02-23-2005 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
February 23, 2005
Supervisors in Attendancel
Mr. Edward B. Barber, Chairman
Mr. R. M. ~Dickie" King, Jr.,
Vice Chairman
Mrs. Renny Bush Humphrey
Mr. Kelly E. Miller
Mr. Arthur S. Warren
Mr. Lane B. Ramsey
County Administrator
School Board Members in
Attendances
Ms. Dianne E. Pettitt, Chairman
Ms. Elizabeth B. Davis
Dr. James R. Schroeder
Staff in Attendances
Lt. Barry Arnold,
Sheriff's Office
Colonel Carl R. Baker,
Police Department
Mr. Jim Banks, Asst.
Dir., Transportation
Dr. Billy Cannaday, Jr.,
Supt., School Board
Ms. Marilyn Cole, Asst.
County Administrator
Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Dir.,
Intergovtl. Relations
Ms. Rebecca Dickson, Dir.,
Budget and Management
Ms. Lisa Elko, CMC
Clerk
Ms. Kelly Fried, Quality
Improvement Mgr., Mental
Health/Mental Retard./
Substance Abuse Services
Mr. Jeff Franklin, Asst.
Dir., Utilities
Mr. Michael Golden, Dir.,
Parks and Recreation
Mr. Bradford S. Hammer,
Deputy Co. Admin.,
Human Services
Mr. John W. Harmon,
Right-of-Way Manager
Mr. Russell Harris, Mgr.
of Community Development
Services
Mr. Joseph A. Horbal,
Commissioner of Revenue
Mr. Donald Kappel, Dir.,
Public Affairs
Acting Chief Paul Mauger,
Fire and EMS Dept.
Mr. Richard M. McElfish,
Dir., Env. Engineering
Mr. Steven L. Micas,
County Attorney
Mr. Francis Pitaro, Dir.,
General Services
Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier,
Deputy Co. Admin.,
Management Services
Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr.,
Deputy Co. Admin.,
Community Development
Mr. Thomas Taylor, Dir.,
Block Grant Office
05-125
02/23/05
Mr. Scott Zaremba, Asst.
Dir., Human Resource Mgt.
Mr. Barber called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at
3:38 p.m.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 9, 2005
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved the minutes of February 9, 2005, as submitted.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS
2.A. VIRGINIA HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PRESENTATION
Mr. Michel Zajur, CEO/President of the Virginia Hispanic
Chamber of Commerce, briefed the Board regarding activities
of the organization. He stated the first bi-lingual business
information center in the country has opened in the county,
which administers a loan program and provides technical
assistance to the Hispanic community. He further stated the
organization sponsors festivals and leadership events to
bring communities together. He stated the Chamber works
closely with the Mexican Embassy and Chesterfield's sister
city in Mexico and hopes to bring Latin American businesses
to the area. He further stated initiatives of the
organization include educational programs; a mentor program;
and job fairs. He thanked the Board for the opportunity to
share information about activities of the Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce.
Mr. Miller stated the Dale District has the largest Hispanic
population in the county and expressed concerns that many
Hispanics are illegal residents, some of whom are involved in
illegal activities.
Mr. Zajur stated the Chamber works closely with law
enforcement agencies and also assists Hispanics in. becoming
legal residents.
Mrs. Humphrey stated little league sports might be a means of
connecting Hispanic families with the community and suggested
that Mr. Zajur meet with Parks and Recreation staff to pursue
this opportunity.
Mr. King thanked Mr. Zajur for his commitment to the Hispanic
community.
Mr. Barber applauded Mr. Zajur's efforts and offered the
Board's support to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
2.B. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
Ms. Curtin provided an update on General Assembly activities.
She stated the remaining county bills have all come out of
committee and are favorably working their way through the
process. She further stated the cash proffer bills have been
05-126
02/23/05
amended through a lot of hard work and are no longer
troublesome to the county. She stated the session is
scheduled to end in a couple of days and the state budget
should be ready on February 25tn.
Discussion ensued relative to amendments to the cash proffer
bills.
Ms. Curtin stated House Bill 2888 has been amended to allow
the county seven years in which to spend cash proffers,
beginning on the date of full payment.
Mr. Ramsey noted the county's cash proffer spending pattern
has been less than the seven-year time period required by the
new legislation, so staff does not anticipate a problem.
Mr. Barber expressed concerns that the county's legislative
delegation supported the original cash proffer bills that
would have negatively impacted Chesterfield County.
In response to Mr. Miller's questions, Ms. Curtin stated an
affordable housing bill was introduced that was specific to
Arlington County. She further stated all of the group home
bills are going through the process with minor technical
amendments.
Mr. Ramsey commended Ms. Curtin, Mr. Charlie Davis and other
county staff on their excellent representation of
Chesterfield County at the General Assembly.
3. BOARD COMMITTEE REPORTS
There were no Board committee reports at this time.
REQUESTS TO POSTPONE ACTION, ADDITIONS, OR CHANGES IN THE
ORDER OF PRESENTATION
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
moved Item 8.B., Acceptance of a Bid to Purchase Chesterfield
County General Obligation Bonds, Series 2005A for Various
Capital Improvement Projects, and General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B for Advance Refunding of Series
1998A and Series 1999A General Obligation Bonds, to be heard
prior to Item 6., Work Session; replaced Item 8.D.4.b.,
Transfer of District Improvement Funds from the Dale District
Improvement Fund to the Chesterfield County School Board to
Upgrade the Sound System in the Cafeteria at Falling Creek
Elementary School; replaced Item 8.D.5.a., Request to
Quitclaim a Portion of a Sixteen-Foot Drainage Easement
(Private) Across the Property of Chesapeake Foods,
Incorporated; added Item 8.D.12., Approval of Naming the
Midlothian Branch Library Meeting Room in Honor of Mr. Walter
G. Muller; replaced Item 10.B., Report on Status of General
Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District
Improvement Funds and Lease Purchases; added Item 10.C.,
Report of the Planning Commission on Growth Management
Retreat Items; and adopted the Agenda, as amended.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-127
02/23/05
5. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOONITIONS
There were no resolutions or special recognitions at this
time.
8.B. ACCEPTANCE OF A BID TO PURCHASE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2005A FOR VARIOUS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND GENERAL OBLIGATION
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2005B FOR ADVANCE REFUNDING OF
SERIES 1998AAND SERIES 1999A GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
Ms. Dickson stated bids received today were for the purchase
of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2005A for capital
improvement projects approved in the November 2004 bond
referendum and General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series
2005B, for advance refunding of Series 1998A and 1999A
General Obligation Bonds. She further stated the refinancing
will save the county approximately $860,000 over the next 13
years. She stated the lowest responsible bidder was
CitiGroup Global Markets, Incorporated at a true interest
cost of 3.84 percent.
Mr. Ramsey stated the $860,000 savings represents evidence of
the county's AAA bond rating and speaks well for the county.
On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
approved the acceptance of a proposal from CitiGroup Global
Markets, Incorporated to purchase $17,635,000 principal
amount of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2005A, .and up to
$30,000,000 principal amount of General Obligation Public
Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B, for advance
refunding of Series 1998A and Series 1999A General Obligation
Bonds, with a true interest cost of 3.84 percent.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
6. WORK SESSION
o COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S FY2006 PROPOSED BIID~ET INCLUDING
PRESENTATIONS FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND SCHOOL BOARD
Ms. Dickson stated this is the second work session on the
FY2006 proposed budget. She introduced Ms. Pettitt to begin
the work session.
Ms. Pettitt expressed appreciation, on behalf of the School
Board, staff and students of Chesterfield County, for the
Board's generous support. She stated results of the Bond
Referendum and the Citizen Satisfaction Survey indicate that
the community as a whole is supportive of public education.
She introduced Dr. Cannaday to provide an overview of the
School Board's approved FY2006 budget.
Dr. Cannaday reviewed student successes, including continued
progress on Standards of Learning scores and the ~No Child
Left Behind" initiative; sustained high graduation rates as
graduation standards increase; and increased acade:mic rigor
and choices. He reviewed employee successes, including 25
National Board Certified teachers in three years; multiple
05-128
02/23/05
regional, state and national awards; and increased
participation in professional growth opportunities. He also
reviewed school successes, including 100 percent
accreditation of comprehensive schools; 71 percent of schools
making ~adequate yearly progress#; and a 100 percent rating
of good/thriving in the School Climate survey. He reviewed
the current status of the FY2006 budget, which anticipates an
unprecedented increase in state revenue for the second year
of the biennium. He stated expenditure demands exceed
revenue and spending decisions must be sensitive to future
anticipated revenue and sustainable. He further stated
increased revenue for FY2006 totals $28.9 million.
In response to Mr. Miller's questions, Dr. Cannaday stated
student enrollment is projected to increase approximately two
percent next year and FY2006 revenue is anticipated to
increase 6.8 percent. He reviewed required expenditure
increases, including $1.2 million to address an increase in
the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) rate; $2.1 million to
address student growth; $1.6 million to address services for
special education and ESL students; $3.1 million for debt
service; $800,000 for county services; and $500,000 for
additional bus drivers. He stated FY2006 expenditure choices
include $11.4 million for salary increases.
There was brief discussion relative to state funding of
salary increases and reserve of fund balance for
contingencies.
Dr. Cannaday continued to review FY2006 expenditure choices
that support the "First Choice" Employer goal, including $5.7
million for health insurance; $200,000 to supplement national
certification or doctorate in field; $500,000 for tuition
reimbursement; and $200,000 to support the leadership
initiative. He then reviewed FY2006 expenditure choices to
prepare each student for success, including $200,000 for
regional programs; $300,000 for secondary guidance support;
and $200,000 for technology positions. He reviewed FY2006
expenditure choices to provide a safe and effective learning
environment, including $1.3 million for secondary
administrative assistants.
Discussion ensued relative to initiatives to address safety
of the learning environment.
Dr. Cannaday continued to review FY2006 expenditure choices
to provide a safe and effective learning environment,
including $1.6 million for elementary front office staffing;
$700,000 for additional school buses and drivers; and a $2.7
million reduction as a result of the elimination of
replacement and one-time costs. He provided details of
enhanced community partnerships. He stated the School
Board's adopted FY2006 Operating Budget totals $454,699,100.
He reviewed Chesterfield County Public Schools Vision 2012
and stated the School Board's adopted budget is necessary to
sustain mission critical achievements and prepare for vision
attainment.
Mrs. Humphrey expressed a desire for the Grandparents Reading
Program at Ettrick Elementary to be funded in the School
Board's budget. She expressed concerns relative to the
projected number of additional students Chesterfield County
will receive as a result of the impending Fort Lee expansion.
05-129
02/23/05
She stated she was informed at a Crater Planning Commission
meeting that this information had been sent to the
localities.
Dr. Cannaday stated the information has not yet been
received, but it would be very helpful to receive it as soon
as possible.
Mrs. Humphrey stated she will make sure the information is
provided to Dr. Cannaday as soon as possible.
Mr. King offered his full support of the School Board's
decision regarding location of the new middle school,
indicating he is very appreciative of the School Board
staying the course and doing what is right for the children
of Chesterfield.
Mr. Barber also expressed confidence in the School Board's
decision. He recognized School Board members who were
present at the meeting. He thanked Dr. Cannaday for the
excellent presentation.
Mrs. Elko called forward Colonel Baker to provide an overview
of the Police Department's proposed FY2006 budget.
Colonel Baker reviewed challenges and trends that are
impacting the Police Department. He then reviewed financial
activity and stated the proposed amended FY2006 budget totals
$39,688,200, and includes funding for six new police
officers; six additional officers under the COPS grant; four
police aides for the new police evidence storage facility;
and 11 positions to open the Hull Street Station (ten sworn
officers and one non-sworn position). He stated, although
calls and assignments continue to increase, the crime rate
has decreased based upon population. He reviewed data
regarding Incident Based Reporting (IBR) Group A incidents
and clearance rates and compared Chesterfield's clearance
rates with national clearance rates. He expressed concerns
relative to average response times for Priority 1, 2 and 3
calls. He reviewed cost per capita for law enforcement
services and stated volunteers provided 27,849 hours of
service during 2004. He provided details of establishment of
an annual staffing plan beginning with FY2006, which includes
the addition of 15 sworn officers per year. He stated
Chesterfield has 1.61 sworn officers per 1,000 citizens,
indicating that the national average is 2.7 officers per
1,000 citizens. He noted if 15 sworn officers are added
annually, the department will be at the same level in 2007 as
it was in 2001 in terms of sworn officers per citizens. He
stated the Hull Street Station is scheduled to open within 12
to 15 months, and the FY2006 budget includes ten sworn
officers and one non-sworn position to staff this station.
He expressed concerns that, because of increases in
population and demands for service, the beat structure must
be updated, indicating that it was last changed approximately
13 years ago. He stated the department is presently unable
to fill eight beats in both the north and south districts in
any 24-hour day. He further stated an increase in minimum
staffing is necessary for officer safety, indicating that
this will not be possible without additional personnel. He
reviewed the percent of increase in calls for service versus
population ~rowth.
05-130
02/23/05
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Colonel Baker stated
illegal Hispanic immigrants have dramatically impacted the
Police Department's workload, indicating it becomes a state
and local problem once the immigrants cross over the border.
