2022-01-26 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
JANUARY 26, 2022
Supervisors in Attendance:
Mr. Christopher M. Winslow, Chair
` Ms. Leslie A. T. Haley, Vice Chair
Mr. James A. Ingle, Jr.
Mr. James M. Holland
Mr. Kevin P. Carroll
Dr. Joseph P. Casey
County Administrator
Mr. Winslow called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. He
reviewed COVID-19 protocols for masks and spatial distancing.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board
of Supervisors approved the minutes of December 15, 2021, and
January 5, 2022, as submitted.
Ayes: Winslow, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None,
Absent: Haley.
Mr. Winslow stated Ms. Haley had to step away to take a phone
call related to her professional duties and would be joining
the meeting shortly.
2. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS,
DELETIONS OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION
There were no requests to postpone agenda items, additions,
deletions or changes in the order of presentation at this time.
3.A. EVERYDAY EXCELLENCE - MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT SERVICES
Dr. Casey called forward Ms. Kelly Fried, Executive Director
of the Community Services Board, to recognize Mental Health
Support Services (MHSS) staff for achieving accreditation by
the Commission on Accreditation for Rehabilitative Facilities,
or CARP. He stated this is an outstanding achievement and marks
the highest standards attained for quality for services
offered, continuous improvement, and satisfaction among those
served.
Ms. Fried introduced Ms. Annette Stinson, Quality Coordinator,
and Mr. Jarek Muchowski, Assistant Director for Strategic
Planning and Quality. She announced MHSS just achieved its
eighth CARF accreditation which evaluates adherence with over
22-6
1/26/2022
2,000 standards of quality across all domains of programs and
services. She stated Ms. Stinson and Mr. Muchowski have the
additional responsibility of preparing the organization for
the actual survey process, which starts approximately six
months in advance. She further stated all MHSS programs are
accredited, which is unique in Virginia. She shared details of
story boards that are on display in Central Library in
observance of the Community Services Board's 50th anniversary.
She stated the story boards describe programs and services,
all of which are certified as a result of the accreditation
process. She expressed appreciation for the opportunity to
recognize Mr. Muchowski and Ms. Stinson and thanked the Board
for its support.
Mr. Holland expressed appreciation for excellence in customer
service.
Mr. Winslow stated there has been over a generation of
consumers who have received accredited care in the county. He
commended Ms. Fried and her staff for setting the gold standard
in care and leading the way in programs such as Same Day Access.
3.E. UPPER MAGNOLIA GREEN REZONING UPDATE
Dr. Casey stated the entire afternoon work session would be
dedicated to the topic of Upper Magnolia Green rezoning. He
informed the Board that Dr. Edward Raspiller, President of John
Tyler (becoming Brightpoint) Community College would be present
in the evening session to discuss workforce development efforts
and answer any questions that may arise from this work session.
He stated the county has been working on diversification of
its tax base with quality companies and jobs and where to
locate these companies, and a key sector in which the county
does not have good representation is advanced manufacturing
sites. He further stated existing sites are becoming
constrained in the county and region, which prompts for the
role of the county to partner or take the lead to position for
the next concentration of quality jobs and investment. He
stated quality -of -life improvements, such as better
transportation networks, proactive school and library sites,
and closer retail and restaurant amenities to mitigate traffic
congestion, can be made in conjunction with these partnerships,
and their return on investment is a concurrent priority. He
stated without efforts to seek concentrated quality jobs, the
county will exhaust its abilities to attract many desired
companies; have greater fiscal challenges without private
business investment; be vulnerable to imbalances that arise
with higher levels of residential development; and result in
net job loss elsewhere with longer commutes for our citizens.
He further stated these situations are what give rise to
stagnation in a community, and the county must be proactive to
avoid this outcome. He reviewed the process for identifying
potential sites and the ultimate acquisition of the Upper
Magnolia property in December 2020. He stated there was also a
concurrent effort to acquire a site to build a reliever school
for Tomahawk Creek Middle School and, if possible, secure
additional sites for future elementary and high schools to
relieve pressures arising in that portion of the county, as
well as a library. He further stated trying to acquire school
and library sites totaling many acres and related site and
infrastructure needs in this area could easily have cost the
county near the total purchase price, and the county has done
22-7
1/26/2022
its best thus far to create momentum for the middle school with
bonds recently issued at one of its lowest interest rates in
history at 1.7 percent. He stated the county hears from many
people to be more proactive in meeting citizen and business
needs, and this acquisition helps position the county to do
just that. He further stated following the acquisition of the
Upper Magnolia property, the county received many inquiries
and good suggestions that helped further analyze and configure
the property to be able to initiate a rezoning request. He
stated the rezoning request was approved by the Board in
` September 2021 and modified with some additional adjoining
parcels a month later. He further stated that was the beginning
of the formal application process for which formal studies and
reviews commenced. He stated the county also continued to get
inquiries and good suggestions, informally or formally, leading
up to the community meeting process. He further stated there
is much work that needs to be done to begin a process that
leads up to holding formal community meetings and receiving
additional input from citizens. He expressed appreciation for
all the input received and stated community meetings and the
additional comments have helped the county as the applicant
and the Community Development departments as the reviewing
agent to best prepare a staff report suitable for presentation
and consideration during the next steps in the process. He
stated there have been some major high-quality advanced
manufacturing announcements occurring in other parts of the
country that would have made a major positive impact upon the
local, regional and state economy if they had occurred in
Chesterfield. He further stated this site competes very well
with other desired national sites for similar companies in the
future, and with less sites available, the Upper Magnolia site
is poised to be one of the best remaining nationally, if it is
zoned properly. He stated he would defer to upcoming guest
speaker Mr. Jason E1 Koubi, interim President of Virginia
Economic Development Partnership (VEDP), to address that topic.
He reminded the Board that its zoning process will restrict
the property to the uses the Board defines as permissible and,
since the county owns the property for others to acquire, any
prospects would still require many briefings with the Board
and the Board's permission for any ensuing performance
agreements and transactions. He stated Mr. E1 Koubi was
accompanied by Mr. Michael Dreiling, Vice President of Real
Estate Solutions for VEDP. He further stated there are
residential growth concerns and related traffic network
concerns that through this application and transportation study
provides a clear illustration of all the improvements needed
in this area of the county in far greater detail and timeliness
than otherwise would ever occur, while also trying to mitigate
potential residential growth and address school capacity issues
that are otherwise already arising. He stated there is a great
deal of information to share, and the most relevant information
would be presented during the work session. He further stated
after the presentation from Mr. E1 Koubi, Mr. Jesse Smith,
Deputy County Administrator, would go through the many details
associated with the rezoning, address any questions, and
receive comments from the Board. He stated staff from all the
Community Development functions were in attendance and
available to answer questions. He further stated other
interested parties were in attendance and available for
questions including Mr. Wilson Flohr, President of GO Virginia;
Ms. Danielle Fitz-Hugh, President of Chesterfield Chamber of
Commerce and member of the Economic Development Authority
(EDA); Mr. Faizan Habib, Program Manager, VDOT Office of
22-8
1/26/2022
Public -Private Partnerships and EDA member; Mr. Brian Anderson,
Chamber RVA President; and Ms. Jennifer Wakefield, President
and Chief Executive Officer for the Greater Richmond
Partnership. He thanked the Board for nearly two years of
meetings, preparation, constructive feedback, and permissions
to acquire the property and initiate the rezoning application.
He stated he anticipates homework assignments for this part of
the county over the next year - some because of the zoning
process, some regardless of it, and some that will require help
from outside experts and partners. He further stated the
homework may include the many alternatives for how the Powhite
extension can occur, the best manners to recruit targeted
retail and restaurants as desired from the community to better
contain sales leakage and reduce related congestion of longer
travels, and the best manners to prepare our students for the
high tech jobs of advanced manufacturing, including scope of
educational facilities and roles of community colleges,
universities and programs like Richard Bland's VA -FAME (Future
Advanced Manufacturing Employees).
Mr. E1 Koubi stated the county has the opportunity to develop
one of the most distinctive and attractive site -related assets
in the Commonwealth of Virginia. He further stated if
cultivated correctly, the site has the potential to attract a
transformational set of projects for Chesterfield County that
offer the opportunity to secure a foothold in a wide range of
sectors such as advanced manufacturing, data centers, and other
things that provide very attractive employment opportunities
and create very significant multiplier benefits. He stated one
of the most common reasons Virginia loses a high-quality
advanced manufacturing or other supply chain -type industrial
project is because there is insufficient inventory of high
quality, project -ready sites suitable to meet the needs of
these projects that are creating hundreds or even thousands of
high -paying jobs in a clean manufacturing environment. He
further stated once project -ready, Upper Magnolia would be
highly attractive to large advanced manufacturers due to its
1,000 -plus -acre footprint and large workforce draw, especially
of skilled workers. He stated the Board is considering the
rezoning at a time when the Commonwealth is considering
unprecedented investments in site development. He provided data
of projects that eliminated Virginia for lack of a viable site
or building option. He stated if the Board wants to compete
for the biggest capital -investment -generating projects, it
should think seriously about developing a site that can
accommodate them. He discussed reasons why site development is
important. He stated companies are trying to minimize risk and
time. He noted the timeframe between making a decision and
ramp -up has been shrinking, and companies have been looking
for sites where they can be fully operational in 12 to 18
months from project announcement. He provided details of the
tier system, which was created to identify sites that are more
prepared and more competitive, and pointed out that chances of
winning a project increase for higher -tiered, project -ready
sites. He stated 81 percent of Virginia sites with greater than
or equal to 250 acres are not competitive for projects because
they are not project ready. He further stated it can take many
years to get a site project ready, but the rewards are enormous
and generate a high return on investment for both communities
and the state. He discussed the Upper Magnolia site and stated
even in its current status it is attracting very serious
interest, but it is getting eliminated because it is not
project ready. He provided a chart showing that peer states'
22-9
1/26/2022
recent annual investments in site development greatly exceed
Virginia's, but stated Virginia's investments are moving in
the right direction. He stated Governor Youngkin has embraced
investment in site development as a priority. He further stated
the vehicle used to invest state dollars is a matching program.
He stated $100 million of the $150 million should be set aside
for larger sites of 250 acres or more because those are fairly
expensive sites to develop and because that is the area of
greatest deficiency in the Commonwealth. He reviewed the
qualifications for additional state funding which are
appropriate zoning for industrial and commercial development;
local and regional commitment to the project; technical
assessment by an engineering firm; competitiveness of the
location; satisfactory assessment by a top site -selection
consultant or firm; having a plan for the site; and
documentation of past project interest.
In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to
competitiveness scores and what would push the county in the
right direction, Mr. E1 Koubi stated the availability, quality
and relevance of a workforce that is suitable to the needs of
the project is typically the number one factor. He further
stated the fact that Upper Magnolia is located in a
metropolitan area is a very big deal. He stated other factors
include infrastructure, nearby airport, school system, general
quality of life, strategic mid-Atlantic region, proximity to
the nation's capitol, stable and predictable operating
environment, and a community that is focused on the right
things. He complimented the Department of Economic Development
and County Administration for their excellent representation
of the Board of Supervisors and stated they are knowledgeable
and capable professionals.
Mr. Holland discussed outsourcing of production to other
countries and the resulting lack of manufacturing in the United
States. He stated timing is critically important. He spoke of
the successes of the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina
which started back in the 1960s. He stated this is imperative
for the nation.
Mr. Carroll inquired about sources of funding from the state
and federal levels to build the necessary infrastructure and,
most importantly, the Powhite Parkway extension. He discussed
the growing traffic load in the western part of Hull Street
and stated a project such as Upper Magnolia would continue to
bring the traffic count numbers even higher. He expressed his
hope that there would be good news as to whether there would
be money available to build the Powhite Parkway extension.
Mr. El Koubi stated he would need to defer to his local partners
to address some of the specifics. He further stated the
Governor's introduced budget contains $150 million one-time
monies but noted it would have to be passed and signed. He
stated VEDP would propose a very significant recurring
investment in site development at the state level to address
needs and catch up. He further stated the proposal would be to
make a significant and sustained investment in site development
at the commonwealth level to be a more capable partner in
communities such as Chesterfield considering these types of
investments. With regard to additional burdens, he stated it
is important to evaluate the return on investment (ROI). He
further stated when looking at the numbers represented by these
22-10
1/26/2022
projects, he thinks there is a way to make the math work in a
way that is favorable to the county.
Mr. Ingle stated the estimate to extend Powhite Parkway is $700
million to $1 billion. He further stated extension of Powhite
Parkway is one of the most important things that can happen to
that area for any development in that area to take place. He
stated his concern would be that the Board zones the property
first hoping for the money and it does not come, and the county
has issues with the roads. He further stated he is interested
in commitments or more conversations with the state about how
to ensure the infrastructure would be put into place if the
zoning is passed. He stated adding jobs in the absence of the
extending Powhite Parkway would cause a catastrophic failure
of the road system in that area. He further stated he is excited
for the opportunity to reduce reliance on the residential real
estate tax to bring in more industry, but he wanted to make
sure it is done in a way that does not cause damage to the
area. He stated he is hoping to find out where the county can
get some more commitments if Upper Magnolia moves forward. He
further stated $150 million is big money, but Powhite Parkway
Extension costs $700 million to $1 billion, and his request
would be to find out how to get there. He inquired of Mr. El
Koubi whether the lack of rail would be detrimental to the
case.
Mr. E1 Koubi stated it could work either way. He further stated
there are some advanced manufacturing projects that absolutely
need rail, others that prefer rail, and others that do not want
rail. He stated it is something to consider and something
Economic Development has already considered, but it is
definitely not a deal breaker. He further stated there are many
projects that could be attractive for Chesterfield County that
would not require rail. He then discussed Tier 5 site readiness
which includes the land being shovel ready, all site permits
in place or identified, and investment in hard costs. He stated
VEDP advises wherever possible getting into the 12- to 18 -
month timeframe by primarily investing in soft costs.
Mr. Ingle referenced slide 10 of Mr. E1 Koubi's presentation
and stated Tier 4 is basically about the difference in the size
of the project and the scope of the utilities available to the
project. He further stated both Tiers 4 and 5 are site ready
and inquired if the difference between them is what they can
accommodate.
Mr. E1 Koubi stated the capabilities needed to land a mid-size
project are much less stringent than what many larger projects
demand. He further stated the difference between Tiers 4 and
5 is more about different project sizes and capabilities. He
stated the standard that had been set for Tiers 4 and 5 for a
normal, mid-size economic development project was not a
standard that provided a reliable basis for being fully ready
for a large project. He further stated there are a handful of
sites larger than 250 acres that are project -ready for a mid-
size project, but there are zero sites that are fully ready
for a large project with very high utility demands.
Mr. Ingle stated many citizens are concerned about
environmental issues generated by a potential industry or
company. He inquired if Mr. E1 Koubi could assist county staff
by providing information relative to what some of the larger
projects that went to other states ended up looking like and
22-11
1/26/2022
how the resulting impacts had to be mitigated. He stated
currently there are many concerns about environmental impacts
which may or may not be valid, and discussions need to occur
and be shared with the community. He further stated if the
Board determines some uses are not good for the property, then
the Board could eliminate those from the proffers. He requested
assistance from the state to help county staff formulate that
information.
Mr. E1 Koubi stated the state is committed to helping the
county through the process. He further stated Mr. Michael
Dreiling, Vice President of Real Estate Solutions for VEDP, is
a professional engineer and was hired because VEDP recognized
the need to dig into the details with communities and their
leaders. He stated VEDP is very interested in working with the
county, and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) is interested as well. He further stated he believes
those resources can be leveraged as the county gets further
into the process.
In response to Dr. Casey's question relative to project
phasing, Mr. E1 Koubi stated a project must get to a baseline
level of readiness. He further stated the Upper Magnolia site
is not there now, but it could be. He stated many projects are
considering a phased approach over many years and they are
looking for sites with room to expand even if there is not a
clearly envisioned phase 2 or 3.
In response to Mr. Carroll's question relative to whether there
are other locations in the state currently proposing or working
toward anything like Upper Magnolia or competing for attention
from the state, Mr. El Koubi stated there are a handful of
other megasites around the state that are very committed and
want to develop, and the state is working very closely with
them. He further stated very few of them are located in a
metropolitan area of Richmond's size, and if the county had a
site that is fully project ready coupled with the other assets
and capabilities of Chesterfield and Richmond, the county would
have a very distinctive real estate option that would be very
competitive.
Dr. Casey thanked Mr. E1 Koubi for the presentation and
announced he would be a guest on an upcoming Behind the Mic
podcast episode as a part of the county's efforts to share
information with citizens on various mediums.
Mr. Jesse Smith provided the Board with a high-level update on
the two companion zoning requests, Upper Magnolia Green - East
(21SN0675) and Upper Magnolia Green - West (21SN0676) currently
before the Planning Commission. He reviewed the timeline of
community meetings and work sessions from September 21, 2021
to the present. He noted staff is working through the case and
recommending conditions to the Economic Development Authority
(EDA) who as the owner will be proffering them. He also noted
the earliest the Board would have the case would be April. He
stated staff has heard six primary issues from citizens, the
first of which is buffers, particularly as they pertain to
acreage lots in the Moseley Road and Duval Road area. He
further stated some residents have asked for a 750 -foot buffer,
and county staff is looking into whether that accommodation
can be made without completely constraining development of the
property. He stated the second issue pertains to uses of the
property; specifically, plastics manufacturing and
22-12
1/26/2022
pharmaceutical manufacturing. He provided details of the third
issue, the widening of Westerleigh Parkway from two to four
lanes, which would be necessary due to extra traffic generated
by three schools in one centralized location. He stated the
county has been in discussions with Schools about whether the
high school could be relocated to a different location within
either the Upper Magnolia Green - East or - West boundary. He
further stated preliminary discussions indicate it is a good
possibility and, assuming that moves forward, it is very likely
that Westerleigh Parkway would be able to remain a two-lane
road based on traffic analyses. He stated the fourth issue is
having three schools on one campus, and moving the high school
will not only reduce traffic impacts on Westerleigh Parkway
but also reduce impacts on surrounding wetlands, waters, and
other environmental features. He provided details of the fifth
issue, which is the timing of the construction of the
north/south road to Duval Road, and which resulted from issues
number three (Westerleigh Parkway) and number four (number of
schools). He stated the community has made clear its preference
to see that road built sooner than later. He further stated to
the degree possible staff is working to determine the right
timing for construction, the cost, and the amount of time it
would take. He stated it is a long extension of approximately
one mile and includes a major creek crossing, and staff will
get into the details of timing to be able to provide the second
access to the schools campus and other facilities. He further
stated because the middle school would be going in first, it
would likely be served for some time through Westerleigh
Parkway with the second north/south road to be provided shortly
thereafter. He stated staff would need to ascertain the timing
and work with county finance personnel on the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) to determine when that could happen.
He then discussed issue number six, which is a desire for
continued community engagement. He stated the Carvana project
could be used as a model, and staff would present some options
relative to suggested conditions for the EDA to consider more
community engagement as the project moves forward.
Mr. Carroll stated he would have some follow up after Mr.
Smith's presentation on the west side.
Mr. Smith stated some of the issues on the west side were
around issues number one (buffers) and two (uses).
Mr. Winslow stated he participated in the Westerleigh and
Moseley Road meetings, and one of the items presented was
traffic on Westerleigh Parkway. He further stated what he is
hearing is that by moving the high school, a lot of the traffic
will be eliminated to the point the Westerleigh Parkway
expansion will not be required.
Mr. Smith concurred and stated the high school represented
approximately one-third of the trips, and by removing it from \
that part of the case it reduces many of the peak -hour trips.
Mr. Winslow thanked staff for working out that issue.
Mr. Smith stated staff believes that is the right solution and
is having conversations with Schools staff about where to find
a location within the boundaries of either the east, west, or
possibly both.
22-13
1/26/2022
Mr. Carroll stated he has heard concerns from the Westerleigh
community about not only the increased traffic flow on
Westerleigh Parkway but also the types of risks presented by
increased traffic flow. He further stated the playground is
toward the front of the subdivision as opposed to the rear,
and one consideration is an underground walkway under
Westerleigh Parkway as the new section is built. He stated this
will provide a much safer way for residents to cross than a
crosswalk. He further stated the road network being
contemplated will add a level of connectivity to Horner Park.
Mr. Smith displayed a map of the eastern property with the
future school site and drew the proposed Westerleigh Parkway
extension as well as potential locations for the middle school.
He also drew a potential location for a grade -separated
pedestrian crossing on Westerleigh Parkway extension, noting
the crossing would be close to the Westerleigh community and
provide safe access to the school's fields and other amenities.
Mr. Carroll stated the neighborhood was also interested in
connectivity up to Horner Park. He stated a connection would
add more mobility and connectivity to that part of the county.
He inquired whether discussions are occurring relative to
making such a connection.
Mr. Smith answered affirmatively. He displayed the Magnolia
Green Approved Master Plan (1991) and drew potential
connections to Horner Park. He stated as planning moves forward
the roads and alignments can be refined to provide more
connectivity to an underused asset.
