Loading...
11-23-2004 Packet CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Subiect: County Administrator' s Comments Item Number: 2.A. County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Mr. Cliff Bickford, Chairman, Government Relations Committee for the Chesterfield Business Council will make a presentation to the Board of Supervisors regarding their initiatives for 2005 and beyond. Preparer: Lisa Elko Attachments: ~] Yes NO Title: Clerk to the Board ~)0000~ CHESTERFIELD BUSINESS COUNCIL GOVERNMENT RELATIONS 11/23/2004 2004 COUNTY ACCOMPLISHMENTS BPOL CLOVERLEAF MALL BOND REFERENDUM 288 2005 CBC INITIATIVES TRANSPORTATION - BUDGET SURPLUS RAIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP LONG TERM ECD/ROI CLIFF BICKFORD, CHAIRMAN GOVERNMENT RELATIONS CHESTERFIELD BUSINESS COUNCIL CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 2.B. Subject: County Administrator's Comments County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) each year recognizes budgets which meet certain rigorous standards. The GFOA has awarded Chesterfield the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the biennium beginning July 1, 2004 and ending June 30, 2006. This is the 21st consecutive year that Chesterfield has won this award and the first time the county has won for a biennial budget. This is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting. In order to receive the award a government must produce a document that meets certain criteria as a policy document, as an operation guide, as a financial plan, and as a communications device. Staff appreciates the support and leadership of the Board and will continue to improve the quality and effectiveness of the County's biennial financial plan. Preparer: RebeccaT. Dickson Attachments: ~ Yes Title: Director, Bud.qet and Manaqement NO OOO00;2 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~ Date: November 23, 2004 Subject: County Administrator's Comments Item Number: 2.C. County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: The Accounting Department has completed preparation of the County's FY04 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which includes financial statements audited by KPMG, LLP, independent auditors. Elizabeth Foster, engagement partner from KPMG, LLP, will be at the meeting to formally present the report to the Board as required by the Code of Virginia. Preparer: Mary Lou Lyle Title: Director of Accounting Attachments: ~----] Yes No ~000003 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 5. Subject: Resolution Recognizing the YMCA of Greater Richmond for Outstanding Community Service County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: ~ Board Action Requested: Mr. Miller has requested that the Board of Supervisors adopt this resolution marking the 150th anniversary of the YMCA of Greater Richmond. Summary of Information: This resolution publicly recognizes the outstanding community service provided by the YMCA of Greater Richmond. Preparer: Donald J. Kappel Attachments: Yes ~-~ No Title: Director, Public Affairs #000004 RECOGNIZING THE YMCA OF GREATER RICHMOND WHEREAS, the YMCA was chartered continuously for 150 years; and in 1854 and has served WHEREAS, the Manchester YMCA was founded in 1967; the Midlothian YMCA in 1995 and the Chester YMCA in 1997; and WHEREAS, the YMCA provides quality services for individuals and families in a wholesome, safe, caring and nurturing environment; and WHEREAS, the mission of the YMCA is to put Christian principles into practice through programs that build healthy spirits, minds and bodies; and WHEREAS, the YMCA of Greater Richmond is one of the largest non- profit charitable providers of human services in Greater Richmond, and in Petersburg, Chesterfield, Goochland, Hanover, Henrico and Powhatan counties, serving some 130,000 people each year with programs that build strong children, strong families and strong communities; and WHEREAS, through the generosity of YMCA friends, the YMCA of Greater Richmond provides more than $4.4 million each year in financial assistance to ensure that nearly 18,000 people from all parts of the community are able to participate in YMCA programs and services; and WHEREAS, through 25,000 swim lessons taught; 11,000 young people involved in organized sports; 3,000 children starting school with the supplies they need and 2,500 children participating in YMCA child care each day, the YMCA is fulfilling its mission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 23rd day of November 2004, publicly recognizes the outstanding community service provided by the YMCA of Greater Richmond; expresses, on behalf of all Chesterfield County residents, gratitude for the wide variety of services and programs offered by the YMCA; and proclaims Monday, November 29, 2004 through Monday, December 6, 2004, as ~YMCA Week" in Chesterfield County, Virginia. 000005 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 7.A. Subject: Authorize the Chesterfield County Health Commission to Make an Application for a Rezoning and Conditional Use to Permit Construction of Additional Living Units at Lucy Corr Village on Parcels Owned by the County (Tax ID Nos. 769665990300000, 773665252300000 and 771665335400000) County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chesterfield County Health Commission to make an application for rezoning and conditional use to permit construction of a convalescence center and detached and attached residential units on parcels owned by the County (Tax ID Nos. 769665990300000, 773665252300000 and 771665335400000). Approval of this agenda item does not obligate the Board of Supervisors to approve the requested rezoning or to transfer title of the County parcels. Summary of Information: The Board of Supervisors on October 27, 2004 deferred action on this item for 30 days to obtain more information on the impact of this project. In November 2002, the Chesterfield County Health Center Commission established a five-year strategic plan for Lucy Corr Village with the participation of County officials and industry leaders. This plan included exploring the feasibility of expanding the current campus to provide a full continuum of care and services for seniors in Chesterfield County. The 2003 Committee on the Future's Report reinforced the Commission's position that an expansion of the facility's services was needed and that this expansion would be critical to the financial future of Lucy Corr Village, given current and forecasted changes among the senior population market. Further, the Commission initiated a study in 2003 that concluded that the Chesterfield Preparer: Bradford S. Hammer Attachments: ~ Yes No Title: Deputy County Administrator 1923:67225.1 # O0000G CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 market would support substantially more than the 102 apartments and cottages proposed in the Lucy Corr Village Project. The proposed expansion would allow Lucy Corr Village to register with the Commonwealth of Virginia as a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) and help meet the need for a full continuum of services for seniors identified in the County's 2003 Committee on the Future Report. On February 5, 2004, the Health Center Commission decided to proceed with pre-development planning for the expansion project and hired a development manager. The pre-development phase has produced a preliminary master plan for the construction and operation of 102 apartments and cottages to be licensed by the Virginia Department of Social Services as assisted living units. The project contemplates using three parcels currently owned by the County (as well as two parcels owned by the Commission) and is contingent upon Board approval of a rezoning and conditional use. The Board's authorization to file the zoning application is necessary because three of the five parcels are owned by the County. The Health Center Commission at its September 2, 2004 meeting requested permission from the Board of Supervisors to proceed with a rezoning and conditional use of the County parcels. If the zoning is approved, the Board of Supervisors would then need to determine at a separate public hearing whether to transfer title of the affected parcels from Chesterfield County to the Health Center Commission. Approval of this agenda item does not obligate the Board to rezone the parcels or transfer title to the Commission, which would need to be accomplished (if at all) pursuant to separate public hearings at a later date. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Health Commission to make an application for the necessary rezoning on County property. 000007 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~ Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 7.B. Subiect: Deferred Streetlight Installations Cost Approvals County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: This item requests Board approval of deferred new streetlight installations in the Bermuda District. Summary of Information: Streetlight requests from individual citizens or civic groups are received in the Department of Environmental Engineering. Staff requests cost quotations from Dominion Virginia Power for each request received. When the quotations are received, staff re-examines each request and presents them at the next available regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors for consideration. Staff provides the Board with an evaluation of each request based on the following criteria: 1. Streetlights should be located at intersections; o There should be a minimum average of 600 vehicles per day (VPD) passing the requested location if it is an intersection, or 400 VPD if the requested location is not an intersection; CONTINUED NEXT PAGE Preparer: Richard M. McElfish Attachments: Yes Title: Director, Environmental Engineering No 000005 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Summary of Information: (Continued) o Petitions are required and should include 75% of residents within 200 feet of the requested location and if at an intersection, a majority of those residents immediately adjacent to the intersection. Cost quotations from Dominion Virginia Power are valid for a period of 60 days. The Board, upon presentation of the cost quotation may approve, defer, or deny the expenditure of funds from available District Improvement Funds for the streetlight installation. If the expenditure is approved, staff authorizes Dominion Virginia Power to install the streetlight. A denial of a project will result in its cancellation and the District Improvement Fund will be charged the design cost shown; staff will notify the requestor of the denial. Projects cannot be deferred for more than 30 days due to quotation expiration. Quotation expiration has the same effect as a denial. BERMUDA DISTRICTs DEFERRED FROM THE NOVEMBER 11, 2004 MEETING In the Amherst Subdivision: Amherst Oak Lane, vicinity of 16706 Cost to install streetlight: $791.18 (Design Costs $93.93) Does not meet minimum criteria for intersection or vehicles Der day Amherst Ridge Way, vicinity of 2900 Cost to install streetlight: $760.29 (Design Costs $93.93) Does not meet minimum criterion for intersection For information regarding available balances in the District Improvement Fund accounts, please reference the District Improvement Fund Report. 000009 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: July 1,2004 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Estimate Received: October 28, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 118 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. Chris Mallory ADDRESS: Amherst Homeowners Association - Streetlight Chairman 2707 Amherst Ridge Way Colonial Heights, VA 23834 REQUESTED LOCATION: Amherst Oak Lane, vicinity of 16706 Cost to install streetlight: $791.18 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "These lights are submitted by the homeowners association. Locations were determined on the bases of availability of nearby transformers in order to reduce costs. This subdivision has active residents, many of who walk or jog in the evening. There are also young children who ride bicycles and skate in the early evening. Streetlights will make these activities much safer. Our subdivision is directly off a busy highway. Into the late night and early morning hours streetlights serve as a deterrent to crime, discouraging persons who may drive in looking for a easy target." Staff notes that this item was deferred from the November 10, 2004 Board of Supervisors meeting pending comments from the requestor. Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight information was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 2OO 100 0 200 Feet O000~L:I. STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: July 1,2004 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Estimate Received: October 28, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 118 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. Chris Mallory ADDRESS: Amherst Homeowners Association - Streetlight Chairman 2707 Amherst Ridge Way Colonial Heights, VA 23834 REQUESTED LOCATIONS: Amherst Ridge Way, vicinity of 2900 Cost to install streetlight: $760.29 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Qualified Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "These lights are submitted by the homeowners association. Locations were determined on the bases of availability of nearby transformers in order to reduce costs. This subdivision has active residents, many of who walk or jog in the evening. There are also young children who ride bicycles and skate in the early evening. Streetlights will make these activities much safer. Our subdivision is directly off a busy highway. Into the late night and early morning hours streetlights serve as a deterrent to crime, discouraging persons who may drive in looking for a easy target." Staff notes that this item was deferred from the November 10, 2004 Board of Supervisors meeting pending comments from the requestor. 0000 Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight information was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 200 100 200 Feet O 0000:13 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meeting Date: November 23? 2004 Item Number: 8.A. Subiect: FY2004 Results of Operations and Set Date for Public Hearing to Appropriate Funds Administrator's Comments: / --cj County /~__~__. ~~. ,,~~ (.¢o-~ County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Approve the actions for year-end FY2004 Results of Operations as outlined below and set December 15, 2004 for a public hearing to appropriate funds for non-recurring items. Summary of Information: As outlined on the attachment, the county ended FY2004 with a $7.5 million increase above the projected ending undesignated fund balance, after adjustments for pending Hurricane Isabel reimbursements. Staff requests approval of the following actions with respect to undesignated ending fund balance. If all recommendations are approved, undesignated general fund balance is projected to be $40.9 million through FY2006 consistent with the Board of Supervisors financial policies of keeping undesignated fund balance at 7.5 percent of general governmental expenditures. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Attachments: Ycs r---] No Title: Director of Budqet& Management CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Summary of Information (continued) General County Recommendations 1) Appropriate $408,037 in FY2005 for the following: $60,000 for the 2004 referendum expenditures, $257,800 for pay plan adjustments in three departments and $90,237 for use in the Comprehensive Services fund to address a year-end shortfall for FY2004. 2) Designate appropriations, FY2006. $2,163,220 in surplus revenue and $226,540 in unspent totaling $2,389,760 for non-recurring items for use in School Recomx~endations Set December 15, 2004 for a public hearing to appropriate $3,077,862 in FY2005 for the following: 1) $48,589 to the School Fund to address a FY2004 year-end shortfall in the Comprehensive Services fund and 2) $3,029,273 for non-recurring items that will be ordered in FY2005 for use in the 2005-2006 school year. Funding is comprised of $23,603 in surplus property tax revenue (after contribution to fund balance), $1,247,157 in surplus state sales tax revenue and $1,807,102 in unspent appropriations (including tax relief), totaling $3,077,862. 0000~$ FY2004 Results of Operations Projected Fund Balance at June 30, 2004 FY2004 Chanqes to Fund Balance Additions: Property Taxes State Sales Taxes, Education All other surplus revenue (net of reserves) Expenditure Savings - (net of reserves) TOTAL, Additions to Fund Balance $1,690,506 1,247,157 5,773,475 2,236,702 $10,947,840 Adjustments: Hurricane Isabel accrual - Federal and state Misc. Correction TOTAL, Adjustments to Fund Balance ($3,379,255) (16,726) ($3,395,981) Change in Fund Balance, Adjusted for Hurricane Isabel Undesignated Fund Balance at June 30, 2004, Adjusted for Hurricane Isabel $38,472,6OO $7,551,859 $46,024,459 Proposed Uses of Undesiqnated Fund Balance Schools - For Use in FY2005/FY2006 for Non-Recurring Items CSA adjustment - FY2004 shortfall Property Taxes (after contribution to fund balance) Unspent Appropriations (including tax relief) State Sales Tax County - For Use in FY2005 for Non-Recurring Items CSA adjustment - FY2004 shortfall Bond referendum expenditures Pay Plan Adjustments in Three Departments County - For Use in FY2006 for Non-Recurring Items Unspent Appropriations All other surplus revenue (net of reserves) Total Proposed Uses of Undesignated Fund Balance Budgeted FY2005 Addition to Fund Balance Undesignated Fund Balance Projected Through FY2006 * Includes $1,676,200 addition to fund balance. $48,589 $23,6O3 1,758,513 1,247,157 $90,237 60,000 257,800 226,540 2,163,220 $3,077,862 $406,037 $2,389,760 ($5,875,659) $750,000 $40,898,800 ooooa.~? O000~t.$ 0000~,9 Z 0000;~0 O000Z~. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: Subiect: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.B. Nominations/Appointments to the Youth Services Citizen Board County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Nominate/appoint members to serve on the Youth Services Citizen Board. Summary of Information: The purpose of the Youth Services Citizen Board (YSCB) is to advise the Board of Supervisors regarding planning and policies affecting youth development and to provide a community forum to focus on youth issues. Mato&ca District. Supervisor Humphrey has recommended that the Board appoint DoD_nell McLean Sr., an adult, to the Youth Services Citizen Board for a term effective immediately and expiring June 30, 2007. Mr. McLean meets all eligibility requirements to fill the vacancy and has indicated his willingness to serve. Under existing Rules of Procedure, appointments to boards and committees are nominated at one meeting and appointed at the subsequent meeting unless the Rules of Procedure are suspended by a unanimous vote of the Board members present. Nominees are voted on in the order in which they are nominated. Preparer: Jana D. Carter Title: Director1 Youth Planning and Development Attachments: [Yes No # 000022 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 4 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Subiect: Streetlight Installations Cost Approvals Item Number: 8.C. County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: This item requests Board approval of new streetlight installations in the Bermuda, Clover Hill, Dale, Matoaca, and Midlothian Districts; and approval of :additional funding for a previously approved streetlight installation in the Clover Hill District. Summary of Information: Streetlight requests from individual citizens or civic groups are received in the Department of Environmental Engineering. Staff requests cost quotations from Dominion Virginia Power for each request received. When the quotations are received, staff re-examines each request and presents them at the next available regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors for consideration. Staff provides the Board with an evaluation of each request based on the following criteria: 1. Streetlights should be located at intersections; CONTINUED NEXT PAGE Preparer: Richard M. McElfish Attachments: Yes Title: Director, Environmental Engineering No O000;Z8 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 4 Summary of Information: (Continued) o There should be a minimum average of 600 vehicles per day (VPD) passing the requested location if it is an intersection, or 400 VPD if the requested location is not an intersection; o Petitions are required and should include 75% of residents within 200 feet of the requested location and if at an intersection, a majority of those residents immediately adjacent to the intersection. Cost quotations from Dominion Virginia Power are valid for a period of 60 days. The Board, upon presentation of the cost quotation may approve, defer, or deny the expenditure of funds from available District Improvement Funds for the streetlight installation. If the expenditure is approved, staff authorizes Dominion Virginia Power to install the streetlight. A denial of a project will result in its cancellation and the District Improvement Fund will be charged the design cost shown; staff will notify the requestor of the denial. Projects cannot be deferred for more than 30 days due to quotation expiration. Quotation expiration has the same effect as a denial. BERMUDA DISTRICT: In the Rayon Park Subdivision: Senate Street, vicinity of 7800 Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 (Design Cost: $185.86) Does not meet minimum criteria for intersection or vehicles Der day Botone Avenue and Senate Street Cost to install streetlight: $491.39 (Design Cost: $185.86) Does not meet minimum criterion for vehicles Der day Congress Road and Senate Street Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 (Design Cost: $185.86) Does not meet minimum criterion for vehicles Der day CONTINUED NEXT PAGE 000024 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 3 of 4 Summary of Information: (Continued) BERMUDA DISTRICT (CONTINUED): In the Rayon Park Subdivision (Continued): Congress Road, vicinity of 2712 Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 (Design Cost: $185.86) Does not meet minimum criteria for intersection or vehicles Der day CLOVER HILL DISTRICT: In the Clarendon Subdivision: Hollyglen Court, in the cul-de-sac Cost to install streetlight: $2,167.83 (Design Cost: $185.86) Does not meet minimum criteria for intersection or vehicles Der day In the Muirfield Green Subdivision: On July 28, 2004, the Board approved an installation meeting all minimum criteria at the intersection of Muirfield Green Drive and Nuttree Woods Drive. The approved funding for this installation was in the amount of $4,745.20. In the intervening months Dominion Virginia Power has been working with nearby residents to acquire the necessary easements for this installation. Opposition to the originally engineered installation site has resulted in the necessity to relocate the installation. The relocation will result in an additional cost of $2,094.61, raising the total cost for this installation to $6,839.81. Dominion Virginia Power has acquired all the necessary easements for the new location. Additional cost to install streetlight: (Design Cost: $371.72) Meets all minimum criteria $2,094.61 CONTINUED NEXT PAGE 000025 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 4 of 4 Summary of Information: (Continued) DALE DISTRICTs In the Creek Meadow Subdivision: Clearview Drive, in the cul-de-sac Cost to install streetlight: $&33.30 (Design Costs $185.86) Does not meet minimum criteria for intersection or vehicles Der day MATOACA DISTRICTs River Road, vicinity of 8414 Cost to install streetlight: $400.48 (Design Costs $185.86) Does not m~et minimum criteria for intersection MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICTs At the entrance to the Edgehill Subdivision: · Iron Mill Road and 01d Bon Air Road Cost to install streetlight: $585.17 (Design Costs $185.86) Meets &ll minimum criteria For information regarding available balances in the District Improvement Fund accounts, please reference the District Improvement Fund Report. 000026 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: June 30, 2004 Estimate Received: November 1,2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. Wade Sprouce ADDRESS: 7800 Senate Street Richmond, VA 23237 REQUESTED LOCATION: Senate Street, vicinity of 7800 Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 122 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "Our street is very dark. We need light to help stop all the crime and teenage meaness running around all hours of the night." O000Z'7 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: June 30, 2004 Estimate Received: November 1,2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. Donald Sanner ADDRESS: 6223 Strathmore Road Richmond, VA 23234 REQUESTED LOCATION: Botone Avenue and Senate Street Cost to install streetlight: $491.39 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 122 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Requestor Comments: None Qualified Not Qualified, less than 600 Vehicles per Day Qualified 000028 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: June 30, 2004 Estimate Received: November 1,2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. William C. Brooks ADDRESS: 7848 Senate Street Richmond, VA 23237 REQUESTED LOCATION: Congress Road and Senate Street Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 122 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "Our street is very dark. We need light to help prevent all the break-ins we have been having. Teens gangs wanderings around at all hours during the night. Street lights would help prevent crime. Crooks don't want to be seen. Please help us get these needed streetlights to help our neighborhood be safer." 000029 Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlig ht info rmation was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 480 240 480 Feet 000030 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Bermuda District Request Received: June 30, 2004 Estimate Received: November 1,2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: ADDRESS: Ms. Lottie Pritchard 2706 Congress Road Richmond, VA 23237 REQUESTED LOCATION: 2712 Congress Road Cost to install streetlight: $484.58 Estimate Requested: July 2, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 122 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "We have a lot of crime in our neighborhood. We are old retired people. My husband is very ill and worries about me going outside at night. It is very dark. We need lights to help us feel safe and to help cut down on crime in our area." 0OOO31 Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight information was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 440 220 0 440 Feet 000032 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Clover Hill District Request Received: May 25, 2004 Estimate Received: November 1,2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mr. Charles P. Wright, Sr. ADDRESS: 3206 Hollyglen Court Midlothian, VA 23112 REQUESTED LOCATION: Hollyglen Court, in the cul-de-sac Cost to install streetlight: $2,167,83 Estimate Requested: May 25, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 160 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "As the residents of Hollyglen Court, we are requesting a streetlight be placed in the cul-de-sac for various reasons. Over the last 8 months we have had reported to the Chesterfield Police numerous times the drug activity at night which takes place in the middle of the road. Some of our neighbors have had houses and cars vandalized. We feel that this is due to the people using the gas line cut-through. These people do not live on our street. They are just passing through for whatever reason. A light may deter their activity in the cul-de-sac. Also we have had, as you know, a police officer shot and killed in the area. And the latest incident was a 5:00 am shooting behind us into another house. In the summer, people are out at all hours on the night. Please install it for the safety of our young children." 0000~3 Street Light Request Map November 25, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight info rmation was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 20O 100 200 Feet 000034 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Dale District Request Received: May 6, 2004 Estimate Requested: May 6, 2004 Estimate Received: November 3, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 183 NAME OF REQUESTOR: ADDRESS: Ms. Cynthia Moore President, Meadow Creek Home Owners Association 3300 Creek Meadow Circle Richmond, VA 23234 REQUESTED LOCATION: Clearview Drive, in the cul-de-sac Cost to install streetlight: $433.30 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Not Qualified, less than 400 Vehicles per Day Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "We would like to provide homeowners with light in dark areas. This will help homeowners be able to see people who are trying to hang on corners and it will be a deterrent for any type of crime activity." OOOO35 Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight information was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 248 120 240 Feet 000036 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Matoaca District Request Received: May 25, 2004 Estimate Received: November 3, 2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Ms. Debora Palumbo ADDRESS: 8414 River Road Petersburg, VA 23803 Estimate Requested: May 25, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 189 REQUESTED LOCATION: River Road, vicinity of 8414 Cost to install streetlight: $400.48 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Not Qualified, location is an intersection Qualified Qualified Requestor Comments: None 000037 Street Light Request Map November 25, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office. Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetlight installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existin g streetlig ht info rmation was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 826 412.6 0 826 Feet 000038 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Midlothian District Request Received: March 22, 2004 Estimate Received: November 4, 2004 NAME OF REQUESTOR: ADDRESS: Ms. Claudia Franklin 10104 Iron Mill Road Richmond, VA 23235 REQUESTED LOCATIONS: Iron Mill Road and Old Bon Air Road Cost to install streetlight: $585.17 Estimate Requested: March 22, 2004 Days Estimate Outstanding: 227 POLICY CRITERIA: Intersection: Vehicles Per Day: Petition: Qualified Qualified Qualified Requestor Comments: Requestor states: "This is a request for a light at this intersection. It is very difficult at night to see where you need to turn." 000039 Street Light Request Map November 23, 2004 This map is a copyrighted product of the Chesterfield County GIS Office, Street Light Legend ~ existing light · requested light N This map shows citizen requested streetli~tht installations in relation to existing streetlights. Existing streetlight info rmation was obtained from the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. 36O 180 360 Feet 000040 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: Subject: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.l.a. Resolution Recognizing Sergeant Nathan Necolettos for His Contribution to the War Against Global Terrorism County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Mr. Warren requested the adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: The Board of Supervisors will recognize Sergeant Nathan Necolettos, United States Army for his courageous service and sacrifice. Preparer: Lisa Elko Title: Clerk to the Board Attachments: Yes ~ No 00004:1- RECOGNIZING SERGEANT NATHAN NECOLETTOS FOR HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WAR AGAINST GLOBAL TERRORISM WHEREAS, on September 11, 2001, the United States was stunned when terrorists hijacked airplanes and attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing and injuring thousands of people; and WHEREAS, as a result of these attacks, the United States military entered into a war against global terrorism; and WHEREAS, this military response has included ~Operation Noble Eagle," involving homeland defense and civil support missions; ~Operation Enduring Freedom," formerly known as ~Operation Infinite Justice," to destroy the terrorist training camps and infrastructure within Afghanistan, the capture of al Qaeda leaders, and the cessation of terrorist activities in Afghanistan; ~Operation Vigilant Resolve," to isolate and root out the terrorist forces responsible for repeated attacks on coalition forces in Fallujah, Iraq; and ~Operation Iraqi Freedom," to free the people of Iraq from years of tyranny under the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, who also sponsored terrorism; and WHEREAS, each of these operations was conducted to make the United States, and the world, a safer place; and WHEREAS, among the hundreds of thousands of military personnel mobilized for this war effort were scores of Chesterfield County residents and employees who serve in the reserve components of the various military services; and WHEREAS, Sergeant Nathan Necolettos, Army Reserve, is one of the courageous Americans who answered the call to duty unflinchingly and honorably; and WHEREAS, this Board of Supervisors supports the President and our troops, and commends the reserve military personnel who served in these military operations for their courageous service and sacrifice; and WHEREAS, the families of these military men and women also bear a great sacrifice and uncertainty in the absence of their loved ones serving in far-off lands; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to recognize the courage and sacrifice of our reservists and their families during this difficult time. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 23rd day of November 2004, recognizes the sacrifice and courage of Sergeant Nathan Necolettos, and expresses its gratitude to him for making the world a safer place for freedom-loving people everywhere. 000042 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.l.b. Subiect: Resolution Confirming Proceedings of the Chesterfield County Industrial Development Authority for Issuance of Industrial Revenue Bonds Not to Exceed $2,000,000 to Assist B and B Printing Company, Incorporated, in Financing the Acquisition and Installation of a Printing Press and Related Production Equipment County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution in support of B&B Printing Co., Inc. Summary of Information: B&B Printing Co., Inc., a Virginia corporation, is located at 521 Research Road in Chesterfield County, Virginia. They are the largest commercial printer in Chesterfield County. Approximately, 12 to 20 employees will be added because of this investment. The public hearing was held on October 28, 2004, and no members of the general public were present. Preparer: James G. Dunn Attachments: Yes ~ No Title: Director, Economic Development #000043 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield (the "Authority") has considered the application of B&B Printing Co., Inc., a Virginia corporation (the "Company"), for the issuance of the Authority's industrial development revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000 (the "Bonds") to assist in financing the acquisition and installation of a printing press and related production equipment (the "Project"), in the Company's commercial printing facility located at 521 Research Road in Chesterfield County, Virginia (the "County"), and to pay certain costs of issuance of the bonds, and has held a public hearing thereon on October 28, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the Board to approve the issuance of the Bonds to comply with Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Tax Code"), and Section 15.2-4906 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended (the "Virginia Code"); and WHEREAS, a copy of the Authority's resolution agreeing preliminarily to assist the Company with the financing of the Project, upon terms to be agreed upon by the Authority and the Company as expressed in such resolution, a record of the public heating at which such resolution was adopted, reaffirmed and ratified in its entirety, a copy of the resolution adopted at such public hearing and a "fiscal impact statement" with respect to the Project have been filed with the Board; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, approves the issuance 000044 of the Bonds by the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield for the benefit of the Company, to the extent required by the Tax Code and the Virginia Code, to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by the Tax Code and the Virginia Code, does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the Company; and, as required by Section 15.2-4909 of the Virginia Code, the Bonds shall provide that neither the County nor the Authority shall be obligated to pay the Bonds or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and moneys pledged therefor, and neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth, the County or the Authority shall be pledged thereto. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 707131v2 -2- 0O00415 CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION The undersigned Chairman of the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield (the "Authority") hereby certifies as follows: 1. A special meeting of the Authority was duly called and held on October 28, 2004, at 3:30 p.m., in the conference room of the Chesterfield County Economic Development Department at 9401 Courthouse Road, Suite B, Chesterfield, Virginia. The meeting was open to the public. At such meeting all of the Directors of the Authority were present or absent as follows: PRESENT: James A. Spencer John L. Ruckart, Jr. James E. Briggs Henry L. Moore John Hughes John V. Cogbill, III ABSENT: Willie Lanier 2. The Chairman announced the commencement of a public hearing on the application of B&B Printing Co., Inc., a Virginia corporation, and announced that a notice of the hearing was published once a week for two consecutive weeks, the first publication being not more than 28 days nor less than 14 days prior to the hearing, in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, a newspaper having general circulation in the City of Richmond, Virginia (the "Notice"). A copy of the Notice attached to a Proof of Publication of such Notice has been filed with the records of the Authority and is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 3. The individuals noted on Exhibit 2 appeared and addressed the Authority. A reasonably detailed summary of their statements, together with the Fiscal Impact Statement required by the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, under the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act, are attached hereto as Exhibits 2 and 3, respectively. 