designed and buildings shall be oriented so that loading areas are not visible from the adjacent residential properties or from any public right of way. (P) Driveways and parking areas. Driveways and parking areas shall be paved with concrete, bituminous concrete, or other similar material. Surface treated parking areas and drives shall be prohibited. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed around the perimeter of all driveways and parking areas. Drainage shall be designed so as not to interfere with pedestrian traffic. (P) Landscaping Requirements. (a) Purpose and Intent. A comprehensive landscaping program for the site is essential for the visual enhancement of the Corridor; and to protect and promote the appearance, character, and economic values of land along the Corridor and surrounding neighborhoods. The purpose and intent of such landscaping requirements is also to reduce the visibility of paved areas from adjacent properties and streets, moderate climatic effects, minimize noise and glare, and enhance public safety by defining spaces to influence traffic movement. Landscaping will reduce the amount of storm water runoff and provide transition between neighboring properties. (b) Landscaping Plan and Planting Requirements. (i) A landscaping plan shall be submitted in con- junction with site plan review. (2) Such landscaping plan shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances, and clearly delineate all existing and proposed parking spaces or other vehicle areas, access aisles, driveways, and the location, size and description of all landscaping materials. (c) Plant Materials Specifications. (1) Quality. 87-212 (d) Ail plant materials shall be living and in a healthy condition. Plant materials used in conformance with the provision of these speci- fications shall conform to the standards of the most recent edition of the "American Standard for Nursery Stock," published by the American Association of Nurserymen. (2) Size and Type. (a) Small Deciduous Trees. Small deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature crown spread of greater than twelve (12) feet. A minimum caliper of at least two and one-half (2 1/2) inches at the time of planting shall be required. (b) Large Deciduous Trees. Large deciduous trees shall be of a species having an average minimum mature crown spread of greater than thirty (30) feet. A minimum caliper of at least three and one-half (3 1/2) inches at the time of planting shall be required. (c) Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shall have a minimum height of five (5) feet at the time of planting. (d) Medium shrubs. Shrubs and hedge forms shall have a minimum height of two (2) feet at the time of planting. (3) Landscaping Design. (a) Generally, planting required by this section should be in an irregular line and spaced at random. (b) Clustering of plant and tree species shall be required to provide a pleasing composi- tion and mix of vegetation. (c) Decorative walls and fences may be inte- grated into any landscaping program. The use of such walls or fences, when having a minimum height of three (3) feet, may reduce the amount of required plant materials at the discretion of the Director of Planning. (4) Tree Preservation. (a) Preservation of existing trees is encouraged to provide continuity, improved buffering ability, pleasing scale and image along the Corridor. (b) Any healthy existing tree may be included for credit towards the requirements of this Condition. Maintenance. (1) The owner, or his agent, shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all landscaping materials as may be required. (2) Ail plant material shall be tended and maintained in a healthy growing condition and free from refuse and debris at all times. All unhealthy, dying or dead plant materials shall be replaced during the next planting season. 87-213 (e) (3) Ail landscaped areas shall be provided with a readily available water supply. The utilization of underground storage chambers to collect runoff to be later used to irrigate plant materials it encouraged. Installation and Bonding Requirements. Ail landscaping shall be installed in a sound, workmanship-like manner and according to accept- ed, good planting practices and procedures. Landscaped areas shall require protection from vehicular encroachment by such means as, but not limited to, wheel stops or concrete or bituminous curbs. (2) Where landscaping is required, no certificate of occupancy shall be issued until the required landscaping is completed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. When the occupancy of a structure is desired prior to the completion of the required landscaping, a certificate of occupancy may be issued only if the owner or developer provides to the County a form of surety satisfactory to the Planning Department in an amount equal to the costs of the remaining plant materials, related materials and installation costs. (3) Ail required landscaping shall be installed and approved by the first planting season following issuance of a certificate of occupancy or the bond shall be forfeited to the County. (f) Arterial Frontage Landscaping. (g) Landscaping shall be required along Route 10 within the required setback and Shall be provided except where driveways or other openings may be necessary. The minimum required landscaping for this setback shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping B" below. Perimeter Landscaping. Landscaping shall be provided at the outer boundaries or in the required yards, except where driveways or other openings may be required. The minimum required landscaping for all outer boundaries of any lot or parcel shall be provided as per "Perimeter Landscaping A" below. There shall be different landscaping requirements as identified herein, which shall be provided as follows: (1) Perimeter Landscaping A. (a) At least one small deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At least one medium shrub for each twenty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. (2) Perimeter Landscaping. B. (a) At least one large deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. 