He further stated illegal immigrants are deported only for
felony convictions. He stated the department offers a
program to instruct Hispanics on driving in the United States
after being convicted of a traffic violation. He further
stated the department notifies the Consulate when illegal
immigrants are discovered, but the calls go unanswered. He
expressed concerns that Spanish speaking officers must be
pulled to answer calls involving the Hispanic and Asian
community. He then reviewed residential growth from 2004
through 2010 and total calls for service by beat. He
expressed concerns relative to the department's inability to
meet response time goals and provided details of the
department's involvement in Metropolitan-wide task forces.
He stated, based on an annual analysis, the staffing plan
will continue in future years requesting an additional 15
officers per year, at a minimum, along with additional
support personnel. He reviewed additional funding requests,
including $573,600 for operating expenses and capital
equipment for grant positions; $54,000 for a Crime Prevention
Specialist; $77,400 for two Records Specialists; and $80,900
for a Forensic Supervisor. He then provided details of
Animal Control's FY2006 budget. He stated the proposed
amended FY2006 Animal Control budget totals $1,114,300. He
reviewed calls for service, animals impounded and animals
adopted from 2000 through 2004. He stated additional funding
requests include $84,600 for an Animal Control Officer;
$30,100 for a Kennelmaster; and $32,000 for a Senior Office
Assistant.
Discussion ensued relative to use of the volunteer auxiliary
police force as well as gang and drug activity in the county.
Mr. King thanked Colonel Baker for his public acknowledgement
that gangs exist in the county and co~ended him on the use
of volunteers.
Mr. Ramsey stated the department's clearance rate is
phenomenal compared to the national clearance rate. He
further stated the addition of 15 officers per year is in
line with what has been done in the past through the COPS
grant and that the FY2006 proposed budget being brought to
the Board on March 9th meets this staffing plan given that 22
additional sworn positions are included.
Both Mr. Miller and Mr. Warren commended Colonel Baker and
Police Department staff for their efforts in protecting
county citizens.
There was brief discussion relative to federal and state
funding for homeland security.
Mr. Barber stated bilateral cooperation and support was the
emphasis of a meeting he had with Mayor Wilder this week and
he hopes the two localities can better understand what we do
together and provide support to each other. He thanked
Colonel Baker for the informative presentation.
05-131
02/23/05
?. DEFERRED ITEMS
There were no deferred items at this time.
8. NEW BUSINESS
8.A. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE T~.X RATES FOR FY2006
BIENNIAL FINANCIAL PL~-N AND SET PUBLIC HEARINGS
Ms. Dickson stated the Board is being requested to advertise
tax rates for the calendar year 2005, the amended FY2006
Biennial Financial Plan, proposed FY2006-FY2011 Capital
Improvement Program, Proposed FY2006 Community Development
Block Grant Program and other ordinance changes necessary to
achieve the revenues included in the Biennial Financial Plan.
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Ms. Dickson stated
staff is putting together a proposal for the Board's
consideration related to enhancing the tax relief for the
elderly program, but clarified that the County
Administrator's proposed budget will not include funding for
this when it is presented on March 9th. She further stated
the $1 increase in the landfill gate fee will provide
approximately $300,000 in revenue, indicating this was a
planned increase and the budget does assume the increase.
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
authorized the advertisement of tax rates, the amended FY2006
Biennial Financial Plan, the proposed FY2006-FY2011 Capital
Improvement Program, the FY2005 Community Development Block
Grant Program, and other ordinance changes.
And, further, the Board set the date of March 23, 2005
beginning at 7:00 p.m. for public hearings to consider these
items.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.C. APPOINTMENTS
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
suspended its rules at this time to allow for simultaneous
nomination/appointment/reappointment of members to serve on
the Chesterfield Community Services Board and the
Preservation Committee.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.C.1. CHESTERFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD
On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
simultaneously nominated/appointed Mr. Lorenzo Ross,
representing the Dale District, to serve on the Chesterfield
Community Services Board, whose term is effective March 1,
2005 and expires December 31, 2007.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-132
02/23/05
8 · C · 2 . PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
simultaneously nominated/appointed/reappointed the following
at-large members to serve on the Preservation Committee,
whose terms are effective March 9, 2005 and expire March 12,
2008: Ms. Mary Ellen Howe, Mr. James V. Daniels, Jr., Mr. J.
Carl Morris, Mr. G. M. "Skip" Wallace, Mr. Bryan Walker, Mr.
John V. Cogbill, and Mr. George Emerson.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D. CONSENT ITEMS
8.D.1. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS
8.D.l.a. RECOGNIZING ~.ARCH 2005, AS "PURCHASING MONTH" IN
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management
profession has a significant role in the quality, efficiency
and profitability of business and government throughout the
United States; and
WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management
profession works for private and public, and profit and
nonprofit organizations; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the purchase of goods and
services, the purchasing and materials management profession
engages in or has direct responsibility for functions such as
executing, implementing and administering contracts;
developing forecast and procurement strategies; supervising
and/or monitoring the flow and storage of materials; and
developing working relations with suppliers and with other
departments within the organization; and
WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management
profession has tremendous influence on the economic
conditions in the United States, with an accumulative
purchasing power running into the billions of dollars; and
WHEREAS, purchasing or procurement operations range from
departments of one person to several thousand; and
WHEREAS, governmental purchasing and other associations
around the world are sponsoring activities and special events
to further educate and inform the general public on the role
of purchasing within business, industry and government.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes the month of
March 2005, as ~Purchasing Month" in Chesterfield County and
encourages all citizens to join in commemorating this
observance.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-133
02/23/05
8.D.l.b.
RECO~NIZIN~ LIEUTENANT CHARLHS p. TAYLOR, JR.,
CHESTERFIELD FIRE AND EMER~ENCY~R.~ICAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Charles Perry Taylor retired from
the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department,
Chesterfield County, on January 1, 2005; and
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Taylor attended Recruit School #3 in
1973, and has faithfully served the county for over thirty-
one years in various assignments including as a Firefighter
at the Manchester Fire Station #2 and Ettrick Fire Station
#12; as a Sergeant at the Ettrick Fire Station #12, the
Manchester Fire Station #2, the Chester Fire Station #1, the
Clover Hill Fire Station #7, the Wagstaff Fire Station #10,
and the Bon Air Fire Station #4; and as a Lieutenant at the
Bon Air Fire Station #4; and
WHEREAS, in 1976, Lieutenant Taylor submitted a
recommendation to form a scuba rescue team and became a
charter member of the team; and
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Taylor received a unit citation
award in 1991 for the rescue of two citizens from their
balcony on East Coal Hopper Lane.; and
WHEREAS, in 1995, Lieutenant Taylor received a unit
citation award for participation in a rescue of a victim from
a smoke stack at the Dutch Gap power station; and
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Taylor' came to the rescue of a
fellow firefighter during a fire at Darryl's Restaurant by
providing lifesaving buddy breathing while assisting him
safely out of the building; and
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Taylor has mentored and trained many
firefighters, of whom more than six have become respected
Fire Officers in the department; and
WHEREAS, Lieutenant Taylor has been ready to respond to
every need of the department within his capability, including
his dedication to public service, his willingness to work
long hours without complaint, and his creativity in
performing a variety of jobs have earned him the respect and
admiration of the entire Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Department.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of
Lieutenant Charles Perry Taylor, expresses the appreciation
of all residents for his service to the county, and extends
appreciation for his dedicated service and congratulations
upon his retirement.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-134
02/23/05
8.D.2. REQUEST FOR A MUSIC/ENTERTAINMENT F~TIVa?. PERMIT FO~
wn~ C~STERPIELD BERRY FARM EVENT BETW~.~MAY 7 ANn
MAY 29, 2005
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved a request for a music/entertainment festival permit
for the Chesterfield Berry Farm Strawberry Festival between
May 7 and May 29, 2005.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.3. REQUEST FOR A PERMIT TO STAGE A FIREWORKS DISPLAY AT
SUNDAY PARK PENINSULA OF BRANDERMI?.T. ON JULY 4,
2OO5
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved a request for a permit to stage a fireworks display
at the Sunday Park Peninsula of Brandermill on July 4, 2005
at dusk, with a rain date of July 5, 2005.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.4. TRANSFER OF DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUND___R
8.D.4.&. FROM THE BERMUDA AND DALE DISTRICT IMPROVeMeNT
kurDS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPART~.~
8.D.4.&.l. TO DEFRAY THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH TH~ ANNUbL
TOUR OF THE FALLING CREEK IRONWORKS
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
transferred $2,500 each ($5,000 total) from the Bermuda and
Dale District Improvement Funds to the Parks and Recreation
Department to defray the costs associated with the annual
tour of the Falling Creek Ironworks.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.4.&.2. TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT FOR DEPARTMENT-RUN BASEBALL
AND SOFTBALL PRO~RAMS IN EACH OF THOSE DISTRICTR
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
transferred $3,000 each ($6,000 total) from the Dale and
Bermuda District Improvement Funds to the Parks and
Recreation Department to purchase equipment for department-
run baseball and softball programs in each of those
districts.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8 .D.4 .b.
FROM THE DALE DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUND TO T~]~
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD TO UPGRADE
SOUND SYSTEM IN THE CAFETERIA AT FALLING CR~ZK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
transferred $4,500 from the Dale District Improvement Fund to
05-135
02/23/05
the Chesterfield County School Board to upgrade the sound
system in the cafeteria at Falling Creek Elementary School.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.5. REQUESTS TO QUITCLAIM
8.D.5.&.
A PORTION OF A SIXTEEN-FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT
(PRIVATE) ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF CHESAP~
FOODS, INCORPORATED
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, 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 16-foot drainage easement (private) across the
property of Chesapeake Foods, Incorporated. (It is noted a
copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.5.b. A PORTION OF A SIXTEEN-FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT
(PRIVATE) ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF INLAND SOUTHEAST
CHESTERFIELD, L.L.C.
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, 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 16-foot drainage easement (private) across the
property of Inland Southeast Chesterfield, L.L.C. (It is
noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this
Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.6. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND
8.D.6.a. ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TURNER ROAD
FROM WELCO, LLC
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
accepted the conveyance of two parcels of land containing a
total of 0.046 acres along the west right of way line of
Turner Road (State Route 650) from Welco, LLC, and authorized
the County Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted
copies of the plats are filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.6.b. ON HERELD GREEN DRIVE FROM REEDY MILL, L.C.
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 1.330
acres on Hereld Green Drive from Reedy Mill, L.C., and
authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed. (It
05-136
02/23/05
is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this
Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.7. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ET.mCTRIC
POWER COMPA~-~ FOR UNDERGROUND Cjtu?.~. TO SERVE ~ NE'.'.'
COSBY ROAD HI~ SCHOOL
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with
Virginia Electric and Power Company for underground cable to
serve the new Cosby Road High School. (It is noted a copy of
the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.8. REQUEST FOR PERMISSION FROM G AND E CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INCORPORATED TO INSTALL A PRIVATE WATER
SERVICE WITHIN A FIFTY-FOOT COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY TO
SERVE PROPERTY ON HAMPTON AVENUE
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved a request from G and E Construction Company,
Incorporated for permission to install a private water
service within a 50-foot county right of way to serve
property at 21305 Hampton Avenue, subject to the execution of
a license agreement, and authorized the County Administrator
to execute the water connection agreement. (It is noted a
copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.9.
AWARD OF ANNUAL REQUIREMENTS CONTRACT FOR PHARMACY
SERviCES FOR T~E SHERIFF'S OFFICE, JUVENILE
DETENTION, YOUTH GROUP HOME AND WOI~FmRS CO_~_~__N~ION
TO MAO PHARMACY, INCORPORATED (WESTWOOD PHARMACY) ANn
u~KOP'S SUFER MARKETS, INCORPORATED
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
awarded the annual requirements contract for pharmacy
services for the Sheriff's Office, Juvenile Detention, Youth
Group Home and Workers Compensation to MAO Pharmacy,
Incorporated (Westwood Pharmacy) and Ukrop's Super Markets,
Incorporated.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.10. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER AMF~M~NTS To
T~E COUNTY'S MASSAgE THERAPY ORDINANCE TO ALLOW
MASSAGES TO BE PERFOIRMED FOR COMPENSATION BY MASSA~
THEI~a%PY STUDENTS
On motion of Mr. Warren,
set the date of March 9,
seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
2005 at 7:00 p.m. for a public
05-137
02/23/05
hearing for the Board to consider amendments to the massage
therapy ordinance to allow massages to be conducted for
compensation by massage students in a post-secondary school
under the supervision of a certified massage therapist.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.11. APPROPRIATION OF STATE WIRELESS 911 SERVICES BOARD
FUNDS TO ADDRESS EQUIPMENT NEEDS RELATED TO wn~
COUNTY'S AUTOMATED 911 SYSTEM
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
appropriated $89,500 in state wireless 911 funds received
from the Virginia Wireless E911 Services Board to address
equipment needs related to the county's automated 911 system.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
8.D.12. APPROVAL OF NAMINO THE MIDLOTHIAN LIBRARY NEETIN~
ROOM IN HONOR OF MR. WALTER ~. MULLER
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. Walter G. Muller, a World War Iii veteran,
was a member of the Midlothian Branch Friends of the Library
for eighteen years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Muller served on the executive board of the
Friends of the Library, promoting cooperation among library
volunteers and the wider Friends' organization in addition to
encouraging new membership; and
WHEREAS, as president of the Midlothian Branch Friends
of the Chesterfield County Public Library, Mr. Muller donated
$25,00.0 on behalf of the Friends, toward the cost of
expanding the library building in 1992; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Muller was instrumental in developing and
organizing the prototype for a highly successful Friends of
the Library book sale program; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Muller was well loved by the Friends of the
Library and staff of the Midlothian Library and served as a
strong supporter of the library for many years.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes Mr. Walter G. Muller
by naming the Midlothian Library Meeting Room, the ~Walter G.