000046 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is a true, correct and complete copy of a resolution (the "Resolution") adopted at such meeting of the Authority by the following vote of the Directors present at such meeting: Directors Vote James A. Spencer Aye John L. Ruckart, Jr. Aye James E. Briggs Aye Henry L. Moore Aye John Hughes Aye John V. Cogbill, III Aye -2- 000047 The Resolution constitutes all formal action taken by the Authority at such meeting relating to matters referred to in the Resolution. The Resolution has not been repealed, revoked, rescinded or amended, and is in full force and effect, on the date hereof. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Authority this --~tf day of October, 2004. (SEAL) · CChmrman, Industrial D.~'/opment Authority of the County of Chesterfield -3- 000048 An Affiliate of Media General Advertising Affidavit (This is not a bill. Please pay from invoice) WIT .I ,IAM~q MI TI,T .F,N CHRISTIAN ~ DORRIN~ 107.1 F. CARY ~TREET RICHMOND VA 2~3 ] 9 P.O. Box 85333 Richmond, Virginia 23293-0001 (804) 649-6000 Account Num. 07~280 10/21/2004 [ Date Code Description Ad Size Total Cost 10/21/2004 121 NOTICE OF PIIRI,IC HEARING ON PROPO~qF, DINT)I 2.00 x 33.00 668.28 ATTACH Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed industrial Development Bond Financing By Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield Notice i~s hereby given that the Indu~tria{ Development Authority of the uounty of Chestedieid (the "Authority") will ho{d a pub{ic hearing on the appliCation and plan of financing'of B&B Printing Co. In.c. (the "Company") whose princ_ip.al place of busines, s is Iocateo at 521 Research Roao, H cnmond Chesten e d County), Virginia 23236, for the Authority to issue, pursuant to{ the Virginia Industrial Development andReven, ue Bond Act (the "Act") up to $2 000.~000 of its indus,'iai devejopment revenue bonos to assist the [Jompany in acquiring ano instalJing a print-, lng press and related equipment (the "Pro ecl') in the Compa- ny~_s commercial printing facility located at 521 Research Road{ in Chesterfield County, Virginia. The public hearing, wh}ch may be continued or adjournea, will be herd at 3:30 p.m. on October 28, 2004, before the Authority, in.the conference room of the{ Chesterfield County Economic uevelopment Department at[ 9401 Courthouse Road Suite B, Chestedieid, VirGinia. As re- quired by the Act, the bonds will not pledge the fa~ and credit! or taxing power of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Chesterfield Courrty or the Authority but will be payable sorely from revenues dedved from the Company and pledged therefor. Any person interested in the issuance of the bonds or the location or pur- pose o.[f the proposed project may appear to be heard. A copy of the.uompany's..app,catiqn may be inspected at the Authon- ty's Grace at the uOunty Office Of Economic Development at 9401 Courthouse Road, Suite B, Chesterfield, Virginia, during business hours. Industrial D~evelopment Authority of the uounty of Chesterfield By: James A. Spencer Chairman HERE Media General Operations, Inc. Publisher of THE RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH This is to certify that the attached NOTICE OF PITRI,IC HEAR]-N was published by Richmond Times-Dispatch, Inc. in the City of Richmond, State of Virginia, on the following dates: 10/14/2004 10/21/2004 The first insertion being given .... Newspaper reference: ]$93550 Sworn to and subscribed before me this _ [[,~'_~_~_~ Notary Public State of Virginia City of Richmond l 0/14/20O4 Supervisor ~, j/ My Commission expires THIS IS NOT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THANK YOU 000049 EXHIBIT 2 Summary of Statements Mr. R. Hart Lee of Williams, Mullen, Clark & Dobbins, bond counsel for the proposed issue, advised the directors that, under the Virginia Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act and federal tax law, the issuance of the Bonds by the Issuer to finance facilities in the County of Chesterfield required a public hearing and the concurrence in the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority and the Board. Mr. John Sherwood, CFO of the Applicant, described the history and operations of the Applicant and the components of the proposed financing project, including the background of the Applicant in Chesterfield County, the proposed project to be financed in Chesterfield County and the benefits expected to be derived from the project. No other members of the public appeared to speak at the public hearing. -2- 000050 FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT Exhibit 3 October 28, 2004 Date B&B Printinq Co., Inc. Applicant Press and related equipment at 521 Research Road Facility Maximum amount of financing sought $_2,000,000 Estimated taxable value of the facility's real property to be constructed in the municipality N/A Estimated real property tax per year using present tax rates $ 11,400 Estimated personal property tax per year using present tax rates $ 17,800 Estimated merchants' capital tax per year using present tax rates N/A a. Estimated dollar value per year of goods that will be purchased from Virginia companies within the locality $ 2,900,000 b. Estimated dollar value per year of goods that will be purchased from non-Virginia companies within the locality $ 400,000 c. Estimated dollar value per year of services that will be purchased from Virginia companies within the locality $ 1,900,000 d. Estimated dollar value per year of services that will be purchased from non-Virginia companies within the locality $ 250,000 Estimated number of regular employees on year round basis 81 Average annual salary p6r employee $ 44,300 Authority Chairman - Industna Deve opment AuthontC"of the County of Chesterfield Name of Authority 00005:1. EXHIBIT 4 RESOLUTION RATIFYING PRIOR RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF UP TO $2,000,000 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF HNANCING MANUFACTURING FACILITIESTO BE LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield (the "Authority"), a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, has previously adopted on October 14, 2004, a resolution (the "Prior Resolution") for the benefit of B&B Printing Co., Inc., a Virginia corporation (the "Applicant"), indicating the Authority's willingness to issue its revenue bonds to assist in the f'mancing of the acquisition and installation of a printing press and related production equipment (the "Project") in the Company's commercial printing facility located at 521 Research Road in Chesterfield County, Virginia (the "County"); WHEREAS, in connection with the Prior Resolution, the Applicant acknowledged the necessity of the Authority holding a public heating on the issuance of the bonds for the Project and requesting, prior to the issuance of the bonds, the approval of the financing of the Project by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia (the "Board of Supervisors"), in accordance with the requirements of Section 147(0 of the Intemal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Tax Code"), and Section 15.2-4906 of the Virginia Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, after due publication of notice, the Authority has held a public heating on the issuance of the bonds for the Project as required by the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD: 1. The Prior Resolution is hereby adopted, reaff'mned and ratified in its entirety, as fully as if set forth herein. 2. The Authority hereby recommends and requests that the Board of Supervisors approve the issuance of the Bonds within sixty days of the date of the adoption of this resolution. The Authority hereby directs the Secretary of the Authority to submit to the Board of Supervisors this resolution, the Applicant's Fiscal Impact Statement, and a summary of the public hearing held by the Authority prior to the adoption of this resolution. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall remain in full force and effect until the fa'st regularly scheduled meeting of the Authority occurring more than two years after the date of adoption of this resolution, at which time it shall terminate unless specifically extended by the Authority. 1093535vl 000052 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~ Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.1.c. Subiect: Adopting a Resolution Requesting Virginia Department of Transportation to Accept a Portion of Marina Drive Into the State Highway System County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve resolution requesting acceptance of Marina Drive into the System. the attached State Highway Summary of Information: Marina Drive meets the requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation for no-cost Rural Addition into the Secondary System of State Highways. This designation will be the first step in providing enhanced access to the Falling Creek Park and Ironworks Historic Site. Future roadway extension will access the lower portion of the Park and allow closure of an existing ingress/egress easement, which bisects the historic area and hampers development of the historic resources. Preparer: Michael S. Golden Attachments: Yes Title: Director, Parks and Recreation ~--~ No # RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT A PORTION OF MARINA DRIVE INTO THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the street described below is shown on the plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street described below to the secondary system of highways, pursuant to § 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. Change to Secondary System of State Highways: Basis for Change: Addition, new subdivision street Statutory Reference: S33.1-229 Project: Marina Drive From: Existing intersection of Route 1/301, Jefferson Davis Highway and Marina Drive, east then north TO: Terminus, a distance of 0.25 miles Right of Way was filed on March 19, 1964, with the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court in Pg.13, Pg. 87; a width of 66 feet. AND, BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Plat: This plat illustrates Right~ofLWay of 2~71 acres [0.33 miles.t of which the last 0.08 miles of roadway has not been constructed. A temporary turnaround easement of 50 feet is provided at the temfinns. No improvements are required to meet Virginia Department of Transportation roadway referenced standards. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.2.a. Subiect: Set a date for a Public Hearing to Consider the Receipt and Appropriation of Grants Funds from the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to set the date of December 15, 2004 for a public hearing to consider the receipt and appropriation of $839,962.12 in noncompetitive grant funds from the United States Department of Homeland Security, State Homeland Security Grant Program. Summary of Information: The United States Department of Homeland Security thru the State Homeland Security Grant Program has awarded a noncompetitive grant to Chesterfield County totaling $839,962.12. The Chesterfield Fire & EMS Department, Office of Emergency Management will be responsible for administering the grant, which will provide funding to purchase terrorism related equipment for public safety personnel. Projects identified in the grant's Initial Strategy Implementation Plan (ISIP) are listed below. No local match funds are required. 1. The purchase of a additional portable radio for special/auxiliary police, 2. The purchase of an emergency generator at the Cosby Road high school 3. Implementation of a countywide weapons of mass destruction (WMD) exercise program, and 4. Institutionalization of the County's preparedness to a WMD program by conducting an all hazards risks assessment and assembling a regional work group to update and implement a terrorism prevention program. Preparer: Paul W. Mauqer Title: Interim Fire Chief Attachments: -] Yes CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meetinq Date: November 231 2004 Budget and Management Comments= This agenda item requests that the Board set a date for a public hearing to consider the receipt and appropriation of $839,962.12 in noncompetitive federal grant funds from the Department of Homeland Security, State Homeland Security Grant Program. Funds will be used to purchase terrorism related equipment for public safety personnel. No local match is required. The grant ending date is November 30, 2005. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Title: Director, Budget and Manaqement 000054 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 3 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.2.b. Subiect: Set Date for a Public Hearing to Consider the Appropriation of Funds for the Happy Hill Road Improvement Project County Administrator's Comments: /~_r_.#-z~/tq(' ~ / ~-- County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Set December 15, 2004, as the date to hold a public hearing to consider appropriation of $548,056 ($502,700 in cash proffers and $45,356 in interest earnings) from traffic shed 19 for improvements to Happy Hill Road between Harrowgate Road and Longmeadow Boulevard. Summary oflnformation: The Board is being requested to set a public hearing to appropriate $548,056 (traffic shed 19) to the Happy Hill Road Improvement Project. Cash proffers and interest earnings for road improvements totaling $628,356 have been collected in shed 19. The majority of these funds, $547,072, have been collected in conjunction with the development of Longmeadow Farms. The proffered condition of rezoning for the Longmeadow Farms property (89SN0444) states that the transportation component per lot will be used for improvements to Happy Hill Road between Harrowgate Road eastwardly to the Site Access Road, Longmeadow Boulevard. Realignment of a substandard horizontal curve and shoulder widening would improve the roadway. The current estimated cost of the project is $2.5 million. The project will need to be constructed in phases due to limited funding. Cash proffers and interest earnings from Traffic Shed 19 ($628,356) could be used to complete the design and an initial phase of the project. The Board appropriated $80,300 previously. A hearing is required to appropriate the $548,056 to the project. Preparer: R.J.McCracken agen580 Attachments: Yes Title: Director of Transportation No 000055 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 3 Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board set December 15,2004, as the date to hold a public hearing to consider the appropriation of $548,056 in cash proffers and interest earnings from traffic shed 19 for the improvements to Happy Hill Road between Harrowgate Road and Longmeadow Boulevard. District: Bermuda 0000~6 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 3 of 3 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Bud.qet and Manaqement Comments: This item requests that the Board of Supervisors set a public hearing for December 15, 2004 to consider appropriation of $548,056 in cash proffers and interest earnings from Traffic Shed 19 for improvements to Happy Hill Road. The current estimated cost of the project is $2.5 million. Therefore the project will need to be constructed in phases. Cash proffers will be used to complete the design and an initial phase of the project. Interest earnings in the amount of $45,356 combined with cash proffers of $502,700 that have been collected in Traffic Shed 13 are available for appropriation. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Title: Director, Budget and Manaqement 000057 Happy Hill Road Improvement Project between Harrowgate Road and Longmeadow Boulevard L.LLLL~L 0000.%8 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 1 of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.2.c. Subject: Set Date for a Public Hearing to Consider the Appropriation of Funds for the Centralia Road Improvement Project County Administrator's Comments: /~~ (~-- /~- County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Set December 15, 2004, as the date to hold a public hearing to consider appropriation of $1,527,466 in cash proffers from traffic shed 13 for improvements to Centralia Road between Salem Church Road and Chalkley Road. Summary oflnformation: The Board is being requested to set a public hearing to appropriate $1,527,466 from traffic shed 13 to the Centralia Road Improvement Project. A high number of traffic accidents are occurring on Centralia Road between Salem Church Road and Chalkley Road (see attached accident diagram). The construction of turn lanes and shoulders would help address the accident problems. The current estimated cost of the project is $5.3 million. The project will need to be constructed in phases due to limited funding. Cash proffers from Traffic Shed 13 could be used to complete the design and an initial phase of the project. Recommendation: Staff recommends the Board set December 15, 2004, as the date to hold a public hearing to consider the appropriation of $1,527,466 in cash proffers from traffic shed 13 for the improvements to Centralia Road between Salem Church Road and Chalkley Road. District: Bermuda/Dale Preparer: R.J.McCracken agen581 Attachments: Yes Title: Director of Transportation No #000059 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Bud.qet and Management Comments: This item requests that the Board of Supervisors set a public hearing for December 15, 2004 to consider appropriation of $1,527,466 in cash proffers from Traffic Shed 13 for improvements to Centralia Road between Salem Church Road and Chalkley Road. The current estimated cost of the project is $5.3 million. Therefore the project will need to be constructed in phases. Cash proffers will be used to complete the design and an initial phase of the project. Sufficient cash proffers have been collected in Shed 13 for this appropriation. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Title: Director, Budget and Mana,qement 000O60 00006~ Centralia Road Improvements between Salem Church Rd & Chalkley Rd ~ · RAL~A CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.2.d. Subiect: Set a Public Hearing for December 15, 2004 to Consider Amending Background Check Policy for Coaches of Co-Sponsored Youth Athletic Leagues County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to set a public hearing for December 15, 2004 to consider amending the background check policy for coaches of co-sponsored youth athletic leagues. Summary of Information: The Board has requested that a public hearing be set to consider proposed changes to the "barrier crimes" contained in the criminal background check policy for coaches of co-sponsored organizations. Preparer: Michael S. Golden Title: Director, Parks & Recreation 0623: 67456.1 Attachments: '] Yes No # ) 000( 68 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.3. Subiect: Conveyance of an Easement to Verizon Virginia Incorporated County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with Verizon Virginia Inc. to install underground cable across county property to serve Fire Station #20 on Courthouse Road. Summary of Information: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the Chairman of the Board of Supervisor and the County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with Verizon Virginia Inc. to install underground cable across county property to serve Fire Station #20 on Courthouse Road. District: Clover Hill Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Ri.qht of Way Manaqer Attachments: --]No 000064 VICINITY SKETCH CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO VERIZON VIRGINIA INC. RRAND RD ~ C 0 MARBLERIDOE ~u ~ ..