Loading...
07-26-2000 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES July 26, 2000 Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. Arthur S. Warren, Chairman Mrs. Renny B. Humphrey, Vice Chrm. Mr. Edward B. Barber Mr. J. L. McHale, III Mr. Kelly E. Miller Mr. Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Ms. Deborah Altice, Deputy Registrar Mr. George Braunstein, Exec. Dir., Community Services Board Dr. William Bosher, Jr. Supt., School Board Mr. Craig Bryant, Dir., Utilities Dr. Billy K. Cannaday, Jr. Incoming Supt., School Board Mr. Alan Carmody, Budget Manager Ms. Marilyn Cole, Asst. County Administrator Major Stephen Davis, Police Department Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Dir., Intergovtl. Relations Mr. James Dunn, Dir., Economic Development Mr. William D. Dupler, Building Official Ms. Lisa Elko, Clerk Chief Stephen A. Elswick, Fire Department 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, County Ombudsman Mr Thomas E. Jacobson, Dir., Planning Mr R. John McCracken, Dir., Transportation Mr Richard M. McElfish, Dir., Env. Engineering Mr Steven L. Micas, County Attorney Mr Richard A. Nunnally, Extension Agent Mr Glen Peterson, Dir., Community Diversion Incentive Program Mr. Francis Pitaro, Dir., General Services Ms. Karen F. Russell, Risk Manager 7/26/00 00-502 Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier, Deputy Co. Admin., Management Services Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Deputy Co. Admin., Community Development Mr. Thomas A. Taylor, Dir., Block Grant Office Ms. Marcella Williamson, Asst. Dir., Public Affairs Mr. Warren called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 3:15 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 28, 2000 On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the minutes of June 28, 12000, as submitted. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS O Mr. Ramsey stated that the County's eleventh annual internships in cultural diversity began May 22, 2000. He further stated that approximately 75 students have completed the internship program and noted that several of the interns have returned to work full-time for the County. Each of the interns introduced themselves and Mr. Ramsey introduced Ms. Melissa Bowers, EEO Employment Analyst with Human Resource Management, who is coordinating the internship program. Dr. Bosher introduced Dr. Billy Cannaday, Jr., Chesterfield County's incoming Superintendent of Schools. He stated that Dr. Cannaday's experience in Hampton gives him a strong grasp of Chesterfield County's primary mission - teaching. Dr. Cannaday stated that he looks forward to being a part of the Chesterfield family. He further stated that great communities are defined by the people who live there as well as those who will be living there - the children who are currently being taught. He stated that he sees his job as being the steward of the community to make certain that all of the children demonstrate the kinds of values that will help the community' to grow. He further stated that he looks forward to developing a long-lasting relationship with the Board members. Mr. Warren stated that he had the pleasure of having lunch with Dr. Cannaday on July 24, 2000. He further stated that the Board of Supervisors will do everything possible to work with Dr. Cannaday, the School Board, principals and teachers to make sure that the County continues to have the very best educational system. 00-503 7/26/00 o o Each of the Board members welcomed Dr. Chesterfield County. Cannaday to Mr. Hammer introduced Mr. George Braunstein, the newly appointed Executive Director of the Community Services Board. Mr. Braunstein stated that he has done some consulting in various parts of the country and that Chesterfield County has one of the best public service systems that he has seen. He further stated thaE he is excited and proud to become a part of the County. He stated that, for the first three months in his new position, he will be meeting with all of the stakeholders who have an interest in the services of the Community Services Board and that he would like to meet with each of the Board members during this time to get their perspective. He further stated that he looks forward to worklng with the Board to serve the citizens in the best possible way. Mr. Warren stated that the Board looks forward to working with Mr. Braunstein. Each of the Board members welcomed Mr. Braunstein. Mr. Ramsey recognized Ms. Russell, Director of Risk Management. He stated that, as a result of a national survey conducted by the Department of Public Administration at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, she was recognized in the category of Reputational Leaders/Risk Managers as one of the top ten outstanding Risk Managers in the nation. He congratulated Ms. Russell and commended her for the expertise she provides in the area of risk management. 3. BOA/~D COMMITTEE REPORTS There were no Board Commit~e~ Reports at this time[ REQUESTS TO POSTPONE ACTION, ADDITIONS, OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board replaced Item 8.C.5.c., Award of Contract for the Government Center Parking Lot Paving Project; replaced Item 8.C.6.f., Adoption of Resolution Requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to Approve Rivers Bend Industrial Access Road 2 and Appropriation and Transfer of Funds; replaced Item 8.C.10.b., Set Date for Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance to Create Great Branch Sewer Assessment Districts A and B; replaced Item 8.C.12.c., Transfer of Disnrict Improvement Funds from the Dale District Improvement Fund to the Police Department for Educational Initiatives for the Neighborhood Watch Program; deleted Item 8.C~16., S~reet Name Change; moved Item 9., Hearings of Citizens on Unscheduled Matters and Claims to follow Item 15., Requests for Mobile Home Permits and Rezoning Placed on the Consent Agenda; and adopted the Agenda, as amended. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, HcHale and Miller. Nays: None. 7/26/00 00 -504 5. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS 5.A. RECOGNIZING ~?.T.STATE INSURANCE COMPANY F/~PLOYEES AND THE ALLSTATE FOUNDATION FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT Battalion Chief Mark Nugent introduced Ms. Doris Brown, Mr. Jeff Martin, Mr. Joe Carter and Ms. Cindy Anderson, representing Allstate Insurance Company and The Allstate Foundation who were present to receive the resolution. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the majority of the injuries in our community occur to our youth; and WHEREAS, providing pro-active education is the foundation of Chesterfield County; and fire and life safety injury prevention in WHEREAS, utilizing a wonderful partnership with our School System allows us to teach valuable prevention techniques to our school children; and WHEREAS, the key to fire and life safety education is to promote a proper safety attitude, and to demonstrate proper safety behaviors to our youth; and WHEREAS, this proper safety attitude will be taught in our "Fourth Grade Fire and Life Safety Program' by providing pro- active fire and life safety education on several topics, including locating and removing hazards in the home; developing exit drills; maintaining smoke detectors; practicing safe bicycle habits; and being properly prepared for a natural disaster; and WHEREAS, the employees of Allstate Insurance Company and The Allstate Foundation have formed a partnership with the members of the Chesterfield Fire Department by working side-by- side in delivering fire and life safety education programs to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, The Allstate Foundation has designated the Chesterfield Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services as the recipient of a grant in the amount of $12,000 that will be used to print the Fourth Grade Fire and Life Safety Education Program student handbook which will allow the department to expand the curriculum as well as develop an in- house handbook featuring Chesterfield County students. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes The Allstate Foundation for its generous contribution to the Chesterfield Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services and the students of Chesterfield County, and acknowledges their community support in making Chesterfield County the safest and most secure community of its size in the U.S.A. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mr. Warren presented the executed resolution to Ms. Brown, accompanied by Chief Elswick and the other representatives from Allstate, and expressed appreciation for Allstate's generous contribution to the Department of Fire and Emergency Medical 00-505 Services as well as their efforts in promoting fire and life safety. Mr. Martin expressed appreciation for the opportunity for Allstate to strengthen its role as a corporate citizen by partnering with the Chesterfield Fire Department. Mr. Carter presented a check, in the amount of $12,000, to Chief Elswick. 5.B. RECOGNIZING PHILIP MORRIS U.S.A. FOR ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT Battalion Chief Nugent introduced Hr. Charlie Agee and Ms. Robin Stansel, representing Philip Morris U.S.A. who were present to receive the resolution. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, a goal of the Chesterfield County Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services is to enhance service delivery by utilizing technology and equipment; and WHEREAS, the majority of all injuries and deaths to our customers due to fire occur in the home; and WHEREAS, due to fire conditions, firefighters must perform their life saving job in a zero-visibility atmosphere; and WHEREAS, the utilization of thermal imaging technology allows firefighters to "SEE" through smoke and toxic gasses; and WHEREAS, the utilization of thermal imaging technology allows firefighters to perform their life saving search operations in a safer and more efficient manner; and WHEREAS, Philip Morris U.S.A. has designated the Chesterfield County Departm6St of Fire and Emergency Medical Services as the recipient of a $20,500 donation to purchase a "Flit" thermal imaging device. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Philip Morris U.S.A. for its generous life saving contribution to the Chesterfield Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services, and the citizens of Chesterfield County, and acknowledges their dedicated community support in making Chesterfield County the safest and most secure community of its size in the U.S.A. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mr. Warren presented the executed resolution to Mr. Agee, accompanied by Chief Elswick, Battalion Chief Nugent and Ms. Stansel, and expressed appreciation for Philip Morris' generous contribution to the Department of Fire and Emergency Medical Services as well as their community support. Chief Elswick expressed appreciation for Philip Morris' contribution towards the safety of firefighters and citizens. 00-506 7/26/00 Mr. Agee expressed appreciation for the County providing Philip Morris the opportunity to promote the company's value of sharing with others. 5.C. RECOGNIZING MR. MELVIN SHAFFER FOR HIS SERVICE ON THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD Mr. Pitaro introduced Mr. Melvin Shaffer who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. Melvin Shaffer represented the Dale District as a member of the Chesterfield County Airport Advisory Board from 1968 to July 2000; and WHEREAS, Mr. Shaffer served as Chairman of the Committee in 1979, 1980, 1982, 1992 and 19913; and WHEREAS, Mr. Shaffer has helped oversee the airport from its initial conception in 1968, continuing through today; and WHEREAS, Mr. Shaffer provided guidance and assistance in the privatization of airport services and airport development into the future; and WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Airport is recognized as one of the best reliever airports on the east coast; and WHEREAS, the continuing growth in airport activities is having a beneficial economic impact on the County. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Mr. Melvin Shaffer and expresses its sincere gratitude and appreciation for his service to the County as a member of the Chesterfield County Airport Advisory Committee representing the Dale District. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mr. Shaffer and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mr. Miller, accompanied by Mr. Warren, presented the executed resolution to Mr. Shaffer, accompanied by Mr. Pitaro and Mr. John Mathiasen, Executive Director of Richmond International Airport, and expressed appreciation for his exemplary service on the Airport Advisory Board and numerous contributions to the Chesterfield County Airport. Mr. Shaffer stated that the County Airport is an elegant facility and urged the Board to use caution when considering future zoning requests in the area of the Airport. He expressed appreciation for the Board's support during his service on the Airport Advisory Board. oo-so? ?/ s/oo 6. WORK SESSIONS o EMS REVENUE RECOVERY REPORT Second Deputy Chief Frank Edwards introduced Mr. Richard Keller and Ms. Diane Wright from Fitch and Associates, the consultant who conducted an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) fee-for- service feasibility study. Mr. Keller presented a summary of the findings and recommendations of the study. He first reviewed the purpose and background of the study. He stated that the County's growing retiree population represents 43 percent of County ambulance transports. He reviewed system activity and stated that the Fire Department's EMS transports have been climbing steadily over the last three years while the Volunteer Rescue Squads have maintained a fairly level number of transports. He then reviewed Fire Department and Volunteer Rescue Squad activity and stated that Fire Department personnel are responsible for 58 percent of all transports. He reviewed the methodology used for the study and stated that, in setting transport rates, there needs to be some relationship between the cost for providing the service and the rates. He further stated that the recommendation includes a continued subsidy from the County to support EMS activities and additional revenue potential. He stated that the total system costs, not including the Fire Department's first responder costs, are estimated at $6.3 million annually which reflects a per transport cost of approximately $500. fie reviewed categories of EMS System Costs and stated that the cost estimate for the Volunteer Rescue Squads includes the total operating budget for each of the three rescue squads that are totally contained within the County as well as an allocated portion of Forest View Rescue Squad's budget. There was brief discussion relative to sources of funding for Volunteer Rescue Squads' expenditures. Mr. Keller reviewed Proposed RaEes including $385 for Advanced Life Support (ALS); $360 f69 Basic Life Support (BLS); and $7.50 per mile. He stated that these are allowable charges by Medicare and will be paid at 80 percent. He further stated that the rates are reflective of, and in some cases lower than, what other services charge throughout the country. He reviewed the anticipated collection rate and stated that 35 percent of all charges is anticipated to be uncollectible. There was brief discussion relative to a Board policy for writing off uncollectible amounts. Mr. Keller reviewed fee-for-service revenues and costs to implement the program. He stated that the first year cost is estimated at less than $400,000. He then reviewed anticipated patient payments. Mr. Barber expressed concerns relative to the anticipated patient payment of Medicare patients without supplemental insurance. Mr. Keller stated that the Board should not, as a policy, write off the co-insurance amounts required to be billed by Medicare. He further stated that the recommendations include a Board policy to identify indigent patients and write-off their co- insurance amounts. oo-so 7/ 6/oo Mr. McHale expressed concerns relative to collection from uninsured persons. Mr. Keller stated that it is estimated that the County would only collect about 15 percent of all the amounts billed to people who are uninsured. He further stated that these people will frequently fall into the category of financial hardship and will be written off if they meet that criteria. He stated that historical data from hospitals indicates that approximately three to five percent of all transports are uninsured. Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to credit reporting of uncollectible amounts. Mr. Keller stated that the Board would have the option to determine what accounts, if any, would be turned over to a collection agency. He then reviewed impacts and issues and stated that ambulance service represents less than one percent of total healthcare expenditures. He reviewed volunteer issues including membership recruitment and retention; loss of donations; community perception and identity; and legal questions. He stated that the squads believe the fee-for- service program will challenge their survival. Mrs. Humphrey questioned the data supporting the volunteer issues and stated that the workforce in the County has changed and that there are times when the volunteer rescue squads need assistance from the County's Fire Department for staffing. Mr. Keller stated that the challenge of daytime coverage of volunteer rescue squads is being experienced throughout the country. He further stated that the driving force behind implementing fee-for-service for many volunteer rescue squads has been the necessity to hire paid staff during the daytime hours. He stated that Chesterfield County is unique in that it's Fire Department has fulfilled the role of daytime staffing. There was brief discussion relative to decreased donations after implementation of fee-for-service transports. Mr. Keller referenced various rescue squad services that have gone from volunteer to fee-for-service and stated that the revenue received in Pulaski County from their membership program exceeds the donations that were being received. He further stated that loss in personnel did not seem to be as significant an issue as had been anticipated for the squads that went from volunteer to fee-for-service. He stated that 28 different municipalities, fire departments, fire rescue squads and volunteer squads in the State currently bill for ambulance service. Mr. Barber questioned the billing procedure used by Richmond Ambulance Service and the service provided by Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad in the City. Mrs. Humphrey expressed concerns relative to charging for ambulance service provided by Fire Department personnel while staffing the volunteer rescue squad. When asked, Mr. Keller stated that, if a Richmond Ambulance Service vehicle and crew transports a patient within the City of Richmond, the patient is billed, and if a Forest View unit provides a transport in the City, the patient is not billed. 