Muller Meeting Room."
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy' of this
resolution be presented to Mr.. Muller and 'that this
resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of the
Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-138
02/23/05
9. HEARINGS OF CITIZENS ON UNS~g~--DU?.~..D NATTERS OR CL~T~&
There were no hearings of citizens on unscheduled matters or
claims at this time.
10. REPORTS
10.A. REPORT ON DEVELOPER WATER AND ~_~;ER CONTRACT?
10.B. REPORT ON STATUS OF GENERAL FUND BALANCe, RESERVE FO~
~'UTU~E CAPITAL PROJECTS, DISTRICT TMDRO~ FUND~
LEASE PORC~ASES
10 .C.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON GROWTW
MANAGEMENT RETREAT ITEMS
Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to acceptance of the
Planning Commission's Report on Growth Management Retreat
Items, indicating that he does not necessarily agree with
certain recommendations in the report.
Mr. Ramsey stated the intent of accepting the report is to
acknowledge the actions that have been taken by the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Micas stated acceptance of the report merely acknowledges
receipt of the information and does not anticipate any
action.
On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board
accepted a Report on Developer Water and Sewer Contracts; a
Report on the Status of General Fund Balance, Reserve for
Future Capital Projects, District Improvement Funds and Lease
Purchases; and a Report of the Planning Commission on Growth
Management Retreat Items.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
11. DINNER
On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
recessed to the Administration Building, Room 502, for dinner
with members of the Chesterfield School Board.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
Reconvening:
12. INVOCATION
Dr. Wilson Shannon, Pastor of First Baptist Church Centralia
gave the invocation.
05-139
02/23/05
o MUSICAL S~?~CTIONS BY ~ MASS CHOIR OF FIRST BAPTIST
CHURCH CENTRALIA
Mr. Stith introduced members of the Mass Choir from First
Baptist Church Centralia.
The choir performed two musical selections.
13. p?.~.r~E OF AT.?.~.GIANCE TO T~~- FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA
Mr. Stith led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America.
14. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS
o ~CO~NIZIN~ _T~__.~r~ADOWBROOK HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOOTBALL
TEAM FOR ITS OUTSTANDING ACCOMPLISI~I~ENTS AND SPORTSMANSHIP
Mr. Hammer introduced Coach William Bowles and members of the
Meadowbrook High School Varsity Football Team, who were
present to receive the resolution.
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, participation in high school sports has long
been an integral part of Chesterfield County's e~ucational,
physical, and emotional development for students; and
WHEREAS, Mr. William Bowles, coach of the Meadowbrook
High School Boys Varsity Football Team completed his 21st year
of coaching in Chesterfield County, and was named State
Football Coach of the year; and
WHEREAS, under Mr. Bowles and his staff's guidance and
direction, the 2004 Meadowbrook Monarchs finished the regular
season 9-1; and
WHEREAS, the Meadowbrook Monarchs
Region Champions; and
were
the Central
WHEREAS, the Meadowbrook Monarchs were the AAA Division
5 State Champions; and
WHEREAS, the senior members included Teorn Whitlock, Roy
Haliburton, Christopher Walker, Michael Traylor, Terrance
Peterkin, DeAndre King, Kenneth Mistak-Conner, Darren Dyson,
Dewayne Kelley, Geoffrey Brown, James Thorpe, Detrich
Anderson, Francis Babaran, and Andrew Frie; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Chesterfield County continue to
support high school football games.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors, this 23~ day of February 2005,
publicly recognizes the Meadowbrook High School Varsity
Football Team for its outstanding representation of
Chesterfield County.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of
Supervisors, on behalf of the citizens of Chesterfield
County, hereby commends the Meadowbrook Monarchs for their
05-140
02/23/05
splendid sportsmanship and expresses their best wishes for
continued success.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
Mr. Miller presented executed resolutions to Coach Bowles and
members of the Meadowbrook Monarchs Varsity Football Team,
congratulated them for being the first high school in the
county to win the state championship, and offered best wishes
for continued success.
Coach Bowles and the team's quarterback both expressed
appreciation to the Board for the recognition.
A standing ovation followed.
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS
O TO CONSIDER THE APPROPRIATION OF UP TO $30,000,000 IN
PAYMENT TO THE ESCROW AGENT FOR ADVANCE REFUNDING OF
SERIES 1998A AND SERIES 1999A GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
CLOSING COSTS
Mr. Allan Carmody, Budget Manager, stated this date and time
has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to
consider the appropriation of up to $30,000,000 in payment to
the escrow agent for advance refunding of Series 1998A and
Series 1999A General Obligation Bonds and closing costs.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the issue.
On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved the appropriation of up to $30,000,000 in payment to
the escrow agent for advance refunding of Series 1998A and
Series 1999A General Obligation Bonds and closing costs.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
14. REQUESTS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND ~ONIN~
PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BT W~RD IN ~
FOLLOWING ORDER~ - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES Ww~p~
THE APPLICANT ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION AND Tw~-RE IS NO
OPPOSITION - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT DOES NOT ACCEPT
THE RECOMMENDATION AND/OR T~_~RE IS PUBLIC OPPOSITION
WILL BE HEARD AT SECTION 17
04SN0312
In Matoaca Magisterial District, GRIND-ALL LLC requests
Conditional Use and amendment of zoning district map to
permit material recycling operations plus amendments to
Conditional Use (Cases 88S005 and 89SN0140) relative to time
limitations and grantee restrictions. The density of such
amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or
Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for rural conservation area use.
This request lies in an Agricultural (A) District on 55.0
05-141
02/23/05
acres fronting approximately forty (40) feet on the south
line of Hull Street Road, approximately 2,800 feet. west of
Skinquarter Road. Tax IDs 689-666-Part of 6773 and 690-666-
Part of 5881 (Sheets 14 and 22).
Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 04SN0312 and stated
the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval
subject to one condition and acceptance of the proffered
conditions.
Mr. William Shewmake, representing the applicant, stated the
recommendation is acceptable.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved Case 04SN0312 subject to the following condition:
With approval of this request, Condition 12 of Case 88S005
and the Condition of Case 89SN0140 shall be deleted. (P)
And, further,
conditions:
the Board accepted the following proffered
Uses permitted under Case No. 04SN0312 shall be limited
to the following:
Grinding, mulching and processing of vegetative
waste to include grass, leaves, waste and land
clearing debris such as stumps and brush.
b. Soil processing.
c. Composting.
Material recycling facility, to include the
grinding, mulching, recycling, reprocessing, and
management of such materials as wood, pallets,
sheet rock, waste paper, inert materials such as
bricks, concrete and asphalt as well as
construction and demolition material. Provided,
however, the term construction and demolition
materials do not include paints, coatings,
solvents, asbestos, liquid compressed gasses and
garbage.
Solid waste transfer station to enable trucks to
consolidate the loads from smaller quantity
generators to larger trailers.
f o
Wholesales of ground, mulched,
recycled materials. (P)
processed and/or
2. Retail sales shall be prohibited. (P)
o
A 100 foot buffer shall be provided around the perimeter
of the operation. Within the buffer, existing
vegetation and/or topography shall be supplemented as
necessary to provide year-round screening. Other than
utilities and access which run generally perpendicular
through the buffer, and a fence, there shall be no other
05-142
02/23/05
o
o
o
10.
facilities located within this buffer. Landscaping,
including existing vegetation, within the buffer shall
have an initial height, density and be of a species
which will provide year-round screening when installed.
The limits of buffers shall be defined to preclude
dumping and grading within the buffer. Also, there
shall be no filling or grading permitted in the buffer
except that necessary to accommodate utilities, access
and/or landscaping. A detailed plan depicting these
requirements shall be submitted to the Planning
Department in conjunction with site plan review. (p)
The area of permitted activity and buffer area shall be
clearly defined by a permanent means. The method of
delineation shall be approved by the Planning
Department. (p)
The operations boundary shall be secured by permanent
means (i.e., fencing, etc.) to preclude vehicles from
entering the property at any point other than the single
entrance road. The exact means of securing the boundary
shall be approved by the Planning Department at the time
of site plan approval. (p)
Direct access from the property to Route 360 shall be
limited to one entrance/exit. The exact location of
this entrance/exit shall be determined by the
Transportation Department. (T)
The entrance road shall be hard surfaced for a length of
250 feet from Route 360. Further, the entrance road
shall be designed to preclude the view of activity from
Hull Street Road and secured to prohibit indiscriminate
dumping of materials. The landfield owner/operator
shall be responsible for the removal of any materials
dumped along either the access road or along Hull Street
Road adjacent to the subject property. Further, the
owner/operator shall be responsible for removing dirt
and debris from Hull Street Road resulting from the
operation. A procedure for controlling dust shall be
submitted to the Environmental Engineering Department
for approval and shall be implemented in conjunction
with activity. Measures to correct dust control
problems shall be taken within twenty-four (24) hours of
notification by the County. (P and EE)
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, 100 feet of
right-of-way, measured from the centerline of Hull
Street Road along the entire property frontage, shall be
dedicated to and for the County of Chesterfield, free
and unrestricted. (T)
Prior to any site plan approval, a ninety (90) foot wide
right-of-way for an east/west major arterial shall be
dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit
of Chesterfield county. The exact location of this
right-of-way shall be determined by the Transportation
Department, but shall generally be located as set forth
in Exhibit A. (T)
Prior to any filling, grinding, mulching or processing
of vegetative waste, soil processing, composting,
material recycling, operation of a transfer station, or
05-143
02/23/05
11.
12.
13.
sales of ground, mulched, processed and/or recycled
materials, additional pavement shall be constructed
along Route 360 to provide left and right turn lanes at
the site access. (T)
Stormwater Runoff. Stormwater runoff from decomposable
materials generated by yard and lawn care or land
clearing activities, including, but not limited to,
leaves, grass trimmings, woody wastes such as shrub and
tree prunings, bark, limbs, roots and stumps, shall not
be permitted to drain or discharge directly into the
storm sewer system and/or directly to surface water.
Areas used for the storage and recycling of ~materials
shall be graded to minimize and to collect runoff.
Collected runoff shall be conveyed to a wastewater
treatment disposal or holding facility. Such disposal
or holding facility includes, without limitation,
recirculation. A stormwater pollution prevention plan
that is applicable to the project site shall be
developed by the applicant and submitted to the Office
of Water Quality for review and approval in conjunction
with site plan review. (EE)
Cleared Area. There shall be a minimum seventy-five
(75) foot cleared area between the buffer identified in
Proffered Condition 3 and the perimeter of the mulch,
compost or other piles of recyclable material. (F)
Pond. The site plan shall incorporate the following
improvements for County review and approval:
A pond with a minimum size of .5 acres and a
minimum average water depth of five (5) feet,
excluding any required safety benches, and a dry
fire hydrant to access the water in case of fire.
A driveway sufficient to provide emergency vehicle
access to the pond and dry fire hydrant.
In conjunction with site plan review, a phasing
plan for the construction of the improvements noted
in proffers 13a and 13b shall be submitted for the
Fire Department's review and approval. (F)
14.
East/West Arterial Access. Prior to any site plan
approval, an access plan for the East/West Arterial
shall be submitted to and approved by the Transportation
Department. Access to the property from the East/West
Arterial shall conform to the approved access plan.
(T)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
04SN0306
In Dale Magisterial District, MIDLOTHIAN ENTERPRISES, INC.
requests rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-88) with Conditional Use
Planned Development to permit exceptions to setback
requirements. Residential use of up to 0.50 unit per acre is
permitted in a Residential (R-88) District. The
05-144
02/23/05
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
residential use of 1-5 acre lots, suited to R-88 zoning.
This request lies on 61.4 acres lying approximately 960 feet
southeast of the terminus of Waterfowl Flyway, also lying
approximately 860 feet off the north line of Nash Road
approximately 475 feet east of Eastfair Drive. Tax ID 762-
655-7397 (Sheet 25).
Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 04SN0306 and stated
the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval
subject to one condition and acceptance of the proffered
conditions.
Mr. Oliver "Skitch" Rudy, representing the applicant, stated
the recommendation is acceptable.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
approved Case 04SN0306 subject to the following condition:
Setbacks for principal buildings and accessory structures
shall comply with the requirements of the Residential (R-40)
District provided that such lots are accessed through the
Woodland Pond Subdivision. (P)
And, further,
conditions:
the Board accepted the following proffered
The Owners-Applicants in this zoning 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, proffer that the
development of the properties known as Chesterfield County
Tax IDs 762-655-7397-00000 (the ~Property") under
consideration will be developed according to the following
conditions if, and only if, the rezoning requests for R-88
with R-40 Setbacks as set forth in the above heading and the
application filed herein is granted. In the event the request
is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the
Owners-Applicants, these proffers and conditions shall be
immediately null and void and of no further force or effect.
