Loading...
2021-09-22 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2021 Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. James M. Holland, Chair Mr. Christopher M. Winslow, Vice Chair Mr. James A. Ingle, Jr. Mr. Kevin P. Carroll Ms. Leslie A. T. Haley Dr. Joseph P. Casey County Administrator Mr. Holland called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. He reviewed the requirements for facial coverings and spatial distancing and requested all individuals in the Public Meeting Room to not congregate in groups. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board of Supervisors approved the minutes of August 25, 2021, and September 8, 2021, as submitted. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 2. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS, DELETIONS OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board removed Item 13.A.1. - GRTC Transit System Board of Directors Appointment, and approved the agenda, as amended. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 3. WORK SESSIONS 3.A. EVERYDAY EXCELLENCE - UTILITIES Mr. George Hayes, Director of Utilities, introduced Mr. Chris Yandle representing the wastewater collections CCTV crew and the flushing crew. He stated Mr. Yandle goes above and beyond the line of duty, often works after hours to respond to emergencies, and excels at providing exceptional customer service. He further stated Mr. Yandle has a warm and welcoming personality, and his compassion for and dedication to his profession is evident. He shared a heartwarming and unbelievable story of a customer, Ms. Joy Harris, who accidentally lost her wedding ring down a sink drain. He stated 21-554 9/22/2021 Ms. Harris contacted a private plumber who was unable to locate her ring and who ultimately contacted the Utilities Department after hours for assistance. He provided details of the CCTV crew's response the next morning and their successful location and retrieval of the ring in the 8 -inch main line sewer. He stated if the ring had been left to push into the next sewer run, the higher flows in that line would have lost the ring forever, highlighting the importance of the crew's timely response. He further stated the fact that the crew located and retrieved the ring in under an hour speaks volumes of their expertise, professionalism, and commitment to public service. He expressed his pride in the Utilities Department's employees who continue to go above and beyond to deliver exceptional customer service. He then introduced Ms. Harris to provide additional remarks. Ms. Harris expressed her appreciation to Mr. Yandle and his team for their hard work. Mr. Holland thanked Mr. Yandle and Ms. Harris for sharing their story and wished them all the best. 3.B. SWIFT CREEK RESERVOIR UPDATE Mr. George Hayes provided the Board with an update on the Swift Creek Reservoir. He first discussed hydrilla, which is a non- native invasive water plant indigenous to Asia/Africa which first appeared in Florida in the 1950s as a result of discarded aquarium plants. He then reviewed the hydrilla monitoring and control program utilizing triploid grass carp and provided a comparison of hydrilla growth between 2020 and 2021. With regard to the reservoir's raw water quality, he stated this year has been exceptional as measured by lower turbidity, lower suspended solids, and greater Secchi depths. He further stated the higher water quality provided better growing conditions for all aquatic vegetation, with hydrilla being the dominant vegetation; however, there were no algal blooms, and no algal treatment has been needed the entire season. He provided data of hydrilla growth in the reservoir from 2009 to the present. He stated one lesson learned was that the introduction of too many carp can cause a collapse of not only hydrilla but also all the other plant communities, which is not healthy for the reservoir and which can contribute to algal blooms. He further stated in response to this realization, the carp program was changed in 2018 to add multiple classes of carp in smaller quantities more frequently which resulted in a more consistent outcome. He discussed the aftereffects of the 700 -year flood in 2020, most notable of which were an increase in the carp mortality rate and the removal of nutrient -rich sediment. He stated the plan moving forward is to calibrate the carp mortality rate so the model can better inform the need for future restockings. He provided details of interactions with representatives from the Brandermill and Woodlake Community Associations. He stated a group of Woodlake homeowners purchased a hydrilla cutter and successfully created a boating lane. He further stated a representative from the Reservoir Hydrilla Management Group is documenting the process and will share the information with the community. He then addressed various questions, concerns, and claims from citizens 21-555 9/22/2021 pertaining to the county's water delivery and wastewater conveyance systems and the quality of drinking water. He stated the first claim was the county has an overtaxed water delivery system that discharged into the James River five times in a two-week period. He provided a chart of Number of Reportable Sanitary Sewer Overflows Per 100 -Miles of Sanitary Sewer - Annual Total and stated the county's rate of 0.7 is six times lower than the industry standard. He further stated an Internet search revealed a Richmond Times -Dispatch news article dated August 6, 2021 which accurately reported on five sanitary sewer overflows from two jurisdictions in ten days into the James River, none of which were related to the county's sanitary system. He stated the second concern related to impacts to the utility system for developments that do not pay cash proffers. He explained that cash proffers were never used or intended for water and wastewater infrastructure; developers install and pay for water and wastewater systems into new developments and then donate the assets to Chesterfield Utilities; new homes pay a connection fee for water and wastewater capacity; and development pays for development. Mr. Ingle reiterated there is no individual proffer because developers pay one hundred percent of the cost of additional utilities for their development. Mr. Hayes then addressed a third claim that the county's system has more wastewater than it can handle and has not been upgraded in 50 years. In response to this claim he provided details of the wastewater collection system, the wastewater plants, and 10 -year (FY2012-FY2021) upgrades and investments made in the utility system. He stated the Utilities Department 21-556 9/22/2021 has been very aggressive in rehabilitating the existing utility ` system and ensuring capacity for future customers, and the total 10 -year investment is $166 million. He then addressed a fourth concern related to lead in the drinking water. He stated the county has a fairly young system and does not experience the same challenges with lead as some older cities. He explained that lead typically leaches from service lines and plumbing containing lead, and there are no known public lead water service lines in the county. He provided details of the county's proactive water treatment measures, including the addition of corrosion control and pH adjustments. He stated that decades of water quality testing results support that lead is not an issue in the county. He further stated the county is placed on reduced monitoring requirements from the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) based on the decades of water quality data. He provided an excerpt of the most recent Annual Water Quality Report and stated the last time the water system was tested for lead there was a non -detect (ND) on every single sample taken. He stated the last concern was affordability of utility rates and a proposal for state agencies to take over Chesterfield Utilities. He provided a chart of Average Residential Customer's Monthly charges for Water and Wastewater Service at 7 CCF (5,250 gallons) and stated the county is very competitive in the region. He further stated the county could double its rates and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would still consider them affordable. With regard to the state taking over the county's utilities, he stated the state does not have the resources to take over utilities, and he is often called upon to assist smaller 21-556 9/22/2021 utilities that do not have the resources that Chesterfield has. He further stated one option would be to privatize utilities, but it would cost more because there is a profit margin in the private sector. Dr. Casey stated Mr. Hayes is recognized as a leader in the industry, and he knows the business of customer service and customer satisfaction. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to whether the j actual carp mortality rate was determined, Mr. Hayes stated J September data would be needed to make that determination. Mr. Winslow stated there is a lot of interest in the topic of carp as well as the topic of harvesting hydrilla. He further stated he would like to explore ways to make it easier for homeowners associations (HOAs) to purchase equipment. He stated the county's interest extends only to drinking water, but it should be sensitive to residents' needs. Mr. Hayes concurred and stated that is why the county has a seat on the Reservoir Hydrilla Management Group, and the Utilities Department utilizes its expertise and staff to support them. He further stated the Utilities Department fully supports harvesting and assists the HOAs with any regulatory challenges. Mr. Carroll stated based on his research it would not be a good idea to introduce a different kind of fish such as freshwater tilapia because they are an even more invasive species than carp. He encouraged those fishing in the reservoir to avoid catching the carp. He inquired about the process of harvesting and whether the harvested material is being removed from the reservoir. Mr. Hayes stated staff observed the process, and residents were trying to collect hydrilla as best they could. He further stated staff recommended they collect as much as possible, double -bag it, and bring it to the landfill. Mr. Carroll stated leaving the hydrilla could allow for reseeding in other locations. Mr. Hayes concurred and stated Utilities also wants to avoid dead hydrilla washing up on other residents' shorelines. In response to Mr. Carroll's question relative to the effect of dead hydrilla on water quality, Mr. Hayes stated dead hydrilla consumes oxygen as it decays which impacts aquatic life, degrades water quality, and makes it more difficult to treat. He stated it also decreases filter run times. He further stated for all those reasons Utilities takes a proactive approach to protect the reservoir as a long-term water supply. He stated it is understood that there are other uses of the reservoir, which is why Utilities is actively involved in the Reservoir Hydrilla Management Group and tries to do as much as possible to assist their needs for aesthetics, boating, and recreation. 21-557 9/22/2021 Mr. Carroll supported Mr. Winslow's suggestion to look across the country for inventive ways to mitigate hydrilla besides adding more carp. In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to educating residents on the proper way to cut and remove hydrilla, Mr. Hayes confirmed staff is educating residents on collection, bagging, and disposal of vegetation. He stated residents generally understand that vegetative fragmentation can occur, ( and they try to collect the hydrilla and do the right thing. l`r In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to the approximate change in an average customer's bill if the state were to take over utilities, Mr. Hayes stated the state does not have the resources that the county has, and Chesterfield is often called upon to assist with some of the smaller utilities. Mr. Ingle surmised that the state would try to use some of the more efficient localities to raise their rates in order to offset costs somewhere else. Mr. Hayes stated he could see that possibility. Ms. Haley stated reinvestment in infrastructure is critically important to the whole functionality of the system. She further stated plans to maintain the existing utility infrastructure are why Chesterfield does not have the problems other localities are experiencing. She stated she has been incredibly impressed with how the department works and how reinvestment ensures quality and the rate structure. She commended Utilities staff for working all hours in all conditions. Mr. Hayes stated he is fortunate to be the director and he is genuinely proud of the employees. Mr. Holland congratulated Mr. Hayes on his position in the state and expressed appreciation for addressing citizen concerns. 3.C. COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD UPDATE Mr. Nick Pappas, Vice Chair of the Community Services Board (CSB), thanked the Board and County Administration for their ongoing support. He recognized the outstanding efforts of the Mental Health Support Services (MHSS) staff over the last year and a half and stated they stepped up during this extraordinary time and provided services to the most vulnerable people in the county. He introduced Ms. Kelly Fried, Executive Director of the CSB, to provide the Board with an update on the CSB's activities. Ms. Fried reviewed the CSB's mission to promote wellness and an improved quality of life for Chesterfield residents through exceptional and comprehensive behavioral health and developmental services. She provided statistics of individuals served in FY2021. She also provided an overview of revenues, expenditures, and Mental Health Fund performance. She discussed some of the many highlights in FY2021 including continuing to meet the demands of COVID-19; beginning to 21-558 9/22/2021 develop the Electronic Health Record; continuing to use telehealth as an alternate means for individuals unable to come to the building for services; continuing audits; transitioning the Intensive Community Treatment program to Assertive Community Treatment; and expanding services for service members, veterans, and family members (STEP -VA). She stated a Housing Case Manager position was developed to assist clients with attaining and maintaining stable housing. She further stated SOAR365 (Camp Baker) has struggled throughout the pandemic trying to ensure staffing and provide services in the safest manner possible, but it is slowly coming back online. She provided details of the Opioid Outreach Coordinator position, which has undergone a name change to Substance Use Outreach Coordinator, and stated the position received a National Association of Counties (NACo) award. She then reviewed FY2022 Initiatives and Challenges, including a Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARE) survey in October; emphasis on workforce development; and census pressures at state hospitals. She provided details of the transformation of the crisis system and stated the goal is to have more crisis community response to stabilize individuals and get them to the point where they do not need hospitalization, thus diverting the need for a temporary detention order. She stated the alternative transportation program was rolled out to transport individuals to state hospitals once they are released from police custody. She further stated efforts are being made to expand the contract to provide chaperones for individuals waiting for a bed, thereby freeing up police officers who would otherwise have to sit with the individuals. Mr. Ingle stated an individual accompanied by law enforcement i must be restrained, but restraints can be released once the J individual is transferred to the organization. Ms. Fried concurred. She stated another issue is the individual is not receiving psychiatric help while sitting in the emergency room for days. She further stated the key is to get the individual in a placement as soon as possible so they can receive the help they should be getting. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the state's efforts to meet that need, Ms. Fried stated she believes the state's efforts are currently directed toward getting more mobile response in the community. She discussed the challenges of multiple initiatives going into effect on December 1, 2021. She stated private hospitals have been more supportive by taking individuals during this time. She further stated the psychiatric hospitals are the biggest challenge due to staffing shortages and COVID-19. She stated crisis transformation is the biggest planned initiative to try to impact that on the front end. She then discussed the Marcus -David Peters Act which adds to the Code of Virginia mental health awareness and response protocols for law enforcement when addressing behavioral health crisis situations. She stated the goal of Marcus Alert is to provide a behavioral health response to a behavioral health emergency. She provided a graphic of the tiered response with protocols for each of four levels. She stated even though Chesterfield is not slated to implement Marcus Alert for some time, all localities are required to 21-559 9/22/2021 submit their local plan of compliance by June 2022, and a planning team is working on the county's plan. She then shared a success story of a consumer named David who began receiving services in 2017 at the age of 12 to address many behavioral concerns. She described the many challenges David faced and the services provided to him. She stated one such service was enrollment at Martial Arts World, where David flourished and found healthy physical and emotional outlets to help build his confidence and self-worth. She further stated in the summer of 2021 MHSS received a request to stop funding David's enrollment at Martial Arts World, not because he was dropping out of the program but because he was offered a job on their team. She stated David's case manager reports that he expresses stability and satisfaction with his life, and he continues to grow and find his place and purpose. She announced September is National Recovery Month and is in its 32°a year of recognizing millions of Americans in treatment for substance misuse as well as the recovery service providers. Next, she announced September is Suicide Prevention Month and encouraged anyone having thoughts of suicide to reach out to the Chesterfield Crisis Intervention Line at 804-748-6356 or the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1 -800 -TALK (1-800-8255). Lastly, she announced the CSB will be celebrating its Soth anniversary with an outdoor event at the Rogers Building next week. She introduced the members of the MHSS senior team who were present: Ms. Danielle Sayre, Director of Finance; Mr. David Meadows, Director of Community Services; Mr. Doug Bilski, Clinical Director; Mr. Jarek Muchowski, Administration; Dr. Angela Catolico, Medical Director; and Ms. Mandy Pilk, Human Resources Manager. She stated their leadership and strong staff make it all possible. In response to Mr. Ingle's request for staff to ensure the availability of a link or a phone number on the county's website for obtaining suicide prevention services, Ms. Fried stated staff would make sure that information is available. She then called forward Mr. Pappas and the MHSS senior team for the reading of the Resolution Recognizing Chesterfield Community Services Board Upon its 50th Anniversary. (It is noted the resolution was later adopted on the Consent Agenda.) Mr. Holland congratulated Mr. Pappas, Ms. Fried, and the senior MHSS team and expressed appreciation for their service. 3.D. BROADBAND UPDATE Mr. Barry Condrey, Chief Information Officer, provided the Board with an update on broadband service in the county. He first reviewed the definition of broadband, federal standards, and services which are not considered broadband. He provided details of broadband service availability and stated there are 116,085 eligible parcels in the county, 115,359 of which have their choice of Verizon or Comcast and 726 of which have no broadband service option. He discussed many partnerships between the county and electric cooperatives, electric utilities, and Virginia Telecommunications Initiative (VATI) programs. He stated Southside Electric Cooperative is an important partner delivering service in the southern part of the county, and it stands ready to assist once the county is ready to build out the fiber plant to include the 726 unserved 21-560 9/22/2021 parcels. He provided details of the VATI grant program which provides financial assistance for broadband projects. He stated the county submitted an application for universal coverage and special construction costs. He further stated the announcement of awards will occur in late December, and the county's project with private partner Comcast could begin as early as January 2022. He provided details of the county's application and project scope which will result in true universal coverage availability for everyone. He then discussed the county's digital community efforts which include equity, inclusion, digital literacy, and affordability. He stated the federal infrastructural bill in its current form provides $42 billion of funding to overcome the digital divide in America. He encouraged Board members to refer their constituents' broadband questions to him at broadband@chesterfield.gov. He stated in a recent resident survey, 75 percent of respondents stated their broadband access was just as important as their water and electricity. He further stated overcoming the digital divide will be the subject of much work moving forward. Mr. Carroll thanked Mr. Condrey and his staff for the tremendous undertaking to identify underserved locations. He stated one of the lessons learned from the pandemic when school buildings were closed was that many students struggled to learn because they did not have access to broadband for remote learning. He further stated broadband makes information available to everyone in the community, and it also helps business ventures. He stated this is a forward -thinking project and wanted citizens to know the county is still trying to find ways to bring everything forward within the community. He further stated the grant will make a big difference for everyone, especially those who are underserved. He expressed appreciation to Southside Electric for allowing infrastructure to be installed on its structures. He stated working with Comcast is going to be a great partnership. He further stated if all goes well, Southside Electric may consider entering into similar partnerships with its communities. 3.E. DONINION ENERGY ANNUAL UPDATE Mr. James Beazley, Manager - Regional, State and Local Affairs, provided the Board with an update on the activities of Dominion Energy. He stated Dominion Energy was one of the first utilities to suspend disconnections during the pandemic. He further stated power outages during the pandemic became even more worrisome due to the number of students who would not be able to access remote learning. He provided details of outages during Tropical Storm Isaias and the 2021 Valentine's Weekend Ice Storm. He reviewed Dominion Energy's assets and impact in the county. He discussed a multi -channel approach to storm communications via Facebook and Twitter as well as an application which allows customers to report and check the i status of outages. He announced the implementation of smart J meters throughout the service territory in the northern part of the county and stated the Petersburg (Dinwiddie) office would be implementing smart meters in the southern part of the county. He described the smart meter as a router that enables two-way communication with the meter and provides notification 21-561 9/22/2021 of an outage. He reviewed the Restoration Priority System which enumerates the priority order for restoration of the electric transmission and distribution system during an outage. He provided details of Dominion Energy's efforts to advance, modernize, and place layers of security on the distribution grid. He stated Dominion Energy is willing to partner with the county's broadband expansion efforts. He discussed strategic underground projects in the county. He announced two electric school buses were delivered to Chesterfield County Public Schools in May 2021 as a part of Dominion Energy's Electric School Bus Program, and he provided details of battery storage and pumped storage projects. He stated Dominion Energy has purchased the rights to East Point Energy's Dry Bridge Battery Storage Project and, pending regulatory approval, will be constructing a 20 -megawatt facility battery storage project in the Midlothian District. He further stated Chesterfield County is leading the region on a big project such as this one. He underscored Dominion Energy's priority to ensure such facilities are properly sited, screened, and isolated. He reported on Dominion Energy's implementation of solar energy and stated it is the third largest utility with solar panels. He encouraged the county to think about new construction projects, such as large parking areas, where Dominion Energy could install solar panels. He provided details of the new Dominion Energy -owned asset, winterpock Solar Project, recently purchased from Cypress Creek Renewables. He also provided details of the Harrowgate-Locks Rebuild project. He provided the Board with an update on activities at Dutch Gap, including the Chesterfield Brown-Boveri Rebuild and power generation. with regard to the coal ash removal project, he stated Dominion Energy personnel continue to look for ways to mitigate impacts on citizens utilizing amenities at the boat launch, Henricus, and the conservation area. He shared an example of a fishing tournament which occurred over the summer. He stated because the road was closed from 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., station staff opened the head gate at 3:30 a.m. and escorted boaters through the power block area into the boat launch area. Mr. Ingle stated the tournament participants expressed their appreciation for the accommodation, and it was successful. Mr. Beazley then provided the Board with the next steps for the coal ash project and the associated memorandum of understanding (MOU). He stated Dominion Energy will start moving coal ash at the end of the fourth quarter of 2021. He further stated there will be a virtual meeting on November 4th and interested parties can request presentation materials by mail if they are unable to participate in the virtual meeting. In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to when Dominion Energy expects to receive a ruling from the State Corporation Commission (SCC), Mr. Beazley stated he believed it would be next year and he would follow up to confirm. He further stated the hearing examiner and staff did not have any concerns with what was in the application for Chesterfield and approval was recommended. Mr. Ingle requested a release of more guarantees on what the county spends once approval is given. 21-562 9/22/2021 Mr. Beazley stated that should be outlined in the MOD and it is going in a forward fashion. In response to Mr. Carroll's question relative to the types of solar panels being installed on the Winterpock Road property, Mr. Beazley stated they are an encapsulated silicone -type panel that can be used for recyclability. Mr. Carroll stated citizens in the area are concerned about the types of panels that will be installed, and it is his understanding that monocrystalline are one of the best and safest. He requested Mr. Beazley to include that as a topic of discussion during the community meeting. He then inquired about the type of training Dominion Energy would provide to public safety personnel. Mr. Beazley stated Dominion Energy will begin outreach for not only the solar facilities but also the battery storage facilities. He further stated Dominion Energy has a great partnership with Chesterfield public safety and he looked forward to continuing and strengthening that relationship. Mr. Carroll stated it is important for the community to know the type of technical expertise Dominion Energy lends to the county's public safety personnel to ensure they are prepared to respond to any issues. He further stated this is a new type of technology, and he did not think there was a 20 -megawatt solar farm anywhere else in the county. Mr. Beazley stated there is a 2 -megawatt facility in the Philip Morris Park 500 area. Mr. Carroll stated more of these types of facilities are coming and it is important for the community to know that the county's public safety personnel will have the necessary training to respond to any issues. He encouraged Mr. Beazley to let him know if he needed any assistance reaching out to the community. Mr. Beazley stated hazards would be one of the topics of discussion. Mr. Carroll stated it is his understanding that incidents are rare, but the county wants to be prepared. 