00-509 ?/26/00 He further stated that there are issues that will need to be addressed in the County to determine whether or not a patient is charged. He stated that there are three options for EMS revenue recovery: Option 1 -- every patient transported by the County's EMS System, regardless of the vehicle and crew, will be charged for ambulance services; Option 2, Status Quo - everything remains the same; and Option 3 - patients transported by the Fire Department only will be charged. He reviewed the rationale for Option 1 and stated that ambulance reimbursement is already being paid for through health insurance and taxes for Medicare and Medicaid. He further stated that EMS system costs and the volume of transports by the Fire Department are increasing and that volunteer rescue squad transports have decreased. He stated that the feasibility study identified problems in the EMS system that needed improvement. He further stated that it has been indicated that there will be no momentum in the State to increase EMS funding until entitlement healthcare dollars are sought. He reviewed the challenges of Option 2 and stated that future service improvements will depend upon increasing the rate of County support. He then reviewed the challenges of Option 3 and stated that a number of issues would need to be addressed. He further stated that improvement funds would be limited with Option 3. He stated that the study concluded that Option 1 would best support the volunteer rescue squads; improve the EMS system; and protect patients from financial hardship. He further stated that the study also concluded that a membership program (with a $49 annual fee that pre-pays all deductibles and co-insurance, as well as uninsured charges) should be implemented. When asked, Mr. Keller stated that, under Option 1, all transports would be billed. He further stated that, under Option 1, the first year revenue potential would be $2.7 million from transports and $200,000 from subscriptions to the membership program. He stated that, four years after implementation, the revenue potential is estimated at $4.8 million. He then reviewed the Allocation Plan and stated that $625,000 allocated to fund the squads represents 75 percent of their total operating budge~"~' Which is the approximate amount of donations that currently support the volunteer rescue squads. He further stated that allocations are recommended for performance incentives as well as EMS system improvement. He then summarized the findings of the feasibility study relative to Option 1, including significant revenue potential; mitigation of impact on volunteer rescue squads; minimized cost to patients; and ability to fund EMS improvements that will benefit patients. Mr. Miller stated that he is not as concerned about the impact on volunteer rescue squads as he is the benefit to patients. He requested additional time for the Board to receive more information and study the issue further. Mr. Ramsey stated that staff recommends proceeding with additional information meetings; constituent meetings; and meetings with various organizations throughout the County to provide information relative to the EMS fee-for-service study to the community. He further stated that staff recommends that a public hearing be held in the Fall of 2000. Mr. Miller stated that he feels additional time may be necessary to inform the citizens. 00-510 7/26/00 Mr. Barber stated that Chief Elswick will speak on the revenue recovery issue at a Midlothian Rotary Club meeting as well as at his constituents' meeting on October 2, 2000. When asked, Mr. Keller stated that, if fee-for-service is implemented, the rescue squad volunteers may lose their protection under the Good Samaritan Act. He further stated that there is a possibility they may be covered under the County's sovereign immunity. He stated that malpractice insurance for the individuals has also been proposed with the revenue recovery plan. Mr. Barber requested that the County Attorney prepare a comparison of the coverage provided to the volunteers by the Good Samaritan Act, malpractice insurance and sovereign immunity. There was brief discussion relative to charging for medical supplies used during transport and the exchange of medical supplies between hospitals and ambulance services. Mr. Barber stated that he feels staff can efficiently determine a method of charging for transports by career firefighters and not charging for transports by volunteer rescue squad personnel without the loss of revenue into the system as a whole. Mr. Warren introduced Mr. Rick Morrow, Chairman of the EMS Advisory Council. Mr. Morrow stated that the project itself does not represent any form of controversy between volunteer squads, the Fire Department and/or the County, but rather a greater opportunity toward full collaborated system integration. He further stated that the EMS Advisory Council recommends Option 3 as it might be developed among the component organizations. He presented the Board members with a list of issues that were determined by members of Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad upon review of the consultant's report and stated that Manchester, Bensley- Bermuda and Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squads all strongly oppose a full revenue recovery fee-for-service system, but rather support the development of Option 3 so that it works for everyone. He further stated that the Fire Department and squads are working to provide a seamless integrated system so that the best possible service can be delivered at the lowest possible cost. Chief Elswick stated that the Board has been provided another option to look at payment for critical issues within the EMS system. He further stated that staffing is a critical issue that he is faced with every day and noted that taking firefighters off of a fire apparatus and putting them on a rescue squad vehicle affects the safety of citizens as well as firefighters. He stated that he feels the County can work within the framework of the consultant's study to develop a system that is good for all of the organizations within the EMS system. He further stated that he feels the cooperation between the rescue squads and Fire Department will continue. There was brief discussion relative to insufficient staffing of the Fire Department because of the necessity to staff volunteer rescue squads. When asked, Chief Elswick stated that EMS calls now represent 70 percent of the Fire Department's workload. 00-511 7/26/00 7. DEFERRED ITEM~ O AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEb~.NT WITH GREATER RICHMOND TRANSIT COMPANY FOR VAN SERVICE Mr. Stith stated that, following a public hearing on June 28, 2000, the Board approved the administration's concept for van service. He further stated that the proposed contract with Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) sets the terms of how the van service will be conducted and provides basic rights for the County to insure that GRTC will not be making any changes without the input of County Administration. He stated that staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Administrator to enter into the agreement with GRTC and also authorize the County Administrator to make service adjustments at certain stop locations and frequencies as necessary to provide efficient service. Mr. Barber stated that his requested revision, terminating the Route 60 van route at Chesterfield Towne Center rather than extending it to Walmart, has been incorporated in th® agreement. Mr. McHale stated that a new business coming to the County expressed concerns relative to lack of public transportation to the Walthall area. He also expressed concerns that Bermuda Run is currently not served under the proposal and questioned the possibility of extending service into those areas if it was determined that a need existed. Mr. Ramsey stated that the agreement would not prohibit such adjustments, but that extensions of service would have to be brought back to the Board for approval. Mr. Stith stated that the existing businesses in Walthall had not expressed an interest in public transportation. He further stated that that there was a significant cost factor involved in providing service to Bermuda Run. Mr. McHale stated that a change has been made in service delivery with the shortened Route 60 van route and requested that staff consider the addition of Walthall and Bermuda Run in the future. Mr. McHale then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to authorize the County Administrator to enter into an agreement with Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC), acceptable to the County Attorney, to provide van service to the County, and authorize the County Administrator to make service adjustments in the stop locations and frequencies as necessary to provide efficient service. Mrs. Humphrey stated that she supports Mr. McHale's request to extend the extra mile that Mr. Barber has given up from Route 60 to the Jefferson Davis Corridor. Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to terms of the agreement which state that the service can be assigned and GRTC will not necessarily have to operate it. He further expressed concerns relative to indemnification of losses. Mr. Micas stated that he is not familiar with either GRTC's self-insurance or liability insurance limits. 00-512 7/26/00 Mr. Miller expressed further concerns relative to GRTC being allowed to put a substituted operation in place to provide the van service and also to the lack of knowledge of GRTC's insurance limits for indemnification of the County. He then expressed concerns relative to a term of the agreement whereby GRTC would have no financial liability if the County were to terminate the agreement. Mr. Warren stated that the two-year trial program that was developed as the result of General Assembly funding. He further stated that the County is not involved in the funding from a local standpoint. He stated that GRTC has been identified as one of the premier managed regional transit systems in the country and that he feels the County should be optimistic about the proposal. Mr. Miller stated that he will abstain from voting on the issue. There was brief discussion relative to Mr. McHale's request to extend van service to the Walthall area. Mr. Warren called for a vote on the motion made by Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to authorize the County Administrator to enter into an agreement with Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC), acceptable to the County Attorney, to provide van service to the County, and authorize the County Administrator to make service adjustments in the stop locations and frequencies as necessary to provide efficient service. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber and McHale. Nays: None. Abstain: Miller. 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.A. APPOINTMENTS On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board suspended its rules at this time to allow simultaneous nomination/appointment/reappointment of members to serve on the Airport Advisory Board and the Community Criminal Justice Board. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.A.1. AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board nominated/appointed Mr. Steven R. O'Leary, representing the Dale District, to serve on the Airport Advisory Board, whose term is effective immediately and expires February 14, 2001. (It is noted Mr. O'Leary will fill the unexpired term of Mr. Melvin Shaffer.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.A.2. COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board nominated/appointed/reappointed Mr. Michael C. Allen, Mr. Raeford W. Walker and Mr. Michael W. Lee to serve on the 00-5~3 7/26/00 Community Criminal Justice Board whose terms are effective immediately. (It is noted that the terms of Mr. Allen and Mr. Walker expire June 30, 2002 and that Mr. Lee's term expires June 30, 2001.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.B. STREETLIGHT INST~r.?.ATION APPROVALS After brief discussion, on motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board approved the following streetlight installation cost approvals: Matoaca District * Shaker Drive, vicinity of 20804/20806 Cost to install streetlight: $1,229.93 * Sasha Court, vicinity of 20902/20904 Cost to install streetlight: $1,004.80 Midlothian District * Trabue Road, at 8536 Cost to install streetlight: $284.16 And, further, the Board deferred the following streetlight installation cost approval until October 25, 2000: Matoaca District Sacks Lane, vicinity opposite 4301/4303 Cost to install streetlight: $6,281.58 Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C. CONSENT ITF24S On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board removed Item 8.C.5.b., Award of Contract to R. W. Beck for Professional Consulting Services to Develop an Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, and Item 8.C.13., Initiation of a Conditional Use Planned Development Application to Permit Bulk Exceptions and an Exception to the Subdivision Ordinance and Initiation of Amendments to the County Subdivision Ordinance, from the Consent Agenda to allow for public comment. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.1. APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER FOR THE BENSLEY PA~J{ CO~qUNITY CENTER CONSTRUCTION On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute Change Order Number 6 in the amount of $28,863 for the construction contract with Brooks and Company, Incorporated for additional contractor 00-514 7/26/00 charges for the Benstey Park Community Center. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8 .C.2. AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE THE POLICE MUTUAL AID JOINT AVIATION AGBRR~R. NT BETWEEN CHESTERFIELD AND HENRICO COUNTIES AND THE CITY OF RICHMOND On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the County Administrator or his designee to execute the Police Mutual Aid Joint Aviation Agreement on behalf of the County. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.3. APPROVAL OF TIME EXTENSION FOR ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER SIGNS On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board granted the Planning Commission an additional one hundred days to make their recommendation on the Zoning Ordinance Amendment relative to electronic message centers. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.4. APPROV~ OF R~TENSION OF REPAYMENT DATE FOR ADVANCE BY THE HENRICUS FOUNDATION On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the extension of the repayment date for the $350,000 advance to the Henricus Foundation from June 1, 2000 to July 15, 2001. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.5. AWARD OF CONTRACTS 8.C.5.a. TO BLUE RIDGE GENERAL INCORPORATED FOR PHASE TWO OF THE SNAIL BUT,?,RT TRAP FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY SMALL ARMS TRAINING FACILITY IN ENON On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute a sole source contract, in the amount of $240,559, with Blue Ridge General Incorporated, a Virginia Class A Contractor, for the procurement and installation of phase two of the Snail Bullet Trap for the small arms training facility at the Public Safety Training Facility in Enon. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-515 7/26/00 .8.C.5.c. FOR THE GOVERNMENT CENTER PARKING LOT PAVINC PROJECT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board awarded a contract in the amount of $575,151 to Shoosmith Brothers, Incorporated for the paving of the parking lot at the Government Center. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.6. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS 8.C.6.a. RECOGNIZING SENIOR DETECTIVE STEPHEN D. SMITH, POLICE DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Senior Detective Stephen D. Smith will retire from the Chesterfield County Police Department August 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith has provided 27 years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith has faithfully served the County in the capacity of Dispatcher, Patrol Officer, Investigator, Detective and Senior Detective; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith was one of the first patrol officers to become a Breathalyzer operator; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith served as one of the first Field Training Officers and Evidence Technicians for the Police Department; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith was selected as Police Officer of the Year in 1979 by the Central Chesterfield Ruritan Club; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith's teamwork efforts with his fellow department members and members of other agencies have resulted in the resolution of many cases, including high profile cases such as the 288 Auto Sales capital murder case and the Luis Cristobal bombing case; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith has received several Certificates of Commendation for his professionalism, diligence, and interrogation skills in the successful resolution of murder and robbery cases; and WHEREAS, Detective Smith has provided the Chesterfield County Police Department with many years of loyal and dedicated service; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Detective Smith's diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Senior Detective Stephen D. Smith and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for his service to the County, their congratulations upon his retirement, and their best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-516 7/26/00 8.C.6.b. RECOGNIZING MR. JESSE ANDREW KEPPLER UPON ATTAINING THE RANK OF EAGLE SCOUT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was incorporated by Mr. William D. Boyce on February 8, 1910; and WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was founded to promote citizenship training, personal development, and fitness of individuals; and WHEREAS, after earning at least twenty-one merit badges in a wide variety of fields, serving in a leadership position in a troop, carrying out a service project beneficial to his community, being active in the troop, demonstrating Scout spirit, and living up to the Scout Oath and Law; and WHEREAS, Mr. Jesse Andrew Keppler, Troop 183, sponsored by Saint Ann's Catholic Church, has accomplished those high standards of commitment and has reached the long-sought goal of Eagle Scout which is received by less than two percent of those individuals entering the Scouting movement; and WHEREAS, growing through his experiences in Scouting, learning the lessons of responsible citizenship, and priding himself on the great accomplishments of his Country, Jesse is indeed a member of a new generation of prepared young citizens of whom we can all be very proud. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to Mr. Jesse Andrew Keppler and acknowledges the good fortune of the County to have such an outstanding young man as one of its citizens. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.6.c. RECOGNIZING THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BLACK ADMTNISTRATIVE PROFESSIONALS UPON ITS ANNUAL CONFERENCE On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the National Association of Black Administrative Professionals, formerly known as the Black Professional Secretaries Association, held its first meeting in December 1984 and began operations in 1985; and WHEREAS, the group was formed as a non-profit organization of office support professionals with a common goal of enhancing professionalism through networking, seminars and communications; and WHEREAS, administrative professionals serve as vital information hubs in the modern office, managing information, organizing the office and mastering office technology; and WHEREAS, the association promotes communication among office support workers, and also sponsors events, programs and 00-517 7/26/00 activities that contribute to the professional, social and educational development of its members; and WHEREAS, the Richmond chapter is holding its llth Annual Professional Development Conference August 16-19, 2000; and WHEREAS, this conference will attract black administrative professionals who live and work in Chesterfield County. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors congratulates the National Association of Black Administrative Professionals on its upcoming llth annual conference, and wishes its members continued success in all their endeavors. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.6.e. RECOGNIZING MS. KATHERINE G. HUDSON, HUlqAN RESOUI~CR MANAGEMENT, UPON HER RETIRE~.NT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Ms. Katherine "Kitty' G. Hudson will retire from the Chesterfield County Departmen% of Human Resource Management on September 1, 2000; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hudson began her public service with the County as a Data Entry Operator I in the Information Systems Technology Department on October 21, 1980, and has faithfully served Chesterfield County for nineteen years; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hudson joined the Department of Human Resource Management (HRM) on March 30, 1992 as a Senior Office Assistant in the Employment unit; and WHEREAS, through dedicated service to the County, Ms. Hudson has keyed over 213,000 employment applications in the Human Resource Information System during the past eight years; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hudson has provided service to Chesterfield County employees, applicants, and. citizens through ongoing assistance at the front desk; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hudson has willingly offered and assisted in representing HRM and Chesterfield County by participating in several "Meet Chesterfield County Government Day" events and numerous career fairs after hours as well as weekends. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Katherine "Kitty' G. Hudson and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County, their congratulations upon her retirement, and their best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. oo-sz8 ?/26/00 8.C.6.f. REQUESTING THE VIRGINIA DEPAi~TMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO APPROVE RIVERS BEND INDUSTRIAL ACCESS ROAD 2 AND APPROPRIATION AND TRANSFER OF FUNDS On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Liberty Property Development Corporation ("Liberty") plans to construct a new industrial park off of Kingston Avenue; and WHEREAS, Liberty intends to immediately construct an initial 176,000 square foot building with a capital investment of $45 million for qualifying manufacturing/processing users; and WHEREAS, the property on which the initial building will be located requires the construction of a new road connecting to Kingston Avenue; and WHEREAS, the construction of the initial building and subsequent qualifying buildings are expected to occur within five (5) years of the Commonwealth Transportation Board's allocation of funds for the construction of an access road to the property and is expected to satisfy VDOT's capital investment requirements; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County hereby guarantees that the necessary right-of-way and utility adjustments for the new access road will be provided at no cost to the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to provide industrial access funding to construct an adequate road to the industrial park. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby agrees to provide a surety acceptable to VDOT, to guarantee sufficient qualifying capital investment will occur within five years of the Commonwealth Transportation Board's allocation of industrial access funds for the access road. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby agrees that the new roadway so constructed will be added to and become a part of the Secondary System of Highways. And, further, the Board appropriated $395,000 in anticipated Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) reimbursements and $47,500 in anticipated developer reimbursements for the construction of the access road; transferred $47,500 from the Industrial Access Account to the project for matching funds; transferred $25,000 from the Industrial Access Account to the project for the Capital Investment Surety cost; authorized the County Administrator to enter into the necessary County/VDOT/ Developer construction agreements/contracts, permits and surety agreements, acceptable to the County Attorney, in order to have the access road constructed; authorized staff to advertise a road construction contract for the access road and award bid for Rivers Bend Industrial Access Road 2 to the lowest responsible bidder up to $360,000; and accepted the right-of- way for the access road and authorized the County Administrator to sign the deed. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.7. REQUESTS FOR ENTERTAINMENT/MUSIC FESTIVAL PERMITS 8.C.7.a. FROM T~R CHESTERFIELD COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from the Chesterfield County Fair Association for a musical/entertainment festival permit to hold the 87th annual Chesterfield County Fair at the fairgrounds complex from August 25 through September 4, 2000, subject to conditions and adherence to staff recommendations. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHate and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.7.b. FROM CHESTERFIELD BAPTIST CHURCH On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from Chesterfield Baptist Church for an entertainment/music festival permit to conduct its First Annual Healing Hands Summer Festival on the stadium grounds of Clover Hill High School on July 29, 2000. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.8. APPROVAL TO CREATE NEW POSITION IN SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND APPROPRIATE COMPENSATION BOARD REVENUE On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board created a Local Inmate Data System (LIDS) Technician position in the Sheriff's Office and appropriated $34,400 in Compensation Board Revenue in the Sheriff's OperaEing Budget. (It is noted the source of funds for the local match of $3,800 will be identified at the end of the fiscal year.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.9. CANCELLATION OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS On motion of Mr. McHale, canceled the September Supervisors. seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board 27, 2000 meeting of the Board of Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-520 7/26/00 8.C.10. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 8 .C.10.a. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSE FEES On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board set the date of August 23, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider an ordinance amendment relating to business license fees. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.10.b. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE GREAT BRANCH SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS A AND B On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board set the date of August 23, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to establish Great Branch Sewer Assessment Districts A and B. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.11. CANCET.?.ATION OF YARD WASTE COMPOSTINGAND RECYCLING CONTRACT WITH CENTRAL VIRGINIA WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY AND SHOOSMITH BROTHERS, INCORPORATED On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded, by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute a cancellation contract for the yard waste composting and recycling contract with the Central Virginia Waste Management Authority and Shoosmith Brothers, Incorporated. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.12 TRANSFER OF DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUNDS 8.C.12.a. FROM THE MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUND TO THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT FOR PAINTING ON THE BON AIR WATER TANK On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board transferred $3,970 from the Midlothian District Improvement Fund to the Utilities Department for painting of "Bon Air Circa 1877" on the Bon Air water tank. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.12.b. FROM THE MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUND TO THE SCHOOL BOARD TO PURCHASE TWO-WAY RADIOS FOR CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board transferred $1,530 from the Midlothian District Improvement Fund to the School Board to purchase two-way radios for Crestwood Elementary School. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-521 7/26/00 8.C.12.c. FROM T~E D~T.R DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUND TO THE POLICE DEPART~R. NT FOR EDUCATIONAL INITIATIVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PROGRAM On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board transferred $2,000 from the Dale District Improvement Fund to the Police Department to support educational initiatives for the County's Neighborhood Watch Program. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.14. APPROPRIATION OF STATE REVENUE AND CREATION OF THREE POSITIONS IN COMSKINITY CORRECTIONS SERVICES On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board appropriated $128,191 in State Revenue and created two Casemanager positions and one Senior Casemanager position in Community Corrections Services. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.17. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to ~ 33.1-229, Code of Virqinia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Type Chanqe to the Secondary System of State Hi,qhways Basis for Change: Statutory Reference: Project: From: To: Addition, New subdivision street §33.1-229 Waterviews @ The Reservoir Sailview Court, State Route Number: 4633 Sailview Dr., (Rt. 4632) Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.15 miles. Addition 00-522 7/26/00 Right-of-way record was filed on 10/23f1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 95; Pg. 99, with a width of 40 Ft. · Sailview Drive, State Route Number: 4632 From: Genito Rd., (Rt. 604) To: Sailview Ct., (Rt. 4633), a distance of: 0.11 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 10/23/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 95; Pg. 99, with a width of 40 Ft. · Sailview Drive, State Route Number: 4632 From: Sailview Ct., (Rt. 4633) To: Sailview Dr., (Rt. 4632), a distance of: 0.03 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 10/23/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 95; Pg. 99, with a width of 40 Ft. · Sailview Drive, State Route Number: 4632 From: Sailview Dr. (Rt. 4632), 0.14Mi S of Rt.604 To: Sailview Dr. (Rt. 4632), a distance of: 0.12 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 10/23/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 95; Pg. 99, with a width of 40 Ft. And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to ~ 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Type Change to the Secondary System of State Hi.qhways: Addition Basis for Change: Addition, New subdivision street Statutory Reference: §33.1-229 Project: Lonas Parkway · Lonas Parkway, State Route Number: 6045 From: Hull Street Rd., (Rt. 360) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.52 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 6/11/1998 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 99; Pg. 7, with a width of 50-135 Ft. 00-523 7/26/00 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to ~ 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Type Chanqe to the Secondary System of State Hiqhways: Addition Basis for Change: Addition, New subdivision street Statutory Reference: {}33.1-229 Project: Woodland Pond, Section 10 Timber Point Drive, State Route Number: 3807 From: Owl Trace Dr., ( Rt. 3806) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.17 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 7/22/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 94; Pg. 83, with a width of 50 Ft. · Owl Trace Drive, State Route Number: 3806 From: Woodland Pond Py., (Rt. 3670) To: Timber Point Dr., (Rt. 3807), a distance of: 0.21 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 7/22/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 94; Pg. 83, with a width of 50 Ft. · Owl Trace Drive, State Route Number: 3806 From: Timber Point Dr., (Rt. 3807) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.13 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 7/22/1997 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 94; Pg. 83, with a width of 50 Ft. And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and 00-524 7/26/00 WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to ~ 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Tvoe Chan.qe to the Secondary System of State HiRhways: .Addition Basis for Change: Addition, New subdivision street Statutory Reference: §33.1-229 Project: Bon Air Vista and a Portion of Bon Air Hills · Winterslow Terrace, State Route Number: 4197 From: Cul-de-sac To: Winterslow Rd., (Rt. 4194), a distance of: 0.07 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 10/30/1996 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 92; Pg. 41, with a width of 50 Ft. · Winterslow Road, State Route Number: 4194 From: Winterslow Tr., (Rt. 4197) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 10/30/1996 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb. 92; Pg. 41, with a width of 50 Ft. · Winterslow Road, State Route Number: 4194 From: Fairwood Dr., (Rt. 2142) To: Winterslow Tr., (Rt. 4197), a distance of: 0.08 miles. Right-of-way record was filed on 8/23/1956 with the Office Of Clerk To Circuit Court in Pb 9; Pg. 134, with a width of 50 Ft. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.18. DESIGNATION OF RIGHTS OF WAY 8.C.18.a. FOR THE NEW MATOACA HIGH SCHOOL On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board designated 9.283 acres of County property as public right of way for the new Matoaca High School and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary Declaration. (It is noted copies of the plats are filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-525 7/26/00 8.C.18.b. FOR IMPROVEM~.NTS TO DREWRY'S BLUFF ROAD On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board designated a ten foot strip of land as public right of way for improvements to Drewry's Bluff Road (State Route 1602), and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary Declaration. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.} Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.19. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND 8.C.19.a. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF HULL STREET ROAD AND THE WEST LINE OF SPRING RUN ROAD FROM SYDNEY VENTURE VI, LIMITED On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.884 acres from Sydney Venture VI, Limited, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.19.b. ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF GROVE ROAD FROM LOUIS T. SMITH AND JANE M. SMITH On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.021 acres along the west right of way line of Grove Road (State Route 868) from Louis T. Smith (also known as Lewis T. Smith) and Jane M. Smith, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.19.c. ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TURNER ROAD FROM MOTUNRADE GRACE ILORI On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.03 acres along the east right of way line of Turner Road (State Route 650) from Motunrade Grace Ilori, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-526 7/26/00 8.C.19.d. ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BERMUDA ORCHARD LANE FROM SOUTHBEND, LLC On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.607 acres along the west right of way line of Bermuda Orchard Lane from Southbend, LLC, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.19.e. AT POINT OF ROCKS PARK AND DESIGNATION OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO ENON CHURCH ROAD On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 4.3 ± acres at Point of Rocks Park, designated right of way for improvements to Enon Church Road, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed and declaration. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8 C.20. REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION 8.C.20.a. FROM RICHMOND METROPOLITAN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, INCORPORATED TO CONSTRUCT A CONCRETE WEIR WITHIN A SIXTEEN FOOT SEWER EASEMENT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from Richmond Metropolitan Habitat for Humanity, Incorporated to construct a concrete weir within a sixteen foot sewer easement across property at 2500 Merriewood Road, subject to the execution of a license agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8 .C.20 .b. FROM THOMAS R BADER, JR. AND JEANNE M. BADER TO CONSTRUCT A FENCE WITHIN A THIRTY-FIVE FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND AN EIGHT FOOT EASEMENT ACROSS LOT 37, BLOCK E, POWDERHAM, SECTION D On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from Thomas R. Bader, Jr. and Jeanne M. Bader to construct a fence withiu~ a thirty-five foot drainage easement and an eight foot easement across Lot 37, Block E, Powderham, Section D, subject to the execution of a license agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00-527 7/26/00 8.C.20.c. FROM GEORGE E. HENLEY, SR. AND BARBARA D. HEN?.w.Y FOR CONCRETE CULVERTS TO ENCROACH WITHIN A SIXTEEN FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT ACROSS LOT 1, BLOCK C, WALTHALL MILL, SECTION I On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from George E. Henley, Sr. and Barbara D. Henley for concrete culverts to encroach within a sixteen foot drainage easement across Lot 1, Block C, Walthall Mill, Section 1, subject to the execution of a license agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.} Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.21. CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ET.RCTRIC AND POWER COMPANY TO INSTALL POWER LINES FOR LIGHTING AT MEADOWEROOK HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FIELDS On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, 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 to install power lines to provide lighting to the athletic fields at Meadowbrook High School located on Cogbill Road. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.22. TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE SCHOOL RESERVE FOR SCHOOl, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FUND On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board transferred $5,950,000 from the Reserve for School Capital Improvements to the School Capital Improvement Program fund for technology and major maintenance. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda for Board discussion: 8.C.6.d. APPROVING THE FINANCING PLAN FOR RICHMOND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION Mr. Warren introduced Mr. John Mathiasen, Executive Director of Richmond International Airport. Mr. Mathiasen stated that, every three years, the Capital Region Airport Commission requires approval of the proposed plan of financing. He further stated that the plan includes a list of all capital projects that the Airport Commission would like to do over the next three years. He stated that Chesterfield is the final locality to adopt the resolution that will enable the Commission to proceed with its aggressive capital improvement plan at the Airport. oo-528 7/26/oo On motion of Barber, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY APPROVING THE PLAN OF FINANCING FOR THE CAPITAL REGION AIRPORT COMMISSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING OR REFINANCING IMPROVEMENTS AND EXTENSIONS AT THE RICHMOND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WHEREAS, the Capital Region Airport Commission was created pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 380 of the Acts of Assembly of 1980, as amended (the "Enabling Act"), and owns and operates the Richmond International Airport (the "Airport"); and WHEREAS, in order to expand its facilities due to increasing passenger and cargo demand, the Commission desires to undertake any or all of the improvements, enlargements or replacements at the Airport (the "Project") and issue its bonds, notes or other obligations (the "Obligations") pursuant to a plan of financing, all as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Enabling Act requires that the governing body of each participating political subdivision of the Commission approve the maximum amount and general purposes of the issuance of indebtedness by the Commission; and WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), provides that, following a public hearing, the plan of financing for the issuance of exempt facilities bonds or notes be approved by certain elected public bodies in respect of the issuer of such bonds or notes; and WHEREAS, the plan of financing for the issuance of the Obligations for the Project was the subject of a public hearing by the Commission on May 30, 2000, in accordance with the provisions of Section 147(f) of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission has requested that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia (the "County') approve the plan of financing for the issuance of the Obligations to finance or refinance any or all parts of the Project and their maximum amount, as required by the Enabling Act and to the extent required by the Code; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the County to approve the Commission's plan of financing as set forth in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board hereby approves the issuance of Obligations by the Commission pursuant to the plan of financing for the Project, all as described in Exhibit A, and the general purposes thereof for the financing or refinancing of the Project, as required by the Enabling Act and to the extent required by Section 147(f) of the Code. 2. The approval of the plan of financing for the issuance of the Obligations does not constitute an endorsement to 00-529 7/26/00 prospective purchasers of the Obligations of the creditworthiness of the Project, the Airport or the Commission. As set forth in the plan of financing, the Obligations or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and moneys pledged therefor and from any other funds which may become available, and neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth, the County or the Commission shall be pledged thereto. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Exhibit A CAPITAL REGION AIRPORT COMMISSION Airport Development Program PLAN OF FINANCING (May 30, 2000) The Capital Region Airport Commission (the "Commission") was created by and pursuant to Chapter 537 of the Acts of Assembly of 1975, as amended, and continued by Chapter 380 of the Acts of Assembly of 1980, as amended (the "Enabling Act"), and is authorized to issue its bonds or other obligations for the purpose of financing, among other things, the cost of maintaining, enlarging and improving any of its facilities. The Commission is continuing the capital expansion program that was the subject of its previous plan of finance, dated October 28, 1997 and approved by its Participating Political Subdivisions (as that term is defined in the Enabling Act) in November and December, 1997 (the "1997 Plan of Finance"). The Commission's current capital improvement program (the "Airport Development Program') consists of the following projects (some of which were the subject of the 1997 Plan of Finance): The acquisition, construction and equipping of expansions to the Commission's existing terminal building, such expansions to consist of a two-level expansion to the arrival and departure areas, passenger sky bridges from the terminal to the Commission's parking facilities, second-level curbside canopies, and improvements to the terminal's facilities, systems and equipment (including ticket counters, offices, baggage make-up and claim devices and utility equipment); The acquisition, construction and equipping of expansions to the concourse and administrative areas of the terminal building, including additional concession areas, airline operations areas, public circulation areas, federal inspection facilities, ticket counters, offices and passenger holdrooms for additional gates in Concourses A and C, and including passenger loading bridges; o The acquisition, renovation and equipping of upgrades, improvements and refurbishments to the heating - ventilating - air conditioning system and the interior areas (including furnishings and tenant build-outs/finishes) of the existing and the expanded terminal (including the concourses 00-530 7/26/00 o o o o 10. 11. thereto); The relocation, construction and equipping of the air traffic control tower; The acquisition, construction, reconstruction and equipping of the ingress and egress terminal roadways, including an elevated roadway and platform to connect the terminal access and departure roadways with the two level expansion to the arrival and departure areas ef the terminal, realignment and relocation ef existing roadways and parking facilities, and site improvements with respect thereto; The acquisition, construction and equipping (including site work) of a building or buildings of up to 350,000 square feet for air cargo and other aviation-related purposes and to serve the Commission's foreign trade zone, such projects to include associated office space, ancillary roads, site infrastructure and equipment; The acquisition (including related land and associated rights in respect thereof), construction, reconstruction, expansion, improving and equipping of (i) additional public parking facilities, including satellite parking facilities, additional structured parking facilities adjacent to the existing public parking garages, and related vehicle servicing facilities, (ii) improvements to the rental car storage and ready/return facilities, including a rental car ready/return garage adjacent to the terminal building to accommodate approximately 600 vehicles, and related vehicle servicing facilities, and (iii) additional employee and tenant parking facilities; The renovation, expansion, conversion and equipping (including site work) of current and future aircraft hangars for general aviation, air cargo and aircraft maintenance purposes,, and the acquisition, construction and equipping of additional facilities for air cargo (including for transportation logistics, intermodal purposes, and package sorting, distribution, and delivery), aircraft storage and aircraft maintenance; The construction, reconstruction, extension or rehabilitation of aircraft maintenance purposes, and the acquisition, construction and equipping of additional facilities for air cargo (including for transportation logistics, intermodal purposes, and package sorting, distribution, and delivery), aircraft storage and aircraft maintenance; The construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, extension and upgrade of the Commission's infrastructure facilities, including its water, sewer, de-icing, drainage and stormwater management systems; The acquisit!ion, construction, renovation or relocation of other functionally related and subordinate facilities in and around the Airport and 00-531 7/26/00 the projects set forth above; and 12. The funding of debt service reserve and other reserve funds, the costs of design and engineering of any part of the Airport Development Program, and the costs of issuance of the Obligations referred to below, including the costs of any credit enhancement for such obligations and interest on them during and for up to one year after the completion of any of the projects set forth above. The Airport Development Program will provide better airport services to the inhabitants of the Participating Political Subdivisions, which presently consist of the City of Richmond and the Counties of Chesterfield, Hanover and Henrico. The Airport Development Program will also promote the welfare, convenience and prosperity of the inhabitants of the Participating Political Subdivisions and the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the increase of their commerce. The Commission anticipates that it will finance or refinance all or a part of the Airport Development Program through the issuance of its bonds, notes or other obligations in an aggregate maximum amount now estimated not to exceed $270,000,000. As described further below, the Commission contemplates that it may also issue bonds, notes or other obligations to refund any bonds, notes or other obligations issued to finance or refinance the Airport Development Program, also in an aggregate maximum amount now estimated not to exceed $270,000,000. Any such bonds, notes or other obligations and refunding bonds, notes or other obligations are together referred to in this plan of finance as "Obligations". Obligations for initial financing or refunding may be issued at different times in several series of different amounts, with the timing, amounts and number depending on the Commission's need for funds and market conditions. The Commission expects that the first issuance of Obligations will occur no later than one year after the approval of the last Participating Political Subdivision to approve the issuance of the Obligations and the general purposes thereof and the last such issuance to occur no later than three years after the first issuance pursuant to the plan of finance. The Obligations may be issued on either a taxable or tax- exempt basis and may be secured by or payable (i) from the revenues of the Commission generally or certain designated projects or facilities on or about the Airport, (ii) exclusively from the income and revenues of the Airport Development Program's facilities or any part thereof, or (iii) from passenger facility charges approved by the Federal Aviation Administration and collected by or on behalf of the Commission. The Commission may additionally secure the Obligations by a pledge of any grant or contribution from a Participating Political Subdivision, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any political subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, any federal agency or any unit, private corporation, copartnership, association, or individual, as such Participating Political Subdivision, or other entitie~ may be authorized to make under general law or by a pledge of any income or revenues of the Commission, or where such mortgage has been approved by the Participating Political Subdivisions, a mortgage of any facilities of the Commission. The Commission may also obtain credit enhancement, such as bond insurance or letters of credit, to secure the Obligations, but it does not now contemplate that it will seek the moral 00-532 7/26/00 obligation support of the Participating Political Subdivisions. The Obligations shall not be a debt of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any political subdivision thereof (including the Participating Political Subdivisions), other than the Commission, and neither the Commonwealth of Virginia nor any political subdivision thereof (including the Participating Political Subdivisions), other than the Commission, shall be liable thereon, nor shall such bonds be payable out of funds or properties other than those of the Commission. While the Airport Development Program likely will be financed ultimately through the issuance of the Commission's long term revenue bonds, the Commission anticipates that it will finance some or all of it initially through a short term credit facility, a line or lines of credit or bond anticipation notes. Accordingly, the plan of finance includes not only the issuance of bonds, note or other obligations in an aggregate amount now estimated not to exceed $270,000,000 to finance the Airport Development Program, but also the issuance of refunding bonds, notes or other obligations, also in an aggregate amount now estimated not to exceed $270,000,000, to refinance indebtedness issued to finance or refinance the Airport Development Program. The plan of financing includes the refunding, if deemed advantageous or desirable by the Commission, of any or all of the Commission's outstanding indebtedness, including its 1994 Bonds, 1995 Bonds, 1996 PFC Bonds, 1999 PFC Bonds, the Commission's Tax-Exempt Unsecured Note, Series 1993, the Commission's Tax-Exempt Unsecured Note, Series 2000, or amounts outstanding under the Commission's Exempt Facility Credit Agreement dated as of December 1, 1997, or its Bank Qualified Credit Agreement dated December 19, 1997, all of which borrowings previously have been approved by the Participating Political Subdivisions. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.15. APPROVAL OF CHANGE TO STREETLIGHT POLICY Mr. Barber requested an explanation as to the proposed change to the Streetlight Policy. He expressed concerns relative to the wording of the section relative to a petition from residents as well as the section relative to streetlight costs that will be presented to the Board. Mr. Ramsey stated that it is anticipated that all requests for streetlights will still be presented to the Board for approval. He further stated that streetlight requests that are estimated at $2,700 or more will be presented to the individual Board member prior to being placed on the Board's agenda. Mr. McHale requested that "presented to the Board for approval" be replaced with "presented to the Board for consideration" in section II.D. of the proposed streetlight policy. There was brief discussion relative to other possible changes to the policy that might need to be made. Mr. Barber stated that he is now comfortable with the proposed change to the Streetlight Policy. Mr. Barber then made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, for the Board Eo approve a change to the existing Streetlight 00-533 7/26/00 Policy as it pertains to existing developments (including the change in the proposed language from "approval" to "consideration") which will control the overall effect of increasing cost on Community Enhancement appropriations and provide Board members with greater flexibility in approval of installation requests. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.23. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ALL IMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS OF T~R SWIFT CRRRK WATERSHED MASTER PLAN AND COUNTYWIDE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Mr. Ramsey stated that a work session was held June 28, 2000 relative to the Swift Creek Watershed Master Plan and Countywide Maintenance Program. He reviewed staff's recommendations for implementation of the Plan, including setting a public hearing on October 25, 2000 for adoption of the Swift Creek Watershed Master Plan which will implement the prorata fee for development to pay for the construction of regional BMPs in the Upper Swift Creek; not implementing the portion of the study that would put a Countywide stormwater utility in place, but rather implementing a Countywide BMP maintenance program to be phased in over three years beginning in FY2002; commercial establishments continuing to maintain their own BMPs; and, beginning with the next capital improvement phase, start adding funding to Environmental Engineering's budget to initiate stream restoration and build Environmental Engineering's capital fund from $200,000 a year over four years to a $400,000 per year capital program. There was brief discussion relative 'to advertising for a public hearing according to staff's recommendations. Mr. Barber stated that he is not comfortable with the County taking over maintenance of the BMPs. He suggested that the County consider creating a district in the Upper Swift Creek area for both construction and maintenance. He stated that he would like the public hearing to include a wider spectrum of options than what is being recemmended by staff. Mr. McHale expressed concerns relative to the Board's ability to deviate from staff's recommendation after the public hearing. Mr. Miller stated that he feels the public should have input on all aspects of the Plan as well as the Maintenance Program, rather than be limited to staff's recommendations. Mr. Warren stated that he does not feel a strategy should be set prior to a public hearing. Mr. Ramsey stated that, if the Board desires, the whole stormwater utility concept could be included as an option in the public hearing. Mr. Miller requested that staff advertise the public hearing including all options and be prepared to entertain any other options that might be suggested. Mr. Warren made a motion, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to set a public hearing date of October 25, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider all implementation options of 00-534 7/26/00 the Swift Creek Watershed Maintenance Program. Master Plan and Countywide Mr. Micas stated that the Board is never limited to staff's recommendation. He further stated that the public hearing should be advertised including all options to alleviate the necessity to readvertise. Mr. Warren called for a vote on his motion, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to set a public hearing date of October 25, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. for a public hearing to consider all implementation options of the Swift Creek Watershed Maintenance Plan and Countywide Master Program. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. The following items were removed from the Consent Agenda for public comment: 8.C.5.b. TO R. W. BECK FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES TO DEVELOP AN INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN Mr. George Beadles stated that he feels the County should get out of the business of collecting residential trash and leaves and charge the true cost at the transfer station. There was no one else present to speak to the issue. On motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board authorized the County Administrator to execute a professional services contract with R. W. Beck to develop an integrated solid waste management plan for the Solid Waste Management Division, not to exceed $130,000. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 8.C.13. INITIATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION TO PERMIT BULK EXCEPTIONS AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND INITIATION OF AMEND~NTS TO THE COUNTY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Mr. George Beadles stated that he feels the Board's responsibility ends after it adopts the ordinance to correct the problems that occurred during the subdivision of the property at issue and that he does not feel the Board should continue to initiate zoning cases on behalf of residents. He expressed concerns as to why a title company did not discover the problem. There was no one else present to speak to the issue. Mrs. Humphrey stated that in the 1970's, Mr. Carter Dettor divided his land and sold parcels and then illegally redivided the parcels of land that he sold while people had pending building permits. She further stated the requested action is the only reasonable means of consistency with the County's land use plan and subdivision policies. She stated that it was only after the last homeowner applied for a building permit, that 00-535 7/26/00 the County Attorney's staff had to backtrack 30 years and discover the discrepancy. Mrs. Humphrey then made a motion, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to initiate a conditional use planned development application on 131 acres in an Agricultural (A) District to legalize existing residential uses and parcels that do not currently comply with the zoning ordinance and an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the Board to waive subdivision requirements as a condition of a conditional use planned development under certain limited conditions. Mr. Miller expressed concerns relative to people neglecting their responsibilities when purchasing property and stated that he feels this issue calls for relief. Mr. Barber stated that Mr. Beadles made a good point, but that he cannot think of an occasion where the Board has gone beyond reasonable limits in the expenditure of County resources initiating applications for rezoning on behalf of applicants. Mrs. Humphrey stated that the County Attorney's office diligently brought the issue to the attention of the other eleven property owners. Mr. Warren called for a vote on the motion made by Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Barber, for the Board to initiate a conditional use planned development application on 131 acres in an Agricultural (A) District to legalize existing residential uses and parcels that do not currently comply with the zoning ordinance and an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the Board to waive subdivision requirements as a condition of a conditional use planned development under certain limited conditions. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 10. REPORTS On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board approved the following reports: A report on Developer Water and Sewer Contracts; and a Status Report on the General Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District Improvement Funds, and Lease Purchases. And, further, the following roads were accepted into the State Secondary System: ADDITIONS LENGTH FAIRWAY WOODS AT RIVERS BEND (Effective 6/28/2000) Fairway Woods Court (Route 4786) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 4785 Fairway Woods Drive (Route 4785) - From Route 4786 to Route 4835 Fairway Woods Drive (Route 4785) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 4786 Hogan's Alley (Route 4835) - From Route 00-536 0.04 Mi 0.09 Mi 0.05 Mi 7/26/00 4785 to 0.21 Mile North Route 4785 Hogan's Alley (Route 4835) - From Route 4836 to Route 4785 FOXCROFT, SECTION 10 (Effective 6/29/2000) Fox Gate Court (Route 5226 - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5225 Fox Gate Lane (Route 5225) - From Route 5226 to Route 5227 Fox Gate Lane (Route 5225) - From Route 5201 to Route 5226 Fox Gate Place (Route 5227 - From Route 5225 to Cul-De-Sac Fox Gate Place (Route 5227 - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5225 FOXCROFT, SECTION 11 (Effective 6/28/2000) Fox Haven Lane (Route 5220) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5228 Fox Haven Lane (Route 5220) - From Route 5228 to 0.06 Mile West Route 5222 Fox Haven Terrace (Route 5228) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5220 FOXCROFT, SECTION 3 (Effective 6/23/2000) Fox Club Court (Route 5230) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5229 Fox Club Lane (Route 5229) - From Route 5230 to Route 5201 Fox Club Lane (Route 5229) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5231 Fox Club Lane (Route 5229) - From Route 5231 to Route 5230 Fox Club Parkway (Route 5201) - From 0.19 Mile East Route 5212 to Route 5200 Fox Club Way (Route 5231) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5229 FOXCROFT, SECTION 8 (Effective 6/28/2000) Fox Haven Court (Route 5221) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5220 Fox Haven Lane (Route 5220) - From Route 5222 to Route 5221 Fox Haven Lane (Route 5220) - From 0.06 Mile West Route 5222 to Route 5222 Fox Haven Lane (Route 5220) - From Route 5221 00-537 0.21 Mi 0.26 Mi 0.11 Mi 0.06 Mi 0.07 Mi 0.05 Mi 0.15 Mi 0.20 Mi 0.04 Mi 0.14 Mi 0 04 Mi 0 07 Mi 0 06 Mi 0 09 Mi 0 03 Mi 0 11 Mi 0.09 Mi 0.06 Mi 0.06 Mi 7/2 /oo to Route 5201 0.07 Mi Fox Haven Place (Route 5222) - From Cul-De-Sac to Route 5220 REEDY MILL, SECTION D (Effective 6/29/2000) Tavern Hill Court (Route 4510) - From Route 3696 to Cul-De-Sac Waterfall Cove Drive (Route 3696) - From Route 4510 to 0.25 Mile West Route 3694 Waterfall Cove Drive (Route 3696) - From Route 4122 to Route 4510 Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 0.11 Mi 0.21 Mi 0.04 Mi 0.11 Mi 11. DINNER On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board recessed to the Administration Building, Room 502, for dinner. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Reconvening: 12. INVOCATION Elder Barry Bradby of Bethesda Baptist Full Gospel Church gave the invocation. 13. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITR~ STATES OF AMERICA Eagle Scout Evan Durling led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. 14. 14 .A. RESOLUTIONS ~ SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS RECOGNIZING MS. BELINDA HUGHES FOR HER KINDNESS AND GENEROSITY Mrs. Humphrey introduced Ms. Belinda Hughes who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, Ms. Belinda Hughes is the owner of Bee's Bridal Shop in Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Bee's Bridal Shop has been assisting women with wedding planning for many years; and WHEREAS, over the years, Ms. Hughes has gone "above and beyond the call of duty" in providing assistance; and 00-538 7/26/00 WHEREAS, in March of 1998, the Bridal Elegance Shop on Midlothian Turnpike was involved in a fire that destroyed thousands of wedding dresses; and WHEREAS, at that time, Ms. Hughes offered a free wedding gown to replace one lost in the fire so that at least one prospective bride would have her special day salvaged; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2000, a fire in Petersburg destroyed a wedding gown belonging to Ms. Cynthia Crenshaw; and WHEREAS, upon learning of Ms. Crenshaw's dilemma, Ms. Hughes once again came forward as a good samaritan and offered to make a replacement wedding dress for Ms. Crenshaw at no expense; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hughes met with Ms. Crenshaw, assisted her in picking out and being fitted for a wedding gown, and made the wedding gown; and WHEREAS, Ms. Crenshaw was married on July 15, 2000, wearing the gown created for her by Ms. Hughes; and WHEREAS, the continued selfless, caring and generous conduct of Ms. Hughes toward strangers in need deserves fitting recognition and appreciation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors expresses its appreciation to Ms. Belinda Hughes for her kindness and generosity to those in need, and on behalf of all Chesterfield County citizens, thanks her for the outstanding manner in which she has represented the people of Chesterfield County in these matters. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be presented to Ms. Hughes and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mrs. Humphrey presented the executed resolution to Ms. Hughes and expressed appreciation for her generosity and willingness to help within the community and the region. 14.B. RECOGNIZING MR. EVAN JOSEPH DURLING UPON ATTAINING THE RANK OF EAGLE SCOUT Mr. Hammer introduced Mr. Evan Durling who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was incorporated by Mr. William D. Boyce on February 8, 1910; and WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was founded to promote citizenship training, personal development, and fitness of individuals; and WHEREAS, after earning at least twenty-one merit badges in a wide variety of fields, serving in a leadership position in a troop, carrying out a service project beneficial to his 00-539 7/26/00 community, being active in the troop, demonstrating Scout spirit, and living up to the Scout Oath and Law; and WHEREAS, Mr. Evan Joseph Durling, Troop 806, sponsored by Woodlake United Methodist Church, has accomplished those high standards of commitment and has reached the long-sought goal of Eagle Scout which is received by less than two percent of those individuals entering the Scouting movement; and WHEREAS, growing through his experiences in Scouting, learning the lessons of responsible citizenship, and priding himself on the great accomplishments of his Country, Evan is indeed a member of a new generation of prepared young citizens of whom we can all be very proud. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to Mr. Evan Joseph Durling and acknowledges the good fortune of the County to have such an outstanding young man as one of its citizens. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mrs. Humphrey presented the executed resolution and patch to Mr. Durling, accompanied by members of his family, congratulated him on his outstanding achievement, and wished him well in his future endeavors. Mr. Durling expressed appreciation to his Scoutmaster and parents for their support. church, God, 15. REQUESTS FOR MOBILE HOME PERMITS AND REZONING PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE HEARD IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION AND THERE IS NO OPPOSITION - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT DOES NOT ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION AND/OR THERE IS PUBLIC OPPOSITION WILL BE HEARD AT SECTION 17 00SN0147 (Amended) In Matoaca Magisterial District, ARCON DEVELOPMENT LLC requested rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from Agricultural (A) to Residential Townhouse (R-TH) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit use, bulk and development standards exceptions. Residential use of up to 8 units per acre is permitted in a Residential Townhouse (R-TH) District. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for community mixed use with residential densities of 8 to 14 units per acre and for single family residential use of 2.2 units per acre or less. This request lies on 30.4 acres fronting approximately 1,350 feet on the west line of North Spring Run Road, also fronting approximately 1,500 feet on the north line of McEnnally Road and located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax ID 724-670-5538 (Sheet 15). Mr. Jacobson stated that the applicant has requested a deferral to October 25, 2000. Mr. John Fredrickson, representing the applicant, requested a deferral until October 25, 2000. 00-540 7/26/00 There was no opposition to the deferral present. On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board deferred Case 00SN0147 until October 25, 2000. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 99SN0309 (Amended) In Clover Hill Magisterial District, G.H.K. DEVELOPMENTS, INC. requested rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from Agricultural (A) to Neighborhood Business (C-2), plus proffered conditions on an existing zoned Neighborhood Business (C-2) tract, all with Conditional Use Planned Development to allow bulk exceptions. A drugstore/pharmacy is planned. However, with approval of this request other C-2 uses would be permitted. 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 3.3 acres fronting approximately 430 feet on the north line of Hull Street Road, across from North Spring Run Road. Tax IDs 725-672-Part of 1175 and 726-672-Part of 1039 (Sheet 15). Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case 99SN0309 and stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. He further stated that the request conforms to the Upper Swift Creek Plan. Ms. Ashley Harwell, representing the applicant, stated that the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board approved Case 99SN0309 and accepted the following proffered conditions: This application contains one exhibit described as follows: Exhibit A - Elevation titled "Proposed Walgreens Elevation," prepared by T. Byron Architects, Ltd., dated April 26, 2000, last revised June 14, 2000. 1. Utilities. Public wastewater systems shall be used. (U) 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) Dedications. Prior to any final site plan approval, or within sixty (60) days from a written request by the County, whichever occurs first, the following rights-of-way shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County: Sixty (60) foot wide right-of-way ("North Spring Run Road Extended") along the western Property line from Hull Street Road ("Route 360") to the northern 00-541 7/26/00 o o Property line, and; One hundred (100) feet of right-of-way, on the north side of Hull Street Road "Route 360" measured from the centerline of that part of Route 360 immediately adjacent to the Property. The exact location of the sixty (60) foot right-of-way shall be approved by the Transportation Department. (T) Property Access. as follows: The Property access shall be controlled Direct access from the Property to Route 360 shall be limited to two (2) entrances/exits. One (1) entrance/exit shall be located at the eastern Property line, and one (1) entrance/exit shall be located at the western Property line (North Spring Run Road Extended) and align with the existing crossover along Route 360 that serves North Spring Run Road. The easternmost access shall be designed and constructed as a right-turn-in and right-turn-out only access and the westernmost access shall be designed and constructed to allow all turning movements. Prior to final site plan approval, the exact location of these accesses shall be approved by the Transportation Department. If required by the Transportation Department, prior to final site plan approval, access easement(s) acceptable to the Transportation Department shall be recorded across the Property to provide shared use of these accesses with the adjacent properties. (T) Transportation Improvements. To provide an adequate roadway system, the Developer shall be responsible for the following. If any road improvement outlined herein is provided by others then that specific requirement set forth below shall be deemed satisfied: a o Construction of an additional lane of pavement along the westbound lanes of Route 360 for the entire Property frontage; Construction of additional pavement along the westbound lanes of Route 360 at the easternmost access and North Spring Run Road Extended intersection to provide separate right turn lanes; Construction of additional pavement along the eastbound lanes of Route 360 at the North Spring Run Road Extended/Route 360 intersection to provide an adequate left turn lane. The exact length of this road improvement shall be approved by the Transportation Department; Construction of North Spring Run Road Extended as a two (2) lane roadway from Route 360 to the northern Property line; e o Construction of a four-lane typical section [three (3) southbound, one (1) northbound] for North Spring Run Road Extended at its intersection with Route 360; 00-542 7/26/00 o o o Full cost for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of North Spring Run Road Extended/North Spring Run Road/Route 360 intersection, if warranted, as determined by the Transportation Department; and go Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, of any additional right-of-way (or easements) required for the improvements identified in above. (T) Phasing. Prior to any site plan approval, a phasing plan for the required road improvements, as identified in Proffered Condition 5, shall be submitted to and approved by the Transportation Department. (T) Architecture. The building shall be compatible in architectural style, colors, and materials to the design shown on Exhibit A and as further delineated below. At the time of site plan review, the Planning Commission may modify these requirements provided that the alternative materials, roof line(s , and colors accomplish the intent of the condition. The primary building material shall be brick, not to exceed a size of four (4) inches by four (4) inches by twelve (12) inches. The