87-214 (h) (b) At least one small deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) At least one medium shrub for each fifteen lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. OR: (a) A minimum three (3) berm, and foot high undulating (b) Perimeter Landscaping A. (3) Perimeter Landscaping C. (a) At least one large deciduous tree for each fifty lineal feet and at least one evergreen tree for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (b) At least one small deciduous tree for each thirty lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (c) At least one medium shrub for each ten lineal feet shall be planted within the setback area. (d) Low shrubs and ground cover shall be rea- sonably dispersed throughout. OR: (a) A minimum four berm, and (4) foot high undulating (b) Perimeter Landscaping B. Landscapin9 Standards for Parkin9 Areas. (1) Interior parking area landscaping. (a) The parking area(s) shall have at least twenty (20) square feet of interior land- scaping for each space. Each required landscaped area shall contain a minimum of 100 square feet and have a minimum dimension of at least ten feet. With the provision of this landscaping, parking space size may be reduced to 9.5 x 18 feet or 171 square feet. (b) The primary landscaping material used in parking areas shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Each required landscaped area shall include at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition. The total number of trees shall not be less than one for each 200 square feet, or fraction thereof, of required interior landscaped area. The remaining area shall be land- scaped with shrubs and other vegetative material to compliment the tree landscaping. (c) Landscaping areas shall be reasonably dispersed throughout, located so as to divide and break up the expanse of paving. The area designated as required setbacks shall not be calculated as required land- scaped area. 87-215 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. (2) Peripheral parking area landscaping. (a) Peripheral landscaping shall be required along any side of a parking area that abuts land not in the right of way of a street such that: A landscaped strip at least ten (10) feet in width shall be located between the parking area and the abutting property lines, except where driveways or other openings may be required. Continuous hedge forms or at least one small tree, as outlined in this Condition, shall be planted in the landscaped strip for each fifty lineal feet. (p) Exterior lighting. Ail exterior lights shall be arranged and installed so that the direct or reflected illumination does not exceed 0.5 foot candles above background measured at the lot line of any adjoining residential district public right of way. Lighting standards shall be of a directional type capable of shielding light source from direct view. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) Architectural treatment. The architectural treatment of all buildings shall be compatible with Chesterfield Meadows Shopping Center and shall be such that no building facade (whether front, side, or rear) consists of architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance, or detail to any other facade of the same building. No portion of a building constructed of unadorned cinder block or corrugated and/or sheet metal shall be visible from any adjoining property, or public right of way. Mechanical equipment, whether ground-level or rooftop, shall be shielded and screened from public view and designed to be perceived as an integral part of the building. Detailed renderings depicting these requirelments shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with site plan review. (P) A minimum twenty-five (25) foot buffer shall be provided along the eastern boundary where adjacent to residential zoning. This buffer shall be landscaped, bermed, and/or fenced so as to effectively screen the development from the adjacent residential property. In conjunction with schematic plan review, a conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval. A detailed landscaping plan shall be sub- mitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunc- tion with final site plan review. (p) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, additional pavement, curb, and gutter shall be constructed along Route 10 for the entire property frontage. This condition may be modified by the Planning Commission at the time of schematic plan review. (T&CPC) Access for this development shall be limited to Chesterfield Meadows Drive. There shall be no direct access to Route 10. The exact location of access shall be approved by the Transportation Department at the time of schematic plan review. This condition may be modified by the Planning Commission at the time of schematic plan review. (T&CPC) Public water and sewer shall be used. (U) (Note: The conditions stated herein supersede all previ- ously imposed conditions of Conditional Use Planned Devel- opment 84S082 for