In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to whether there
would be sidewalks on both sides of Westerleigh Parkway and
the length thereof, Mr. Smith stated the county would want to
provide pedestrian connectivity to the facilities. He further
stated there is a sidewalk on the existing Westerleigh Parkway,
and that is a conversation to be had with the community. He
stated from a staff perspective, there is a goal to leave the
community exactly the way it is and retrofitting sidewalks
would have impacts.
Additional discussion ensued relative to sidewalk
connectivity.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to how the
Bikeways and Trails Plan has been factored into the
development, Mr. Smith stated there are plans to accommodate
development of bikeways and trails in accordance with the plan
adopted by the Board.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to uses, Mr.
Smith stated the uses that are predominately drawing the most
attention are plastics manufacturing and pharmaceutical
manufacturing.
Mr. Smith then provided a map of the subject property showing
the portion initiated for rezoning by the Board on September
22, 2021 plus what was added in October 2021. He stated most
of the property was purchased by the county and conveyed to
the EDA. He then discussed the initiation of the zoning itself
and explained how the public could access more detailed
information online.
22-14
1/26/2022
Mr. Ingle summarized the process for filing a case and inquired
when in that process the staff report would be generated in a
normal case.
Mr. Smith stated that process is done in conjunction
with the
Planning Commission. He
further stated before a
case is
advertised
for its first
public hearing held by the
Planning
Commission,
there needs
to be buy -in from the
Planning
Commission
that the case
is ready to be heard. He stated that
is what is
happening with
the Upper Magnolia Green case.
Mr. Ingle stated the Planning Commission is still asking for
another meeting to finish meeting with other departments.
Mr. Smith concurred and stated Planning staff has had lengthy
discussions with all the Planning Commissioners. He further
stated he will cover what their particular input is and what
staff will work on with them over the next 60 days or so. He
stated the earliest the Planning Commission would hold its
public hearing would be March, and if it chooses to move the
case forward, the Board would hold its public hearing in April.
Mr. Ingle stated because the Board initiated the case, it has
probably drawn more attention to the process. He further stated
just because the Board or any other applicant files an
application does not mean the case is ready to be presented to
the Planning Commission. He stated it just means the process
has been initiated and there will be community meetings,
revisions, possibly another community meeting and more
revisions until the case is at a point where everyone thinks
it is ready to go before the Planning Commission for a public
hearing. He further stated the Planning Commission makes a
recommendation and the case then comes to the Board for a
public hearing before the Board makes a decision. He stated
this is a normal process and discussed varying degrees of
interest in different cases. He further stated he wants to
ensure that citizens know their input matters, it is being
taken into consideration, and it is being looked at as staff
studies things such as buffers, sound proffers, and lighting
proffers. He stated by putting some of those things in the case
it helps citizens understand what the case would look like. He
further stated I-2 zoning might sound bad to someone who lives
in the country and is not accustomed to having industry next
door. He discussed working together to ensure citizens
understand what that means and how it would truly affect them.
He stated the community often wants to see everything in the
very beginning, but that is not the way a normal case develops.
He further stated it is the way a normal case appears before
any public meeting at the Planning Commission or Board of
Supervisors level. He stated it is important to say the Board
is listening, and he is concerned about some of the issues that
have been brought up. He further stated the Board needs to be
transparent and share that with the community and ensure that
citizens know they are a part of the process. He stated just
because the Board initiated the process does not mean the Board
brought a case that was completely finished and will not have
any changes. He further stated he thinks many citizens are
concerned that whatever is going to happen is already done,
which is not true.
Mr. Smith stated the case will end up vastly different from
where it started, and the Board gave staff a homework
assignment to rezone the property to accommodate a technology
22-15
1/26/2022
park, three schools, a library, and a few other things. He
further stated it is staff's job to bring the Board a good case
after having worked with staff, the Planning Commission, and
the community so that by the time it comes to the Board it is
in good shape.
Mr. Winslow stated it is important to understand that in every
single conversation, email, and meeting the Board is listening
for issues, and the Planning Commission and staff are working
to mitigate issues mined from those conversations. He further
stated this is meant to be an iterative process with drafts
and discussions until there is a product that both the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors can in turn evaluate. He
stated each comment is valuable, and the Board appreciates
every citizen coming out and giving input because it only makes
the case better at the end of the day.
Mr. Smith provided the Board with a map showing the boundaries
of Upper Magnolia East and Upper Magnolia west. He stated the
West parcel contains approximately 1,700 acres for a technology
village, and the East parcel is intended to be for two or three
schools, a library, and no more than 600 residential units. He
indicated on the map a potential school location south of Duval
Road. He stated nothing has been finalized, but staff is
looking at those sorts of issues.
Mr. Carroll stated if the school is moved, he hoped an updated
traffic analysis would be required to determine the effects on
the previous site as well as the new location.
Mr. Smith stated staff would need to take a look at timing of
certain road improvements as they pertain to that particular
facility.
Mr. Ingle inquired whether all the traffic studies have been
based on the Powhite Parkway Extension being completed.
Mr. Smith stated the Powhite Parkway Extension must be built
in order for Upper Magnolia West to fully develop. He confirmed
the traffic studies were based on the Powhite Parkway Extension
being completed and stated staff did not envision a scenario
where it was not built for the West. He further stated he was
not sure the county could even make it work absent the Powhite
Parkway Extension being built.
Mr. Ingle stated the case, without Powhite Parkway going all
the way through, would defeat a lot of what the county would
need to do for that area because Powhite Parkway needs to give
relief to Hull Street. He further stated the Upper Magnolia
project could be the catalyst to make the Powhite Parkway
Extension project available. He stated outside of having
Powhite Parkway extended all the way through and making the
improvements to allow Hull Street to have some relief, the
Upper Magnolia project would be catastrophic to the area. He
further stated the county needs to ensure it looks at phasing,
proffering, what can happen, and what cannot happen. He stated
just because the property has zoning does not mean it is
available to be built on immediately without other things
taking place if proffered correctly.
Dr. Casey stated one item that is worthy of its own standalone
work session is an informational update from VDOT on the
history and scope of the major roads in the county, the
22-16
1/26/2022
Richmond Metropolitan Transit Authority (RMTA) and its role,
VDOT's role, and the mechanism of tolls and when they may be
expiring because the bonds are satisfied. He further stated
regardless of the zoning case the county needs to look at how
Powhite Parkway can be extended to serve the people who are
there today and the units that are approved there today. He
stated one of the challenges is, when it is just a residential
project, state and federal partners are not necessarily with
the county. He further stated staff would work out a lot of
that information just to summarize it for the February work
session. He stated the county may need to hire experts in the
field of major road construction, and hopefully partner with
VDOT on such experts, for them to bring back the answers. He
expressed his hope to have VEDP at the table as well as the
support of United States Representative Rob Wittman. He
reiterated that when it is just a residential discussion, it
is hard to get those parties to the table. He stated Tomahawk
Creek Middle School is a priority regardless of the zoning
process, and a middle school site should be positioned sooner
than later so that the site can be designed, specced out, and
the procurement process can begin. He further stated the county
can make disclosures in the procurement documents that it is
subject to rezoning. He stated the county has issued the bonds
for it, and he thinks it is the will of the Board to construct
the site somewhere in this area. He further stated in fairness
to those who would bid on it, they need to know where the
school is to be located. He stated bidders could begin scoping
out the project so the county does not start the process at
the closure of the zoning process, but it would already be in
the midst of receiving documents.
Mr. Carroll stated because the high school is to be moved to
a different area, there is already a design used for previous
schools which will save money because the county will not have
to pay for a new design to be done. He further stated the
county will still have to pay on the backend because there will
not be shared services between the high school and the middle
school. He stated although there is already a model design,
additional facilities such as an auditorium may have to be
built. He further stated as far as the design goes, that is
ready to go.
Mr. Smith concurred and stated if the high school is moved,
the topography changes and some of the sitework package has to
change, and staff is working through those issues. He further
stated this something that is happening in the last few days
and it is all just getting worked out. He stated every effort
is going to be made to stick to the 2024 timeline.
Mr. Carroll stated he wanted to make it clear so that the
community is getting all of the updated information.
Mr. Smith then reviewed the Upper Magnolia West rezoning from
R-9 to A and I-2 to allow for a technology village. He displayed
a map of the parcel with 100 -foot buffers and stated staff will
create a map showing a 750 -foot buffer. He stated staff is
sensitive to the fact that residents located there for a more
agrarian lifestyle, and they want to mitigate the impact on
that. He further stated staff is cognizant that this is a
significant change for residents on Moseley Road.
In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to whether the
county has done enough wetland studies to know if there are
22-17
1/26/2022
Mr. Smith then discussed the eight uses that would be permitted
on the property. He stated pharmaceutical products
manufacturing and plastic products manufacturing have caused
concerns in the community. He further stated the idea is that
there would not be a plant manufacturing raw plastic, but it
would be an accessory to a permitted use such as manufacturing
plastic cases for computer equipment. He stated the idea is
that there would not be a large construction or lay -down area
or Amazon distribution center. He further stated staff does
recognize that a computer manufacturer will have some
warehousing, and some facilities may have yard storage, but
those would not be primary uses. He stated there are many uses
that could go into those sorts of facilities, but not all of
them are the right fit for the community.
Mr. Ingle stated there are some other uses that have been
requested. He further stated the county will not know how the
property could be used until it knows where the wetlands are.
He inquired if uses such as a hospital or town center would be
precluded or if they could be proffered as conditional uses to
I-2 if the Board were to allow those types of uses.
Mr. Smith stated a Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD)
was added to the case in order to permit, for example, a fire
station or water tower. He further stated a town center and
retail uses may be appropriate, but the application may need
to be adjusted in order to do that. He stated from a staff
perspective, they are uncertain the property is the right spot
for a town center use and there are other locations on Hull
Street, such as Cosby Village, that might be better suited for
mixed-use residential, retail, and commercial uses.
Mr. Ingle stated all of that needs to be worked through so
that, even though it is not necessarily part of the case, it
is part of the case.
Mr. Winslow stated the county has other places for retail, and
�r there have been discussions in the past about other locations
for a town center type place. He further stated Centerpointe
has been mentioned several times, and there are other locations
such as Roseland in the Midlothian District. He stated when he
looks at opportunities, this case is not the be-all and end-
all for a town center and it can still happen. He further
stated from his discussions with people who would put a town
center together, they would be looking broadly at five square
miles to see what heads on beds look like and what the
22-18
1/26/2022
250 contiguous acres
without some type of wetland mitigation,
Mr. Smith stated the
natural resource inventory is underway
and should be finalized.
He further stated Timmons is doing it
on behalf of the EDA
in early February. He stated that will
identify where those
particular facilities are, and there are
resource protection areas (RPAS) throughout the property. He
further stated while
there are contiguous sites, there
certainly could be in
the future some sort of impacts to those.
He stated that is not
unusual and the goal is to try to avoid
and minimize those as
much as possible.
Dr. Casey stated it is
hard to have 250 contiguous acres with
no wetland mitigation
anywhere in the county. He further stated
the county's goal is
to negate the acres that would be
associated with that.
He stated 250 acres is a large contiguous
parcel.
Mr. Smith then discussed the eight uses that would be permitted
on the property. He stated pharmaceutical products
manufacturing and plastic products manufacturing have caused
concerns in the community. He further stated the idea is that
there would not be a plant manufacturing raw plastic, but it
would be an accessory to a permitted use such as manufacturing
plastic cases for computer equipment. He stated the idea is
that there would not be a large construction or lay -down area
or Amazon distribution center. He further stated staff does
recognize that a computer manufacturer will have some
warehousing, and some facilities may have yard storage, but
those would not be primary uses. He stated there are many uses
that could go into those sorts of facilities, but not all of
them are the right fit for the community.
Mr. Ingle stated there are some other uses that have been
requested. He further stated the county will not know how the
property could be used until it knows where the wetlands are.
He inquired if uses such as a hospital or town center would be
precluded or if they could be proffered as conditional uses to
I-2 if the Board were to allow those types of uses.
Mr. Smith stated a Conditional Use Planned Development (CUPD)
was added to the case in order to permit, for example, a fire
station or water tower. He further stated a town center and
retail uses may be appropriate, but the application may need
to be adjusted in order to do that. He stated from a staff
perspective, they are uncertain the property is the right spot
for a town center use and there are other locations on Hull
Street, such as Cosby Village, that might be better suited for
mixed-use residential, retail, and commercial uses.
Mr. Ingle stated all of that needs to be worked through so
that, even though it is not necessarily part of the case, it
is part of the case.
Mr. Winslow stated the county has other places for retail, and
�r there have been discussions in the past about other locations
for a town center type place. He further stated Centerpointe
has been mentioned several times, and there are other locations
such as Roseland in the Midlothian District. He stated when he
looks at opportunities, this case is not the be-all and end-
all for a town center and it can still happen. He further
stated from his discussions with people who would put a town
center together, they would be looking broadly at five square
miles to see what heads on beds look like and what the
22-18
1/26/2022
investment and infrastructure look like to determine
appropriateness for putting a town center in place. He stated
Chesterfield Towne Center has experienced ups and downs, and
retail is struggling. He further stated the metric has changed
over the years as a result of how people are purchasing goods
and how those goods are ultimately getting to them. He stated
Amazon is a good example of that as a disruptor. He further
stated all of that needs to be kept in mind from a commercial
and town center perspective.
Mr. Smith referred to the Magnolia Green Approved Master Plan
(1991) map and discussed conversations with Mr. Tom Page with
iStar who is interested in a very nice non-residential,
commercial facility with local restaurants, but they are not
quite at the tipping point to do that. He stated it will
probably be the last thing that shows up and Mr. Page is being
patient because he wants it to be an amenity for not only
Magnolia Green in general but also the community as a whole.
Mr. Carroll discussed traffic on the western part of Hull
Street from Route 288 to Woodlake and Otterdale Road and stated
the residents are all using the same places to shop and the
same restaurants which necessitates trips going east. He
further stated one of the things that has to be considered for
the future is moving some of those amenities out west, so trips
do not have to go east. He stated in one of the traffic studies
he read, certain sections in a.m. and p.m. peaks are already
failing on Hull Street mainly due to increased population. He
further stated part of the way to mitigate that is to put, for
example, restaurants out west so less people are going to the
same bottleneck. He stated he knows there are properties
further west, but when you get past Magnolia Green, that is it
because water and sewer do not extend beyond there.
Dr. Casey stated these are all appropriate conversations, and
he suggested creating a small citizens group to get suggestions
on the types of retail, restaurants, and specific entities they
would like closer to them. He further stated it is worthy to
look at who can provide expert advice and help frame this topic
better for the Magnolia Green property or other frontage
property along Route 360. He stated if retail was being
embedded in the Upper Magnolia Green West, state and federal
partners would not help with road improvements for a retail
project, nor would they help with a hospital -related project.
He further stated state and federal partners want to see the
1-2 uses to get them to the table with their funding resources.
He stated there is leakage from that area and socio-economic
factors there that, if the county invests a little time, money,
and attention, the county could position the private property
and let them do what they do best. He further stated most of
the retail currently arising usually has residential and mixed-
use components to it. He discussed properties across the region
that were once zoned one -hundred -percent commercial that have
sat idle for so long and need embedment of residential because
that is the business of how somebody makes money in developing
it privately. He stated traditionally, the residential side of
the equation has not been incentivized, and the county can work
toward models of incentivizing the commercial side.
Mr. Smith provided photographs of the Medline facility in
Meadowville Technology Park to show the campus -style
development as well as the architecture. He stated there is no
noise or smell coming from the Medline facility, and the idea
22-19
1/26/2022
is there would be similar facilities within the Upper Magnolia
Green West area. He further stated one the proffered conditions
is that there would be a master plan for the entire site, which
is very similar to what was done with the Meadowville
Technology Park, and it would dictate things like landscape
and architecture and ensure quality development. He then
provided details of the Upper Magnolia Green East property
which includes public facilities and potential residential. He
stated there could be three schools and a maximum of 600 R-15
residential units which are either similar to or larger than
those in the adjacent Westerleigh subdivision. He further
stated the property is approximately 700 acres in total. He
displayed the map discussed earlier and on which he drew the
proposed extension of Westerleigh Parkway and the proposed
locations of the elementary and middle schools. He noted there
is more work to do on the high school location.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to the 600
single-family homes for the entire area, Mr. Smith stated there
would be a maximum of 600 homes to potentially be located on
the east side. He further stated the west side would not have
any residential with the idea that Powhite Parkway and buffers
would serve as a dividing line to separate residential uses
from the technology park.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to consideration
of a school redistricting, Mr. Smith deferred to Schools for
follow up on that question.
Ms. Haley stated she thought those conversations would take
place at the County - Schools Liaison Committee meetings and
there would be community conversations about what Schools'
expectations are. She further stated she thought it was on
their radar as to not just Upper Magnolia Green but also the
other rebuilds currently happening. She stated that is a great
opportunity for Schools to bring that forward.
Referring back to Mr. Holland's earlier question about bikeways
and trails, Mr. Smith displayed the Upper Magnolia Green East
map once more to show the darker lines where some of the trails
would be located adjacent to the residential areas and very
close to the school.
Mr. Holland stated he can imagine there would be a lot of
biking and outside activities which are significant to consider
upfront including the chapter in the Comprehensive Plan that
relates to bikeways and trails.
Mr. Ingle stated several people sent him questions about
whether the Board must rezone for schools and what that process
could look like, whether it goes through this zoning process
or some other format. He asked Mr. Smith to explain the
process.
Mr. Smith stated the Board could have gone through a couple of
processes, the first one being substantial accord, which looks
exactly like a zoning case. He stated from a staff perspective,
there are challenges with the existing zoning of the 1,300 -
plus residential units, and staff has heard there is not a
desire to have that much residential in the area. He further
stated it made sense to fix it all at one time. He then provided
a slide of Planning Commission concerns and discussed the
22-20
1/26/2022
commissioners' input to make the case the best by the time it
gets to the Board.
Mr. Ingle stated his Planning Commissioner, Mr. Gib Sloan,
wanted to make it clear that the Planning Commission is
independent of the Board of Supervisors, and they are
evaluating the case independently. He further stated Mr. Sloan
does have a lot of experience and he is sharing questions which
staff is working to answer. He stated he wanted to make it
clear that the Planning Commission is independent of the Board
and it does not make a decision based on what the Board tells
them to do. He further stated the Planning Commissioners are
absolutely evaluating the case themselves.
Mr. Smith stated staff does want to honor the process, and
staff does not want to disservice the Planning Commission by
getting to the end before it has had a chance to hold a public
hearing. He stated to the degree staff can update the Board on
where the case is headed, he could echo Mr. Ingle's sentiment
that the Planning Commission will make sure it is vetted
properly and there are appropriate protections for the
community while the case is moving forward. He then continued
his discussion of Planning Commission concerns which include
buffers and setbacks, the need for more conceptual plans, and
performance standards for light, noise, odor, building height,
etc.
Mr. Carroll stated it is important to look into odor,
especially when looking at different types of companies to come
to the county. He further stated these companies already exist
and have manufacturing plants or businesses somewhere else,
and the proof of whether they are a good steward to the
community should be there. He stated if the county does its
homework it should be able to provide that information to the
community and be very transparent.
Dr. Casey stated with regard to desired and targeted companies,
staff is trying to understand the land use and conditions where
the companies ultimately located. He further stated there may
be conditions staff is not even thinking of that also work to
protect the community and, if so, those are things for staff
to consider. He stated if, on the other hand, there is an
imposed condition that would prevent desired companies from
coming to the county, the county would have to work with VEDP
and site consultants to understand that. He further stated the
county does not want to go through all of this effort only to
have one word in the entire case mitigate or negate any company
from wanting to locate in the county.
Mr. Smith continued his discussion of performance standards.
He stated other concerns of the Planning Commission are a
desire to further limit uses or create greater setback for
undesirable uses; utilities uses proffer; and consistency of
treatment with privately initiated zoning cases.
Ms. Haley stated it is important to recognize that
conversations are ongoing, and this is a listening opportunity
for the Board. She further stated what the Board is seeing in
Mr. Smith's presentation is a result of the Planning
Commissioners having community conversations and collecting
feedback. She stated the case is still in the early stages,
and once the staff report is available there will be more
22-21
1/26/2022
specificity on the issues and much better detail of where the
case is.
Mr. Smith stated staff will go back through the issues and show
how each one was addressed. He further stated if the Board has
any separate concerns above and beyond that, staff will work
to address those as well. He then continued his discussion of
the consistency of treatment with privately initiated zoning
cases. He stated there are some questions, and it is difficult
to provide the same level of detail, but staff will work with
the Department of Economic Development to answer some of those
questions. He then discussed specifying what transportation
improvements will be provided and when they will be provided.
