Loading...
2020-01-22 MinutesDq BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES January 22, 2020 Supervisors in Attendance: Ms. Leslie A. T. Haley, Chair Mr. Kevin P. Carroll, Vice Chair Mr. James A. Ingle, Jr. Mr. Christopher M. Winslow Mr. James M. Holland Dr. Joseph P. Casey County Administrator Ms. Haley called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved the minutes of December 11, 2019. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 2. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS, DELETIONS OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board replaced Item 13.B.8., Award of Construction Contract for County Project #19-0006, Falling Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Digesters 1 and 2 Mixing Systems, and replaced Item 13.A.2., Appointments to the Capital Region Airport Commission. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 3. WORK SESSIONS 3.A. EVERYDAY EXCELLENCE - JUVENILE PROBATION Ms. Marilyn Brown, Director of the Juvenile Detention Home, introduced Mr. Jim Nankervis, Director of the Twelfth District Chesterfield -Colonial Heights Court Services Unit, who recently received the Virginia Juvenile Justice Association Meritorious Award for Court Services. Mr. Nankervis expressed his appreciation for the recognition and acknowledged his staff and CSU partners for their dedication. 20-12 1/22/2020 Ms. Haley thanked Mr. Nankervis and his staff for the great work they do every day. 3.B. GENERAL ASSEMBLY UPDATE Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, presented a brief update to the Board of Supervisors on the status of several bills before the General Assembly. She stated there are a number of bills that would equalize the powers of counties with cities and towns in terms of taxing authority and some bills specific to a meals tax or cigarette tax, all of which are anticipated to be rolled into an omnibus bill, HB785, that is being carried by Delegate Watts. She further stated the governor has an omnibus transportation bill which, among other things, includes language correcting an inadvertent deletion pertaining to local vehicle registration fees. She discussed Delegate Delores McQuinn's bill, HB1541, which would create a Central Virginia Transportation Authority. She noted Delegate Ware has requested the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) to study the Compensation Board funding process for constitutional officers, which was a topic discussed at the December 2019 meeting with the county's local delegation. She discussed favorable budget amendment requests including an increase in jail per diems; disbursement of federal Help America Vote Act money directly to localities to deal with election security issues; bringing HB599 monies up to where they are supposed to be, growing with the state general fund; elimination of the current diversion of $2 million from the Communications Sales and Use Tax, which is a local revenue that flows through the state budget; funding for no excuse absentee voting implementation; general fund restorations for local Community Services Boards to make up for funding gaps caused by Medicaid expansion; and correction of an inadvertent deletion from the state budget allowing the group studying body worn cameras to continue. She stated budgets will become public on February 16, 2020. In response to Mr. Holland's request for continued updates pertaining to transportation and educational funding, Ms. Curtin stated she would be watching education funding closely due to potential efforts to change the composite index which could have a negative impact on the county. 3.C. REAL ESTATE HOUSING MARKET AND REGIONAL HOUSING FRAMEWORK PLAN UPDATES Ms. Laura Lafayette, Chief Executive Officer, Richmond Association of Realtors, accompanied by Ms. Elizabeth Greenfield, Executive Director, Partnership for Housing Affordability, provided the Board with an overview of the county's real estate market. Ms. Lafayette noted Chesterfield leads the region in real estate sales. She reviewed key metrics for single family homes and condominiums/townhomes in the months of December 2018 and December 2019 and compared them to year-to-date metrics for 2018 and 2019. She compared median sales prices in Chesterfield to the Central Virginia 20-13 1/22/2020 IK Ic P] 14 A Region Multiple Listing Service (CVR MLS) which encompasses sixteen jurisdictions including Metropolitan Richmond and the Tri -Cities. She noted sales prices are outpacing wages in both Chesterfield and Central Virginia as a whole. In response to Mr. Winslow's question, Ms. Lafayette stated realtors need more affordable inventory for first-time homebuyers which can be achieved by preserving older communities or finding creative ways to build new homes at a price point a first-time homebuyer can afford. She commended the Board for donating surplus land to the Maggie Walker Community Land Trust to aid in the creation of affordable housing. Ms. Haley noted the resistance of current homeowners in certain areas of the county is a barrier to building more affordable new homes. Ms. Lafayette concurred with Ms. Haley, noting that all citizens want choice, great schools, and affordable housing. Ms. Haley expressed her appreciation for the partnership and her desire to keep the dialogue going. Mr. Holland welcomed Ms. Lafayette's input especially as it pertains to the county's proffer policy and revitalization. Ms. Greenfield provided the Board with an overview of the regional housing framework which is a solution -oriented plan to address the region's housing needs. She discussed the five values of the framework which are opportunity, quality, equity, regionalism, and innovation. She defined affordable housing as not spending more than thirty percent of income on housing. She noted the continuing growth of the region as well as changing demographics. She stated single-family home prices and rents are escalating at a higher pace than wages which results in cost -burdened households. She explained that cost -burdened households spend more than thirty percent of their income on housing, and severely cost -burdened households spend more than fifty percent of their income on housing. She stated the county has the fastest growing senior population in the region and approximately seventy-six hundred senior households are cost -burdened. She further stated many seniors occupy first-time homebuyer inventory despite its unsuitability for aging in place because they do not have anywhere else to go. She discussed the increase in multi -generational living. She then reviewed the goals and solutions of the framework which include reducing barriers to accessory dwelling units; increasing the number of non- traditional homeownership units; revitalizing manufactured home communities; issuing bonds to support housing and community revitalization efforts; preserving naturally occurring housing; and, where appropriate, increasing the amount of land available for multi -family housing development in residential zones. She introduced Mr. Jovan Burton, Director of Implementation, who will work with the Board and county staff to implement the framework. 20-14 1/22/2020 Mr. Holland expressed his appreciation for the presentation and stated he would like to improve the process for the senior tax relief program. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Ms. Greenfield stated there is a need for all types of housing inventory across the entire county. Ms. Lafayette stated in order to retain recent college graduates and millennial talent in the county, it is necessary to provide more rental options. She also noted locating multi -family housing in transit and commercial corridors makes good sense when developing revitalization strategies. Mr. Holland acknowledged the growing age wave and senior population and stated there is a need to study housing and transportation. Dr. Casey stated county staff and he recently met with Ms. Danna Markland and Mr. Mitchell Bode of the Homebuilding Association of Richmond (HBAR) which is developing concepts to make a business out of the variety of housing products. He further stated HBAR may come before the Board at a future meeting to discuss these concepts. Ms. Greenfield stated Ms. Markland with HBAR and Mr. Dan Cohen, Director of Revitalization, were among the members of the workgroup that met every month for a year to develop the framework. 3.D. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MOT) UPDATE Mr. Kyle Bates, P.E., Resident Engineer, provided the Board with an update on VDOT's winter operations. He reviewed the Chesterfield Residency area headquarters and organizational chart and provided statistics on the infrastructure in the county. He discussed maintenance services provided by VDOT and provided details of the snow removal operation. Ms. Haley noted constituents frequently contact Board members immediately following a snow event. Mr. Bates reviewed VDOT's incident management program. He discussed the criteria for determining the paving schedule. He reviewed mowing operations, VDOT's essential contracts, engineering services, and resources available to citizens. He then discussed Special Hauling Vehicles, noting Federal Highway Administration standards dictate that states have all bridges posted with load ratings by December 31, 2022. He stated Dundas Road bridge is currently the only bridge in the county which has not been posted. He further stated the Dundas Road bridge is scheduled for a full replacement in 2021. He extended an invitation to Board members to meet with him individually. Ms. Haley expressed appreciation for the presentation. 20-15 1/22/2020 P] P] A Mr. Holland requested the 2020 schedule, particularly for the Dale district. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Jesse Smith suggested citizens reach out to the county's Transportation Department with concerns. Mr. Bates stated it is most helpful to VDOT when concerns are called in to 1 -800 -367 -ROAD. Mr. Carroll expressed his appreciation for the presentation and stated he would contact Mr. Bates for a meeting to discuss issues in the Matoaca district. Ms. Haley welcomed Chief Judge Edward A. Robbins, Jr., to the meeting. She congratulated him for being selected as chief judge for the Chesterfield County Circuit Court and thanked him for his service. She stated the Board looks forward to a collaborative relationship with the court. Judge Robbins thanked the Board for the welcome. He stated his purpose for attending the meeting was to see Mr. Nankervis be recognized for his award. He further stated Mr. Nankervis is by far one of the finest court services unit directors in the state and the award is well-deserved. 3.E. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP WEBSITE Ms. Susan Pollard, Director of Communications and Media, provided the Board with an overview of the county's new Environmental Stewardship web portal. She reviewed the four major categories of the portal which are Clean water and Air; Healthy Land and Wildlife; Sustainability; and Awards, Accreditations and Regulations. Ms. Lauren Henry, Public Information and Creative Content Manager, demonstrated the functionality of the web portal, noting the goal is to ensure no content will ever be out of date. She explained the web portal is an aggregator of links to partner websites. She provided the Board with a virtual tour of the portal. She stated content will be rapidly growing and the portal will better assist citizens with finding accurate and up-to-date information. Mr. Winslow applauded the effort to implement this web portal. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Ms. Henry confirmed the air quality report would be linked through the portal. Dr. Casey stated there would also be links to the Department of Environmental Quality reporting. He further stated citizens would have access to everything pertaining to the county even if there is a state relationship to it. Mr. Holland noted the Highlands community often has questions about air quality. 