Tract D.) 87-216 And further, the Board accepted the following proffered condition: Prior to the release of any building permit, the developer and County shall enter into an agreement acceptable to the County whereby the developer reserves 100 feet of right of way, measured from the centerline of Route 10. The right of way shall be dedicated to the County, free, unrestricted, and at no expense, at such time as the County prepares to improve Route 10 and the improvements necessitate all or part of the additional right of way. Said agreement shall be recorded and binding upon all successors. Vote: Unanimous 87S025 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, COWLES R. AND KATHERINE GARRISON requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 74S021) to permit a bulk exception (setback) in a Residential (R-7) District on a 0.2 acre parcel fronting approximately 62 feet on the northwest line of Northwich Terrace, approximately 460 feet southwest of Northwich Road. Tax Map 61-4 (7) Northwich, Section 2, Lot 48 (Sheet 20). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request. Mrs. Katherine Garrison stated the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request. Vote: Unanimous 87S026 In Matoaca Magisterial District, FIRST VIRGINIA BANK AND INVESTORS SAVINGS BANK requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Cases 84S082 and 85S082) relative to signs. This request lies in a Convenience Business (B-l) District on a 3 acre parcel fronting approximately 450 feet on the east line of Iron Bridge Road, also fronting approximately 200 feet on Centralia Road, and located in the so'utheast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 96-9 (1) Part of Parcel 20 (Sheet 31). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. Mr. Ron Gholson, with Investors Savings Bank, Colson, representing First Virginia. Bank, recommended conditions. and Mr. Joe accepted the There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: Two (2) freestanding signs shall be permitted to identify the uses located within the two (2) existing structures. The size, color, height, materials, lighting, and location of the freestanding signs shall be as depicted on the site plan, elevations, renderings, and Textual Statements submitted with the application. Landscaping shall be installed around the base of the freestanding signs. (P) In conjunction with the approval of this request, the Planning Commission shall grant schematic sign approval of 87-217 the two (2) signs. (P) (Note: These conditions are in addition to Conditions 4 and 8 of Conditional Use Planned Development [Case 85S082] and Condition 13[b] of Conditional Use Planned Development [Case 84S082].) Vote: Unanimous 87S033 In Midlothian Magisterial District, SIGMA G.J. ASSOCIATES/PETULA ASSOCIATES, LIMITED requested amendments to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 82S066 and 83S091) relative to building heights. This request lies in an Office Business (O) District on a 153 acre parcel fronting approximately 40 feet on the south line of Jahnke Road, also fronting approximately 4,300 feet on west line of Chippenham Parkway, and located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of these roads, also fronting the east and west lines of Chinaberry Boulevard. Tax Map 19-1 (1) Parcel 16 and Tax Map 19-9 (1) Parcel 8 (Sheet 8). Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to a single condition. Mr. Edward Willey, Jr., representing the applicants, stated the recommended condition is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved this request, subject to the following condition: Within Boulders I and Boulders II, with the exception of three (3) buildings to include a hotel, no structure shall exceed a height of six (6) stories. The three (3) struc- tures to include the hotel shall not exceed a height of eight (8) stories. The hotel, however, shall be located in Boulders I. (P) (Note: This condition supersedes Condition 20 of Case 82S066 and Condition 28 of Case 83S091.) Vote: Unanimous 87S014 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, BEXLEY WEST ASSOCIATES requested a Conditional Use to permit a recreational facility in a Residential (R-15) District on a 2.2 acre parcel lying approximately 400 feet northwest of the western terminus of Lockshire Drive. Tax Map 39-13 (8) Bexley West, Section 1 Block A, Lot 31 (Sheet 14). ' Mr. Jacobson stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request, subject to certain conditions. The applicant was not present; however, Mr. Jacobson stated that staff has contacted the attorney representing the applicant and he indicated acceptance of the recommended conditions. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board approved this request, subject to the following conditions: The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc., dated 12/15/86, shall be considered the plan of development. (p) Hours of operation shall be limited to between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday; between 8:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., Friday through Saturday. Vehicular drive- 87-218 ways shall be barricaded with a locked gate between 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., Sunday through Thursday; and between 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday. (p) Ail driveways and parking areas shall be curbed and gut- tered. (EE) Parking shall be provided on the basis of one (1) space for each ninety (90) square feet of combined swimming and wading pool areas, and four (4) spaces for each