He stated this is a very large case, and there is a long list
of improvements to approximately 20 intersections. He further
stated absent knowing what is coming in and in what order it
will be developed, it is very difficult to say what should
happen first. He stated the middle school will assuredly be
developed first on the east side, and there are specific
improvements tied to the middle school. He further stated it
would be tough for staff to come up with a phasing plan for
the entire 2,000 acres and assume in what order it would
develop, but staff understands the request to ensure certain
major improvements occur early on, such as ensuring the Powhite
Parkway Extension is built prior to a certain level of
development. He stated Ms. Laura Farmer, the Chief Financial
Officer for VDOT, will be scheduled to discuss Powhite Parkway
at an upcoming Board meeting. He further stated through
conversations with VDOT, RMTA, and partners in the industry,
staff can get more granular and provide insight as to how to
make that happen in the time and manner the Board wants.
Mr. Winslow stated he was encouraged by Mr. E1 Koubi in that
there seems to be bipartisan support for infrastructure
improvements which is good see and will help with conversations
moving forward.
Ms. Haley stated Powhite Parkway Extension is not even a topic
of discussion until the county identifies opportunities. She
further stated in the background people have been talking about
Powhite Parkway forever, but the county knows the price tag
attached to it. She stated the county needs partners to make
that happen, and those partnership conversations were never
really happening until the county had an opportunity like this.
She further stated no one can make exact promises or an exact
timeline, but now there are willing participants at every
single level talking about how and what needs to happen. She
stated everyone understands that infrastructure and
transportation are priorities, and she agreed the county must
be mindful but also looking at reasonable terms that include
addressing the transportation issue.
Mr. Smith then addressed the last topic under Planning
Commission concerns which is the benefit of having a shovel -
ready site as discussed earlier by Mr. E1 Koubi.
Mr. Ingle requested staff to look into whether Dominion Energy
would need to build a substation onsite or offsite and try to
get an answer as to what that looks like for the citizens.
Mr. Smith expressed his hope to have an answer no later than
the upcoming Planning Commission work session. He then provided
the Board with the tentative timeline for next steps, the next
22-22
1/26/2022
one being a community meeting in the Public Meeting Room on
February 3, 2022.
In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the format
for the community meeting, Mr. Smith stated staff will collect
questions from the audience as well as from Facebook Live.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to the time of
the meeting on February 3rd, Mr. Smith stated the meeting would
begin at 7:00 p.m.
Ms. Haley stated there have been concerns about holding the
community meeting in the Public Meeting Room and focusing on
reaching out to the direct community involved. She further
stated the rest of the Board members are now hearing from and
having interactions with their constituents because this is a
countywide project. She stated it is advantageous to allow
citizens to use the opportunities that exist, both online and
in person, to be active and engaged. She further stated the
community meeting is an opportunity for citizens to ask
questions and gain information, but as the case moves forward
citizens will have the opportunity to state their opinions
during public hearings before the Planning Commission and the
Board. She encouraged everyone to be openminded until the staff
report becomes available and outlines what the end product
could look like.
Mr. Holland stated the community meeting is where input is
received, shared, and discussed, and nothing is final until
the Board votes. He further stated in the past he has seen
interested parties make a final decision based on partial
information, and he stressed the importance of waiting,
listening, being openminded, getting all the facts, and
evaluating the information versus just sharing an opinion. He
encouraged citizens to ask questions and be openminded.
Mr. Smith continued his review of the next steps which include
three separate opportunities for community input, two of which
are formal public hearings. He stated the earliest the Planning
Commission would hold its public hearing is March, and the
earliest the Board would hold its public hearing is April. He
further stated staff will endeavor to complete the staff report
as soon as possible, typically no less than a week prior to
the Planning Commission's public hearing. He encouraged
submission of questions prior to that. He thanked Mr. Dave
Goode, Constituent Services Administrator, and his staff for
their assistance with answering questions and scheduling
meetings.
Mr. Winslow thanked Mr. Smith and staff for helping the Board
engage with citizens throughout the process.
3.C. CONSENT AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS J
Mr. Smith provided details of Item 12.B.4. - Authorization to
Proceed with Grant Request and Resolution of Support for
Transit Demonstration Funds for Route 60 Transit Service; Item
12.B.S. - Transfer Funding, Appropriate Cash Proffers and Award
a Design Build Construction Contract for the Otterdale Road
Drainage Improvement Project; Item 12.B.1l.a. - Set Public
Hearing to Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the
Acquisition of Right -of -Way and Easements for the Otterdale
22-23
1/26/2022
Road Drainage Project - Blackman Creek Crossing; Item 12.B.7.
- Accept and Appropriate Grant Funds from the Virginia
Department of Aviation (DOAV) for Design of the Ramp Portion
of the Airport Southeast Ramp Project; Item 12.B.11.b. - Set
Public Hearing to Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Relative to the County Thoroughfare Plan - Henricus Park Access
Road; Item 12.B.12.c. - Authorize Receipt of $737,865.66 in
Reallocated Federal Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) Funding
from the Department of Treasury; and Item 12.B.12.e. -
Authorize the Receipt of $3.1 Million from the Virginia Housing
Trust Fund Operated by the Virginia Department of Housing and
Community Development (DHCD) for Emergency Rental Assistance.
Mr. Winslow stated many of the Board members recently attended
the State of Housing conference and congratulated Mr. Dan
Cohen, Director of Community Enhancement, and his team for
helping so many people via the emergency rental assistance
program.
4. REPORTS
4.A. DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT FUNDS (DIF) MONTHLY REPORT
The Board accepted the Monthly Report on District Improvement
Funds.
5. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
Mr. Glen Besa addressed the Board relative to the climate
emergency and severe weather events costing billions of dollars
across the country.
6. DINNER
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
recessed for dinner.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
Reconvening:
7. INVOCATION
The Honorable Chris Winslow, Clover Hill District Supervisor,
gave the invocation.
22-24
1/26/2022
Mr. Winslow reviewed COVID-19 protocols
for masks
and spatial
distancing. He stated he verified that
all Board
members have
received copies of citizen comments
posted to
the online
portal. (It is noted citizen comments
received
through the
online portal are attached as Attachment
A.)
7. INVOCATION
The Honorable Chris Winslow, Clover Hill District Supervisor,
gave the invocation.
22-24
1/26/2022
8. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Eagle Scout Sibi Sundar led the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag of the United States of America.
9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION UPDATE
9.A. VALOR AWARDS
Dr. Casey introduced Fire and Emergency Medical Services Chief
Loy Senter and Police Colonel Jeffrey Katz to help recognize
members of the public safety family who perform remarkable
feats within their day-to-day duties and who were recognized
in early December during the Retail Merchants Association's
Valor Awards ceremony.
Chief Senter introduced Engine 209 members Captain Duane
Garrison, who received a Silver Valor Award; Firefighter Thomas
Brownlee, who received a Bronze Valor Award; Acting Lieutenant
Kenneth Hudgins, who received a Bronze Valor Award; and
Firefighter James Newsome, who received a Bronze Valor Award.
He stated they were awarded for their valiant efforts
performing search and rescue operations at the Flynn Road fire
in August 2021. He provided details of two very difficult and
dangerous operations last winter, one in Bedford County and
one in Rockbridge County, to rescue injured hikers on the
Appalachian Trail who had to be hoisted by the Virginia State
Police Medflight helicopter at great risk to the pilot and
crew. He introduced Virginia State Police Sergeant -Pilot
Vincent Mancano and Flight Paramedic Nikolas Ronesi and stated
Flight Nurse Kevin Kissner was unable to attend. He also
introduced Trooper -Pilot David Barfield and Flight Paramedic
J
Mike Abbott and stated Flight Nurse Chad Springer was unable
to attend. He congratulated them for their efforts in
performing those search and rescue evolutions. Lastly, he
stated Firefighter Thomas Varner was recognized with a Silver
Valor Award for his actions last year while off-duty in the
Town of Farmville where he helped an individual who was stuck
in flood waters. He further stated Firefighter Varner was
recognized in Firehouse Magazine, a premier trade journal in
the fire service, and received one of their valor awards. He
stated this is commendable because Firefighter Varner was up
against others from the Fire Department of New York (FDNY),
Chicago Fire Department, and Los Angeles Fire Department, all
of whom have significant events each year for which they are
recognized. He congratulated the award recipients and thanked
them for their service to the community.
Colonel Katz recognized Officers Joseph Coy, Sean McGann,
Jordan Collins, Gordon Painter, and Jordan Dodson who each
received Valor Awards this year. He stated they represented
the best of who the Police Department is as an organization
and profession. He further stated each of them was put in
harm's way but successfully navigated their circumstances with
the utmost professionalism, grace, and dignity. He expressed
his pride in them, who they are, and what they represent. He
stated the incidents do not define who they are, but rather
who they are showed up at the incidents and illuminated their
character and professionalism. He expressed appreciation to
the Board and Dr. Casey for recognizing them.
22-25
1/26/2022
In response to Mr. Ingle's question relative to Gold Award
recipients, Colonel Katz stated of the five nominees, four
received Gold Awards, which were the only Gold Awards for the
whole region.
Ms. Haley stated attending the Valor Awards ceremony and
listening to the stories is a very humbling experience. She
further stated the event serves as a reminder to citizens of
how lucky they are to be served by the men and women in the
county's public safety departments. She stated there are not
enough thank-yous that can begin to express the heartfelt
appreciation for their commitment and the commitment of their
families to serve the citizens.
Mr. Carroll expressed his appreciation and stated it is a
testament to the quality of people who are in the community
and who come work for the community.
Mr. Holland thanked Chief Senter, Colonel Katz, and the Valor
Awards recipients. He stated it is an honor to honor those who
make such a big sacrifice for the community.
Mr. Winslow thanked Chief Senter and Colonel Katz for creating
a culture of public service in the county that is selfless,
helpful, courageous, and impactful. He stated their work is
extremely meaningful, and the county is a beacon of public
safety in the commonwealth and will continue to be under their
leadership.
Mr. Carroll stated the county is fortunate to have a great
assembly of Virginia State Troopers and have the State Police
headquarters and training center located in the county. He
` further stated they are not only conducting Medflight
operations, they are also working on the county's roads and
interstates every day assisting the community.
A standing ovation followed
Dr. Casey noted The 100 Club RVA was born out of the Retail
Merchants Association, and they will take a greater ownership
role in hosting the event next year. He encouraged the public
to look them up and participate. He stated the Valor Awards
ceremony is almost a spiritual experience, and it is open to
the public with sponsorships available to help award recipients
attend the ceremony with their proud families.
9.B. COVID UPDATE
Dr. James Worsley, Deputy County Administrator, participating
virtually, provided the Board with a general COVID-19 update.
He provided details of free PCR testing opportunities including
a new testing center at the county fairgrounds. He discussed
free at-home rapid tests offered by the federal government and
encouraged the public to request theirs at COVIDtests.gov. He
provided details of Chesterfield Libraries' partnership with
the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) to distribute 11,232
free rapid test kits to county residents between November 17,
2021 and January 6, 2022. He gave an overview of Schools' K-
12 Test to Stay (TTS) practice which consists of contact
tracing and serial COVID-19 testing to allow school -associated
close contacts who are not fully vaccinated to continue to
attend school during their quarantine period. He discussed the
22-26
1/26/2022
School Board's special meeting held on January 25, 2022 where
it voted to approve a motion to amend its existing COVID-19
Mitigation Plan to include providing parental choice for face
masks effective January 27, 2022. He reviewed Governor
Youngkin's COVID-19 Action Plan which provides a COVID-19
Vaccine Plan for Virginia; expands health care flexibility,
support, and treatment; and prioritizes testing guidelines. He
provided details of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services' federal requirement for certain Medicare- and
Medicaid -certified providers and suppliers to ensure that all
applicable staff are vaccinated for COVID-19. He stated there
are some staff in Mental Health Support Services (MHSS) who
meet this requirement, and through a multi -department effort
MHSS was able to establish the CMS Vaccine Requirement Policy
and Procedures to ensure staff are in compliance. He encouraged
citizens to visit Chesterfield.gov/COVID for more information
and to view a list of places to register for an appointment.
He then introduced Dr. Alexander Samuel, Director of VDH
Chesterfield Health District, for a health district update.
Dr. Samuel, participating virtually, provided details of the
highly and easily transmissible Omicron variant coming out of
South Africa. He provided charts of current COVID-19 trends
and projection. He stated the low death numbers relative to
the very high case numbers so far seem to confirm the
observation that Omicron is not causing severe outcomes like
previous variants of concern. He further stated there is a
greater proportion of the population that is fully vaccinated,
particularly among the elderly, which is certainly helping,
but death data tends to lag a few weeks and the trend will
need to be monitored. He stated hospitalization utilization
has increased significantly for the central health care region,
most likely because of the sheer number of people who are
becoming infected by this highly transmissible variant. He
discussed a projection from the University of Virginia
Biocomplexity Institute which shows a projected sharp decline
in cases through February, if current variables remain in play.
He provided statistics of PCR testing as well as COVID-19
vaccinations. He stated statewide the number of doses
administered has dropped significantly since the beginning of
the new year, and the declining trends have been true for the
Rockwood Vaccination Center and the Health Department's
Community Outreach Team.
In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to what types
of masks people should wear and why, Dr. Samuel stated the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance
recommends wearing the most protective mask that fits well and
that a person will wear consistently. He further stated the
key is simply to wear a mask, and there are recommendations to
wear a mask or respirator if a person has a higher risk profile
such caregivers, the immunocompromised, and those who interact
with large numbers of people. `
In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to which type J
of immunity, vaccination or previous infection, lasts longer,
Dr. Samuel stated there is no definitive answer yet. He further
stated the CDC is sticking with 90 days although there is
evidence that immunity from previous infections lasts longer
than 90 days. He stated the VDH is still following CDC
guidelines about the 90 -day immunity protection offered from
previous infection as it relates to isolation and quarantine.
22-27
1/26/2022
Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services (CFEMS) Chief
Loy Senter then provided the Board with a community update. He
first provided statistics of CFEMS members who have tested
COVID-positive since the beginning of the pandemic and the
resulting staffing challenges. He stated CFEMS had to make the
unfortunate decision to stop covering ongoing, unplanned gaps
in scheduled duty crews for the Manchester Rescue Squad over
nights and weekends, leaving the ninth busiest EMS district in
the county open at times on nights and weekends, which then
must be covered by the second, third, and fourth busiest career
` medic units in the County. He provided details of voluntary
and mandatory overtime due to staffing shortages. He provided
statistics of service demands and stated in calendar year 2021,
CFEMS responded to 13.8 percent more incidents than the year
prior, representing a growth rate higher than the past five
years combined. He stated over 80 percent of those incidents
were medically related with significant drivers being COVID,
chronic illness/deferred care, and aging in place. He further
stated CFEMS is seeing an increase in calls for lift
assistance. He stated collectively, high call volume, longer
EMS committed times, and declining volunteer participation
contribute to lower EMS reliability which has dropped to 59
percent. He further stated if current incident trends continue,
CFEMS anticipates a growth rate of 10.9 percent by the end of
the current fiscal year and a growth rate of 6.5 percent by
the end of the calendar year. He then discussed ongoing
hospital challenges which are seeing an increase in COVID
patients as well as more patients with intensive care needs.
He stated emergency departments also continue to see many
patients with lower acuity needs that could probably be handled
through other resources. He further stated hospitals are
experiencing staffing shortages due to retirements, nurses
` pursuing higher -paying jobs as travel nurses, transfers to more
stable clinical settings, and leaving the healthcare
profession altogether. He stated in talking with hospital
administrators, the staffing situation is not likely to
drastically improve any time soon. He further stated there is
a very real concern about the shortage of nurse educators and
students who will be needed well beyond the pandemic to meet
the needs of the growing number of older patients. He stated
in the interim, CFEMS continues to collaborate and coordinate
with area hospital systems and regional EMS council, and CFEMS
has assumed a greater leadership role in this effort. He
further stated Battalion Chief Justin Adams and Dr. Allen Yee
continue to actively participate in the regional Hospital
Diversion Committee, and Deputy Chief Tim McKay was recently
elected to serve as the chair of that committee. He stated
hospitals in central Virginia have been in code black status
since August 2021 in accordance with the regional Hospital
Diversion Policy. He explained that code black status means
eight or more hospitals in the region are in diversion, and a
patient destination center (PDC) is activated to direct
ambulances to the closest hospital that can handle their
patient. He stated the Hospital Diversion Policy and use of
the PDC was intended for a short-term event that overloaded
hospital capacity, such as a mass casualty event, but it was
not designed for long-term operations, is not sustainable, and
will likely discontinue operating as soon as the upcoming
weekend. He further stated approximately 90 percent of the
time, a patient was routed to their facility of choice by the
PDC and, even under the PDC 's direction to a specific hospital,
crews have been met with hours -long patient turnover times. He
stated in advance of the PDC discontinuing operations, CFEMS
22-28
1/26/2022
is engaged in a pilot program over the next several days that
essentially cancels all diversions, and CFEMS will transport
patients to the closest appropriate hospital consistent with
the patient's choice. He further stated he would follow up with
the Board later in the weekend with the results of the pilot
study and let the Board know what the next steps are. He
discussed safely offloading patients consistent with
guidelines established by the CFEMS medical director and
federal law in order to prevent ambulances from being stuck at
the hospital and unable to respond to a greater need in the
community. He stated other short-term actions to address
staffing challenges in hospitals include Governor Youngkin's
executive orders that relax some of the regulations related to
bed capacity and staffing requirements and allow broader use
of related professions in a hospital environment. He further
stated this allows nurses certified in other states to practice
in Virginia. Lastly, he stated there may be some opportunity
in the future for public service announcements (PSAs) to better
educate the public on the current challenges and what they
should expect in the event they call 911 for a transport to a
hospital.
Mr. Holland stated the PSAs are an excellent idea because the
health community, hospitals, and frontline workers are very
stressed. He inquired if there has been an increased need for
counseling for those under health duress in the community.
Chief Senter
stated the Mobile Integrated Health (MIH) program
is actively
involved in many
different cases, and there are
many mental
health needs. He
further stated CFEMS works with
MHSS to address
those mental
health needs, and many of those
patients come through the 911
system. He stated he would follow
up with more
information.
Mr. Ingle discussed the PulsePoint app which will notify those
who are cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) certified when CPR
is needed nearby. In inquired if there was a way for CFEMS to
know if a person is going to respond to a notification.
Chief Senter stated with this particular app, there is no way
for anyone to engage back with CFEMS to let them know they are
responding.
Mr. Ingle stated there may be people also willing to respond
to calls for lift assistance, and maybe the county could look
into a program like that. He stated the PulsePoint app is a
great program CFEMS put into place.
Chief Senter stated the county has to be careful about that.
He explained that the PulsePoint app sends notifications for
incidents in public settings nearby but sending someone into
a home is a wholly different situation. He stated CFEMS
essentially would be looking for volunteers which is already
a challenge.
Mr. Ingle stated he understood the challenges.
Chief Senter stated when CFEMS responds for lift assistance,
they also do a patient evaluation to ensure there are no
injuries and rule out the need for transport to a hospital. He
further stated Mr. Ingle's point was well taken, but he did
not know if there was an easy fix. He stated it is a topic
22-29
1/26/2022
CFEMS would have to think through and discuss with the Board
as the county moves forward with the aging population.
Mr. Winslow congratulated Chief McKay on his new role. He
inquired when the new Midlothian fire station and associated
ambulance would come online.
Chief Senter provided details of hiring and training personnel
and stated completion of the station is expected late summer
or early spring. He further stated it may go active with just
the fire engine. He stated once the new recruits graduate and
are distributed to the field, personnel will be reassigned to
the Midlothian station. He further stated the ladder truck and
ambulance would go in service.
Dr. Casey then introduced Dr. Edward "Ted" Raspiller, President
of John Tyler (becoming Brightpoint) Community College (JTCC),
to provide the Board with an update on the college's activities
and initiatives.
Dr. Raspiller expressed appreciation for the many partnerships
with the county. He provided enrollment data and stated the
current headcount is approximately 8,500 which is down from
10,000 two years ago. He discussed the dual enrollment program
and provided statistics of enrollment numbers and credit hours
taken that resulted in saving Chesterfield families more than
$1.6 million in tuition. He provided details of concurrent
classes which allow high school students to complete a college
credential and earn industry -recognized certifications before
graduating high school so they can go to work immediately. He
introduced Dr. Bill Fiege, Chief Academic Officer, Ms.
Elizabeth Creamer, Vice President of Workforce Development and
Credential Attainment, and Mr. Fred Taylor, Director of
Governmental and Administrative Services, to provide the Board
with additional updates.
Dr. Fiege provided details of two new Business Management
Programs, which are Digital Marketing Specialization and
Project Management Specialization. He announced the addition
of new programs in the fall of 2022 including Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN), Digital
Marketing, Funeral Director, and Web Design, Graphics
Specialization. He provided details of new initiatives such as
the Transfer Virginia Portal; the Claude Moore Grant supporting
Meadowbrook High School students interested in healthcare; and
the G3 (Get a Skill. Get a Job. Get Ahead.) last -dollar tuition
assistance program for majors in high -demand fields including
early childhood education, healthcare, information technology,
manufacturing, skilled trades, public safety, and human
services. He then turned over the presentation to Ms. Creamer
to discuss the Community College Workforce Alliance (CCWA).