20-16 1/22/2020 3.F. FY2021 BUDGET PROCESS Mr. Matt Harris, Deputy County Administrator, provided the Board with an update on the FY2021 budget process. He noted the timeline would be different during this budget season. He discussed the process overview, noting development of the budget is a year-round exercise. He reviewed the priorities and accomplishments from the general government five-year plan dating back to FY17. He discussed how the five-year plan has evolved and how the county budgets horizontally. He provided the Board with a preview of operating themes, the first of which is addressing staffing and personnel challenges. Ms. Haley pointed out the ongoing implications of salary increases which underscores the need for five-year planning. Mr. Harris concurred with Ms. Haley, noting one of the lessons learned during the last economic disruption was that the county wants to grow at a manageable pace. He stated staff is bringing to the Board a plan that is sustainable. Mr. Winslow noted there is improvement every year over time focusing on balancing needs. Mr. Harris stated there have been times when plans were approved but were ultimately inexecutable due to the size, and that is another lesson learned from the past. Mr. Carroll agreed with Mr. Harris, noting implementation over time works very well. Mr. Holland noted an important consideration of the budget is the funding of employee career development. He stated having background on what has been accomplished would be helpful. Mr. Harris stated Ms. Mary Martin Selby, Director of Human Resources, will talk more about career development in March. Mr. Harris then provided a preview of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) themes which are continued focus on care and maintenance of existing infrastructure; focus on technology improvements; and planning for the future. He reviewed referendums from 2004 and 2013 and discussed a potential referendum in 2020. He provided the Board with a revenue and economic update, noting the average increase in residential assessments in tax year 2020 will be 3.8 percent. In response to Mr. Winslow's question, Mr. Harris stated the county is seeing tax revenues from recent commercial and industrial sector projects. He stated while the numbers are healthy, the county does not want to build a budget on numbers that may not repeat. Dr. Casey discussed recent Board approvals which enabled commercial development including the Bissell warehouse, expansion of the Maruchan facility, and expansion of the Sabra facility. 20-17 1/22/2020 PJ FE J A CEJ Mr. Harris gave an update on the which was released the day prior, first step in a long journey for stated the proposed Schools budget to the Board, rather it enumerates may come to the Board when Schools by the end of February. proposed Schools budget noting this is the very the Schools budget. He was not a formal request potential requests that makes its formal request In response to Mr. Winslow's question, Mr. Harris stated Dr. Thomas Taylor, Deputy Superintendent, is serving as Mr. Harris' counterpart in Schools, but the chief financial officer position has not been filled. He further stated heavy collaboration between the county and Schools would be needed and county staff is ready to help in that capacity. Dr. Casey stated the law requires the county to have a balanced budget. He further stated he has no intention of burdening taxpayers with any change in property tax rates, noting the 3.8 percent average increase in real estate assessments for 2020. He pointed out that seventy percent of households in the county do not have school-age children. He discussed state funding and the disparity between what the state pays and what the county pays. He expressed his confidence in Mr. Harris and his budget team and their willingness to assist Schools in the budget process. Mr. Holland concurred with Dr. Casey and stated there is a need to show Schools the five- to seven-year trend of school funding from the county as well as the state. Mr. Harris stated Schools' preliminary layout would use eighty-three to eighty-four percent of the 3.9 percent projected increase for 2021 which leaves $3 to $4 million to spend on other initiatives in FY21. He compared that amount to the typical two percent merit increase which equates to approximately $4 million. He clarified the $40 million budget gap projected by Schools is really a $54 million gap. Ms. Haley pointed out that these are ongoing, recurring expenses that must be acknowledged and accounted for in the future. Dr. Casey noted there are risks associated with relying on state funding. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Harris stated the $99.9 million projected Schools budget consists primarily of operational costs. He then discussed the trend of property taxes indexed to the student population, and he reiterated there is not only diversity in Schools' population, but also diversity in the county's general government population. Mr. Winslow agreed there is a growing senior population with fixed incomes to consider. Ms. Haley stated the general government faces the same challenges as Schools and there must be balance. 20-18 1/22/2020 Mr. Harris continued his discussion of property taxes indexed to the student population. He provided the Board with statistics on local support for Schools and general government per capita and per student. He discussed "needs based" budgeting. He reviewed the calendar and next steps leading to budget adoption on April 8, 2020. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Harris stated the Board will have a joint work session with Schools on February 19, 2020. In response to Mr. Holland's request for information on funding set-aside, Mr. Harris stated Mr. Clay Bowles, Director of General Services, will be present when staff presents the CIP to the Board. In response to Mr. Holland's request for a financial report showing Schools' operating revenue versus operating expenditures, Mr. Harris stated the Board would see some of that accountability as it goes through the process. He further stated Schools prepares monthly reports which could be provided to the Board. Dr. Casey stated the financial report is topic number one when Schools gets a new chief financial officer. In response to Mr. Holland's request for information on head counts for both the county and Schools, Mr. Harris stated staff is conducting that analysis with Ms. Selby and it would be provided to the Board in March. 3.G. UPDATE ON PUBLIC UTILITIES CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS Mr. George Hayes, Director of Utilities, provided the Board with an update on four public utilities construction contracts which include Falling Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Digester 1 and Digester 2 Mixing Systems; Addison -Evans Water Treatment Plant Motor Control Center; Addison -Evans Water Treatment Plant Lime Feed System Replacement and Sodium Hypochlorite Facility Upgrade; and Johnson Creek Force Main, Gravity Sewer and Waterline Project. 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. Wayne Martin addressed the Board relative to Second Amendment gun rights and asked the Board to look at a proposal to establish a small, organized militia. 20-19 1/22/2020 J F] E CEJ (04, r� 6. CLOSED SESSION 1) PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2-3711(A)(19), CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950, AS AMENDED, FOR DISCUSSION OF PLANS AND REPORTS RELATED TO THE SECURITY OF COUNTY -OWNED BUILDINGS IN THE AREA OF THE 1917 COURTHOUSE COMPLEX, AND THE SAFETY OF PERSONS USING SUCH BUILDINGS; AND 2) PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2-3711(A)(5), CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950, AS AMENDED, TO DISCUSS OR CONSIDER PROSPECTIVE BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIES OR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIES WHERE NO PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT HAS BEEN MADE OF THE BUSINESSES' OR INDUSTRIES' INTEREST IN LOCATING OR EXPANDING THEIR FACILITIES IN THE rr)WArnJrmV On motion of Mr. Carroll, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board went into closed session 1) Pursuant to Section 2.2- 3711(A)(19), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, for Discussion of Plans and Reports Related to the Security of County -Owned Buildings in the Area of the 1917 Courthouse Complex, and the Safety of Persons Using Such Buildings; and 2) Pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)(5), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss or Consider Prospective Businesses or Industries or the Expansion of Existing Businesses or Industries Where No Previous Announcement Has Been Made of the Businesses' or Industries' Interest in Locating or Expanding Their Facilities in the Community. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. Reconvening: On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has this day adjourned into Closed Session in accordance with a formal vote of the Board and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act effective July 1, 1989 provides for certification that such Closed Session was conducted in conformity with law. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that to the best of each member's knowledge, i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements under the Freedom of Information Act were discussed in Closed Session to which this certification applies, and ii) only such business matters were identified in the motion by which the Closed Session was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the Board. No member dissents from this certification. Mr. Ingle: Aye. Mr. Winslow: Aye. Mr. Holland: Aye. Mr. Carroll: Aye. Ms. Haley: Aye. 20-20 1/22/2020 7. DINNER On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board recessed for dinner. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. Reconvening: 8. INVOCATION The Honorable Kevin Carroll, Vice Chair, Board of Supervisors, gave the invocation. 9. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Eagle Scout Chase Payne led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. 10. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION UPDATE • Sheriff Karl Leonard introduced the Honorable Judge T.J. Hauler who retired from the Chesterfield County Circuit Court on January 1 after thirty-three years of service. He stated it was a fitting tribute for the Sheriff's Office to give Judge Hauler a send-off on his last day. He then introduced the Honorable Edward A. Robbins, Jr., Chief Judge of the Chesterfield County Circuit Court. Judge Robbins provided details of Judge Hauler's extraordinary career in public service and wished him well in his retirement. Ms. Haley expressed her appreciation to Judge Hauler for his wisdom and years of public service. Judge Hauler thanked Board members for the recognition. Mr. Carroll shared his memories of working with Judge Hauler during his tenure in the Police department and thanked Judge Hauler for his service to the community. Dr. Casey thanked Judge Hauler and welcomed Judge Robbins. • Dr. Casey provided details of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service hosted by Virginia State University and attended by Chesterfield County and VSU alumni. He also provided details of the 31St Annual Black History Month Celebration, noting county employees and VSU staff have worked hard to provide a month full of events at not only VSU but also county libraries. 20-21 1/22/2020 P] P] P] 14 [A (60v • Dr. Casey introduced Brent Epps, the new Director of Transportation; Khara Durden, the new Director of Internal Audit; and Andrea Peeks, the new Director of Budget and Management. 11. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Holland noted the upcoming observance of the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday. He also noted the passing of retired Colonel Wardell Baker who was a valuable member of the Meadowbrook Civic Association. He stated the Hispanic community recently held the widely -attended Three Kings Celebration which is an annual event held at L. C. Bird High. Mr. Winslow recognized Andrew Webster, accompanied by his friend, Marina, for his outstanding efforts to organize and conduct litter pick-up events around the county. Mr. Carroll stated he had the honor of representing the Board of Supervisors at the recent graduations of the 75th Basic Police Academy and the 33rd Basic Sheriff Academy. Ms. Haley stated she had the privilege of installing the auxiliary, senior, and current officers of the Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad which has a diverse and dedicated membership. 