~,.%,-~ el Chesterfield County Department of Utilities 1 Iici eq~a~ ~1657 eat FXHIRIT A VIRGINIA, INC. EAS~IdENT II II PROPOSED IS' VERIZON VIRGNA, mC. £ASEIdENT PARCEL/SITE OESCRIPI:ION/SITE PLAN NO.~ 201COURTHOUSE RD/ FIRESTATION '20 / PROJECT NO~ 0214 VERIZON VIRGINIA INC. RIGHT-OF-WAY EXHIBIT 'A' E.A.= HEATHER HALL PHONE N0a 772-4415 DENOTES P/L ----.LIMITS OF PROPOSED EASEMENT CENTRAL OFFICE; MIOLOTHIAN VZ ROW NUMBER:CBCC-O4-201724-R :OVER SHEET NUMBER=CH OWNER= CHESTERFELD .COUNTY CONTACT TEL. NO,I MIKE WEST 804 796 7173 GRANTOR= CHESTERFIELD COUNTY GRANTORs CITY/COUNTYs MIOLOT~AN MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT~CLOVER TAX MAP NO.--7457011188OOO00 PROPERTY ID · SAME DEED B 0 OK. _4_5_8.0.., INSTRUMENTal PLAT BOOKs PAGEs WORK ORDER #8 MLO4144 SH OF .4_.. 000066 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.3.b. Subiect: Conveyance of an Easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company County Administrator's Comments= ~)~:c_~/¢;4fJ /'~~~ County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with Virginia Electric and Power Company to install underground cable across county property on Chester Road. Summary of Information: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the Chairman of the Board of Supervisor and the County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with Virginia Electric and Power Company to install underground cable across county property to provide service to the Chester House. District: Bermuda Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Ri.qht of Way Mana.qer Attachments: Yes r---] No VICINITY SKETCH CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY O t ST W Chesterfield County Department of Utilities I lick e(llal~ 53g..~1 l~e t COUNTY OF CHESTERFTELD PTN: 7896567307 DB 5688 PG 948 11814 CHESTER ROAD Legend __ Location of Boundary Llnea of Right of Way Form No. 7:~la~oe~ 87) O Plat to Accompany mam.~ Rigt~t' of. Way A groement COR 16 Virginia Electric and Power Company Dlstrict-Townshlp":BoF6u h ~' Coun Cit Stat t:~tiroate NurnDe~.~ _.~ ' . Grid Number ' D-ate By CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.4.a. Subiect: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along the East Right of Way Line of Genito Place from JMS Investments, LLC County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.032 acres along the east right of way line of Genito Place (State Route 991) from JMS Investments, LLC, and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: It is the policy of the county to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the County Thoroughfare Plan. The dedication of this parcel conforms to that plan, and will decrease the right of way costs for road improvements when constructed. District: Clover Hill Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Ri(~ht of Way Manager_ Attachments: Yes --]No # VICINITY SKETCH ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GENITO PLACE FROM JMS INVESTMENTS. LLC N .,~ ATERFO RD WAY 0~( L: GENITO RD Chesterfield County Department of Utilities 1 Iici eqlal~ ~6.61 PLAT SHOWiMQ TWO PARC~, LS OF LAND TO BE ~ , ~ 0000~ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.4.b. Subiect: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along the East Right of Way Line of Genito Place from J. Mark Sowers County Administrator's Comments= County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.210 acres along the east right of way line of Genito Place (State Route 991) from J. Mark Sowers, and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: It is the policy of the county to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the County Thoroughfare Plan. The dedication of this parcel conforms to that plan, and will decrease the right of way costs for road improvements when constructed. District: Clover Hill Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Ri_aht of Way Manaaer Attachments: [-~No VICINITY SKETCH ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GENITO PLACE FROM J. MARK SOWERS .~ATERFO RD WAY GEN[TO RD Chesterfield County Department of Utilities 1 Iici eqlal; 66657 l~et 0000'~:1. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.4.c. Subiect: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along the South Right of Way Line of Bailey Bridge Road from Glenn M. Hill County Administrator's Comments: ///~~ /~~:,=,,_~ C County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.647 acres along the south right of way line of Bailey Bridge Road (State Route 654) from Glenn M. Hill, and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: It is the policy of the county to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the County Thoroughfare Plan. The dedication of this parcel conforms to that plan, and will decrease the right of way costs for road improvements when constructed. District: Matoaca Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Right of Way Mana(~er Attachments: No VICINITY SKETCH ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BAILEY BRIDGE ROAD FROM GLENN M. HILL t W Chesterfield County Department of Utilities I lick 000074 Plot Showing o 0.647 Acre Porcel to be Dedicoted to the County of Chesterfield from Glenn ~I. Hill in the Motooco District of Chesterfield County, Vo. Scale: I".,2oo' Ai~Y g, 20o4 200 0 2OO 40O 6OO ~120802Pl~e4 .File Nome: F.'\OWGS\20802 Phose 4\20802-4~'11~'~ 0 0~'~ 5 Scale: I' = 200' CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.5. Subiect: Request Permission to Install a Private Water Service Within a Private Easement to Serve Property at 7509 Midlothian Turnpike County Administrator's Comments= County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Grant John D. Norris permission to install a private water service within a private easement; subject to the execution of a license agreement and authorize the County Administrator to execute the water connection agreement. Summary of Information: John D. Norris has requested permission to install a private water service within a private easement to serve property at 7509 Midlothian Turnpike. This request has been reviewed by staff and approval is recommended. District: Midlothian Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Right of Way Manaqer Attachments: Ycs No 0OO0?6 VICINITY SKETCH REQUEST PERMISSION TO INSTALL A PRIVATE WATER SERVICE WITHIN A PRIVATE EASEMENT TO SERVE PROPERTY AT 7509 MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE Chesterfield County Depar[ment of Utilities 00OO?7 SEWER 0.B.23~6 /~ ~_ ~,~ ~ Pg,112 / \ ~ ...- P~ 1~.762706785500000 c \ ?,50~ ~ID/OTHI^~ TPK£. .... --~\N 3 6 4earn PROPOSED 16' PRIVATE C PPEN WATERLINE f~[//~ Pin N PBC-RICHMOND LLC Pin No. 762706554100000 7545 MIDLOTHIAN TPKE. D.B.5577 Pg.892 · \~' \\ CHIPPENHAM SG ~,CG¥1SITION LLC Pin No. 76370~253200000 7415 MIDLOTI'~IAN~ TPKE. D.B.3528 P~g.7{~6 3~706~209.68 11,762,778 96 ~ ~ ~ P~T SHOWING ~ ~ A I~' PRIVATE WATER EASEHENT ~ ~ ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF 1' .., 50' 100' Stole 1%' 50' PREPARED FROM EASEMENT PLATS #19930255,~19820074, ~19820075, AND COUN3Y PROJECT ~W81-950. CHESTERFIELD COUN'IY. VIRGINIA OIS SYSTEM CHIPPENHAH SQ ACQUISITION LLC CLOVER HILL DISTRICT, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA. uTILITIES DEPARTMENT Q CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE . REVISIONS DRAWN BY: 1'-50' DATE VAG DATE CHECKED BY: 11-4--2004 'nu[ No. o~w~6 ~0. 760-706 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Subject: Item Number: 8.D.6. Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Sixteen-Foot Sewer Easement Across the Property of R C & D, LLC County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a portion of a 16' sewer easement across the property of R C & D, LLC. Summary of Information: R C & D, LLC has requested the quitclaim of a portion of a 16' sewer easement across its property as shown on the attached plat. Staff has reviewed the request and approval is recommended. District: Clover Hill Preparer: John W. Harmon Title: Right of Way Manager Attachments: Ycs -]No VICINITY SKETCH REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A SIXTEEN FOOT SEWER EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF R C & D, LLC PL sToN~TRE © DR .< poCO 80WLfN c,2, A~ CT Chesterfield County Department of Utilities 1 Iml eqral~ 666~7 000080 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Subiect: State Road Acceptance Item Number: 8.D.7. County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Bermuda: Ironbridge Boulevard, Extension Phase II Matoaca: Chesdin Landing, Section 5 Preparer: Richard M. McEIfish Title: Director, Environmental En,qineerinq Attachments: Yes 1N° O0008Z TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Department of Environmental Engineering SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance - Ironbridge Blvd, Extension Phase II DISTRICT: BERMUDA MEETING DATE: 23 November 2004 ROADS FOR CONSIDERATION: IRONBRIDGE BLVD Vicinity Map: Ironbridge Blvd, Extension Phase II UMMER ARBOR LN :)~ABRIDG E PKWy Produced By Chesterfield County GIS 000083 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Department of Environmental Engineering SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance- CHESDIN LANDING, SEC. 5 DISTRICT: MATOACA MEETING DATE: 23 November 2004 ROADS FOR CONSIDERATION: CORAPEAKE PL CORAPEAKE TER Vicinity Map: CHESDIN LANDING, SEC. 5 Produced By Chesterfield County GIS 00O084 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.8. Subject: Appropriation of State Chapter 10 and Medicaid Funds for the Community Services Board County Administrator's Comments: ~~~ J 1¢~~/~ County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Appropriate $50,000 in State Chapter 10 funds and establish one full time position. Appropriate $130,600 in additional Medicaid State Plan Option revenue. Summary of Information: The State Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse has awarded $50,000 to the Community Services Board to provide additional services to youth that do not currently qualify for services under the Comprehensive Services Act. These funds will fund one full time Senior Clinician Position. Additional Medicaid revenue will be received due to increased services to individuals with serious mental illness. These funds will be utilized to finance the services provided. Preparer: Georqe E. Braunstein Community Services Board Title: Executive Director Attachments: [-~ Yes No CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Bud.qet and ManaRement Comments: This item requests the Board to appropriate $50,000 in additional Chapter 10 funds from the State Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse and $130,600 in additional Medicaid State Plan Option funds. It also requests the Board to create one Senior Clinician position related to the Chapter 10 funds. The Chapter 10 funds will be used to provide services to non mandated Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) youth with serious mental illness. The Medicaid State Plan Option funds will be used to provide services to adults with serious mental illness. These funds will be available on an ongoing basis and will be made part of the FY06 budget. In addition, the Community Service Board plans to use three of their existing positions to address the needs related to the additional Medicaid State Plan Option funds in FY05 and then create one Counselor and two Case Manager positions during the FY06 budget process. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Title: Director, Bud.qet and Mana.qement 000086 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 8.D.9. Subject: Approval of Change Order #2 in the amount of $33,726.67 with CHN Construction Company for Expansion of Rockwood Nature Center; Appropriation of $72,400 in Cash Proffers for the Lowes Soccer Field Project; and Transfer of $72,400 in General Fund Budget from Lowes Soccer Field to the Rockwood Nature Center Project County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Authorize the County Administrator to execute Change Order #2 to CHN Construction Company in the amount of $33,726.67 for Expansion of Rockwood Nature Center; Appropriate Cash Proffers in the amount of $72,400 for Lowes Soccer Field; and Transfer General Fund Budget from the Lowes Soccer Field Project to the Rockwood Park Nature Center Project Summary of Information: Various changes were made to the original construction contract through the duration of this project causing the increase in the original bid price. An example of changes in this change order are for building inspection code revisions, additional electrical work, HVAC duct revisions, additional locks, and other miscellaneous items. The amount of this change order exceeds the county policy for construction contracts under $500,000, which is 20% of the original contract price; and therefore, must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. Preparer: Francis M. Pitaro Attachments: [-~ Yes Title: Director of General Services No 000087 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Budget and Manaqement Comments: This item requests approval of change order #2 in the amount of $33,726.67 to CHN Construction Company for renovations to the Rockwood Nature Center. This is the final change order to be processed. The Nature Center is open and includes 1,800 square feet of classroom space, restrooms, and a deck area that can be used as an outdoor classroom. The site now also has connection to the county's mainframe, which allows staff to take program registrations at the site, access financial information, and also provides internet access. A transfer of $72,400 in general fund budgeted revenue is requested from the Lowes Soccer Complex project account in order to cover this change order and other project expenses. An appropriation of $72,400 in cash proffers will replenish the Lowes Soccer Complex project account. The additional $72,400 will cover this change order, $21,000 for a three phase power hookup, $9,247 for a fiber optic connection, and $8,427 in additional construction management charges. The additional $72,400 will bring the total revised project budget to $426,749. Preparer: Rebecca T. Dickson Title: Director, Budget and Manaqement 00oo88 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 2 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Subject: Developer Water and Sewer Contracts County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Item Number: 10.A. Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors has authorized the County Administrator to execute water and/or sewer contracts between County and Developer where there are no County funds involved. The report is submitted to Board members as information. Summary of Information: The following water and sewer contracts were executed by the County Administrator: Contract Number: Project Name: 00-0208 Southcreek, Section 8 Developer: Hill Development Associates, Ltd. Contractor: Castle Equipment Corporation Contract Amount: Water Improvements - Wastewater Improvements - $37,730.00 $60,950.53 District: Bermuda Preparer: Craig S. Bryant Title: Director of Utilities Attachments: '~ Yes No 60(/o89 Agenda Item November 23, 2004 Page 2 o Contract Number: Project Name: Developer: Contractor: Contract Amount: District: 02-0002 Grand Oaks Apartments Grand Oaks Apartments, LP Shoosmith Brothers Construction Company Water Improvements - $263,500.00 Wastewater Improvements - $147,500.00 Bermuda o Contract Number: Project Name: Developer: Contractor: Contract Amount: District: 04-0010 Oaklake - Capitol Granite C.G.M. Enterprises, LLC Subterra Utilities LLC Water Improvements - Wastewater Improvements - Clover Hill $30,970.19 $2,500.00 o Contract Number: Project Name: Developer: Contractor: Contract Amount: District: 04-0192 Oaklake Boulevard - Road Completion DuVal Development DuVal Development Water Improvements - Clover Hill $13,268.00 00,0090 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 10.B. Subiect: Status of General Fund Balance, District Improvement Fund, and County Administrator's Comments: Reserve for Future Lease Purchases Capital Projects, County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Preparer: Lane B. Ramsey Title: County Administrator Attachments: Ycs 00OO91 BOARD MEETING DATE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY GENERAL FUND BALANCE November 23, 2004 DESCRIPTION 07/01/03 FY2004 Actual Beginning Fund Balance 11/25/03 Designate excess revenue (County) for non-recurring items in FY2005 11/25/03 Designate excess expenditures (County) for non-recurring items in FY2005 11/25/03 Designate excess expenditures (Schools) for non-recurring items in FY2005 11/25/03 Designate excess expenditures (Schools) for non-recurring items in FY2004 11/25/03 FY03 Results of Operations - Police for use in FY2004 11/25/03 FY03 Results of Operations - Fire for use in FY2004 11/25/03 FY03 Results of Operations - Libraries for use in FY2004 11/25/03 FY03 Results of Operations - MH/MR/SA for use in FY2004 11/25/03 FY03 Results of Operations - Projected CSA Shortfall for use in FY2004 07/01/04 FY05 Budgeted Beginning Fund Balance (Projected FY04 Results of Operations) *Pending outcome of FY2004 Audit Results AMOUNT (102,908) (3,133,048) (456,699) (349,922) (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) (43,000) (156,000) 750,000 BALANCE $42,264,186 $42,161,278 $39,028,230 $38,678,308 $38,221,609 $38,121,609 $38,021,609 $37,921,609 $37,878,609 $37,722,609 $38,472,600 * 0000,92 Board Meeting Date CHESTERFIELD COUNTY RESERVE FOR FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS TRADITIONALLY FUNDED BY DEBT November 23, 2004 Descrivtion FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 BEGINNING JULY 1, 2002 4/10/2002 FY03 Budgeted Addition 4/10/2002 FY03 Capital Projects 8/28/2002 Purchase land for athletic facilities at Spring Run Elen~ntary School, closing costs, and environmental assessn~ent FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004 BEGINNING JULY 1, 2003 4/9/2003 FY04 Budgeted Addition 4/9/2003 FY04 Capital Projects 7/23/2003 National search for a developer to revitalize the Cloverleaf Mall area 10/22/2003 Debris pick-up program due to Hurricane Isabel 4/14/2004 To General Services for building unexpected repairs and maintenance items incurred during FY04 411412004 Trf to Sheriff for start-up expenses and capital for new replacement jail project 4/14/2004 Designate funding for police vehicles associated with the new COPS grant. Funds