Timbering. Except for the timbering approved by the
Virginia State Department of Forestry for the purpose of
removing dead or diseased trees, there shall be no
timbering on the property until a land disturbance
permit has been obtained from the Environmental
Engineering Department and the approved devices have
been installed. (EE)
The applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay the
following to the County of Chesterfield prior to the
issuance of building permit for infrastructure
improvements within the service district for the
property:
$11,500 per dwelling unit, if paid prior to July 1,
2005; or
05-145
02/23/05
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not
to exceed $11,500 per dwelling unit adjusted upward
by any increase in the Marshall and Swift Building
Cost Index between July 1, 2004, and July 1 of the
fiscal year in which the payment is made if paid
after June 30, 2005.
In the event the cash payment is not used for the
purpose for which proffered within 15 years of
receipt, the cash shall be returned in full to the
payor. (B&M)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SN0142
In Midlothian Magisterial District, JIMMIE A. NORWOOD AND
CHARLES G. LEWIS request rezoning and amendment of zoning
district map from Neighborhood Business (C-2) to Community
Business (C-3). The density of such amendment will be
controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The
Comprehensive Plan. suggests the property is appropriate for
community mixed use. This request lies on 0.5 acre and is
known as 130 Buford Road. Tax ID 759-706-5587 (Sheet 7).
Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 05SN0142 and stated
the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval and
acceptance of the proffered conditions.
Mr. Jimmie Norwood stated the recommendation is acceptable.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. King, the Board
approved Case 05SN0142 and accepted the following proffered
conditions:
Direct access from the property to North Providence Road
shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. The exact
location of this entrance/exit shall be determined by
the Transportation Department. (T)
Prior to any site plan approval, thirty-five (35) feet
of right of way on the east side of North Providence
Road, measured from the centerline of that part of North
Providence Road immediately adjacent to the property,
shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for
the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T)
Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, an
additional lane of pavement shall be constructed along
North Providence Road for the entire property frontage
based on Transportation Department standards. The
developer shall dedicate, free and unrestricted, to and
for the benefit of Chesterfield County, any additional
right of way (or easements) necessary for this
improvement. (T)
Ayes: Barber, Kin~, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-146
02/23/05
05SN0169
In Bermuda Magisterial District, SAMUEL W. GALSTAN requests
Conditional Use Planned Development and amendment of zoning
district map to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements
in a Neighborhood Business (C-2) District. The density of
such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or
Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for mixed use corridor uses. This
request lies on 0.4 acre and is known as 12290 Iron Bridge
Road. Tax ID 780-652-5963 (Sheet 26).
Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 05SN0169 and stated
the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval
subject to one condition.
Dr. Samuel Galstan stated the recommendation is acceptable.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board
approved Case 05SN0169 subject to the following condition:
With the approval of this request, a fifteen (15) foot
exception to the forty (40) foot rear yard setback shall be
granted only for those uses permitted by right or with
restrictions in the Neighborhood Office (0-1) District. (P)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SR0225
In Midlothian Magisterial District, CLIFTON AND GLORIA
ARMSTEAD request renewal of Manufactured Home Permit 96SR0274
to park a manufactured home in a Residential (R-7) District.
The density of this proposal is approximately 3.33 units per
acre. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is
appropriate for residential use of 1.01 to 2.5 units per
acre. This property is known as 13941 Westfield Road. Tax ID
726-709-7049 (Sheet 5).
Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 05SR0225 and stated
staff recommends approval for seven years subject to
conditions.
Ms. Gloria Armstead stated the recommendation is acceptable.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved Case 05SR0225 subject to the following conditions:
The applicants shall be the owners and occupants of the
manufactured home.
05-1&7
02/23/05
Manufactured home permit shall be granted for a period
not to exceed seven (7) years from date of approval.
o
No lot or parcel may be rented or leased for use as a
manufactured home site nor shall any manufactured home
be used for rental property.
o
No additional permanent-type living space may be added
onto a manufactured home. All manufactured homes shall
be skirted but shall not be placed on a permanent
foundation.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SN0139
In Bermuda Magisterial District, THOMAS MOODY AND GEORGE COOK
request rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) and Neighborhood Business (C-2) to Community
Business (C-3). The density of such amendment will be
controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
residential use of 1-2.5 units per acre. This request lies
on 2.0 acres fronting approximately 280 feet on the west line
of Branders Bridge Road across from West Hundred Road. Tax
IDs 782-651-2546 and 3034 (Sheet 26).
Ms. Rogers presented a summary of Case 05SN0139 and stated
staff recommended denial because the proposed zoning and land
use do not conform with the Central Area Plan whiclh suggests
the property is appropriate for residential use of one to 2.5
units per acre. She further stated the Planning Commission
recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered
conditions, indicating that the business is already located
on the property and is being operated under a Conditional Use
Permit. She further stated the Commission also noted the
existing business has not adversely affected adjacent
properties.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
Mr. King stated the proposal represents another opportunity
for the Board to control residential growth and keep a good
business in the county.
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board
approved Case 05SN0139 and accepted the following proffered
conditions:
Uses permitted shall be limited to uses permitted in the
Neighborhood Office (0-1) District and the following
additional use:
Furniture sales with associated warehouse (P)
o
Prior to any site plan approval or within sixty (60)
days from a written request by the Transportation
Department, whichever occurs first, forty-five (45) feet
of right-of-way, exclusive of the existing structure,
05-14,8
02/23/05
measured from a revised centerline of Branders Bridge
Road shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and
for the benefit of Chesterfield County. The exact
location of this right-of-way shall be approved by the
Transportation Department. (T)
Direct access from the property to Branders Bridge Road
shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. The exact
location of this entrance/exit shall be determined by
the Transportation Department. (T)
Additional pavement shall be constructed along Branders
Bridge Road at the site access to provide left and right
turn lanes, if warranted, based on Transportation
Department standards. The developer shall dedicate,
free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of
Chesterfield County any additional right-of-way (or
easement) required for these road improvements. (T)
Except that loading docks and drive-in loading doors
shall be permitted, development of the property shall
meet Neighborhood Office (0-1) District standards. (P)
The developer shall install Perimeter Landscaping C
within the required setback along the southern property
boundary adjacent to Tax ID 782-650-2788. A minimum of
fifty (50) percent of the required small deciduous trees
shall be evergreen trees. (P)
7. The public wastewater system shall be used. (U)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05BR0151
In Matoaca Magisterial District, LUDSON W. HUDGINS requests
renewal of Conditional Use (Case 94SN0212) and amendment of
zoning district map to permit a self-storage warehouse
facility in an Agricultural (A) District. The density of
such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or
Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for single family residential use of
2.0 units per acre or less. This request lies on 5.0 acres
and is known as 8801 Baldwin Creek Road. Tax ID 707-662-Part
of 7295 (Sheet 23).
Ms. Rogers presented a summary of Case 05SR0151 and stated
staff recommended denial, indicating that while the use has
been previously approved for a limited time in the past, the
area has experienced substantial residential growth and
continued operation of the warehouse facility would not be
appropriate and would be inconsistent with the uses suggested
by the Upper Swift Creek Plan. She further stated the
Planning Commission recommended approval and acceptance of
the proffered conditions, indicating that the use would be
appropriate until pressures resulted in redevelopment of the
area for uses suggested by the Plan.
Mr. Ludson Hudgins stated the storage facility has been
operating for 20 years without any complaints from the
05-149
02/23/05
neighborhood. He requested the Board's approval of the
Planning Commission's recommendation.
In response to Mrs. Humphrey's question, Mr. Hudgins stated
there is no time limit on the use with the proposed
Conditional Use renewal.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. King, the Board
approved Case 05SR0151 and accepted the following proffered
conditions:
The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan
submitted with the application shall be considered the
Master Plan. (P)
This Conditional Use shall be limited to the operation
of a warehouse (self-storage) facility, exclusively.
(p)
Ail activity associated with this use shall be confined
to the interior of the existing structures. Outside
storage of vehicles or other items shall be prohibited.
(p)
o
Other than normal maintenance or cosmetic improvements,
no additions or exterior alterations shall be permitted
to accommodate this use. (P)
o
Hours of operation shall be limited to between 9:00 a.m.
and 9:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. (P)
o
There shall be no tractor trailer deliveries permitted.
(p)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SN0163
In Dale Magisterial District, GEORGE MICHAEL ROWLAND requests
Conditional Use and amendment of zoning district map to
permit a residential stock farm (keeping of fowl) in a
Residential (R-12) District. The density of such amendment
is controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards.
The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate
for residential use of 1.00 to 2.5 units per acre. This
request lies on 0.3 acre and is known as 4430 Boones Bluff
Way. Tax ID 757-684-7598 (Sheet 11).
Ms. Rogers presented a sununary of Case 05SN0163 and stated
the applicant is permitted to keep 12 fowl as a non-
conforming use, but today's ordinance does not allow the
keeping of fowl in a Residential area without a Conditional
Use Permit. She further stated staff recommended denial
because the proposed land use does not comply with the
Central Area Plan and is incompatible with existing
residential development. She stated the Planning Commission
recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered
05-150
02/23/05
conditions because
residents.
the use has been supported by area
Mr. George Michael Rowland stated he acquired chickens and
guineas at the recommendation of county staff because of the
multitude of ticks, insects and snakes in the vicinity of his
property. He presented the Board with petitions signed by
his neighbors in support of the request. He stated he
believes he deserves the permit and requested the Board's
approval.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
Mr. Kevin Erickson stated he supports the request. He
expressed concerns regarding the seriousness of snakebites.
He noted Mr. Rowland's guineas have killed numerous snakes in
his community and requested that the Board approve his
request.
There being no one else to speak to the request, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the
Board to approve Case 05SN0163 and accept the proffered
conditions.
After brief discussion, Mr. Barber called for a vote on the
motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board
to approve Case 05SN0163 and accept the following proffered
conditions:
Ail areas associated with the keeping of fowl (coops,
yards, etc.) shall be cleaned and made free of waste on
a regular basis. In addition, the property owner shall
employ a means of eliminating any odor problems and
propagation of insects. (P)
Any stock farm use shall be limited to the keeping of a
total of twenty (20) chickens and/or guineas. (P)
This Conditional Use shall be granted to and for George
Michael Rowland exclusively, and shall not be
transferable nor run with the land. (P)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SN0167
In Bermuda Magisterial District, BRECKENRIDGE ASSOCIATES LLC
requests amendment to zoning Case 86S156 and amendment of
zoning district map relative to buffer and setback
requirements. The density of such amendment will be
controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
community commercial/mixed use corridor uses. This request
lies in Community and General Business (C-3 and C-5)
Districts on 30.9 acres and is known as 12700 Jefferson Davis
Highway. Tax ID 798-653-0495 (Sheet 26).
Ms. Jane Peterson presented a summary of Case 05SN0167 and
stated staff recommends approval if, after public input,
05-151
02/23/05
there is no opposition. She noted the proffered condition
was negotiated with area property owners and meets the intent
of the original condition. She stated the Planning
Commission recommended approval and acceptance of the
proffered condition and noted the Gay Farms Civic Association
supports the request.
In response to Mr. King's question, Ms. Peterson stated the
existing wall will remain in place and the requested activity
will be contained on the side of the shopping center.
Mr. Jim Theobold, representing the applicant, stated the
request represents an excellent opportunity to further
upgrade the Breckenridge Shopping Center. He recAlested the
Board's support of the proposal.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
No one came forward to speak to the request.
On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board
approved Case 05SN0167 and accepted the following proffered
condition:
The property owner and applicant in this rezoning case,
pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950
as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County,
for itself and its successors or assigns, proffer that the
property under consideration will be developed according to
the following proffers if, and only if, the rezoning request
submitted herewith is granted with only those conditions
agreed to by the owner and applicant. In the event this
request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to
by the owner and applicant, the proffers shall immediately be
null and void and of no further force or effect.
Proffered Condition 11 of Case No. 86S156 is hereby amended
and restated as follows:
11.
On the western property line, adjacent to Tax ID 798-
653-0325, there shall be a fifty (50) foot landscaped
buffer, except as shown on the plan by Vanasse Hangen
Brustlin, Inc. dated February 9, 2005. Within the fifty
(50) foot buffer, healthy vegetation having a caliper of
six (6) inches or greater shall be maintained, staggered
evergreens (fifteen (15) feet on center, four (4) to
five (5) foot minimum height at time of planting) shall
be installed and minimum of a six (6) foot tall masonry
wall shall be installed. The exact treatment of the
buffers shall be approved by the Planning Department.
There will be a 125 foot minimum building setback,
except as shown on the aforementioned plan. (P)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05SN0127 and 05SN0128
In Matoaca Magisterial District, FOX CREEK DEVELOPMENT, INC.
requests rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12). Residential use of up
to 3.63 units per acre is permitted in a Residential (R-12)
05-152
02/23/05
District. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is
appropriate for single family residential use of 2.0 units
per acre or less. This request lies on 6.6 acres lying
approximately 3,150 feet off the south line of Woolridge
Road, measured from a point approximately 750 feet west of
Fox Club Parkway. Tax ID 714-674-1733 (Sheet 15).
In Matoaca Magisterial District, GLEN ABBEY PARTNERS LLC
request rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) with Conditional Use
to permit recreational facilities on up to four (4) acres.
Residential use of up to 3.63 units per acre is permitted in
a Residential (R-12) District. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for single-family
residential use of 2.0 units per acre or less. This request
lies on 75.5 acres fronting approximately 510 feet on the
northeast line of 0tterdale Road approximately 1,620 feet
south of Woolridge Road, also fronting approximately 830 feet
on the south line of Woolridge Road approximately 2,300 feet
east of Otterdale Road. Tax IDs 709-672-8088; 709-673-9924;
710-672-1082; 710-673-1868; and 711-675-0131 (Sheet 15).