12. RESOLUTIONS AND SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS 12.A. RECOGNIZING BOY SCOUTS UPON ATTAINING THE RANK OF EAGLE SCOUT Ms. Susan Pollard introduced Mr. Chase Alan Payne and Mr. Michael Aarness Clabough, who were present to receive the resolution. On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, 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 service projects beneficial to their community, being active in the troop, demonstrating Scout spirit, and living up to the Scout Oath and Law, Mr. Chase Alan Payne and Mr. Michael Aarness Clabough, both sponsored by Mt. Pisgah United Methodist Church, have accomplished those high standards of commitment and have reached the long -sought goal 20-22 1/22/2020 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, Chase and Michael 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 22nd day of January 2020, publicly recognizes Mr. Chase Alan Payne and Mr. Michael Aarness Clabough, 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. Ms. Haley and Mr. Carroll presented the executed resolutions and patches to Mr. Payne and Mr. Clabough, accompanied by their parents, and congratulated them on their outstanding achievements. Mr. Payne and Mr. Clabough provided details of their Eagle Scout projects and expressed appreciation to their parents and others for their support. 12.8. RECOGNIZING MISS KENLEY TELLER FOR HER ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENTS AT THE U.S. PARA SWIMMING NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP Sheriff Karl Leonard introduced Miss Kenley Teller, who was present to receive the resolution. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Ms. Kenley Scout Teller was born in 2010 at Fort Polk, Louisiana, to Aaron C. and Mary E. Teller; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller has a rare genetic condition called popliteal -pterygium syndrome that required her to endure many surgeries, including a double leg amputation; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller is 9 years old and is a fourth - grader at the Steward School in Richmond, Virginia; and WHEREAS, her father, a member of U.S. Army, is stationed at Fort Lee, Virginia, while her mother serves as the Inmate Programs Manager for the Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller has had a natural attraction to water throughout her life, participated on her first swim team at age 6, and has a reputation as natural fighter who 20-23 1/22/2020 P1 P] W 14 has never allowed immense obstacles to stand in the way of achieving great success; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller set her first two Junior Nationals records at age 7, followed by six more records at age 8; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller, at age 9, qualified for and competed in the U.S. Para Swimming National Championship from December 6 through 8, 2019, in Lewisville, Texas, and became the youngest ever to participate in this prestigious meet hosted by USA Paralympic Swimming and the only Virginia athlete to compete; and WHEREAS, Ms. Teller medaled in the S8 50 Meter Backstroke and set three additional personal records, including shaving 12 seconds off her previous best in the 100 Meter Freestyle and 11 seconds off her 100 Meter Breaststroke; and WHEREAS, USA Paralympic Swimming also awarded Ms. Teller with its 2019 Amazing Grace Award recognizing a developing athlete who demonstrates courage, friendliness, determination and cheer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of January 2020, publicly recognizes and congratulates Ms. Kenley Scout Teller for her outstanding athletic achievement and, more so, for being an outstanding role model for all children and adults facing great personal challenges. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Ms. Teller and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. Ms. Haley presented the executed resolution to Miss Teller, accompanied by members of her family, and commended her for her dedication to the sport of swimming. Miss Teller introduced her family and talked about her love for the water, noting her favorite venue was in Dallas, Texas. A standing ovation followed. 13. NEW BUSINESS 13.A. APPOINTMENTS 13.A.1. PLANRVA (FORMERLY RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION) On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Carroll, the Board made the following nominations/appointments to Plan RVA 20-24 1/22/2020 (formerly Richmond Regional Planning District Commission): Mr. Jim Ingle, Bermuda District Supervisor, to serve as Executive Committee Member; Ms. Gloria Freye, Clover Hill District Planning Commissioner, to serve as the Planning Commission representative; and Mr. Jesse Smith, Deputy County Administrator, to serve as alternate, whose terms are effective immediately and expire December 31, 2023. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.A.2. CAPITAL REGION AIRPORT COMMISSION On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board made the following nominations/appointments/reappointments to the Capital Region Airport Commission: Ms. Leslie Haley, Midlothian District Supervisor, and Mr. Chris Winslow, Clover Hill District Supervisor, both to serve as Board member representatives; and Mr. Jim Williams to serve as the citizen representative, whose terms are effective immediately and expire December 31, 2023. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.A.3. COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board made the following nominations/appointments/reappointments to the Community Services Board: Mr. Gibbons Sloan, Mr. Christian Finkbeiner, Ms. Talisha McAuley -Davis, Mr. Patrick Knightly, Mr. Nicholas Pappas, Mr. Harvey Powers, and Mr. Ricky Russell, whose terms are effective January 1, 2020 and expire December 31, 2022. (It is noted Mr. Gibbons Sloan is filling the vacancy created by the resignation of Mr. Tyler Craddock for the duration of his term.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.A.4. PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board simultaneously nominated/appointed/reappointed the following members to serve on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, whose terms are effective immediately and expire on December 31, 2023: Name Ms. Catherine Cheely Ms. Brenda White Ms. Mary Ellin Arch Mr. Shayne McDavid Mr. Rueben Turner Mr. Raymond Marsh Mr. William Pipp Di Stri c -t Bermuda Bermuda Clover Hill Clover Hill Dale Matoaca Matoaca 20-25 1/22/2020 F] PJ Le CEJ Mr. Robert McCurry Mr. John Simpson Midlothian Midlothian Mr. David Glass was reappointed as the School Board representative. (It is noted Mr. Turner is replacing Mr. Earnest W. Harris, Jr., and Mr. Robert Terrell's position will be vacant.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B. CONSENT ITEMS 13.B.1. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS 13.B.1.a. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MS. TAMARA J. VEST, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, UPON HER RETIREMENT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Ms. Tamara J. Vest retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on December 31, 2019; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest began her public-service career with the Chesterfield County Commissioner of the Revenue on November 16, 1998, as a customer service representative who was responsible for answering inbound calls from customers and providing information about tax services; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest worked as an emergency communications officer and a public safety records specialist for two years, and during that time, she served as the primary contact for emergency and non -emergency requests where she assisted saving lives and protecting property by facilitating the flow of information between callers and Fire and EMS, Police, and Animal Services; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest returned to the Commissioner of the Revenue as a tax assessment specialist and then held the position as auditor for personal property tax and then the position of business tax assessment specialist from August 4, 2012, to April 30, 2019, and during that time, she succeeded in understanding property, licenses, and tax laws; and WHEREAS, as a business tax assessment specialist, she ensured all customers' needs were served in an expeditious, courteous, and prompt manner; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest learned to complete the DMV audit, keyed refunds and exonerations, completed daily address change reports and personal property duplicate payment reports; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest received complimentary emails, letters, and calls from customers regarding the excellent customer service that she provided to them; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest transferred to the Utilities Department where she exhibited a willingness to learn new 20-26 1/22/2020 procedures and was diligent in answering incoming calls, establishing new service, disconnecting service, and providing customers with instructions on Utilities processes; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest has been an asset to the county because of her dedication to customer service, her high degree of integrity, and her willingness to learn new processes; and WHEREAS, Ms. Vest was committed to supporting excellence in local government and exhibited knowledge, pride, and quality in the work she has performed at the Commissioner of the Revenue and Utilities Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Tamara J. Vest and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County appreciation for her more than 21 years of service to the county. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.1.b. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MS. KELLY GREGG, EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER (ECC), UPON HER RETIREMENT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Ms. Kelly Gregg began her public service with the County as a Dispatcher March 5, 1990 in the Emergency Communications Center, and faithfully served Chesterfield County for 30 years until March 1, 2020; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg was able to adapt to the ever- changing environment and growth within Chesterfield County and the Emergency Communications Center, and participated in upgrades of the enhanced 9-1-1 system, county's radio system, and Computer -Aided Dispatch System throughout her career; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg has served in the Dispatcher Center as a Cross -trained Dispatcher and Trainer, Completed the Employee Leadership Institute, and received three official life saves; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg was an active member of the Bensley - Bermuda Volunteer Rescue Squad and a practicing EMT prior to being hired in the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) and continued as a member for over 16 years while working in the ECC. WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg displayed a helpful, courteous, and caring attitude while working with internal and external customers; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg has provided a high level of commitment to her work performance as a thorough and conscientious employee; and 20-27 1/22/2020 P] P] P] L WHEREAS, Ms. Gregg 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 Ms. Gregg for her diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, January 22, 2020 publicly recognizes Ms. Gregg, and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for her service to the county, congratulations upon her retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of the resolution be presented to Ms. Gregg and that the resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.1.c. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING CORPORAL JOSEPH D. DEVIVO, II, POLICE DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Corporal Joseph D. DeVivo, II, will retire from the Chesterfield County Police Department on February 1, 2020 after providing over 24 years of quality service to the residents of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo Is service to the citizens of Chesterfield County began in 1995 as a Sheriff's Deputy with the Chesterfield County Sheriff's Office; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo transferred to the Police Department and continued to faithfully serve in the positions of Patrol Officer, Senior Police Officer, Career Police Officer, Sergeant, and Corporal; and WHEREAS, during his tenure, Corporal DeVivo has also served as a Field Training Officer, General Instructor, Defensive Tactics Instructor, Firearms Instructor, and Critical Incident Training Instructor; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo has served as various assignments to include Community Policing Officer, Street Drug Enforcement Unit Member, Special Enforcement Team Sergeant and Administrative Sergeant; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo is a commercial pilot and serves as a member of the Richmond Metro Aviation Unit, where he is the only flight instructor for the unit; and WHEREAS, for his devotion to duty ad his willingness to 20-28 1/22/2020 help improve the quality Chesterfield County, Officer Officer of the Year; and of life for the residents of Devivo was selected as the 2001 WHEREAS, Officer DeVivo received a Unit Citation for dedication, commitment and professionalism displayed while serving as a member of the Ettrick Task Force, whose main goal was the reduction of crime in the Ettrick area; and WHEREAS, Senior Officer DeVivo was awarded the Mason T. Chalkley Award for Excellence for exceptional performance, dedication and devotion to duty; and WHEREAS, Senior Officer Devivo was awarded a Unit Citation as a member of the Police Honor Guard. The unit was recognized for the diligence and professionalism displayed during funeral and memorial services held in multiple states following the line -of -duty death of a Chesterfield County Police Officer; and WHEREAS, Sergeant DeVivo has received numerous Chief's Commendation awards while serving as a member of the Street Enforcement Team. He was recognized for his diligence, teamwork, dedication and outstanding performance; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo is recognized for his strong work ethic, teamwork, and excellent communications and human relations skills, all of which he has utilized within the Police Department and in assisting residents of Chesterfield County during his career; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo has received numerous letters of commendation, thanks and appreciation for services rendered; and WHEREAS, Corporal DeVivo has provided the Chesterfield County Police Department with many years of loyal and dedicated service; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Corporal DeVivo's diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 22nd day of January 2020, publicly recognizes Corporal Joseph D. DeVivo, II, 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. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Corporal DeVivo, and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-29 1/22/2020 P] P] P] A L CEJ 13.B.1.d. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH APARTMENTS USING PROCEEDS FROM TAX- EXEMPT BONDS ISSUED BY THE VIRGINIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY UNDER THEIR MIXED -INCOME PROGRAM On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors Chesterfield, Virginia, desires to mak required by Section 36- 55.30:2.B of the 1950, as amended, in order for th Development Authority to finance the project (the "Project") described on hereto: Holland, the Board of the County of e the determination Code of Virginia of e Virginia Housing economically mixed Exhibit A attached NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA THAT: 1. the ability to provide residential housing and supporting facilities that serve persons or families of lower or moderate income will be enhanced if a portion of the units in the Project are occupied or held available for occupancy by persons and families who are not of low and moderate income; and 2. private enterprise and investment are not reasonably expected, without assistance, to produce the construction or rehabilitation of decent, safe and sanitary housing and supporting facilities that will meet the needs of low and moderate income persons and families in the surrounding area of the Project and this Project will induce other persons and families to live within such area and thereby create a desirable economic mix of residents in such area. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, on the 22nd day of January, 2020. (It is noted a copy of Exhibit A is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2. REAL PROPERTY REQUESTS 13.B.2.a. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND 13.B.2.a.1. ALONG LUCKS LANE FROM THE GROVE AT LUCKS LANE, LLC On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of four parcels of land containing a total of 0.158 acres along Lucks Lane from The Grove at Lucks Lane, 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.) 20-30 1/22/2020 Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.a.2. ADJACENT TO MANCHESTER MIDDLE SCHOOL/FIRE STATION 2 FROM R. LARRY TURNER AND KATIE G. TURNER On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.26 acres adjacent to Manchester Middle School/Fire Station 2 from R. Larry Turner and Katie G. Turner 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None.. 13.B.2.a.3. ALONG JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY FROM JOHN ALLEN REASON, JR. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.1435 acres along Jefferson Davis Highway from John Allen Reason, Jr. 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.a.4. ALONG INTERSTATE 95 FROM SINA18, LLC On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.0513 acres along Interstate 95 from Sina18, 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.a.5. ALONG COURTHOUSE ROAD AND NEWBYS BRIDGE ROAD FROM BANNER CHRISTIAN SCHOOL On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of four parcels of land containing a total of 1.603+/- acres along Courthouse Road and Newbys Bridge Road from Banner Christian School 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-31 1/22/2020 L7 PJ J A c. CEJ 13.B.2.a.6. ALONG CENTER POINTE PARKWAY FROM RP2B, LLC On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 2.336 acres along Center Pointe Parkway from RP2B, 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.a.7. ADJACENT TO CHARTER COLONY PARKWAY FROM COMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION FOR CANCER RESEARCH On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 1.110 acres adjacent to Charter Colony Parkway from Commonwealth Foundation for Cancer Research 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: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.b. CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENTS 13.B.2.b.1. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO COLUMBIA GAS OF VIRGINIA, INC. FOR THE CHESTER CENTER FOR THE ARTS On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an agreement with Columbia Gas of Virginia, Inc., for conveyance of an easement for gas service to the Chester Center for the Arts. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.c. REQUESTS TO QUITCLAIM 13.B.2.c.1. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A VARIABLE WIDTH TEMPORARY REDUCED IMPERVIOUSNESS BMP EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF WOODLANDS REAL ESTATE, LLC On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, 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 variable width temporary reduced imperviousness BMP easement across the property of Woodlands Real Estate, 20-32 1/22/2020 LLC. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.). Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.2.d. REQUESTS FOR PERMISSION 13.B.2.d.1. TO INSTALL A PRIVATE WATER SERVICE WITHIN A PRIVATE EASEMENT TO SERVE PROPERTY AT 6050 NEWBYS BRIDGE ROAD On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board granted Banner Christian School permission to install a private water service within a private easement and authorized the County Administrator to execute the water connection agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.3. CENTRAL VIRGINIA ALL HAZARDS INCIDENT MANAGEMENT TEAM (CVAHIMT) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board approved a Memorandum of Understanding authorizing the Police Department to join the Central Virginia All Hazards Incident Management Team. (It is noted a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.4. AUTHORIZE THE RECEIPT AND APPROPRIATION OF GRANT FUNDS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, VIRGINIA 9-1-1 SERVICES BOARD FOR THE 2020 NG9-1-1 MIGRATION GRANT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the receipt and appropriation of grant funding up to $705,142.04 for the 2020 NG9-1-1 State mandated migration and implementation from the current Verizon 9-1-1 network to the AT&T ESInet platform. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.5. ALLOCATE FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF A SPECIAL PURPOSE PARK AT THE WARE BOTTOM CHURCH BATTLEFIELD AND APPROVE NEW CONSERVATION EASEMENT HOLDER On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the County Administrator or his designee to allocate an additional $52,000 from the Future Facility Land 20-33 1/22/2020 PC PC A 14 Acquisition Account to cover the county's increased share of the purchase of a special purpose park at the Ware Bottom Church Battlefield and changed the conservation easement holder from the Department of Historic Resources to Capital Region Land Conservancy. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.6. AUTHORIZATION FOR 5G AIR LLC TO ENTER INTO A LEASEHOLD MORTGAGE AT THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the County Administrator to approve a request from 5G Air LLC to enter into a leasehold mortgage at the Chesterfield County Airport. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.7. AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CORRECTIONAL NURSING SERVICES On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Director of Procurement to enter into a contract with Correctional Medical Services for Correctional Nursing Services for the Chesterfield County Jail. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.8. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COUNTY PROJECT #19-0006, FALLING CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DIGESTERS 1 AND 2 MIXING SYSTEMS On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract for county project #19-0006 to Waco, Inc., in the amount of $1,378,765 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Falling Creek WWTP Digesters 1 and 2 Mixing Systems project. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.9. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COUNTY PROJECT #16-0169, JOHNSON CREEK FORCE MAIN, GRAVITY SEWER, AND WATERLINE PROJECT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract for county project #16-0169 to Garney Companies, Inc. in the amount of $3,667,344 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for 20-34 1/22/2020 the Johnson Creek Force Main, Gravity Sewer and Waterline proj ect . Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.10. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COUNTY PROJECT #17-0235, ADDISON-EVANS WATER TREATMENT PLANT LIME FEED SYSTEM REPLACEMENT AND SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE FACILITY UPGRADES On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract for county project #17-0235 to Harlan Construction Co., Inc. in the amount of $1,818,660 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Addison -Evans Water Treatment Plant Lime Feed System Replacement and Sodium Hypochlorite Facility Upgrades project. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.11. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COUNTY PROJECT #14-0222, ADDISON-EVANS WATER PRODUCTION AND LABORATORY FACILITY MOTOR CONTROL CENTER REPLACEMENT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract for county project #14-0222 to Southwood Building Systems, Inc. in the amount of $3,883,804 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Addison -Evans Water Production and Laboratory Facility Motor Control Center Replacement project. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.12. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE OTTERDALE ROAD AND OLD HUNDRED ROAD ROUNDABOUT PROJECT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board (1) appropriated $850,000 in road cash proffers (Shed 6) to the Otterdale Road and Old Hundred Road Roundabout project; (2) authorized the Director of Procurement to award a construction contract of $3,789,007 to J.R. Caskey; and (3) authorized the Director of Procurement to execute all necessary change orders, up to the full amount budgeted, for the project. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-35 1/22/2020 lk P] Ic 14 A 13.B.13. AUTHORIZE THE RECEIPT AND APPROPRIATION OF 2019 STATE HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT FUNDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the Fire and EMS Department to receive and appropriate $76,000 in 2019 State Homeland Security Grant funds from the Department of Homeland Security. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.14. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE ROADS On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, 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: Battery Brooke Parkway Extension Tvve Chanae to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Battery Brooke Parkway, State Route Number 938 From: 0.47 miles east of Coach Road, (Route 614) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.25 miles. Recordation Reference: Deed Book 12038, Page 531 Right of Way width (feet) = 60 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 20-36 1/22/2020 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: Glebe Point Estates Section 2 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Comstock Landing Drive, State Route Number 8109 From: 0.03 miles north of Rocky Run Road, (Route 3016) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 262, Page 24 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. 20-37 1/22/2020 P] P] 1b7 A A L Project/Subdivision: The Townes at Notting Place Section 1 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Westhall Gardens Drive, State Route Number 8126 From: Pocoshock Forest Drive, (Route 8125) To: Amber Branch Drive, (Route 8127), a distance of: 0.13 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Pocoshock Forest Drive, State Route Number 8125 From: Westhall Gardens Drive, (Route 8126) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Amber Branch Drive, State Route Number 8127 From: Pocoshock Boulevard, (Route 733) To: Westhall Gardens Drive, (Route 8126), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Amber Branch Drive, State Route Number 8127 From: Westhall Gardens Drive, (Route 8126) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Westhall Gardens Drive, State Route Number 8126 From: Amber Branch Drive, (Route 8127) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 • Pocoshock Forest Drive, State Route Number 8125 From: Pocoshock Boulevard, (Route 733) To: Westhall Gardens Drive, (Route 8126), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 250, Page 93 Right of Way width (feet) = 47 And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on a plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets 44MY. 1/22/2020 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: Baileys Grove Section C Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Baileys Grove Place, State Route Number 8135 From: Baileys Grove Drive, (Route 7250) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 260, Page 43 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 • Baileys Grove Drive, State Route Number 7250 From: Baileys Grove Place, (Route 8135) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 260, Page 43 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 • Baileys Grove Drive, State Route Number 7250 From: 0.01 miles north of Baileys Path Road, (Route 7252) To: Baileys Grove Place, (Route 8135), a distance of: 0.07 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 260, Page 43 Right of Way width (feet) = 58 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. 20-39 1/22/2020 P] P] P7 c. CEJ 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: Bayhill Pointe Section 22 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 • Buffalo Springs Drive, State Route Number 5109 From: 0.05 miles northwest of Bailey Hill Road, (Route 7939) To: Buffalo Springs Place, (Route 8131), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Beech Hill Drive, State Route Number 8134 From: Miranda Lane, (Route 8132) To: The temporary cul-de sac, a distance of: 0.13 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Beech Hill Drive, State Route Number 8134 From: Buffalo Springs Drive, (Route 5109) To: Miranda Lane, (Route 8132), a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Miranda Lane, State Route Number 8132 From: Beech Hill Drive, (Route 8134) To: Buffalo Springs Drive, (Route 5109), a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 • Buffalo Springs Drive, State Route Number 5109 From: Bailey Valley Drive, (Route 7941) To: Miranda Lane, (Route 8132), a distance of: 0.11 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Buffalo Springs Place, (Route 8131), State Route Number 8131 From: Buffalo Springs Drive, (Route 5109) To: The cul-de sac, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Bailey Valley Drive, State Route Number 7941 From: Buffalo Springs Drive, (Route 5109) To: Bailey Valley Court, (Route 8133), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Buffalo Springs Drive, State Route Number 5109 From: Miranda Lane, (Route 8132) pill T, V7 1/22/2020 To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Buffalo Springs Drive, State Route Number 5109 From: Buffalo Springs Place, (Route 8131) To: Beech Hill Drive, (Route 8134), a distance of: 0.04 miles Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Buffalo Springs Drive, State Route Number 5109 From: Beech Hill Drive, (Route 8134) To: Bailey Valley Drive, (Route 7941), a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 • Bailey Valley Court, State Route Number 8133 From: Bailey Valley Drive, (Route 7941) To: The cul-de sac, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 40 • Bailey Valley Drive, State Route Number 7941 From: Bailey Valley Court, (Route 8133) To: Existing Bailey Valley Drive, (Route 7941), a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 251, Page 58 Right of Way width (feet) = 44 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. 20-41 1/22/2020 P] 1b] J A Project/Subdivision: Whittington Forest Section 1 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Avery Mill Lane, State Route Number 8137 From: Avery Mill Court, (Route 8138) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Avery Mill Court, State Route Number 8138 From: Avery Mill Lane, (Route 8137) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Avery Mill Lane, State Route Number 8137 From: Brillhart Station Drive, (Route 8136) To: Avery Mill Court, (Route 8138), a distance of: 0.08 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Hampton Avenue, State Route Number 1315 From: Brillhart Station Drive, (Route 8136) To: Existing Hampton Avenue, (Route 1315), a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Brillhart Station Drive, State Route Number 8136 From: Avery Mill Lane, (Route 8137) To: Hampton Avenue, (Route 1315), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Hampton Avenue, State Route Number 1315 From: Brillhart Station Drive, (Route 8136) To: The cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.15 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 • Brillhart Station Drive, State Route Number 8136 From: Halloway Avenue, (Route 722) To: Avery Mill Lane, (Route 8137), a distance of: 0.13 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 255, Page 86 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 20-42 1/22/2020 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: Wynwood at Foxcreek Section 2 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: 0.04 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005) To: 0.10 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005), a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 226, Page 99 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: 0.01 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005) To: 0.03 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005), a distance of: 0.02 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 226, Page 99 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: 0.03 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005) To: 0.04 miles southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005), a distance of: 0.01 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 226, Page 99 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 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 20-43 1/22/2020 P] P] P] 14 14 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: Wynwood at Foxcreek Section 13 Type Change to the Secondary System miles of State Highways: Addition Reason for Change: New Subdivision Street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: §33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number • Cassia Loop, State Route Number 8123 From: Thornapple Run, (Route 8008) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 53 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: Ledgestone Lane, (Route 8124) To: Cassia Loop, (Route 8123), a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: Cassia Loop, (Route 8123) To: Ledgestone Lane, (Route 8124), a distance of: 0.09 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: 0.10 mile southwest of Strider Road, (Route 8005) To: Cassia Loop, (Route 8123), a distance of: 0.06 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Thornapple Run, State Route Number 8008 From: Cassia Loop, (Route 8123) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.01 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Cassia Loop, State Route Number 8123 From: Thornapple Run, (Route 8008) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 53 • Ledgestone Lane, State Route Number 8124 From: Thornapple Run, (Route 8008) To: Gossamer Drive, (Route 8009), a distance of: 0.08 miles. 20-44 1/22/2020 Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 53 • Cassia Loop, State Route Number 8124 From: Thornapple Run, (Route 8008) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.01 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 53 • Gossamer Drive, State Route Number 8009 From: Ledgestone Lane, (Route 8124) To: The end -of -maintenance, a distance of: 0.01 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 • Gossamer Drive, State Route Number 8009 From: Ledgestone Lane, (Route8124) To: Existing Gossamer Drive, (Route 8009), a distance of: 0.01 miles. Recordation Reference: Plat Book 241, Page 73 Right of Way width (feet) = 61 Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.15. SET PUBLIC HEARING ON CODE AMENDMENT RELATING TO MAILING OF WRITTEN ORDERS On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board set the date of February 19, 2020, as a public hearing for the Board to consider amending Chapter 19.1 of the County Code relating to Mailing of Written Orders. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 13.B.16. APPROVAL TO TERMINATE THE LEASE WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY (AUTHORITY) OF A PORTION OF THE STONEBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT TO FACILITATE THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY TO SHAMIN HOTELS, INC. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board approved the termination of the lease with the Economic Development Authority of Chesterfield County of a portion of the Stonebridge Development to facilitate the sale of the property to Shamin Hotels, Inc. (It is noted a copy of the Lease Termination Agreement is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-45 1/22/2020 P1 P1 P7 L 14. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS Ms. Cheryl Nici-O'Connell with Richmond United for Law Enforcement thanked the Board for supporting the Second Amendment. She presented Colonel Jeffrey Katz, Chief of Police, with a plaque and thanked him for his dedicated service, leadership, and commitment to the citizens of the county. Mr. Brandon Decker expressed his concerns that the Board has not done enough to protect Second Amendment gun rights. He asked the Board to establish a training program, establish a public shooting range, establish a volunteer county militia, and hold a county -wide referendum to consider being annexed into West Virginia. Mr. Cory Hodges agreed with Mr. Decker and asked the Board to consider Mr. Decker's requests. Mr. Freddy Boisseau of the Bermuda District thanked the Board for standing for the rights of citizens. 