to be transferred to Police in FY2006 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 BEGINNING JULY 1, 2004 4/14/2004 FY05 Budgeted Addition 4/14/2004 FY05 Capital Projects 7/28/2004 Pre-development studies for Cloverleaf Mall 8/11/2004 Deposit on acquisition of the mall buildings at Cloverleaf Mall 9/3/2004 Purchase of public safety equipmant for search and rescue, natural disasters and other emergency situations 10/13/2004 Operating costs associated with Cloverleaf Mall for 2004/2005 10/13/2004 Debt Service costs associated with IDA loan for Cloverleaf Mall 10/13/2004 Other Cloverleaf Mall operating costs (including costs associated with the acquisition of additional property) 11/10/2004 Woodmont Drive road and waterline repairs resulting from damage from Tropical Storm Gaston Amount 8,600,000 (7,277,800) (140,000) 9,354,000 (8,559,300) (44,0O0) (1,000,000) (125,000) (260,000) (500,000) 9,600,000 (8,496,900) (65,000) (250,000) (59,600) (500,000) (300,0OO) (250,OOO) (30,455) Balance 10,111,312 2,833,512 2,693,512 12,047,512 3,488,212 3,444,212 2,444,212 2,319,212 2,059,212 1,559,212 11,122,692 2,625,792 2,560,792 2,310,792 2,251,192 1,751,192 1,451,192 1,201,192 1,170,737 000093 000094 Prepared by Accounting Department October 31, 2004 Dge Began 04/99 1/01 03/01 04/01 11/00 09/01 03/03 03/04 11/04 SCHEDULE OF CAPITALIZED LEASE PURCHASES APPROVED AND EXECUTED Description Public Facility Lease - Juvenile Courts Project Certificates of Participation- Building Construction, Expansion and Renovation; Acquisition/Installation of Systems Telephone System Upgrade School Copier Lease #2 - Manchester High School School Copier Lease #3 - Chester Middle School School Server Lease Certificates of Participation - Building Construction, Expansion and Renovation Certificates of Participation - Building Construction, Expansion and Renovation; Acquisition/Installation of Systems School Archival/Retrieval System Lease Original Amount $16,100,000 13,725,000 1,222,411 20,268 20,268 278,372 6,100,000 21,970,000 21,639 TOTAL APPROVED AND EXECUTED $59,457,95~8 PENDING EXECUTION Description None Date Ends 11/19 11/21 03/05 03/06 09/05 07/05 11/23 11/24 01/08 Outstanding Balance 10/31/04 $12,075,000 10,965,000 84,797 7,115 4,468 58,647 5,780,000 21,970,000 21,639 $50,996,666 Approved Amount 000095 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of I Meeting Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 14. Subject: Resolution Recognizing the South of the James Jaycees County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Mr. Ed Barber requests that the Board of Supervisors adopt this resolution in recognition of the outstanding civic service of the South of the James Jaycees Summary of Information: This resolution recognizes Jaycees for the outstanding volunteer efforts of the South of the James Jaycees Preparer: Donald J. Kappel Attachments: Yes ['~ No Title: Director1 Public Affairs # 000o96 RECOGNIZING THE SOUTH OF THE JAMES JUNIOR CHAMBER OF JAYCEES FOR OUTSTANDING COMMUNITY SERVICE WHEREAS, the Jaycees is an organization whose members are committed to community service; and WHEREAS, the Jaycees were established in 1920 to provide young men with the opportunity to develop themselves through service to others; and WHEREAS, the program later expanded to include women in those same development opportunities; and WHEREAS, at the heart of the Jaycees is the concept of selfless volunteerism; and WHEREAS, the Jaycees Creed includes the line, "Service to humanity is the best work of life"; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County is strengthened by the presence of the diverse membership of the South of the James Jaycees; and WHEREAS, the South of the James Junior Chamber is a local chapter of Junior Chamber International, the U. S. Jaycees and the Virginia Jaycees; and WHEREAS, the South of the James Junior Chamber was founded in March 2004 by Quenton and LaTika Lee; and WHEREAS, in an environment that fosters true friendships, personal growth and career advancement, the South of the James Jaycees offer opportunities in business management, individual development, international and community involvement; and WHEREAS, the South of the James Jaycees build tomorrow's leaders today; and WHEREAS, the work of the South of the James Jaycees is beneficial to Chesterfield County, Virginia and the United States of America; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 23rd day of November 2004, publicly recognizes the outstanding contributions of the South of the James Jaycees, commends its founders and members on their civic-minded spirit, and extends to the South of the James Jaycees the gratitude of this Board of Supervisors, along with the gratitude of all Chesterfield County residents, for the outstanding volunteer efforts of the South of the James Jaycees, along with best wishes for continued success. 000097 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 1 of 3 Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 16.A. Subiect: Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance County Administrator's Comments= County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Adoption of an ordinance amending the Chesapeake Bay Preservation ordinance relating to site-specific delineations of perennial streams. Summary of Information: Since 1989 the County has been obligated by State mandate to require that land development comply with location restrictions and building standards when constructing structures near watercourses. The restrictions are intended to reduce non-point-source surface water pollution that eventually enters the Chesapeake Bay. In 2002, the State further required localities by December 31, 2003 to verify on a site-specific basis whether watercourses or streams are intermittent or perennial in flow. Those portions of a stream that have perennial flow must be protected by development setbacks and use restrictions within Resource Protection Areas (RPAs). The new requirement to (continued) Preparer: Steven L. Micas Title: County Attorney 0800(23) :65290.2(63078.3) Attachments: Yes ~ No OOO09$ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 3 delineate perennial streams can sometimes reduce "lot yield", increase development costs, or require modification in development plans. (See attached map.) In January and February 2004, the Board of Supervisors expressed public concern about aspects of the proposed ordinance drafted to comply with this State mandate and deferred consideration until May 26, 2004. After a public hearing at its May meeting, the Board again deferred consideration to a public hearing on November 23, 2004. Between the February and May Board meetings, staff made the following recommended changes (in red ink) to the ordinance: Instead of being required to use the County's determination of perenniality, developers can now hire qualified professionals to make site-specific perenniality determinations, which will be approved by staff. o The process to allow exceptions to perenniality standards is extended if there exists a possibility of losing buildable lots. 3. Damaged or destroyed structures can now be rebuilt in RPA's. o Ail provisions not mandated by the State such as, additional water quality standards for golf courses and exclusion of all-terrain vehicles from RPA's, have been eliminated. Between the May and November Board meetings, staff has met with the State and interested citizens, including representatives of the farm community, in an effort to resolve remaining issues. Staff recommends the following additional changes (shown in blue ink) to the ordinance: Administrative exceptions can now be made for lots created as the result of condemnation, under threat of condemnation, judicial partition, bankruptcy and judicial action relating to decedents' estates. o Exceptions to ordinance requirements are now made by the Board of Supervisors instead of the Planning Commission. o Language has been added to clarify that nothing in the ordinance violates vested rights or takes property without just compensation. ° To address concerns of the farm community, the term "conservation area" has been changed to "RPA buffer area" and the ordinance has been clarified to state that RMA performance standards do not apply to land used for agricultural uses. 00O099 1900(23):65290.2 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 3 of 3 The Board previously raised questions about the impact of the new Chesapeake Bay requirements on certain areas of the County and Staff believes that the new perenniality standards will have little impact on the Meadowville Tract and the Cosby Road High School tract. The regulations will likely impact the Tomahawk Creek/Route 288 area, depending upon how the development is designed. Except for instances of condemnation, judicial partition, etc. discussed above, subdivisions that have already been approved will be exempt (grandfathered) from complying with the new RPA requirements only when (i) the subdivision was recorded prior to March 1, 2002, or (ii) when the subdivision was recorded after March 1, 2002, but before the effective date of this ordinance, and the developer can show that he (a) diligently pursued the development of that subdivision from the time of recordation and (b) already invested substantial expenses in developing the property. In response to a question raised at a Board meeting, RPA restrictions are applicable to agriculturally-zoned property that is used for residential and not agricultural purposes. Any structures constructed on the property must comply with the RPA requirement unless the property qualifies for an exception as discussed above. Since the May Board meeting the State has forwarded this matter to the Attorney General for enforcement action against the County. The County brought suit against the State regarding the enforcement action, but by agreement of the parties the case has been stayed until December 2004. Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached ordinance as amended. 1900(23):65290.2 000100 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTIONS 19-228, 19-229, 19-230, 19-231, 19-232, 19-233, 19-234, 19-235, 19-236, 19-241, 19-242 AND 19-301 RELATING TO THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19-228, 19-229, 19-230, 19-231, 19-232, 19-233, 19-234, 19-235, 19-236, 19-241, 19-242 and 19-301 of the Code of the Coun~ of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted to read as follows: DIVISION 4. CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREAS Sec. 19-228. Resource protection area boundaries. (a) At a minimum, resource protection areas shall consist of lands adjacent to water bodies with perennial flow that have an intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and biological processes they perform or are sensitive to impacts which may cause significant degradation to the quality of state waters. In their natural condition, these lands provide for the removal, reduction or assimilation of sediments, nutrients and potentially harmful or toxic substances in runoff entering the bay and its tributaries, and minimize the adverse effects of human activities on state waters and aquatic resources. (b) Resource protection areas shall consist of: (-a) (1) Tidal wetlands. (2) Nontidal wetlands connected by surface flow ...~'4 that are contiguous to i_(D tidal wetlands or (ii) water bodies with perennial flow ,.4t.., ..... , ..... (c) (3) Tidal shores. (4) __ A vegetated e,o,~~m-RPA buffet' area a minimum of 100 feet in width, located adjacent to and landward of the environmental features listed in subsections (1) 69,-) through (3) ¢---) above, and along both sides of any water body with perennial flow h41mt, ar~am. The full e~efio~-RPA buffer area shall be designated as the landward component of the resource protection area. (5) Such other lands determined by the department of environmental engineering to meet the provisions of subsection (a) of this section and to be necessary to protect the quality of state waters. ~ Designation of the components listed in subdivision (5) of subsection (b) shall not be subject to modification unless based on a reliable, site specific information as provided for in 9 VAC 10-20-105. 1923(00):63078.3 1 0 0 0 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM Sec. 19-229. Resource management area boundaries. (a) Resource management areas shall include land types that, if improperly used or developed, have a potential for causing significant water quality degradation or for diminishing the functional value of the resource protection area. (b) A resource management area shall be provided contiguous to the entire inland boundary of the resource protection area. Resource management areas consist of one or more of the following: (a-) (1) One-hundred-year floodplains. (2) Highly erodible soils, including steep slopes. (-c--) (3) Highly permeable soils. (4) Nontidal wetlands not included in resource protection areas. (5) Land areas a minimum of 100 feet in width that are located adjacent to and landward of every resource protection area. Sec. 19-230. Chesapeake Bay preservation areas maps. Chesapeake Bay preservation areas include resource protection areas and resource management areas. Subject to any adjustments by the director of environmental engineering pursuant to section 19-231, the boundaries of these areas are esmbt4she4~m included as a map layer in the County's Geographic Information System (GIS) which is available for viewing in the department of environmental engineering. This GIS map layer shall serve as the general determination of the extent of the resource protection area boundary as defined in 9 VAC 10-20- be keel ~n file ~n t~e ~;~*~ ~c .... ; ......*-~ eng:neenng's ....... Sec. 19-231. boundaries and boundary adjustments. Site-specific refinements of Chesapeake Bay Area (a) As part of, or prior to, the zoning application or plan review processes, or during the review of a water quality impact assessment pursuant to subsection 19-232(e), a reliable, site- specific evaluation shall be conducted or approved by the county office of water quality to determine whether water bodies on or adjacent to the proposed development site have perennial flow. The Resource Protection Area boundaries for the site shall then be adiusted, as necessary, based on this evaluation. Upon the completion of a county wide map depicting streams with 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 2 000 02 perennial flow, as identified utilizing a scientifically valid method approved by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board, the site-specific evaluations shall no longer be required. (-a-) (b) The director of environmental engineering may adjust the delineation of any resource protection area boundaries when an environmental site assessment prepared by a qualified expert indicates a need for change based on the environmental features listed in section ..4° ,~,~-,'~'~t~ 19-228(b)(1) through t,~,~j (4). The environmental site assessment shall be drawn to scale and shall clearly delineate such environmental features. Wetlands delineations shall be performed in accordance with the procedures specified in the most recently approved edition(s) of the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. 0~ c.(_C.) The director of environmental engineering may adjust the delineation of any resource management area boundaries when an environmental site assessment prepared by a qualified expert indicates a need for such change based on the environmental features listed in section~n/,~/''n~"x~,,j 19-229(b)(1) through (-e-) (5). The environmental site assessment shall be drawn to scale and shall clearly delineate such environmental features. Wetlands delineations shall be performed in accordance with the procedures specified in the most recently approved edition(s) of the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. (c--) (d) Any person aggrieved by the director of environmental engineering's decision concerning the boundaries of a resource protection area or a resource management area may appeal such decision in accordance with section 19-268(d). (-d-)(e) Boundary adjustments shall not be available to property that is undergoing redevelopment if, due to previous development of the property, the Chesapeake Bay preservation t,~ (5) or section ~n ~nr~ 19- area features listed in section..'n --,-,~-J"~r"~ 19-228(b)(1) through ~,~j 229(b)(1) through (-e-) (5) cannot be determined. Sec. 19-232. Resource protection area regulations. In addition to the general performance criteria set forth in section 19-233, the criteria in this section are applicable in resource protection areas. only be ~;**~ ;~, ~t; ..... *~- '~ .... '~"* ...... *;~"* .... '~ .... ~ ..... * Land development may be allowed in a resource protection area, subject to the approval of the department of environmental engineering, only if it (i) is water dependent; (ii) constitutes redevelopment; (iii) is a permitted encroachment established pursuant to subdivision (d) of this section; (iv) is a road or driveway crossing satisfying the conditions set forth in subdivision (a)(4) of this section; or (v) is a flood control or stormwater management facility satisfying the conditions set forth in subdivision (a)(5) of this section. (1) water quality impact assessment in accordance with section 19-232(e)(1) shall be required for any proposed land disturbance. (2) 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 000 03 (3) (5) am~:q~q~r-~. A new or expanded water-dependent facility may be permitted, provided that: a. It does not conflict with the comprehensive plan; bo It complies with the performance criteria set forth in sections 19-232(b) and 19-233; Co Any nonwater-dependent component is located outside any resource protection area; and do Access shall be provided with minimum disturbance necessary. If possible, a single point of access shall be provided. Redevelopment shall be permitted in the Resource Protection Area only if there is no increase in the amount of impervious cover and no further encroachment within the Resource Protection Area, and it shall conform to applicable erosion and sediment control and stormwater management criteria set forth in section 10- 233, as well as all applicable stormwater management requirements of other start and federal agencies. Roads and driveways not exempt under section 19-235 (a) (1) may be constructed in or across Resource Protection Areas only if each of the following conditions are met: ao The department of environmental engineering makes a finding that there are no reasonable alternatives to aligning the road or driveway in or across the Resource Protection Area. bo The alignment and design of the road or driveway are optimized, consistent with other applicable requirements, to minimize the encroachment in the Resource Protection Area and adverse impacts on water quality. Co The design and construction of the road or driveway satisfies all applicable criteria of this chapter, including submission of a water quality impact assessment. do The department of environmental engineering reviews the plan for the road or driveway proposed in or across the Resource Protection Area. Flood control and stormwater management facilities that drain or treat water from multiple development projects or from a significant portion of a watershed may be allowed