Ms. Creamer provided statistics of CCWA workforce training
enrollment during program year 2020-2021. She stated
industries' biggest demand is for talent pipelines, and JTCC
is meeting this demand by holding high school certification
bootcamps, conducting programs with Fort Lee to transition
military members into civilian employment, collaborating with
Social Services to get people to work who have not worked
before, and working with mothers who are returning to the
workplace after being out for some time with caretaking
responsibilities. She discussed efforts to assist those who
are unemployed and underemployed. She stated JTCC was so
22-30
1/26/2022
successful that it gave out 70 percent more financial
assistance to low- and moderate -income jobseekers than any
other college in Virginia. She provided details of businesses
served through incumbent worker training, pre-employment
training, and/or career readiness assessments for current and
prospective employees. She also provided details of earn and
learn programs with employers such as Lucy Corr, Tyler's
Retreat, Church and Dwight, and Hill -Phoenix. She stated there
has never been a better time to be a high school graduate, a
community college student, a young person, or a middle -age i
person looking for a new career because JTCC does everything J
from truck driver training all the way to teacher career
switcher programs to train professionals to teach after having
a successful career in something else. She then turned the
presentation over to Mr. Taylor.
Mr. Taylor provided the Board with an update on a development
on the Midlothian Campus. He stated JTCC is looking to build
market rate apartments for faculty and students at the corner
of Woolridge Road and Charter Colony Parkway in partnership
between the college's Real Estate Foundation and Boyd Homes.
He further stated the project is currently in the design phase,
and the zoning application will be submitted in the coming
months for approximately 240 apartments and 10,000 square feet
of retail space. He stated the project will add real estate
tax revenue to the county. He provided a tentative layout of
the property.
Dr. Raspiller provided the Board with additional details of
the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Technician program which he
stated is in the early stages but will be big. He discussed
the idea of onshoring the things that were offshored years ago,
and pharmaceutical manufacturing is one of them. He stated
there are three companies in Petersburg, and JTCC has been
working with those companies and the VEDP on a talent
accelerator to prepare technicians. He further stated the
program will have three different options: an entry level
credential, a full career studies certificate in
pharmaceutical manufacturing technician, and a two -plus -two
degree program with Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU)
School of Engineering for those who want to pursue full
pharmaceutical manufacturing engineering. He stated those are
good, clean jobs with a $50,000 to $70,000 salary. He further
stated beginning in the fall of 2023, the three companies
desire to hire 100 persons per year, and the plan is to build
the ecosystem for pharmaceutical manufacturers. He stated
JTCC's degrees are down 10 percent, while high demand workforce
credential enrollment last year was up 54 percent because
people understand and want to get connected with good, middle -
skill work. He stated of the 2,000 credentials that were
earned, over 500 were in advanced manufacturing, and those
students are obtaining careers with competitive pay in good,
clean environments. He further stated he would be back to talk
more about the startup of pharmaceutical manufacturing
programs. He stated he hoped the Board would encourage
constituents to check out JTCC and CCWA where there is
something for everyone, and JTCC can take them to the next
level wherever they are at.
Mr. Winslow thanked Dr. Raspiller and his staff for the
presentation. He stated JTCC is building a future of human
talent in the county, and the Board wants to continue this
extremely important partnership.
22-31
1/26/2022
9.D. CHRISTMAS MOTHER UPDATE
Ms. Emily Ashley, Director of Citizen Information and
Resources, provided the Board with a review of the 2021
Christmas Mother program. She stated the Christmas Mother
program is led by a very dedicated group of volunteers
including this year's Christmas Mother, Ms. Phyllis Poats. She
further stated it was a very successful year despite some
challenges, and the program was able to serve 1,086 families
and elders which equated to 3,749 individuals. She stated 60
percent of the families were served by items that were donated
to the program, and other items were purchased with funds
raised in the community. She provided additional details of
the program, partnerships, and fundraisers. She announced 2022
will be Christmas Mother's 50th anniversary which will be marked
with celebration throughout the coming year.
9.F. GENERAL ASSEMBLY UPDATE
Ms. Natalie Spillman, Intergovernmental Relations
Administrator, provided the Board with a General Assembly
update. She stated there are 30 days remaining in the session
and nearly 2,400 bills have been introduced. She further stated
a high volume of bills are causing either significant or
catastrophic concern for localities across the state by looking
at eliminating or significantly diminishing a locality's
ability to assess and collect critical revenue. She stated if
the state was in a position such that it was fully funding its
requirements, the county may be in a different position, but
that is not the case. She highlighted some bills the county is
closely monitoring and stated she is having conversations with
the delegation, sharing concerns, and helping them understand
what the ramifications could be if some of the bills were to
continue forward. She provided details of HB380 proposing to
eliminate business, professional and occupational license
(BPOL) tax and stated it is a significant impact to localities
across the state that have BPOL, including Chesterfield. She
further stated there is no other clause with that bill to
replace lost revenue. She then provided details of HE1010 and
SB620 which would require a governing body of a locality to
hold a referendum before making most increases in the real
property tax rate. She stated the current process is to hold
a public hearing, but this proposed legislation would put a
referendum in place of that. She further stated concerns with
the proposed legislation include a diminished ability to assess
and collect that local revenue; logistical challenges such as
having to change the budget timeline; and legal problems with
the structure of the bill. She provided details of HB90 and
53380 which represent the grocery tax bill that would eliminate
all taxes, thereby eliminating the local one -percent receipt
to the county. She stated the bills have been a mixed bag of
things, and some of them have worked to partially replace some
of that revenue while some eliminate it in totality. She
reviewed the gas tax bill and stated the version in Governor
Youngkin's legislative package would delay the tax for one
year, so the increase that would have gone into effect July 1,
2022 would be pushed out for a year. She further stated this
will have minimal impact to how the county operates because
these are future revenues the county has yet to collect. She
discussed HB978 which has companion Senate bills, and which
22-32
1/26/2022
reestablishes distribution of recordation taxes to localities.
She provided details of SB472 allowing for localities, if they
so choose, to put forward by referendum an additional one
percent sales tax for schools construction. She stated this is
something the county would be interested in, there is support
for this bill, and it has been passed in the Senate. She
reviewed HB444 which was a bill that worked to codify actions
that were put in place through emergency order at the beginning
of the pandemic to allow for electronic meetings. She stated
this bill went through a lot of work and study over the summer,
and it just made its first round through committee. She further
stated there are some nice guardrails in place, but it also
provides the Board the option, if needed, to enact that virtual
meeting ability. She then discussed the budget totaling $8.9
billion in the House and $4.4 billion in the Senate. She stated
some of the biggest ticket items being closely monitored are
funding a K-12 education support cap which is a priority topic
for the Board; increased funding for instructional aides;
increased Compensation Board funding in the Treasurer,
Commissioner of the Revenue, and Sheriff's offices; and an
increase in the aid to localities for the police departments'
599 program. She thanked county departments and staff for their
help behind the scenes to keep her supplied with information.
She recognized Delegate Roxann Robinson and Senator Ghazala
Hashmi for offering to carry a memorial resolution for the
passing of former County Administrator James "Jay" Stegmaier.
9.C. BOND ISSUANCE AND RATINGS UPDATE
Dr. Casey announced the top three bond rating agencies,
Moody's, Fitch, and S&P, have reaffirmed the county's Triple -
AAA bond rating. He stated the county immediately put the
rating to use with the issuance of $115 million of bonds for
the new middle school to relieve Tomahawk Creek and the
rebuilding of Falling Creek Middle School. He stated the bonds
were issued at one of the lowest interest rates he could ever
recall at 1.7 percent, which is a budget savings to the project
from the very start. He thanked the fiscal and operational
teams who presented the facts to the bond rating agencies. He
stated the marketplace recognizes the value of the rating in
such a low interest rate.
9.G. OTHER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION UPDATES
Dr. Casey recognized Mr. George Hayes, Director of
Utilities, for receiving the National Association of
Clean Water Agencies 2022 National Environmental
Achievement Award for Utility Leadership. He stated Mr.
Hayes was one of only two professionals who received this
year's national award, which recognizes his exemplary
commitment to the community, environmental stewardship
and ability to lead what is undoubtedly one of the top -
run water and wastewater utilities in Virginia and our
nation.
• Dr. Casey expressed heartfelt thanks to the many employees
who provided support and prayers to the Stegmaier family
in the loss of their patriarch, Jay. He stated the family
has relayed that this work family has helped them greatly
over the past week. He thanked all the regional localities
22-33
1/26/2022
for the show of condolences and respect as they all
lowered their local flags to half-staff in honor and
remembrance of Jay and what he did for the region. He
stated JTCC and Virginia State University (VSU) flags were
also lowered. He further stated staff is working on a
keepsake of pictures of all the flags for the family to
display, and he has already received requests for displays
in the county, the courts, and the Greater Richmond
Convention Center.
10. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Carroll reported on his participation in several community
meetings to receive input from citizens on the Upper Magnolia
Green project. He expressed appreciation for the community
coming out and sharing information. He stated he wants to
reassure the community that the Board is listening and noted
that adjustments have already been made based on community
input. He further stated there will be more community meetings
in the near future, and he looks forward to receiving more
input. He then played his video highlighting Parks and
Recreation opportunities available in the Matoaca District. He
stated he hopes the community takes to heart the purpose of
the videos which is to highlight the spectacular amenities in
the county and raise awareness about available facilities. He
announced future upgrades to Horner Park in the western part
of Hull Street.
Mr. Holland reported on his attendance at the Chesterfield -
Metro Area Section of the National Council of Negro Women
charter and installation ceremony where 34 women were inducted.
He stated the National Council was founded in 1935 by Ms. Mary
McCleod Bethune who consulted with presidents in the 1930s. He
further stated Ms. Bethune also founded Bethune-Cookman
University in Florida. He stated he congratulated the women
and challenged them to make a difference in Chesterfield County
and the region. He shared the following from Ms. Bethune: I
will not have many resources to leave you, but I do leave you
this legacy. I leave you a legacy of love, a legacy of hope,
a legacy for the thirst for education. I leave you a legacy of
faith and, of course, leave you a desire to live harmoniously
with your fellow man. And, finally, I leave you a legacy for
a responsibility to our young people. He stated this is a great
organization in the county's midst, and he looks forward to
working with them to ensure they make a difference in not only
Chesterfield County, but also in the region.
Mr. Winslow stated both Dr. Casey and he will be participating
in a point -in -time count of homeless citizens in the county.
He further stated they will be joining volunteers from Homeward
and other organizations who have an interest in connecting with
the homeless and getting a count to see where the county is.
11. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS
11.A. RECOGNIZING BOY SCOUTS UPON ATTAINING RANK OF EAGLE
SCOUT
Ms. Susan Pollard, Director of Communications and Media,
introduced Mr. Sibi Sundar and Mr. Bryce Barnes, who were
present to receive the resolution.
22-34
1/26/2022
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was incorporated by
Mr. William D. Boyce on February 8, 1910, and was chartered by
Congress in 1916; and
WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America was founded to build
character, provide citizenship training and promote physical
fitness: and
WHEREAS, after earning at least 21 merit badges in a wide
variety of skills including leadership, service and outdoor
life, serving in a leadership position in a troop, carrying
out a service project beneficial to their community, being
active in the troop, demonstrating Scout spirit, and living up
to the Scout Oath and Law, Mr. Sibi Sundar, of Troop 2842,
sponsored by Chesterfield Baptist Church, and Mr. Bryce Anthony
Barnes, of Troop 178, sponsored by Ivey Memorial United
Methodist Church, have accomplished those high standards of
commitment and have reached the long -sought goal of Eagle
Scout, which is received by only four percent of those
individuals entering the Scouting movement; and
WHEREAS, growing through their experiences in Scouting,
learning the lessons of responsible citizenship, and
endeavoring to prepare themselves for a role as leaders in
society, Sibi and Bryce have distinguished themselves as
members 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, this 26th day of January 2022,
publicly recognizes Mr. Sibi Sundar and Mr. Bryce Anthony
Barnes, extends congratulations on their attainment of Eagle
Scout, and acknowledges the good fortune of the county to have
such outstanding young men as its citizens.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
Mr. Winslow and Mr. Carroll presented the executed resolutions
and patches to Mr. Sundar and Mr. Barnes, accompanied by their
parents, congratulated them on their outstanding achievements,
and wished them well in future endeavors.
Mr. Sundar provided details of his Eagle Scout project to
refurbish an outdoor learning space at Maggie L. Walker
Governor's School.
Mr. Barnes provided details of his Eagle Scout project to help
provide service, relaxation, and storage needs at the Fisher
House.
11.B. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MR. JAMES B. MCDOWELL,
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT
Mr. George Hayes, Director of Utilities, introduced Mr. James
McDowell, who was present to receive the resolution.
22-35
1/26/2022
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. James B. McDowell retired from the
Chesterfield County Utilities Department on January 1, 2022
after faithfully serving the county and its citizens for more
than 44 years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell began his public service to the
citizens of Chesterfield County in 1977 as a Plant Operator
Trainee at the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell was promoted several times to the
positions of Maintenance Foreman, Utilities Supervisor, Senior
Labor Crew Chief, Senior Plant Operator, and Principal Plant
Operator; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell supported the department's role of
being a responsible protector of the environment by providing
wastewater treatment that is safe, reliable, and
environmentally sound; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell continuously utilized his knowledge
of wastewater treatment and equipment operations to ensure the
effluent discharged was of a high-quality and met state
discharge permit requirements; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell's daily efforts contributed to the
numerous awards that the county's wastewater treatment
facilities received over the years from regulatory agencies
and wastewater industry associations; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell acted as an exemplary steward of
the public trust by working with fellow operators to optimize
the plant in the most efficient and cost-effective manner; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell helped Chesterfield County
Utilities achieve both Silver and Gold Peak Performance Awards
from the National Association of Clean Water Agencies for
exceptional plant performance and effluent quality; and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell willingly and faithfully worked
endless hours performing relief operations, emergency
operations, and after hours repairs to ensure continued service
to Chesterfield County's public wastewater system customers;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. McDowell was highly respected by his peers
and coworkers; and
WHEREAS, throughout his career with Chesterfield County,
Mr. McDowell displayed exceptional dependability, aptitude,
initiative, good character, and high values.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors, this 26th day of January 2022,
publicly recognizes Mr. James B. McDowell and extends on behalf
of its members and the residents of Chesterfield County,
appreciation for his service to the county, congratulations
upon his retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy
retirement.
22-36
1/26/2022
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution
be presented to Mr. McDowell, and that this resolution be
permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
Mr. Winslow presented the executed resolution to Mr. McDowell,
accompanied by his wife, expressed appreciation for his
valuable service and contributions to the county, and wished
him a happy retirement.
Mr. McDowell thanked the Board of Supervisors for the special
recognition and kind sentiments.
Dr. Casey presented Mr. McDowell with an engraved brick,
expressed appreciation for his exceptional and faithful
service to the county, and wished him well in his retirement.
A standing ovation followed.
12. NEW BUSINESS
12.A. APPOINTMENTS
12.A.1. CENTRAL VIRGINIA WASTE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
On motion
of Mr. Holland,
seconded by Ms.
Haley,
the Board
nominated
and appointed
Ms. Dawn Bowyer
to serve as an
alternate
member on the
Central Virginia
Waste
Management
Authority,
whose term is effective immediately and
will expire
December 31.
2023.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.A.2. CITIZENS' BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
nominated and appointed Ms. Sheila Walters to serve as an at -
large member on the Citizens' Budget Advisory Committee, whose
term is effective immediately and will expire September 30,
2023.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B. CONSENT ITEMS
12.8.1. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS
12.B.1.a. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MR. GREGORY K. HAROLD,
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. Gregory K. Harold retired from the
Chesterfield County Utilities Department on January 1, 2022
22-37
1/26/2022
after faithfully serving the county and its citizens for more
than 29 years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold began his public service to the
citizens of Chesterfield County in 1991 as a County Maintenance
Worker in the Department of Parks and Recreation; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was further promoted on June 21, 2003
to Utility Plant Mechanic within the same section; and
WHEREAS, from 1992 to 2022, Mr. Harold maintained and
operated water pumping and storage facilities and equipment
essential to the distribution of clean drinking water to
Chesterfield County's public water system; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was instrumental in contributing to
the excellent reputation of the department by providing world-
class customer service to the residents of Chesterfield County;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold acted as an exemplary steward of the
public trust by working with fellow staff to ensure that the
citizens of Chesterfield County received services in the most
efficient and cost-effective manner possible; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold routinely volunteered to assist in
the Annual Flushing Program for Chesterfield County's water
distribution system thereby ensuring high-quality water was
available to our customers; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold willingly and faithfully worked
endless hours during emergencies and after hours to ensure
continued service to Chesterfield County's public water system
customers; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was highly respected by his peers and
coworkers; and
WHEREAS, throughout his career with Chesterfield County,
Mr. Harold displayed dependability, aptitude, initiative, good
character, and high values.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of
Mr. Gregory K. Harold, expresses the appreciation of all
residents for his service to the county, and extends their
appreciation for his dedicated service and their
congratulations upon his retirement.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-38
1/26/2022
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold
transferred to
Chesterfield County
Utilities Department on January 6, 1992;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold
was promoted on
August 13, 1993 to
Senior Utility Worker in
the department's
Water Distribution
section; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was further promoted on June 21, 2003
to Utility Plant Mechanic within the same section; and
WHEREAS, from 1992 to 2022, Mr. Harold maintained and
operated water pumping and storage facilities and equipment
essential to the distribution of clean drinking water to
Chesterfield County's public water system; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was instrumental in contributing to
the excellent reputation of the department by providing world-
class customer service to the residents of Chesterfield County;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold acted as an exemplary steward of the
public trust by working with fellow staff to ensure that the
citizens of Chesterfield County received services in the most
efficient and cost-effective manner possible; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold routinely volunteered to assist in
the Annual Flushing Program for Chesterfield County's water
distribution system thereby ensuring high-quality water was
available to our customers; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold willingly and faithfully worked
endless hours during emergencies and after hours to ensure
continued service to Chesterfield County's public water system
customers; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Harold was highly respected by his peers and
coworkers; and
WHEREAS, throughout his career with Chesterfield County,
Mr. Harold displayed dependability, aptitude, initiative, good
character, and high values.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of
Mr. Gregory K. Harold, expresses the appreciation of all
residents for his service to the county, and extends their
appreciation for his dedicated service and their
congratulations upon his retirement.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-38
1/26/2022
12.B.1.b. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MR. ALLAN L. WEESE,
EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER, UPON HIS
RF.TTPF 7..NT
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. Allan L. Weese began his public service with
the County as the Automation Coordinator on November 14, 2002
in the Emergency Communications Center, and faithfullyserved
Chesterfield County for over 19 years until January 1, 2022;
and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese has served on the Information
Technology Advisory Group and the Public Safety Data
Communications Systems Committee; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese served as the Security Coordinator with
IST, the CJIS Local Agency Security Officer, the VCIN Security
Representative and the VEC Information Security Officer for
the Emergency Communications Center; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese obtained multiple certifications to
include the NENA Emergency Number Professional, Microsoft
Certified Systems Engineer, Microsoft Certified Systems
Administrator, Virginia Emergency Medical Technician to which
he was also Nationally Registered; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese served as the First and Second Vice
President for the Virginia Chapter of NEMA; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese was highly involved in multiple
projects during his tenure with the Emergency Communications
Center to include being a team member on the 2002 CAD/Mobile
Project, wrote and edited the RFP's for the Public Safety Data
Communications System, consultant services for the security
console, digital voice recorder system replacements, E9-1-1
system replacements, audio-visual system project, ECC
Generator and UPS Maintenance Projects, UPS and Tower Battery
Replacement Projects, as well as designed new console
arrangement, ECC training lab re -arrangement, ECC break and
locker room re -arrangement, ECC Intranet site, and multiple
internal databases used daily; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese has displayed a helpful, courteous,
and caring attitude while working with internal and external
customers by providing a high level of commitment to his work
performance as a thorough and conscientious employee; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Weese has provided the Emergency
Communications Center and Chesterfield County with many years
of loyal and dedicated service; and
WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors
thank Mr. Weese for his diligent service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors recognizes Mr. Allan L. Weese and
extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of
Chesterfield County, appreciation for his service to the
county, congratulations upon his retirement, and best wishes
for a long and happy retirement.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-39
1/26/2022
12.B.1.c. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REQUEST OF HOSPITAL TO
HOME, LLC TO OPERATE NON -EMERGENCY AMBULANCE
SERVICE
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Hospital to Home, LLC is requesting approval to
establish and operate a non -emergency ambulance transport
service in Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the County has received a letter from Hospital
to Home, LLC stating that this approval is required for
compliance with the State Board of Health, Virginia EMS
Regulations, Section 12 VAC 5-31-420; and
WHEREAS, Hospital to Home, LLC will not be part of the
County's emergency response system or a designated response
agency for Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, Hospital to Home, LLC has developed dispatch
policies to ensure that emergency calls are referred to a 911
system and that it will only conduct non -emergency transports.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the request of
Hospital to Home, LLC to establish and operate a non -emergency
ambulance transport service in Chesterfield County.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.2. REAL PROPERTY REQUESTS
12.B.2.a. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND
12.B.2.a.1. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND ADJACENT TO RIVER
ROAD FROM PATRICK H. 14ATTHEWS
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
accepted the conveyance of two parcels of land containing a
total of 0.259 acres adjacent to River Road from Patrick H.