15. DEFERRED ITEMS 15.A. ZONING REQUEST 19SN0628 - DEAN L. HAWKINS, LA In Bermuda Magisterial District, Dean E. Hawkins, L.A. requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to General Industrial (I-2) plus conditional use planned development to permit setback reductions for parking and buildings and amendment of zoning district map on 14.8 acres located at the northeast corner of Allied Road and Bermuda Hundred Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Industrial use. Tax ID 833-650-7922. Mr. Josh Gillespie, Planning Administrator, gave a brief summary of the case which was deferred at the December 11, 2019 Board of Supervisors meeting. He stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval of Request I (Rezoning), but denial of Request II (Setbacks). Mr. Ingle stated he made a site visit and observed a six-foot elevation drop approximately seventy-five feet into the property which is an important characteristic. He further stated this elevation drop combined with the proffered fence in the front of the property provides approximately fourteen feet of cover back to the property. He stated adding twenty- five feet to the setback requirement does not add aesthetic value to the property and it adds cost to the project. On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved Case 19SN0628 (Requests I and II), subject to the following conditions: 20-46 1/22/2020 1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement dated November 1, 2019 shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. Conceptual Plan. Development of the property shall generally conform to the Conceptual Plan prepared by Dean E. Hawkins, ASLA, dated July 8, 2019 and titled "Preliminary Site Masterplan". (P) And, further, the Board accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. Security and Access Control. The security of the site shall be provided to discourage trespassing by the installation of the following: a. A minimum six (6) foot high chain link fence installed along the property boundary and/ or at the limits of the parking and storage areas located internally on the site, exclusive of the property frontage along Bermuda Hundred Road, and b. Gate(s) of sufficient width within this security fencing public right -of way, utilities, etc., as may be approved site plan. (P) shall be provided for access to the easement areas, required by the 2. Dedication. Prior to any site plan approval, forty -five (45) feet of right-of-way on the north side of Bermuda Hundred Road, measured from the centerline of that part of Bermuda Hundred Road immediately adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T) 3. Connection to Public Water and Sewer. The Chesterfield County public water and wastewater systems shall be used for domestic service requirements. It is anticipated that the development will draw about 2,000 gallons per day (gpd) from the public water system, which is less than the 5,000 gpd allocated for this site by the Utilities Department for treatment by the public wastewater system. (U) 4. Architectural Design. The exteriors of the buildings proposed for this site will be constructed as generally depicted on the elevations prepared by Dean E. Hawkins, ASLA dated July 8, 2019, and titled "A & A Express Transport". (P and BI) 5. Screening of Outside Storage. Outside storage shall be screened by a solid fence of comparable materials to the principal building in accordance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Such fence shall be constructed of metal with brick pillars. Where visible from public rights of way, such brick 20-47 1/22/2020 lu ID] J 14 A pillars shall have a maximum separation of thirty- two (32) feet. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 16. REQUESTS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND REZONING PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE HEARD IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT ACCEPTS THE RECOMMENDATION AND THERE IS NO OPPOSITION - CASES WHERE THE APPLICANT DOES NOT ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION AND/OR THERE IS PUBLIC OPPOSITION WILL BE HEARD AT SECTION 18 209N0526 In Dale Magisterial District, 29:11 Chesterfield, LLC requests a rezoning from Agricultural (A) and General Business (C-5) to Community Business (C-3), with conditional use and conditional use planned development to permit multi- family and townhome uses plus to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and amendment of zoning district map on 123.9 acres located at the northeast quadrant of Iron Bridge and Courthouse Roads, also fronting the south line of Route 288. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Corporate Office uses. Tax IDs 768-666-9817, 769-667-9512, 770-664, -Part of 0099, 773-665, - Part of 2424. Mr. Andy Gillies, Director of Planning, provided a brief introduction to Case 20SNO526 (project commonly known as Courthouse Landing). Mr. Holland made the following statement: "In December I viewed the Planning Commission's public hearing actually live, I watched it, and listened to all the comments made regarding the proposed Courthouse Landing development, zoning Case 20SN0526, and I talked with many citizens and read many emails regarding this project. While I believe investment in the Dale district is sorely needed, it will not be at the detriment of its current citizens. As such, I will not support this case until the following issues are resolved. There are three basic issues; first is traffic. Citizens rightly expressed concerns about the additional traffic that this development will bring to an area already congested. I am directing staff to work with the applicant and VDOT and the VDOT study to develop a plan that will improve traffic in both the short and long term. This plan must be part of the case and the applicant will be expected to contribute their fair share to its implementation. Secondly, the impact on the airport. The applicant must show that the FAA has conceptually approved the impact on the flightpath from this development. In addition, the developer must agree to take the necessary steps to prevent waterfowl from congregating around the property's stormwater management 20-48 1/22/2020 facilities. And third, impact on our schools. Staff from the county and schools must verify that the existing schools in the area can accommodate the new students anticipated in the proposed residential development. I am further directing staff to immediately begin working on a plan to improve the traffic circulation at all the schools located on Courthouse Road. So, tonight, January 22nd, at this Board meeting, I will request that the Board of Supervisors remand this case back to the Planning Commission so that these issues can be properly addressed. In addition, I am directing staff to hold another community meeting on the project so as to explain the proposed solutions to these three issues. If the applicant can address these concerns, I will be prepared to consider recommending approval of this case when it returns to the Board. Finally, I am asking that all of this be done in a timely manner so that the amended case can be heard by the Board of Supervisors at its April 22nd meeting; however, I must note, we are concerned about quality and for the best for the Dale district moving forward. We will only do what is best for the Dale district moving forward. I think this is so very important. Thank you, Madam Chair, and that is my motion." Mr. Mark Kronenthal appeared on behalf of the applicant. Ms. Haley opened the public hearing on the issue of remand only. Ms. Sonia Smith of the Bermuda District and president of the Chesterfield Education Association agreed with the remand and expressed her concerns relative to the impact of the project on schools. Mr. Mike Uzel of the Bermuda District expressed his support for remand of the case. He expressed his concerns relative to the transfer of the property to the EDA and the lack of an independent appraisal. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing. On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board remanded case 20SN0526 back to the Planning Commission. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 19SN0597 In Midlothian Magisterial District, SRBF, L.L.C. (project commonly known as Starview Village) requests rezoning from Residential (R-7), General Business (C-5) and Agricultural (A) to Regional Business (C-4) with Conditional Use and Conditional Use Planned development to permit single family, townhouse and multifamily residential uses plus exceptions to ordinance requirements and amendment of zoning district map on 109 acres fronting a total of 530 feet in two places on the east line of Turner Road, 1200 feet south of Midlothian Turnpike; fronting the north and south lines of Cloverleaf 20-49 1/22/2020 P] Ic PJ A A Drive, 725 feet east of Turner Road; bordering the west line of Chippenham Parkway; and located at the southern terminus of Granite Springs Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Regional Mixed Uses. Tax IDs 762-705-7225 and 9750; 763-705-0418, 1590, 3882, 7089 and 9301; 763-706-7503; 764-703-1276; 764-704-8184; 765-704- 0028 and 6589; 766-704-3488; 766-705-1605 and 1843. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 19SN0597. He stated this case utilizes a new technique called SmartCode which is a customized urban form -based code design. He further stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mr. Will Shewmake was present on behalf of the applicant and stated he believes all of the conditions proffered are reasonable under state law. Ms. Haley called for public comment. Ms. Sonia Smith expressed her concerns relative to the impact of this project on schools. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing. Ms. Haley stated there is a void in the county for certain types of housing such as what is proposed in this project. She further stated development in the Midlothian area corridor is exciting and necessary. She noted the real impact of development on schools should derive from collaboratively established demographic models instead of perceptions. She moved for approval of Case 19SNO597 subject to the proffered conditions. Mr. Winslow seconded the motion. In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to anticipated school impact numbers contained in the staff report, Mr. Gillies stated he believes the numbers are current as of September 2019. In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to other schools which might be impacted by the overflow of students at A.M. Davis Elementary School, Mr. Gillies stated the project will occur over three to five years which should give the county and Schools time to come up with a reasonable solution. He further stated current enrollment levels of the schools impacted by the project are still within a workable level, but the county and Schools should start planning for the eventual impact in the three- to five-year period of time. Mr. Holland stated anticipated school impacts on adjacent schools would be helpful in future staff reports. Mr. Ingle stated looking at the data in this current zoning case does not give a good picture due to the three- to five- year delay in the start of the project. He requested staff in 20-50 1/22/2020 Schools to develop a tool to assist with making decisions for the schools. Mr. Gillies stated staff is working on such a tool. Ms. Haley acknowledged the importance of considering impacts on schools but noted that projects do not always proceed after zoning approval and it is difficult to either restrict development or build in anticipation of development. She encouraged continued conversations and trying to obtain as much data as possible. Mr. Ingle stated he has asked Fire and EMS to include in staff reports the response time it is capable of meeting rather than stating it cannot meet response time goals which is its current practice. Mr. Carroll agreed the numbers need to be realistic so the Board and Schools can adequately prepare. Mr. Winslow concurred with Mr. Carroll and stated the Board knows there are ongoing needs in the county. Mr. Carroll noted new development will bring necessary tax dollars to the community along with good jobs to help fund needs. Ms. Haley called for a vote on her motion, seconded by Mr. Winslow, for the Board to approve Case 19SNO597 and accept the following proffered conditions: 1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement dated December 5, 2019, and all referenced exhibits shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. Public Water and Sewer. Public water and wastewater_ will be used. (U) 3. Utilities Master Plan. A. The Developer will submit to the Utilities Department an overall utilities master plan for the development. The utilities master plan will be submitted with the first site plan or tentative subdivision plan on the Property. B. The Developer will perform and submit a hydraulic analysis of the county's water and wastewater system to quantify the existing capacity as part of the overall utilities master plan. Any capacity related improvements required to support the demands of this development will be reflected on the overall utilities master plan. C. To the extent existing capacity of sewer and water lines cannot support the demands of this development, the developer shall be responsible for the necessary water and/or sewer line improvements. (U) 20-51 1/22/2020 P7 J R CEJ u r� A 4. Stormwater. The post -development peak discharge rates for the 1, 2, and 10 -year storm events shall not exceed the pre -development peak discharge rates for the 1, 2 and 10 -year storm events, respectively. The post - development 100 -year peak discharge rate shall not exceed the 50 -year pre -development peek discharge rate. Provided, however, in lieu of providing onsite detention/retention of the 100 -year storm, if stormwater improvements per a watershed drainage study approved by the Department of Environmental Engineering are implemented prior to the commencement of the development, then the 100 -year post -development peak discharge rate condition is satisfied if the discharge rate is consistent with the implemented improvements. (EE) 5. Parks and Trails. A. North South Path Dedication. Prior to any site plan approval, the developer shall dedicate to the County a public easement for the County's Comprehensive Plan bike and trail system as generally shown on Exhibit A to the Textual Statement. The minimum width of the easement shall be 20 feet, and the exact location of the easement shall be determined at time of site plan approval for any of the parcels. B. East West Pedestrian Path. To the extent permitted by Environmental Engineering and Planning, a path with a minimum width of 6 feet shall be provided generally as depicted on Exhibit A. The exact location shall be determined and designed in conjunction with site plan approval for Parcel 4. (P&R) 6. Dedication. In conjunction with recordation of the initial subdivision plat, prior to any site plan approval or within ninety (90) days from a written request by the Chesterfield Department of Transportation, whichever occurs first, forty-five (45) feet of right-of-way along the east side of Turner Road, measured from the centerline of that part of Turner Road immediately adjacent to the property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T) 7. Access. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Turner Road shall be limited to one (1) entrance/exit. The exact location of the access shall be approved by the Transportation Department. (T) 8. Road Improvements. To provide an adequate roadway system, the developer shall be responsible for the following road improvements and shall be completed, as determined by the Transportation Department. 20-52 1/22/2020 The exact design, length, and/or modifications of these road improvements shall be approved by the Transportation Department. If any of the road improvements identified below are provided by others, as determined by the Transportation Department, then the specific road improvement shall no longer be required. A. Connecting Starview Lane to the Stonebridge Shopping Center with the development of Parcel 1. B. Improving Starview Lane to provide two (2) ten (10 ) foot wide travel lanes and two ( 2 ) seven (7) foot parking lanes from the Cloverleaf Drive/Starview intersection to approximately 1,600 feet north of the Cloverleaf Drive/Starview intersection, as generally shown on Exhibit C. C. Improving Cloverleaf Drive from Turner Road to the eastern edge of the Dominion transmission line easement to provide two (2) eleven (11) foot wide travel lanes and a four (4) foot wide paved shoulder on both sides of the road, as generally shown on Exhibit C. D. Improving Cloverleaf Drive, from the eastern edge of the Dominion transmission line easement to the Cloverleaf Drive/Starview Lane intersection to provide two (2) twelve (12) foot wide travel lanes and two (2) seven (7) foot parking lanes, as generally shown on Exhibit C. E. Construction of a three -lane typical section (i.e. two westbound turn lanes and one eastbound lane) along Cloverleaf Drive at the intersection with Turner Road. F. Construction of additional pavement along the northbound lanes of Turner Road at its intersection with Cloverleaf Drive to provide a separate right turn lane. G. Bearing the full cost of traffic signalization modifications at the Cloverleaf Drive/Turner Road intersection to accommodate the required road improvements. H. Constructing additional pavement along the northbound lanes of Turner Road at its intersection with Site Road A to provide a separate right turn lane I. Constructing a VDOT standard sidewalk along the east side of Turner Road for the entire Property frontage. 20-53 1/22/2020 P7 W P] A J. Construction of a ten (10) foot wide shared use path along Cloverleaf Drive from Turner Road to the proposed intersection with the North South Path, as generally shown on Exhibit A as "E." At time of site plan, the shared use path alignment and construction limits may be modified as determined by the Planning Department. Provided however, the exact location shall be determined at time of site plan to ensure consistency with the County Bikeway and Trails Plan. K. Dedicating to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, of any additional right-of-way (or easements) required for the improvements identified above. In the event the Applicant is unable to acquire the "off-site" right-of- way that is necessary for the road improvements identified in 8.C., 8.E., 8.F., 8.G., 8.H., and 8.J., the Applicant may request, in writing, that Chesterfield County acquire such right-of-way as a public road improvement. All costs associated with the acquisition of the right-of-way shall be borne by the Applicant. In the event Chesterfield County chooses not to assist the Applicant in acquisition of the "off-site" right-of-way, the Applicant shall be relieved of the obligation to acquire the "off-site" right-of- way and shall provide the road improvements to the extent they can be constructed within available right -of- way, as determined by the Transportation Department. (T) 9. Phasing Plan. Prior to any tentative subdivision plan, construction plan, or site plan approval, whichever occurs first, a phasing plan for the required road improvements, as identified in Proffered Condition 8, shall be submitted to and approved by the Transportation Department. (T) 10. Elevator. Any multifamily residential building with more than 3 floors shall contain elevator(s). (P and BI) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 19SNO566 In Bermuda Magisterial District, John S. Bolton (project commonly known as Winchester Green), requests rezoning from Residential (R-7)) to Multifamily Residential (R -MF) with conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and amendment of zoning district map on 16.8 acres fronting 1020 feet on the north line of Drewrys Bluff Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the 20-54 1/22/2020 property is appropriate for residential mixed-use minimum 12.0 dwelling units per acre. Tax IDs 789-679-2472 and 6083; 789-680-0739 and 5623. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 19SNO566 and stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mr. John Bolton was present and agreed the proffered conditions are reasonable under state law. Mr. Carroll stated affordable housing is sorely needed in the county and he thanked the applicant for bringing the case forward. In response to Mr. Winslow's question relative to the amount of time necessary to complete the project, Mr. Bolton stated he anticipates groundbreaking to occur in the first or second quarter of 2021 and a twelve- to fifteen -month construction cycle from there. Ms. Haley called for public comment. Ms. Renae Eldred expressed her support for the project and asked the Board to consider accepting a donation of property from the applicant between this development and Bensley Park in order to provide pedestrian access to the park for residents without them having to walk along Drewrys Bluff Road. Ms. Sonia Smith expressed her concerns relative to the impact of this project on schools, specifically Falling Creek Middle School which is over capacity and Meadowbrook High School which is at capacity. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing. Mr. Ingle stated he attended a public meeting and citizens were in favor of the case. He noted concerns with the schools and a need to work with the School Board to develop plans. He then made a motion to approve Case 19SNO566 and accept the proffered conditions. Mr. Holland seconded the motion and noted although this case is in the Bermuda District, Falling Creek Middle School and Meadowbrook High School lie in the Dale District and are impacted by the project. He stated he would like a new Falling Creek Middle School. He read the comments in the staff report from Fire and EMS regarding response times. In response to Mr. Holland's questions relative to response time goals, Deputy Chief Tim McKay stated the goal is reasonable and explained that the standards derive from the National Fire Protection Association Best Practices combined with county -specific information such as topography, traffic, and road systems. He provided details about the calculation of response time goals and clarified that a response time goal is a self-imposed goal but it does not mean the department cannot provide adequate fire protection or a 20-55 1/22/2020 9 P] P] A timely response. He noted the department is always looking for opportunities to improve response times and get closer to that goal. He stressed the importance of the Fire and Life Safety division's involvement in plans review to ensure fire protection systems are installed and properly working in order to give the department extra response time. In response to Mr. Holland's question relative to whether there are operational costs that need to be considered during the budget process, Chief McKay stated the department is always looking at building additional fire stations to close the gaps and shorten travel distances and ensuring there is adequate staffing. Mr. Holland expressed an interest in seeing staffing needs as they relate to meeting the goal. In response to Mr. Ingle's question, Chief McKay discussed computer modeling to calculate response times. Discussion ensued relative to response times, possible causes for delay in those response times, and moving fire stations for better deployment. Mr. Winslow noted the impact on schools in the area of this project are a concern. Mr. Holland stated it is important to consider the increased operational and capital costs associated with projects, and school overcrowding must be addressed in the CIP. Ms. Haley stated these conversations need to continue with the new School Board members, and she pointed out that some concerns are not within the purview of this Board. She welcomed input from the School Board during the next capital campaign. Ms. Haley called for a vote on Mr. Ingle's motion, seconded by Mr. Holland, for the Board to approve Case 19SN0566 and accept the following proffered conditions: Better Housing Coalition (the Developer) in this zoning case, proffers that the development of the property consisting of four (4) parcels with 16.8 total acres (the Project Site) will be developed according to the following conditions. In the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the Developer, the proffers shall immediately be null and void and of no further notice or effect. The application contains three (3) exhibits: Exhibit A - Conceptual Site Layout prepared by Arnold Design Studio and dated Nov. 4, 2019 Exhibit B - Building Elevations prepared by Arnold Design Studio and dated Oct. 3, 2019 20-56 1/22/2020 Exhibit C - Photos of existing building types at Winchester Green. 1. Master Plan -The Textual Statement last revised on December 4, 2019 and the Conceptual site Layout (Exhibit A) shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) 2. Number of Dwelling Units - The total number of dwelling units on the Project Site shall not exceed 164 multi -family units. (P) 3. Unit Types - The dwelling units shall consist of no more than 200-. one -bedroom units and no more than 20% three-bedroom units. The remaining units shall be two-bedroom units. (P and BI) 4. Number of Units - The maximum number of units per floor shall be 25 (three story building) or 35 (if it is a two story building). (P and BI) 5. Architecture - The architectural style shall generally be consistent with the buildings in Exhibit B. Each unit shall have a functional balcony or porch with a minimum depth of six (6) feet. The new buildings shall be complimentary in style to the existing buildings within the Winchester Green development as shown in Exhibit C. (P and BI) 6. Building Facades and Foundations - Exterior building facades shall be a minimum of eighty-five (85) percent brick with the remaining facade treatment to be cementitious board siding. Building foundations shall be brick. (P and BI) 7. Construction Standards - Buildings shall be EarthCraft Gold, NGBS Silver or Enterprise Green certified. Verification of such certification shall be submitted to the county with the building permit application for each building. (P and BI) 8. Pedestrian Design - Five foot wide sidewalks shall be constructed throughout as part of the development Project Site. Sidewalks shall be constructed around all buildings. A paved pedestrian/bike path shall be constructed that will directly connect the Project Site to the Winchester Green development via Bensley Commons Boulevard and terminate at Jefferson Davis Highway. The exact location, treatment, and design shall be determined at the time of site review. (P) 9. Recreational Amenities - A. Indoor amenities - A minimum of 750 square feet of indoor activity area, open and easily accessible to building residents for resident activities shall be provided. 