3.F. 2021 REDISTRICTING UPDATE Mr. Jeff Mincks, County Attorney, provided the Board with an update on the 2021 redistricting of the county. He stated the law requires the Board to change the boundaries of magisterial districts every 10 years ending in 1; district changes need to reapportion population among the districts; and boundary changes must be based on United States Census data. He further stated redistricting of magisterial districts does not change any school district boundaries. He stated magisterial districts must be contiguous, compact, have clearly observable boundaries such as streets, rivers, and other permanent features shown on maps, and have "equal" population with a maximum deviation of less than 5 percent between districts. He 21-563 9/22/2021 further stated currently there is close to 14 percent deviation between the most populated and least populated districts. He stated redrawing magisterial districts cannot result in racial vote packing or racial vote cracking. He further stated the proposal balances out all the foregoing factors. He provided details of the 2020 census results and stated the county's current population of 365,306 reflects a 15.5 percent increase since 2010. He provided a current breakdown by district of total population, population variance from ideal of 73,061, { and deviation. He also provided maps of the current magisterial lir districts and the proposed changes to each district. He stated Dale District would gain portions from Clover Hill and Midlothian districts; Clover Hill District would gain portions from Matoaca District; and Midlothian District would gain portions from Matoaca District. He then provided a new breakdown by district of total population, population variance from ideal of 73,061, deviation, and the number of residents changing districts. Next, he discussed the changes in racial composition in each magisterial district. He noted there were no proposed changes to the Bermuda District. He stated there is no appreciable change in the percentages within any of the racial or cultural categories, thereby addressing the concentration or dilution of racial populations. He reviewed the next steps which are setting the public hearing for October 27; opening the public comment portal at chesterfield.gov/census; holding community meetings via Facebook Live on October 13 (hosted by Mr. Holland and Mr. Winslow) and October 19 (hosted by Mr. Carroll and Ms. Haley); and, lastly, holding a public hearing on October 27. Mr. Holland confirmed that citizens would have the opportunity to comment via the online comment portal in the event they could not participate in the Facebook Live events. 3.G. CONSENT AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS Mr. Jesse Smith, Deputy County Administrator, provided the Board with an overview of various agenda items on the Consent 21-564 9/22/2021 Agenda. He provided details of Items 13.B.3. and 13.B.4. pertaining to the acceptance and appropriation of grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for projects at the Chesterfield County Airport. He stated Item 13.B.7. allows staff to move forward with $30 million in drainage improvements on Otterdale Road, Indian Springs Road, and Belmont Road. He further stated Item 13.B.8.a. will set the public hearing for the Board to consider a County Code amendment relative to the Route 1 Residential Overlay. He stated Item 13.B.9. will allow staff to move forward with the contract for the retention and salary study for remaining county and Schools employees not part of the prior pay studies. Lastly, he stated Item 13.B.11. will initiate a zoning application for 1,850 acres known as Upper Magnolia Green which is necessary to accommodate the new middle school scheduled to be opened by the fall of 2024. 21-564 9/22/2021 4. REPORTS 4.A. DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUNDS (DIF) MONTHLY REPORT The Board accepted the Monthly Report on District Improvement Funds. 5. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS Ms. Roslyn Faines addressed the Board relative to the lack of safe, affordable senior housing in the county. Ms. Wendy Little addressed the Board relative to special education in the Chesterfield County Public Schools system. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board recessed to Room 502 for a closed session. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 6. CLOSED SESSION 6.A. CLOSED SESSION 1) PURSUANT TO 5 2.2-3711(A)(5), CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950, AS AMENDED, TO DISCUSS OR CONSIDER PROSPECTIVE BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIES OR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIES WHERE NO PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT RAS BEEN MADE OF THE BUSINESSES' OR INDUSTRIES' INTEREST IN LOCATING OR EXPANDING THEIR FACILITIES IN THE COMMUNITY, AND 2) PURSUANT TO 2.2-3711(A)(1), CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board went into closed session 1) pursuant to § 2.2-3711(A)(5), Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to discuss or consider prospective businesses or industries or the expansion of existing businesses or industries where no previous announcement has been made of the businesses' or industries' interest in locating or expanding their facilities in the community, and 2) pursuant to 2.2-3711(A)(1), Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, relating to the performance of the Chief of Police. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. Reconvening: On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has this day adjourned into Closed Session in accordance with a formal vote of the 21-565 9/22/2021 J Board and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act effective July 1, 1989 provides for certification that such Closed Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that to the best of each member's knowledge, i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Freedom of Information Act were discussed in Closed Session to which this certification applies, and ii) only such business matters were identified in the motion by which the Closed Session was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the Board. No member dissents from this certification. Mr. Ingle: Aye. Mr. Carroll: Aye. Ms. Haley: Aye. Mr. Winslow: Aye. Mr. Holland: Aye. The Board then returned to the Public Meeting Room for the evening session. Mr. Holland reviewed the requirements for facial coverings and spatial distancing and requested all individuals in the Public Meeting Room to not congregate in groups. He stated all Board members have received copies of citizen comments posted to the online portal. (It is noted citizen comments received through the online portal are attached as Attachment A.) 8. INVOCATION The Honorable Jim Holland, Chair, gave the invocation. 9. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Ms. Tara Krohn, representing the Freedom Flag Foundation, led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION UPDATE 10.A. FREEDOM FLAG FOUNDATION Dr. Casey introduced Ms. Tara Krohn to share information about the Freedom Flag, the Freedom Flag Foundation, and her role in a children's book about the Freedom Flag. Ms. Krohn stated she is a Third -Grade teacher at Woolridge Elementary School and a proud product of Chesterfield County. She shared how on September 12, 2001, after seeing the despair in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Henrico restaurateur Richard 21-566 9/22/2021 Melito sketched an image on a napkin which later became the Freedom Flag. She reviewed the ten elements of the Freedom Flag which tell the story of September 11, 2001. She stated Mr. Melito put the flag in his restaurant, and today it is a national symbol of remembrance. She further stated the Freedom Flag is in the Code of Virginia and is the Virginia symbol of remembrance for 9/11. She stated Chesterfield County has been a wonderful supporter, and there is a flag in every elementary school. She further stated a display case was unveiled on September 11, 2021, at the Chesterfield Technical Center (CTC) j on Hull Street. She displayed a piece of steel from To that was gifted to the Foundation. She stated Midlothian High School Class of 1992 lost a classmate, Mr. Doug Ketcham, in Tower One. She provided details of the Foundation's steel program designed to teach today's children about 9/11. She announced as of this year there is a flag in all 50 states, and she expressed the Foundation's hope that Virginia's symbol of remembrance will become the national symbol of remembrance. She shared her children's book entitled Unfurling the Freedom Flag: A 9/11 Story which is a first -person account of the Freedom Flag. She thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak and expressed her hope that no one would forget 9/11. Dr. Casey announced the book would be in all the county's public libraries shortly. 10.8. COVID-19 UPDATE Dr. James Worsley, Deputy County Administrator, provided the Board with a general update on COVID-19. He announced the county reached its community vaccination goal, but vaccination efforts continue as the delta variant runs rampant. He provided a chart of New COVID-19 Cases and Positive Test Results. He discussed booster shots and stated the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee recommended a third shot for people age 65 and older and other vulnerable individuals. He further stated vaccinations are currently not available for children ages 5 to 11. He provided resources to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine (https://www. vaccines. gov/) and a COVID-19 test (https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/chesterfield/). He provided details of the Rockwood Vaccination Center led by Dr. Alexander Samuel, Director of the Chesterfield Health District. He discussed COVID-19 protocols and workplace procedures for county personnel and stated the county recently re -implemented previously effective workplace safety and health protocols, such as the wearing of facial coverings, to protect employees and citizens and to ensure compliance with state standards. He reviewed hospital bed capacity and diversion status. He stated there are limited hospital beds available due to staffing shortages, higher acuity patients, longer in-patient stays, an uptick of COVID-19 patients, and limited emergency department capacity due to patients being held in the emergency department. He further stated because of these factors, hospitals in the region have been in a constant state of diversion status for 37 days straight. He then provided the Board with statistics on unemployment and stated 6,911 citizens lost federal supplemental benefits on September 4, 2021. He shared several outreach efforts including Social Services having an on-site presence at Virginia Career Works, 21-567 9/22/2021 a data sharing agreement negotiation with the Virginia Employment Commission (VEC), and a partnership with Virginia Career Works at the Turner Road location. Mr. Carroll stated there is a lot of information relating to vaccinations and expressed appreciation for what has been provided. He further stated citizens have reached out asking if the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the VDH have released any information about what the community can do from a health point of view to stay healthier, such as an increase in Vitamin C or Vitamin D. He inquired if anything has been seen from the CDC or state that could be shared with the community. Dr. Worsley stated he did not know the answer, but he would follow up with Dr. Samuel and report back to the Board. He then introduced Mr. Shawn Smith to provide Schools' update on COVID- 19. Mr. Smith stated this year 98 percent of students are in the school buildings compared to 40 percent last year. He further stated almost 2,000 students are enrolled in the virtual academy. He provided a real-time demonstration of Schools' website which includes COVID-19 guidance and resources as well as a dashboard containing case data. He stated two areas of focus are (1) self -assessments for not only staff but also families and (2) encouraging students and staff to get vaccinated. He discussed contact tracing and stated the rule change from six feet to three feet has brought some relief. He also discussed guidance for connected cases, sports -connected cases, and outbreaks. He stated whenever there are two or more connected cases for sports, all sports activities are immediately paused for at least seven days. Mr. Winslow inquired if that guidance applies to indoor and outdoor sports. Mr. Smith stated the guidance applies to both indoor and outdoor sports because Schools looks at connected cases that have the ability to transmit further. With regard to classrooms, Mr. Smith stated the guidance in place is for three or more connected cases. He further stated since the beginning of the school year there have been less than 10 classrooms that have quarantined entirely. He stated staff has worked hard to maintain seating charts to assist with contact tracing. He discussed Schools' interest in COVID-19 pool testing and take- home testing, but noted late October is the earliest those products may be provided. He stated looking ahead, the two biggest pushes are flu shots in mid-October and community -wide testing once vaccines become available for ages 5 to 11. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to utilizing 21-568 9/22/2021 nurses to administer vaccines to children ages 5 to 11, Mr. Smith stated he believes it will be a major push to work together for the county proper and to stand up the larger operational piece with regard to the fairgrounds and Virginia State University. 21-568 9/22/2021 10.C. ELECTION PREPAREDNESS Dr. Casey stated early voting is going smoothly at the Registrar's central office. He further stated 5 libraries will open up on October 18th to serve the final two and a half weeks of the election. He stated Chesterfield was one of the pioneering localities to set up libraries for early voting, and last year's success is expected to continue this year. 10.1). PERSONAL RECOGNITION BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENTAL PURCHASING Dr. Casey announced Ms. Lori Newton, a recently retired purchasing agent, was presented with the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing's Professional Manager of the Year award. He stated the award recognizes public procurement professionals who have supervisory or management responsibilities. He further stated Ms. Newton brought a professional development focus to the entire office which allowed the office to thrive and procure the best quality at the best cost for the people of the county. Ms. Newton expressed appreciation for the support throughout her career and stated it was very special that the Chesterfield County staff nominated her for the award. 10.E. LAUNCH OF PODCAST Dr. Casey announced the launch of the Chesterfield Behind the Mic podcast which will spotlight stories and issues facing the county by speaking directly to citizens, elected officials, staff, and businesses. He stated the podcast will be hosted by Mr. Brad Franklin with Communications and Media. He further stated the podcast can be found on the county's website at chesterfield.gov/podcast, Spotify, iTunes, and Google Podcasts. He stated the podcast will also be videotaped and made available on the county's YouTube channel and community television station. He further stated the first episode features a discussion with Mr. Bill Fiege and Ms. Rosemary Fitzgerald about the softball team that finished second in the Little League world Series. 10.F. CHIEF ASSESSOR INTRODUCTION Mr. Matt Harris, Deputy County Administrator, introduced Mr. Melvin Bloomfield who was selected as the county's new Real Estate Assessor after a nationwide recruitment. He stated Mr. Bloomfield has 20 years of experience in the industry, holds a bachelor's degree in the real estate field, and is a licensed appraiser with two current International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) designations. He further stated Mr. Bloomfield has been in a leadership capacity in the City of Richmond's Assessor's Office since 2014. He thanked Ms. Ashley DeBiase for her leadership in the interim between Mr. Jonathan Davis and Mr. Bloomfield. 21-569 9/22/2021 Mr. Bloomfield expressed his appreciation for the opportunity to serve in this leadership role. 10.G. YOUTH FARMERS MARKET Dr. Casey announced the first Youth Farmers Market for youth in Sth to 12th grades was held recently and was very successful. He stated there were 50 applications for the 12 available spots. He further stated the program will be expanded in 2022 to provide multiple opportunities for young people to be engaged in the county's Farmers Market. 10. H. OTHER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION UPDATES Dr. Casey announced Chesterfield was one of only two places in Virginia to earn a spot on Money Magazine's Top 50 Best Places to Live. He stated the county was recognized for its low unemployment rate, great public schools, cost of living, diversity, strong economic growth, and geographical location. He further stated making the list is a significant accolade to citizens, businesses, county and Schools staffs, and elected officials. 11. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Holland expressed his appreciation to Dr. Mervin Daugherty, Superintendent of Schools, and the School Board for inviting him to participate in the 9/11 event at CTC - Hull. He recalled that President Bush called for a national day of prayer shortly after 9/11. He thanked Ms. Krohn for sharing the Freedom Flag Foundation's initiative to educate today's children about 9/11 so that the nation will always remember. He stated he was invited to do the coin toss at Salem Church Football Association's 9/11 game. He then announced his recent gubernatorial appointment to the Opioid Abatement Authority which will be critical to combatting the opioid epidemic. Mr. Winslow announced a Facebook Live event tentatively scheduled for October 21st to discuss the Genito and 288 Special Focus Area Plan. Mr. Ingle announced each Board member is filming a video highlighting parks and recreation in their respective districts. He played his video highlighting opportunities available in the Bermuda District. 12. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS 12.A. RECOGNIZING CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CENTENARIANS IN HONOR OF NATIONAL CENTENARIAN DAY Ms. Emily Ashley, Director of Citizen Information and Resources, stated National Centenarian's Day is observed annually on September 22 to honor individuals who are 100 years of age or older. She stated the 12 remarkable centenarians being recognized shared words of wisdom on the secret to their 21-570 9/22/2021 longevity and advice to the younger generation. She further stated they project an attitude of hope, care, and compassion for others. She stated they are pillars in their communities who live life with purpose and stress the importance of resilience, relationships, recreation, responsibility, and respect. She extended warm birthday greetings to the following centenarians who will be 100 years of age or older in 2021: Marie Haskins Yates Austin Lee Randolph Beale Andy Roberts Laura Scott Evelyn Watkins Jemison Mabel Wheel In addition, she wished a happy birthday to the following alumni: Marjorie Caldwell Dolores Bisbee Rose Strickler Good Delby Huff Carrie Evelyn Samuel Shirley Wiegand 12.B. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE CHESTERFIELD -COLONIAL HEIGHTS 2021 CHRISTMAS MOTHER Ms. Kiva Rogers introduced Mrs. Phyllis Taylor Poats, who was present to receive the resolution. Mrs. Poats thanked the Board, citizens, and many county departments for their support of the Christmas Mother program. Mr. Holland thanked Mrs. Poats for her service to the citizens of the county. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, most families in Chesterfield County enjoy peace and happiness during the Christmas holidays; and WHEREAS, there are many families and elders who do not have the means to enjoy this special time of year; and WHEREAS, the Chesterfield -Colonial Heights Christmas Mother Program has successfully provided food, toys, books and clothing to many of our citizens in the past; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Phyllis Taylor Poats has been elected Christmas Mother for 2021 and requests support of all the citizens of Chesterfield County to ensure that that no family, child or elder is forgotten as we celebrate the holidays in our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September 2021 hereby congratulates Mrs. Poats on being selected as the 2021 21-571 9/22/2021 Christmas Mother, and urges all of the citizens of Chesterfield County to support this worthy endeavor. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors that the Christmas Mother Program is hereby commended for their successful efforts in past years and extends best wishes for a successful 2021 season. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mrs. Poats and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 12.C. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE HONORABLE M. KIRKLAND COX ON HIS RETIREMENT FROM THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Director of Intergovernmental Relations, introduced The Honorable M. Kirkland Cox, who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Delegate M. Kirkland Cox will retire from the Virginia General Assembly at the end of his current House of Delegates term; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox has served the citizens of Chesterfield County in the House of Delegates since 1990; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox's commitment to public service and long dedication to the citizens of Chesterfield County and the Greater Crater Region guided his actions for over 30 years in the Virginia General Assembly; and WHEREAS, all citizens of the Commonwealth benefited from the leadership displayed by Delegate Cox in numerous areas, notably in economic development, education, business issues and the state budget where he served as a budget conferee many times, always working to ensure fiscal responsibility balanced by the appropriate provision of services to citizens; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox will always be remembered and respected for his strong support of veterans in Virginia, helping to develop many programs that provide support and assistance to veterans, both abled and disabled; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox also strongly supported the disabled community through expansion of developmental and intellectual disability waivers over his years of service as well as supported the men and women who serve in public safety, including Police, Fire and Emergency Medical, Med-Flight and the Sheriff's Office; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox will always be known for his respect for, and devotion to the institution that is the House of 21-572 9/22/2021 Delegates of the Virginia General Assembly where he proudly served as Speaker of the House in 2018-2020; and WHEREAS, Delegate Cox has always worked in concert with Chesterfield County elected and appointed officials, helping to achieve legislative success. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September 2021, publicly recognizes The Honorable M. Kirkland Cox and extends i on behalf of the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation ter/ for his long service to the county and the Commonwealth of Virginia, congratulations on his retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Delegate Cox and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. Mr. Holland presented the executed resolution to Delegate Cox and expressed appreciation for his valuable and dedicated service to the county and the Commonwealth of Virginia. Delegate Cox expressed appreciation for the kind words and stated it was an honor to be recognized. 12.D. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MS. MARY ANN CURTIN, DIRECTOR OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, UPON HER RETIREMENT Mr. Matt Harris introduced Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Ms. Mary Ann Curtin began serving Chesterfield County as an Analyst in the Budget and Management Department in August of 1984, became Senior Budget Analyst in December, 1987, and Chief of Budget and Management in September, 1989; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin became Chesterfield's Director of Intergovernmental Relations in July, 1997; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has distinguished herself as a trusted and well-respected expert on matters regarding intergovernmental relations, particularly those related to the functions of the Virginia General Assembly; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has consistently demonstrated her unique skills in navigating the intricate balance between state lawmaking and the delivery of local government programs and services; and 21-573 9/22/2021 WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin's institutional knowledge of both the state legislature and the local government she serves, coupled with her strong working relationships with members of Chesterfield County's legislative delegation and county elected officials and other leaders, has made her a capable and sought-after resource to deliver salient advice and guidance; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin's expansive knowledge of legislative matters and their impact on local government has also made her a trusted and highly sought-after resource for countless county staff and other colleagues among Virginia localities; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has consistently and effectively served as a liaison between county and state leaders, assisting both newly elected and veteran political leaders, alike, and shaping a narrative among state, regional and local leaders that contributes greatly to the quality of life in Chesterfield; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has extended her knowledge, talents and time to serving numerous outside organizations and associations, including the Virginia Municipal League, Virginia Association of Counties, and many other local, regional and statewide organizations; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has equally contributed her time and talents to numerous special teams among Chesterfield County departments and staff, resulting in many process improvements and efficiencies, improved customer service and satisfaction, heightened fiscal stewardship, and greater awareness of the critical role Chesterfield's local government plays in the daily lives of citizens; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin has remained committed to generously sharing her knowledge as a mentor to others within Chesterfield County and among her many colleagues and aspiring legislative liaisons; and WHEREAS, Ms. Curtin's longtime advocacy for Chesterfield County among state lawmakers, their staffs, and the county's regional partners leaves a legacy that will benefit Chesterfield County for years to come. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September, 2021, publicly recognizes Ms. Mary Ann Curtin and extends on behalf of its members and the residents of Chesterfield County, appreciation for her decades of service to the county, sincerest congratulations, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Ms. Curtin, and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-574 9/22/2021 Mr. Holland presented the executed resolution to Ms. Curtin, expressed appreciation for her valuable service and contributions to the county, and wished her a happy retirement. Dr. Casey presented Ms. Curtin with an engraved brick, expressed appreciation for her exceptional and faithful service to the county, and wished her well in her retirement. Ms. Curtin received a standing ovation. Ms. Curtin expressed appreciation for the recognition and thanked her fellow county employees for supporting her in her role as legislative liaison. 12.E. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MR. JAMES M. MCDONNELL JR., INFORMATION SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT Mr. Barry Condrey, Chief Information Officer, introduced Mr. James McDonnell, Jr., who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Mr. James McDonnell, Jr. will retire from the Chesterfield County Information Systems Technology Department on September 1, 2021, after providing 43 years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell began his career in the Fire Department in September 1978 as a Fire Dispatcher and was promoted in 1981 to Assistant Fire Communications Supervisor with a focus on technology; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell served on the project team to implement 911 service in Chesterfield County in 1984; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell continued his career in the Emergency Communications Center in 1993 as a Senior Automation Analyst Technical Coordinator, and was promoted to Operations Support Manager in 2002 with responsibilities for all emergency communications technology including first generation automated dispatching systems, budgeting, quality assurance and training; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell continued his career in the Information Systems Technology Department in 2004 as a System Administrator, working with the second generation of Public Safety response technology including computer aided dispatching, Fire and Police records management, mobile data computing and reporting software; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell has been instrumental in the implementation of the Public Safety Technology System Project in May 2021, the third generation of Public Safety response technology, diligently working to ensure a successful transition from the previous systems; and 21-575 9/22/2021 WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell served as President of the Virginia Emergency Number Association and was appointed to the Virginia Wireless E911 Service Board in 1999; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell has been a member of the Virginia chapter of the Public Safety Communications Officers Association, faithfully representing the interests of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell has been recognized many times for ((✓ superior performance and commitment to his customers and has received special recognitions and accolades for his timely and thoughtful support; and WHEREAS, Mr. McDonnell has been a valued friend and co- worker to many in the Information Systems Technology Department, demonstrating his pleasant and charming personality, always willing to help his coworkers and commit his time generously. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September 2021, publicly recognizes Mr. James McDonnell, Jr., and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for his service to the county, congratulations upon his retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mr. McDonnell and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. Mr. Holland presented the executed resolution to Mr. McDonnell, commended him on his many years of loyal and dedicated service, and wished him well in his retirement. Dr. Casey presented Mr. McDonnell with an engraved brick, congratulated him on his retirement and expressed appreciation for his outstanding service to the county. Mr. McDonnell expressed his appreciation to the Board for the special recognition and kind sentiments. A standing ovation followed. 12.F. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MS. MICHELE MACPHEE, DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT SERVICES UPON HER RETIREMENT Ms. Kelly Fried introduced Ms. Michele MacPhee, who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board adopted the following resolution: 21-576 9/22/2021 WHEREAS, Ms. Michele MacPhee was hired by Chesterfield County Mental Health Support Services on September 9, 1996 and will be retiring effective October 1, 2021; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee was hired as a Clinician, promoted to Senior Clinician on August 9, 1997, and became Services Supervisor for the Specialized Services Team of the Child and Adolescent Services Team on February 16, 2013; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee was named the Mental Health Support Services Employee of the Year in 2003; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee was instrumental in the development of the Chesterfield County Child Advocacy Center which opened in 2018 and provides a comprehensive community-based program to survivors of child abuse during the investigation and prosecution of child abuse cases; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee served on the Child Advocacy Center Leadership Team, Child Advocacy Center Caregiver Group and Care Review Team; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee assisted with creating and overseeing the Child and Adolescent Hospital Liaison role for Chesterfield youth placed at Commonwealth Center for Children and Adolescents; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee served on the Trauma Informed Care Network Committee, Legal Committee, Trauma Informed Leadership Team and served as focus group facilitator; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee for over ten years served as an internship instructor for Master of Social Work students from the Virginia Commonwealth University as well as participated in and assisted with a published university study on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee served as a multidisciplinary team member with Greater Richmond Stop Child Abuse Now as well as on the SCAN Peer Supervision group; and WHEREAS Ms. MacPhee maintained effective partnerships with County departments as well as private providers and served as Mental Health Support Services / Department of Social Services Ambassador; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee served on numerous committees and workgroups throughout her career including Same Day Access, Healthcare Integration, No -Show Cancelation, Emotional Animal Support, Collaborative Documentation, and the Dialectal Behavior Therapy Consultation Group; and WHEREAS, Ms. MacPhee was a dedicated and instrumental member of the Mental Health Support Services Child and l i Adolescent Services Team and will be missed by those she served as well as her community partners and coworkers. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September 2021, publicly recognizes the outstanding contributions of Ms. 21-577 9/22/2021 Michele MacPhee and extends appreciation, on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, for 25 years of service, congratulations upon her retirement, and best wishes for a long, happy, and healthy retirement. Mr. Holland presented the executed resolution to Ms. MacPhee, accompanied by members of her family, commended her on her many years of dedicated and impactful service to the community, and wished her well in her retirement. Dr. Casey presented Ms. MacPhee with an engraved brick, congratulated her on her retirement, and expressed appreciation for her outstanding service to the county. Ms. MacPhee expressed her appreciation to the Board for the special recognition and kind sentiments. A standing ovation followed 13. NEW BUSINESS 13.A. APPOINTMENTS 13.A.1. CITIZENS' BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board nominated and reappointed Mr. Chip Hughey, Mr. Eugene Johnson, Jr., and Mr. Ralph Eudailey to serve as at -large representatives on the Citizens' Budget Advisory Committee, whose terms are effective October 1, 2021, and will expire September 30, 2023. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8. CONSENT ITEMS 13.8.1. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS 13.B.1.a. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTION OF THE REBEEE WESTCHESTER APARTMENTS USING PROCEEDS FROM TAX-EXEMPT BONDS ISSUED BY THE VIRGINIA HOUSING MIXED -INCOME PROGRAM On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, desires to make the determination required by Section 36-55.30:2.B of the Code of Virginia of 21-578 9/22/2021 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be presented to Ms. MacPhee and be permanently recorded among the papers of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. Mr. Holland presented the executed resolution to Ms. MacPhee, accompanied by members of her family, commended her on her many years of dedicated and impactful service to the community, and wished her well in her retirement. Dr. Casey presented Ms. MacPhee with an engraved brick, congratulated her on her retirement, and expressed appreciation for her outstanding service to the county. Ms. MacPhee expressed her appreciation to the Board for the special recognition and kind sentiments. A standing ovation followed 13. NEW BUSINESS 13.A. APPOINTMENTS 13.A.1. CITIZENS' BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board nominated and reappointed Mr. Chip Hughey, Mr. Eugene Johnson, Jr., and Mr. Ralph Eudailey to serve as at -large representatives on the Citizens' Budget Advisory Committee, whose terms are effective October 1, 2021, and will expire September 30, 2023. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8. CONSENT ITEMS 13.8.1. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS 13.B.1.a. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTION OF THE REBEEE WESTCHESTER APARTMENTS USING PROCEEDS FROM TAX-EXEMPT BONDS ISSUED BY THE VIRGINIA HOUSING MIXED -INCOME PROGRAM On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, desires to make the determination required by Section 36-55.30:2.B of the Code of Virginia of 21-578 9/22/2021 1950, as amended, in order for Virginia Housing to finance the economically mixed project (the "Project") described on Exhibit A attached hereto: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA THAT: 1. the ability to provide residential housing and supporting facilities that serve persons or families of lower or moderate income will be enhanced if a portion of the units in the Project are occupied or held available for occupancy by persons and families who are not of low and moderate income; and 2. private enterprise and investment are not reasonably expected, without assistance, to produce the construction or rehabilitation of decent, safe and sanitary housing and supporting facilities that will meet the needs of low and moderate income persons and families in the surrounding area of the Project and this Project will induce other persons and families to live within such area and thereby create a desirable economic mix of residents in such area. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, on the 22nd day of September, 2021. (It is noted a copy of Exhibit A is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. r` 13.B.1.b. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING CHESTERFIELD COMMUNITY J SERVICES BOARD UPON ITS 50TH ANNIVERSARY On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Chesterfield Community Services Board will celebrate its 50th anniversary on September 29th; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board was created by the Board of Supervisors on September 29, 1971; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board provides services to citizens with mental health, substance use, intellectual and developmental disabilities; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board earned national accreditation from the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities in September of 1997; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board branded the department as Mental Health Support Services in 2005; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board provides an array of comprehensive services including same day access, emergency services, mental health outpatient counseling, substance use counseling and group therapy, case management, assertive community treatment, psychosocial rehabilitative services, 21-579 9/22/2021 psychiatric services, medication assisted treatment, prevention, day programs, employment, 24 hour residential programs, and early intervention; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board has strong partnerships with other County departments and has integrated mental health resources to develop model programs with Fire/EMS, Sheriff's Department, Police, Courts, Drug Courts, Community Corrections, Juvenile Detention, Child Advocacy Center, and the Department of Social Services; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board has been a leader throughout the State in developing state of the art programs such as the integration of primary and behavioral healthcare, same day access, model psychiatry and clinical internship programs, peer recovery services, intermediate care facilities, and adopting evidence based practices to enhance treatment modalities; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board has developed strong community partnerships with faith -based and civic organizations, private providers, and businesses to further the mission of serving citizens; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board recognizes the many staff, leaders, and CSB board members, past and present, who have provided dedicated service toward the mission of the department; and WHEREAS, the Community Services Board is to be commended for its comprehensive programs and services and dedication to those with disabilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of September 2021, publicly recognizes the Chesterfield Community Services Board and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for its commitment to exceptional service to the county. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be presented to the current Executive Director and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.2. REAL PROPERTY REQUESTS 13.B.2.a. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND 13.B.2.a.1. ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ADJACENT TO JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY FROM CHH PROPERTIES CHESTER, LLC On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board accepted the conveyance of land containing 0.028 acres adjacent to Jefferson Davis Highway from CBH Properties Chester, LLC 21-580 9/22/2021 and authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.2.b. REQUESTS TO QUITCLAIM 13.B.2.b.1. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A SEWER EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS ACROSS THE PROPERTY OWNED BY DEER HILL PLACE, LLC On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a portion of a sewer easement and temporary construction easements across the property owned by Deer Hill Place, LLC. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.2.c. REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION 13.B.2.c.1. REQUEST PERMISSION FOR AN EXISTING PRIVATE SEWER PLUMBING LINE WITHIN AN EXISTING PRIVATE EASEMENT TO SERVE PROPERTY AT 1501 WARE BOTTOM SPRING ROAD On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board granted Heartland Equipment, Inc. permission for an existing private sewer plumbing line within an existing private easement to serve property at 1501 Ware Bottom Spring Road and authorized the County Administrator to execute the sewer connection agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.3. ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FROM THE FAA FOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT EASEMENT ACQUISITION AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION SERVICES On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board approved the acceptance and appropriation of grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for easement acquisition and easement acquisition services related to the Airport runway extension project. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-581 9/22/2021 13.B.4. ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FROM THE FAA FOR DESIGN SERVICES TO REHABILITATE THE PAVEMENT ON THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT MAIN AIRCRAFT APRON On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board approved the acceptance and appropriation of grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for design services to rehabilitate the pavement on the Chesterfield County Airport main aircraft apron. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.5. ACCEPTANCE OF FY2022 HIGHWAY SAFETY PROJECT GRANTS AWARDED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board accepted and appropriated FY2022 Highway Safety Project Grants, in the amount of $274,405, from the Department of Motor Vehicles for speed, alcohol and pedestrian enforcement activities. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8.6. AUTHORIZE THE RECEIPT AND APPROPRIATION OF 2021 PORT SECURITY GRANT FUNDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board authorized the Fire and EMS Department to receive and appropriate $72,454 in 2021 State Homeland Security Grant funds from the Department of Homeland Security. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.7. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH OTTERDALE ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AT HORSEPEN CREEK, BLACKMAN CREEK, AND OTTERDALE BRANCH, INDIAN SPRINGS ROAD EXTENSION AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT, BELMONT ROAD (WHITEPINE ROAD TO CORCORAN DRIVE) DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board authorized staff to proceed with the Otterdale Road Drainage Improvement Project at Horsepen Creek, Blackman Creek and Otterdale Branch; Indian Springs Road Extension and Drainage Improvement; and Belmont Road (Whitepine Road to Corcoran Drive) Drainage Improvement. And, further, the Board: 1. Authorized the County Administrator to enter into the customary VDOT/county agreements/contracts, permits/mitigation agreements and surety agreements, acceptable to the County Attorney; and 21-582 9/22/2021 2. Authorized the County Administrator to continue with preliminary design, proceed with the final design and right-of-way acquisitions, including advertisement of eminent domain public hearings if necessary and to accept the conveyance of right-of-way and easements that are required; and 3. Authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator to execute easement agreements for relocation of utilities; and 4. Authorized the Procurement Director to continue with the advertisements of construction contracts for the projects. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8.8. SET PUBLIC HEARING 13.B.8.a. TO CONSIDER CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO THE ROUTE 1 RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board set the date of October 27, 2021, for a public hearing to consider amendments to the County Code relative to the Route 1 Residential Overlay. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. \ Nays: None. J 13.B.8.b. TO CONSIDER CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO THE KEEPING OF CHICKENS (21PJ0115) On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board set the date of October 27, 2021, for a public hearing to consider amendments to the County Code relative to the keeping of chickens (21PJ0115). Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.B.8.c. SET PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REDISTRICTING OF THE COUNTY On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board set the date of October 27, 2021, for a public hearing to consider the redistricting of the county. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-583 9/22/2021 13.B.8.d. TO CONSIDER AMENDING COUNTY CODE ¢ 9-131 RELATING TO THE ASSESSMENT OF FEES OR COSTS IN CRIMINAL AND TRAFFIC CASES FOR E -SUMMONS PROGRAM On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board set the date of October 27, 2021, for a public hearing to consider amending County Code Section 9-131 relating to the assessment of costs in criminal and traffic cases for the E -summons program. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8.9. CONTRACT WITH A CONSULTING FIRM TO CONDUCT A RETENTION AND SALARY STUDY FOR REMAINING COUNTY AND SCHOOLS EMPLOYEES NOT PART OF PRIOR PAY STUDIES On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board authorized the County Administrator, in collaboration with the School Superintendent, to hire a management consulting firm(s) for the purposes of conducting a retention and salary study for remaining County and Schools employees not part of prior pay studies. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8.10. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet 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 streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. 21-584 9/22/2021 Project/Subdivision: Meadowville Landing at Rivers Bend - Section 8 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: AAMis Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 433.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Sinker Creek Drive, State Route Number 7741 From: 0.07 miles north of Riverboat Drive, (Route 7740) To: 0.01 miles south of Anchor Landing Drive, (Route 7638), a distance of 0.21 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 278, Page 20 Right of way width (feet) = 55 • Helmway Court, State Route Number 8105 From: 0.01 miles south of Helmway Drive, (Route 8103) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 278, Page 20 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the street described below is shown On a 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 state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 433.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number j Rolling Tide Court, State Route Number 8004 From: 0.02 miles south Helmway Drive, (Route 8103) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.7 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 280, Page 51 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 21-585 9/22/2021 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street l\r' Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Prosect/Subdivision: Ramblewood Estates and Cvoress Woods - Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Bastian Drive, State Route Number 8312 From: Ramblewood Drive, (Route 617) To: Marsham Road, (Route 8315), a distance of 0.05 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Bastian Drive, State Route Number 8312 From: Marsham Road, (Route 8315) To: Berwin Lane, (Route 8313), a distance of 0.18 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 266, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Bastian Drive, State Route Number 8312 From: Berwin Lane, (Route 8313) To: Bastian Place, (Route 8314), a distance of 0.06 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 21-586 9/22/2021 . Bastian Drive, State Route Number 8312 From: Bastian Place, (Route 8314) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.11 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Berwin Lane, State Route Number 8313 From: Bastian Drive, (Route 8312) To: Silverdust Lane, (Route 7241), a distance of 0.06 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Bastian Place, State Route Number 8314 From: Bastian Drive, (Route 8312) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Marsham Road, State Route Number 8315 From: Bastian Drive, (Route 8312) To: Marsham Place, (Route 8316), a distance of 0.22 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Marsham Road, State Route Number 8315 From: Marsham Place, (Route 8316) To: Marsham Court, (Route 8317), a distance of 0.10 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 J Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Marsham Road, State Route Number 8315 From: Marsham Court, (Route 8317) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.03 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Marsham Place, State Route Number 8316 From: Marsham Road, (Route 8315) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.03 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Marsham Court, State Route Number 8317 From: Marsham Road, (Route 8315) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 77, Plat Book 161, Page 48 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution 21-587 9/22/2021 WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet 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 streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number . Adkins Village Lane, State Route Number 8309 From: 0.07 miles southeast of Adkins Road, (Route 672) To: Virvos Way, (Route 8310), a distance of 0.05 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 . Adkins Village Lane, State Route Number 8309 From: Adkins Road, (Route 672) To: 0.07 miles southeast of Adkins Road, (Route 672), a distance of 0.07 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 . Adkins Village Lane, State Route Number 8309 From: Virvos Way, (Route 8310) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 . Virvos Way, State Route Number 8310 From: Adkins Village Lane, (Route 8309) To: Virvos Terrace, (Route 8311), a distance of 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 (\r Right of Way width (feet) = 40 21-588 9/22/2021 • Virvos Terrace, State Route Number 8311 From: Northwest of Virvos Way, (Route 8310) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 Right of way width (feet) = 40 Virvos Terrace, State Route Number 8311 From: Southeast of Virvos Way, (Route 8310) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 264, Page 51 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet 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 streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Project/Subdivision: Watermark Section C Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Faulkner Drive, State Route Number 7625 From: 0.03 miles northwest of Michener Court, (Route 7770) To: Simeon Court, (Route 8306), a distance of 0.21 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 19 Right of Way width (feet) = 55 Simeon Court, State Route Number 8306 From: Faulkner Drive, (Route 7625) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 19 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 21-589 9/22/2021 • Simeon Lane, State Route Number 8307 From: Simeon Court, (Route 8306) To: 0.01 miles south, to the end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.01 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 19 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Faulkner Court, State Route Number 8308 From: Faulkner Drive, (Route 7625) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.03 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 19 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet 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 streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Project/Subdivision: Watermark Crosswinds Boulevard Phase A Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Crosswinds Boulevard, State Route Number 7594 From: 0.08 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674) To: 0.22 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674), a distance of 0.14 miles Recordation Reference: Deed Book 11906, Page 950; Plat Book 253, Page 80 Right of Way width (feet) = 55 • Crosswinds Boulevard, State Route Number 7594 From: 0.22 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674) To: 0.28 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674), a distance of 0.06 miles Recordation Reference: Deed Book 11906, Page 950; Plat Book 253, Page 80 Right of Way width (feet) = 55 21-590 9/22/2021 • Crosswinds Boulevard, State Route Number 7594 From: 0.28 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674) To: 0.29 miles south of Whisperwood Drive, (Route 7674), a distance of 0.01 miles Recordation Reference: Deed Book 11906, Page 950; Plat Book 253, Page 80 Right of way width (feet) = 55 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a 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 streets meet 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 streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Project/Subdivision: The Sanctuary at Roseland Section - 1 and Hallsley Section - 1 (remainder of Swindon Way) Tvoe Chance to the Secondary Svstem miles of State Hiahways: Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Garston Lane, State Route Number 8058 From: 0.26 miles north of Swindon Way, (Route 8285) To: Intersection with Garston Lane, (Route 8058), a distance of 0.13 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 240, Page 68 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 • Garston Lane, State Route Number 8058 From: Swindon Way, (Route 8285) To: 0.14 miles south of Swindon Way, (Route 8285), a distance of 0.14 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 240, Page 68 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Garston Lane, State Route Number 8058 From: Swindon Way, (Route8285) To: 0.26 miles north of Swindon Way, (Route8285), a distance of 0.26 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 240, Page 68 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 21-591 9/22/2021 M Ij j • Swindon way, State Route Number 8285 From: Bedwyn Lane, (Route 7451) To: Garston Lane, (Route 8058), a distance of 0.09 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 240, Page 68 Right of Way width (feet) - 44 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the street described below is shown on a 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 state highways, pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT 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. Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 933.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number Garston Lane, State Route Number 8058 From: 0.14 miles south of Swindon Way, (Route 8285) To: Existing Garston Lane, (Route 8058), a distance of 0.14 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 244, Page 39 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 13.8.11. INITIATE AN APPLICATION FOR A REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE AND CONDITIONAL USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO PERMIT ORDINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS EXCEPTIONS ON APPROXIMATELY 1,850 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF HULL STREET ROAD GENERALLY KNOWN AS UPPER MAGNOLIA GREEN On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board initiated an application for Rezoning to permit residential uses, a technology park to include advanced manufacturing uses, 21-592 9/22/2021 and Conditional Use to permit public facilities, and Conditional Use Planned Development to permit exceptions to Zoning Ordinance and development standards requirements on three (3) parcels containing approximately 1,850 acres, identified as Tax IDs 697-660-2507; 694-675-7241 and 695-671- 5448; appointed Andrew G. Gillies, Director of Planning, as the agent for the Board; and waived disclosure requirements. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 14. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS There were no requests to address the Board at this time. 15. DEFERRED ITEMS 15.A. CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO MIDLOTHIAN SPECIAL DESIGN DISTRICT AND PARKING FOR CERTAIN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES COUNTYWIDE (20PJ0121) Mr. Steve Haasch stated this item was deferred at the August 25, 2021 meeting. He further stated staff met with individuals who had expressed concerns with the ordinance, and there were no further changes recommended. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 19.1-53, 19.1- 61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76, 19.1-81,19.1-86, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-111, 19.1-112, 19.1- 121, 19.1-127, 19.1-129, 19.1-131, 19.1-133, 19.1-235, 19.1-236, 19.1-237, 19.1-238, 19.1- 251, 19.1-263, 19.1-341, 19.1-373, 19.1-374,19.1-375, 19.1-376 AND 19.1-570 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE MIDLOTHIAN SPECIAL DESIGN DISTRICT AND PARKING FOR CERTAIN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES COUNTYWIDE BE IT ORDAINED by the Bowd of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19.1-53, 19.1-61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76, 19.1-81,19.1-86, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-111, 19.1-112, 19.1-121, 19.1-127, 19.1-129, 19.1-131, 19.1-133, 19.1-235, 19.1-236, 19.1-237, 19.1-238, 19.1-251, 19.1-263, 19.1-341, 19.1-373, 19.1-374, 19.1-375, 19.1-376 and 19.1-570 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted, to read as follows: Note: The Ordinance as adopted by the Board is attached as Attachment B to the final minutes. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. ` Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-593 9/22/2021 16. REQUESTS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND REZONING PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE HEARD IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION AND THERE IS NO OPPOSITION - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT DOES NOT ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION AND/OR THERE IS PUBLIC OPPOSITION WILL BE HEARD AT SECTION 1S Ms. Sara Hall stated for each case on the consent agenda, staff [ has received written confirmation from the applicant that they \`r are in agreement with the conditions or proffers contained within the staff report, and that they confirm the conditions or proffers are reasonable under state law. In Matoaca Magisterial District, Oasis Park LLC requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential Townhouse (R-TH) District, conditional use to permit an existing communications tower, and a conditional use planned development to permit use exceptions, exceptions to ordinance requirements and development standards and amendment of zoning district map on 59.8 acres fronting 1,700 feet on the east line of Fox Club Parkway, fronting 1,500 feet on the north line of Cosby Road and fronting 2,250 feet on the south line of Millwood School Lane. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Medium -High Density Residential use (minimum 4.0 to 8.0 dwellings/acre). Tax IDs 715-671-6427; 716-671-1195, 7058 and 9458; 716-672-0380 and 9111; and 717- 673 -Part of 2340. Ms. Hall introduced Case 20SN0608. She stated Mr. Carroll has requested a deferral to the Board's regularly scheduled meeting on October 27, 2021 to permit the applicant additional time to address the application. She further stated the applicant consented to the deferral. Mr. Holland called for public comment on the deferral There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board deferred Case 20SN0608 to its regularly scheduled meeting on October 27, 2021. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 20SN0500 tow In Midlothian Magisterial District, Mike Garcia requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) and Residential Townhouse (R- TH) Districts to Residential Townhouse (R-TH) District plus conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements, development standards, and uses (residential multifamily) and amendment of zoning district map on 7.69 acres located at the northeast corner of Coalfield Road 21-594 9/22/2021 and Sycamore Village Drive. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Community Mixed Use and Medium -High Density Residential uses. Tax IDs 728-706- 4147; 4257; 5176; 7094; and 728-707-9003. Ms. Hall introduced Case 20SN0500. She stated staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. J Mr. Holland called for public comment. Mr. Andy Scherzer, representing the applicant, made himself available to answer any questions from the Board. There being no one else to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board approved Case 20SN0500 subject to the following conditions: 1. Master Plan. The Master Plan for the Property shall consist of the following: a. The Textual Statement last revised August 4, 2021. b. The site shall be designed in general conformance with the concept plan entitled "Conceptual Plan Exhibit A" prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. last revised August 4, 2021. The layout on the Conceptual Plan is conceptual in nature and may vary i based on final soil studies, RPA lines, lot and road design, building footprints and other engineering reasons. If adjustments are deemed to be significant, the Conceptual Plan shall be presented to the Planning Commission for final approval. C. Conceptual Elevations, Exhibits B and C. (P) 2. Utilities. a. Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. b. The developer shall submit a hydraulic analysis of the existing wastewater collection system for approval by the Utilities Department prior to the first site plan submittal for this development. The developer shall be responsible for making any wastewater system capacity increases, both on or off- site, to support the demands proposed by this development. (U) 3. Right of Way Dedication. In conjunction with the recordation of the initial subdivision plat or prior to final site plan approval, whichever occurs first, forty- five (45) feet of right of way along the east side of Coalfield Road, measured from the centerline of that part of Coalfield Road immediately adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the 21-595 9/22/2021 7. Landscape Strip. A minimum twenty (20) foot wide landscape strip shall be maintained within open space along the common boundary line with Tax ID's 728-706-6958, 6864, 6768, 6774, 6979, 7983 & 8879, and 729-706-0178, 1474 & 2270, as generally shown on Exhibit A. A variable width, up to twenty (20) feet, landscape strip shall be maintained within open space along the common boundary line with Tax ID 728-706-7185. Utility or drainage easements shall be permitted to cross this area generally in a perpendicular fashion. The exact location and design shall be approved in conjunction with plan approval. (P) 8. Environmental Engineering. a. The maximum post -development discharge rate for the 21-596 9/22/2021 benefit of Chesterfield County. (T) 4. Access. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Coalfield Road shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. The exact location of this access shall be approved by the Transportation Department. (T) 5. Geotechnical Report. A geotechnical report prepared by a consultant who has had previous mining/geotechnical experience in reclamation of mine shafts shall be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Department prior to or in conjunction with any plan submission. Upon review by Environmental Engineering, or its designee, the report may either be accepted, or revisions requested and, if revisions are requested, the report shall be resubmitted in the same manner for review and acceptance by Environmental Engineering, or its designee. All development on the Property shall comply with the recommendations of the accepted report. Prior to final plan approval, the developer shall submit to Environmental Engineering evidence of compliance with the recommendation of the geotechnical report. (EE) 6. Focal Point / Common Area. a. A minimum 8,000 square foot area shall be provided within this Property to provide focal point(s). Part of the focal point(s) shall be hardscaped and have benches and other amenities that facilitate gatherings, including a pavilion. The focal point(s) shall be developed concurrent with the phase of development where the focal point(s) is located. b. The open space areas between dwelling units, including the space where townhouses face each other, shall be designed to include hardscape, softscape, and other amenities that accommodate and facilitate pedestrian friendly gatherings. Hardscape elements may include, but not limited to, decorative paving units, benches, pathways, water features, up lighting, bird feeds, bike racks. Softscape elements may include, but not limited to, sod, bushes, trees, perennials, annuals, potting bed, community garden, grass, flower boxes, walking paths. (P) 7. Landscape Strip. A minimum twenty (20) foot wide landscape strip shall be maintained within open space along the common boundary line with Tax ID's 728-706-6958, 6864, 6768, 6774, 6979, 7983 & 8879, and 729-706-0178, 1474 & 2270, as generally shown on Exhibit A. A variable width, up to twenty (20) feet, landscape strip shall be maintained within open space along the common boundary line with Tax ID 728-706-7185. Utility or drainage easements shall be permitted to cross this area generally in a perpendicular fashion. The exact location and design shall be approved in conjunction with plan approval. (P) 8. Environmental Engineering. a. The maximum post -development discharge rate for the 21-596 9/22/2021 100 -year storm shall be based on the maximum capacity of the existing facilities downstream, and the established 100 -year backwater and/or floodplain shall not be increased. On-site detention of the post -development 100 -year discharge rate to below the pre -development 100 -year discharge rate may be provided to satisfy this requirement. b. No impervious areas shall sheet flow through the Sycamore Village subdivision. C. The SWM/BMP shall have enhanced landscaping, as generally shown on Exhibit A, which must be approved by the Department of Environmental Engineering during plans review. (EE) 9. Off -Site Connection from Sycamore Village Drive to the East/West Road. The Owner/Developer shall be responsible for the acceptance of the public off-site connection to Sycamore Village Drive, as shown on Exhibit A, into the state system. Construction of the connection shall be completed prior to the issuance of the 74th certificate of occupancy. (EE & T) 10. Project Design Elements. a. Sidewalks. Five (5) foot wide concrete sidewalks, constructed to VDOT standards, shall be provided along both sides of the East/West Road. b. Front Walks. Minimum 3 -foot -wide concrete front walks shall be provided to the front entrance of each dwelling unit, to connect to drives, sidewalks, open space or street, as generally shown on Exhibit A. C. Driveway. Where provided, driveways shall be brushed concrete, stamped concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, decorative pavers, or asphalt. Gravel driveways shall not be permitted. d. Streetscape. Streets trees shall generally be installed or preserved and maintained along both sides of the East/West Road and Coalfield Road, except where there is a conflict with utilities, sightlines, and driveway areas, as generally shown on Exhibit A. e. Mailboxes. Cluster mailboxes shall be of a consistent design and color throughout the development. The boxes and posts shall be made of low maintenance material, as approved by the planning department at the time of plan review. f. Front Foundation Planting Beds. Foundation planting is required along the entire front faqade of all units and shall extend along all sides facing a street. Foundation Planting Beds shall be a minimum of three (3) feet wide from the unit foundation. Planting beds shall include medium shrubs, spaced a maximum of four (4) feet apart. The plant materials 21-597 9/22/2021 used should visually soften the unit corners and complement the architecture of the home at their mature sizes. Planting bed deviations may be approved by the Planning Department at time of plans review due to unique design circumstances. (P) 11. Dwelling Unit (Townhouses and Condominiums) Architecture and Materials. a. Conceptual Elevations: Unless significant deviations LL/ are approved by the Planning Commission during plans review, the architectural treatment of the dwelling units shall generally be as follows: i. Development of the Townhouse Tract shall be in general conformance with the architectural appearance (incorporating similar, but not necessarily identical design elements, style and materials) shown in the elevations attached hereto as Exhibit B. Final design shall be determined in conjunction with plans review and comply with the architectural styles outlined in the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan. ii. Development of the Multifamily Tract shall be in general conformance with the architectural appearance (incorporating similar, but not necessarily identical design elements, style and materials) shown in the elevations attached hereto as Exhibit C. Final design shall be determined in conjunction with plans review and comply with the architectural styles outlined in the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan. b. Siding Materials: Acceptable siding materials include brick, stone, masonry, fiber cement siding (such as HardiPlank, HardieShingle, and HardieTrim), or engineered wood siding (such as LP SmartSiding), or other comparable material as approved by the Planning Department at time of plans review. Vinyl, plywood and metal siding are not permitted. Other materials, as noted in the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan, may be used for trim, architectural decorations, or design elements provided they blend with the architecture of the dwelling unit. C. Slab Construction: If the dwelling unit is constructed on a slab, brick or stone shall be employed around the base of the front and sides of the dwelling unit a minimum twelve (12) inches above grade as to give the appearance of a foundation. If not constructed on slab, all exposed portions of the foundation of each dwelling unit shall be faced with brick or stone veneer. d. Roof Material: Roofing material shall be standing seam metal or a minimum thirty (30) year architectural dimensional shingles with algae protection. 21-598 9/22/2021 e. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Units and House Generators: Units shall initially be screened from view by landscaping or low maintenance material. f. Front Porches/Covered Stoops. If provided, front entry stoops and front porches shall be constructed with continuous masonry foundation wall or on 12" x 12" masonry piers, with brick or stone veneer. Front porches shall be a minimum of four (4) feet deep. Space between piers under porches shall be enclosed with framed lattice panels. Handrails and railings shall be finished painted wood, vinyl rails or metal rail systems with vertical pickets or sawn balusters. Pickets shall be supported on top and bottom rails that span between columns. g. Garages. All townhome garages shall be rear loaded garages and if provided, condominium garages shall be rear loaded. If a protruding second story deck is not provided over the garage, the garage door shall be upgraded. An upgraded garage door is any door with a minimum of two (2) enhanced features, including, but not limited to, windows, raised panels, decorative panels, arches, hinge straps or other architectural features on the exterior that enhance the entry (i.e., decorative lintels, shed roof overhangs, arches, columns, keystones, eyebrows, etc.). Flat panel garage doors are prohibited. h. Special Focus Units. For the special focus units i noted on Exhibit A, identified as lots 7, 25, 31, 47, 57 & 58, all street -facing facades shall be finished in the same materials. Enhanced landscaping, such as shade trees, garden fences, hedges, shrubs, evergreens, etc. or a combination thereof shall be used to minimize the view of the street facing side elevation. Additionally, each street facing side fapade shall have embellished features, such as bay windows or doors, balcony, dormers, shutters, or other architectural features on the exterior that enhance the fapade. As the final subdivision plat may not exactly match Exhibit A, the special focus unit lots shall be determined in conjunction with construction plan approval. (P) 12. Maintenance of Building Exteriors and Common Areas. In addition to other responsibilities outlined in recorded Homeowner's Association documents, the homeowner's association shall be responsible for the maintenance of common areas including the recreational amenities and landscaping (common area and townhome yard), and the periodic power washing of the exterior of all dwellings. (P) 13. Road Cash Proffer. a. The applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s) shall pay $5,922 for each residential townhouse unit and $5,640 21-599 9/22/2021 for each residential condominium unit to the County of Chesterfield for road improvements within the service district for the Property. b. Each payment shall be made prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for a dwelling unit. Should Chesterfield County impose impact fees at any time during the life of the development that are applicable to the Property, the amount paid in cash f proffers shall be in lieu of or credited toward, but (\✓ not in addition to, any impact fees, in a manner determined by the County. C. At the option of the Transportation Department, cash proffer payments may be reduced for the cost of road improvements provided by the applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s), as determined by the Transportation Department. (B&M, T) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21SN0557 In Matoaca Magisterial District, Keith Jones Properties, LLC requests conditional use to permit a special events business, bed and breakfast as accessory to special events business, equestrian center, conditional use planned development for exceptions to development standards and amendment of zoning district map in an Agricultural (A) District on 177.3 acres known as 12820, 12824, 12830, 12850, 12900, and 12904 River Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Rural Residential/Agricultural use. Tax IDs 736-640-3878, 737-641-1513, 738-641-3359, 736- 641-7793, 735,641-7076, 735-642-7841. Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0557. She stated staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mr. Holland called for public comment. Mr. Kerry Hutcherson, representing the applicant, made himself available to answer any questions from the Board. There being no one else to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board approved Case 21SN0557 (Requests I and II) subject to the following conditions: The Applicant in this case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, agree that the property known as Chesterfield County Tax Identification Numbers 735-641-7076, 735-642-7841, 736- 21-600 9/22/2021 641-7793, and 738-641-3359 (the "Property") under consideration will be used according to the following proffered conditions if, and only if, the request submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the Applicant. In the event this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the owner and Applicant, these proffered conditions shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. 1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement, dated August 14, 2021, together with the Concept Plan referenced above, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. Use: With approval of this Case Number 21SN0557, the following conditional uses shall be permitted on the Property: (P) The first conditional use approval shall be for: (a) the operation of a Special Events business including events such as weddings, wedding rehearsals, rehearsal dinners, bridal luncheons, wedding receptions, birthday parties, and fundraisers and (b) short-term rental of the existing guest house located on Tax Identification Number 738-641- 3359, which shall provide overnight accommodations exclusively for some of the guests who attend the Special Events (referred to herein as the "Special Events Center Use"). The term "Special Event," as used herein, shall mean an event where the Special Events Center Improvements (defined below) have been rented for the purpose of engaging in the Special Events Center Use, and a Special Event shall be permitted to include an event that occurs on up to and including three consecutive days (subject to the hours and days of operation specified below in Condition 8). The second conditional use approval shall be for the operation of an equestrian center, including but not limited to, the boarding, grooming, exercising, training, and riding of equines together with equestrian competitions and expositions (referred to herein as the "Equestrian Events Center Use"). The term "Equestrian Event," as used herein, shall mean an event where more than forty (40) people are present on the Property for the purpose of engaging in the Equestrian Events Center Use. No Equestrian Event shall occur simultaneously with a Special Event. 3. Non -Transferable Ownership: This Conditional Use (including both the Special Events Center Use and the Equestrian Events Center Use) approval shall be granted exclusively to Keith Jones Properties, LLC, and shall not be transferable with the land. (P) 4. Improvements Serving Special Events Center Use: Improvements serving the Special Events Center Use (the "Special Events Center Improvements") shall be limited to the following: (a) the Special Events Center (including the patio and any other structures located within the curtilage of the building) and associated gravel parking area comprising approximately 150 spaces, (b) the existing 21-601 9/22/2021 gravel entrance road known as North Barn Drive and existing internal roads, (c) the asphalt loop driveway, and (d) the guest house located on Tax Identification Number 738-641-3359, all as generally located and shown on the conceptual site plan prepared on August 3, 2021 by Sekiv Solutions and entitled, "Keystone Acres Chesterfield County, VA," attached hereto and included with the Application (the "Concept Plan"). The existing gravel entrance road shown on the Concept Plan and commonly known as North Barn Drive shall be the sole access that serves the Special Events Center Use, and during Special Events temporary signage shall be utilized to direct traffic to North Barn Drive. Prior to the operation of the first Special Event, the Applicant shall cause North Barn Drive to be paved with asphalt from the existing covered horse arena to River Road. One or more of the following farm -related uses may operate, separately, and/or in conjunction with any Special Events, within the Special Events Center Building: a farm manager's office, classroom instruction for equestrian education, or storage of farm equipment, supplies, or materials. (P) 5. Improvements Serving Equestrian Events Center Use: Improvements serving the Equestrian Events Center Use (the "Equestrian Events Center Improvements") shall be limited to the following: (a) the Equestrian Events Center (including the existing covered equestrian arena and existing horse barn), (b) associated paddocks, and (c) the existing gravel entrance road located southeast of North Barn Drive (the "Southeast Entrance") and existing internal roads, all as generally located and shown on the conceptual site plan prepared on June 9, 2021 by Sekiv Solutions and entitled, "Keystone Acres Chesterfield County, VA," attached hereto and included with the Application. The Southeast Entrance shall be the sole access that serves the Equestrian Events Center Use, and no traffic associated with Equestrian Events shall utilize the North Barn Drive entrance. Signage shall be posted at the aforesaid entrance for Equestrian Events that says in substance that no Special Event traffic is permitted through the Southeast Entrance. (P) 6. Special Events Center Attendance: The Special Events Center Use shall be subject to limitations on the number of persons in attendance at Special Events, as follows: (P) a. For no more than ten (10) events per twelve-month period the Conditional Use shall be restricted to a maximum of 300 attendees at any one (1) event. b. For no more than thirty (30) events per twelve-month period the Conditional Use shall be restricted to a maximum of 250 attendees at any one (1) event. 7. Amplified Sound Equipment: Amplified sound equipment shall not exceed a noise level of 65 dB(A) as measured at the eastern boundary of Tax Identification Number 735- 643-5203, as measured at the northern boundaries of Tax 21-602 9/22/2021 Identification Numbers 735-640-1525, 735-639-2797, 738- 640-0139, 738-640-4729, 739-639-0186, and 739-640-4173, and as measured at the western boundaries of Tax Identification Numbers 739-640-9018 and 740-642-8670. Within sixty (60) days after issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the Special Events Center, information shall be submitted to the Planning Department for their review and approval to confirm compliance with this condition. (P) 8. Special Events: Hours and Days of Operation; Limitation on Total Number of Events: The days and hours that the Special Events shall be permitted to operate shall be as follows: 10 a.m. through 11 p.m. on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. The total number of Special Events per twelve- month period shall be limited to forty (40). (P) 9. Traffic Control and Security: (P) A minimum of one (1) Chesterfield County Police Officer shall be provided to direct traffic in and out of the Property and to monitor the lawful conduct of guests at each Special Event where more than fifty (50) guests are in attendance. Where more than one hundred (100) guests are in attendance at a Special Event there shall be provided a minimum of one (1) Chesterfield County Police Officer for every one hundred (100) guests. 10. Signage and Lighting: Except for the temporary signage required by Condition 4 above, no signage shall be permitted to advertise the Special Events Center Use. Any lighting that is installed at the North Earn Drive access shall be designed so that it does not project onto Tax Identification Numbers 735-643-5203, 734-640-8877, 735- 640-1525, or 735-639-2797. (P) 11. Stormwater Management. For any drainage flowing towards the existing pond to the northwest of the Property that is generated as a result of Special Events Center Improvements, the 100 -year post -development peak discharge rate shall be less than the 100 -year pre - development peak discharge rate, unless otherwise approved by the Department of Environmental Engineering at the time of plans review. (EE) 12. Dedication. Prior to any final site plan approval, or within sixty (60) days from a written request by the Transportation Department, whichever occurs first, thirty (30) feet of right-of-way along the north side of River Road, measured from the centerline of the part of the roadway immediately adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-603 9/22/2021 21SN0586 In Dale Magisterial District, Allen and Sumac Diaz request Conditional Use to permit a second dwelling in an Agriculture (A) District and amendment of zoning district map on 16.16 acres known as 6007 Qualla Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Residential Agricultural use. Tax ID 747-673-6881. Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0586. She stated staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mr. Holland called for public comment There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved Case 21SN0586 subject to the following conditions: 1. Occupancy Limitations: Occupancy of the second dwelling unit shall be limited to: the occupants of the principal dwelling unit, individuals related to them by blood, marriage, adoption or guardianship, foster children, guests, and any domestic servants. (P) 2. Deed Restriction: For the purpose of providing record notice, within thirty (30) days of approval of this request, a deed restriction shall be recorded setting forth the limitation in Condition 1. The deed book and page number of such restriction and a copy of the restriction as recorded shall be submitted to the Planning Department. (P) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 11 AW 911 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Jeff Galanti requests amendment of zoning approval (Case 88SN0059) relative to uses and amendment of zoning district map in a Residential (R-7) District on 22.04 acres known as 14101 Center Pointe Parkway. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Regional/Mixed use. Tax ID 724-694-6938. Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0631. She stated staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mr. Holland called for public comment 21-604 9/22/2021 Mr. Jeff Geiger, representing the applicant, stated the applicant is in agreement with the conditions in the staff report. There being no one else to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Winslow stated Thales Academy is a private school next to Tomahawk Creek Middle School, and concerns were expressed relative to traffic. He further stated there are both proposed and required traffic control devices in the Centerpointe development plan that will facilitate traffic through the area. He thanked Mr. Geiger for good discussions about drop-off and pick-up times not coinciding with those at the middle school. He then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Carroll, for the Board to approve Case 21SN0631 subject to the following conditions: The property owner and applicant ("Applicant") are requesting to amend Case 88SN0059, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, only as to the proffer that the property under consideration (being shown as Parcel 9 in Case 88SN0059 and as Parcel 8 on the Schematic Plan approved in Case Number 17PS0193, and hereby defined as the "Property"). The Applicant proffers that the Property will be developed according to the following additional proffers if, and only if, the rezoning request submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the Applicant. In the event this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the Applicant, the proffers shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. The Proffered Conditions in Case 88SN0059 are hereby amended by adding the following proffers that are only applicable to the Property: 1. Fence. The Applicant shall install a four foot (4') fence along the shared property line between the Property and Tomahawk Creek Middle School (the "Middle School") in the event that the grading plan does not allow any trees to remain along the property line shared with the Middle School. (P) 2. Sidewalks. The Applicant shall provide sidewalks along the Property's frontage on Brandermill Parkway and Center Pointe Parkway. (P) Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Cross Creek Development requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) with a conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and development standards and amendment of zoning district map on 29.2 acres located at the terminus of Mill View Drive and Mill Manor Drive. Density will 21-605 9/22/2021 be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban Residential II uses (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 733-682-8822. Mr. Ryan Ramsey presented a summary of Case 21SN0597. He stated a single-family, cluster -style development containing a maximum of 43 dwelling units is proposed, and total residential density would be limited to 1.5 dwelling units per acre. He provided a location map of the property and the applicant's conceptual plan, which shows a total of 39 dwelling units. He stated approval of a conditional use planned development (CURD) is requested to permit a proposed minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet. He provided details of the applicant's proffered design requirements which include a conceptual layout, sidewalks, street trees, and a minimum one -acre focal point. He stated a homeowners association (HOA) would be required for long-term maintenance of the amenities in the common area. He further stated the conceptual layout provides potential pedestrian connection to any future development located to the south, and lot design standards have been proffered to include hardscaped driveways and front walks, screening for mechanical equipment, and foundation planting beds. He provided a graphic of the applicant's proffered conceptual elevations and stated design standards include proffered elevations, specified building materials, minimum dwelling sizes, and treatments of garages and porches. He further stated the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval, noting the request offers quality design and architecture for a convenient, attractive, and harmonious community, and the residential density is compatible with existing development in the Old Hundred Mill Subdivision. He stated following the Planning Commission's consideration of the request, staff received revised proffered conditions which included a reduction in the permitted density from 58 to 43 dwelling units and a limitation on permitted construction hours that further restrict construction on specified holidays. He further stated these changes are outlined in the Proffered Conditions section of the staff report. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the number of lots, Mr. Ramsey stated the conceptual plan shows 39 actual lots, but it could potentially go up to a maximum of 43. Mr. Holland called for public comment. 21-606 9/22/2021 Mr. Andy Scherzer, representing the applicant, stated the full survey of wetlands and field delineation has not yet been completed, but the applicant feels the final number of lots is fairly close and could be plus or minus one to two lots. He discussed the applicant's efforts to draft proffered conditions. He provided details of an open space in the Old Hundred Mill Subdivision that originally was a part of a non - lot -frontage road. He stated the developer and the neighborhood chose not to extend that road all the way down to serve the adjacent properties. He further stated the developer could build that road with the Transportation Department's concurrence, but the applicant feels most people do not want that. He discussed community meetings in June and August and contact with the HOA that is run by a professional association. 21-606 9/22/2021 He stated a few people spoke at the Planning Commission meeting, and the applicant tried to further address concerns by changing the proffers. He further stated the applicant feels the case merits the Board's approval. Mr. Tom Loughlin expressed concerns relative to construction traffic and encouraged paving of the unfinished road so construction traffic could have direct access to the development rather than having to drive through the Old Hundred Mill Subdivision. Mr. Mark Bowers expressed concerns relative to insufficient notification to affected homeowners as well as increased traffic. Ms. Carla Collins expressed concerns relative to traffic and safety issues; the proposed square footage, quality, and architecture of the new homes; the need for a playground and pavilion in the proposed open space; and the need for a reduced speed limit, signage, and speed bumps. In response to Mr. Holland's request to address the unfinished road, Mr. Scherzer stated this developer is not the developer of the original Old Hundred Mill Subdivision. He deferred to the county Transportation Department who he stated may have researched the issue and uncovered any decisions or accommodations made long ago. He stated a number of people did get the initial letter and participated in the initial meeting with Ms. Freye and staff. He further stated one of the issues discussed was the fact that the unfinished road is a right of way and has the right to be improved, and the applicant is willing to pave the road if that is the desire of the Old j Hundred Mill community. He stated the applicant is leaving it up to the HOA to make that decision. He further stated the cash proffer was written to allow offsite improvements, and this would meet the criteria. Mr. Winslow stated the applicant intends to either pay the cash proffer or put in the road. Mr. Scherzer concurred. He then addressed the speakers' concerns relative to construction traffic. He stated the roads have to be utilized. He stated the stub roads were created and lawfully recorded, and the right of way and temporary easement are clearly shown on the Old Hundred Mill subdivision plat. With regard to lot size, he stated what is proposed matches up to the minimum, ordinary standards that Old Hundred Mill developed under. He further stated the applicant is amenable to a bigger lot size if imposed. He stated the applicant is just matching the adjacent subdivision. In response to Ms. Haley's question relative to the current zoning, Mr. Scherzer stated the property is currently zoned Agricultural. He further stated the Horner family owns the property, but they were not the original developers of the Old Hundred Mill Subdivision either. Mr. Winslow stated it is an oddity that the road just stops. He further stated he is not sure what happened twenty years ago, but this is not the standard in county neighborhoods. He 21-607 9/22/2021 stated he appreciates the applicant's willingness to either pay the cash proffer or pave the road, but from his perspective the road should be paved. Mr. Scherzer stated there was some discussion that the neighbors enjoy the open space as a place for kids to play and passive recreation. He further stated the applicant is willing to work either way. He stated environmental studies are ongoing, and the Horner family has allowed analysis which is a normal way of doing business. He further stated standards have to be met, and a lot of open space will be retained. He stated that is why the density is so much lower than the original Old Hundred Mill Subdivision. He further stated the applicant has played by the ordinary standards and rules and even the more current standards which are higher than what was in effect 20 years ago. Mr. Winslow stated there is a creek running through which means there is a resource protection area (RPA) which cannot be disturbed under law. Mr. Scherzer stated the main, heavy duty stream is in Nuttree Branch and the others are more like wet weather streams. He further stated the rules must be followed and permits must be obtained from the Corps of Engineers and Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Mr. Winslow stated that is not done until after zoning. Mr. Scherzer concurred. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the building LW of a bridge, Mr. Scherzer stated it would probably end up being a culvert, but it could be a bridge, and that is all part of the permitting process. He further stated he was not aware of any Balzer or developer employee living in Old Hundred Mill Subdivision who would not speak publicly about the case for fear of reprisal as suggested by one of the speakers. He stated the applicant has followed state, local, and federal requirements and is not trying to do anything different than that. He further stated the developer will be as flexible as possible within the rules, but connection to the roads that are stubbed out is required by VDOT. In response to Mr. Winslow's request to discuss the stub road policy, Mr. Brent Epps, Director of Transportation, stated VDOT does require state -maintained, stubbed -out roads to be connected to future roads if those roads are going to be state - maintained. He concurred with Mr. Winslow's statement that connection to the two roads into the proposed development would be required. Mr. Epps pointed out the two stubs on the conceptual plan. Mr. Winslow stated the stub at Mill Manor Drive is where there is a cul de sac. 21-608 9/22/2021 Ms. Haley requested the two stub roads be pointed out on the conceptual plan. She stated she was unclear as to why the unfinished road does not have to be built out. Mr. Epps pointed out the two stubs on the conceptual plan. Mr. Winslow stated the stub at Mill Manor Drive is where there is a cul de sac. 21-608 9/22/2021 Upon further questioning by Ms. Haley, Mr. Epps pointed out on the conceptual plan the location where there is no public road. Ms. Haley stated that is where the road just stops and where neighbors installed safety measures to indicate the end of the pavement, but the pavement picks up on the other end going into the proposed Old Hundred Mill Extension. Mr. Epps concurred. J Mr. Winslow stated this is the road that was not built. In response to Mr. Carroll's question as to how that was even approved, Mr. Epps explained that, based on the limited research his department was able to uncover, it was done in an effort to make the neighborhood more circuitous. Mr. Winslow stated it is his understanding that the developer wants an up or down vote from the HOA as to whether it wants the developer to build out the road. He further stated if it is a yes vote, the developer will build it, and if it is a no vote, the developer will pay the cash proffer. In response to Ms. Haley's question as to how the county would not require the developer to build out the road, Mr. Winslow stated if the developer can pay the cash proffer, it is meeting the policy. He further stated the developer did not cause this to happen, and it is offering to fix some other developer's unfinished road. Ms. Haley reiterated her question and stated there should not i be an unfinished road. She further stated she understood the J developer would be given credit for offsite improvements, to which she had no objection, but she had a problem with leaving the unfinished road. In response to Mr. Carroll's question relative to ownership of the unfinished road, Mr. Epps stated if it is within dedicated right of way, the county would own that property. Mr. Carroll stated if the county owns the property it could ensure it gets paved regardless. He further stated the HOA needs to vote on the matter, but it makes sense that the road would be completed because it goes right out to Old Hundred Road. Mr. Epps clarified that he has not seen the unfinished road in person, but it is his assumption that it would take more than just asphalt to finish it. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the stream as it relates to the RPA or wildlife activity, Mr. Scott Smedley, Director of Environmental Engineering, stated the whole section would have RPA, and there would probably be associated wetlands connected to that which will increase the amount of RPA. He further stated the applicant is conducting preliminary environmental work which will expand some of those protected areas. He stated once the developer gets to site plan submittal, it will have the wetlands permit, and it would not 21-609 9/22/2021 be able to proceed before that information is submitted to the county under the land disturbance permit. He further stated the developer would have to get those details ironed out before construction could begin. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to measuring the width of an RPA, Mr. Smedley stated there is 100 feet on each side of the stream, and where there are wetlands the RPA will extend out even further around those connected and contiguous areas. Mr. Scherzer clarified that the normal process of development is doing all of these delineations, such as tentative plan of subdivision or construction plan, as part of the next step. He stated those steps are not taken until the developer has the right to do so. He further stated the unusual road situation causes people to feel there is a conflict with the proposed development, but the Old Hundred Mill neighborhood needs to decide what they want and what is best for them. He stated the developer will work with them either way. In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to the possibility of completing the road as part of the initial construction process, thereby allowing it to be used to transport construction materials to the site, Mr. Scherzer stated that would be possible. Mr. Holland stated it is his understanding that the neighborhood would have to vote in favor of building out the road. Mr. Scherzer concurred and stated there would be a year or two before things would happen. In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to proper communications to affected homeowners about the case, Mr. Ramsey stated in this particular case staff was required by local code to notify only the adjacent property owners which equated to 22 properties including the subject property. He further stated all of those property owners were notified of the Planning Commission board hearing. He stated in working with the applicant there was also a community meeting, and it is the applicant's responsibility to reach out to that same list of adjoining property owners to give them notice. He stated there were also signs posted on the property to give notice for not only the Board of Supervisors' public hearing but also the Planning Commission meeting and community meeting. He further stated there was a misnomer in the community meeting sign in that the street address for the subject property was mislabeled, but it was corrected thereafter. He stated there was participation at that community meeting that night, and signs were up on the property to give notice. In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to whether the community meeting occurred before or after the Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Ramsey stated the community meeting occurred in early June before the Planning Commission meeting. In response to Ms. Haley's question relative to how the county or VDOT is not requiring the developer to finish the road, Mr. 21-610 9/22/2021 Epps stated the missing piece of the road in question was not built because it is effectively a no -lot -frontage road and simply bisected the property. He further stated all homes in the neighborhood front the adjacent side streets. He stated if the county wanted to build this road today, which it has a right to do, there are still eight or nine homes backing up to the section of missing road that may not be too happy with the road being finished. He further stated during the development of the subdivision, the piece was left out in an effort to make the neighborhood more circuitous and to eliminate the straight- j through connection that did not have any homes fronting on it. He stated it is an effort to make vehicles take several turns to get to the same destination. He further stated since there were no homes fronting this road, there was no destination along it, so the decision was made to allow them to not build that portion of the road. He stated it would likely be done differently today. Mr. Scherzer assured the Board that the applicant did attempt outreach including to the HOA. He stated the applicant offered to send additional messages, but he was not certain the HOA is active. He further stated the applicant attended one HOA meeting where they did not quite have a forum. With regard to the unfinished road, he stated the developer will work with the HOA either way they decide. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to how long it would take to get a decision from the HOA, Mr. Mark Bowers stated an HOA meeting is planned for mid-October. He expressed concerns that callers did not receive the correct case information when they used the number on the zoning sign. He also expressed concerns relative to not knowing the exact i number of homes being built or the exact size of the homes. J There being no one else to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Winslow expressed appreciation to the speakers. He stated the road situation does need to be dealt with, but he believed he had a handle on what the issues are. He moved to approve the case subject to some imposed conditions. He stated the minimum dwelling size should be 1,800 to 1,825 square feet because 1,600 square feet is not in keeping with the neighborhood. He further stated he would like to impose a minimum 10 -foot by 20 -foot pavilion and equipment for a tot lot in the focal area. He stated the county cannot do anything about the interconnectivity policy of VDOT. He further stated he would like to impose a third condition that the county receive a vote from the HOA in 30 days on whether it wants the road to be built. Mr. Mincks stated with regard to the last condition, Mr. Winslow was not in a position in this particular zoning case to impose a condition on what the HOA might have to do and under what timing. He further stated that is outside the bounds of this zoning case. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to whether the imposed condition could require the developer to pay the cash proffer if it does not receive word in 30 days to move forward 21-611 9/22/2021 on constructing the missing piece of road, Mr. Mincks stated he thought the condition was roughly in that shape now. Mr. Ramsey stated Proffered Condition 6.c. does provide for the Transportation Department, at its option, to reduce the cash proffer payments for the cost of offsite improvements provided by the applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s). Mr. Winslow stated there was no deadline to that condition. Mr. Minks stated Mr. Winslow would like the condition to direct staff to make the decision based on the HOA providing the information within the 30 -day period. Mr. Winslow concurred Discussion ensued relative to extending the deadline for receiving the HOA's decision from 30 to 60 days. Mr. Winslow stated the three conditions are (1) the dwelling size will be a minimum of 1,825 square feet, (2) the focal point will have a minimum 10 -foot by 20 -foot pavilion and a tot lot, and (3) there will be a 60 -day window to receive an answer from the HOA. He made a motion to approve the case with those three imposed conditions. The applicant accepted the imposed conditions and offered to go down to 40 lots to help out the neighborhood. Mr. Mincks stated going down to 40 lots would have to be imposed. Mr. Winslow imposed a maximum of 40 lots as a condition of the case. He stated this makes four imposed conditions. With regard to the condition relating to the HOA's decision about finishing the road, Mr. Mincks clarified that staff would make a determination based on the HOA's decision within 60 days. Mr. Winslow concurred. In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to the need for an HOA in the new section, Mr. Scherzer stated the applicant is already having discussions about whether to join the existing Old Hundred Mill Subdivision HOA. Mr. Ingle stated he wanted to confirm an HOA had to be in place and that the applicant was open to joining the existing HOA if the HOA was also open to it. Mr. Mincks stated if the HOA fails to come forward with a decision within the 60 -day period, then the proffered condition as it stands now would allow staff to do it based on their own determination under whatever considerations they would raise. Mr. Carroll requested an explanation of what the proffered conditions are. 21-612 9/22/2021 Mr. Mincks stated as a part of Mr. Winslow's motion, there are some proffered conditions that would need to be rejected. Mr. Winslow moved for approval of Case 21SN0S97 and acceptance of the proffered conditions in the staff report and the rejection of Proffered Conditions 5 and 10 as listed in the report which are replaced by the imposed conditions. Mr. Andy Gillies, Director of Planning, stated Proffered Condition 3 pertaining to density had a limit of 1.5 dwelling units per acre, so Proffered Condition 3 would also need to be rejected. He further stated Mr. Winslow could then add the fourth imposed condition which would limit the number of units to 40. Mr. Winslow moved for approval of Case 21SN0597, acceptance of the proffered conditions in the staff report, rejection of Proffered Conditions 5, 10, and 3, and imposition of conditions as described. Mr. Mincks stated because there was no second or substitute motion, the case would automatically carry to the Board's next meeting. He further stated the public hearing is closed, and the case carries over only for a decision. Mr. Holland stated Case 21SN0597 is carried to the Board's next meeting. 17. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17.A. TO CONSIDER PROPOSED FUNDING PLAN FOR SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS Mr. Matt Harris stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the issuance of up to $130 million in bonds to support the provision of school facilities. He further stated it is the county's intention to satisfy the full amount of Schools' Supplemental Retirement Plan (SRP) which will free up an income stream that can be dedicated to paying the debt service payments on Schools' capital facilities and also to fill in the gap year that resulted from delaying the referendum to November 2022. He stated the item before the Board would fill that gap year and allow for continued momentum of the capital plans put into place, whether it be major maintenance or, in this case, rebuilding Falling Creek Middle School and building a new middle school in the western Route 360 area which will provide capacity relief for Tomahawk Creek Middle School. He further stated there may be some costs beyond the $130 million, but strategies have already been identified. He stated design and preparation for the facilities would begin immediately, and the bonds would be sold closer to the January timeframe. He further stated the aim is for both facilities to open in the fall of 2024. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. 21-613 9/22/2021 J L/ On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board authorized the sale of up to $130 million in school bonds via the Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA) to support the rebuild of Falling Creek Middle School and the construction of a new western Route 360 middle school. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.8. TO CONSIDER THE FY2023 AND FY2024 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROJECT Mr. Scott Zaremba, Deputy County Administrator, stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the Commonwealth Center Swift Creek Trail FY2023 and FY2024 Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) project and adopt a resolution of support for the project, upon approval by VDOT. He further stated pedestrian and bicycle facilities projects are eligible for TAP funding, and the deadline for FY2023 and FY2024 projects is October 1. He stated VDOT staff will review project applications for eligibility, and the Commonwealth Transportation Board and Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) will subsequently select projects for funding. He further stated Parks and Recreation has submitted for consideration the Commonwealth Center Swift Creek Trail which runs along Swift Creek and Brad McNeer Parkway. He stated the project is consistent with the Bikeways and Trails Plan, Public Facilities Plan, and Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and it is the first segment of a larger trail paralleling Swift Creek from the Commonwealth Center near Brandermill all the way to Pocahontas State Park. He further stated the trail will also serve as a neighborhood connector for the surrounding apartments and condominiums to access the Commonwealth Center shopping. He stated the project is estimated at $1.73 million and is roughly two miles of trails and sidewalk segments. He further stated if selected and approved, the project would require a local match of 20 percent which will be covered through the county's parks improvement fund. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, it is necessary that the local governing body request, by resolution, approval of a proposed transportation alternatives project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board provide funding for the Commonwealth Center Bike/Pedestrian Trail. 21-614 9/22/2021 AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby agrees to pay 20 percent of the total estimated cost of $1.730M for construction of the Commonwealth Center Bike/Pedestrian Trail. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.C. TO CONSIDER A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH EVENTMAKERS USA Mr. Zaremba stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider a license agreement with EventMakers-USA, Inc. to hold concerts at the fairgrounds. He further stated EventMakers is the group that has successfully offered the Innsbrook After Hours concerts. He provided details of the license agreement and tentative plans for fall concerts. He stated if the fall concerts prove to be a success, a full slate may be offered in 2022. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board approved a license agreement with EventMakers-USA, Inc. to hold concerts at the fairgrounds beginning after September 22, 2021. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.D. TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A 20' EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY FOR THE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER Mr. Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager, stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider conveyance of a 20 -foot easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for the Emergency Communications Center (ECC). He further stated the Board approved the conveyance of an easement for Dominion facilities back in April 2021, and now a little more easement is needed. He stated the request has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board approved the conveyance of a 20 -foot underground easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for the Emergency Communications Center and authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute the agreement. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-615 9/22/2021 17.E. TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF COUNTY OWNED RIGHT OF NAY TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FOR THE ] OTTERDALE ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT Ms. Lynn Snow, Assistant Real Property Manager, stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider conveyance of county owned right of way to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Route 360 and Otterdale ( Road Traffic Signal Project. She further stated the request [(+ has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board approved the conveyance of 0.246+/- acres of county owned right of way to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Route 360 and Otterdale Road Traffic Signal Project and authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute the deed. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.F. TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A 15' EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY FOR HENRICUS PARR Ms. Snow stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider conveyance of a 15 - foot easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for Henricus Park. She further stated the request has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board approved the conveyance of a 15 -foot underground easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for service to Henricus Park and authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute the agreement. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.G. TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A 15' EASEMENT TO COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC FOR HENRICUS PARE Ms. Snow stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider conveyance of a 15 - foot easement to Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC for Henricus Park. She further stated the request has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. 21-616 9/22/2021 Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board approved the conveyance of a 15 -foot underground easement to Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC for service to Henricus Park and authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute the agreement. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.H. TO CONSIDER CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM OF STATE HIGHWAYS A PORTION OF WINTERFIELD LANE, STATE ROUTE 1004 Mr. Sasek stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the adoption of a resolution to abandon a portion of Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, from the Secondary System of State Highways. He further stated the abandonment has been properly posted, published, and advertised, and the request was reviewed by county staff, VDOT, Comcast, and Verizon. He stated approval is recommended. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, a sketch has been provided to the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County depicting a portion of Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, to be abandoned from the Secondary System of State Highways; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of this Board, dated July 28, 2021, the required notices of the County's intent to abandon a portion of Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, identified as segment A -B 0.05 miles on the attached sketch, have been given in that: on August 3, 2021, a notice was posted in at least three places along Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, and on September 8, 2021 and on September 15, 2021, a notice was published in the Richmond Times -Dispatch having general circulation within the County announcing this Public Hearing to receive comments concerning the proposed abandonment; and on August 26, 2021, a notice was sent to the Commissioner of Highways; and, •I WHEREAS, after considering all evidence available, this Board is satisfied that no public necessity exists for the continuation of this portion of Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, identified as segment A -B 0.05 miles, since it serves no 21-617 9/22/2021 public necessity and is no longer necessary as part of the Secondary System of State Highways. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby abandons the above described segment of Winterfield Lane, State Route 1004, and removes it from the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.2-909, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Chesterfield Residency Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation at 3301 Specks Drive, Midlothian, VA 23112. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 17.I. TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A PORTION OF A 10' DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN LONGWOOD ACRES, SECTION B Mr. Joe Duty, Assistant Real Property Manager, stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider an ordinance to vacate a portion of a 10 -foot drainage easement within Longwood Acres, Section B. He further stated the request has been reviewed by Environmental Engineering, and approval is recommended. Mr. Holland called for public comment. There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE whereby the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, ("GRANTOR") vacates to ROBERT LOVING GARRETT ("GRANTEE"), a portion of a 10' drainage easement within Longwood Acres Subdivision, Section B, CLOVER HILL Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Chesterfield County, Virginia in Plat Book 10, Page 111. WHEREAS, Robert Fitzgerald petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a 10' drainage easement within Longwood Acres Subdivision, Section B, Clover Hill Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, more particularly shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 10, Page 111. The easement petitioned to be vacated is more fully described as follows: 21-618 9/22/2021 A portion of a 10, drainage easement across Lots 1 and 2, Block E, within Longwood Acres Subdivision, Section B, the location of which is more fully shown on a plat by BALZER AND ASSOCIATES, INC., dated AUGUST 27, 2001, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.2- 2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and, WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the easement sought to be vacated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid easement be and is hereby vacated. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.2- 2274 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This Ordinance shall vest fee simple title to the drainage easement hereby vacated in the owners of Lots 1 and 2, Block E, within Longwood Acres Subdivision, Section B, free and clear of any rights of public use. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the GRANTOR and GRANTEE, or their successors in title. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 18. REMAINING MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND ZONING REQUESTS There were no remaining manufactured home permits and zoning requests. 19. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS There were no requests to address the Board at this time. 21-619 9/22/2021 14411 VSd`Zi •I�F.i 11"r3 4 On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board adjourned at 8:18 p.m. until October 27, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. for a work session to be held in the Public Meeting Room. Ayes: Holland, Winslow, Ingle, Carroll and Haley. Nays: None. 21-620 9/22/2021 Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments 9/7/2021 EK Midlothian Unscheduled During December matter 2020,Governor Northam and State Superintendent of Public Instruction, James Lane announced the plan to support "No Loss Funding' of schools. The ADM (average daily membership) used to calculate state funding remains unadjusted for the 2021-2022 school year regardless of student enrollment. With school performance dropping, the addition of controversial equity & gender policies, mandatory masking, teacher and bus driver shortages, the school approval rating is rapidly declining. The number of students enrolled in Virginia public schools continues to fall, but the system remains fully funded. Those who can have opted to home school or send their students to private school. But that is not an option for many families. "We have no choice but to send our children to public schools even though we disagree with what they are pushing on our kids. My children are suffering academically and emotionally but as long as they have our tax money, we are essentially held hostage. Like it or not, we are stuck." Chesterfield County Public Schools receive more than $11,000 per student. Several states offer a voucher system 21-621 9/22/2021 W RI Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments allowing parents to put the public funding towards private school. Virginia does not. 9/20/2021 Carla Collins Clover Hill 215N0597- The votes from the Cross Creek Planning Commission Development should be recalled and a vote should be taken again on 21SNO597 - the Cross Creek Development because it is NOT true that residents received proper notice concerning this matter and there are residents who are legitimately opposed to this proposal/proffer. Only two showed up to speak in opposition because no one else knew about it. Even the signs that were posted sent callers to a recording about an unrelated project. The applicant did NOT meet with, speak with, or work with the residents as the Minutes from the August meeting erroneously reflect, either. He met with some residents once only AFTER that meeting had taken place and only AFTER the votes had been cast without the residents' knowledge. I spoke with him once by phone on 9/19/21 only. Neither the one meeting; nor the single phone call, AFTER THE VOTES HAD BEEN CAST contrary to the residents' wishes, resolved any of my, or the other residents', legitimate concerns and objections to this proposal. I am asking that this matter be removed from the Board's 9/22 Agenda and rescheduled with notice to the residents 21-622 9/22/2021 Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments of the Old Hundred Mill subdivision of the date, time, and place of the meeting so that the residents can receive notice and be given a meaningful opportunity to prepare and be heard. There are strenuous objections to this proffer from residents and the plan is NOT, in fact, a simple extension of an existing neighborhood. The applicant has been asked to sincerely consider revising his proffer to include fewer lots, larger, nicer homes, a different builder, and a better plan concerning traffic at minimum. The existing HOA has made NO decision concerning whether the applicant's planned subdivision would be permitted to join the existing one, either. For all these reasons, I respectfully request that this matter be removed from the Agenda and rescheduled to another meeting date when the residents of Old Hundred Mill can be heard. Thank you for your kind consideration. Sincerely, Carla R. Collins 13001 Foggy Mill Drive 9/21/2021 Mark Bowers Clover Hill 21SN0597— l oppose the planed Cross Creek development. Traffic Development will increase and there are only 3 ways into this new subdivision through our neighborhood. Why does Chesterfield County continue to take away wood lands. There was no NRI completed here because 21-623 9/22/2021 J J J Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments Chesterfield County does not require, but you have a pair of Bald Eagles flying up and down 288 along this area. What about nesting? Chesterfield County does not need a new small subdivision, with a limited amount of houses to it. Please do not vote on this item. Please postpone vote at least to the next meeting. Mark Bowers 9/21/2021 Sallie Keller Clover Hill 21SN0597— Dear Mrs. Freye, Mr. Cross Creek Owens, Dr. Hylton, Mr. Development Petroski, Mr. Sloan, Mr. Holland, Mr. Winslow, Mr. Carroll, Ms. Haley, and Mr. Ingle: We, the residents of the Old Hundred Mill subdivision, respectfully request that the Minutes from the Planning Commission's August 17, 2021 meeting be revised to reflect that the applicant for 21SN0597 —Cross Creek Development --- did not discuss this proposal with us or "work with" us until after the Planning Commission had already voted to approve it and that the signs that had been posted concerning this matter sent callers to a recording concerning an entirely unrelated matter. Additionally, Cross Creek Development, as proffered, is not a mere extension of the existing Old Hundred Mill subdivision and must not be referred to as such in the Minutes. 21-624 9/22/2021 Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name last Name District Category Comments The proffer proposes homes that are smaller in square footage than our homes and that would not remotely reflect the same quality or curb appeal as our homes. More importantly, we, each, strenuously object to the approval of this 21N0597 Cross Creek Development proffer and proposal and request that this matter be removed from the Board of Supervisors' September 22, 2021 Agenda and rescheduled to another date and time of which the residents will be afforded notice so that each resident who wants to do so will be afforded an opportunity to prepare and present his or her concerns and objections to the Board of Supervisors because the residents have not been afforded reasonable notice or a meaningful opportunity to be heard. We have legitimate concerns and objections to this Cross Creek Development proffer and proposal and, as taxpayers and residents of the community to be adversely impacted, should be given the opportunity to speak before the Board votes to adversely and irrevocably impact our daily lives and most treasured investments in Chesterfield County. Simply put, the neighborhood toddlers play in the current cul de sac and children await school buses at the locations destined 21-625 9/22/2021 J Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments for traffic under this proposal, it contains too many lots, and will contain tiny unattractive homes in comparison to ours. We want our children safe and our property values not to decline. Thank you for your kind consideration. Sincerely, Carla R. Collins, 13001 Foggy Mill Drive Sallie Keller, 4006 Mill Manor Dr 9/21/2021 Amy Bird Clover Hill 21SN0597- Dear Mrs. Freye, Mr. Cross Creek Owens, Dr. Hylton, Mr. Development Petroski, Mr. Sloan, Mr. Holland, Mr. Winslow, Mr. Carroll, Ms. Haley, and Mr. Ingle: We, the residents of the Old Hundred Mill subdivision, respectfully request that the Minutes from the Planning Commission's August 17, 2021 meeting be revised to reflect that the applicant for 21SN0597 -Cross Creek Development --- did not discuss this proposal with us or "work with" us until after the Planning Commission had already voted to approve it and that the signs that had been posted concerning this matter sent callers to a recording concerning an entirely unrelated matter. Additionally, Cross Creek Development, as proffered, is not a mere extension of the existing Old Hundred Mill subdivision and must not be referred to as such in the Minutes. The proffer proposes homes that are smaller in square footage than 21-626 9/22/2021 Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments our homes and that would not remotely reflect the same quality or curb appeal as our homes. More importantly, we, each, strenuously object to the approval of this 21NO597 Cross Creek Development proffer and proposal and request that this matter be removed from the Board of Supervisors' September 22, 2021 Agenda and rescheduled to another date and time of which the residents will be afforded notice so that each resident who wants to do so will be afforded an opportunity to prepare and present his or her concerns and objections to the Board of Supervisors because the residents have not been afforded reasonable notice or a meaningful opportunity to be heard. We have legitimate concerns and objections to this Cross Creek Development proffer and proposal and, as taxpayers and residents of the community to be adversely impacted, should be given the opportunity to speak before the Board votes to adversely and irrevocably impact our daily lives and most treasured investments in Chesterfield County. Simply put, the neighborhood toddlers play in the current cul de sac and children await school buses at the locations destined for traffic under this proposal, it contains too many lots, and will 21-627 9/22/2021 J 1) R Attachment A Board of Supervisors Meeting September 22, 2021 Citizen Comments on Unscheduled Matters and Public Hearings Comment Date First Name Last Name District Category Comments contain tiny unattractive homes in comparison to ours. We want our children safe and our property values not to decline. Thank you for your kind consideration. Sincerely, Carla R. Collins 13001 Foggy Mill Drive Sallie Keller 4006 Mill Manor Dr Amy Bird 3942 Waterwheel Drive 21-628 9/22/2021 i i ATTACHMENT B AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 19.1-53, 19.1- 61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76, 19.1-81,19.1-86, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-111, 19.1-112, 19.1- 121, 19.1-127, 19.1-129, 19.1-131, 19.1-133, 19.1-235, 19.1-236, 19.1-237, 19.1-238, 19.1- 251, 19.1-263, 19.1-341, 19.1-373, 19.1-374, 19.1-375, 19.1-376 AND 19.1-570 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO THE MIDLOTHIAN SPECIAL DESIGN DISTRICT AND PARKING FOR CERTAIN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES COUNTYWIDE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (I) That Sections 19.1-53, 19.1-61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76, 19.1-81,19.1-86, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-111, 19.1-112, 19.1-121, 19.1-127, 19.1-129, 19.1-131, 19.1-133, 19.1-235, 19.1-236, 19.1-237, 19.1-238, 19.1-251,19.1-263, 19.1-341, 19.1-373, 19.1-374, 19.1-375, 19.1-376 and 19.1-570 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted, to read as follows. Chapter 19.1 ZONING Those uses listed as "R" or "RS" in Table 19.1-52.A. shall be permitted in the respective zoning districts provided that the restrictions as outlined below are met. If the restrictions cannot be met, the use may be allowed in the respective zoning district through either a Conditional Use or Special Exception. onn: Parking lot, commercial C-1, C-2, C-3 Districts: Use is within Ettrick and Midlothian Special Design Districts. 000 Vendor, outdoor, fruit, vegetable and prepared food 1. C-2 District: a. Sales are restricted to retail of fruits, vegetables and prepared food; b. Use is located on property occupied by a permanent use; c. Use is located where improved permanent puking facilities are available for use; d. Required minimum and most convenient parking spaces for the permanent use are not used; e. Vendor areas are either: • setback 100 feet from R, R-TH or R -MF property, or A property designated for residential use on the comprehensive plan; or • sales areas are separated from such property by a permanent building; I. Vendor areas conform to the setback requirements of the district except in Ettrick and Midlothian Special Design Districts or the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District where use may be located within permitted hardscaped pedestrian areas; stand g. 1 nd not to exceed 200 square feet is allowed; h. 1 properly licensed, inspected and operative truck or other vehicle associated with the vendor use is parked; i. Use is not operated more frequently than 3 consecutive days nor more than 3 days in any 7 day period beginning on Monday and ending on Sunday; j. Hours of operation is limited to those of the permanent use; 21-629 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B k. Stand, vehicle, signs, trash, debris or other material associated with, or resulting from, the use is removed no later than 24 hours following the end of each sales period. 2. C-3, C-4, C-5 Districts: a. Sales are restricted to retail of fruits, vegetables and prepared food; b. Use is located on property occupied by a permanent use; c. Use is located where improved permanent parking facilities are available for use; d. Required minimum and most convenient parking spaces for the permanent use are not used: e. Vendor areas are either: • setback 1,000 feet from R, R-TH or R -MF property, or A property designated for residential use on the comprehensive plan; or • sales areas are separated from such property by a permanent building; f. Vendor areas conform to the setback requirements of the district except in the Midlothian Special Design District and the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District where use may be located within permitted hardscaped pedestrian areas; and g. Stands, vehicles, signs, trash, debris or other material associated with, or resulting from, the use is removed no later than 24 hours following the cessation of the use. nze=u j j 21-630 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-88 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards [11 For lots not having direct 1. Lot area and width road. lot area may be reduced to a. Area (square feet 88,000111121 square feet with use of public b. Width feet area is reduced, the maximum 1 Fronting on major arterial 300 be based upon the calculation 2 Fronting on other road 150 Subject to the previsions of 2. Lot coves a (maximum %) 20 private onsite water and B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes a lot which shares a common feet or tree canopy preservation area 1. Family subdivision lot 15 with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] 2. Other ImS131 be reduced to 30 feet. [4] a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 stub street does not meet the b. Radius of a loop street 30 unless through the preliminary c. Other roadsl41 50 determined that extension of C. Princillial Building Setbacks (feet)['] serve funis development. [51 1. Front ard161 Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, a. Non cul-de-sac 75 for Principal Buildings, b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 Upper Swift Creek Watershed 2. Interior side yard 40 Minimum setbacks shall be 3. Corner side yard obtain the required lot width at a. Through lot, lot back to back t71 Open space or common area with another comer lot, or lot wide for the entire length of the backing to open space or 40 Height limits are subject to common areal8 b. Other lot 75 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 50 It. Through lot 75 D. Principal Building Heights maximum 181 1' Lesser of 2.5 Chester Corridor East Special stories or 30 feet Design Districts Lesser of 3 stories 2. Other or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-631 .air Notes for Table 19.1-61.A. [11 For lots not having direct access onto a major arterial road. lot area may be reduced to 65,340 square feet or 43,560 square feet with use of public water and wastewater. If lot area is reduced, the maximum number of lots permitted shall be based upon the calculation as shown in Figure 19.1-6 LA, t2] Subject to the previsions of Chapter 12 relative to use of private onsite water and wastewater facilities, the area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus ofa stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve funis development. [51 Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [61 Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. t71 Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear propertyIme. [81 Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-40 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. Table A. 19.1-66. A. Requiied Conditions R-40 Lot Standards Disuict 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 40,000111121 It. Width feet 150 2. Lot coverage maximum % 20 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes fee[ 131 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 Is. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roadsl4l 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet I" 1. Front yal a. Non cul-de-sac 60 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 20 3. Comer side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/1/1974 1) 'Through lot, lot back to back with another comer lot, or lot 30 backing to open space or common area [71 2 Other lot 55 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 30 4. Rear: yard a. Non through lot 50 b. Through lot 60 D. Principal Building Heights maximum lsl 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 Notes for Table 19.Ifi6.A. [11 Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Referto Chapter 12. [21 The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with See. 19.1-306. [31 For Bag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [41 Frontage on the terminus of a stub street docs not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve fnm. development. [51 Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot w-idth at the front building line. 171 Open space or common arca shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. 181 Height limits one subject to Article IV. Division 2. 21-632 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-25 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 25,000111111 b. Width feet 120 2. Lot coverage maximum % 25 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet PI 1. Family subdivision lot 2. Other lots 15 a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads['] 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet ISI 1. Front ardlbl a. Non cul-de-sac 50 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Corner side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another comer lot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [71 25 b. Other lot 45 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 40 b. Through lot 50 D. Principal Building Hei is maximum ISI 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 enzc 21-633 Notes for Table 19.1-71.A. [❑ Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tote canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1- 306. 13] For Bag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [41 Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review Process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [61 Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary [o obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [71 Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [81 Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-15 District. A. Lot and Buildine Standards. f/� Notes for Table 19.1-76.A. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 15,000111121 b. Width feet 100 2. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B-7 Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes (feet)['] 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roadsl°l 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet 151 1. Front ard[61 a. Non cul-de-sac 40 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard a. Lots recorded after 12/11/1945 15 b. Lots recorded on, or prior to, 12/11/1945 10 3. Comer side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/1/1974 1) Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common areal71 20 2 Other lot 35 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 20 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 40 D. Principal Building Heights maximum lel 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 [11 Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter12. [2] The arca of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [31 For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [41 Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension ofthe stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [61 Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary m obtain the required lot width at the front building line. 17] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. 181 Hcight limits arc subject to Article IV, Division 2. '/ 21-634 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-12 District. A. Lot and Buildina Standards. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 12,000111121 b. Width feet 90 2. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes (feet)[31 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roadsl4l 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet Isl 1. Front ard[61 a. Non cul-de-sac 35 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 10 3. Comer side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common areal71 20 b. Other lot 30 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 It. Through lot 30 D. Princitial Building Hei is maximum Isl 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-635 Notes for Table 19.1-81.A. [1] Lot area requirements maybe impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. 121 The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [31 For Flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [41 Frontage on the terminus ofa smb street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. 151 Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yazd Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [71 Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B rl r] B. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet) 12,0001111 21 b. Width feet 90 2. Lot coverage maximum o/0 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet 131 1. Funnily Subdivision Lot 15 2. Other Lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads 141 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks (feet)]'] 1. Front yard16j a. Non cul-de-sac 35 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 10 3. Comer side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [71 20 b. Other lot 30 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lotBI 35 D. Principal Building Height maximum 181 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 [Q<n P4W-*R ► Nates far Table 19.1-86.B. 1 [11 Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Re[er to Chap 12. [21 The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer or bikeway, may be reduced in accordance with Sea 19,1-306, 131 For flag lots, road frontage shall be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [51 Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks —Generally, Permitted Yard encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. 