in Resource Protection Areas, provided that (i) the department of environmental engineering has conclusively established that the location of the facility within the Resource Protection Area is the optimum location; (ii) the size of the facility is the minimum necessary to provide necessary flood control, 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 4 000 _04 stormwater treatment, or both; (iii) the facility must be consistent with the Watershed Management Plan for the Swift Creek Reservoir or any other stormwater management program that has been approved by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board as a Phase I modification to the county's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act program; (iv) all applicable permits for construction in state or federal waters must be obtained from the appropriate state and federal agencies, such as the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission; (v) approval must be received from the department of environmental engineering prior to construction; and (vi) routine maintenance is allowed to be performed on such facilities to assure that they continue to function as designed. It is not the intent to allow a best management practice that collects and treats runoff from only an individual lot or some portion of the lot to be located with in a Resource Protection Area. (b) Conservation RPA buffer area requirements. The 100-foot eqg~q~a-RPA buffer area shall be the landward component of the Resource Protection Area as set forth in subsection 19-228 (b) (4). Notwithstanding permitted uses and encroachments, as set forth in 19-232 (c) and (d), the 100-foot censervation RPA buffer area shall not be reduced in width. To minimize the adverse effects of human activities on the other components of the Resource Protection Area, state waters, and aquatic life, a 100-foot wide ~qm,~mOoa-RPA buffer area of vegetation that is effective in retarding runoff, preventing erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff shall be retained if present and established where it does not exist. The following criteria shall apply to the 100-foot ~swat4o~-RPA buffer area. (1) extend a minimum of ~ nn feet in widt~ e-o ..... ~ .... ; ......,~ e=~, ....... a conservation area. The 100-foot wide ~RPA buffer area shall be deemed to achieve a 75% reduction of sediments and a 40% reduction of nutrients. (2) ad~k~onal perfo-"-mnce standards: Where land uses such as agriculture or silviculture within the area of the ~RPA buffer area cease and the lands are proposed to be converted to other uses, the full 100-foot wide ~RPA buffer area shall be reestablished. In reestablishing the 5 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 000~-0~ ~RPA buffer area, management measures shall be undertaken to provide woody vegetation that assures the o~ser~at4~aRPA buffer area functions set forth in this chapter. Existing vegetation in the conservationRPA buffer area shall not be cleared or disturbed except (i) as provided in section 19-232(c) and (d) and (ii) with the prior approval of the water quality administrator,l~'"~-,~....,~., ..... .~v.-,~...~..-~ ...... ~ ~.~c vegetation (c) Permitted modifications of the conxcrvaficnRPA buffer area. In order to maintain the eov, s~o, mt4~q RPA buffer area's functional value, imtigemms existing vegetation may ovAg be removed, subject to the approval of the water quality administrator, only to provide for reasonable sight lines, access paths, pedegtSan ways, general woodlot management and best management practices, including those that prevent upland erosion and concentrated flows of stormwater, as follows: Trees may be pruned or removed if necessary to provide for sight lines and vistas. If trees are removed, they shall be replaced with other vegetation that, in the judgment of the water quality administrator, is equally effective in retarding runoff, preventing erosion and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff. Any ~ path shall be constructed and surfaced to effectively control erosion. Dead, diseased or dying trees or shrubbery and noxious weeds (such as Johnson grass, kudzu, and multifora rose) may be removed and thinning of trees may be allowed, pursuant to sound horticultural practices ~ For shoreline erosion control projects, trees and woody vegetation may be removed, necessary control techniques employed and appropriate vegetation established to protect or stabilize the shoreline in accordance with the best available technical advice and applicable permit conditions or requirements. 6 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 0 0 0 ~.()6 (2) 1 On agricultural lands, the censervation RPA buffer area shall be managed to prevent concentrated flows of surface water from breaching the ~ RPA buffer area and appropriate measures may be taken to prevent noxious weeds (such as Johnson grass, kudzu, and multiflora rose) from invading the eo,~ser~,~q~ RPA buffer area. T-hem Agricultural activities may encroach into the eo~er~m RPA buffer area mas,-be-tq~uo~ only as follows: .........~-~ *'-~ ~'.",~ .~.,..o.. ........., ...~..*; ...... ,~.~.. Agricultural acti vities may encro ach within the landward 50 feet of the 100-foot wide eo,~seq~m~ RPA buffer area when at least one agricultural best management practice which, in the opinion of the local soil and water conservation district board, addresses the more predominant water quality issue on the adjacent land is being implemented on the adjacent land provided that the combination of the undisturbed eo~er~mmm RPA buffer area and the best management practice achieves water quality protection, pollutant removal, and water resource conservation at least the equivalent of the 100-foot RPA buffer area. If nutrient management is identified as the predominant water quality issue, a nutrient management plan, including soil tests, must be developed consistent with the Virginia Nutrient Training and Certification Regulations ( 4 VAC 5-15) administered by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. consistent %5t5 this division. Aghcultural activities may encroach within the landw~d 75 feet of the 100-foot wide ~ RPA buffer area when agricultural best management practices which address erosion control, nutdent management, and pest che~cal control, approved by the 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 7 O00 L07 James River soil and water conservation district, are being implemented on the adjacent land. The erosion control practices must prevent erosion from exceeding the soil loss tolerance levels, referred to as "T," as defined in the "National Soil Survey Handbook" of November 1996 in the "Field Office Technical Guide" of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service. A nutrient management plan, including soil tests, must be developed, consistent with the Virginia Nutrient Management Training and Certification Regulations (4 VAC 5-15) administered by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. In conjunction with the remaining ccnser;'atic, n RPA buffer area, this collection of best management practices shall be presumed to achieve water quality protection at least the equivalent of that provided by the 100- foot ~ RPA buffer area. The ~ RPA buffer area is not required for drainage ditches associated with agricultural land if the adjacent agricultural land has in place at least one best management practices in accc. r~ance with a ConserYat:~.vn Dist~ct which, in the opinion of the James River soil and water conservation district, addresses the predominant water quality issues on the adjacent land. (d) Permitted encroachments into the ............... RPA buffer area. When the application of the ~RPA buffer area would result in the loss of a buildable area on a lot or parcel recorded prior to October 1, 1989, encroachments into the ~RPA buffer area may be allowed through an administrative process, in accordance with the following criteria: ao Encroachments into the censerYatienRPA buffer area shall be the minimum necessary to achieve a buildable area for a principal structure and necessary utilities. Where practicable, a vegetated area that will maximize water quality protection, mitigate the effects of the eov, sc~at4o~RPA buffer area encroachment, and is equal to the area of encroachment into the eo~s~qml4o~RPA buffer area shall be established elsewhere on the lot or parcel. Co The encroachment may not extend into the seaward 50 feet of the c~ms~qqa~aRPA buffer area. do A written request for an exception to this division's requirements shall be made to the director of environmental engineering. It shall identify the impact of the proposed exception on water quality, on public safety and on lands within the resource protection area through the completion of a water quality impact assessment that complies with section 19-232 (e). 8 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM OOO~O8 2_:. When the application of the RPA buffer area would result in the loss of a buildable area on a lot or parcel recorded between October 1, 1989 and March 1, 2002, encroachments into the RPA buffer area may be allowed through an administrative process in accordance with the following criteria: ao The lot or parcel was created as a result of a legal process conducted in conformity with the county's subdivision ordinance; Conditions or mitigation measures imposed through a previously approved exception shall be met; Co If the use of a best management practive (BMP) was previously required, the BMP shall be evaluated to determine if it continues to function effectively and, if necessary, the BMP shall be reestablished or repaired and maintained as required; do The requirements of section 19-232(d)(1) shall be met. o When the application of the RPA buffer area would result in the loss of a buildable area on a lot or parcel created as the result of bankruptcy, condemnation or threat of condemnation, judicial partition or judicial action relating to a decedent's estate, encroachments into the RPA buffer area may be allowed through an administrative process in accordance with the requirements of 19- 232(d)(2)(b), (c) and (d). -(c--) (e) Water quality impact assessments and resource protection area restoration plans. A water quality impact assessment shall be submitted to, and approved by, the director ~' .... ; ...... ~ ~..;.=~.4.. water quality administrator for any proposed development within a resource protection area, including any eo,,~q~as,4~a RPA buffer area modification or r-educ-6o~ encroachment authorized as provided by section..~c~ ~----t-.~o~'~rt'x 19-232(d), and may be required by the director of environmental engineering for any other development in Chesapeake Bay preservation areas based on the site's unique characteristics or the intensity of the proposed use or development. The purpose of the water quality impact assessment is to identify and, where applicable, quantify the impacts of proposed development on water quality and lands in the Resource Protection Areas consistent with the goals and objectives of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, this chapter, and to identify specific measures for the mitigation of those impacts. There shall be two types of water quality impact assessments: a minor assessment and a major assessment. a0 Minor water quality impact assessment. A minor water quality impact assessment shall be required for a development or redevelopment which involves 2,500 square feet or less of land disturbance. The minor water quality assessment must demonstrate that the combination of undisturbed eo,wserqmgo~RPA buffer area, restoration plantings and identified best management practices or measures will be effective in retarding runoff, 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 9 000 ,09 bo preventing erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff. The minor water quality impact assessment shall include a site drawing, to scale if practicable, which shows the following: (i) The location of the resource protection area; (ii) The location~ and nature and quantification of proposed encroachments into the resource protection area, including type of material proposed to be used for access paths, areas of clearing or grading, location of any structures, drives or other impervious surfaces; (iii) Justification for ava? the proposed encroachment; (iv) Type and proposed location of any best management practice facilities or measures; and (v) Existing and proposed runoff outfalls from the property:; (vi) Location and density of existing vegetation on site, including the number and type of trees and other vegetation to be removed in the c~q6~qm~mRPA buffer area as a result of the encroachment or modification; and (vii) A restoration plan that includes the replacement of vegetation that has been removed from the ~qm14o~RPA buffer area. The type, quantity and density of vegetation shall be capable of retarding runoff, preventing erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff. Major water quality impact assessment. A major water quality impact assessment shall be required for a development which exceeds 2,500 square feet of land disturbance. The major water quality impact assessment shall be prepared by a qualified expert and shall include: (i) All information required for a minor water quality impact assessment; ~,~,;~ ~ u,,~ ..... A description of the proposed encroachment including: A description of the proposed improvements, including structures (including the type and size), roads, access paths, irrigations systems, lighting systems, and utilities; 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 10 000:15.0 (iii) (iv) If an access path is proposed, an identification of the location of the path and the materials that will be used for the path. n ~..~-.^. ^~: .... , ....... "~"'~" ""'~ ~" ...... A description of the encroachment site's physical characteristics including: The site's existing topography, soil characteristics, erosion potential and hydrology; o A description of wetland areas including their functions and values; o A description of streams and other water bodies; ° Location and density of existing vegetation on site, including the number and type of trees and other vegetation categorized by type (e.g. shrubs, trees, groundcover) within 50 feet of the proposed land disturbance. discussion of the potential water quality impacts of the proposed encroachment, including: A quantification of any identified impacts on streams or other water bodies, including potential erosion and sedimentation that could enter those waters as a result of the encroachment; ° An identification and quantification of any impacts on wetlands, including impacts on wetland hydrology; o An identification of temporary or permanent impacts to streams or other water bodies; ° An identification of any areas to be disturbed outside the resource protection area that have the potential to adversely affect the resource protection area; ° The limits of clearing, grading and the percent of the site to be cleared; o Where applicable, an estimation of the pre-construction and post-construction pollutant loads; o Estimation of the percent increase in impervious cover; 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM (v) A discussion of the number and type of trees and other vegetation to be removed in the c~a~-~-~m~io~RPA buffer area as a result of the encroachment or modification; A discussion of proposed changes to the site topography and hydrology and the impacts of those changes on water quality; 10. A construction schedule, including the anticipated duration of construction. d ............ A discussion of measures to mitigate the identified impacts, including: A Restoration Plan that includes the replacement of vegetation that has been removed from the ~q~oer~mt4~mRPA buffer area. The Plan shall include the schedule for replanting, which shall take into account the appropriate season for replanting. The type, quantity and density of vegetation specified shall be capable of retarding runoff, preventing erosion, and filtering nonpoint source pollution from runoff. The vegetation specified plantings shall, to the maximum extent practicable, consist of native species. A listing of proposed erosion and sediment control measures, including additional measures that are beyond those required chapter 8 of the Code of Chesterfield County; A listing of best management practices and measures to reduce impacts on water quality; A discussion that demonstrates, in a quantifiable manner, that the combination of revegetation and best management practices will achieve pollutant removal that is equivalent to that which is achieved without the encroachment. o A listing of other mitigation measures that may be required by the director of environmental engineering or the water quality administrator. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 12 O001i2 .(D When a person has violated the requirements of this subsection, the violator shall submit a resource protection area restoration plan to the water quality administrator for review and approval. The intent of the restoration plan is to ensure that the resource protection area function are restored in a manner that will achieve the pollutant removal requirements as defined in 19-232(b)(1). The restoration plan shall specify the types and number of vegetation to be planted and a schedule for the installation of the plantings. When determined to be necessary by the water quality administrator, the violator shall provide surety in an amount sufficient, as determined by the water quality administrator, to purchase and reinstall any vegetation required by the restoration plan that has not survived for one year from date of installation. The surety must be in a form approved by the county attorney's office and may consist of a certified check, cash escrow, a surety bond, or a letter of credit from a financial institution. The establishment of Sec. 19-233. o ................. , ......... ,..,:...o General performance criteria. Any use, development or redevelopment of land within a Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area shall meet the following performance criteria: (a) No more land shall be disturbed than is necessary to provide for the ~ proposed use or development. (b) Indigenous vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible practicable consistent with the use or development allowed. (c) Land development shall minimize impervious cover consistent with the use or development allowed. (d) (1) St ..... ,cc ,,I.,,111-,.... ~-~11~,-1 *, h;e"e ,k, ~,,,, .... ;"-' All development o..":--:,'ater .......................v- ~ ac ................. o- exceeding 2,500 square feet of land disturbance shall be subiect to the site plan or subdivision review processes. bo Co 1923(00):63078.3 13 O00~L~,3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM Any land disturbing activity that exceeds an area of 2,500 square feet (including construction of all single family houses, septic tanks and drainfields, but other wise as defined in § 10.1-560 of the Code of Virginia) shall comply with the requirements of the local erosion and sediment control ordinance. Stormwater management criteria consistent with the water quality protection provisions (4 VAC 3-20-71 et. seq.) of the Virginia Stormwater Management Regulations (4 VAC 3-20) shall be satisfied. (2) LD The following stormwater management options shall be considered to comply with the requirements of this subsection,~,~Aw,.