Matthews and authorized the County Administrator to execute
the deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the
papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.a.2. ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ADJACENT TO BON
SECOURS DRIVE FROM BON SECOURS-ST. FRANCIS
MEDICAL CENTER, INC.
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.036
acres adjacent to Bon Secours Drive from Bon Secours-St.
Francis Medical Center, Inc. and authorized the County
Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the
plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-40
1/26/2022
12.B.2.a.3. ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ADJACENT TO
MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE FROM EDENS REALTY, INC.
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.002
acres adjacent to Midlothian Turnpike from Edens Realty, Inc.
and authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed.
(It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of
this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.a.4. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND ADJACENT TO SOUTH
OLD HUNDRED ROAD FROM SWIFT CREEK DEVELOPMENT,
LLC
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
accepted the conveyance of two parcels of land containing a
total of 0.093 acres adjacent to South Old Hundred Road from
Swift Creek Development, LLC and authorized the County
Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the
plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.b. CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENTS J
12.B.2.b.1. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF
CHESTERFIELD FOR ACCESS TO ADELINE ACRES
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute an agreement with the Economic
Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield for a 30 -
foot and variable width access easement to the Adeline Acres
property. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the
papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.b.2. DESIGNATION OF A VIRGINIA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM (VSMP) EASEMENT ACROSS HARROWGATE PARK
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board `
designated a Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP)
easement across Harrowgate Park. (It is noted a copy of the
plat is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-41
1/26/2022
12.B.2.b.3. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ELECTRIC
AND POWER COMPANY FOR A 15' UNDERGROUND EASEMENT
ACROSS THE CAREER AND TECHNICAL CENTER AT HULL
STREET ROAD
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute an agreement with Virginia
Electric and Power Company for a 15 -foot underground easement
across the Career and Technical Center at Hull Street Road.
(It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of
this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.b.4. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO VIRGINIA ELECTRIC
AND POWER COMPANY FOR A 15' UNDERGROUND EASEMENT
ACROSS REPLACEMENT SITE FOR FIRE AND EMS STATION
5
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute an agreement with Virginia
Electric and Power Company for a 15 -foot underground easement
across Replacement Site for Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Station 5. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the
papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.c. REQUESTS TO QUITCLAIM
12.B.2.c.1. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A TEMPORARY DRAINAGE
EASEMENT, A SWMBMP EASEMENT AND A SWMBMP
ACCESS EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OWNED
BY BON SECOURS-ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER,
INC.
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a
temporary drainage easement, a SWMBMP easement and a SWMBMP
access easement across the property owned by Bon Secours-St.
Francis Medical Center, Inc. (It is noted a copy of the plat
is filed with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.c.2. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A 20' SWM/BMP
ACCESS EASEMENT AND A 16' AND 20' DRAINAGE
EASEMENT (PRIVATE) ACROSS THE PROPERTY OWNED BY
JEFFERSON GREEN COMMONS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a
portion of a 20 -foot SWM/BMP access easement and a 16 -foot and
20 -foot drainage easement (private) across the property owned
22-42
1/26/2022
by Jefferson Green Commons Owners Association, Inc. (It is
noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this
Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.c.3. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A 16' WATER
EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF FSLRO IRON
BRIDGE CHESTER, LLC
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to a portion
of a 16 -foot water easement across the property of FSLRO Iron
Bridge Chester, LLC. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed
with the papers of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.c.4. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A 20' SEWER
EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF MIDLOTHIAN WEST
LAND INVESTMENT, LLC
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to a portion
of a 20 -foot sewer easement across the property of Midlothian
West Land Investment, LLC. (It is noted a copy of the plat is
filed with the papers of this Board.)j
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll
Nays: None.
12.B.2.c.5. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A TEMPORARY
REDUCED IMPERVIOUSNESS BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
EASEMENT AND A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT
(PRIVATE) ACROSS THE PROPERTY OWNED BY WOODLANDS
REAL ESTATE, LLC
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the
County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a
portion of a temporary reduced imperviousness best management
practice easement and a portion of a drainage easement
(private) across the property owned by Woodlands Real Estate,
LLC. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers
of this Board.)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.2.d. REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION
12.B.2.d.1. AWARD AND EXECUTE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AND
APPROVE ALL POTENTIAL CHANGE ORDERS FOR HORNER
PARR MAINTENANCE STORAGE SHED
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Director of Procurement to (1) award a
22-43
1/26/2022
construction contract in the amount of $194,000.00 to D and H
Construction L.L.C., the lowest responsive and responsible
bidder, and (2) approve all necessary change orders, up to the
amount budgeted for the project: Horner Park Maintenance
Storage Shed.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.3. APPROVAL OF CITIZEN INFORMATION AND RESOURCES
MOBILITY TITLE VI PLAN
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved Citizen Information and Resources' Title VI Plan,
which incorporates nondiscrimination policies and practices in
providing transportation services to the public.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.4. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH GRANT REQUEST AND
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR TRANSIT DEMONSTRATION
FUNDS FOR ROUTE 60 TRANSIT SERVICE
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
adopted the following resolution of support for a transit
demonstration project on Route 60 (Chippenham Parkway - Walmart
Way):
WHEREAS, on behalf of the Commonwealth Transportation
Board, the Virginia Department of Rail and Public
Transportation administers the transit demonstration grant
program and is seeking funding requests for FY2023; and
WHEREAS, Chesterfield County has identified the Route 60
corridor between Chippenham Parkway and Walmart Way as a
candidate for local transit service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County requests the Commonwealth
Transportation Board provide a demonstration grant for local
bus service on Route 60 between Chippenham Parkway and Walmart
Way.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Chesterfield County hereby agrees to pay 20 percent of the
total estimated cost of $2,350,000 to initiate local bus
service on Route 60 between Chippenham Parkway and Walmart Way.
And, further, the Board authorized the County Administrator to
proceed with the transit demonstration grant funding request.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.5. TRANSFER FUNDING, APPROPRIATE CASH PROFFERS AND
AWARD A DESIGN BUILD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE
OTTERDALE ROAD DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the Director of Procurement to award a design -build
22-44
1/26/2022
construction contract to Kokosing Construction Company, Inc.
in the amount of $17,920,000, appropriate and transfer a total
of $7,200,000 from existing projects and cash proffers, and
execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount
budgeted for the Otterdale Road Drainage Improvement Project
at Horsepen Creek, Blackman Creek and Otterdale Branch.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.6. ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FOR THE FEDERAL
AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AIRPORT RESCUE GRANT
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved the acceptance and appropriation of $59,000 in Airport
Rescue Grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration
for the Chesterfield County Airport to offset personnel
expenses.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.7. ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FROM THE VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION (DOAV) FOR DESIGN OF THE RAMP
PORTION OF THE AIRPORT SOUTHEAST RAMP PROJECT
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved the acceptance and appropriation of $330,000 in
additional state grant funds from the Virginia Department of
Aviation for design of the ramp portion of the Chesterfield
County Airport Southeast Apron project.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.8. (1) DEFER PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND COUNTY CODE § 7-3 (PRECINCT BOUNDARIES AND
POLLING PLACES) TO CURE PRECINCT SPLITS RESULTING
FROM THE REDISTRICTING OF THE COUNTY'S MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICTS, TO ESTABLISH POLLING PLACES FOR NEW
PRECINCTS, AND TO MOVE PRECINCTS REDISTRICTED INTO
NEW MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS AND (2) TO THE DEFERRED
PUBLIC HEARING, ADD CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL
AMENDMENT TO COUNTY CODE § 7-3 (PRECINCT BOUNDARIES
AND POLLING PLACES) TO CURE PRECINCT SPLITS
RESULTING FROM THE STATE'S REDISTRICTING OF
CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board (1)
deferred to February 23, 2022 the public hearing scheduled for
January 26, 2022 to consider an ordinance to amend County Code
§ 7-3 (Precinct Boundaries and Polling Places) to cure precinct
splits resulting from the redistricting of the County's
magisterial districts, to establish polling places for new
precincts, and to move precincts redistricted into new
magisterial districts and (2) to the deferred public hearing,
added consideration of an additional amendment to County Code
§ 7-3 (Precinct Boundaries and Polling Places) to cure precinct
splits resulting from the State's redistricting of
congressional and legislative districts.
22-45
1/26/2022
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.9. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE ROADS
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Project/Subdivision: Forest Lake Section D (Portion)
Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways:
Addition
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Laketree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: 0.01 miles east of Nile Road, (Route 1565)
To: Water Leaf Circle, (Route 8367), a distance of 0.02
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Laketree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: Laketree Court, (Route 6368)
To: Shady Hollow Circle, (Route 8369), a distance of 0.18
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
f Right of Way width (feet) = 50
L`r • Lake Tree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: Shady Hollow Circle, (Route 8369)
To: Jefferson Davis Highway, (Route 1/Route 301), a distance
of 0.10 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
22-46
1/26/2022
On motion of Ms. Haley,
seconded by Mr.
Ingle,
the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets
described below
are shown
on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the
Circuit
Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Project/Subdivision: Forest Lake Section D (Portion)
Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways:
Addition
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Laketree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: 0.01 miles east of Nile Road, (Route 1565)
To: Water Leaf Circle, (Route 8367), a distance of 0.02
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Laketree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: Laketree Court, (Route 6368)
To: Shady Hollow Circle, (Route 8369), a distance of 0.18
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
f Right of Way width (feet) = 50
L`r • Lake Tree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: Shady Hollow Circle, (Route 8369)
To: Jefferson Davis Highway, (Route 1/Route 301), a distance
of 0.10 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
22-46
1/26/2022
. Laketree Drive, State Route Number 5780
From: Water Leaf Circle, (Route 8367)
To: Laketree Court, (Route 8368), a distance of 0.08 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
. Water Leaf Circle, State Route Number 8367
From: Laketree Drive, (Route 5780)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.03 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
J
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
. Laketree Court, State Route Number 8368
From: Laketree Drive, (Route 5780)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
. Shady Hollow Circle, State Route Number 8369
From: Laketree Drive, (Route 5780)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 35
Right of way width (feet) = 50
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Project/Subdivision: Reedy Springs Section "A -
Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways:
Addition
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
j
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
J
Street Name and/or Route Number
. Reedy Springs Drive, State Route Number 8376
From: Reedy Hill Drive, (Route 8378)
To: Windingrun Lane, (Route 8379), a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 55
22-47
1/26/2022
• Reedy Springs Drive, State Route Number 8376
From: Reedy Knoll Drive, (Route 8377)
To: Reedy Hill Drive, (Route 8378), a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 55
• Reedy Springs Drive, State Route Number 8376
From: Reedy Springs Court, (Route 8380)
To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 47
Reedy Spring Drive, State Route Number 8376
From: Salem Church Road, (Route 642)
To: Reedy Knoll Drive, (Route 8377), a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 60
• Reedy Springs Drive, State Route Number 8376
From: Windingrun Lane, (Route 8379)
To: Reedy Springs Court (Route 8380), a distance of 0.11 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 55
• Reedy Knoll Drive, State Route Number 8377
From: Reedy Springs Drive, (Route 8376)
To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.02 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Reedy Hill Drive, State Route Number 8378
From: Reedy Springs Drive, (Route 8376)
To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.03 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 47
• Windingrun Lane, State Route Number 8379
From: Reedy Springs Drive, (Route 8376)
To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.01 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Reedy Springs Court, State Route Number 8380
From: Reedy Springs Drive, (Route 8376)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.03 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 273, Page 2
Right of Way width (feet) = 40
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
22-48
1/26/2022
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Cove at
es of State
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Ruby Hill Road, State Route Number 8371
From: 0.02 miles South of Woolridge Road, (Route 7766)
To: Cherry Creek Lane, (Route 8372), a distance of 0.04
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of way width (feet) = 50
• Ruby Hill Road, State Route Number 8371
From: Cherry Creek Lane, (Route 8372)
To: Ruby Hill Court, (8373), a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Ruby Hill Road, State Route Number 8371
From: Ruby Hill Court, (8373)
To: Timber Banks Lane, (Route 8374), a distance of 0.08
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of way width (feet) = 50
Ruby Hill Road, State Route Number 8371
From: Woolridge Road, (Route 7766)
To: 0.02 miles South of Woolridge Road, (Route 7766), a
distance of 0.02 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Cherry Creek Lane, State Route Number 8372
From: Ruby Hill Road, (Route 8371)
To: Timber Banks Lane, (Route 8374), a distance of 0.22
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Ruby Hill Court, State Route Number 8373
From: Ruby Hill Road, (Route 8371)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
22-49
1/26/2022
• Timber Banks Lane, State Route Number 8374
From: Cherry Creek Lane, (Route 8372)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.06 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Timber Banks Lane, State Route Number 8374
From: Ruby Hill Road, (Route 8371)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Timber Banks Lane, State Route Number 8374
From: Ruby Hill Road, (Route 8371)
To: Cherry Creek Lane, (Route 8372), a distance of 0.18
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 272, Page 51
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Project/Subdivision: Legacy Park at Magnolia Green
Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways:
Addition
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Cove Creek Drive, State Route Number 8363
From: Magnolia Green Parkway, (Route 7692)
To: Maple Summit Lane, (Route 8364), a distance of 0.46
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
22-50
1/26/2022
• Cove Creek Drive, State Route Number 8363
From: Maple Summit Lane, (Route 8364)
To: The stub at the end -of -maintenance, a distance of 0.03
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Maple Summit Lane, State Route Number 8364
From: Cove Creek Drive, (Route 8363)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.07 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Maple Summit Lane, State Route Number 8364
From: Cove Creek Drive, (Route 8363)
To: Maple Summit Court, (Route 8365), a distance of 0.10
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Maple Summit Lane, State Route Number 8364
From: Maple Summit Court, (Route 8365)
To: Magnolia Green Parkway, (Route 7692), a distance of 0.06
miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Maple Summit Court, State Route Number 8365
From: Maple Summit Lane, (Route 8364)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 271, Page 83 i
Right of Way width (feet) = 50 J
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. i
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this v/
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
22-51
1/26/2022
Project/Subdivision: Magnolia Green Parkway Extension -
miles of State
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 633.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.02 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.06 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.06 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.10 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.10 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 6036)
To: 0.18 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.08 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.18 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.22 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.22 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.27 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.27 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.52 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.25 miles
LI Recordation Reference: Plat Book 268, Page 91; Deed Book
12442, Page 409
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
22-52
1/26/2022
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Green Parkwav Extension Phase
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.52 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.64 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.12 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 42; Deed Book
13068, Page 258
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.64 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.68 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 42; Deed Book
13068, Page 258
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.68 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.73 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 42; Deed Book
13068, Page 258
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.73 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.75 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8036),
a distance of 0.02 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 42; Deed Book
13068, Page 258
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
22-53
1/26/2022
• Magnolia Green Parkway, State Route Number 7692
From: 0.75 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038)
To: 0.77 miles northwest of Creekshire Drive, (Route 8038),
a distance of 0.02 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 42; Deed Book
13068, Page 258
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
(/ And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
�✓ WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
of State
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 933.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.02 miles northwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274)
To: 0.06 miles northwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8374), a
distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.05 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337)
To: 0.10 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337), a
f distance of 0.05 miles
(`r Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
22-54
1/26/2022
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.06 miles northwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 6274)
To: 0.10 miles northwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274), a
distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.10 miles northwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274)
To: 0.23 miles southwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274), a
distance of 0.13 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.10 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337)
To: 0.15 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337), a
distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.15 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337)
To: 0.16 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 6337), a
distance of 0.01 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.23 miles southwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274)
To: 0.27 miles southwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274), a
distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: 0.27 miles southwest of Bear Trace Way, (Route 8274)
To: Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337), a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Woolridge Road, State Route Number 7766
From: Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337)
To: 0.05 miles southwest of Bay Creek Road, (Route 8337), a
distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
. Bay Creek Road, State Route Number 8337
From: Woolridge Road, (Route 7766)
To: 0.02 miles northwest to existing Bay Creek Road, (Route
8337), a distance of 0.02 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12442, Page 389; Plat Book
268, Page 88
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
22-55
1/26/2022
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
State
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Swift Fox Drive, State Route Number 7288
From: 0.11 miles northeast of Strongbow Drive, (Route 8277)
To: Tag Alder Terrace, (Route 8362), a distance of 0.01
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 234, Page 1
Right of Way width (feet) = 55
• Swift Fox Drive, State Route Number 7288
From: Tag Alder Terrace, (Route 8362)
To: 0..15 miles northeast of Tag Alder Terrace, (Route 8362),
a distance of 0.15 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 234, Page 1
Right of Way width (feet) = 55
• Tag Alder Terrace, State Route Number 8362
From: Swift Fox Drive, (Route 7288)
To: The temporary cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 234, Page 1
Right of Way width (feet) = 47
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the street described below is shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the street
22-56
1/26/2022
meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
Wheatley Court, State Route Number 8375
From: Ashwell Drive, (Route 5843)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.06 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 271, Page 59
Right of way width (feet) = 50
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None. Ij
12.B.10. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE ROADS - CORRECTIONS TO
PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED ITEMS
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
22-57
1/26/2022
Project/Subdivision: River Walk at Rivermont Crossing
(Corrected)
Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways:
Correction
Reason for Change: Correction to Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
as 0.05
reported as Page 80)
Right of Way width (feet) = 50 (previously reported as 40)
• South Hackberry Road, State Route Number 2489
From: South Hackberry Road, (Route 2489)
To: 0.02 miles north to the cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.02
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 201, Pave 88 (previously
Way width (feet) = 50
• River Shore Place, State Route Number 7610
From: Hackberry Road, (Route 833)
To: 0.11 miles west to the cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.11
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 201, Page 88 (previously
reported as Page 80)
Right of Way width (feet) = 40
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
State
Reason for Change: Correction to Subdivision Street
22-58
1/26/2022
• Hackberry
Road, State Route
Number 833
From: 0.01
miles east of Starpine
Lane, (Route 2488)
(previously
reported as "From:
Star Pine Lane...")
as 0.05
reported as Page 80)
Right of Way width (feet) = 50 (previously reported as 40)
• South Hackberry Road, State Route Number 2489
From: South Hackberry Road, (Route 2489)
To: 0.02 miles north to the cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.02
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 201, Pave 88 (previously
Way width (feet) = 50
• River Shore Place, State Route Number 7610
From: Hackberry Road, (Route 833)
To: 0.11 miles west to the cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.11
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 201, Page 88 (previously
reported as Page 80)
Right of Way width (feet) = 40
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
State
Reason for Change: Correction to Subdivision Street
22-58
1/26/2022
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Barrows Ridge Lane, State Route Number 7755 (this
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Barrows Ridge Lane, State Route Number 7755 (previously
reported as Route 7752)
From: Barrows Ridge Court, (Route 8393) (previously reported
as Route 7755)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.21 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Barrows Ridge Lane, State Route Number 7755 (previously
reported as Route 7752)
From: Woodland Pond Parkway, (Route 3670)
miles (previously reported as Route 7753)
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Barrows Hill Court, State Route Number 8391 (previousl
reported as Route 7753)
From: Barrows Ridge Lane, (Route 7755) (previously reported
as Route 7753) 1
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Barrows Hill Terrace, State Route Number 8392 (previously
reported as Route 7754)
From: Barrows Ridge Lane, (Route 7755) (previously reported
as Route 7752)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Barrows Ridge Court, State Route Nun
reported as Route 7755)
From: Barrows Ridae Lane. (Route 7755
as Route 7752)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.04 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 190, Page 49
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
22-59
1/26/2022
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
Reason for Change: Correction to Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Harpers Mill Parkway, State Route Number 7600
From: Otterdale Road, (Route 667)
To: Deelev Lane. (Route 7723), a distance of.
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 7194, Page 687
Right of Way width (feet) = 90
• Harpers Mill Parkway, State Route Number 7600
From: Deeley Lane, (Route 7723)
To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.01 miles
Recordation Reference: Deed Book 7194, Page 687
Right of way width (feet) = 90
And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Chesterfield County; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets
meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests
the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets
described below to the secondary system of state highways,
pursuant to Sections 33.2-705 and 33.2-334, Code of Virginia,
and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees
a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any
necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this
resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the
Virginia Department of Transportation.