Mr. Barber stated staff will now present both Cases 05SN0127
and 05SN0128, followed by the applicant addressing both cases
and then public input on Case 05SN0128 as well as 05SN0127,
if necessary. He further stated the Board will vote
separately on the two requests following the public hearing.
Ms. Robert Clay presented a summary of Case 05SN0127 and
stated staff recommended approval and acceptance of the
proffered conditions, indicating that the proposed zoning and
land use conform to the Upper Swift Creek Plan and are
representative of existing and anticipated area development.
He further stated the proffered conditions address the impact
of the proposed development on necessary capital facilities.
He stated the Planning Commission, on a vote of three ayes,
one abstention and one member absent, recommended denial
indicating that area roads cannot accommodate the increased
traffic generated by the proposal without adversely affecting
the health, safety and welfare of the community and that
action on the request would be premature based on the pending
Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment.
Mr. Clay then presented a summary of Case 05SN0128 and stated
staff recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered
conditions, indicating that the proposed zoning and land use
conform to the Upper Swift Creek Plan and are representative
of existing and anticipated area development. He further
stated the proffered conditions address the impact of the
proposed development on necessary capital facilities. He
stated the Planning Commission, on a vote of three ayes, one
abstention and one member absent, recommended denial,
indicating that the area roads cannot accommodate the
increased traffic generated by the proposal without adversely
affecting the health, safety and welfare of the community and
that action on the request would be premature based on the
pending Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment. He noted a
Regional BMP Plan has been adopted for the Upper Swift Creek
watershed, and noted the plan does not propose relocation of
a regional pond through which these properties will drain.
He stated the BMP Plan suggests construction of a BMP
upstream from the subject property. He further stated the
applicant has offered a proffered condition, which requires
05-153
02/23/05
construction and maintenance of ponds, which will achieve a
maximum phosphorous runoff of .22 pounds per acre per year
until the county obtains the initial permit for the
implementation of the Regional BMP Plan. He stated the
applicant has submitted plans, which propose construction of
the downstream regional BMP within the overall development,
but the zoning case does not quarantee such relocation and
construction and only guarantees that temporary measures will
be in place until the initial permits are obtained for the
Regional Plan implementation.
In response to Mr. Warren's questions, Mr. Clay reiterated
that the applicant's proposal does not require relocation of
the regional pond within the boundaries of the overall
development. He further stated the Upper Swift Creek Plan
was originally adopted in 1991 and amended in March 2000 to
reduce the recommended densities of residential development
that drain into Swift Creek Reservoir.
Mr. Turner stated staff anticipates the public hearing
process regarding the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment to
begin in September 2005 before the Planning Commission.
Mr. John Cogbill, representing the applicant, stated Case
0SN0127 includes a maximum of seven new lots on 6.6 acres.
He further stated the proposal incorporates the same
proffered conditions as the Fox Creek development. He stated
one additional cul-de-sac is proposed and there is no access
from the subject property to Otterdale and Woolridge Roads
other than through Fox Creek. He further stated other
relevant conditions include designing and maintaininH silt
basins to remove .22 pounds of phosphorous per acre annually
from stormwater runoff until reHional ponds are approved; a
50-foot buffer and 25-foot tree save area; and maximum cash
proffers of $11,500 per lot. He stated the request conforms
to the Upper Swift Creek Plan and the proffered conditions
adequately mitigate the impact on capital facilities.
Mr. Cogbill then addressed Case 05SN0128. He stated the
request will provide a maximum of 151 new lots on 75.5 acres.
He further stated, in an attempt to accommodate the Foxcroft
residents, no additional accesses are proposed to Foxcroft,
Woolridge or Otterdale Roads. He stated the applicant tried
to minimize the conflict points on Otterdale and Woolridge
Roads and has not requested a waiver for connectivity
requirements in either of the cases. He further stated the
two developments will generate a maximum of 1,580 trips per
day, noting that the applicant will meet all connectivity
requirements of staff during the subdivision process. He
stated, in addition to paying the cash proffer, the applicant
will be making numerous additional improvements to Otterdale
and Woolridge Roads at an estimated cost of $168,000 over and
above the cash proffers. He further stated the applicant has
addressed community concerns relative to growth, schools,
roads and water quality. He noted the county's growth rate
has and will continue to moderate. He referenced traffic
conditions on Courthouse Road in 1991 and stated the problem
was taken care of within ten years.
Mr. Miller expressed concerns that there appears to be very
little state funding for road infrastructure.
05-15~
02/23/05
Mr. Cogbill stated the county is acquiring road funding
through grants as well as from developers.
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Mr. Cogbill stated the
developer is proposing to put in place a regional BMP
facility pursuant to a plan the county has had for four years
that will provide better protection of Swift Creek Reservoir.
Mr. Warren expressed concerns that the regional BMP alluded
to by Mr. Cogbill has not been offered as a proffered
condition.
Mr. Cogbill stated the applicant has made a promise and spent
money. He further stated a Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ) permit has been issued and a Corps of Engineers
(Corps) permit is about to be issued. He noted there is an
informal agreement with staff relative to funding of the BMP,
which includes a substantial contribution by the developer.
Mr. Warren thanked Mr. Cogbill for his efforts in securing
funding for Route 288. He expressed concerns that the county
has over $1 billion in transportation needs.
Mr. Cogbill stated the county will benefit by increased state
development and revenue. He addressed the misconception that
the Woodlake community is growing faster than any other part
of the county, indicating that the Woodlake area was ranked
second among the communities in annual growth percentage from
1990-2004 and is currently ranked sixth in projected annual
growth percentage among all of the county's 25 communities.
He stated the county is maturing, and growth is beginning to
decline in this area and remains slower than it did in the
70's and 80's. He addressed school concerns, stating the
percentage of school-aged county residents is declining and
enrollment increases are not constant across all grade and
school levels. He further stated this imbalance will be
addressed either through redistricting and/or additional
schools. He stated the Public Facilities Plan has
recommended at least two new elementary schools and a new
middle school in or near the Upper Swift Creek Plan area. He
then addressed transportation concerns stating that the
Woodlake community had a lower rate of traffic accidents than
the county as a whole and, in fact, is tied with Salisbury
for the lowest rate in the county. He stated none of the top
ten crash areas are listed in this study area, and
transportation statistics indicate most of the accidents on
Woolridge and Otterdale Roads were related to poor driver
behavior. He stated sections of Woolridge and Otterdale
Roads nearest to the property are currently operating at
level of service "C," which indicate fully functioning roads.
He provided details of road improvements proposed with the
project. He then addressed water quality concerns,
indicating that the developer has agreed to construct the
first regional pond to provide greater protection of the
reservoir and has also agreed to contribute $310,000 towards
construction of the regional BMP. He noted the reservoir's
water quality is currently in a steady state and phosphorous
levels have actually declined slightly. He stated the
developer will provide over $1.8 million in cash proffers and
$750,000 in additional road improvements and requested the
Board's favorable consideration of both requests.
05-155
02/23/05
Mr. Barber called for public comment on Case 05SN0128 and
noted the Board would also accept comment on Case 05SN0127 at
this time.
Ms. Lee Dillar, expressed concerns relative to the number of
springs, riparian streams and perennial streams located on
the property that is the subject of Case 05SN0127, and stated
she does not believe the Board should allow development on
this acreage.
Mr. Ted Lushch expressed concerns that the additional traffic
generated by approval of these developments will guarantee
that Woolridge and Otterdale Roads are designated as unsafe,
by the county's definitions. He urged the Board to support
the Planning Commission's recommendation and deny the
requests.
Dr. Tom Pakurar expressed concerns that, during construction,
the two developments will generate over 3,000 pounds of
phosphorous, and the proposed BMP will only remove 100 to 200
pounds. He stated engineering standards are not correct for
the soils in this area. He further stated he sent a letter
to the Board on November 30, 2004, making them aware that the
reservoir's phosphorous levels were very high based on data
obtained from the county's web site on November 26~. 2004 for
the year 2003. He stated, on December 2, 2004, the high
phosphorous numbers were deleted from the county's database.
He further stated he requested a detailed explanation from
staff as to why the phosphorous data is statistically
different, but has not yet received a response. He requested
that the Board defer the requests for 12 months and make
Matoaca a better place for its residents.
Mr. Warren inquired how the data could change in two days.
Mr. Ramsey stated Ms. Joan Salvati,
Administrator, can provide an explanation.
Water Quality
Mr. Barber requested that Ms.
following public comment.
Salvati address the issue
Ms. Kathy Kirk, a Foxfire resident, requested a deferral of
both cases consistent with the Board action to defer cases in
the Upper Swift Creek Plan area for 12 months. She stated it
is her understanding the 12-month deferral period is
calculated for each individual zoning application from the
date the case is first scheduled to be heard by the Board.
She requested that the Board implement its policy and either
defer or deny the requests.
Ms. Kitty Snow stated she was not provided traffic statistics
under the Freedom of Information Act because she has filed a
lawsuit against the county. She expressed concerns relative
to traffic accidents on Genito and Otterdale Roads. She
requested that the Board vote to deny this and any other
rezoning cases under the present conditions in the Upper
Swift Creek area.
Ms. Brenda Stewart stated neither the Planning Commission nor
the Director of Planning has approved the plat for the land
that is the subject of Case 05SN0127. She further stated the
official original plat for the property affirms that the sale
or transfer is not for purposes of creating a parcel for
05-156
02/23/05
residential use. She expressed concerns relative to exchange
of parcels, including the subject parcel, that ultimately
resulted in the option for the Cosby Road High School site
and, therefore, involved the expenditure of county funds.
She requested that the Board deny the development and provide
an explanation to the citizens as to the reason for the
property exchanges.
Mr. Barber requested that Mr. Micas provide the Board with an
explanation regarding Ms. Stewart's concerns at the end of
public comment, if possible.
Mr. Greg Blake, President of the Foxcroft Homeowners
Association Board of Directors, expressed concerns that there
have been no improvements in road, school and reservoir
conditions in the Upper Swift Creek area since the Board
approved the original Fox Creek development in November 2003.
He stated the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment will not be
completed until September 2005 at the earliest and requested
that the Board defer or deny the requests until the Plan
amendment is complete.
Dr. Betty Hunter-Clapp, a resident of the Clover Hill
District, referenced a 1974 study surrounding the impact of
development in the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, which
indicated if uncontrolled growth is permitted within the
watershed or if land use management is inadequate,
degradation of Swift Creek Reservoir would be significantly
accelerated. She went on to say the study provided three
alternatives for use of the watershed - 1) as a protected
open space serving as a buffer to expanding suburban
development; 2) as an area of highly managed developmental
growth where land use is adjusted to the protection
requirements of the reservoir and of the watershed; or 3) as
an area of developmental sprawl with patterns and
characteristics of land use similar to those currently
experienced elsewhere in the county. She expressed concerns
relative to the concentration of soils in the Upper Swift
Creek Watershed and stated extra measures are not yet in
place to protect the reservoir. She requested that the Board
either deny or defer the proposed developments.
Mr. Peter Martin, a resident of Mount Hermon Road, stated the
transportation impact of the development proposed in Case
05SN0128 will make a bad situation intolerable. He requested
that the Board deny the request until roads are available to
accommodate additional traffic in the area. He also stated
school overcrowding is already severe, and additional
development will create inadequate school facilities.
Mr. Bill Hastings, a resident of the Matoaca District,
expressed concerns relative to the imbalance of growth versus
citizen safety and high quality of life. He stated the Board
has an opportunity to address this imbalance by deferring the
request for 12 months.
Ms. Irene Maschalko, a resident of the Matoaca District,
expressed concerns relative to endangered drinking water,
serious traffic congestion and quality of life in the Upper
Swift Creek area and requested that the Board deny the
request until the Upper Swift Creek Plan has been updated.
05-157
02/23/05
Ms. Marleen Durfee, Director of the Task Force for
Responsible Growth, expressed concerns relative to facility
needs, severe school overcrowding, environmental issues and
extreme transportation conditions in the Upper Swift Creek
area. She stated Woolridge Road has seen a vehicle increase
of nearly 8,000 from 2002 to 2004, and Mr. John McCracken has
described Otterdale Road as being the most dangerous in the
county. She further stated the Planning Commission's
recommendation to deny the request on the basis of health,
safety and welfare issues should not be dismissed by the
Board. She stated the proposed developments will add an
additional 5,189 trips on Woolridge and 0tterdale Roads, and
Mr. McCracken has indicated funding for improvements on these
roads will not be available for a long time. She stated the
Board should focus on commercial rather than residential
development in the Upper Swift Creek area and requested that
the Board deny the request or exercise its deferral policy
until the Plan is revised.
Ms. Mandy Wilson expressed concerns relative to the traffic
that will be generated from the proposed development and
stated the $1.8 million for transportation improvements will
not touch what is needed for adequate infrastructure in the
area. She stated Swift Creek Middle School is at 145 percent
with 12 trailers and there is no planned relief for school
capacity at the middle school level in this vicinity. She
requested that the Board deny the proposed develo~nent until
adequate infrastructure is in place to protect the health,
safety and welfare of residents in the area.
There being no one else to speak to Case 05SN0128, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. Barber requested a five-minute recess.
Reconvening:
Mr. Barber requested that Mr. Micas address questions raised
during the public hearing.