~ ,~'. ao Incorporation on the site of best management practices that ac-hi6w~ *~' ...... :~'~ ~-*~^~ meet the water quality protection requirements set forth in this subsection. For the purposes of this subsection, the "site" may include multiple projects or properties that are adjacent to one another or lie within the same drainage area where a single best management practice will be utilized by those projects to satisfy water quality protection requirements; bo Com ance with a loca ' -----r ..... e, .......... Watershed Management Plan for the Swift Creek Reservoir which has been found by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board to achieve water quality protection equivalent to that required by this subsection;: Co Compliance with a ¢~ ~.,~ ~ .... .~. ~ ~ ..~.. .~ ...... . ~ ~a~ site-specific VPDES pe~t issued by the Dep~ment of Environmental Quality, provided the dep~ment of environmental engineering specifically dete~nes that the pe~it requires measures that collectively achieve water quality protection equivalent to that required by this subsection. v-,/r~x (2) Any maintenance, alteration, use or improvement to an existing structure · :&ich that does not degrade the quality of surface water discharge, as determined by the director of environmental engineering, may be exempted from the requirements of this subsection. Any person aggrieved 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 14 (g) (-'0 (h) by a decision of the director of environmental engineering under this subsection may appeal such decision in accordance with the procedures provided in section 19-268(d). (3) .~, ..... a n a ~ ..... a ............~ear. Sto~water management criteria for redevelopment shall apply to any redevelopment. .... g Where the best management practices utilized in a commercial development require regular or periodic maintenance in order to continue their functions, such maintenance shall be ensured by a maintenance/easement agreement, commercial surety bond, bank letter of credit or other assurance satisfactory to the director of environmental engineering, g: Where the best management practices utilized for a residential development require regular or periodic maintenance in order to continue their functions, such maintenance shall be ensured by a commercial surety bond, bank letter of credit or cash escrow in an amount equal to $100.00 for each dwelling unit in a residential development. The requirement excludes apartment developments outside the Swift Creek Reservoir Watershed. The form of any bond or letter of credit provided pursuant to this section shall be subject to approval by the county attorney. Land on which agricultural activities are being conducted, including but not limited to crop production, pasture, and dairy and feedlot operations, shall have a soil and water quality conservation -' .......... a k.. ,u~ ~ .... o; .... Sc.;' and nr~,~, r- ........ ,;^. r~;o,.~, S Fl p Fi ld Offi ~ e Ce ....... V ........... ~ ..... J V ......................................... assessment conducted that evaluates the effectiveness of existing practices pe~aining to soil erosion and sediment control, nut~ent management, and management of pesticides and, where necess~y, results in a plan that outlines additional practices needed to ensure that water quality protection is being accomplished consistent with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act and this division. RMA performance c~teria shall not apply to land used for agricultural pu~oses. The director of environmental engineering may authorize the developer to use a retention or detention basin or alternative best management practice facility to achieve the performance criteria set forth in ~ this chapter. The department of environmental engineering shall require evidence of all wetlands permits required by law prior to authorizing grading or other on-site activities. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 15 0005-.:t5 (3) Sec. 19-234. Exemptions in resource protection areas. ..................................... ~. ..... ~,~. ...... ., .... I ir nia v.. and Water r.._.....~. ........ ........';^~ ~v°~n~'~. ~.n,, .... ,;... ..... . ....... ;,k ~k;o .~;.,;o;~., ...... ; ..... ~o The following land disturbances in resource protection areas may be exempt from the criteria of section 19-232 provided that, in the judgment of the director of environmental engineering, they comply with subdivisions 1 through 4 below: (i) water wells; (ii) passive recreation facilities such as boardwalks, trails and pathways; and (iii) historic preservation and archaeological activities. (1) Any required permits, except those to which this exemption specifically applies, shall have been issued; (2) Sufficient and reasonable proof is submitted that the intended use shall not result in an adverse impact on water quality; (3) The intended use does not conflict with nearby planned or approved uses; and (4) Any land disturbance exceeding an area of 2,500 square feet shall comply with all erosion and sediment control requirements of chapter 8 and the Code of Chesterfield County. 16 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM O00~J[,6 (1) (3) (c-) (b) Silvicultural activities in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas shall be exempt from this division's requirements, provided that such activities adhere to water quality protection procedures prescribed by the department of forestry in its "Best Management Practices Handbook for Forestry Operations," as amended. The Virginia Department of Forestry will oversee and document installation of best management practices and will monitor in-stream impacts of forestry operations in Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas. This exemption shall not apply to land disturbing activities on land in an agriculturally zoned district which is not used directly for the management of agricultural crops, forest crops and livestock, or land which has been rezoned or converted, or proposed to be rezoned or converted, at the request of the owner or previous owner, from an agricultural to a residentially, commercially or industrially zoned district or use. (1) xxr~, ...... ,,o. ao A division. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 17 000 7 (-o-) (c) Nonresidential uses which are located over 100 feet from and are not adjacent to R, R-MF or R-TH Districts or any property used for residential purposes, schools, child care centers, playgrounds, shopping centers, libraries, hospitals, public institutions or similar facilities shall be exempt from the provisions of sections I~- ~-,~e,,~,,~°'~'~f~w~ .... ,~ ,,,,~ ~.,~,~f~ 19-241. Sec. 19-235. Exemptions and gexceptions. utilities, railroads, public roads, and facilities exemptions. Construction, installation, operation and maintenance of electric, natural gas, fiber-optic and telephone transmission lines, railroads and public roads and their appurtenant structures in accordance with (i) the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Va. Code §10.1-560 et seq.), and the Stormwater Management Act (Va. Code § 10.1-603.1 et seq.), or (ii) an erosion and sediment control plan and stormwater management plan approved by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. The exemption of public roads is further conditioned as follows: optimization of the road alignment and design, consistent with other applicable requirements, to prevent or otherwise minimize encroachment in the Resource Protection Area and adverse impacts on water quality. Construction, installation and maintenance of water, sewer natural gas, and underground telecommunications and cable television lines owned, permitted, or both, by the county or a regional service authority shall be exempt from this division's requirements, provided that: ao To the degree possible, the location of such utilities and facilities should be outside resource protection areas. No more land than necessary shall be disturbed to provide for the proposed utility installation. All construction, installation and maintenance of such utilities and facilities shall be in compliance with any applicable federal, state and local requirements and permits and designed and conducted in a manner that protects water quality. do Any land disturbance exceeding an area of 2,500 square feet shall comply with all erosion and sediment control requirements of chapter 8 and this division. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 18 000i 8 (1) ......................... * ..... Exceptions to the requirements of sections 19-232 and 19-233 may be granted, subject to the procedures set fo~h in 19- 235(b)(2), provided that a finding is made that: ao The requested exception is the minimum necessary to afford relief. Granting the exception shall not confer any special privileges upon the applicant that are denied by this division to other property owners who are subject to its provisions and who are similarly situated. The exception is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this division and will not result in a substantial detriment to water quality. do The exception request is not based on conditions or circumstances that are self-created or self-imposed. eo Reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed, as warranted, that will ensure that the permitted activity will not cause a degradation of water quality. fo The request is being made because of the particular physical surroundings, use, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved or property adjacent to or within 100 feet of the subject property, or a particular hardship to the owner will occur, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of this division is carried out. (2) Exceptions to requirements of section 19-232. A request for an exception to the requirements of section 19-232, except for an encroachment permitted under 19-232(d), shall be made in writing to the planning ccmmissicn department for action by the board of supervisors. It shall identify the impact of the proposed exception on water quality, on public safety and on lands within the resources protection area through development of a water quality impact assessment which complies with section 19- 232 (e). Exception requests seeking relief from the best management practice facility safety measures and design criteria 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 19 required in sections 19-241 and 19-242 shall not require the completion of a water quality impact assessment if the request is supported by documentation which demonstrates that the request will not be detrimental to public safety and welfare. The planning department shall notify the affected public of any such exception requests and the planning com:,nission board of supervisors shall consider these requests during a public hearing in accordance with Va. Code § 15.2-2204, except that only one hearing shall be required. The~,.,,,,,,,~. ,-~ .... ; .......... ~..,,,,,,,...,,~,,;,-~;.-~ board of supervisors shall review the request for an exception and the water quality impact assessment and may grant the exception with such conditions and safeguards as deemed necessary to further the purpose and intent of this division only if the ....... ........... :.: .... board makes the findings set forth in section 19-235(b)(1). If the planning commis':,:on /~oard ol supervisors cannot make the required findings or refuses to grant the exception, it shall return the request for an exception together with the water quality impact assessment and the written findings and rationale for the decision to the applicant. bo Exceptions to the requirements of section 19-233. Upon written request, the director of environmental engineering may approve exceptions to the requirements of section 19-233 when the director finds that the criteria of section 19-235(b)(1) have been satisfied. (4) (5) Sec. 19-236. Non-conforming uses~ vested rights and oOther exceptions. 20 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 000~.~0 (1) In addition to the requirements of this chapter, no use which is nonconforming to the requirements of this division, in a Chesapeake Bay preservation area, shall be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted or structurally altered unless the director of environmental engineering grants an exception pursuant to section 19-235, and also finds that: a. There will be no net increase in the nonpoint source pollution load; and bo Any development or land disturbance exceeding an area of 2,500 square feet complies with all erosion and sediment control requirements of chapter 8 and division 4 of article IV of this chapter. This division shall not be construed 1o prevent the reconstruction of pre-existing structures within Chesapeake Bay Preservation Areas from occurring as a result of casualty loss unless otherwise restricted by applicable ordinance. (3) Tine provisions of this division shall not affect the vested rights ol any landowner under exisling law. (4) The provisions of this division shall not 17o construed to require or allow the taking of private property for public use without just compensation. OOO Sec. 19-241. Design criteria for all basins. All basins required by the director of environmental engineering as either a stormwater management facility or a Best Management Practice for water quality improvement or designed as a retention or detention facility for any new development or redevelopment of property shall conform to the following criteria: (1) Safety criteria. a. Outflow device safety measures. If a vertical sided weir box is located within the basin's embankment, a six-foot fence or dense vegetative barrier, or a combination thereof, shall be installed as prescribed by the director of environmental engineering. If a dense vegetative barrier is used, it shall be designed and installed in accordance with professionally accepted landscaping practices and procedures. Plans far the ~ The director of environmental engineering shall approve plans for the vegetative barrier, including the size and description of proposed plant materials. The dense vegetative barrier shall be a minimum of six feet in width. If a fence or vegetative bamer is to be established around the entire basin 21 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 00~)~ 2~. facility in accordance with subsection (1)(b), then no barrier or fence is required around the weir box. If a developer uses a concrete weir for either the principal or emergency spillway and the concrete weir is greater than three feet in depth, a pedestrian crossing or access structure shall be established across the weir. A fence or vegetative barrier, or combination thereof, may be substituted if the pedestrian crossing is not practicable. b. Basin safety measures and dimensions. The following safety measures shall be required for that portion of each basin ';,'~ic~ that has a side slope above the normal water surface whic~ that is steeper than 6:1 over a horizontal distance of 20 feet or more. 000 If a fence is used, the minimum height of the fence shall be six feet. The fence may be made of a dense vegetative barrier. If the fence is made of a vegetative barrier, it shall be designed and installed in accordance with professionally accepted landscaping practices and procedures. Plans for tSe vegetative bm-~er, e a rove ....................... The director of environmental engineering shall approve plans for the vegetative barrier, including the size and description of proposed plant materials. If a vegetative barrier is used, the property owner or developer shall provide to the county a form of surety for the cost of materials and installation for the proposed plant materials. Provisions for maintenance of and access to the fence or vegetative barrier shall be included in the best management practice easement dedication. 000 Side slopes. The side slopes above the normal water surface elevation in basins shall be no steeper than 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). If the excavation of the slope to 3:1 will result in the removal of dense vegetation or woodland ';.'Sics that is acting to stabilize the slope, the developer may seek an exception from the director of environmental engineering pursuant to the provisions of section 19-235 to leave the slope in its existing condition. 000 Sec. 19-242. Minimum criteria for basins serving as a best management practice for water quality improvement. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 22 oooaz2 (a) Depth. Basins sized solely as best management practice facilities in conformance with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act shall have a range in depth of three to eight feet to prevent stratification. For those basins which have been designed with sections which exceed eight feet in depth, only those portions which are less than eight feet in depth shall be included as part of the best management practice facility volume. Basins ',v~ich that are less than one acre in surface area shall not exceed eight feet in depth. 000 Sec. 19-301. Definitions. Conservation area: An area of natural or established vegetation managed to protect other components of a resource protection area and state waters from significant degradation due to land disturbances. Referred to as an "RPA buffer area" in Division 4 of this chapter. 000 Nontidal wetlands: Those wetlands other than tidal wetlands "that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions", as defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act in 33 CFR 328.3b,,~,,,~,~n~-~ ~,..,.,~_.~,,,,~'T ..... ~,~ ~,~ ~,~,,,~a~'< as amended. 000 Resource protection area: That component of the Chesapeake Bay preservation area comprised of lands at er near the she, reline adjacent to water bodies with perennial flow that have an intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and biological processes they perform or are sensitive to impacts that may result in significant degradation to the quality of state waters. 000 RPA bu[fer area: See "conservation area." Silvicultural activities: Forest management activities, including but not limited to the harvesting of timber, the construction of roads and trails for forest management purposes, and the preparation of property for reforestation that are conducted in accordance with the silvicultural best management practices developed and enforced by the State Forester pursuant to Va. Code § 10.1-1105 and are located on property defined as real estate devoted to forest use under Va. Code § 58.1-3230. 000 Tidal wetlands: Vegetated and nonvegetated wetlands as defined in Va. Code § 28.2- 1300. OOO 23 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 0001.23 000 Water Body with Perennial Flow: A body of water that flows in a natural or man-made channel year-round during a year of normal precipitation. This includes, but is not limited to streams, estuaries, and tidal embayments and may include drainage ditches or channels constructed in wetlands or from former natural drainage ways, which convey perennial flow. Lakes and ponds, through which a perennial stream flows, are a part of the perennial stream. Generally, the water table is located above the streambed for most of the year and groundwater is the primary sources for stream flow. 000 Water-dependent facility: A development of land that cannot exist outside of a resource protection area and must be located on the shoreline because of the intrinsic nature of its operation. These facilities include, but are not limited to.' (1) Ports. (2) The intake and outfall structures of power plants, water treatment plants, sewage treatment plants and storm sewers. (3) Marinas and other boat docking structures. (4) Natural bgeaches and other water-oriented recreation areas. (5) Fisheries or other marine resources facilities. 