171 Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length ofthe rear property line. [81 116ght limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 J A C ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-9 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet t3O b. Width feet 2. Lot coverage maximum %];i B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling feet 171 purposes 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads141 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet Isl 1. Front ard161 a. Non cul-de-sac 30 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 7.5 3. Comer side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner Jot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [71 15 b. Otherlot 25 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 30 D. Principal Building Heights maximum [sl 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-637 Notes for Table 19.1-92.A. 11 ] Lot area requirements maybe impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, hikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [31 For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. 141 Frontage on the terminus ofa stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development, 15J Setbacks may be imparted by Buffer. Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings. Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [61 Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line [71Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [81 Height limits are subject to Article IV. Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-7 District. A. Lot and Buildin Standards. A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width for lots recorded prior to 1/1/1989 which received tentative lat approval prior to 11/13/1985 and such plat has beenro erl renewed. a. Areas uaze feet 7,00014 b. Width feet 50 2. Lot area and width for lots where tentative approval is 11/13/1985 received on or after a. Area(square feet 9,00014121 b. Width feet 75 3. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes (feet)[" 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads)^I 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks (feet)['] I. Front yard except for Ettrick Special Design DistrictM171 a. Non cul-de-sac 30 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard a. Lots recorded after 12/11/1945 7.5 b. Lots recorded on, or prior to, 12/11/1945 5 3. Comer side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/1/1974 1) Through lot, lot back to back with another comer lot, or lot backing too ens ace or common area181 15 2 Other lot 25 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 IS 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lod91 30 D. Principal Building Heights maximum Ito! 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser feet of 2.5 stories or 30 2. Other I Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements I Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-638 9/22/2021 j j J ATTACHMENT B Notes for Table 19.1-97.A. [I] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapterl2. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] For lots located in Ettrick Special Design District: • Between contiguous developed lots, front yard setback may be reduced to the least front yard setback of any principal building on any adjacent lot; or • For other developed lots, front yard setback may be reduced to the front yard setback of any principal building on the same side of the street and within 200 feet of the lot. [7] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [8] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [9] For lots located in Ettrick Special Design District: • Between contiguous developed lots, through yard setback may be reduced to the least through yard setback of any principal building on any adjacent lot; or • For other developed lots, through yard setback may be reduced to the through yard setback of any principal building on the same side of the street and within 200 feet of the lot. [10] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. ••• 21-639 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B 000 C. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards I . Lot area (square feet a. Internal lot 1520 b. End lot in row of less than 5 attached lots 2320 a End lot in row of 5 or more attached lots 2720 2. Lot width (feet) a. Internal lot 19 b. End lot in row of less than 5 attached lots 29 c. End lot in row of 5 or more attached lots 34 3. Lot coverage maximum % 50 B. Road Frontage for Townhouse Units I'I C. Principal Building Setbacks feet Irl 1. Major arterial all yards 50 2. Front yard I'0n a. Non cul-de-sac 20 b. Permanent cul-de-sacElots 20 3. Side yard a. End unit in a row of less than 5 at10 b. End unit in a row of 5 or more att15 4. Comer side yard 25 5. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Throw hlot 20 D. Principal Building Height maximum Isl 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts 1 Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of stories or 40 feet E. Accesso Building Re uirements Subjectto Section 19.1-304 Notes for Table 19.1-111.C. [ 1] All lots shall have frontage on a road. If approved by the director of transportation, lots may front on private pavement which has direct access to a public road when the private pavement is designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 17 for alleys and private pavement. [2] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [3] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [4] The front yard setback of each unit shall be varied at least 2 feet from the adjacent unit and every third unit shall be varied at least 4 feet from the adjacent unit. [5] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 000 21-640 9/22/2021 J J L ATTACHMENT B C. Lot and Building Standards. A. Lot Standards L Lot area (square feet) a. Internal lot 1520 frontage on a public b. End lot 2. Lot Width (feet) a. Internal lot 2320 19 b. End lot 29 via a common right- 3. Lot coverage (maximum %) 40 B. Road Frontage 01 C. Principal Building Setbacks (feet) U1 Setbacks --Generally, 1. Major arterial all yards 2. Front yard 131 a. Non cul-de-sac 50 25 Encroachments for b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 3. Side yard end unit 10 Chesapeake Bay or 4. Comer side yard 25 5. Rear yard [3] Minimum setbacks a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 25 D. Principal Building Heights (maximum)141 width at the front 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet [4] 2. Other I Lesser of 3 stories of 40 fee[ E. Accessory Building Requirements I Subject to Section 19.1-304 [WWW' 21-641 [I] Lots shall have frontage on a public road or be within 500 feet of a public road via a common right- of-way or easement. [2] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations [3] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [4] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B C. Buildin¢ Standards. A. Individual Building Setbacks feet 01 1. Project property lines I2I a. Adjacent to R -MF 30 b. Adjacent to other than R -MF 50 2. Road Mn] 50 3. Interior private pavement excluding constructed along a public parkiror spaces NI 25 4. Parking spaces 15 30 feet plus 5 feet for 5. Distance between buildings each story above 3 B. Dwelling Units per Floor maximum 10 C. Principal Building Heights maximum Isl 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Lesser of 2.5 stories Districts or 30 feet 2. Other Special Design Districts Lesser of stories or excluding Ettrick 40 feet Lesser of 6 stories or 3. Other Areas 70 feet D. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 Notes for Table 19.1-121.C. [I] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [2] Within these setbacks, Landscaping C shall be installed. [3] A multifamily building constructed along a public road shall front the road. [4] Setbacks for a building with a height of 48 feet or greater which is adjacent to a fire lane may be reduced to 20 feet. [5] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 000 J 21-642 9/22/2021 A ATTACHMENT B rrr C. Individual Manufactured Home Standards. reet or Parke Area Fronto a PIual Manufactured Home Spacing (feet) Irltween 7hurne;m manufactured homesPu'I 16tween attached structure ofa tured home such as deck, porch,art, and another manufactured 6 between another manufactured home's attached structure such as deck, arch, or carport 3. Between manufactured home and detached accessory building ofanother 8 manufactured home PI 4. Edge of internal road or private 5 avementlsl -C-7 Principal Structure Heights maximum Iel 1. Chester Corridor East Special Lesser of 2.5 Design Districts stories or 30 feet 2. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet PRKu 21-643 for Table 19.1-127. C. [I] Manufactured homes shall abut a park street or parking area adjacent to a street. [2] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [3] For the purposes of this requirement, a manufactured home includes any attached enclosed building. [4] The planning director may reduce the spacing between manufactured homes to 10 feet when the homes are placed end to end and no other practicable alternative is available. [5] The required setback shall include the manufactured home hitch. Manufactured homes shall not obstruct any road, private pavement, sidewalk or public utility easement. [6] Height limits are subject to Article TV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B 000 B. Lot and Individual Manufactured Home Standards. A. Lot Standards The lot width for a double 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet) 7,000 b. Width (feet) 11 [2] 50 B. Road Frontage feet R1 meet the requirements 1. Family subdivision lot for road frontage unless 15 through the preliminary 2. Other lots d. Permanent cul-de-sac plat review process it is 30 determined that e. Radius of a loop street extension of the stub 30 street is not needed to f. Otherroads serve future 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet lal Setbacks may be 2. Front ard l°I a. Non cul-de-sac 30 b. Permanent cul-de-sac with radius of more than 40 feet 25 Encroachments for c. Permanent cul-de-sac with radius of40 feet or less 30 3. Interior side yard 7.5 4. Comer side yard 30 [4] 5. Rear yard a. Non through lot 30 b. Through lot 30 D. Principal Building Height maximum Isl [5] Height limits are subject 1. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements I Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-644 Notes for Table 19.1-129.6. [ 1 ] The lot width for a double wide manufactured her shall be increased m feet. Sixty [2] Frontage on the terminus of a scab street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [3] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [4] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [5] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B aaa C. Individual Manufactured Home Standards. A. Ped Standards Isla 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet)71n b. Width fee[ B. Street or Parkin Area Fmn aC. Individual Manufactured Home S in feetI. Between manufactured homes 2. Roads, drives and parking areas 20 D. Principal Building Setbacks for each pad site (feet) 1. Front yard 20 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Corner side yard 20 4. Rearyard 15 E. Principal Building Heights maximum 141 1. Chester Corridor East Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet F. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 000 21-645 Notes for Table 19.1-131. C. [71 Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [81 Manufactured homes shall be placed in designated pad sites and shall not obstruct any road, private pavement, sidewalk or public utility easement. [9] Manufactured homes shall abut a park driveway or parking area which is adjacent to the driveway. [101 Height limits are subject to Article IV. Division 2. 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an A District. A. Lot and Structure Standards. A. Lot Standards I . Excluding family subdivisions, lot area and width for dwelling purposes or manufactured home a. Area (acres) 5 b. Width(feet)(n 150 2. Family subdivision lots, lot area and width for dwelling purposes or manufactured home a. Area (acres) 1 b. Width (feet) 150 3. Lots other than for residential or manufactured home use, lot area and width a. Area (acres) I b. Width (feet) 150 4. Lot coverage (maximum %) 20 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes or manufactured home (fmf lr) I. Family subdivision lots 1IS2. Other lots 250 C. Principal Structure Setbacks for lots having road frontage (feet)l'l I. Front yard1501'1 2. Interior side yard 40 3. Comer side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another comer, lot, or lot backingto open spa e or common areal °1 40 b. Otherlot 75 4, Rear Yard a. Non through lot 50 b. Through lot 150 D. Principal Structure Setbacks for which zoning approval has been granted to allow use for dwelling purposes or a manufactured home without public road =frontage feet P1 I. Front yard 4010 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Rear yard 25 E. Principal Structure Heights (maximum)l'I I. Structure Excluding Farm Structure a. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet 2. Farm Structure a. Chester Corridor Fast Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts excluding Ettrick Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas 50 feet F. Accessory Structure Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 21-646 9/22/2021 j j r 164M .tf R �e- Notes for Table 19.1-133.A.1. [1] The lot width shall be increased to the minimum required road frontage width for a depth necessary to create a 5 acre lot or in an arrangement approved by the director of planning based upon limitations imposed by the lot shape or environmental features. [2] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless a determination is made that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [3] Setbacks may be impacted by Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [4] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required width at the front building line. [5] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [6] Height limits we subject to Article IV, Division 2. 21-647 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B A. Lot Standards I. Lot area and width a. Arca (acres) I E Width (feet) 150 2. Lot coverage (maximum 20 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes or manufactured home (feet)[') 1. Family subdivision lots 15 2. Other lots 50 C. Principal Structure Setbacks for lots having road frontage (feet)[°) 1. Front yard I PI 01 2. Interior side yard 40 3. Comer side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another comer lot backingto open space or common area [51 lot, or 40 b. Other lot 75 4. Rear Yard a. Non through lot 50 b. Through lot 150131 D. Principal Structure Setbacks for which zoning approval has been granted to allow use for dwelling purposes or a manufactured home without public road trona a feet ¢l 1. Front yard 40141 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Rear yard 25 E. Principal Structure Heights (maximum)[41 1. Structure Excluding Fame Structure a. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts Lesser of stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet 2. Fenn Structure a. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts excluding Ettrick Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas 50 feet F. Accessory Structure Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 21-648 9/22/2021 j j ATTACHMENT B Notes for Table 19.1-133.A.2. [l ] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless a determination is made that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [2] Setbacks may be impacted by Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [3] For a lot created prior to 6/23/1993 which has a principal building constructed prior to 6/23/1993 with a setback less than 150 feet, the building may be expanded, if the addition is set back at least the same distance as the existing building, but not less than 40 feet. [4] Minimum setbacks shall be increased, where necessary, to obtain the required width at the front building line. [5] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [6] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 21-649 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet) 15,000111 b. Width (feet) 100 2. Lot coverage (maximum %) 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes or manufactured home (feet)1�1131 1. Family subdivision lots 15 2. Otherlots 50 C. Principal Structure Setbacks for lots having road frontage (feet)['] 1. Front yard 100 PIN 2. Interior side yard a. Lot recorded on, or after, 12/11/1945 15 b. Lot recorded prior to 12/11/1945 10 3. Comer side yard a. Lot recorded on or after 4/1/1974 that is a Through lot, lot back to back with another comer lot, or lot backing too ens ace or common area [71 20 b. Lot recorded on or after 4/1/1974, other lot 35 c. Lot recorded prior to 4/1/1974 20 4. Rear Yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 100111 D. Principal Smactum Setbacks for which inning approval has been granted to allow use for dwelling oses or a manufactured home without public road fronta a fee[ 141 I. Front yard 401e1 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Rear yard 25 E. Principal Structure Heights (maximumll'1 I. Structure Excluding Farm Structure a. Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet 2. Farm Structure a Chester Corridor Fast Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet b. Other Special Design Districts excluding Ettrick Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet c. Other Areas 50 feet F. Accessory Structure Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 21-650 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B Notes for Table 19.1-133.A.3. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless a determination is made that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [31 Lots recorded without road frontage prior to 4/28/1976 are not subject to road frontage requirements. Such lots may be used for dwelling purposes or manufactured home purposes with zoning approval. [41 Setbacks may be impacted by Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [5] For a lot created prior to 5/26/1988 which has a principal building constructed prior to 5/26/1988 with a setback less than 100 feet, the building may be expanded, if the addition is set back at least the same distance as the existing building, but not less than 40 feet. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. A. Required On site Parking. Unless otherwise stated, sufficient off street parking areas shall be provided on the premises in connection with, and accessory to, each use. B. Off site Parking. Excluding permitted off site parking for uses in the Bon Air and Midlothian Special Design Districts, parking may be located on a lot other than the zoning lot on which the use it serves is located provided such lot is zoned to permit the use which it serves. For uses in the Bon Air and Midlothian Special Design Districts, parking may be located on a lot other than the zoning lot on which the use it serves is located provided the parking is in, or within 1320 feet of, the applicable Special Design District. The property on which the puking is located need not be zoned to permit the use which it serves, provided parking for any nonresidential use may not be located in areas zoned only for residential use. In either case, the owner shall obtain a lease for the off site parking, the terms and duration of which shall be acceptable to the director of planning. The approved lease shall be recorded with the circuit court clerk. C. Parkins; Serving Non -Residential Uses in A. R. MH and R-TH Districts. Parking areas of 5 or more spaces that serve non-residential uses shall conform to the parking requirements of an O, C or I District including, but not necessarily limited to, setbacks, landscaping, and buffers. D. Parking Required Prior to Required Prior to Occupancy. An occupancy permit shall not be issued until the required number of parking spaces is provided. 21-651 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B 000 E. Rideshare and Paratransit Pick-up and Drop-off. In the Midlothian Special Design District, required parking for nonresidential uses in nonresidential or mixed- use communities may be reduced by up to 5 percent for developments providing designated areas, and associated stacking spaces, to facilitate the use of ridesharing or paratransit. F. Overall Parking Reductions. The maximum total parking reduction permitted for a development, including any of the above-mentioned reductions used in combination with any parking reductions provided in Section 19.1-236.A., shall not exceed 15 percent. 21-652 9/22/2021 j Number of Spaces Required All Areas Excluding Special Destgu Specific Use General Use Category or Special Design Districts Size of Use Districts pl pl lal [012](3)[41 000 1 per each 20 persons enrolled up to a Adult maximum of 6 spaces, plus one for each em to ee171 4 per 1000 s/f ofgfa171 Day Can I per each 20 persons enrolled up to a Child maximum of 6 spaces, plus one for each em to eel7i Family day care home =Sec. Sec. 19.1- As per Sec. 19.1- 235.A. 235.A. 000 10,000 s/f or less of gfa I I per 200 s/f of gfa- 4 per 1000 s/f of gfalal 5 spaces minimum 1 per 200 s/f for the 10,001 to 26,500 s/f of first 10,000 s/f of gfa, gfu plus 1 per 250 s/f in 4 per 1000 s/f ofgfasi excess of 10,000 s/f of fa '., 1 per 200 s/f for the 1 per 200 s/f for the 26,501 to 50,000 s/fof first 10,000 s/f of gfa, fust 10,000 s/f ofgfa, jplus l per 250 s/f in plus l per 250 s/f in gfa excess of 10,000 s/f of excess of 10,000 s/f of a fatal 1 per 200 s/f for the 1 per 200 s/f for the fust 10,000 s/f of gfa, first 10,000 s/f of gfa, Office ''�, plus 1 per 250 s/f for plus 1 per 250 s/f for 50,001 to 75,000 s/f of the next 40,000 s/f of the next 40,000 s/f of gfa I gfa, plus 1 per each gfa, plus 1 per each additional 300 s/f in additional 300 s/f in excess of 50,000 s/f of excess of 50,000 s/f of fa false 1 per 200 s/f for the 1 per 200 s/f for the first 10,000 s/f of gfa, first 10,000 s/f of gfa, plus I per 250 s/f for plus 1 per 250 s/f for the next 40,000 s/f of the next 40,000 s/f of 75,001 s/f or more of gfa gfa, plus I per each gfa, plus 1 per each additional 300 s/f for additional 300 s/f for the next 25,000 s/f of the next 25,000 s/f of gfa, plus I per each gfa, plus 1 per each additional 400 s/f in j additional 400 s/f in 21-652 9/22/2021 j V Fie LM ATTACHMENT B 21-653 9/22/2021 excess of 75,000 s/f of excess of 75,000 s/f of fa falsl 000 Shopping Center Siar or map 4.4 per 1000 s/f of gfa Qao[ 4 per 1000 s/f of gfalal RttaQ Bund 4 per 1000 s/f of gfa Appliance store 1 per 750 s/f of gfa I per 400 s/f of 1 per 400 s/f of Building materials sales enclosed gfa area, plus enclosed gfa area, plus 1 per 2000 s/f of I per 2000 s/f of outside display area outside display area 4 per 1000 s/f of gfa Furniture store I per 750 s/f of gfa I per 200 s/f of gfa in 4 per 1000 s/f of gfa in enclosed building enclosed building exclusive of exclusive of Greenhouse or plant greenhouse, plus 1 per greenhouse, plus 1 per Retall 700 s/f of gfa in 700 s/f of gfa in nursery greenhouse, plus 1 per greenhouse, plus 1 per 700 s/f of outside 700 s/f of outside display and growing display and growing area area 1 per 400 s/f of I per 400 s/f of Home Center enclosed gfa area, plus enclosed gfa area, plus I per 2000 s/f of 1 per 2000 s/f of outside display area outside display area 4 per 1000s/f of gfalal Retail Uses Not Iper 200 s/f of gfa Otherwise Enumerated 5 for each vendor Vendor, outdoor 5 for each vendor Personal Service I per 200 s/f of gfa 4 per 1000 s/f of gfalal Reehuraat I per 100 s/f of gfa 4 per 1000 s/f of gfalal Outside Dining I per 100 s/f 1'l 4 per 1000 s/f lar'l 000 I for each 3 karts, boats I for each 3 karts, boats Go-kart, bumper boats or or similar use or similar use similar use accommodated on accommodated on track, water or similar track, water or similar facility at any one time facility at any one time Golf course 60 per each 9 holes 60 per each 9 holes Golf driving range 1.2 per each tee 1.2 per each tee 3 for each hole for the 3 for each hole for the first 18 holes, plus 2 for first 18 holes, plus 2 for Golf course, miniature each hole for the each hole for the second 18 holes, plus 1 second 18 holes, plus 1 for each hole in excess for each hole in excess of 36 of 36 Sports playfields, indoor Recreational and outdoor with fixed 1 for each 4 seats I for each 4 seats seats Sports playfields, indoor 45 per field 45 per field without fixed seats Sports playfields, outdoor 30 per field 30 per field without fixed seats 1 per 90 s/fof I per 90 s/f of Swimming pool Iswimming and wading swimming and wading area area Tennis, racquetball, 4 per court 4 per court squash and handball court Volleyball court 12 per court 12 per court Indoor facilities no, 1 per 200 s/f of gfa 4 per 1000s/f of gfalsl otherwise listed 000 21-653 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B Notes for Table 19.1-236.A. [11 In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District, parking requirements for nonresidential uses shall be based upon the lesser of that outlined in the Table or 4 per 1000 s/f of gfa. [21 In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District, Employment Center, Special Design Districts and C-1 Districts, the required number of parking spaces for non-residential uses or multiple family dwelling units may be reduced by 10% if the development contains a pedestrian or bikeway system which connects, or will connect, to off-site existing or planned pedestrian systems or a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208. In addition, countywide for any district having established public transit routes, multiple family developments may have the number of required parking spaces reduced by 5% for units located within 1,320 feet of an established transit stop if the development is connected to such stop by a pedestrian or bikeway system. [31 In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District and Special Design Districts, for nonresidential uses and multiple family dwelling unit parking spaces in a road may be counted toward the required number of parking spaces when more than 1/2 of the space adjoins the use. [4] Within a non-residential or multiple family dwelling unit development adjacent to a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208., the number of parking spaces may be reduced by I for each 6 bicycle storage spaces, with a maximum reduction of 5 and provided a minimum of 5 parking spaces shall be provided. [5] For residential uses, parking spaces within a garage or an enclosed or covered space may be counted toward parking requirements. [6] In an MH -1 District, one of the required parking spaces may be located in a common parking area within the park. [7] if a drop-off or pick-up area is provided directly from vehicles to the building, stacking space shall be provided. If such an area is not provided, 5 additional parking spaces shall be installed. If care is provided for school age children, a sidewalk shall be installed from the building to the school bus stop for the facility. [8] In the Ettrick Special Design District, parking requirements for the use shall be based upon 22 parking spaces per 1,000 s/f of gfa. [9] The required number of spaces shall be based upon the square footage of the outside dining that exceeds 20 percent of the gm of the associated principal use. A. Required Spaces. Stacking spaces shall be provided for a use having drive-through facilities or uses having drop-off and pick-up areas. Stacking spaces shall be provided as outlined in Table 19.1-237.A. Use Stacking Spaces Automatic or drive throw 7 per ba Automobile Wash Self-service 3per bay Accesso togasoline sales 5 per ba Bank 4 for the first window plus 2 for each additional window Fast Food Restaurant 6 for the first window plus 2 for each additional window Other Use with Drive-in Window 3 spaces for each window Ridesbare, Paratransit pick-up/ drop-off 3 spaces per designated pick-up/drop-off area A. Parking Space Size and Design. 1. Parking spaces shall be of a shape, location and design so as to be effectively usable. Paved parking spaces shall be legibly striped. 2. Except for handicapped parking spaces, paved parallel parking shall be 7 feet wide and 22 feet long and striped with 4 inch wide white lines perpendicular to the curb or edge of pavement. Other paved spaces shall be 9 feet wide and 18 feet 21-654 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B long, and gravel or unpaved overflow parking spaces shall be 10 feet wide and 20 feet long. (Note: Size and location of handicapped spaces is based on building code standards.) B. Stacking Space Size and Design. 1. Stacking spaces shall be separated from internal drives with raised medians for traffic movement or safety, as deemed necessary at the time of site plan review. Stacking spaces shall be designed so as not to impede on- or off-site traffic movement or access to parking spaces. 2. Stacking spaces shall be of a shape, location and design so as to be effectively usable. Except for stacking spaces serving paratransit, spaces shall be 18 feet long. Paratransit spaces shall be a minimum of 22 feet in length. A. Generally. Landscaping shall be required at the outer boundaries of projects and in the required yards of a lot, parcel, or development except where driveways or other openings may be required. B. Perimeter Landscapine Types and Minimum Requirements. Table 19.1-251.B. outlines the requirement of the different perimeter landscaping types required by this chapter. The table generally specifies the number of trees or shrubs required for each linear foot of the yard, and/or other treatment that may he required within the yard. 888 21-655 9/22/2021 Plantin reatment U111 Perimeter Landscaping Type Small Deciduous/ Large Evergrem Tree/ Medi2m Shrub/ ma/ DwidLinear Other Lmeat Feet Liam Feet Linear Feet Feet A 1/50 1/50 1/20 1121 BOptim 1 1/50 1/50 1/30 1/15 1121 2setbxk 1/501'1 1/30 1/15 1411121 3n�m recitundB el road Optim 3. 