Mr. Micas stated Ms. Stewart believes that there was a
relationship between public and private real estate
transactions for the Cosby Road High School site. iHe further
stated she has been told that this is not the case. He
stated the Board is being asked to make a land use decision,
and Ms. Stewart's concerns regarding the real estate
transactions are unrelated to the requested zoning action.
He further stated that Dr. Pakurar's reference to a March
2004 letter from him was a reference to a memo that he had
sent to the Board of Supervisors explaining that once an
application for zoning has been filed, the Board has 12
months to consider the request before it has to take action
and the 12-month period is calculated from the date the
request first comes before the Board.
In response to Mr. Barber's question, Mr. Micas stated there
has been no effort to withhold information from Ms. Stewart.
Mr. Barber called forward Ms. Joan Salvati, Water Quality
Administrator, to address a concern, of Mr. Warren.
05-158
02/23/05
Mr. Warren inquired whether the applicant's proposal for a
regional BMP would cover the entire project.
Ms. Salvati stated both of the proposed developments will
drain into the area of the proposed BMP.
Mr. Turner stated the applicant has not proffered a condition
with this zoning case to guarantee construction of a regional
BMP, only made a promise to do so.
Ms. Salvati addressed the issue raised by Dr. Pakurar
relative to deletion of phosphorous data. She stated the
Swift Creek Treatment Plant posted several data points on the
Internet and, upon review by treatment plant staff, some of
the points were found to be statistical outliers and not
accurate; therefore, they were removed from the web site.
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Ms. Salvati stated the
developer would be required to meet the .22 phosphorous level
criteria as an interim measure until a regional BMP is
constructed.
In response to Mr. Warren's question, Ms. Salvati stated,
whenever an application is submitted to the DEQ, it is
typical for the DEQ to request additional information. She
further stated staff is in the process of providing the
specific information requested.
Mr. Ramsey stated, when the Regional BMP Plan was designed,
staff had hoped the Corps would approve the plan in its
entirety. He further stated he and Ms. Salvati recently met
with the Corps of Engineers, and the Corps has indicated,
although the Regional BMP Plan is not an inadequate plan,
they will not approve the plan in its entirety, but will
approve individual BMP facilities as construction plans are
completed.
Ms. Salvati stated both the Corps and the DEQ have officially
stated they approve of the overall regional plan concept, but
federal law does not permit the Corps to provide a permit on
a master plan basis unless each of the facilities is designed
in detail. She further stated they have agreed to approve
the BMP facilities in phases.
Mr. Warren expressed concerns relative to the muddy
conditions in the reservoir while the county is awaiting
approval of the BMP facilities.
In response to Mr. Barber's question, Ms. Salvati stated she
has a high level of confidence that the developer will
construct the proposed regional BMP facility because he has
applied for and gone through the process, with both DEQ and
the Corps of Engineers.
In response to a question from Mr. Miller, Mr. Cogbill stated
the two proposed developments will complete a subdivision
approved by the Board more than a year ago. He further
stated the proffered conditions adequately address all
infrastructure concerns based upon facts contained in county
documents. He stated the streams Ms. Dillar spoke of will be
dealt with through the subdivision process. He further
stated the Swift Creek Reservoir has a lot of life remaining.
He stated the developer is trying to address the issues
05-159
02/23/05
raised by Dr. Hunter-Clapp by constructing a BMP facility on
a voluntary basis at substantial expense to the developer.
He noted 94.2 percent of county residents believe they have a
good or excellent quality of life. He stated the proposed
developments will constitute no more than 158 new homes on 82
acres, and he has provided facts to address every concern
expressed tonight.
Mr. Barber then called for public comment on Case 05SN0127 at
this time.
No one came forward to speak to Case 05SN0127.
Mr. Barber closed the public hearing.
In response to Mrs. Humphrey's question, Mr. Cogbill stated
the DEQ has verbally approved the proposed regional BMP and
there is now a waiting period before issuance of the final
permit. He further stated the Corps of Engineers has
reviewed and verbally approved the proposed BMP. He stated
the developer is now awaiting Mr. McElfish's approval of
plans, indicating he anticipates the process will be complete
within 60 days.
In response to Mrs. Humphrey's questions, Ms. Salvati stated
there are no contaminants in the county's drinking water, as
suggested by Ms. Maschalko. She further stated a proffered
condition would provide a higher level of comfort that the
BMP facility would be constructed, but noted the .22
phosphorous standard would be required until such time as a
BMP is constructed.
Mrs. Humphrey stated she has attempted with staff to evaluate
what the Board can do within reason relative to an additional
deferral of cases in the Upper Swift Creek area, specifically
looking at the western perimeter of the Powhite Parkway
extension. She further stated she believes zoning cases to
the eastern and southern boundaries of the proposed Powhite
extension should be looked at differently because water and
sewer lines are available, a new high school is proposed and
road improvements are being realized through zoning cases.
She stated she had intended to ask several citizens to assist
her in drafting a second deferral motion to deal with what
will probably change in the Upper Swift Creek Plan and give
the Board and the business community the opportunity to move
forward on what probably will not change. She furtlher stated
there is a very defined line for the Powhite extension, and
noted these two requests fall within the infill area. She
stated the Board has asked the Planning Commission to
evaluate a number of strategies, including differential cash
proffers, and they recommended that no changes be made to the
county's cash proffer methodology for commercial and
industrial uses. She requested the other Board members
thoughts relative to a proffered condition to ensure
construction of the proposed BMP.
Mr. Barber stated the BMP facility has not been made a
proffered condition because it is not located on the subject
property.
Mr. Micas stated it is not uncommon for the Board to accept
proffered conditions that require off-site improvements.
05-160
02/23/05
Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to the legalities of
off-site proffers, indicating there could be enforcement
issues.
Mr. Micas stated the proffered condition would be performance
based and, if the developer did not adhere to the proffered
condition, amendment to the zoning would be necessary or an
alternative for construction of the BMP found. He further
stated there could be a phasing component in a proffer
addressing construction of the BMP.
Mr. King expressed concerns relative to the Board's
credibility being attacked by speakers during the public
hearing. He stated, while he supports property rights, he
cares greatly about the citizens of Chesterfield County and
is bothered by suggestions that he does not.
Mr. Barber addressed Ms. Wilson's comments relative to siting
of the proposed middle school. He stated, if the school were
to be sited outside of the growth area to the west, the
overcrowding problem would be exasperated by new homes being
located on lots that have already been zoned near the
facility. He further stated he has no reservations about
locating facilities further east to serve our current
students.
Mr. Miller stated each person who purchases a home in the
county contributes to school and traffic overcrowding. He
further stated developers are an integral part of our county,
providing jobs and opportunities. He expressed concerns that
staff recommended approval, but the Planning Commission
recommended denial, indicating he always finds it difficult
to overrule the Planning Commission. He stated the requests
were filed subsequent to the deferral policy, so there is no
inequity if the Board chooses to defer the cases, and it
would not seem unfitting to await the outcome of the Upper
Swift Creek Plan amendment prior to acting on the requests.
In response to Mr. Warren's question, Mr. Cogbill stated the
applicant has proffered everything that has been legally
requested. He further stated the developer went the extra
mile to start the process for constructing the first regional
BMP facility and inquired why the county would require that
the developer submit a proffered condition relative to the
BMP, necessitating a wait for zoning approval. He stated the
developer is willing to stand behind its offer to construct
the regional BMP facility with a letter, but requested that
the Board move forward on their generous offer to serve the
county at this time. He further stated the applicant has met
all of the county's requirements and he believes the project
should move forward.
Mr. Warren stated he would prefer that a proffered condition
be prepared regarding the BMP facility.
Discussion ensued relative to preparation of a deferral
motion for rezoning of properties in Upper Swift Creek Plan
area, west of the Powhite Parkway extension.
Mrs. Humphrey stated she is inclined to reevaluate the far
western Upper Swift Creek area, but is not prepared with a
deferral motion at this time.
05-161
02/23/05
Mr. Warren stated, when the Board approved the deferral of
residential cases in the Upper Swift Creek Plan for one year,
he was under the assumption that the deferral was to allow
for revision of the Upper Swift Creek Plan so the Board would
be in a position to act on requests in a logical manner. He
further stated he would like to honor that commitment by not
approving this request and, at the very least, deferring it
until the Plan has been revised.
Mr. Miller stated he would be prepared to support Case
05SN0127 at this time, indicating he sees no reason to delay
it. He further stated he is not sure he would be supportive
of requiring a proffered condition for the BMP facility
because it bothers him to require off-site improvements. He
stated citizens remarking that the Board is insensitive to
their needs and wishes is offensive to him, indicating this
is not true and the Board tries very hard to make the right
decisions.
Mr. Barber stated he is reluctant to approve another deferral
action, and he believes it would be wiser on the Board's part
to judge every case on its merits and engage the citizenry on
a regular basis case by case. He further stated he agrees
with Mr. Miller that approving the smaller of the two cases
makes great sense.
Mrs. Humphrey made a motion, seconded by Mr. King, for the
Board to approve Case 05SN0127 and accept the following
proffered conditions:
The Owners and the Developer (the ~Developer") in this zoning
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,
proffer that the development of the Property known as
Chesterfield County Tax Identification Number 714-674-1733
(the ~Property") under consideration will be developed
according to the following conditions if, and only if, the
rezoning request for R-12 is granted. In the event the
request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to
by the Developer, the proffers and conditions shall
immediately be null and void and of no further force or
effect. If the zoning is granted, these proffers and
conditions will supersede all proffers and conditions now
existing on the Property.
1. Density. A maximum of seven (7) lots shall be
permitted. (P)
o
Utilities. The public water and wastewater systems
shall be used, except for sales facilities and/or
construction offices. (U)
o
Timbering. With the exception of timbering which has
been approved by the Virginia State Department of
Forestry for the purpose of removing dead or diseased
trees, there shall be no timbering until a land
disturbance permit has been obtained from the
Environmental Engineering Department and the approved
devices have been installed. (EE)
Foundations. The exposed surfaces of the foundations of
each dwelling shall be covered with brick or stone
05-162
02/23/05
10.
veneer or exterior insulation and finishing systems
(EIFS) materials. (p)
House Size. Ail dwellings shall have a minimum gross
floor area of 2,500 square feet. (P)
Cash Proffers. For each dwelling unit developed, the
applicant, subdivider, or assignee(s) shall pay
$11,500.00 per unit to the County of Chesterfield, prior
to the time of issuance of a building permit, for
infrastructure improvements within the service district
for the Property if paid prior to July 1, 2005.
Thereafter, such payment shall be the amount approved by
the Board of Supervisors not to exceed $11,500.00 per
unit as adjusted upward by any increase in the Marshall
and Swift Building Cost Index between July 1, 2004 and
July 1 of the fiscal year in which the payment is made
if paid after June 30, 2005. If any of the cash
proffers are not expended for the purposes designated by
the Capital Improvement Program within fifteen (15)
years from the date of payment, they shall be returned
in full to the payor. (B&M)
Lot Size. Ail lots shall have a minimum area of 15,000
square feet. (P)
Notice. The developer shall notify the last known
representative of the Foxcroft Homeowners Association on
file with the Planning Department of the submission of
tentative subdivision plans. Such notice shall occur at
least twenty-one (21) days prior to the approval of such
plans. The developer shall provide the Planning
Department with a copy of the notice. (P)
Curb and Gutter. Public subdivision roads shall be
constructed with concrete curb and gutter. (P)
Covenants. At a minimum, the following restrictive
covenants shall be recorded for the development.
Specific terms and definitions shall be set forth in the
Covenants and may not be the same as definitions set
forth in the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance. All
terms and definitions set forth in the Covenants shall
control this Proffered Condition.
Architectural Board. The Architectural Board shall
have exclusive jurisdiction over all original
construction, modifications, additions or
alterations made on or to all existing
improvements, and the open space, if any,
appurtenant thereto on all property. It shall
prepare and, on behalf of the Board of Directors,
shall promulgate design and development guidelines
and application and review procedures, all as part
of the design and environmental standards. The
standards shall incorporate all restrictions and
guidelines relating to development and construction
contained in this Declaration as well as
restrictions and guidelines with respect to
location of structures upon property, size of
structures, driveway and parking requirements,
foundations and length of structures, and
landscaping requirements. Copies shall be available
05-163
02/23/05
from the Architectural Board for review. The
guidelines and procedures shall be those of the
Association, and the Architectural Board shall have
sole and full authority to prepare and to amend the
standards available to Owners, builders, and
developers who seek to engage in development of or
construction upon property within their operations
strictly in accordance therewith. The Architectural
Board shall initially consist of three (3) members,
all appointed by the Declarant. At such time as
fifty percent (50%) of all property within subject
property has been developed, improved, and conveyed
to purchasers in the normal course of development
and sale, the Board of Directors of the Association
shall have the riglht to appoint a maximum of two
(2) additional members. At no time shall the
Architectural Board have fewer than three members
nor more that five (5) members. At suclh time as
one hundred percent (100%) of all property has been
developed, improved, and conveyed to purchasers in
the normal course of development and sale, the
Board of Directors shall appoint all members of the
Architectural Board. The declarant may, at his
option, delegate to the Board of Directors its
right to appoint one or more members of the
Architectural Board. At all times, at lease one (1)
member of the Architectural Board shall be a member
of the Association, and at least one (1) member
shall be an architect licensed to practice in the
State of Virginia, Who shall also be the
Chairperson.