22-60
1/26/2022
Reason for Change: Correction to Subdivision Street
Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 533.2-705, 33.2-334
Street Name and/or Route Number
• Heron Pointe Boulevard, State Route Number 7750
From: Genito Road, (Route 604)
To: Heron Pointe Way, (Route 7751), a distance of 0.13
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 70
• Heron Pointe Way, State Route Number 7751 (this paragraph
previously excluded)
From: Heron Pointe Boulevard, (Route 7750)
To: Heron Pointe Court, (Route 7752), a distance of 0.04
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Way, State Route Number 7751 (this paragraph
previously excluded)
From: Heron Pointe Boulevard, (Route 7750)
To: Heron Pointe Place, (Route 7753), a distance of 0.04
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Way, State Route Number 7751 (this paragraph
previously excluded)
From: Heron Ponte Court, (Route 7752)
J
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.06 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Way, State Route Number 7751
From: Heron Pointe Place, (Route 7753)
To: Heron Pointe Terrace (Route 7754), a distance of 0.06
miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Court, State Route Number 7752 (this
paragraph previously excluded)
From: Heron Pointe Way, (Route 7751)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.12 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Place, State Route Number 7753
From: Heron Pointe Way, (Route 7751)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.08 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
• Heron Pointe Terrace, State Route Number 7754
From: Heron Pointe Way, (Route 7751)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.05 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
22-61
1/26/2022
• Heron Pointe Terrace, State Route Number 7754
From: Heron Pointe Way, (Route 7751)
To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of 0.06 miles
Recordation Reference: Plat Book 186, Page 21
Right of Way width (feet) = 50
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.11. SET PUBLIC HEARING
12.B.1l.a. TO CONSIDER THE EXERCISE OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR
THE ACQUISITION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS FOR
THE OTTERDALE ROAD DRAINAGE PROJECT - BLACKMAN
CREEK CROSSING
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board set
the date of February 23, 2022, for a public hearing to consider
the exercise of eminent domain for the Otterdale Road Drainage
Project - Blackman Creek Crossing.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.11.b. TO CONSIDER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT RELATIVE
TO THE COUNTY THOROUGHFARE PLAN - HENRICUS PARK
ACCESS ROAD
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board set
the date of February 23, 2022, for a public hearing to consider
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Relative to the County
Thoroughfare Plan - Henricus Park Access Road.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.8.12. AUTHORIZE THE RECEIPT OF
12.B.12.a. $100,255 IN FY22 FUNDING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH & DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved the receipt of $100,255 in FY2022 funding from the
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services for
the Community Services Board to support Step 5 of STEP (System
Transformation Excellence and Performance) VA - Peer and Family
Support.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.12.b. $123,070 IN ARPA INFANT PART C ONE-TIME FUNDS
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved the receipt of $123,070 in American Rescue Plan Act
(ABPA) funding for the Community Services Board to supplement
current Infant Part C funding and services.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-62
1/26/2022
12.B.12.c. $737,865.66 IN REALLOCATED FEDERAL EMERGENCY
RENTAL ASSISTANCE (ERA) FUNDING FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the receipt and appropriation of $737,865.66 in
reallocated Federal Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) Funding
from the Department of Treasury for use by the county to
support costs associated with emergency rent relief assistance
for households that have already applied to the existing
program and are waiting for assistance.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.12.d. $623,436 IN ONGOING ANNUAL FUNDING PLUS $228,027
IN ONE-TIME FUNDING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH & DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved the receipt of $623,436 in annual funding from
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services for
the Community Services Board to develop and support a Permanent
Supportive Housing program to serve 30 individuals with Serious
Mental Illness.
And, further, the Board appropriated one-time funding in the
amount of $228,027 and the FY2022 prorated program amount of
$193,624.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.12.e. $3.1 MILLION FROM THE VIRGINIA HOUSING TRUST FUND
OPERATED BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (DHCD) FOR EMERGENCY RENTAL
ASSISTANCE
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the receipt and appropriation of $3.1 million from
the Virginia Housing Trust Fund operated by the Virginia
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to
assist the county with the continuation of the County's
Emergency Rental Assistance Program.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
12.B.12.f. 2021 STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT FUNDS FROM
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
authorized the receipt and appropriation of $302,000 in 2021
State Homeland Security Grant funds from the Department of
Homeland Security for the Fire and Emergency Medical Services
Department regional projects.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-63
1/26/2022
13. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
Ms. Doris Knick addressed the Board relative to concerns about
cell phone towers and radio frequency radiation.
Mr. Mike Uzel expressed concerns about Board actions relative
to rezonings.
14. DEFERRED ITEMS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS
There were no Deferred Items at this time.
15. REQUESTS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND REZONING
PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE HEARD IN THE
FOLLOWING ORDER: - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES
PLICANT DOES
IS PUBLIC
AT SECTION 17
Ms. Sara Hall stated for each case on the consent agenda, staff
has received written confirmation from the applicants that they
agree with the conditions being imposed and all proffers are
offered in compliance with state law.
21SN0644
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Lisa and Stephen Phillips II
request conditional use to permit parking and storage of a
recreational vehicle outside the rear yard and amendment of
zoning district map in a Residential (R-12) District on 0.3
acre known as 8116 Whirlaway Drive. Density will be controlled
by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive
Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban
Residential II use (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 728-
664-3879.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0644. She stated Mr. Carroll
recommended a 30 -day deferral to the Board's February 23, 2022
meeting, to which the applicant consented.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment on the deferral.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
Mr. Carroll stated a last-minute change was made to the case,
and he did not think it would be prudent to move it forward
since it had already been advertised. He made a motion,
seconded by Mr. Ingle, for the Board to defer Case 21SN0644
l`r for 30 days to its February 23, 2022 meeting.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-64
1/26/2022
21MH0132
In Dale Magisterial District, Bonnie Nuckoles requests renewal
of manufactured home permit (Case 14SN0116) to permit a
temporary manufactured home and amendment of zoning district
map in a Residential (R-7) District on 0.86 acres known as 6716
Hill Rd. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or
ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for Suburban Residential II use (2.0
to 4.0 dwellings per acre) Tax ID 771-679-9910.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21MH0132. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21MH0132 subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owners, Bonnie Nuckoles, Jimmie E. Nuckoles
and Kenneth W. Overacre, shall be the owners of the
manufactured home. Occupancy of the manufactured home
shall be limited to Jimmie E. Nuckoles. (P)
2. No permanent type living space may be added to the
manufactured home. The manufactured home shall be skirted
but shall not be placed on a permanent foundation. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
11CNng41
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Piedmont Venture LLC requests
amendment of zoning approval (Cases 05SN0221 and 18SN0514)
relative to master plan, cash proffers, garages, uses, common
area, plus conditional use planned development to permit
exceptions to ordinance requirements, development standards
and residential townhouse uses and amendment of zoning district
map in a Residential (R-12) District on 164.2 acres fronting
1,600 feet on the south line of Genito Road, 1,140 feet east
of Mount Herman Road. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Phased Suburban
Residential (maximum of 2.0 dwellings per acre) and Suburban
Residential I (maximum of 2.0 dwellings/acre) use. Tax ID 705-
687-3536.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0543. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
22-65
1/26/2022
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board
approved Case 21SN0543 subject to the following conditions:
The property owner and applicant in this rezoning case,
pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as
amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for
themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the
property under consideration (the "Property") will be developed
/ according to the following proffers if, and only if, the
(\r rezoning request submitted herewith is granted with only those
conditions agreed to by the owner and applicant. In the event
this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed
to by the owner and applicant, the proffers shall immediately
be null and void and of no further force or effect.
The Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 1 of Case
18SN0514 to read as follows:
1. Road Cash Proffer. For each dwelling unit and except as
set forth below, the applicant shall pay a cash proffer
to the County of Chesterfield for road improvements within
the service district for the property. Each payment shall
be made prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for a dwelling unit unless state law modifies
the timing of the payment. The amount of the cash proffer
payments for each applicable unit shall be as follows:
single-family, $9,400; senior housing (detached), $4,324;
and townhomes, $5,922 (the "Road Cash Proffer Payment").
The owner shall receive a credit in the amount of
$1,397,538 against the payment of Road Cash Proffer
Payments. Once the aggregate amount of Road Cash Proffer
Payments, which would have been due prior to the issuance
of a certificate of occupancy, exceeds $1,397,538, the
owner shall then begin making the Road Cash Proffer
Payments prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for each additional unit. Should Chesterfield
County impose impact fees at any time during the life of
the development that are applicable to the property, the
amount paid in cash proffers shall be in lieu of or
credited toward, but not in addition to, any impact fees,
in a manner determined by the County. Cash proffer
payments may be reduced for the cost of road improvements
provided by the Applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s),
as determined by the Transportation Department. (B&M)
The Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 5 of 18SN0514
to read as follows:
2. Garages. All townhome dwelling units shall include a
minimum of a one (1) car attached garage. All other
dwelling units shall include a minimum of a two (2) car
attached garage. Any front -loaded garages shall not
extend more than four (4) feet beyond the front edge of a
porch or stoop or if no porch or stoop, the front edge of
the house. Any garage doors visible from a street shall
use an upgraded garage door. An upgraded garage door is
any door with a minimum of two (2) enhanced features.
Enhanced features shall include windows, raised panels,
decorative panels, arches, hinge straps or other
architectural features on the exterior that enhance the
entry (i.e. decorative lintels, shed roof overhangs,
22-66
1/26/2022
arches, columns, keystones, eyebrows, etc.) Flat panel
garage doors shall be prohibited. (P)
The Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 1 of Case
05SN0221 to read as follows:
3. Master Plan. The Textual Statement dated February 12,
2007, as amended by the Textual Statement Amendment dated
October 1, 2021, shall be considered to be the Master
Plan. (P) i
NEW PROFFERED CONDITIONS
4. Environmental Engineering. (EE)
a. Super Silt Fence, or an alternative as approved by
the Department of Environmental Engineering, shall
be provided as a perimeter control in locations where
standard silt fence would have been required.
b. Sediment traps and sediment basins sized at least
250 larger than the minimum Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook's standard shall be
provided.
C. Anionic PAM, Flexible Growth Medium and/or a County -
approved equivalent shall be applied to denuded areas
during construction and at final stabilization in
the locations shown on plans approved by
Environmental Engineering at the time of plans
review.
5. Stormwater. (EE)
a. Prior to the commencement of construction of a new
culvert where Otterdale Branch passes under
Otterdale Road, the following standard shall be used
in the design of stormwater facilities: the post -
development 1, 2, 10 and 100 -year peak discharge to
Otterdale Branch shall not exceed the pre -
development 1, 2, 10 and 100 -year peak discharge,
respectively.
b. After the commencement of construction of a new
culvert where Otterdale Branch passes under
Otterdale Road, the stormwater facilities may be
designed with the following standard: the maximum
post -development discharge rate for the 100 -year
storm shall be based on the maximum capacity of the
existing facilities downstream, and shall not
increase the recorded and /or established 100 -year
backwater and /or floodplain. On-site detention of
the post -development 100 -year discharge rate to
below the pre -development 100 -year discharge rate
may be provided to satisfy this requirement.
6. Amenity. The project shall include the following passive
recreational amenities: a pavilion or other covered
structure, and at least two of the following: play area,
gazebo, walking trails, benches, hardscape patio area,
outdoor eating area. (P)
22-67
1/26/2022
7. Elevations. Construction of the townhomes on the Property
shall be in general conformance with the architectural
appearance shown on the elevations attached hereto as
Exhibit A. Any substantial modifications to the
architectural appearance shown on the elevations shall be
approved by the Planning Commission at the time of plans
review. (P)
10. Stub Road Connection. Prior to recordation of more than a
cumulative total of fifty (50) lots, a minimum fifty (50)
foot wide stub road right-of-way shall be dedicated, free
and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield
County, from the Property to GPIN 706-688-6608 (labeled
as "FC Richmond"), as generally depicted on the Conceptual
Layout (Exhibit B) and labeled as "Possible Connection",
with the exact location approved by VDOT. Prior to
recordation of more than a cumulative total of fifty (50)
lots, the right of way for the eastern entrance, as
generally depicted on the Conceptual Layout (Exhibit B),
shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the
benefit of Chesterfield County, from Genito Road to the
stub road. (P)
11. Privacy Fence. In the event a lot line located on the
Property is within fifty feet (50') of the property line
shared by the Property and the Adjacent Property, then
the owner of the Property shall construct a six foot (6')
high privacy fence using low maintenance materials (such
as composite or vinyl) along the adjacent shared property
line for the distance where a lot line is located within
fifty feet (50') of the shared property line. The fence
may meander to avoid existing trees and shall not be
installed within any resource protection areas, stream
protection area or wetlands. The fence shall be installed
22-68
1/26/2022
8. Road Width. The roads shall have a minimum width of
twenty-nine feet (29') from face of -curb to face -of -curb,
`
except any stub roads provided to adjacent property may
use the minimum road width permitted by VDOT. (P)
9. Parking Enforcement. The declaration creating the
restrictive covenants for the homeowners' association for
the townhome dwelling uses, and, the homeowners'
association documents applicable to the townhome use,
shall prohibit the parking on one side of internal streets
serving the townhome use and shall provide the homeowners'
association the power to tow vehicles parking on the wrong
side of the streets serving the townhome use. Further,
the homeowners' association shall work with the
Chesterfield Fire Department, at the request of the Fire
Department, to educate the members who own townhomes on
the reason for limiting parking to one side of internal
streets and the power of the homeowners' association to
tow vehicles. Upon request from the Fire Department, the
homeowners' association shall provide the Fire Department
with its operational procedures for towing offending
vehicles on streets serving the townhome use and shall
modify these procedures as required by the Fire
Department. The applicable recorded declaration and the
applicable homeowners' association documents shall be
submitted to the Planning Department and the Fire
Department prior to the issuance of the first building
permit for a townhome dwelling in the project. (P)
10. Stub Road Connection. Prior to recordation of more than a
cumulative total of fifty (50) lots, a minimum fifty (50)
foot wide stub road right-of-way shall be dedicated, free
and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield
County, from the Property to GPIN 706-688-6608 (labeled
as "FC Richmond"), as generally depicted on the Conceptual
Layout (Exhibit B) and labeled as "Possible Connection",
with the exact location approved by VDOT. Prior to
recordation of more than a cumulative total of fifty (50)
lots, the right of way for the eastern entrance, as
generally depicted on the Conceptual Layout (Exhibit B),
shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the
benefit of Chesterfield County, from Genito Road to the
stub road. (P)
11. Privacy Fence. In the event a lot line located on the
Property is within fifty feet (50') of the property line
shared by the Property and the Adjacent Property, then
the owner of the Property shall construct a six foot (6')
high privacy fence using low maintenance materials (such
as composite or vinyl) along the adjacent shared property
line for the distance where a lot line is located within
fifty feet (50') of the shared property line. The fence
may meander to avoid existing trees and shall not be
installed within any resource protection areas, stream
protection area or wetlands. The fence shall be installed
22-68
1/26/2022
in sections as lots are developed with installation
occurring after completion of erosion and sediment control
work and prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for a particular lot. This fencing shall be
maintained by the homeowners, association. The initial
deed for each dwelling unit located on a lot abutting GPIN
706-688-6608 shall disclose that such lot abuts a property
zoned for a soccer facility. The subdivision plat(s)
containing these same lots shall include a note advising
of the adjacent location of this future soccer facility. i
(P) J
12. Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of
public streets that have townhomes fronting on the
road.(P)
13. Focal Point. A minimum of 0.75 acre of open space shall
be located and positioned to provide a "focal point" as
one enters the townhome development. Part of this area
shall be "hardscaped" with benches and other similar
passive amenities, such as a gazebo, that accommodate and
facilitate small outdoor gatherings. This area shall be
developed concurrently with the development of the first
phase of the townhome development, and its exact design
and location shall be approved at the time of tentative
subdivision review. (P)
14. Conceptual Layout. The site shall be developed in general
conformance with the conceptual layout depicted on Exhibit
B attached hereto entitled "Piedmont/Genito Road
Property" dated October 20, 2020, last revised December
29, 2020 and prepared by E.D. Lewis & Associates
("Conceptual Layout"). The Conceptual Layout is
conceptual in nature and may vary based on the final site
plan depending on the final soil studies, RPA lines,
wetlands, road design, lot locations, lot widths, amenity
locations, locations of walking trails and paths, location
of tree save area, other engineering reasons or other
design reasons. Any substantial deviations not related
to the foregoing sentence may be approved by the Planning
Commission at the time of plans review. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
P442mlbf1#1
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Harpers Mill Development
Corporation requests amendment of zoning approval (Case
02SN0209) relative to cash proffers and amendment of zoning
district map in a Residential (R-12) District on 0.7 acre
located at the northwest corner of Harpers Mill Parkway and
Herton Cross Road. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban Residential
I use (Maximum of 2 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 711-663-9172.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0620. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
22-69
1/26/2022
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0620 subject to the following conditions:
Delete Proffered Condition #5 from 02SN0209.
L1. Architectural/Design Elements: These Architectural/Design
Elements shall apply. All design elements below are
considered minimum standards.
i.
Driveways: All portions of driveways and parking
areas shall be brushed concrete, stamped concrete,
exposed aggregate concrete, asphalt or decorative
pavers.
ii.
Front Walks: A minimum of a three (3) foot wide
concrete front walk shall be provided to each
dwelling unit or building of multiple units, to
connect to drives, sidewalks or streets.
iii.
Landscaping and Yards: Front foundation planting
beds shall be required along the entire front facade
of all units and shall extend along all sides facing
a street. Foundation Planting Beds shall be a
minimum of 4' wide from the unit foundation.
Planting beds shall be defined with a trenched edge
or suitable landscape edging material. Planting
beds shall include medium shrubs, spaced a maximum
`
of four (4) feet apart. Unit corners shall be
visually softened with vertical accent shrubs (4'-
51) or small evergreen trees (6'-81) at the time of
planting. An alternative to one corner landscaping
treatment shall be one small deciduous tree planted
in the front yard of the dwelling or building.
iv.
Sod: All front, side and corner side yard lawns
shall be sodded and irrigated.
V.
HVAC Equipment: HVAC equipment shall be placed at
the rear of the dwelling or shall be screened with
a framed lattice or other approved screening
enclosure or landscaping if located on the side of
the dwelling. No HVAC equipment shall be allowed in
the front yard.
vi. Architecture and Materials:
Exterior Facades: Acceptable siding materials
include brick, stone, masonry, stucco, synthetic
stucco (E.I.F.S), horizontal lap siding, vertical
siding, shingles, board and batten siding, and
shake siding. Siding may be permitted to be
manufactured from natural wood, cement fiber board,
or may be premium quality vinyl siding, or other
material of comparable quality as approved by the
Planning Department. Plywood and metal siding shall
not be permitted. Plywood, metal, PVC, Fypon,
vinyl, or other similar materials may be used for
trim and accent features only.
22-70
1/26/2022
Additional siding requirements:
a. Premium quality vinyl siding is defined as
siding with a minimum wall thickness of 0.044
inches.
b. Synthetic Stucco (E.I.F.S.) siding shall be
finished in smooth, sand or level texture. Rough
textures are not permitted. lJ
vii. Eaves: All gables located on front and side facades V
shall have flying rafters. Overhangs shall be a
minimum of 12". Exceptions to this requirement can
be granted by the Director of Planning on a case by
case basis if the architecture of the house does
not warrant the use of flying rafters.
viii. Garage Doors: Front loaded and corner side loaded
garages, shall use an upgraded garage door. An
upgraded garage door is any door with a minimum of
2 enhanced features. Enhanced features shall
include; windows, raised panels, decorative panels,
arches, hinge straps or other architectural
features on the exterior that enhance the entry
(i.e. decorative lintels, shed roof overhangs,
arches, columns, keystones, eyebrows etc.). Flat
panel garage doors are prohibited.
ix. Columns: Columns on the front or corner sides of
the dwelling, including tapered columns, shall be
a minimum of 10" diameter. No smaller than 10"
diameter columns shall be allowed unless the
architectural style specifically needs a smaller
size for proper balancing as determined by the
Director of Planning.
X. Foundations: The exposed portion of any foundation
shall be of brick, synthetic stone, natural stone
or combinations thereof. Synthetic or natural
stucco foundations may be permitted for facades
constructed of entirely stucco. Siding step down
foundations shall be permitted on the side and rear
elevations provided that a minimum eighteen (18)
inches of exposed brick or stone shall be required.
A maximum of two (2) steps shall be permitted on
any elevation.
xi. Roof Material: Roofing material shall be a material
consisting of, but not limited to, architectural
dimensional shingles, metal, or rubber membrane,
and having a minimum 30 -year warranty.
xii. Porches, Stoops and Decks: \
Front Porches: All front entry stoops and front J
porches shall be constructed with continuous
masonry foundation wall or on minimum 12"x12"
masonry piers. Extended front porches shall be a
minimum of five (5)' deep. Space between piers under
porches shall be enclosed with framed lattice
panels. Handrails and railings shall be finished
painted wood or metal railing with vertical pickets
or swan balusters. Pickets shall be supported on
top and bottom rails that span between columns.