brick shall be integrally colored. The brick type shall be Driftwood, utility #19 (inventory # 4403551-9136) and the corner brick shall be Driftwood, utility exterior corner #7 (inventory ~ 44310551-9DWS), both from Carolina Ceramics. No exposed concrete masonry units (CMU) shall be permitted. Mortar shall be similar in color to the brick color. Any accent brick shall not exceed the size of the utility brick listed herein. Any accent colors shall be the same or substantially similar to the primary brick color used on Tax ID 724-672-Part of 9216 (Aunt Sarah's) to create a tone on tone effect. Should the tower be constructed, as shown on Exhibit A, the glass within such tower shall be clear. Ail other glass elements (except the doors) used on the building elevation shall be tinted, similar to that utilized in the building located on Tax ID 728-673-4668 (First Virginia Bank). bo Except for the "tower" shown on Exhibit A, the upper roofline shown on Exhibit A shall be similar to the pitch of the roof line used on Tax ID 744-697-4324 (Shops at Lucks Lane). Any roof shall be standing seam metal and shall be gray in color. (P) Use Restrictions. The following uses shall not be permitted on the Property: a. Alcohol sales. b. Gasoline sales. Route 360 Setback. The minimum fifty (50) foot setback requirement of the Zoning Ordinance from Route 360 shall be measured from the ultimate right-of-way of Route 360. Specifically, the reduction permitted in Section 19-505(e) shall not be permitted. The required landscaping within this setback shall be 2.0 times Perimeter Landscaping C, 00-5A3 7/26/00 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Parking and Drives Setbacks. Ail parking and driveways shall be located no closer to Route 360 or North Spring Run Road Extended than the building which it serves unless measures such as landscaping, grading, or other design features are employed to minimize the visibility of the parking areas from such roads. If landscape measures are employed, at a minimum, the measures shall consist of evergreen shrubs at least two (2) feet in height at the time of planting and spaced to create a continuous hedgerow at maturity. Such hedgerow shall be installed between the roads (North Spring Run Road Extended and Route 360) and the parking areas, planted adjacent to those parking areas. These shrubs shall be in addition to required perimeter landscaping requirements outlined in Proffered Condition 9. (P) Sidewalk. A sidewalk shall be provided along the east side of North Spring Run Road Extended and internal to the Property so that it connects this Property to the North Spring Run Road Extended sidewalk system. Such requirement shall not require the installation of a sidewalk along the private driveways abutting the Property but shall only require an interconnection point to the public sidewalk system. The exact location and design of the sidewalk shall be approved at the time of site plan review. (P) Street Trees. Along North Spring Run Road Extended, street trees shall be planted. Such trees shall be large deciduous trees, as defined in the Zoning Ordinance, and shall be the same species. The trees shall be planted between the road and the sidewalk, spaced uniformly, and there shall be one tree planted every forty (40) lineal feet. This requirement is in addition to the perimeter landscaping requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Waivers. Development shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance requirements for commercial districts in Emerging Growth Areas with the exception of setbacks along North Spring Run Road Extended which shall be reduced as necessitated by the new alignment and associated improvements along North Spring Run Road Extended. The exact amount of such setback reduction shall be determined by the Planning Commission at the time of site plan review. Except as stated herein, no variance or development standards waiver shall alter the Emerging Growth Area requirements. (P) Freestanding Sign. A maximum of one (1) freestanding sign shall be permitted on the Property. Such sign shall comply with Section 19-644 (2) (m) of the Zoning Ordinance as it applies to buildings located within a shopping center or business park. Changeable copy may be incorporated into this sign in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance standards. The sign shall be a monument style sign and the shape of the sign face shall not be a uniform rectangle or square, but rather shall have a shape similar to the sign faces for the outparcels located within Harbour Pointe Shopping Center. The base/structure of the sign shall be constructed of the same materials and color(s) as the building on the Property. (P) 15. Number of Buildings. A maximum of one (1) building shall 00-544 7/26/00 be permitted on the Property. The building shall not exceed a height of two (2) stories or thirty (30) feet, whichever is less, except that the tower shown on Exhibit ~ may be thirty-six (36) feet in height. The gross square footage of the building shall not exceed 15,500. (P) 16. Drive-in Windows. Drive-in window(s) shall not be located between the building and Route 360 or North Spring Run Road Extended. (P) 17. Storm Water Management Facilities or BMP's. Any above ground facilities located on the Property and required for water quantity or quality control shall be designed as wet ponds and shall be landscaped or otherwise improved so that the facilities become visual enhancements to, and visual amenities for, the Property. At the time of site plan review, a plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted for review and approval. (EE) 18. Hours of Operation. No restaurant use shall be open to the public between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. 19. Lighting. Freestanding parking lot lights shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height and shall be a shoebox design. (P) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00SN0204 In Midlothian Magisterial District, C & G ASSOCIATES requested rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from Residential (R-7) and Community Business (C-3) of 8.9 acres to Neighborhood Business (C-2) plus proffered conditions on .47 acre zoned Neighborhood Business (C-2), all with Conditional Use Planned Development to allow bulk, development and use exceptions; and amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 84S060 and 99SN0224) relative to access, bulk and development exceptions. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Village Fringe, Village Shopping District and Village Square uses. This request lies on 42.2 acres fronting in two (2) places for a total of approximately 700 feet on the south line of Midlothian Turnpike, also fronting the east and west lines of North Woolridge Road and is located at the intersection of these roads. Tax IDs 731-706-3947, 731-707-6510 and 8621, 732-706-2567 and 732-707-0427, 1234, 3222 and 4701 (Sheet 6). Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case 00SN0204 and stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to one condition and acceptance of the proffered conditions. He further stated that the request conforms to the Midlothian Area Community Plan. Mr. Andy Scherzer, representing the applicant, stated that the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. After brief discussion, on motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board approved Case 00SN0204 subject to the 00-5~5 7/26/00 following condition: The Textual Statement received June 20, considered the Master Plan. (P) 2000, shall be (NOTE: All other conditions of Cases 84S060, 88SN0125 and 99SN0224 remain in effect, except as modified by this request.) And, further, conditions: the Board accepted the following proffered For Parcels 5 and 6 as identified on the "Railey Hill West Rezoning Plan" 1. The public water and wastewater systems shall be used. (U) With the exception of timbering which has been approved by the Virginia State Department of Forestry for the purpose of removing dead and diseased trees, there shall be no timbering until a land disturbance permit has been obtained from Environmental Engineering and the approved measures installed. (EE) A geotechnical report prepared by a consultant who has had previous mining/geotechnical experience in reclamation of mine shafts, shall be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Department in conjunction with any site plan submission. Upon review by Environmental Engineering, or their designee, the report may either be accepted or revisions requested and, if revisions are requested, resubmitted in the same manner for review and acceptance by Environmental Engineering, or their designee. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the following: The location and analysis to include, but not be limited to, type (e.g., mine entrance shaft, air vents, unsuccessful exploratory pits, etc.), size, and depth of any mining pits or tailing heaps; Fill-in/reclamation procedures; setbacks between the perimeter of any shaft; and any other safety measures intended to protect the health, safety and welfare of people and structures; The impact of any horizontal shafts on construction and future health, safety and welfare issues; The location and number of soil borings and depth necessary to confirm that the building site is not impacted by any horizontal shafts; and The allowable building envelopes and location based on the geotechnical recommendations. Development shall comply with the recommendations of the accepted report. (EE) All former mining activity shall be filled in/reclaimed under the direction of a consultant who has had previous mining/geotechnical experience in reclamation of mine shafts. Ail reclamation shall be observed by the geotechnical expert and shall be certified as to compliance with the recommendations established in the accepted report. Prior to the release of any building 00-546 7/26/00 10. 11. permit, a copy of the certification shall be submitted to Environmental Engineering. (EE) At the time of site plan review and approval, conditions may be imposed to address any identified impacts outlined in the report referenced in Proffered Condition 3. Any found mining pits or tailing heaps and the allowable building envelopes as established by the report outlined in Proffered Condition 3 shall be shown on the site plan. The site plan shall include a statement that the only pits found on the site are those shown on the site plan. For those sites where there is no found mining pits or tailing heaps, the report outlined in Proffered Condition 3 shall confirm that such information is not necessary. (EE) Any above-ground facilities required for water quantity or quality control located within any required setbacks along public right-of-way shall be designed as wet ponds and shall be landscaped or otherwise improved so the facilities become visual enhancements to, and amenities for, uses developed on the property. At the time of site plan review, a plan depicting these requirements shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. (EE) The developer shall be responsible for notifying by registered, certified or first class mail, the last known representative on file with the Planning Department of the Walton Park Homeowners Association of the submission of any site plan. Such notification shall occur as soon as practical, but in no event less than twenty-one (21) days prior to approval or disapproval of the plan. The developer shall provide a copy of the notification letter(s) to the Planning Department. (P) Provided the monthly electric service is paid through the street light program, the developer shall be responsible for installation of decorative street lighting similar in design to the light fixture specified in The Midlothian Village Technical Manual, the street lighting shall be provided along all public roads adjacent to the site. Spacing shall be approximately seventy-five (75) feet on center. Ail on-site freestanding street light fixtures shall be compatible with the aforementioned street lights. (EE) Internal sidewalks shall be extended through sites to facilitate pedestrian movements from buildings and parking areas to the sidewalks along public rights of way. The exact location and design of the sidewalks shall be reviewed and approved at the time of site plan review. The architectural style, materials and colors of buildings shall be compatible with that which exists in the development located on 732-707-4947 and 7346 (Walgreens and Amoco). (P) Buildings on Parcel 5 shall be designed in such a manner that future retail space oriented toward the future access road shown on the "Railey Hill West Rezoning Plan" can be accommodated. Site Plans for Parcel 5 shall, at a minimum, depict how such retail space can be accommodated. oo-5 7 7/e /oo 12. Direct access from the property to Route 60 shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. The exact location of this access shall be approved by the Transportation Department. Prior to any site plan approval, an access easement, acceptable to the Transportation Department, shall be recorded across the property to provide shared use of this access with adjacent properties. Note: This proffered condition would allow the existing access to Route 60 that currently serves the easternmost parcel in Tract 6 (Tax ID 731-707-8621) to remain until such time as that parcel is further developed or redeveloped as determined by the Transportation Department. (T) 13. To provide an adequate roadway system, the developer shall be responsible for the following: Construction of additional pavement along the eastbound lanes of Route 60 at the approved access to provide a right turn lane, based on Transportation Department standards; Construction of a sidewalk along the south side of Route 60 for the entire property frontage; Co Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, any additional right-of-way (or easements) required for the improvements identified above. (T) 14. Prior to any site plan approval, a phasing plan for the required road improvements as identified in Proffered Condition 13, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Transportation Department. (T) Parcels 1, 2, 4.a, 4.b, 5 and 6 15. Other than one (1) single user which may exceed 40,000 square gross feet, no individual user shall exceed 20,000 gross square feet. No individual building shall exceed 20,000 gross square feet except that one (1) building which houses a user larger than 20,000 gross square feet may exceed 20,000 gross square feet. (P) 16. Any individual use in excess of 40,000 gross square feet shall be located in Parcel 5 and shall have its main entrance oriented towards North Woolridge Road and the building shall be located a minimum of 300 feet from North Woolridge Road. (P) 17. A building shall not exceed 20,000 square feet unless such building is designed to incorporate a variety of off-sets, other architectural variations or other features so as to create the appearance of smaller unique buildings to avoid monotonous facades and bulky masses. The same material(s) shall be used on all four (4) sides of the building unless at the time of site plan review, the Planning Commission approves alternative materials of a similar quality which will not adversely affect adjacent properties or views from roads. Ail solid waste and loading areas shall be architecturally incorporated into the building. 18. The existing structures located on Tax ID 731-707-8936 and 00-548 7/26/00 731-707-3819 shall not be used to meet the compatibility requirements of Section 19-611 (b) of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Parcels 5 & 6 19. Uses shall not be opened to the public between the hours of midnight and 6:00 am with the exception that a single grocery store use having 40,000 gross square feet or greater may be opened to the public between the hours of midnight and 6:00 am provided that a security officer is located on-site for the sole purpose of patrolling parking areas during these specified hours. (P) Parcels 1, 2, 3a, 4a, 4b, 5, 6 20. Within two (2) months of clearing an area, the required perimeter landscaping shall be installed within the setback along all public roads abutting such area, unless there is an active building permit and active construction within 405 feet of North Woolridge Road, in which case the required perimeter landscaping shall be installed prior to the issuance of final occupancy of any site within 405 feet of North Woolridge Road. (P) Parcel 3 21. A minimum 60 foot parking setback shall be maintained along Woolridge Road for the length of Parcel 3A until such time as a building is constructed on Parcel 3A. (P) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00SN0244 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, BRANDERMILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 98SN0290) and amendment of zoning district map relative to building area, height, location, architectural elevations and materials for an approved nursing, convalescent and rest home use, parking lot lighting, landscaping and number of buildings permitted. 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 use. This request lies in a Corporate Office (0-2) District on 4.1 acres fronting approximately 1,000 feet on the north line of Harbour Lane, also fronting approximately 5 feet on the west line of Harbour Pointe Parkway and located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax ID 729-675-Part of 6803 (Sheets 15 & 16). Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case 00SN0244 and stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Ms. Ashley Harwell, representing the applicant, stated that the recommendation is acceptable. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board approved Case 00SN0244 and accepted the following proffered conditions: 00-549 7/26/00 o In addition to the uses permitted by Case No. 85S002, nursing, convalescent and rest homes shall be permitted. There shall be no facility which accommodates substance abuse treatment. Any nursing, convalescent and rest home use shall be located in a single building having a maximum area of 48,000 gross square feet and a maximum height of two stories. (NOTE: This condition supersedes Proffered Condition 1 of Case 98SN0290 and is an addition to the Textual Statement for Case No. 85S002, Exhibit B, Part A, for the request property only.) Any nursing home, convalescent home, or rest home shall be located toward the northeast corner of Parcel A as far as practicable. The locations of Parcel A and Parcel B shall be as depicted on the attached exhibit entitled "Assisted Living at Harbour Pointe" prepared by Ray Troxell Assoc., Inc Architects/Planners. (P) (NOTE: This condition supersedes Proffered Condition 3 of Case 98SN0290.) On Parcel A, all parking lot lights shall be a maximum twelve (12) feet in height and shall be of "shoebox" design. The restriction of parking lot lights shall not apply to Parcel B. (P) {NOTE: This condition supersedes Proffered Condition 6 of Case 98SN0290.) Within the area lying between the building on Parcel A and Harbour Lane (previously known as "Harbour Pointe Parkway" in this location) and between the building on Parcel A and the western boundary of Parcel A, additional landscaping to that required by the Zoning Ordinance shall be installed. The purpose of such landscaping shall be to provide intermittent visual separation between the building on Parcel A and Harbour Lane and the western boundary line of Parcel A. (P) (NOTE: This condition supersedes Proffered Condition 8 of Case 98SN0290.) (NOTE: Proffered Condition 4 of Case 98SN0290 is hereby deleted. Except as modified herein, all other conditions of approval for Cases 74S021, 85S002 and 98SN0290 remain in effect with approval of this request.) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 00SN0259 In Bermuda Magisterial District, GUJU ASSOCIATES, LLC AND PARIVAR GUJARAT SAMANVAY requested amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 86S097) and amendment of zoning district map to permit an indoor recreational facility 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 community mixed use. This request lies on 2.2 acres fronting 104.7 feet on the south line of Ironbridge Parkway, approximately 609 feet west of Ironbridge Boulevard. oo-sso ?/2 /oo Tax ID 775-655-Part of 3944 and Part of 8171 (Sheet 25). Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case 00SN0259 and stated that the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to one condition and acceptance of the proffered condition. Mr. Oliver "Skitch" Rudy, representing the applicant, stated that the recommendation is acceptable. There was no opposition present. On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved Case 00SN0259 subject to the following condition: In addition to the uses permitted by Case 86S097, non-profit indoor recreational facilities shall be permitted in association with religious, ethnic or cultural organizations. (P} (NOTE: This condition modifies Condition 1 of Case 86S097 relative to permitted uses.) And, further, the Board accepted the following proffered condition: The Architectural style and materials of any indoor recreational building shall be as depicted on the elevation prepared by Dewberry & Davis, Architects - Engineers - Planners - Surveyors, dated November 16, 1998. (P) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller Nays: None. 9. HEARINGS OF CITIZENS ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS OR CLAIMS o MR. DAVID PACKETT ADDRESSING THE BOARD REGARDING ZONING REFORM Mr. David Packett, a resident of Bon Air Forest Subdivision, stated that he presently serves on industrial development boards and is a former realtor. He further stated that he feels there is an overwhelming need for zoning reform in the County. He referenced the CVS development that was approved in Bon Air despite Planning staff's recommendation for denial and lack of support by the neighborhood. He stated that he feels the negative impacts of the CVS development will include increased exposure to crime; sound and noise pollution; increased traffic; decreased property values; and lowered quality of life. He expressed concerns relative to better notification of requests for rezoning; citizens' inability to communicate with Board and Planning Commission members; lack of citizen input in proposed developments; and zoning violations at the development site. Mr. Warren requested that Mr. Ramsey respond to Mr. Packett's concerns. Mr. Barber stated thatl the zoning process for the CVS development referenced by Mr. Packett involved at least eight well attended community meetings; posting of zoning notice signs on the property according to County policy; and notification of adjacent property owners. He further stated that, after considerable community input, it was concluded that 00-551 7/26/00 the CVS development would economically drive the development of office buildings behind it. He stated that a zoning condition of the CVS development included simultaneous development with the office buildings which would create a buffer for the CVS. He further stated that representatives from the community spoke in favor of the development based on the concept of the office buildings being a buffer to the CVS development, as well as the enhanced buffer; raising of an abandoned building; and two acres across the street from the church remaining undeveloped. He stated that, when concerns were expressed, he demanded that the applicant's attorney hold a public information meeting which was attended by only twelve people. He further stated that much effort was expended and a great deal of community input was received on the zoning case. He further stated that staff's recommendation for denial was only a technical one and the neighborhood voiced its approval at the public hearing. He stressed the importance of citizens voicing their concerns prior to approval of zoning requests. Mrs. Humphrey stated that State law requires notification of adjacent property owners only in zoning cases and that perhaps the Board should consider notification of residents within a certain distance of property that is the subject of proposed zoning cases. Mr. Miller stated that zoning decisions are made based upon the merits of the case, and that he feels it is inappropriate to personally attack people because of their decisions in zoning issues. 16. PUBLIC HEARINGS 16.A. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE RELOCATING THE CENTRAL ABSENTEE VOTER PRECINCT Ms. Altice stated that this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to relocate the Central Absentee Voter Precinct from the Old Historic Chesterfield Courthouse to the Office of the General Registrar. She further stated that the action is necessary because the Historic Courthouse has been reactivated for regular court duty. She stated that the relocation will also require approval from the Department of Justice under the Voting Rights Act, and it is felt that approval can be received in time to make the relocation effective for the November 2000 general election. No one was present to speak to the ordinance. After brief discussion, on motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED BY AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 7-1 RELATING TO CENTRAL ABSENTEE VOTER PRECINCT BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Section 7-1 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re-enacted to read as follows: 00-ss2 Sec. 7-1. Central absentee voter precinct--Established. There is hereby established a central absentee voter election precinct in the Office of the General Registrar, 9848 Lori Road for the purpose of receiving, counting and recording all absentee ballots that are cast in all elections within the county. The central absentee voter election precinct shall receive, count and record all absentee ballots in accordance with the requirements of Code of Virginia, ~ 24.2-712, and all other state laws. (2) That this ordinance immediately upon adoption. shall become effective Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 16.B. TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ESTABLISHING A ~NO-WAKE" ZONE FOR A PORTION OF LAKE CHESDIN Mr. Micas stated that this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing to consider approval of establishing a "No-Wake" Zone for a portion of Lake Chesdin. He further stated that the applicant was unable to attend the meeting, but indicated that she does support the application. No one was present to speak to the issue. After brief discussion, on motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ("NO-WAKE") MARKER ON LAKE CHESDIN, A CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC WATERWAY WHEREAS, Section 29.1-744 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, allows persons to request the establishment of "no- wake" zones on public waterways by submitting an application to the County for placement of "no-wake" markers; and WHEREAS, state law further requires that the County forward the application to the State Department of Game and Inland Fisheries for final approval; and WHEREAS, four landowners have submitted a joint application for a "no-wake" maker' on the cove between Eagle Cove Court and Talon Point Drive, all locations within Eagle Cove Subdivision on Lake Chesdin, a public waterway located in Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the application explains that the "no-wake" markers are needed for safety and ecological reasons, as well as to prevent the destruction of personal property; and WHEREAS, the County adopted an ordinance allowing for the establishment of "no wake" zones on July 28, 1999; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly noticed and held on July 26, 2000 to receive public co~ent on the application. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County that the application for a regulatory marker ("no-wake") on Lake Chesdin as described fully in the attached application shall be forwarded with the approval of oo-553 ?/26/oo this Board to the Director of the State Department of Game and Inland Fisheries for final approval. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 16.C. TO CONSIDER A CODE A~R. NDM~NT RELATING TO OFF-TRACK BETTING FACILITIES IN AGRICULTURAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS Mr. Jacobson stated that this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance relating to off- track betting facilities in Agricultural, Commercial and Industrial Districts. He further stated that currently off- track betting facilities are permitted in heavier commercial districts (C-3, C-4 and C-5) and are allowed as conditional uses within the Agricultural and Industrial Districts. He stated that the Planning Commission recommends limiting off- track betting facilities as regulated by the zoning ordinance to be located in a C-5 District through a conditional use process. He further stated that, if the Board chooses to adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation, it would need to adopt Sections 19-126, 19-301, 19-175 and 19-190 in the proposed ordinance which define off-track betting facilities and require a Conditional Use for such facilities in General Business (C-5) Districts. When asked, Mr. Jacobson stated that the Board has the flexibility of identifying any one of the advertised districts and, either by conditional use or as a permitted use, limit off-track betting to that district alone. When asked, Mr. Micas stated that no matter what action the Board takes, a referendum would still be necessary before off- track betting of any kind could occur in Chesterfield County. Mr. George Beadles stated that he feels the General Assembly may remove the necessity of a referendum before off-track betting can take place and that the Board would be wise to adopt this ordinance. There being no one else to speak to the ordinance, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to adopt an ordinance limiting off-track betting facilities to I-3 districts only by conditional use. Mr. Barber stated that he feels it would be prudent for the Board to limit off-track betting by conditional use. He questioned the difference between the Planning Commission's recommendation and Mr. Miller's motion. Mr. Jacobson stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation limits off-track betting facilities through a conditional use process or site specific process to the C-5 zoning district. He further stated that the areas of the County zoned C-5 are primarily on the older commercial corridors. He stated that Mr. Miller is proposing the restriction of off-track betting facilities in I-3 Districts with a conditional use and noted that the I-3 Districts are the older, heavier industrial areas located primarily in the eastern part of the County. 00-554 7/26/00 Mr. Barber stated that off-track betting facilities appear to be commercial rather than industrial, and questioned Mr. Miller's rationale for permitting them as conditional uses in I-3 Districts. When asked, Mr. Miller stated that there are C-5 properties that are in close proximity to residential areas and that he feels that, if the facilities must be permitted within the County, they should be placed in areas where they will do the least harm - the I-3 areas. Mr. McHale questioned the location of I-3 Districts within the County. Mr. Jacobson stated that I-3 Districts are primarily along the James River and include the sites of DuPont, Park 500, Honeywell, and sections of Drewry's Bluff. Mr. McHale stated that he is not convinced that off-track betting facilities are compatible with I-3 uses. He expressed concerns that all of the I-3 Districts appear to be located in the Bermuda District and stated that, if off-track betting facilities are going to be permitted by conditional use, then the opportunity should be provided throughout the County - not just the Bermuda District. Mr. Miller stated that, before making his motion, he made no inventory of where the I-3 Districts were located. He further stated that, by permitting off-track betting facilities in I-3 Districts only by conditional use, the Board would still have the opportunity to deny an application for conditional use. Mr. Barber stated that he feels off-track betting is a commercial use and should not be allowed in an industrial area. He further stated that he will support the motion simply because he does not feel any developer would bring forward such an application for conditional use, nor would the community support off-track betting in a referendum. Mr. Warren stated that he does not feel off-track betting would be approved at a referendum in the County and that he is pleased the Board is considering restricting off-track betting facilities. Mrs. Humphrey stated that she understands that most of the I-3 districts are located in the Bermuda District, but she feels off-track betting should be limited. She further stated that it is the Board's job to forecast future issues and noted that there are many opportunities, other than off-track betting facilities, to provide a tax base which will enhance the entire County. Mr. McHale stated that he intends to vote against the motion because of the concerns he expressed earlier. He further stated that, if the ordinance is adopted as proposed by Mr. Miller, future Boards of Supervisors might determine that it was the current Board's plan to locate off-track betting facilities in the Bermuda District. Mr. Barber stated that off-track betting facilities are legal entities that cannot be totally zoned out of existence in the County. He further stated that Mr. Miller's proposal limits off-track betting facilities to the least amount of County acreage. 00-555 7/26/00 Mr. Warren called for a vote on the motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Warren, for the Board to adopt the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED BY AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTIONS 19-301 AND 19-197 RELATING TO OFF TRACK BETTING FACILITIES BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19-301 and 19-197 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re- enacted to read as follows: Sec. 19-301. Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: o o o Off track betting facility: a facility that broadcasts the audio or video portion, or both, of horse races from a licensed horse racetrack or off track betting facility by satellite communication devices, television cables, telephone lines, or any other means for the purpose of conducting wagering on those races. o o o Sec. 19-197. Conditional uses. The following uses may be allowed by conditional use in the I-3 District, subject to the provisions of section 19-13: o o o (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (k) (1) Any conditional use allowed in the I-2 District, unless otherwise permitted in the I-3 District. Ammunition, ordnance and accessories--manufacturing and storage. Fertilizer manufacturing. Incinerating, reducing or dumping of dead animals, garbage or refuse for compensation, including loading or transfer thereof and sanitary landfills. Slaughterhouses. Stockyards. Electric power generation plants producing electricity for others. Animal and marine fats and oils manufacturing. Petroleum refining and related industries. Off-track betting facilities. Any other use which is classified by the Uniform Statewide Building Code as high hazard or, by reason of its nature or manner of operation, is or may become more hazardous, objectionable or offensive than other uses permitted by right in this district and which is incompatible with such uses because of odor, dust, smoke, cinders, fumes, noise, vibration, wastes, fire, explosion, glare or unsightliness. Subject to the following requirements, other uses which are not specifically enumerated in this chapter and which are of the same general character as the specifically oo-sss 7/~/oo enumerated uses allowed in this district. Before the planning commission and board of supervisors hear an application pursuant to this subsection, the director of planning shall consider, among other things, the following: the size and proposed configuration of the site; the size, height and exterior architectural appearance of any proposed structure or structures; noise; light; glare; odors; dust; outdoor activities; traffic; parking; signage; and hours of operation. Based on these considerations, he shall determine that the proposed use's operating characteristics are substantially similar to, and its impact on neighboring properties no greater than, the operating characteristics and impacts of the specifically enumerated uses allowed in this district. {2) That this ordinance immediately upon adoption. shall become effective Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber and Miller. Nays: McHale. 16.D. TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A SIXTEEN FOOT AND VARIABLE WIDTH SEWER EASEMENT AND A TEN FOOT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ACROSS LOTS 33 AND 34, SOUTHSHORE, SECTION A Mr. Stith stated that this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to vacate a sixteen foot and variable width sewer easement and a ten foot temporary construction easement across Lots 33 and 34, Southshore, Section A. No one was present to speak to the ordinance. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. McHale, the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE whereby the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, ("GRANTOR") vacates to SOUTHSHORE REALTY, L.C., a Virginia limited liability company, ("GRANTEE"), a 16' and variable width sewer easement and a 10' temporary construction easement across Lots 33 and 34, Southshore Subdivision, Section A, CLOVER HILL Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 77, at Pages 71 and 72. WHEREAS, SOUTHSHORE REALTY, L.C., petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a 16' and variable width sewer easement and a 10' temporary construction easement across Lots 33 and 34, Southshore Subdivision, Section A, CLOVER HILL Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 77, Pages 71 and 72, by BALZER & ASSOCIATES, INC., dated OCTOBER 17, 1991, and recorded FEBRUARY 7, 1992. The easements petitioned to be vacated are more fully described as follows: A 16' and variable width sewer easement and a 10' temporary construction easement, across Lots 33 and 34, Southshore Subdivision, Section A, the location 00-557 7/26/00 of which is more fully shown on a plat made by BALZER & ASSOCIATES, INC., dated OCTOBER 17, 1991, a copy ef which is attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and, WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the easements sought to be vacated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid easements be and are hereby vacated. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.2-2276 of the Code of Virqinia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.2-2274 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This Ordinance shall vest fee simple title of the easements hereby vacated in the property owner of Lots 33 and 34, within Southshore Subdivision, Section A free and clear of any rights of public use. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD as GRANTOR, and SOUTHSHORE REALTY, L.C., or its successors in title, as GRANTEE. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. 17. REMAINING MOBILE HOME PERMITS AND ZONING REQUESTS 00SN0210 In Midlothian Magisterial District, BRUCE S. AND HOPE E. KING requested a Conditional Use and amendment of zoning district map to operate a family day care home in a Residential (R-15) District. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive plan suggests the property is appropriate for medium density residential use of 1.51 to 4.0 units per acre. This request lies on 1.1 acres and is known as 1400 Buford Road. Tax ID 756-713-8921 (Sheet 7). Mr. Jacobson presented a summary of Case 00SN0210 and stated that County zoning regulations allow the caring of five children plus children related to the person maintaining the home in all residential districts, subject to a number of restrictions. He further stated that approval of the request will allow the care of additional children. He stated that staff had originally recommended approval of the request and that, because of opposition, the applicant proffered that the conditional use would expire September 30, 2001. He further 00-558 7/26/00 stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to conditions and acceptance of the three proffered conditions, including the time limitation for the conditional use. Ms. Hope King stated that the Planning Commission's recommendation is acceptable. She further stated that she has had a County business license since January 1, 1990 as well as a State daycare provider's license which allows her to keep twelve children. She stated that she was unaware that she was in violation of the County's zoning ordinance until she received a notice of zoning violation. She further stated that children need a safe place to stay as well as a care giver who is interested in their well-being and she feels the County should support working families. She stated that she does not agree with the County's zoning ordinance because it conflicts with State guidelines, and that she feels the County should review its zoning ordinance relative to day care providers. She expressed disappointment in having to proffer a condition which would limit her conditional use to September 30, 2001. She presented the Board with a letter from a child who formerly received her care expressing support of the request. Mr. Emory Weisiger, a resident of Brown Summit Road, stated that the community does not support the conditional use permit, but is willing to accept it with the proposed limitation. When asked, Mr. Weisiger stated that the only reason the community opposed the request is the possibility of opening the door to business use of neighboring property. He further stated that the community now supports the application with the additional proffered condition limiting the conditional use to September 30, 2001. Mr. Don Munyak, a resident of the Dale District, stated that he supports the proposed request as well as Planning Commissioner Dan Gecker's attempt to change the County ordinance relative to day care providers to more closely align itself with the State ordinance. He further stated that Ms. King provides a much needed service and has been his child's day care provider for the past eighteen months. He expressed concerns relative to untruths presented by residents at the Planning Commission meeting and stated that he does not feel the additional 12 to 14 cars per day as a result of the day care service will significantly impact traffic in the area. He further stated that he feels the real issue concerns setting a precedent by allowing a business to operate in a residential district and noted that, if Ms. King had not applied for the conditional use permit, no one would know that a business was located in the dwelling. Mr. Norvel Miller, a Bon Air resident, stated that the only opposition of area residents is the establishment of businesses in a residential area. Ms. Leslie Miller stated that Ms. King provides excellent day care for her daughter. She further stated that the General Assembly dictates by State law that Ms. King can provide care for 12 children and urged the Board to consider changing its zoning ordinance relative to day care provision. Ms. Julie Burns stated that Ms. King was her babysitter for seven years and taught her many things. She further stated that "Hopie's House" (Ms. King's home) always made her feel like she was at home. oo-559 ?/2 /oo Ms. Sarah Burns, a ten year old, stated that Ms. King was her babysitter for seven years. She further stated that she always had fun at "Hepie's House" and it made her feel comfortable. Ms. Hary Bryde, a Hatoaca District resident, stated that Ms. King has cared for her children for eight years. She expressed concerns relative to the emotional difficulties the zoning process has caused Hs. King and encouraged the Beard to make State and County guidelines for day care providers compatible. Dr. John Armentrout, a child clinical psychologist who is employed by the Bon Air Juvenile Correctional Center, stated that Hs. King has provided specialized care for his adopted daughter who spent her first ten months in a Chinese orphanage and is new thriving under the care of Hs. King. He further stated that he would like to see other families have the opportunity te have their children provided such loving home care. Dr. Terri Busic Armentreut stated that home day care is difficult to find and noted that Hs. King offers a wonderful environment for the children she provides care for. She further stated that she supports changes in County ordinances that would make home day care mere available. Ms. Anita Hunyak, a resident ef the Dale District, stated that she supports family day care in the community. She further stated that she feels there has been a gross misunderstanding relative te traffic issues and noted that all parents do net arrive at same time to drop off and pick up children. She stated that Hs. King's family day care center does not represent a commercial enterprise and its unique location far back from Buferd and Brown Summit Reads make it an excellent site for family day care. She expressed disappointment that some County residents de net support the needed service ef family day care and requested that the Board seriously consider changing the existing County ordinance relative te family day care providers. Mr. Ken Piazza, a resident of the Matoaca District, stated that Ms. King provides excellent child care for his two children and that he hopes the Board would encourage the type of nurturing care that Ms. King provides. Hs. Carolann Pacer-Ramsey, Executive Director ef Families First ef Virginia, Incorporated, stated that the County needs te look at how ether localities are dealing with the issue of child care. She further stated that several localities have developed an advisory council consisting of educators, child care providers, parents and administrative personnel from the localities te review issues relative to child care. She stated that she feels Chesterfield County is a leader and requested that the Beard take a step above and beyond what ether localities in the area are doing by establishing an advisory council to address child care issues. Hs. Klm Glenn stated that she supports Hs. King's request and requested that the Beard consider the children involved when making their decision. Mr. Robert Dolbeare, a resident of Brown Summit Road, stated that the opposition was related to traffic and business precedent issues. He expressed concerns relative to the County's process for obtaining a business license not including a review of the zoning ordinance relative to the proposed 00-560 7/26/00 business, and stated that this could alleviate numerous zoning violations. There being no one else to speak to the case, the public hearing was closed. Ms. King stated that she hopes the Board will consider changing the County's ordinance to make the process easier for home day care providers. She further stated that the County needs more professionals who understand child development and chose to provide home day care. Mr. Barber stated that he feels the Board believes in the service that home day care provides. He acknowledged the issues raised relative to traffic and additional commercial development on Buford Road as genuine issues. He stated that, following a community meeting, a compromise was reached whereby Ms. King would be allowed to meet her current commitment to the children until September 1, 2001. He further stated that, although there are still people with concerns relative to traffic and commercial encroachment, he feels the compromise will allow Ms. King the ability to fulfill a commitment to the families and children she provides care for until September 2001, without allowing for additional future commercial development on Buford Road. Mr. Barber then made a motion for the Board to approve Case 00SN0210 subject to conditions and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mrs. Humphrey seconded the motion of Mr. Barber. She stated that she recognizes a need in the County for additional family child care providers and that she sympathizes with Ms. King that the conditional use is only for a limited amount of time. She further stated that, even though the zoning process is a burden, it guarantees citizen input. Mr. Miller stated that he does not feel the case is about Ms. King and the operation of her business, but rather a land use issue to determine if the business should be permitted in a residential district. He further stated that he feels it is the Board's duty to see that home day care facilities are appropriately placed within the County. He referenced the concerns raised and stated that he feels it is a citizen's right to seek to protect private property rights. He stated that he will support Mr. Barber's motion, but indicated that he feels the Board should use caution when considering zoning issues relative to home day care providers. Mr. McHale stated that it is obvious that Ms. King provides quality child care service, but noted that he concurs with Mr. Miller in that it is a land use issue. He further stated that citizens who purchase property in residential districts have a right to expect that the uses in their area will be residential uses and noted that home day care is a business use. He stated that he will support Mr. Barber's motion because he feels the compromise will minimize disruption to the families who rely upon Ms. King's day care. He requested that staff review the process relative to issuing business licenses and provide recommendations to the Board that might alleviate future zoning issues. He expressed concerns relative to changing the County's regulation of home day care providers in residential districts without serious consideration of the impact upon area residents. 00-561 7/26/00 Mr. Warren called for a vote on the motion of Mr. Barber, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, for the Board to approve Case 00SN0210 subject to the following conditions: This Conditional Use shall be granted to and for Bruce S. and Hope E. King exclusively, and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. There shall be no external additions or alterations to the existing structure to accommodate this use. (P) There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. (m} And, further, conditions: the Board accepted the following proffered This Conditional Use shall expire on September 30, 2001. This use shall not be open to the public between the hours of 5:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 5:30 p.m. on Friday and 7:00 a.m. on Monday. (P) The number of children permitted at any one time shall not exceed a total of twelve (12), which shall include children which are not related and children which are related to the applicants. Other than the applicants and their immediate family members, the number of employees involved in the operation at any one time shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) persons. (P) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Miller. Nays: None. Mr. Warren requested that Planning staff meet with Ms. Carolann Pacer-Ramsey to discuss issues regarding the County's ordinance relative to the provision of home day care. Mr. Warren requested a five minute recess. Reconvening: 00SN0272 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS requested Conditional Use Planned Development and amendment of zoning district map to permit a third freestanding sign. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for medium density residential use of 1.51 to 4.0 units per acre. This request lies in an Agricultural (A) District on 14.9 acres and is known as 1501 South Providence Road. Tax ID 755-698-4828 (Sheets 7 and 11). Ms. Rogers presented a summary of Case 00SN0272 and stated that the Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance in 1987 to allow a second freestanding sign on the subject property, as well as variances to allow the signs to exceed the permitted square footage of twenty square feet. She further stated that the proposed request is to erect a third freestanding sign which would be approximately 72 square feet in size and approximately 00-562 7/26/00 eight feet in height. She stated that staff recommends denial of the request because it does not conform to the zoning ordinance. She further stated that staff acknowledges that the church does have a substantial amount of road frontage and the ordinance does not provide flexibility relative to the number of freestanding signs permitted for parcels having a substantial amount of road frontage. She stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval subject to conditions and that the Planning Commission indicated that, because of the substantial amount of road frontage, a third freestanding sign would not represent sign proliferation. When asked, Ms. Rogers stated that the subject property has approximately 870 feet of road frontage. Mr. Kirk Turner, representing the applicant, accompanied by Pastor Ben Haygood and Mr. Bob Glover from Bethany Place Baptist Church, stated that 'the Planning Commission's recommendation is acceptable. Mr. George Beadles expressed concerns relative to excessive signage, nonconformance with the County's zoning ordinance, and the Board's initiation of zoning requests for religious bodies. There being no one else to speak to the Case, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Warren made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, for the Board to approve Case 00SN0272 subject to conditions. When asked, Ms. Rogers stated that, under the current variances, the two existing signs .on the subject property each contain 41.76 square feet. She further stated that the current zoning ordinance allows for a total of 40 square feet. She stated that the two existing signs are mounted on brick walls that define the entrance into the church property and that, even though technically by the County's zoning ordinance they are defined as signs, she feels the walls act more as an entrance identification as opposed to signs. Mr. McHale expressed concerns relative to excessive signage and questioned the size of the proposed third freestanding sign. Ms. Rogers stated that the third sign is proposed to be 72 square feet. There was brief discussion relative to the size difference in signs permitted for churches and businesses. Mr. McHale expressed concerns relative to the Board setting a precedent by approving the additional signage. Mr. Warren stated that the entrance walls do not have the appearance of signs and noted that the requested sign is necessary to properly identify the church. Mr. McHale stated that he does not dispute the architectural attractiveness, but rather is concerned with setting a precedent. He further stated that he is inclined to abstain from voting because of his concerns. Mr. Warren stated that he feels every zoning case stands on its own merits. ~ .... ..., ., .. · ~ ~.~ Mr. Miller questioned the necessity fo~ additional signage. 00-563 7/26/00 Mr. Turner stated that the existing signs fail to support the church's mission and list its special events. He further stated that the proposed sign is of the same size as another church in the area. Mr. Barber stated that he feels the Board needs to use discretion when approving exceptions to the ordinance and initiating applications for conditional uses. He expressed concerns relative to the possibility of setting a precedent, but indicated that he would support the motion. Mr. Warren stated that he does not feel approval of the request will set a precedent, but rather is an example ef the Beard's and Planning Commission's flexibility. Mr. Warren then called for a vote on the motion made by him, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, for the Board to approve Case 00SN0272 subject to the following conditions: The sign shall generally conform to the sketch received May 26, 2000, with respect to height, square footage, design and lighting. (P) o The base of the proposed sign shall conform to Section 19-641 (a) of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber and Miller. Nays: None. Abstain: McHale. Reverend Ben Haygood, Pastor of Bethany Place Baptist Church, led the Board in a closing prayer. 18. AD JOURNMENT On motion of Mr. McHale, seconded by Mr. Barber, the Board adjourned at 10:04 p.m. until August 23, 2000 at 2:00 p.m. for a tour of the Jefferson Davis Corridor prior to their regularly scheduled meeting at 4:00 p.m. Ayes: Warren, Humphrey, Barber, McHale and Hiller. Nays: None. County Admini~ Arthur S. Warren Chairman 00-564 7/26/00