Mailboxes. Every improved lot shall be required to
have a mailbox with supporting post and street
light of design and installation as specified in
the standards. Each lot owner shall be responsible
for the maintenance and operation of the fixture,
support, and mailbox.
Parking. Each property owner shall provide space
for the parking of automobiles off public streets
prior to the occupancy of any building or structure
constructed on said property in accordance with the
standards.
Garages. Ail dwellings will have side or rear
loaded garages.
Signs. No signs shall be erected or maintained on
any property by anyone including, but not limited
to, the owner, a realtor, a contractor, or a
subcontractor, except as provided for in the
standards or except as may be required by legal
proceedings. Residential property identification
and like signs not exceeding a combined total of
more than one (1) square foot may be erected
without the written permission of the Declarant or
the Association.
Condition of Ground. It shall be the
responsibility of each property owner and tenant to
prevent the development of any unclean, unsightly,
or unkempt conditions of buildings or grounds on
05-16&
02/23/05
such property which shall tend to substantially
decrease the beauty of the neighborhood as a whole
or the specific area.
Minimum Square Footage. No plan required under
these Covenants will be approved unless the
proposed house or structure has a minimum square
footage of enclosed dwelling space as specified in
the standards. Such minimum requirement for each
lot will be specified in each sales contract and
stipulated in each deed. The term ~enclosed
dwelling area" as used in these minimum size
requirements does not include garages, terraces,
decks, open porches, and the like areas.
Residential Use.
(i)
Ail lots shall be used for residential
purposes exclusively. The use of a portion of
a dwelling on a lot as an office by the owner
or tenants thereof shall be considered a
residential use if such use does not create
customer or client traffic to and from the
lot. No structure, except as herein after
provided, shall be erected, altered, placed,
or permitted to remain on any lot other than
one (1) detached single family dwelling and
one (1) accessory building which may include a
detached private garage, provided the use of
such accessory building does not overcrowd the
site and provided further that such building
is not used for any activity normally
conducted as business. Such accessory building
may not be constructed prior to the
construction of the main building.
(ii) A guest suite or like facility without a
kitchen may be included as part of the main
dwelling or accessory building, but such suite
may not be rented or leased except as part of
the entire premises including the main
dwelling and provided, however, that such
suite would not result in overcrowding of the
site.
(iii) The provisions of this paragraph shall not
prohibit the Developer from using a house as a
model as provided in this Declaration.
Exterior Structure Completion. The exterior of all
houses and other structures must be completed
within one (1) year after the construction of same
shall have commenced, except where such completion
is impossible or would result in great hardship to
the owner or builder due to the strikes, fires,
national emergency, or natural calamities. Houses
and other dwelling structures may not be
temporarily or permanently occupied until the
exteriors thereof have been completed. During the
continuance of construction the owner of the lot
shall require the contractor to maintain the lot in
a reasonably clean and uncluttered condition.
05-165
02/23/05
Lo
Screened Areas. Each lot owner shall provide a
screened area to serve as a service yard and an
area in which garbage receptacles, fuel tanks or
similar storage receptacles, electric and gas
meters, air conditioning equipment, clotheslines,
and other unsightly objects much be placed or
stored in order to conceal them from view' from the
road and adjacent properties. Plans for such
screened area delineating the size, design,
texture, appearance, and location must be approved
by the Architectural Board prior to construction.
Garbage receptacles and fuel tanks may be located
outside of such screened area only if located
underground.
Vehicle Storage. No mobile home, trailer, tent,
barn, or other similar out-building or structure
shall be placed on any lot at any time, either
temporarily or permanently. Boats, boat trailers,
campers, recreational vehicles, or utility trailers
may be maintained on a lot, but only when in an
enclosed or screened area approved by the
Architectural Board such that they are not
generally visible from adjacent properties.
Temporary Structures. No structure of a temporary
character shall be placed upon any lot at any time
provided, however, that this prohibition shall not
apply to shelter or temporary structures used by
the contractor during the construction of the main
dwelling house, it being clearly understood that
these latter temporary shelters may not at any time
be used as residences or permitted to remain on the
lot after completion of construction,. The design
and color of structures temporarily placed on the
lot by a contractor shall be subject to ~reasonable
aesthetic control by the Architectural Board.
Antennas. Except as otherwise provided by
applicable law, no television antenna, radio
receiver or sender, satellite dish, or other
similar device shall be attached to or installed on
the exterior portion of any building or structure
or any lot except that should cable television
services be unavailable and good television
reception not be otherwise available, a lot owner
may make written application to the Association for
permission to install such a device and such
permission shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Further Subdivision. No lot shall be subdivided or
its boundary lines changed except with the written
consent of the Declarant. However, the Declarant
hereby expressly reserves to itself, its
successors, or assigns the right to replat any lot
or lots owned by it and shown on the plat of any
subdivision in order to create modified building
lot or replatted lot suitable and fit as a building
site including, but no limited to, the recreational
facilities, and other amenities to conform to the
new boundaries of said replatted lots, provided
that no lot originally shown on a recorded plat is
reduced to a size smaller than the smallest lot
05-166
02/23/05
11.
shown on the first plat of the subdivision section.
Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit the
combining of two (2) or more contiguous lots into
one (1) larger lot, only the exterior boundary
lines of the resulting larger lot shall be
considered in the interpretation of these
covenants.
Animals. Only common household pet animals shall
be permitted. All pet animals must be secured by a
leash or lead, or be under the control of a
responsible person and obedient to that person's
command at any time they are permitted outside a
residence or other enclosed area upon a lot
approved by the Architectural Board for the
maintenance and confinement of pet animals. No
livestock including cattle, horses, sheep, goats,
pigs, or poultry shall be permitted upon any lot.
After giving a lot owner written notice of
complaint and reasonable opportunity to remedy the
situation, the Board of Directors may order the
removal of any pet which has been a nuisance or a
danger.
Motor Bikes Ail Terrain Vehicles. No motor bikes,
motorcycles, or all terrain vehicles shall be
driven upon the common area, lots, or roads (unless
properly licensed on roads) with the exception of
licensed vehicles and mopeds which shall be
operated solely upon the public streets for direct
ingress and egress purposes only.
External Lighting. No external lighting shall be
installed or utilized on any property which is of
such character, intensity, or location as to
interfere with the use, enjoyment, and privacy of
any lot or owner in the near vicinity. No neon or
flashing lights shall be permitted. All external
lighting shall be approved by the Architectural
Board as appropriate in size, location, color, and
intensity.
Swimming Pools. No swimming pool, whether in
ground or above ground, whether permanent or
temporary, shall be installed upon any lot without
the prior written consent of the Architectural
Board. The Architectural Board shall require that
all swimming pools be adequately screened.
Rules and Regulations. The Board of Directors is
granted and shall have the power to promulgate
rules and regulations, from time to time, governing
the use of and activity upon the Common Area and
the Recreational Facilities (if the Recreational
Facilities are owned or leased by the Association).
All rules and regulations promulgated by the Board
of Directors shall be published and distributed to
each member of the Association at least thirty (30)
days prior to their effective date. (P)
Garages.
garages.
Ail dwellings will have side or rear loaded
(p)
05-167
02/23/05
12.
13.
14.
Best Management Practice (BMP) Facility. The developer
shall leave in place temporary sediment control devices
and/or construct new BMP's or combinations of BMP's
which would achieve a maximum phosphorous runoff limit
of 0.22 pounds per acre per year until Chesterfield
County obtains its initial permit for the implementation
of the Upper Swift Creek Watershed Plan. (EE)
Open Space. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of common open
space shall be maintained adjacent to Foxcroft
Subdivision. Except for utilities and pedestrian/bicycle
paths which run generally perpendicular through the
buffer, there shall be no uses permitted in the buffer.
Except where necessary to provide the uses stated
herein, any healthy trees that are six (6) inches or
greater in caliper shall be retained unless removal is
approved through the subdivision process. (P)
Tree Preservation. A twenty-five (25) foot tree
preservation strip within the proposed lots shall be
maintained along the western boundary of the common open
space described in Proffered Condition 13. Utility
easements and rights-of-way shall be permitted[ to cross
this strip in a perpendicular fashion. Any healthy
trees that are six (6) inches in caliper or greater
shall be retained within this tree preservation strip
except where removal is necessary to accommodate the
improvements permitted by the preceding sentence. This
condition shall not preclude the removal of *vegetation
from the tree preservation strip that is unhealthy,
dying or diseased. (P)
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey and Miller.
Nays: Warren.
Mrs. Humphrey stated she appreciates the c~,ality of
development the applicant has provided in the county. She
expressed concerns that the~citizens have not participated in
the process to get the Upper Swift Creek Plan completed. She
further stated the policy adopted in February 2004 was to
provide one year for the Planning Commission and staff to
complete the Plan revision.
Mrs. Humphrey then made a motion, for the Board to .defer Case
05SN0128 for six months.
Mr. Warren seconded the motion.
Mrs. Humphrey requested that the Planning Commission respond
to her in writing regarding the anticipated completion of the
Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment. She stated this request
will be heard in six months, whether or not the amendment is
complete.
Mr. Barber called for a vote on the motion of Mrs. Humphrey,
seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to defer Case 05SN0128
until August 24, 2005.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-168
02/23/05
Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. King, for the Board
to suspend its rules at this time to consider an item after
11:00 p.m.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
04SN0232
In Matoaca Magisterial District, DOUGLAS SOWERS requests
rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from
Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) with Conditional Use
Planned Development to permit exceptions to Ordinance
requirements. Residential use of up to 3.63 units per acre
is permitted in a Residential (R-12) District. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
single family residential use of 2.0 units per acre or less.
This request lies on 242.3 acres fronting approximately 4,000
feet on the west line of Otterdale Road, approximately 1,500
feet south of Old Hundred Road. Tax ID 714-694-7687 (Sheet
9).
Ms. Jane Peterson presented a summary of Case 04SN0232 and
stated staff recommended approval of the rezoning request,
indicating that the proposed zoning and land use conform to
the Upper Swift Creek Plan and the proffered conditions
address the impacts of the proposed development on necessary
capital facilities. She further stated the Planning
Commission, on a vote of three to two, recommended denial and
noted that area roads could not accommodate the increased
traffic generated by the request without adversely affecting
the health, safety and welfare of the community. She stated
the Commission suggested that the request should not be acted
upon until the review of the Upper Swift Creek Plan is
completed. She further stated staff and the Planning
Commission, on a three to two vote, recommended denial of the
waiver to street connectivity requirement and that Proffered
Condition 10 not be accepted, indicating that granting such
relief necessitates design details that can best be provided
through the subdivision review process.
Discussion ensued relative to the Planning Commission's
recommendation for denial of the original request for the
proposed development in August 2004.
In response to Mr. Barber's questions, Ms. Peterson stated
the connectivity policy addresses planning and fire safety
issues. She further stated several criteria must be met to
grant a waiver to connectivity requirements, and staff feels
it would be more appropriate to consider the appropriateness
of a waiver through the subdivision process when design
information is available.
Mr. Barber stated, although it makes sense short term to
grant connectivity requirements to address concerns of
residents, this can create a great deal of trouble long term
for public safety, school transportation and other issues.
Mr. Jim Theobold, representing the applicant, stated this
request was remanded to the Planning Commission because the
applicant was seeking credit for dedication of significant
right of way for the Powhite Parkway extension, indicating
05-169
02/23/05
that the applicant has now provided this right of way without
seeking credit toward the cash proffer. He further stated
the applicant has done everything requested by staff, and
citizens from the adjacent North Hundred Subdivision support
the proposal. He stated the developer is in compliance with
the county's BMP policy and has agreed to phase the
development of the project, dedicate over 60 acres of land
for the Powhite Parkway extension, pay a full cash proffer
and not ask for any credit in return for the substantial land
dedication and road improvements. He further stated many of
the residents of North Hundred Subdivision have experienced
serious water issues, indicating that the developer has
agreed to bring public water to North Hundred Subdivision as
well as to the proposed development. He stated the proposed
development will include three or four direct access points
to 0tterdale Road, and there will be no need for connectivity
into North Hundred. He requested the Board's approval of the
rezoning request and the waiver to street connectivity
requirements.
In response to Mr. Barber's question, Mr. Theobold stated the
applicant has made a commitment to the neighbors not to
support a request for connectivity should the Transportation
Department determine that additional traffic warrants such.
Mr. Barber called for public comment.
Mr. Wayne Bass, Matoaca District Planning Co~nissioner,
stated seven meetings have already been held involving the
general public in the amendment of the Upper Swift Creek
Plan, and expressed concerns that the Planning Commission has
not been able to complete the amendment of the Plan because
the Transportation and Environmental Engineering Departments
have not presented their components for the Plan.
Mr. Warren stated the information provided by Mr. Bass is
critical information because the Board had been led to
believe the Planning Commission was holding up the process.
He requested that Mr. Barber, as Chairman, direct staff to do
everything possible so that the Plan amendment can be
completed in six months.
Dr. Tom Pakurar, a resident of the Clover Hill District,
provided an aerial view of the reservoir depicting muddy
conditions in the vicinity of the subject property. He
stated the BMP located along Genito Road servicing this area
is supposed to meet the .22 phosphorous level standard, and
questioned whether the required efficiency is being received
from this pond. He requested that the Board defer the
project for 12 months to allow for approval of the Upper
Swift Creek Plan amendment. He stated the BMP plan for the
Ruffin Mill Road area is an excellent plan because it deals
up front with the soil conditions of that area, indicating it
could be a strong model for the Upper Swift Creek PI. an.