22-71
1/26/2022
There shall be no unpainted vertical surfaces on
decks, porches and stoops on the front or sides of
the house.
xiii. Architectural styles: Single family detached
dwellings with the same elevations may not be
located adjacent to, directly across from, or
diagonally across from each other on the same
street. In either case, this requirement does not
apply to dwellings on different streets backing up
to each other.
xiv. Chimneys:
Chimneys: Chimney chases shall be constructed of
brick or stone. Sided chimneys shall be permitted if
it does not face a street. The foundation of any
chimney shall match the house foundation. For gas
fireplaces, metal flues may be used on the roof.
Direct Vent Fireplaces: Direct vent gas fireplace
boxes, which extend beyond the exterior plane of the
dwelling, are not permitted on front facades or side
facades facing a street. The exterior material and
finish used will match the surrounding facade. (P)
Staff Note: Proffered Condition 5 from Case 02SN0209 was
deleted by Case 21SN0620 relative to cash proffer payments.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SN0621
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Harpers Mill Development
Corporation requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to
Residential (R-12) District with conditional use planned
development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and
amendment of zoning district map on 0.45 acre located 40 feet
east of the terminus of Greenhart Drive adjacent to the south
line of Harpers Mill SE Subdivision. Density will be controlled
by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive
Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban
Residential I (maximum of 2.0 dwellings/acre). Tax ID 718-663-
0980.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0621. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0621 subject to the following conditions:
22-72
1/26/2022
Incorporation of Additional Land into 02SNO209 (as amended by
14SNO534 and 17SN0557):
The zoning, proffers, textual statement (if any) applicable to
the land set forth in Case 02SNO209 (as amended by Case 14SNO534
and 17SN0557) shall be applicable to the land that is the
subject of this rezoning request. As a result, the parcel
description submitted with Case 02SNO209 (as amended by Case
14SNO534 and 17SN0557) is hereby revised to include GPIN
7186630980 (0.45 acre), and this expanded parcel description
shall be made a part of Case 02SNO209 (as well as Case 14SNO534
and 17SN0557), and the land that is the subject of this request
shall be bound by the zoning, proffers, textual statement (if
any) set forth in Case 02SNO209 (as well as Case 14SNO534 and
17SN0557).
Additional Proffer Applicable only to the Land that is the
Subject of this Request:
1. Density. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted
on the Property shall be 5. (P)
2. Environmental Engineering. (EE)
a. Super Silt Fence, or an alternative as approved by
the Department of Environmental Engineering, shall
be provided as a perimeter control in locations where
standard silt fence would have been required.
b. Sediment traps and sediment basins sized at least
25$ larger than the minimum Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook's standard shall be
provided.
C. Anionic PAM, Flexible Growth Medium and/or a County -
approved equivalent shall be applied to denuded areas
during construction and at final stabilization in
the locations shown on plans approved by
Environmental Engineering at the time of plans
review.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SNO646
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Sowers Buildings, LLC
(project commonly known as Ashlake Crossing) requests rezoning
from Community Business (C-3) to Community Business (C-3) with
conditional use to permit multifamily dwelling uses plus
conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to
development standards and amendment of zoning district map on
2.31 acres located at the northwest corner of Ashlake and
Ashbrook Parkways. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Neighborhood Business
use. Tax ID 720-670-7347.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0646. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
22-73
1/26/2022
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
At Mr. Carroll's request, Mr. Ryan Ramsey provided a brief
explanation of the case from the 1980s that has been modified
and brought forward. He stated the request is in tandem with
the property next door. He referred to the Conceptual Site Plan
and showed a building that will be developed across the two
parcels for a total of 134 dwelling units.
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0646 subject to the following conditions:
The property owner and applicant in this rezoning case,
pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as
amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for
themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the
property under consideration (the "Property") will be developed
according to the following proffers if, and only if, the
rezoning request submitted herewith is granted with only those
conditions agreed to by the owner and applicant. In the event
this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed
to by the owner and applicant, the proffers shall immediately
be null and void and of no further force or effect.
1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement dated December 1, 2021
shall be considered the "Master Plan." (P)
2. Conceptual Site Plan. The site shall be developed as
generally depicted on the conceptual site plan entitled
"Ashlake Project VHDA Exhibit", prepared by Townes Site
Engineering, dated November 1, 2021. (P)
C. Other acceptable siding materials shall include
composition, Hardiplank, engineered wood (e.g. LP
Smartside) and horizontal lap siding. Horizontal
lap siding shall be manufactured from natural wood
or cement fiber board. Plywood, vinyl and metal
siding are not permitted. Painted wood trim is not
permitted. (P)
22-74
1/26/2022
3. Elevations/Exterior Facades. Development of the Property
shall be in general conformance with the architectural
appearance shown on the elevations attached hereto
entitled "Ashlake Crossing", prepared by Edward H. Winks,
James D. Snows Architects, P.C. dated November 1, 2021,
containing 3 sheets. Any substantial modifications shall
be approved by the Planning Commission in conjunction with
plans review.
a. Shingles used on sloped roofs shall be, at a minimum,
a 30 year architectural/dimensional asphalt
composition shingle.
b. The facade of the building shall have a minimum of
fifty (50) percent brick or stone masonry in the
aggregate. The height of the brick and stone shall
be permitted to vary to allow for a mixture of design
features. Measurement of the requirement for masonry
fagade treatment shall be exclusive of windows, gable
vents, dormers, doors, trim, soffit, fascia,
balconies and porches.
C. Other acceptable siding materials shall include
composition, Hardiplank, engineered wood (e.g. LP
Smartside) and horizontal lap siding. Horizontal
lap siding shall be manufactured from natural wood
or cement fiber board. Plywood, vinyl and metal
siding are not permitted. Painted wood trim is not
permitted. (P)
22-74
1/26/2022
4. Uses. Permitted uses for the Property shall be those uses
permitted by -right or with restrictions in the Multifamily
Residential (R -MF) District, a salon, and other uses
accessory to the residential use. (P)
5. Dwelling Units. A maximum of ninety-seven (97) dwelling
units shall be permitted. (P)
6. Sidewalks. Sidewalks and pedestrian paths shall be
provided as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. The
treatment and location of these sidewalks shall be
approved by the Planning Department at the time of site
plan review. (P)
7. Supplemental Landscaping. Supplemental landscaping shall
be provided around the perimeter of all buildings, between
buildings and driveways, within medians, and within common
areas not occupied by recreational facilities or other
structures. Such landscaping shall be designed to:
minimize the predominance of building mass and paved
areas; define private spaces; and enhance the residential
character of the development. The Planning Department,
at the time of site plan review, shall approve the
landscaping plan with respect to the exact numbers,
spacing, arrangement and species of plantings. (P)
8. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Units
and Generators. HVAC units and affixed generators shall
be screened initially by landscaping or low maintenance
material chosen by the applicant, as approved by the
Planning Department. (P)
9. Utilities.
a. Public water and wastewater shall be used.
b. In conjunction with site plan review and approval,
the owner of the Property shall dedicate to
Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, a 16'
wide permanent public wastewater easement, together
with a 10' wide temporary construction easement, for
an upgrade of the existing force main which serves
the Dry Creek wWPS, in a location that is generally
adjacent to the existing force main easement along
to the Property's frontage on Ashbrook Parkway and
Ashlake Parkway. The final location for these
easements shall be determined during the plans review
process. (U)
10. Age Restriction. All units developed on the Property
shall qualify as "housing for older persons" in accordance
with the criteria set forth in Code of Virginia Section
36-96.7, et al., as amended. Further, the Applicant, prior
to construction of the first multifamily building, shall
prepare and record restrictive covenants that define the
qualification for initial and subsequent occupancy of any
age restricted unit associated with the Property and shall
further restrict households to include at least one (1)
person who is age 55 years or older and shall have no
persons under 19 years of age domiciled therein. This
restriction shall be recorded among the land records of
22-75
1/26/2022
Chesterfield County, Virginia and encumber the Property
prior to the occupancy of any age restricted unit. (P)
11. Road Cash Proffers. The applicant, sub -divider, or
assignee(s) shall pay $2,914 for each dwelling unit to
Chesterfield County for road improvements within the
service district for the property. Each payment shall be
made prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy
for a dwelling unit unless state law modifies the timing
of the payment. Should Chesterfield County impose impact
fees at any time during the life of the development that
are applicable to the property, the amount paid in cash
proffers shall be in lieu of or credited toward, but not
in addition to, any impact fees, in a manner determined
by the County. At the option of the Transportation
Department, road cash proffer payments may be reduced for
the cost of road improvements, other than those
improvements identified in Proffered Condition, provided
by the applicant, sub -divider, or assignee(s). (B&M & T)
12. Paths. In Common Areas, pedestrian paths and multi -use
paths may be natural or hard surface or a combination.
In Resource Protection Areas, pedestrian paths and multi-
use paths may be located in a meandering manner through
the Resource Protection Areas in accordance with the
Department of Environmental Quality's Riparian Buffers
Modification and Mitigation Guidance Manual (2006), with
the final location, design and material to be approved by
the Director of Environmental Engineering at the time of
plans review and approval. A multi -use path or pedestrian
path may be located within sewer easements located in
resource protection areas. The exact location, width,
` design and material(s) to be used for this path shall be
shown on the site plan or subdivision plat submitted and
is subject to review and approval by the Directors of
Environmental Engineering and Utilities, or their
designee. Prior to construction of such a path, the owner
shall enter into all applicable agreements necessary to
allow the encroachments within any areas of interest to,
or regulatory authority of, Chesterfield County. (P & EE)
13. Environmental Engineering.
a. Super Silt Fence, or an alternative as approved by
the Department of Environmental Engineering, shall
be provided as a perimeter control in locations where
standard silt fence would have been required.
b. Sediment traps and sediment basins sized at least
25% larger than the minimum Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook's standard shall be
provided.
C. Anionic PAM, Flexible Growth Medium and/or a County -
approved equivalent shall be applied to denuded areas
during construction and at final stabilization in
the locations shown on plans approved by
Environmental Engineering at the time of plans
review. (EE)
14. Access. Access. Direct vehicular access from the
Property to Ashlake Parkway ("Access") shall be limited
to one (1) entrance/exit generally located towards the
northern Property line, as generally shown on the
22-76
1/26/2022
Conceptual Plan, with the exact location to be approved
by the Transportation Department. (T)
15. Road Improvements. Prior to issuance of any certificate
of occupancy, the following road improvements shall be
completed, with any modifications approved by the
Transportation Department.
a. Construction of additional pavement along the
southbound lanes of Ashlake Parkway at the Access to
provide a separate right turn lane.
b. Construction of a VDOT standard raised median within
Ashlake Parkway from its current terminus located
north of the Property to south of the Access at a
point located approximately 50 feet from the
centerline of the Access. If VDOT approves the
Access for left -in and/or left -out movements, then
the median design shall be modified as approved by
the Transportation Department and VDOT.
C. Only if requested by the owner of the Property and
VDOT approves a left -in movement at the Access, then
the owner shall construct additional pavement along
the northbound lane of Ashlake Parkway at the Access
to provide a separate left turn lane.
d. Construction of a VDOT standard sidewalk along the
Property's frontage along Ashlake Parkway and
Ashbrook Parkway.
e. Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and
unrestricted, any additional right-of-way (or
easements) required for the road improvements
identified above.
f. If requested by the County after site plan approval
and within 60 days of such request, the
owner/developer shall dedicate free and
unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield
County, right-of-way for future intersection control
(roundabout) at the Ashlake Parkway and Ashbrook
Parkway intersection with such dedication limited to
the land within the 20' building setback along
Ashlake Parkway and Ashbrook Parkway. (T)
16. Height. The building height shall not exceed four
stories. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SN0647 j
In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Douglas Mundy requests
conditional use to park an additional tow truck in Agricultural
(A) District and amendment of zoning district map on 0.63 acre
known as 9601 Reams Road. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban Residential
II use (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 750-701-7630.
22-77
1/26/2022
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0647. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board
approved Case 21SN0647 subject to the following conditions:
1. Non -Transferable Ownership. This conditional use approval
shall be granted to and for Douglas Mundy exclusively,
and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. (P)
2. Use Limitation. A maximum of two 30 -foot long tow trucks
may be parked on the property. (P)
3. Parking Location. Tow truck parking shall be limited to
behind the front plane of the residence, on the paved
driveway that runs between the residence and accessory
garage structure. (P)
4. Day / Hours of Operation. The operation of the towing
business shall be limited to weekdays, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
(P)
S. Employees. No employees of the towing business, other than
the applicant, shall be permitted on the property. (P)
G. Towed Vehicles. Storage of any towed vehicle shall be
prohibited on the property. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SN0651
In Dale Magisterial District, Cheryl and Andre Morman request
conditional use to permit a family day care home and amendment
of zoning district map in a Residential (R-9) District on 0.26
acre known as 5919 Silver Oak Lane. Density will be controlled
by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive
Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban
Residential II use (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 785-
665-1292.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0651. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0651 subject to the following conditions:
22-78
1/26/2022
1.
Non -Transferable Ownership: This conditional use approval
shall be granted to and for Andre and Cheryl Morman,
exclusively, and shall not be transferable nor run with
the land. (P)
2.
Expansion of Use: There shall be no exterior additions or
alterations to the existing structure to accommodate this
use. (P)
3.
Signage: There shall be no signs permitted to identify
i
this use. (P)
J
4.
Number of Children: This conditional use approval shall
be limited to providing care, protection, and guidance to
a maximum of twelve (12) children, other than the
applicant's own children, at any one time. (P)
S.
Hours of Operation: Hours and days of operation shall be
limited to Monday through Friday from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.,
except that a maximum of four (4) children may be kept
overnight Monday through Sunday. (P)
6.
Fenced Outdoor Play Areas: Any outdoor play area and/or
recreational equipment utilized by the family day-care
home shall be located in the side or rear yard of the
property. Outdoor play and/or recreational equipment
areas shall have perimeter fencing of at least four feet
in height, installed around the equipment or play area.
Equipment for outdoor play areas shall be located no
closer than fifteen (15) feet to the side or rear property
lines. (P)
7.
Employees: No more than two (2) full-time and one (1)
part-time employee shall be permitted to work on the
premises at any given time other than family member
employees that live on the premises. (P)
Ayes:
Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays:
None.
21SN0662
In Bermuda Magisterial District, Havertys Furniture Companies,
Inc. request amendment of zoning approval case (Case 87SN0174)
relative to buffers and amendment of zoning district map in
General Industrial (1-2) District on 21.74 acres known as 1720
Port Walthall Drive. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for
Conservation/Recreation and Industrial uses. Tax ID 809-638-
1949
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0662. She stated staff received
no comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
22-79
1/26/2022
On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0662 subject to the following conditions:
The Applicant in this case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of
the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance
of Chesterfield County, for itself and its successors or
assigns, proffer that the property under consideration in this
case ("the Property") will be used according to the following
proffer(s) if, and only if, the request submitted herewith is
granted with only those conditions agreed to by the Applicant.
In the event this request is denied or approved with conditions
not agreed to by the owners and Applicant, the proffer shall
immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect.
1. The Applicant hereby amends Zoning Case 87SN0174 by
replacing Proffered Condition 6 with the following
condition: "A buffer, variable in width, but extending
for a minimum of twenty-five feet (25') from eastern edge
of the Ruffin Mill Road right-of-way, shall be provided
along the Property's frontage on Ruffin Mill Road as
generally shown in the area labeled "VARIABLE WIDTH
LANDSCAPE BUFFER" on the conceptual site plan, dated April
6, 2021, prepared by Jordan Consulting Engineers, P.E.,
and entitled "HAVERTYS FURNITURE BUILDING AND PARKING
EXPANSION PRELIMINARY PLAN" (the "Concept Plan").
Vegetation existing within this buffer shall be retained,
and additional landscaping and/or berming shall be
determined and approved by the Planning Department at time
of site plan review." (P)
The Applicant hereby proffers the following additional
conditions:
2. Architectural Design. The architectural design of the
building labeled "BUILDING EXPANSION 131,000 SF±" shall
be constructed so that any portions of the building that
face Ruffin Mill Road generally conform to the
architectural design shown on those conceptual
architectural elevations submitted with this case and
entitled "EXHIBIT A-1," "EXHIBIT A-2," and "EXHIBIT A-3."
(P)
3. Lighting. Any outdoor lighting shall be shielded or
otherwise controlled to prevent light emitted from the
Property from glaring on the public road or adjacent
residences. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SN0664
In Dale Magisterial District, Cloverhill Christian Academy
requests amendment of zoning approval (Case 73AN0184) relative
to signage and the operator and amendment of zoning district
map in a Residential (R-7) District on 1.02 acres known as 6200
Hopkins Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions
or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for Suburban Residential II use (2 to
4 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 780-683-9623.
22-80
1/26/2022
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0664. She stated the conditions
of the previous zoning approval limited the operation of the
use to Wee Folks Nursery only and limited the signage to be
more restrictive than today's Ordinance. She further stated
the proposed amendments would delete these conditions to permit
a transfer of the use to new ownership and require any new
signage to meet current Zoning Ordinance requirements. She
stated staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning
Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the
conditions in the staff report.
i
Mr. Winslow called for public comment
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved Case 21SN0664 subject to the following conditions:
Staff Note: Conditions 2 & 7 from Case 73AN0184 were deleted
by Case 21SN0644 relative to ownership and sign standards.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
71RNf 99A
In Matoaca Magisterial District, Hancock Village Investment
Company, LLC requests amendment of zoning approval (case
19SN0599) relative to density and amendment of zoning district
map in Community Business (C-3) District on 16.72 acres known
as 14300 Ashbrook Parkway. Density will be controlled by zoning
conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan
suggests the property is appropriate for Community Business
use. Tax ID 722-670-0309.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0668. She stated the amendment
would modify the master plan of the case to permit up to 198
units. She further stated since 154 were previously approved,
this amendment would permit an additional 44 units. She stated
staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning
Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the
conditions in the staff report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board
approved Case 21SN0668 subject to the following conditions:
The property owners and applicant in this rezoning case,
pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as ���••✓//
amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for
themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the
property under consideration (the "Property") will be developed
according to the following proffers if, and only if, the
rezoning request submitted herewith is granted with only those
conditions agreed to by the owners and applicant. In the event
this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed
22-81
1/26/2022
to by the owners and applicant, the proffers shall immediately
be null and void and of no further force or effect.
The Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 3 a. of Case
19SNO599 to read as follows:
1. The maximum number of residential multifamily (R -MF)
units, or a combination of the two product types (R -MF
and R-TH), shall not exceed 198 units. (P)
The Applicant hereby amends Proffered Condition 2 of Case
19SNO599 to read as follows below and the prior Exhibit A is
replaced by the Exhibit A attached hereto:
2. Master Plan. The Textual Statement, last revised February
13, 2019, and the Conceptual Plan (Exhibit A attached),
dated August 31, 2021, shall be considered the Master
Plan. The site shall be designed as generally depicted on
the Conceptual Plan; provided, however the exact location
of the dwellings, streets, common areas, and other
improvements may be modified provided that the general
intent of the Conceptual Plan is maintained. The focal
point, inclusive of the clubhouse and related patio, as
well as the pedestrian connection to the adjacent Shopping
Center, shall be maintained in the general location as
shown on the Conceptual Plan. In the event the residential
multi -family (R -MF) is not constructed, then the developer
shall have the right to construct residential townhome
(R-TH) units. The far west corner of the property, which
is 1.24 acres, shall maintain the right to have office
uses, as described in Proffered Condition 2 of Case
18SN0612, as well as residential multi -family and
townhouse uses. If Applicant desires in the future to
change the uses and /or residential unit types as depicted
on the Conceptual Plan to something other than all -
condominiums, then a revised Conceptual Plan shall be
presented to the Planning Commission for review and
approval. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
919WA977
In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Triple R Ventures LLC
requests amendment of zoning approval (Case 86SN0115) relative
to signage and amendment of zoning district map in a General
Business (C-5) District on 0.64 acre known as 3591 Courthouse
Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or
ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the
property is appropriate for Community Mixed Use. Tax ID 749-
686-6271.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0677. She stated approval of Case
86SNO115 prohibited a freestanding sign for this property, and
the applicant is amending the case in order to permit the
installation of a freestanding computer controlled variable
message electronic sign. She further stated staff received no
comments on the case, and the Planning Commission and staff
recommended approval subject to the conditions in the staff
report.
22-82
1/26/2022
Mr. Winslow called for public comment
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board
approved Case 21SN0677 subject to the following conditions:
Staff Note: Condition 6 from Case 86SN0115 was deleted by Case
21SN0677 relative to sign standards.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21SN0690
In Bermuda Magisterial District, Melody Force requests
conditional use to permit a two-family dwelling and amendment
of zoning district map in a Residential (R-7) District on 0.53
acre known as 2901 Falling Creek Avenue. Density will be
controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
Suburban Residential II use (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax
ID 788-690-3032.