tennis court. (P) (Note: The Zoning Ordinance requires that all driveways and parking areas for six (6) or more vehicles be paved. Also, the BOCA Code requires two-way driveways to be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet in width unless local agencies grant exceptions. On a routine basis, driveways serving parking lots containing up to fifteen (15) parking spaces to be twenty (20) feet in width are permitted; and driveways serving parking lots of sixteen (16) to thirty (30) parking spaces to be twenty-two (22) feet in width.) There shall be no outside public speakers. (P) address system or Ail outdoor lighting shall be no ihigher than fifteen (15) feet and shall be designed so as not to project light into adjacent properties. All outdoor lighting shall be timed not to permit illumination after 11:00 p.m. (P) One (1) sign to be located at the entrance shall be per- mitted. This sign shall not exceed three (3) square feet in area and shall not be luminous nor illuminated. A rendering of this sign shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to erection. (P) A fifty (50) foot building setback line and buffer strip shall be maintained along the northern, southern, and western property lines of this site. No facilities shall be built within this buffer area, and it shall remain in its natural state with no clearing or access permitted, with the exception of the one (1) entrance driveway into the facility. Additional berming, plantings, and orna- mental fencing may be required to supplement this buffer, as deemed necessary by the Planning Department at the time of landscaping plan approval submitted under Condition 9. (p) In conjunction with final site plan review, and prior to the release of a building permit, a detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval. (P) 10. Transfer of ownership, and maintenance responsibility for the recreational facility, to the Homeowner Association shall not take place prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the recreation facilities, or prior to a bond being posted providing for 100% surety of the completion of all improvements to be made. (P) 11. A commercial entrance shall be provided from St. Regis Drive into the site. (VDOT) 12. Public water and sewer shall be used. (U) Vote: Unanimous The Board recessed at 3:30 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. at which time they would meet at Magnolia Grange for dinner and a work session with the Social Services Board. 87'219 Reconvening: ll.K. DINNER AND WORK SESSION WITH SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD AT MAGNOLIA GRANGE Mr. Daniel called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. (EST). Introductions were made of the members of the Social Services Board and staff who were present and dinner followed. Ms. Elsie Elmore, Chairman of the Board of Social Services, expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the Board and share with them its long-range plans and budget implications. Ms. Jean Smith, Director of the Social Services Department, presented an overview of the Department, identified the various programs, explained the extensive changes that have occurred in recent years in those various programs, the increases in service demands that have transpired, staffing weaknesses, the effect of State mandated programs upon the Department, funding resources, etc. Discussion, questions and comments ensued relative to budget objectives, current trends, funding issues and responsibilities, placement needs of adolescents, relationship with Colonial Heights, summary of department needs, etc. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with the Social Services Board and staff to discuss proposed budget requirements and long range plans. He thanked those present for the dedicated, diligent efforts all those involved in providing these services to the citizens of the County. He stated the Board will give every consideration possible to each request for funding to meet service needs. Mrs. Girone stated she was very impressed with the Department of Social Services staff and their ability to adapt and manage well and she felt the County is very fortunate to have such dedicated, diligent staff. Mr. Mayes stated the Social Services Department's record speaks for itself, however, he did not feel the Department received sufficient credit for their efforts. Ms. Smith expressed concerns relative to the overwhelming workload on staff, the need for relief in the benefit program and the potential for losing qualified staff to better paying positions. Mrs. Elmore expressed disappointment for the constraints affecting staff salary increases and concern relative to the transition to the merit system. Mr. Daniel requested staff prepare a report, prior to the next work session, outlining the job categories that are not paralleling jobs in the private sector, how much such funding will cost etc. ' Mr. Applegate stated, based on the scope of information provided, it appears that to maintain the public health, safety and welfare service levels and meet growth demands, it will be necessary to address new avenues for generating additional revenues. He stated the task before the Board would be a difficult one. Mr. Daniel reiterated the Board's appreciation for the patience, dedicated service and diligent efforts given to the County by staff. 87-220 12. AI~OUI~ On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board adjourned at 7:30 p.m., until 7:00 p.m., on April 1, 1987. Vote: Unanimous County Administrator arry G~. Daniel Chairman 87-221