000 (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. 1923(00):63078.3 Revised 11/12/04 11:27 AM 24 O P.O. Box 25201 Richmond, VA 23260 Tho Honorabl~ R_my H. Hun'ilm~ The Honorable Richard King The Honorable Kelly Miller The Hc~mrablo Art Warren Subject: l~.~blic Hearing Nov 23, to consider adoption of amendments to the Chesapeake Bay Pmserv~on Ordinance ~ Cc,anty has bern mm-campli~ wlh the ~ug~a Stam~ 10.1.2109 and the Bay P~,Xecfion Act m emure complismm wiih Water Quality pmtecfiv~ Measures since Jane, 2004. l'n~ '~ruginia Joi~ Legislative Audit and allowing au:maclummt into tho landward 50-foot portion ofthe RPA and begin mforcing ~ full 100-foot RPA buffer requirement as of Mm~h 1,2002. By March 1, 2003 Iocaliiiesmmt ade~CBLAD ~that Pormnial flow Chesterfield CBLAD Water Quality ~ve Ordinances were roady for approval and imp~ following the Quality Office of Chesl~rfield and demand that thoy inspect tho landownsr's property h~-~liately to ~ if any wat~ bedi~ of~ flow Benefits Anticipated by CBLAD Mandatory Imposition ofthe Bay Act's ~ Criteria has been ~ to each Bcerd nmmber. These include: Benefits from a lower lhreshold for Erosion and Sodimmt Control Reduction in Sto,,,~v~ator Run-off and Water Quality Iksradaiim Reducticm in Nutrient Bacterial and Toxi~ ~ Reductions in the Amount of Nitrog~ Phosphorus, Sedimmt, ~ Pollution and Toxk; Cl~nicals du~ to more Farms applying Eavhmmmially Focused Managamm Activities Reduction in Water PoLlution Due to Changes in Land Use Within the 100-Foot Increased Water Protectim Due to Performance Criteria and F. uvi_mmmmml Impact Promotion of Water Quality Protzcfion Dueto Increased Rzvizw of Local ~ Plmming. You will hear from Dr. Pakurar the losses we hav~ experienced in ~ ingminnmt of our Swii Creek Reservoir C!~_ air, F~t~ of the ~ of the Vhgini~ Cimp~ Siorra Club 10700 Chalkley Road, Rivl~rnaml VA 23237-4048~45-7842 HOM~-BUI~ING ASSOCIATION OF RI~OND Exception Review Process Exhibit 5 CBLAB's Process for Localities to Ensure Compliance With the Bay Act Phase I: Localities designate CBPAs and ~l:',t CBLAB s waler qualil? perlormance criterion. :.x.s p~rt of this pb.~s~. Ioc~ities r~mt: use e×lstin(l d~ta 3nd recapping resources to idenli~' ~n,:l des~be tidal wetlands. nontidal wetla~Js, tidal $~f'es. ,,,cater bc,:lles with pe~r~nial flow, flood plains. I~i,lhly en):lible soils, sleep slopes, h~hly permeable areas. ,]nd other sensitive en¥ironmental resources: b. determine, based upon the identlfica/ior~ ~-~d description, U~ exist ol CBP~ ~ithin their jurisdieti~ns; c. prepare appropriate map(si delineating d. prepare amendments b be. al ordinances 'thal incorporate CBL.'A9 s perfom-~ance ~.Titeria: e¢_abtish a plan of development revie'¢¢ pre;tess ti) ensure that any CBPA land ~¥elo~enl wil be ,~bmp~shed in an envir~nmenlally fliendly manner that r~i,tecb water qua~ty: cr_~:kict a public he~rlncl t,:, s~:4i,~t rAlblic cc, inmont before formally adoptlrK~ CBPAs and performance criteria: and g. p~.~¥ide copies el the adr~led loc'al prr_~;~r~m <~:~;uments to CBLAB tut consistent;,, re~fie?¢: Phase I1: Locv:~l ,~:~¥emm~ls i~.*.oTporate CBLAB's water quality protecb.~ measures into their c-omprel~ensive I~aris to comply wilh §10.1-2109 of the Code e¢ V.,'.rCn/a and the regulations. Localities mu~ p¢~.~Me ~les of their re¥ised plans t~ CPAAB for ~:,n~isl:e r~.; ? review. Ph~e !11: Local governments revise ,.'~11 I~d use ordinances and regtilatiens on an on-~}ing basis b comply with §10, I-2109 of the Code o,~ '¢L~ima and b assure btemal COherency with the bo~,:l regulatbns. Localities nlusi pn~¢ide copbs of their revl~d ordinances and re.qulatbns to CBL,N3 for o~nsb~..ne¥ mvbwg. Note: c,~.~B's regu~ that ~arne en~ttve on octocer 1.1~t ~ ~ ~ ~ to t~ s~c t~me- p~s. $~: ~ 9 VAC 1~2~2~1 of t~e C~a ~ Pr~o~ ~ ~ a ~ ~~ R~u~lons, ~r 10, 2001. Exhibit $ Significant Changes to CBLAB Regulations and Implementation Chronology Items that coq, ice lmcae~tiate imlMementatiot;: Localities must remov~ th~ pr~,istan ~rom their ordt~nc~ allowing e~hment into the landward 50-foot portion of tho RPA and ~gln e~orcl~ tim ft~l l~[oot RPA buffer r~u~on~m as o~~ March I, Z~2. that tmtst ~o adoptocl by M, ar~h 1, P~i~nnlM flow ~sts for detern~nlng t~ RPA buffer a~tat.~t wRh wat~ · RPA buffer preseix,nti~ a~ · Site 5p~ific ~)A delineation requl~nent; · ' Sto~twater Mazm~n~m ~rf~m~e crit~ia: · Agrtc~ture perforate criteria mM with as~ts of agriculture managemonl p{ans, standards, references, and · Clariflcatlor~s ~,~ardlng non-roILforn~ng ~lcturos and lots a~ exemptions: and · ExcepHon revlew a~ approval pr~s. I that ra,,3y be. adopted Sept.tc s~-~tem lnsp~tloi'm m~d alternatives: Some core,neats of fi~e storm~'ater ~rform~ce criteria: [~cM pr~ram pr~tic~ In [nte~ly D~v~lo~ Ma~ {ID,~} whore appropriate; Acconm~a~on of r~ional BMPs Kq tho RPA: Some com~nonts of fl:e ,~gl'iculI ural nmn~en~nt plmis: Tho additional grm~fatl~r ~rt~xl. from O~o~r 1989 to tho offc<~ ~to of Civil ~lties, Chat~geg to tl~ RoRtdati~s that do trot coquit~ local attioa at this tim~: Thoro a~ items that s~uld b.o a~ress~ ~' t~altt~s comurrontly with t~ n~v,' amendments, but tht~V do ~l n~ to ~ ~dross~t ~nttl CBI,AD provtd~ fu~h~' guidance. [hese i~flm include tim~ that will ~ lmc~ary for [~ Ill cotmt~t~:y CBLAD 'on their pr~r~l ad~ntstmtion a~ implementation efforts.' In addition I~alRt~ must u~ergo ~c~pliamo evalmtlons" eve~ five yea~ to ensure that. l~alRt~ are admi~st~ring t~tr pro~ra~ In ac-cordamo with tho B~v Act &~d C:BLAB regulation.. sodrge: CI~I.~D'~ P/ogn~lm ~ F-~ Loca~y CoJ3'4~c@ W/D3 R~gV~3 .~ffo~ an~l JLARC ~talT I~/law ~ Exhibit 8 Benefits Anticipated by CBIAD Repot~ Due to Mandato .fy Imposition of the l~ay Act's Performanc~ Criteria · Benefits from a lower Threshold for Erosion and ~diment Controls- Whereas most western watei shed localities requite ES.-S t~ntrol compliance for land disturbance at 5.000 squ~e fca 0r more, CBL.~'s regulations l~er the ~wesh01d t0 2.5~ square feet 'in areas designated by the local g~ern~nt as environa~ent,~ly sensitive. Redu¢lions in Stonnwaier Run.off and Wilier Q~alit¥ Degradation Duo I. ~om~nvater Manaoemant Remlations- CHLAD ~lati~s w~ld require localities to ~s~blish w3~mt~ standards for stormwa ter runoff' and ~mploy ~st n~an~ement p~actices to reduce t'tliiOff~ ~ i,~haciion s iu Nutrient. ggae it-r iai= and Toxic Pollul ion from ~a ~e l)isdtar?~s Due lo CBLAD's ~ep~ic Sysiem Pumping ~rategy - C~LAD requires 10~1 gc~a'n. outs eve~' flve yea~ (or the use of ~eh~logic~l device~ to identi~v potential ~'~tem ihlL Reduction in the Amount of Nitrogen. Phosphor~s. ~diment~ Bacterial Poilu- lion, and To~c Chemk'als ]~e Io More Farms Applying Environmentally [;i}- (:used ?~na~ment Phllg - CB~D't ~culmr~ assism~e pmgran3 pmvldes suR)oix for farm plans, which CB~D s~'s are IRoi~ mmpre~nslve t~n ot~r pla~. such as fll!~ ~C~lSl~g on nuthent management plans only. Redttction in ~atorway Sedimentatiml I~ae to Local Governments tlavi~ (;renter Authority ~.'er For~t Ha~eali[m ~-fivities Under lite Act [ einments g~n aut,h~ iW ~'er ~r~t ha~ting (sil~culrural) ~:tivit~s in ~e~u~re protec- tion are~ w~re lb~stry operations have ~t fallowed the best man<~n~nt practices of the Department of Forestry. Redttct:ion in Mfater Pollution Due to Changes in Land Use Within the 1O0-Foot Buffer Und~ CBI~) Regulations - U~er the Bay ~,t reg~atl0m, a 100-f0~ buffer along poF~lllli:~ stteatnn and l l'][)utaly ~i~lelS ts designated as a rP~urc~ protectkm avea (RPA), serving as a fillet: for rtlllOff ~vitl~ to Mir[at'e ~ale~ oY as a I)hysiad IlarTiel' to ~le ~at~ bo~', Impact l-(valuati~ls An expalxslon would require the western watershed localities to implement minimum landscap~g criteria, establi~ ~pe~aotts cover standards, ~d re- view developlnent plans to avoid umteces~a~y land disttlrhanct-, Ptx~m olios of Water qual Sty Prot ert ion Due to ! ncre,~xed R evlew of Local Devel- opment Plmm lng ~ 14~'¢ ~t regulations r¢~quit'v local comprehensive plans and lm~d use ordin~lces to address water quality,, sou:rrna: .ILMIC si. aK m;alyals of Chapter IV flz]rl; tit- CBI.AD rt~por L An AffiUate of ~led]a Genera[ Advertisi n§ Affi davit (This is not a bill. P~ea~ pay from invoi~) P.O. Box 85333 Richmond, Vi rg in ia 23293-0001 (8O4) COd~'~ ........ Description Ad Size Tota~ Cost TAK~N(Y]'qCRTAKF~NOT1CF, THATTHF(~()ARDO 200 x 3~'{D0 Med Publisher of THE R~CHMON D T[MES-D~SPATCH This is to certify that the attached TA'K~ NOTI[CF?FAK E?qOT~C'¢ was PuBHshed by Richmond ~mes-D[spatch, inc. in the City of R~ch~ond, State of Vkg~nia, on the foHOw~ng dates: 1/09/2004 11/16/2004 Notary PUbliC SU CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page I of 3 Meetin~l Date: Subject: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 16.B. Adoption of a Residential Connectivity Policy to Establish Standards for Access To and Between Subdivisions County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: Board Action Requested: Adopt the proposed policy effective immediately. Summary of Information: Background~ Staff has met with the development community. The Planning Commission has reviewed the policy and voted 4-1 in favor of recommending its adoption. The Board has held several work sessions on the proposed policy and expressed concern that provision should be made to allow exceptions under specified circumstances. Of special concern are families living on older streets facing the introduction of new traffic through their quiet and often secluded community. Staff has been unable to develop quantifiable criteria which could be consistently applied in all circumstances to guide when such connections should not be made. Therefore, staff has amended the policy to allow the Board and Planning Commission the authority to waive such connections at their discretion and to emphasize their action by requiring such waivers to be granted only by separate motion from any other approval such as zoning or subdivision. Preparer: Kirkland A. Turner Title: Director of Planninq Attachments: Ycs -]No CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 2 of 3 Overview= The policy sets forth four broad purposes for street interconnectivity as: (a) improving public safety response time to residents by providing multiple means of access; (b) reducing travel time and distance between neighborhoods by providing alternative travel paths; (c) maintaining an acceptable quality of life in the residential neighborhoods by preventing excessive through traffic on local streets where individual lots have direct access onto the street; and (d) maintaining the traffic carrying capacity of arterial and collector streets. Connections To Undeveloped Property The policy sets forth four standards that would be utilized primarily at the time of tentative plat review. These standards would require a stub to undeveloped land, unless an evaluation of the adjacent property determines that: (a) the undeveloped property does not have developable potential at that location; or (b) a through street is not required or desired at that location; or (c) the street connection creates a violation of the Planning Commission's Stub Road Policy; or (d) the connection would provide primary access to property not designated for residential development on the Comprehensive Plan through the subdivision. The policy will require the subdivider to sign the stub locations advising future homeowners that the extension of that street is planned. Connections To Infill Development These connections are most frequently addressed through the zoning process though they also arise at the time of tentative plat review. Connections made between existing and infill development is often critical in providing adequate access. It had been the past practice to allow residential development to occur with the belief that future sections or the adjacent property when developed would provide the necessary access. Often these connections are not made and large numbers of lots are only accessible by a single street. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Page 3 of 3 The policy requires streets in new subdivisions to connect to all adjacent stubs unless the resultant local street pattern would create a traffic count that exceeds the Planning Commission's Stub Road Policy or allows a connection to a stub street within a subdivision that complies with access requirements to be waived if: (a) there are a sufficient number of other stub streets to adequately disperse the traffic and not cause a concentrated use of any one stub street connection; or (b) the connection to a particular stub will cause a concentrated use at that location; and (c) may require pedestrian and bicycle paths to be constructed to facilitate traffic between the subdivisions. Internal Circulation In very large residential developments internal circulation is often impeded more by design than by site constraints. The lack of cross connections can increase response time and travel distance. The policy will require the subdivision design to facilitate interconnectivity within its limits. The overall street network shall be laid out to facilitate convenient internal travel based upon topographic and environmental constraints. This will not prohibit the extensive use of cul de sacs, but may potentially require some looping and through streets to be integrated into the overall layout. The design community is currently moving in this direction. Street Spacinq The final aspect of the policy deals with the overall street network of through streets to facilitate travel through residential areas. The spacing or frequency of the through streets decreases with density. An improved circulation network, designed according to the policy guidelines, will provide more alternatives for traffic movement, reduce traffic loading on arterial streets and avoid the needed development of super streets in excess of four lanes. This will result in the creation of alternative parallel travel paths. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION CONNECTIVITY POLICY Purpose The purpose of street interconnectivity shall be to (a) improve public safety response time to residents by providing multiple means of access; (b) reduce travel time and distance between neighborhoods by providing alternative travel paths; (c) maintain an acceptable quality of life in the residential neighborhoods by preventing excessive through traffic on local streets where individual lots have direct access onto the street; and (d) maintain the traffic carrying capacity of arterial and collector streets. Standards 1. New streets shall be stubbed to undeveloped land unless an evaluation of the adjacent property at the time of tentative subdivision plat review determines that: (a) the undeveloped property at that location has development constraints such as but not limited to, wetlands, topographic features, size, etc; (b) a through street is not required to conform to access requirements in the Subdivision Ordinance; (c) the street connection creates a violation of the Planning Commission's Stub Road Policy; or (d) the connection would provide sole access to non-residential property. 2. Streets in new subdivisions shall connect to ail adjacent stubs designated as local streets, residential collectors or thoroughfare streets. Only those connections to a stub street within a subdivision that complies with street access requirements as specified in Section 17-76 (h) of the Subdivision Ordinance may be waived if: (a) there are a sufficient number of other stub streets to adequately disperse the traffic and not cause a concentrated use of any one stub street connection; or (b) the connection to a particular stub will cause a concentrated traffic at that location. (c) the projected traffic volume on any local street within the existing subdivision exceeds 1500 vehicle trips per day. 3. The Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors during its review of a rezoning or a tentative subdivision request may waive connectivity requirements. Such waiver shall be by a separate motion and vote and shall be taken subsequent to the decision upon the pending zoning or preceding the subdivision request. 4. Subdivision design shall facilitate interconnectivity within its limits through the layout of the overall street network. The design concept of solely using multiple unconnected cul de sacs shall be evaluated and approved based upon circulation, topographic and environmental constraints. Connectivity Policy Page 2 The following table depicts the recommended guidelines for spacing of through streets to facilitate travel through residential areas. The spacing or frequency of the streets decreases with density so as to provide more alternatives and avoid or reduce the construction of streets in excess of four lanes. Density Through Street Spacing * < 1 du/a 1 1/2 miles in each direction 1.01 - 2 du/a 4,000 to 2,500 feet in each direction ** 2.01 - 4 du/a 2,500 to 2,000 feet in each direction ** > 4.01 du/a Street spacing will be reviewed on a case by case basis * Through streets include arterial, collector and residential collector streets. ** Spacing between streets decreases proportionally to increase in density. 5. Where street extensions are not required, the subdivider may be required to construct a system of pedestrian pathways, which will facilitate pedestrian travel within and to adjacent development. 6. The subdivider shall initially install and maintain thorough the life of the project signs(s) on all stub roads. The purpose of such signs shall be to advise the public that the extension of the stub is planned. Applicability This policy shall apply to any zoning case filed or any tentative subdivision plat that receives approval after (INSERT DATE). Any property that received zoning or tentative subdivision plat approval prior to the effective date of this policy and has conditions that conflict with provisions of this policy shall be governed by those conditions. Adopted (INSERT DATE) ;eaera~ (Th~s is P, O, Box 85333 Richmond, Vi rg in ia 23293.000 (804) ~9-r~O0 n 1//16/?.001 1ll TAKR N©T~,RTAKR N©TIOR THAT T'HR 'ROARD O 2.00 x I%00 17436 Media Genera] OperatiOns, ]nc. Publisher of 11/16/2004 HERE Sworn to and subscribed before me this ~%\._-, ~ _ State of Vkgin~a tdy Commission expires Ibilic  ~ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page I of 1 ' AGENDA Meetin~l Date: November 23, 2004 Item Number: 18. Subject: Adjournment and Notice of Next Scheduled Meeting of the Board of Supervisors County Administrator's Comments: County Administrator: ~ Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Motion of adjournment and notice of a dinner meeting with the School Board and Legislative Delegation to be held on December 1, 2004 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 502. Preparer: Lisa H. Elko Title: Clerk to the Board Attachments: --1Yes1No # ooe,¢ ;30