Ms. Hall introduced Case 21SN0690. She stated the applicant
proposes to construct an addition to the existing dwelling that
will accommodate living for family members. She further stated
staff received no comments on the case, and the Planning
Commission and staff recommended approval subject to the
conditions in the staff report.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
approved Case 21SN0690 subject to the following conditions:
1. Occupancy Limitations: Occupancy of the second dwelling
unit shall be limited to: the occupants of the principal
dwelling unit, individuals related to them by blood,
marriage, adoption or guardianship, foster children,
guests, and any domestic servants. (P)
2. Deed Restriction: For the purpose of providing record
notice, within thirty (30) days of approval of this
request, a deed restriction shall be recorded setting
forth the limitation in Condition 1. The deed book and
page number of such restriction and a copy of the
restriction as recorded shall be submitted to the Planning
Department. (P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
22-83
1/26/2022
21SN0563
In Bermuda Magisterial District, Duke Quality Homes, LLC
requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential
Townhouse (R-TH) with conditional use planned development to
permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and/or development
standards, and amendment of zoning district map on 32.08 acres
fronting approximately 1,370 feet on the north line of Osborne
Road, 860 feet east of China Cat Terrace. Density will be
controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The
Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for
Suburban Residential II use (2 to 4 dwellings per acre). Tax
IDs 800-659-4189, 6757, 6936, 9447; 800-660-9441; and 801-659-
1655.
Mr. Ramsey provided a summary of Case 21SN0563. He stated a
residential townhouse development containing a maximum of 145
dwellings units is proposed with a minimum of 110 age -
restricted townhouses. He further stated the property is
appropriate for residential development at a maximum density
of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. He stated the applicant has
proffered design requirements as part of this request, and
community design elements include a conceptual plan with
specified areas for townhouse, sidewalks, passive recreation
amenities, and a focal point. He further stated a community
entrance feature with signage is proposed at the development's
entrance. He stated lot and project design standards have been
proffered to include hardscaped driveways and front walkways,
screening for mechanical equipment, light posts, and front
foundation planting beds. He further stated design standards
for dwellings include proffered conceptual elevations,
specified building and roof materials, and the treatment of
garages, porches for townhouse buildings. He reviewed the
exceptions to ordinance requirements relative to lot width,
lot coverage, and setbacks. He stated the Planning Commission
and staff recommended approval.
Mr. Andy Scherzer, representing the applicant, stated the case
started out as a more traditional townhouse development but it
has evolved into a more senior -oriented development with
reduced trips and limited incoming traffic. He further stated
the case will improve Osborne Road and be a reinforcement of
the neighborhood.
Mr. Ingle thanked Mr. Scherzer for explaining that the case
went through some iterations until it was favorably received
by the neighbors. He expressed appreciation for a final product
the community approved of.
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board
approved Case 21SN0563 subject to the following conditions:
The applicant hereby offers the following proffered conditions:
1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement, last revised November
23, 2021, shall be considered the Master Plan. (P)
22-84
1/26/2022
2. Conceptual Plan. Development of the Property shall
generally conform to the Conceptual Plan (Exhibit A),
prepared by Balzer and Associates last revised October
25, 2021, with respect to the general layout of roads and
lots, and the general location of sidewalks, focal points,
and recreational amenities. The layout on the Conceptual
Plan is conceptual in nature and may vary based on the
final site plan depending on the final soil studies,
grading, RPA lines, building footprints, other
engineering reasons or as otherwise approved by the
Planning Commission at the time of plans review. (P)
3. Utilities.
a. The public water and wastewater systems shall be
used.
b. The on-site public wastewater system shall be
designed, and easement access and/or stubs provided,
to facilitate the future extension of public
wastewater service to existing homes in the Coxendale
and Henricus Green subdivisions. (U)
4. Density. The density shall not exceed 145 units. (P)
S. Access. Direct vehicular access from the Property to
Osborne Road shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit.
The exact location of the access shall be approved by the
Transportation Department. (T)
6. Road Improvements. In conjunction with initial
development, the following road improvements shall be
completed, as determined by the Transportation
Department. The Transportation Department shall approve
the exact design, length, or other modifications of the
improvements.
a. Widening/improving the north side of Osborne Road to
a twelve (12) foot wide travel lane, measured from
the centerline of the existing pavement, with an
additional four (4) foot wide paved shoulder and
overlaying the full width of the road with one and a
half (1.5) inch of compacted bituminous asphalt
concrete, with any modifications approved by the
Transportation Department, for the entire property
frontage.
b. Construction of additional pavement along Osborne
Road to provide right and left turn lanes at the
approved access.
c. Construction of a MOT standard shared use path along
the north side of Osborne Road for the entire \
property frontage. J
d. Dedication to Chesterfield County, free and
unrestricted, of any additional right of way (or
easements) required for the improvements identified
above. (T)
7. Dedication. In conjunction with recordation of the initial
subdivision plat, prior to any final site plan approval,
or within sixty (60) days from a written request by the
22-85
1/26/2022
Transportation Department, whichever occurs first,
thirty-five (35) feet of right-of-way along the north side
of Osborne Road, measured from the centerline of the part
of the roadway immediately adjacent to the Property, shall
be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the
benefit of Chesterfield County. (T)
8. Age Restriction. Except as otherwise prohibited by the
Virginia Fair Housing Law, the Federal Housing Law, and
( such other applicable federal, state, or local legal
lir requirements, a minimum of 110 dwelling units constructed
shall be restricted to "housing for older persons" as
defined by the Virginia Fair Housing Law and shall have
no persons under 19 years of age domiciled therein ("Age -
Restricted Dwelling Units"). Dwelling units designated as
age -restricted shall be noted on the subdivision plat and
such limitation shall be recorded as a deed restriction
on each affected lot. (P)
9. Design Elements for Townhouse Units.
a. Driveways. All portions of driveways and parking
areas shall be asphalt or concrete. Gravel driveways
shall not be permitted.
b. Front Walks. A minimum of a three (3) foot wide
concrete walk shall be provided to the front entrance
of each dwelling unit to connect to driveways,
sidewalks, or streets.
C. Front Foundation Plantina Beds. The entire front
facades of all units as well as any side facades
facing public streets shall have foundation
plantings. Foundation Planting Beds shall be a
minimum of four (4) feet wide from the unit
foundation. Foundation plantings shall include a
combination of plant and shrub material spaced a
maximum of four (4) feet apart. Vertical accent
shrubs or small evergreen trees shall be used at
building corners to soften the visual impact.
d. Light Posts. Each individual unit shall have a lamp
post located near the intersection of the front walk
and driveway. Each lamp post shall not exceed ten
(10) feet in height.
e. Architecture and Materials
i. Unless significant deviations are approved by
the Planning Commission during subdivision plan
review, the architectural treatment of the
dwelling units shall be generally compatible
and consistent with the elevations shown in
Exhibit B.
ii. Acceptable siding materials include stone,
brick, masonry, vinyl siding, fiber cement
siding, or engineered wood siding, or other
comparable material as approved by the Planning
Department at time of plans review. Vinyl siding
shall be premium with a minimum wall thickness
of 0.044". Dutch lap, plywood and metal siding
are not permitted. Other materials may be used
22-86
1/26/2022
for trim, architectural decorations, or design
elements provided they blend with the
architecture of the dwelling.
iii. If the dwelling unit is constructed on a slab,
brick or stone shall be employed around the base
of the front of the dwelling unit from grade to
the underside of the first -floor window(s) and
around the side and rear of the dwelling unit a
minimum of twelve (12) inches as to give the
appearance of a foundation. If a concrete patio
is provided in the rear of the unit, then the
brick or stone as stated above shall not be
required for the rear of the dwelling unit.
iv. Stepping the siding down below the first floor
shall only be permitted in circumstances of
unique topographical conditions. Step downs
shall be permitted on the side and rear
elevations that do not front on a street, with
a maximum of two (2) steps permitted on any
elevation, and with a minimum separation of
eight (8) feet. A minimum of eighteen (18)
inches of exposed brick or stone shall be
required on the sides of the dwelling unit,
unless a lesser amount is approved by the
Planning Department at time of plans review due
to unique design circumstances.
f. Variation in Front Elevations. The following
restrictions designed to maximize architectural
variety of the dwelling units and/or buildings
constructed on the Property shall apply:
i. There will be a minimum of two (2) siding styles
on each individual unit to include, but not
limited to, board and batten, horizontal, or
shake siding.
ii. There will be a minimum of two (2) different
styles of covered entries within each building
or group of units similar to Elevation 1 in
Exhibit E.
iii. The front facade of all buildings will have a
stone or brick water table that extends from
ground level up to the bottom of the lowest
first floor window.
iv. No two (2) adjacent units within a building
shall have the same color scheme. Additionally,
no two (2) buildings which are adjacent to each
other shall have the same color schemes.
g. Corner Side Units. Where a dwelling borders more than
one street, all street -facing facades shall be
finished in the same materials and the following
measures shall be implemented, unless otherwise
approved at the time of plans review.
i. Enhanced landscaping, such as shade trees,
garden fences, hedges, shrubs, evergreens, etc.
or a combination thereof shall be used to
22-87
1/26/2022
minimize the view of the street facing side
elevation.
ii. Each street facing side facade shall have brick
or stone veneer from grade to the underside of
the first -floor windows.
iii. Each street facing side facade shall have a
minimum of three windows on the first floor,
with at least two of the windows being real,
and a minimum of two faux windows on the second
floor.
h. Roof Material. Roofing material shall be a material
consisting of, but not limited to, architectural
dimensional shingles, metal, or rubber membrane, and
having a minimum 30 -year warranty.
i. Front Porches and Stoops.
i. For the units facing the main internal road
(connecting Osborne Road to Fortview Drive), a
minimum of two (2) front porches per townhouse
building shall be provided. On all other
townhouse buildings, a minimum of one (1) front
porch and one (1) enhanced entry stoop per
townhouse building shall be provided. Front
porches shall be a minimum of five (5) feet deep
and eight (8) feet wide and enhanced entry
stoops shall be a minimum of five (5) feet deep
and five (5) feet wide. Enhanced entry stoops
shall be covered with a roof element for the
minimum depth requirement.
ii. Where provided, all stoop and porch floors shall
be concrete or exposed aggregate concrete, or a
finished paving material such as stone, tile,
or brick, or properly trimmed composite decking
boards. All front steps shall be concrete.
Wooden steps, stoops, or porches will not be
permitted.
Garages.
i. All units shall have at least a one (1) car
garage.
ii. Front loaded garage doors shall have a minimum
of two (2) architectural features.
Architectural features shall include raised
panels, windows, hinge straps, door handles,
decorative panels or arches used to enhance the
appearance of the door. Flat panel garage doors
are prohibited.
k. Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
Units and House Generators. Units shall initially be
screened from view of public roads by landscaping or
low maintenance material, as approved by the Planning
Department. (P)
22-88
1/26/2022
10. Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of
all public internal streets as generally shown on Exhibit
A. (P)
11. Fences. Chain link fences shall be prohibited, except for
a vinyl coated chain link fence may be used for a dog
park. (P)
12. Entrance Feature. A monument sign and landscaping to
include plants, sod, and irrigation shall be provided at
the main entrance on Osborne Road. (P) J
13. Maintenance of Common Areas and Building Exteriors. The
homeowner's association shall ensure that the association
is professionally managed. The homeowner's association
shall be responsible for proper maintenance and repair of
on-site improvements including, but not limited to, all
Common Areas, monument signs, sidewalks, outdoor
pavilions, driveways, street trees, lot landscaping,
fencing, lighting, and dwelling unit exteriors, to exclude
windows and doors. Cleaning and painting of exterior
doors in need of maintenance will be done by the
homeowner's association. (P)
14. Environmental Engineering.
a. No impervious areas shall sheet flow though the
Coxendale subdivision.
b. The best management practice (BMP) basins shall be
designed as visual amenities with enhanced
landscaping. Such amenities shall be subject to
review and approval of the Environmental Engineering
Department during plans review. (EE)
15. Construction Signage. Prior to any land disturbance on
the Property, sign(s) shall be installed by the
owner/developer at the Coxendale Road and Osborne Road
intersection and appropriate location(s) along Coxendale
Road and Fortview Drive within the Coxendale subdivision
to deter construction traffic from accessing the Property
through Fortview Drive. Sign(s) shall be posted in English
and Spanish that is clearly legible from the public right
of way. Such sign(s) shall be maintained by the developer
and shall remain until construction activity is complete
as determined by the Planning Department. (P)
16. Recreational Facilities. A mixture of active and passive
recreation shall be provided as set forth below and as
generally shown on Exhibit A.
a. A minimum 0.25 -acre recreation area/open space shall
be created as a focal point overlooking the wet pond
located nearest to Osborne Road as generally shown
on Exhibit A. The focal point area shall be
landscaped with benches, walking paths, and
gathering areas to include a covered community
gathering space and two (2) pickle ball courts.
b. The covered community gathering space, such as a
gazebo, pavilion, or similar structure, shall meet
the following standards:
22-89
1/26/2022
i. The structure shall be a minimum of 500 square
feet in size and compatible with the
architectural style of the community.
ii. The structure shall be under construction prior
to the issuance of the 50th certificate of
occupancy.
C. In addition to the facilities outlined above,
community garden(s), a dog park and additional
walking trails shall be provided as generally shown
on Exhibit A. Other amenities, such as, but not
limited to, picnic areas, fire pits, and shuffleboard
courts shall be permitted. If deemed necessary or
appropriate at plans review based on final
engineering, walking trails shall be permitted in
different locations then as shown on Exhibit A. The
exact location and surfacing of any trails proposed
within the resource protection area (RPA) must be
approved by the Department of Environmental
Engineering at the time of plans review.
d. Pedestrian scale amenities, as described above,
shall be developed concurrent with the phase of
development that the amenities are intended to serve.
(P)
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle, Holland and Carroll.
Nays: None.
21MH0133
In Bermuda Magisterial District, Amanda Kitts requests renewal
of a manufactured home permit (Case 13SN0175) to permit a
temporary manufactured home and amendment of zoning district
map in a Residential (R-7) District on 0.43 acre known as 2679
Drewrys Bluff Road. Density is approximately 2.3 units per
acre. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is
appropriate for Residential Mixed Use uses. Tax ID 789-680-
8239.
Ms. Amy Somervell presented a summary of Case 21MH0133. She
stated staff is typically supportive of renewals of previously
approved applicants as owner and occupant of the manufactured
home when the manufactured home and property continue to be
well maintained and in compliance with conditions of the
previous permit approval. She reviewed a timeline of the
current request and noted several concerns which included
storage of discarded materials; applicant not residing on the
property; and lack of power and water service to the property.
She also noted the request was deferred twice by the Board to
allow the applicant time to bring the manufactured home and
property into compliance with the previously approved permit;
however, the concerns were never addressed. She stated staff
did reach out to the applicant to provide assistance with
reoccupying the manufactured home. She further stated the
applicant is not in compliance with the previous approval. She
provided the Board with photographs of the property showing
discarded materials and maintenance issues. She stated it is
staff's belief the applicant has not occupied the manufactured
home since March 2020. She further stated a condition of
approval of a temporary manufactured home permit requires that
22-90
1/26/2022
the unit be occupied, and this manufactured home remains
response to
unoccupied, thereby making the request unnecessary. She stated
staff recommended denial because the manufactured home is
was currently living in the home, Mr. Duncan
inconsistent with the surrounding area; the manufactured home
is vacant, and continued use would not be warranted; and a
back in the
precedent may be set with the approval of this request. She
fix things
further stated the applicant informed staff she would not be
up.
present for the public hearing due to being quarantined, but
stated as soon as her quarantine is
her son, Mr. Joseph Duncan, would attempt to attend.
has
made plans
Mr. Joseph Duncan, representing the applicant, stated he was
V
recently brought into the situation to help out. He provided
details of Ms. Kitts' medical issues that began in March 2020.
He asked the Board for more time to meet the requirements and
allow the family to be more involved in improving the property.
Mr. Ingle stated this was a tough case for him, and he
absolutely did not want to put someone out of their home. He
further stated he has asked just about every department in the
county to help Ms. Kitts through the process. He stated if Mr.
Duncan had reached out sooner, he would have asked for a
deferral and given Mr. Duncan some more time. He further stated
he did not believe the house was livable, nor would it be
livable in the foreseeable future. He stated he was willing to
try to help Ms. Kitts with the property after this, but he was
not able to make a motion to approve the case. He further
stated he has never tried to help somebody and not get a
response as he has in this case. He apologized and stated it
has gone on long enough.
In
response to
Mr. Winslow's question relative to whether Ms.
Kitts
was currently living in the home, Mr. Duncan
stated she
is
back in the
home part-time trying to clean and
fix things
up.
He further
stated as soon as her quarantine is
over, she
has
made plans
to have water service reestablished.
In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to whether Ms.
Kitts was staying in the home tonight, Mr. Duncan stated he
believed so, but he was not sure. He further stated Ms. Kitts
had been staying with his youngest brother, but soon he would
not have room for her once his baby is born.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to
reestablishment of water service to the property, Mr. Duncan
stated it has not been reestablished, but that is the goal. He
further stated the reason Ms. Kitts did not reestablish water
service was because of her quarantine.
In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to whether
anyone applied to the county for help due to the quarantine or
other extenuating circumstances, Mr. Duncan stated he was not
sure.
Mr. Ingle stated the Department of Utilities did go out and
turn the meter on to check for leaks, and there are water leaks
inside the home.
Mr. Holland stated he is always thinking about what happens
next after a vote. He further stated the last thing a person
would want to do is put someone out of their home if they could
live there, but that is to be determined because he did not
have all the information. He thanked Mr. Duncan for coming.
22-91
1/26/2022
Mr. Winslow called for public comment.
There being no one to speak to the issue, the public hearing
was closed.
Mr. Ingle stated it was with a heavy heart, and with an offer
to help Ms. Kitts if she reaches out, that he moved for denial
of Case 21MH0133.
Ms. Haley stated it was with the same heavy heart that she
seconded Mr. Ingle's motion. She further stated there are
opportunities for Social Services to be of assistance, and Mr.
Ingle would be happy to coordinate that connection to find
something safe for Ms. Kitts.
Mr. Winslow called for a vote on Mr. Ingle's motion, seconded
by Ms. Haley, for the Board to deny Case 21MH0133.
Ingle:
Aye
Holland:
Nay
Carroll:
Aye
Haley:
Aye
Winslow:
Nay
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings at this time.
17. REMAINING MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND ZONING REQUESTS
There were no remaining manufactured home permits and zoning
requests.
18. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED
MATTERS
There were no requests to address the Board at this time.
P Clf,-liAliIZ,BI3i-l:ri
On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Ms. Haley, the Board
adjourned at 8:47 p.m. until February 23, 2022, at 1:00 p.m.
for a work session to be held in the Public Meeting Room.
Ayes: Winslow, Haley, Ingle
Nays: None.
u
seph P. Casey
County Administ
Holland and Carrol .
6
6
Christopher M. Winslow
Chairman
22-92
1/26/2022
A
C
_
a
L
S
fO
=
E
o
>
o
«
y
O
N
v
C
d
W
d
L
d
O
O
dr
O
d
d
E
n
_
c
C
(0
a
d
N
v
c
c
a
dN
N
v
a
L
-TJ
mm
ry
c
c
r
a
N
L
J
R
T«
n
Ym
C
3
L
o
t
U
N
E
3
'
c.
>
V
CO
V
y
3
J
m
e
o
s
N
a
'^
c
y
y
$
E
E
N
_
m
a
`o
u
a
o
yE
a
y
r
.E
v
2
o
m
o
u
v
00
J
C
«
m
N
a
0
O
C
y
W=
c
q
c
c
o
a
o
3
v
O
o
L
y
n
Q
c
`m
m
v'�
V
o
a
c
3
1O
>
a
n
i
o
n
O
c
N
9
L
d
N
d
n>
m
c
m
N"�
�'O
c
a
d>o
N>
>oa
+�
d
0
0a�mm
a
>
LJ
J
O
N
L
N
C—
N
d
CO
n
9
j
m
N
,Od
>
!O
O
-L
°'E
O
y
N
i
c
vu3
Jz
O
O
R
.N
F
O
.7
-O
E
2'
O
O
d
C
a
O
O
C
ry
a.
>
«
N'O
L
t
d
a
d
«
N
d
d
c
O
L
U
d
C
c
`o
r
v
E
E
m
c
d
t
m
3
Y
Y`
y
>i
i'O
o—
Ld"
E
i
C
-p
N
d
L
`
m
0-
V
3
v
z
a
E
n
n
>m
m
o
n
o
>'�
N
m
m
n
v
E
c
m
m
1O
N
>
a
o
Z
c
E
E
a
Y
E
v
'_
v
v
z
y
O
O
"c
c
n
00
s
p
3
c
w
o
y
—
d
o
J
d
c
m
O
E
o
m
Q
m=
n
x
E v
N
y
y
p
c
N°««
d
G
m
=0
C
O
g
L
C
o
a
a
a
c>
E
y
d
ry
d
p,_
m
L
�T
0=
C
N
E
7«
y
o
2
v
>;E
a
E
3
y
o>
c
M
`o
u°
¢
n«
Y
a
3
0.$
v
c
Nn
¢
E¢«
u
m
n
a
E
E
E
a
H
v
v
c
c
J
J
d
y
d
Oaj
E
L
5
d
ry
m
N
N
N
N
C
O
O
N
O
O
\
N
\
\