1/35 in requited side ®d rear setbacks spaced ad)eccat to O, C. I propwty uot generally 151 whbm the same Projea on center C4Dptiml 1/30 1/50 1/30 1/10 Jul Option ® I/50 1/501'1 1/30 1/15 14121 1 roadd D 1/50 1/50 1/30 161 161121 E 1/30 1/50 1/30 11 1711121 F 1/30 1/50 1/30 lel 1811121 G 1/501141 I'11-21 H 1/50 1 1.5/30 1.5/50 1.5/30 1.5/10 1221 1/35 11tl spaced 111 generally on center 1/40 spaced K generally 1121 on center 11011-21 1/35 L spaced generally on center M 121 I I 1151 888 21-655 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B A. Buffers between Different Zoning Districts. I. Exemptions. The buffers shown in Table 19.1-263.A.1.a. shall not apply to O and C property located in the Ettrick, Bon Air and Midlothian Special Design Districts. 000 The provisions of this division apply to O, C and I zoned property in Emerging Growth Design District as shown on the zoning maps. The Emerging Growth Design District is generally the area as shaded in Figure 19.1-341. 000 The purpose and intent of the Midlothian Special Design District is to implement the design recommendations of the Midlothian community Special Area and recognize the area's cultural, architectural and historic heritage. It is the purpose of this district to maintain and reinforce the character, identity and pedestrian scale of the area by enhancing existing development patterns, encouraging highly -integrated infill development, promoting redevelopment of underutilized land and providing amenities in order to create a vibrant village environment to live, work, learn, play and visit. Both the comprehensive plan chapter for the Midlothian Community and these regulations are intended to protect and enhance the county's attractiveness to residents, tourists, and other visitors; to enhance economic opportunity; to preserve and increase property values; and to support and stimulate complementary development and future growth that promotes important design elements provided 21-656 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B within the plan and values the properties of historic, architectural and cultural significance provided within this key gateway to, and destination within, the county. A. The provisions of this division apply to O and C zoned property within the Midlothian Special Design District. I zoned property within the Midlothian Special Design District shall conform to the standards of the Emerging Growth Design District. B. The Midlothian Special Design District shall be comprised of the following areas as shown on the zoning maps. The Midlothian Special Design District is generally the areas as shaded in Figure 19.1-374.B.: A. Building and Parkins. Buildings and parking in Midlothian Special Design District shall meet the requirements outlined in Tables 19.1-375.A.1 : A. Building Setbacks (feet)nl/Required Perimeter Landscaping I. Road type a. Limited access and Woolridge Road 40/C b. Midlothian Turnpike 20/1 or G121131141 c. Other roads l5/1 or GI21 [31141 2. Interior side yard a. Adjacent to A, R or MH 25B b. Adjacent to R-TH or R -MF 10/B c. Adjacent to O, C or 1 0 3. Rear yard a. Adjacent to A, R or MH 25/B b. Adjacent to R-TH or R -MF I OB c. Adjacent to O, C or I 0 B. Parking Setbacks(feet)[WRequired Perimeter Landscaping 1. Road type a. Limited access and Woodridge Road 40/C b. Major arterial 151161 21-657 9/22/2021 f: WWTO:i'uFW11 21-658 9/22/2021 c. Other roads 151161 2. Interior side yard a. Adjacent to A, R or MH 25/BI'1 b. Adjacent to R-TH or R -MF 10/13 c. Adjacent to O, C or I 0 3. Rear yard a. Adjacent to A, R or MH 25/Bl'] b. Adjacent to R-TH or R -MF to/B c. Adjacent to O, C or I 0 C. Building Heights 181191 Maximum height lesser of 3 stories or 45 feet Minimum height oft stories for buildings along Midlothian Turnpike within areas designated as Residential Mixed Use and Community Mixed 21-658 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B Notes for Table 19.1-375.A.1. [I] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [21 Setbacks must be sufficient to allow for required improvements to include sidewalks, bikeways, landscaping, street trees and streetlights that are outside of the right of way. Where the right-of-way has a variable width or for projects fronting Midlothian Turnpike, the planning director shall have the authority to permit minor adjustments to street setbacks during plans review in order to provide for an appropriate relationship between building facades and streetscape improvements. Setbacks may include hardscaped pedestrian areas as outlined in this section. [3] The maximum setback shall be 35 feet for Midlothian and 25 feet for all other roads for 60% of the building wall. Where a building wall is recessed in order to provide a public open space or plaza, there shall be no maximum building setback for such recessed building wall so long as the recessed wall does not exceed 40% of the length of any building wall fronting a street. [4] Awnings, canopies, light shelves and decorative lights are permitted to encroach into any street setback provided a vertical clearance of 8 feet is provided between such structure and the sidewallugrade and the encroachment comes no closer than 5 feet from right-of-way. Balconies shall be permitted to encroach six (6) feet provided a vertical clearance of 24 feet is provided between the balcony and the sidewalk/grade. [5] Parking shall be set back as follows. For Midlothian Turnpike • no closer to the road than the front facade of the nearest building facing the road and in no case less than 35 feet; or • ifthere is no building, the greater ofeither 35 feet orno closer to the road than the front facade of the nearest building facing the road. For Other Roads • no closer to the road than the front facade of the building with the least setback from the road. If there is no building on the property, parking shall be setback 15 feet from the road. Notes for Table 19.1-375.A.1. (continued) [6] Views of parking from roads shall either be minimized by a building, or three to four -foot high decorative walls or fences compatible with the building, evergreen hedges or a combination thereof. Hedges shall be maintained at a height between 3 to 4 feet and so as to not impede pedestrian facilities. Walls, fencing and hedges shall be located as follows: • set back from the road at the minimum building setback; or • between the parking and any hardscaped pedestrian area located between the road and the parking area The Director of Planning may modify the requirement for walls, fences or hedges where parking views are minimized through the use of decorative architectural, landscaping and/or topographic features designed to reduce open views of parking from the road and include improvements which accommodate pedestrian travel across storefronts, between buildings, and between sites. [7] Except where adjacent to an R district having a single family subdivision recorded, or a lot outside of a subdivision having an legally existing dwelling built, prior to September 22, 2021, setback may be reduced to 10 feet with the provision of a 5 foot decorative solid screen wall. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. [9] Buildings may exceed the lesser of 3 stories or 45 feet as provided under in 19.1-375.C.2.a.v and 19.1- 375.D. 10. 21-659 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B B. Gasoline Pumps and Associated Drives Standards. Gasoline pumps shall be located behind a building and arranged so as to minimize view from Midlothian Turnpike, Charter Colony Parkway, and Coalfield Road. Views of pumps from other roads shall be minimized either by a building, or 3 to 4 foot high decorative walls, fencing, evergreen hedges or a combination thereof. Hedges shall be maintained at a minimum height of 3 feet and so as to not impede pedestrian facilities. The setback of the walls, fencing or hedges shall be a maximum of 15 feet unless a hardscaped pedestrian area is provided between the road and the gasoline pumps in which case the walls, fencing or hedges shall be located between the gasoline pumps and the hardscaped pedestrian area. The Director of Planning may modify the requirements for walls, fences or evergreen hedges where views are minimized through the use of decorative architectural, landscaping and/or topographic features designed to reduce views of pumps from roads. C. Other Required Conditions. 1. Architecture Treatment Generally. The Midlothian Community Special Area Plan recognizes and promotes the importance of building design in preserving and enhancing pedestrian friendly and a cohesive village. The architectural regulations herein are intended to implement those recommendations: a. Buildings shall be designed to impart harmonious proportions and avoid monotonous facades or large bulky masses, and possess architectural variety while still maintaining a cohesive character and compatibility with existing structures of high historic, cultural or architectural interest. Buildings shall enhance an overall cohesive district character through the use of design elements including, but not limited to: variations in materials, balconies, terraces, articulation of doors and windows, sculptural or textural relief of facades, architectural ornamentation, cornice treatment, varied roof lines, or other appurtenances such as decorative lighting fixtures and landscaping appropriate to the style or design emulated. b. The regulation intent is not to replicate existing buildings but rather to blend new construction and existing building modifications with the existing historic, cultural and architectural interest buildings, objects and sites within the district. Except where otherwise specified, these regulations are not intended to regulate particular materials or methods of construction provided that materials and construction utilized are appropriately compatible with, and reflective of, the character of the district, architectural style and resource emulated. In addition, in review of building design the director of planning shall consider the compliance of the proposal with requirements of Sec. 19.1- 317 and the compatibility with styles recommended and recognized as being of high historic, cultural and architectural value within the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan that promote the vernacular architecture of the region which includes the following architectural styles: Colonial Revival, Dutch Colonial, Federal, Georgian, Victorian Folk, Main Street Commercial and Industrial Style Commercial. Individual buildings should not reference multiple styles or eras. 2. Building Design. In addition to the requirements elsewhere in this section and of Sec. 19.1-317, buildings shall comply with the following: a a. Architecture. i. Where a second story is required it shall extend the full frontage of the first -floor fagade, except where stepbacks may apply, and have a gross floor area not less than 50% of the gross floor area of the first story. 21-660 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B ii. Excluding the area for windows and doors, a minimum of 50% of the fagade of the first two stories of a building fronting a road or containing an entrance, and visible from a road shall be faced with brick, stone, or other masonry materials similar in appearance to brick or stone; on upper floors (beyond 2 stories) high quality materials should be employed and account for 50% of fagade. iii. Facades visible from a road or containing an entrance open to the public shall not be constructed of unadomed or unpainted concrete block, unfinished corrugated metal or unfinished sheet metal; iv. Use of different materials on different facades shall be permitted, but architectural materials inferior in quality, appearance or detail to any other fagade of the same building shall not be used. The director of planning may permit use of alternative materials on a portion of a fagade where determined such portion is not visible to the public from on or off-site; For buildings that abut two (2) arterials or one arterial and one collector road, a significant architectural element such as a bell tower, clock tower or other vertical element on the corner of the building adjacent to the intersection of such roads shall be permitted an additional 10 feet in height above the maximum building height. No portion of such vertical element shall constitute an additional story or half story above the permitted number of stories; and vi. Any building along a public or private road shall architecturally front, and have main entrances that face such road. For corner lots this shall apply to only one such road, provided that a building shall in all instances be designed so as to architecturally front the collector or arterial road upon which it fronts. b. Building Stepbacks Required. For buildings fronting on Midlothian Turnpike and exceeding two (2) stories or 28 feet in height, stepbacks shall be provided at either the second or third floor. The stepback shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the fagade wall at the ground floor fronting Midlothian Turnpike. c. Storefront Windows and Pedestrian Entrances. The first floor of any building fagade facing a road or common area/plaza shall incorporate storefront windows and pedestrian entrances that either connect directly to the sidewalk along the road or to a sidewalk that connects to the sidewalk along the road. A maximum of 10 linear feet along the front fagade of the principal building shall be without windows or pedestrian entrances. d. Building Length. Where building lengths exceed 250 feet, buildings shall provide breezeways or similar designs to accommodate pedestrian access to parking located to rear of building. These should be lighted and decorative in design. The director of planning may grant relief to this provision where it is determined that the intent to provide frequent and reasonable pedestrian access through or across sites is provided through other design means. 3. Size of Individual Uses. With the exception of hotels or offices, and with the further exception of uses otherwise complying with the zoning ordinance which are located within a building constructed prior to September 22, 2021, individual nonresidential uses shall not exceed 12,000 gross floor area per story. 4. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Amenities Generally. Sidewalk and pedestrian amenities shall be provided along all roads as provided for in the Midlothian 21-661 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B Community Special Area Plan, from parking areas to buildings, and as pedestrian connections from projects to adjacent development. The exact location, treatment, design and use of sidewalks and pedestrian amenities shall be determined at time of site plan review or as specifically provided for in item 5 below. Prior to site plan approval easements, acceptable to the Planning Department, shall be recorded across such improvements to allow public use. Bicycle and Pedestrian Amenities Specifically. In addition to the bikeways required by Sec. 19.1-208, bikeways shall be provided throughout projects to connect uses, open spaces, and common areas within the project. If approved by VDOT, such facilities should be located within right-of-way, otherwise the facilities shall be located in a public easement which establishes maintenance provisions by underlying owner, owner's association or other parties as approved at time of plan review. If the development is located adjacent to a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208., bikeway(s) shall be provided to connect to those shown on the Plan as well as to adjacent property, nearby public facilities, and other nearby projects, as determined at the time of plan review. Sidewalks, bicycle facilities and amenities shall be provided in conjunction with development as shown in Table 19.1-375.C.: Table 19.1-375.C. Pedestrian Road/Location and Bicy cic Ne61 (irk Proposed ImproN Facility Type q ements Summary Side of Road Midlothian Turnpike Sidewalk - Minimum 6' North Side Midlothian Turnpike Shared Use Path South Side Woolridge Road Bike Lane and Sidewalk (Existing) Both Charter Colony Parkway Shared Use Path East Side Coalfield Sidewalk - Minimum 5' Both Winterfield Sidewalk - Minimum 5' Both Westfield Road Bike Lane and Sidewalk Both Other/New Roads As identified in the Infrastructure Plan Section of the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan [I] All facilities should be designed in accordance with the recommendations of the Bikeways and Trails Plan and meet VDOT standards, or as approved by the Transportation Department. Hardscaped Pedestrian Areas. Hardscaped pedestrian areas may be located within required setbacks along roads. Such areas are not subject to side or rear yard setbacks except that a rear yard setback of 30 feet shall be required when abutting a single-family (R) or Townhouse (R-TH) District. Iiardscaped areas shall not encroach onto required sidewalks along a road and, so that pedestrian movement is not hindered, a six (6) foot clear zone shall be maintained within any hardscaped area abutting such sidewalks. Hardscaped pedestrian areas shall be designed to facilitate, and include amenities to support, outdoor gatherings and activity such as outdoor dining, temporary vendors, civic or community events or seating areas. These areas may also include pedestrian amenities such as foundation plantings, street furnishings, benches, bike racks and trash receptacles. 7. Street Trees. Street trees shall be provided along all roads and private pavement in accordance with Sec. 19.1-252. 8. Exterior Lighting. In addition to the requirements of Section 19.1-205, lighting shall meet the following standards: 21-662 9/22/2021 J ATTACHMENT B a. Streetlights. Along all public and private roads within required setbacks, or as otherwise approved by the Planning and Transportation Departments, pedestrian scale decorative streetlights shall be installed as follows: i. Streetlights shall be designed to enhance the pedestrian character of the design district and be compatible with development standards of the district. The design of fixtures, poles and lamps shall be generally consistent along a road; it. Streetlights shall be spaced generally 60 feet on center; iii. Fixture mounting heights shall be limited to 12 to 15 feet above the finished grade; and iv. Streetlights shall be compatible with existing decorative lighting. The specific light fixture and spacing shall be approved by the Planning Director in conjunction with site plan approval. b. Other Exterior Lighting. With the exception of pedestrian scale streetlights, exterior lighting shall comply with the following: i. Exterior lighting shall be designed to enhance the character of the design district and be compatible with development standards of the district; ii. Freestanding lights shall not exceed a height of 20 feet above finished grade; and iii. Building mounted lights shall be no higher than the roofiine or parapet wall and be directed downward. 9. Road and Private Pavement Network and Design. Roads and private pavement serving a development shall be designed and arranged so as to accommodate a pedestrian friendly street focused environment and meet the following: a. Roads and private pavement shall be arranged in an interconnected pattern of f walkable blocks and designed to potentially serve and connect to adjacent l development; b. Blocks shall provide pedestrian short cuts at mid -block locations to facilitate foot traffic between parallel roads; c. Arrangement and design shall accommodate provided improvements to include sidewalks, bikeways, street trees, pedestrian street lighting, pedestrian crosswalks, and on -street parking; d. Roads, unless otherwise specified by VDOT, and private pavement shall have concrete curb and gutter. Roads that accommodate general traffic circulation, as determined by the director of transportation, shall be designed, and constructed to, VDOT standards and taken into the state system; e. Roads and private pavement with on -street parallel puking shall narrow at intersections to the minimum width necessary to accommodate the travel Imes of the associated road or private pavement and the narrowed portion shall include a tangent length sufficient to accommodate the width of a crosswalk perpendicular to the curb line; and f These improvements shall be developed in conjunction with projects they are intended to serve. 21-663 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B 10. Vehicular Access. Vehicular drives shall not be located between a building and a road. 11. Drive-in or Drive Through Facilities. Drive-in or drive through facilities shall comply with the following: a. Drive-in or drive through facilities to include windows, bays or similar uses shall be arranged so as to minimize view from streets and shall not be located between the building and roads; and b. The view of stacking spaces from roads shall be minimized either by a building, or 3 to 4 -foot -high decorative walls, fencing, evergreen hedges or a combination thereof. Hedges shall be maintained at a height of 3 to 4 feet. The setback of the walls, fencing or hedges shall meet the minimum building setback unless a hardscaped pedestrian area is provided between the road and the stacking spaces in which case the walls, fencing or hedges shall be located between the stacking spaces and the hardscaped pedestrian area. The Director of Planning may modify the requirement for walls, fences or hedges where stacking space views are minimized through the use of decorative architectural, landscaping and/or topographic features designed to reduce open views of stacking spaces from the road and include improvements which accommodate pedestrian travel across storefronts, between buildings, and between sites. 12. Common Area. For office parks, commercial parks, mixed-use communities and shopping centers, a minimum of 10 percent of the total project area shall be provided as hardscaped or landscaped common area for public use. These areas shall be exclusive of sidewalks along roads or walkways required to provide access between buildings, roads and parking areas as determined at plans review. 13. Shared Cross Access. Unless otherwise approved at time of plan review, direct and convenient onsite vehicular circulation and access between properties shall be provided. The intent is to provide shared access drives located to the rear of buildings fronting on Midlothian Turnpike and to minimize need of vehicular entrances along public streets. 14. Deck Parking. Deck parking structures fronting on Midlothian Turnpike shall either have commercial, office, or, where permitted, residential uses located along the ground floor or be located behind another building located on the lot. For any detached parking structures, such structures shall be designed to have exterior materials and features that enhance the compatibility with principal buildings located within a project. D. Mixed Use and Multiple -family Development. On property recommended for Community or Residential Mixed Use in the comprehensive plan, multiple -family use may be permitted through conditional use provided such use and project in which located complies with following: 1. Property is zoned 0-2, C-3, C-4 or C-5; 2. Development and buildings meet the standards of the design district except as otherwise stated within this subsection; 21-664 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B 3. Multiple -family use is located in a project containing commercial, office or other permitted nonresidential uses consistent with the land use recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan; 4. Multiple -family uses are incorporated into an integrated master plan for the development depicting general location of uses, vehicular and pedestrian accesses, parking areas, sidewalks, paths, and common area and which includes a phasing plan for development. Modifications determined not to affect the general intent, interconnectivity and use mix of the plan may be approved at the time of Le plan review; 5. Prior to construction of residential units, construction has begun on a minimum of 50 percent of the gross project area devoted to nonresidential uses. For projects containing existing nonresidential uses that are intended to be redeveloped, the phasing of such redevelopment and intended future use shall be included in the required master plan at time of zoning; 6. Project has a minimum of 100 feet of contiguous frontage along Midlothian Turnpike or Woolridge Road; 7. With the exception of the number of accesses required to a road under Table 19.1- 121.A., multiple -family dwellings located in a mixed use development we exempt from the provisions of Sec. 19.1-121; 8. Unless located within a building having commercial or office uses, on the ground floor, multiple -family use is located a minimum of 100 feet from Midlothian Turnpike. Such ground floor uses are exclusive of any use that is for the purpose of leasing, maintenance or overall management of the multiple -family use in the building or area intended to serve as common area for the project or to only serve the multiple -family residents and their guests; 9. For any multiple -family project a maximum of 10 percent of the units may have more than 2 bedrooms; 10. A building containing multiple -family dwellings, to include those having a vertical mix of nonresidential and residential uses, shall not exceed a height that is the lesser of 5 stories or 70 feet provided such building does not exceed 3 stories or 45 feet within 100 feet of Midlothian Turnpike, property zoned for single family dwellings, or property occupied by a legal single-family dwelling existing at time of plan approval; 11. Buildings over three stories in height shall provide structured parking for a minimum of 20 percent of required puking; 12. In addition to the common area requirements of Sec. 19.1-375.C.12, for each multiple -family dwelling unit located above a third floor, 100 square feet shall be provided as hardscaped or landscaped common area that includes outdoor amenities and facilities, for active or passive recreation as deemed appropriate at time of plan review. Such common area shall be designed to serve residents of the multiple -family development. At the time of site plan review, this required additional common area may, in lieu of being provided as hardscaped or landscaped common area, be permitted to be to be provided as rooftop garden space, or internal space, that is commonly accessible to, and provides social or activity space, for residents. Internal spaces may also include space that is intended to serve the educational and occupational needs of residents but shall be 21-665 9/22/2021 ATTACHMENT B exclusive of any area utilized for leasing, maintenance or overall management of the development. 13. Restrictive Covenants Required. Prior to approval of site plans for a project having a residential use, restrictive covenants shall be submitted to planning and the county attorney's office for review and approval. Once approved, such covenants shall be recorded prior to release of any building permits within the project or tract, as applicable. Each project or, for larger projects each tract, where determined appropriate by director of planning, shall be required to be under the control and management of a centralized authority. This control and supervision shall be for the life of the project and cannot be dissolved without approval of the director of planning and any other county departments having required provisions within such covenants for operation or maintenance of privately owned utilities or facilities. The covenants shall, at a minimum, provide for the creation of a property owners association, maintenance of development improvements, sites, commonly held property, common area, landscaping, and private pavement, as well as standards for the operation and development of the project or tract. The covenants shall also provide for the responsibility of the property owners association, or the developer prior to the transfer to such association, to collect through sufficient dues, assessments or charges the funds needed to cover and pay common expenses. Common expenses may include but not be limited to, the costs of taxes, repairs, maintenance or replacement of improvements, commonly held property, common area, landscaping, private pavement, and sidewalks or bikeways not maintained by the county or VDOT, as well as funds necessary to maintain standards of operation. Such covenants shall also include provisions that state that the association cannot dissolve or dispose of real property without approval of the director of planning. 000 J For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: 000 Paratransit: Flexible passenger transportation service, typically not operating on a fixed route, that utilizes transit vans or similar vehicles to provide on demand transportation services most often to those with disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or to supplement the public transportation system in support of vanpooling programs, park and ride, or similar services. 000 Rideshare: For the purposes of puking, rideshare is to means a service through which a passenger receives a ride within a privately owned and owner driven automobile, whether for free or a fee, through a transactional arrangement via website or app. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. 21-666 9/22/2021