Mr. William Burroughs, a resident of North Hundred
Subdivision, stated he believes Mr. Sowers has offered the
county above and beyond what they have asked for, giving up
25 percent of his land for the Powhite Parkway extension. He
stated he does not see how the Board could deny this rezoning
request.
05-170
02/23/05
Mr. Steve Harris, a resident of North Hundred Subdivision,
stated he supports the proposed development. He further
stated the developer has addressed the residents'
transportation concerns and has also agreed to assist with
water extension to the North Hundred community. He stated
the Hallsley development will result in an additional 800
vehicles per day through North Hundred Subdivision and the
residents do not want additional traffic from this
development to gain access through their community. He
further stated the Fire and Emergency Services Department has
indicated the applicant has satisfied their requirements and
additional access is not necessary. He requested that the
Board approve the project and waive the street connectivity
requirements.
Mr. Tom Lewis, a resident of North Hundred Subdivision,
thanked Mr. Sowers for addressing the residents' concerns and
bringing water into the neighborhood. He further stated the
residents of North Hundred Subdivision are very much in
support of the proposed development.
Mr. Ted Lushch expressed concerns relative to unsafe road
conditions on Otterdale Road. He stated the current traffic
count on Otterdale is 858 vehicles per day, and this
development will increase that number to 5,298 vehicles per
day, taking the level of service of the road from ~B" to
render it unsafe. He requested that the Board consider
deferring the request.
Mr. Ben Heath, a resident of North Hundred Subdivision,
emphasized that 42 homeowners support the proposed
development and do not support connectivity into their
neighborhood.
Mr. Greg Blake, a resident of the Foxcroft Subdivision,
requested that Mrs. Humphrey move for deferral of the request
until such time as the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment has
been adopted.
Ms. Kathy Kirk, a resident of Foxfire, stated she does not
believe the Board's deferral policy was subject to the
Planning Commission providing the Board with a revised Plan
by February 2005. She expressed concerns that it does not
appear the policy was the approved procedure of action to
guide the Board on future zoning actions in this area and
inquired about the purpose of the policy.
Mr. Larry Kidd, a resident of North Hundred Subdivision,
expressed concerns relative to water issues in his
neighborhood and stated the developer has agreed to assist
the residents by providing a water main and connections to
the neighborhood at his expense. He further stated county
staff has indicated a connection into North Hundred is not
necessary for the proposed development and requested that the
Board approve the project and grant relief to the
connectivity requirement.
Ms. Marleen Durfee stated, although she sympathizes with the
water issues of North Hundred residents, she is more
concerned about the transportation impact of the proposed
development. She further stated she does not believe the
Powhite Parkway extension is the answer to the county's
problems of secondary road congestion. She strongly
05-~7~
02/23/05
requested that the Board not approve development until water
quality and transportation scenarios are available in the
Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment.
No one else came forward to speak to the request.
In response to Mrs. Humphrey's questions, Mr. Banks stated he
does not foresee a staff recommendation proposing to relocate
the proposed alignment of the Powhite Parkway extension as
part of the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment.
Mrs. Humphrey expressed concerns relative to the water issues
in North Hundred, indicating it is imperative that the
co~unity receive access to public water. She expressed
disappointment that the business community and land use
process is being held up because the Upper Swift Creek Plan
amendment has not been completed. She stated she does not
want to hold up this community from getting public water any
longer. She further stated it is the county's responsibility
to secure the rights of way for the Powhite Parkway
extension, indicating that this extension is very important
to the county.
Mr. Barber noted the project will be phased to minimize its
impact on schools, and the first house will be not be
constructed until 2008. He further stated an additional
middle school will be opened in this vicinity by 2008 or
2009, and a second high school will open by 2010.
Mr. Warren inquired whether staff could complete the Upper
Swift Creek Plan amendment within six months.
Mr. Turner stated it is clear that the Board is making the
Plan amendment a priority, and staff will do everything in
its power to bring the amendment to the Planning Commission
within six months.
Mr. Barber stated there are other plans being worked on in
other parts of the county, and requested that staff not speed
up the Upper Swift Creek Plan amendment at the detriment of
other scheduled plan reviews.
Mr. Miller stated he would be inclined not to require
connectivity because of the additional burden it would place
on North Hundred residents.
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Mr. Theobold stated
this request has been in the works for well over a year. He
further stated the development community has backed off to
allow the Board one year to amend the Upper Swift Creek Plan,
but he now believes every case should be reviewed on its own
merits. He stated the developer has agreed to provide 25
percent of his land for the Powhite Parkway extension, and he
believes the project represents an opportunity to do a lot of
good for a lot of people.
Mrs. Humphrey stated she believes the water issue in Old
Hundred has been a significant health, safety and welfare
issue for a long time. She further stated the ability to
acquire this amount of property for the Powhite extension is
available now, and there is no guarantee that it will be here
in six months. She stated she believes approval of the
request represents a unique opportunity for the county.
05-172
02/23/05
Mrs. Humphrey then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Barber, for
the Board to approve Case 04SN0232 and waive the street
connectivity requirements.
Discussion ensued relative to the number of accesses being
proposed for the request project as well as the number of
accesses for North Hundred Subdivision.
Mr. Barber stated he typically does not support waiving
connectivity because it can be detrimental long term, but he
believes concrete reasoning has been presented for the
requested waiver because of the number of accesses proposed
for this development as well as those for North Hundred.
Mr. Warren made a substitute motion for the Board to defer
Case 04SN0232 for six months.
The substitute motion of Mr. Warren failed for lack of a
second.
Mr. Micas clarified that separate votes must be taken for
approval of the zoning case and waiving of the connectivity
requirements.
Mr. Barber called for a vote on the motion of Mrs. Humphrey,
seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to approve Case
04SN0232 and approve the following condition:
The Textual Statement last revised July 26, 2004, shall be
considered the Master Plan. (P)
And, further,
conditions:
the Board accepted the following proffered
The Owners-Applicants in this zoning 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, proffer that the
development of the property known as Chesterfield County Tax
ID 714-694-7687-00000 (the ~Property") under consideration
will be developed according to the following conditions, if
and only if, the rezoning request for R-12 is granted. In
the event the request is denied or approved with conditions
not agreed to by the Owners-Applicants, these proffers and
conditions shall be immediately null and void and of no
further force or effect.
Timbering. Except for the timbering approved by the
Virginia State Department of Forestry for the purpose of
removing dead or diseased trees, there shall be no
timbering on the Property until a land disturbance
permit has been obtained from the Environmental
Engineering Department and the approved devices have
been installed. (EE)
Utilities. Except for one temporary model home within a
modular unit, the public water and wastewater systems
shall be used. (U)
Cash Proffer. The applicant, sub divider, or
assignee(s) shall pay the following to the County of
05-173
02/23/05
Chesterfield prior to the issuance of each building
permit for infrastructure improvements within the
service district for the Property:
a o
$9,000.00 per dwelling unit, if paid prior to July
1, 2004; or
The amount approved by the Board of Supervisors not
to exceed $9,000.00 per dwelling unit adjusted
upward by any increase in the Marshall and Swift
Building Cost Index between July 1, 2003, and July
1 of the fiscal year in which the payment is made
if paid after June 30, 2004.
Provided, however, that if any building permits
issued on the Property are for senior housing, the
dwelling units of which meet the occupancy
requirements for "age 55 or over" housing as set
forth in Section 3607 of the Fair Housing Act, 42
USC Section 3601 et seq., as amended by the Fair
Housing Amendments Act of 1988, and of 24 CFR
Section 100.304 in effect as of the date of the
Rezoning, and which are subject to the occupancy
requirements that no person under 19 shall reside
in each unit, the amount approved by the Board of
Supervisors, but not to exceed $4,815 per dwelling
unit as adjusted 'upward by any increase in the
Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index between July
1, 2003 and July 1 of the fiscal year in which the
payment is made if paid after June 30, 2004. At
the time of payment, the $4,815 will be allocated
pro-rata among the facility costs as follows: $598
for parks and recreation, $324 for library
facilities, $3,547 for roads, and $346 for fire
stations. Payments in excess of $4,815 shall be
prorated as set forth above. (B&M)
Density. The total number of units shall not exceed 2.0
units per acre. (P)
Lot Size. Any lots contiguous to the North Hundred
Subdivision shall contain a minimum of 25,000 square
feet. A maximum of twenty-five (25) lots shall be
located contiguous to the ~North Hundred Subdivision".
(p)
Buffer. A fifty (50) foot buffer, exclusive of
easements and required building setbacks, shall be
provided along the south line of the North Hundred
Subdivision. This buffer shall comply with the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for Sections 19-520
through 19-522. (P)
Age-Restricted Units. Age restricted dwelling units
shall be grouped on a particular portion of the Property
and shall not be scattered among other residential
dwelling units. At the time of recordation of a
subdivision plat, lots for age-restricted units shall be
so noted on the plat. (P)
05-174
02/23/05
8. BMPs.
10.
11.
(a)
For areas that drain through a regional BMP,
temporary sediment basins shall remain in place
and/or new BMPs constructed to achieve the .22
phosphorus standard until the downstream regional
BMP into which the development will drain has been
constructed.
(b)
For areas that do not drain through a regional BMP,
temporary sediment basins shall remain in place
and/or new BMPs constructed to achieve the .22
phosphorus standard until Chesterfield County
obtains its initial permit for implementation of
the Upper Swift Creek Watershed Plan. (EE)
Phasing of Development. No single family shall be
recorded prior to January 1, 2006, and no more than one-
hundred single family lots shall be recorded prior to
January 1, 2007.
Road Connections. There shall be
connection to Sly Fox Road. (P)
no public road
Transportation.
(a)
In conjunction with recordation of the initial
subdivision plat, forty-five (45) feet of right-of-
way along the west side of Otterdale Road, measured
from a centerline based on VDOT Urban Minor
Arterial Standards (50 mph) with modifications
approved by the Transportation Department, of that
part of 0tterdale Road immediately adjacent to the
Property, shall be dedicated, free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of
Chesterfield County.
(b)
In conjunction with recordation of the initial
subdivision plat, or within sixty (60) days from a
written request by Chesterfield County, whichever
occurs first, a 200 foot wide limited access right
of way for Powhite Parkway Extended from Otterdale
Road through the property shall be dedicated to and
for the benefit of Chesterfield County. The exact
location of this right-of-way shall be approved by
the Transportation Department.
(c)
Direct access from the Property to Otterdale Road
shall be limited to four (4) public roads. The
exact location of these accesses shall be approved
by the Transportation Department.
(d)
To provide an adequate roadway system, the
developer shall be responsible for the following
improvements:
Construction of additional pavement along
Otterdale Road at each approved access to
provide left and right turn lanes, if
warranted, based on Transportation Department
standards.
05-~75
02/23/05
ii.
Widening/improving the west side of Otterdale
Road to an eleven (11) foot wide travel lane,
measured from the centerline of the road, with
an additional ()ne (1) foot wide paved shoulder
plus a seven (7) foot wide unpaved shoulder,
and overlaying the full width of the road with
one and half (1.5) inches of compacted
bituminous asphalt concrete with modifications
approved by the Transportation Department, for
the entire Property frontage.
iii. Dedication to and for the benefit of
Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, of
any additional right of way (or easements)
required for the improvements identified
above.
(e)
Prior to any construction plan approval, a phasing
plan for the required road improvements, as
identified in Proffered Condition ll.(d), shall be
submitted to and approved by the Transportation
Department.
12.
Passive Recreation. The developer shall dedicate to and
for the benefit of Chesterfield County, free and
unrestricted, a thirty (30) foot wide ingress/egress
easement along the length of Swift Creek within a
conservation area from the eastern to western parcel
boundaries, exclusive of the Powhite Parkway Extended
right-of-way as identified in Proffered Condition
ll.(b). This easement is intended for use by the Parks
and Recreation Department to provide a passive
recreation facility, and shall be recorded after
recordation of the Powhite Parkway Extended right of
way. (P&R)
Ayes: Barber, King and Humphrey.
Nays: Warren.
Abstain: Miller.
Mrs. Humphrey then made a motion for the Board to waive the
street connectivity requirements for Case 04SN0232.
In response to Mr. Miller's question, Mr. Micas stated his
abstention on the vote concerning approval of Case 04SN0232
does not preclude him from secondin~ a motion to waive street
connectivity requirements.
Mr. Miller seconded the motion made by Mrs. Humphrey.
Mr. Barber called for a vote on the motion of Mrs. Humphrey,
seconded by Mr. Miller, for the Board to waive the street
connectivity requirements for Case 04SN0232.
Ayes: Barber, Kin~, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
05-176
02/23/05
17. REMAINING MANUFACTURED HOM~ PE-~/~ITS AND ZONING REQUEST?,
There were no remaining manufactured home permits or zoning
requests at this time.
18. ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Miller, the
Board adjourned at 12:55 a.m. until March 7, 2005 at 5:00
p.m. in Room 502 of the Administration Building for dinner
with members of the Social Services Board, followed by
budget presentations in the Public Meeting Room.
Ayes: Barber, King, Humphrey, Miller and Warren.
Nays: None.
Lane B. Ramsey //
County Admini strat~r
Cha i rman
05-177
02/23/05