20-57 1/22/2020 PI R7 PJ CEJ B. Outdoor amenities shall be provided recreational space. a hardscaped focal benches designed to two (2) playground families with conve areas. (P) A minimum of 1.6 acres for active and passive These areas shall include point with, at a minimum, facilitate gatherings and areas designed to provide nient access to safe play 10. Utilities - Public water and wastewater systems shall be used. Any existing county water facilities adversely impacted by the proposed development shall be relocated by the Developer, subject to Utilities Department review and approval. (U) 11. Landscaping - Landscaping, including foundation plantings and street trees, shall be provided around the perimeter of the building, driveways, and parking areas. Landscaping shall be designed to minimize the predominance of building mass and paved areas. Native and drought resistant plants shall be installed in parking areas. The exact design, number and species of plantings shall be shown on a landscaping plan to be approved by the Planning Department at the time of plan review. (P) 12. Light Poles - Light poles on the Property shall have a maximum height of twenty (20) feet. Sidewalks, walkways and other pedestrian areas not otherwise illuminated by light poles shall be lit by pedestrian -style lights in accordance with a lighting plan to be approved at the time of plan review. (P) 13. HVAC Screening - Ground -level HVAC equipment shall be screened from view from streets and public areas within the Property in a manner approved at the time of plan review. (P) 14. Environmental - A vapor barrier shall be installed under the concrete foundation of each building. (EE and BI) 15. Stormwater - Stormwater/Best Management Practice facilities shall be designed to retain the 2 -year and 10 -year post development runoff rates and release at the 2-uyear and 10 -year pre -development rate for that area that drains to the southwest to No Name Creek. This may be modified at the time of plans review if a greater release rate has no effect on the flooding of Alcott Road, as it currently exists, to the extent acceptable to the Chesterfield County Environmental Engineering Department. (EE) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-58 1/22/2020 "PlahNiiTiir1 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, the Idlewood Properties Inc (project commonly known as Waterford) requests rezoning from Light Industrial (I-1) to General Industrial (I-2) with conditional use planned development relative to uses and amendment of zoning district map on 10 acres fronting 400 feet on the north line of Tredegar Lake Parkway, 385 feet west of Waterford Lake Drive. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Regional Mixed- use maximum 20 dwelling units per acre. Tax ID's 729-691-8579 part of 730-690-2686. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 19SN0616 and stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Mr. Brennen Keene was present representing the applicant. He stated Idlewood Properties Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tredegar Corporation which is a corporate citizen of the county. He provided a brief history of the development. Mr. Gillies noted there is an addendum to this case removing section 2.D. in the Textual Statement because it is the exact same language contained in section 2.C. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Winslow declared a conflict in this case because his wife is employed by the public auditing company which is currently auditing Tredegar Corporation. On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board approved Case 19SN0616 and accepted the following proffered conditions: The Developer (the "Developer") in this zoning case, pursuant to §15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the development of the Property known as Chesterfield County Tax Identification Number 729-691-8579 and a part of 730-690-2686 (the "Property") under consideration will be developed according to the following conditions if, and only if, the rezoning request for rezoning to I-2, with a conditional use planned development (CUPD), are granted. In the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the Developer, the proffers and conditions shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. If the zoning is granted, these proffers and conditions will supersede all proffers and conditions now existing on the Property. 20-59 1/22/2020 P7 lk P] c. A 1. Master December (P) Plan. The textual statement last revised 9, 2019, shall be considered the Master Plan. 2. Utilities. A. The development shall be served county water and county wastewater. B. The Developer shall submit and receive approval from the Utilities Department an overall utilities master plan indicating the on-site and off-site utilities improvements necessary to support the development prior to the submission of any schematic, tentative subdivision, construction, or site plan on the property. C. The Developer shall perform a hydraulic analysis of the county's water and wastewater systems to verify adequate capacity exists as part of the overall utilities master plan. Any capacity related improvements required to support the demands of this development will be reflected on the overall utilities master plan and the responsibility of the Developer. (U) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, and Holland. Nays: None. Abstain: Winslow. 20SNO520 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Joni Chrystle Roberts requests conditional use to permit a family day care home and amendment of zoning district map in a Residential (R-7) District on 0.2 acre known as 13304 Farm Crest Court. 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 2.0 dwellings per acre). Tax ID 731-678-9030. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SNO520 which is a renewal of a family day care home approved in 2014. He stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Ms. Joni Roberts, the applicant, was present. She discussed her calling to be caregiver and asked the Board to approve her request. Ms. Haley called for public comment. Ms. Haleah Roberts, Ms. Roberts' daughter, expressed her support for approval of the case, noting the center is fully in compliance. Ms. Corrinne Taylor, whose twin daughters attend Ms. Roberts' daycare, spoke in favor of the case. 1/22/2020 Ms. Rosemary Hardwich, a neighbor of Ms. Roberts, stated that she has no concerns with Ms. Roberts' daycare and there is no extra traffic. She further stated she is happy to know there is a licensed daycare facility there. She asked the Board to approve the case. Ms. Hannah Campbell, Ms. Roberts' daughter, stated her mother's daycare adds value to the county and it is a home away from home for the children. She urged the Board to approve the case. Ms. Haley Reilly, Ms. Roberts' daughter, spoke in support of the case. She noted Ms. Roberts has held a state license for twenty-five years and her daycare is subject to unannounced inspection at any time. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing. Board members thanked Ms. Roberts for her positive impact on children. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board approved Case 20SN0520 and accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. Non -Transferable Ownership. This conditional use approval shall be granted to and for Howard and Joni Roberts, exclusively, and shall not be transferable or 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 this use. (P) 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 applicants own children, at any one time. (P) 5. 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 (4) 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) 6. Employees. No more than one (1) employee shall be permitted to work on the premises, other than family member employees that live on the premises. (P) 20-61 1/22/2020 LI RE L7 9 r� [A 7. Hours of Operation. Hours and days of operation shall be limited to Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. There shall be no Saturday or Sunday operation of this use. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 7ncuns9i In Bermuda Magisterial District, Lisa Stinnette requests conditional use to permit a temporary office trailer and amendment of zoning district map in a General Industrial (I- 2) District on 5.4 acres located at 5913 Nena Grove Lane. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for General Business. Tax ID 779-650-5140. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SN0521 and stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered condition. Mr. J. W. Hall was present representing the applicant. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board approved Case 20SN0521 and accepted the following proffered condition: Use. Use of the temporary office trailer shall be limited to office space associated with a general contractor's business for a period not to exceed four (4) years from the date of approval. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. Mr. Winslow asked staff to review uses such as temporary office trailers which could be handled differently in the new zoning ordinance. Mr. Gillies stated it is on the list of items to be addressed in the new zoning ordinance. 20SN0546 In Midlothian Magisterial District, Matthew T. Goodwin, Woodlands Real Estate, LLC and Ronald Milligan requests amendment to zoning approval (Case 06SN0155) relative to development standards and amendment of zoning district map on 1.1 acres zoned Regional Business District (C-4) fronting 600 feet on the north line of Koger Center Boulevard, 580 feet east of Mall Drive. Density will be controlled by zoning 20-62 1/22/2020 conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Regional Mixed use (20 dwellings per acre or greater) . Tax IDs 742-711-8955 and 743-711-0409. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SN0546 and stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval and acceptance of the proffered condition. Mr. Rob Benaicha was present representing the applicant and stated the proffered condition is reasonable under state law. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved Case 20SN0546 and accepted the following proffered condition: The applicant hereby proffers the following, amending Proffered Condition 8.a. of Case 06SN0155: 8.a. Direct vehicular access from the Property to Koger Center Boulevard shall be limited to Mall Drive Extended and three (3) entrances/exits. Mall Drive Extended shall align the existing crossover on Koger Center Boulevard that serves Mall Drive. All other direct entrances/exits to Koger Center Boulevard shall be limited to right - turns -in and right -turns -out only. The exact location of these accesses shall be approved by the Transportation Department. (T) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 9nRMR49 In Midlothian Magisterial District, Columbia Gas of Virginia requests conditional use to permit a utility use requiring a structure and amendment of zoning district map in a Residential (R-7) District on 3.9 acres known as 12718 Midlothian Turnpike. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Neighborhood Office use. Tax ID 734-708-4212. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SN0549 and stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to the conditions. He noted there is an addendum to the case which corrects the date on Exhibit B from a July date to December 20, 2019. Mr. Tom Houston was present representing the applicant. Ms. Haley called for public comment. 20-63 1/22/2020 nj J c, There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board approved Case 20SN0549 subject to the following conditions: 1. Use. This Conditional Use shall be limited to the operation of a Point of Delivery (P.O.D.) station for natural gas distribution. (P) 2. Conceptual Plan. Development of the property shall generally conform to the Conceptual Plan prepared by Townes Engineering, dated July 5, 2019, and titled "Midlothian POD Site: Site Exhibit" (Exhibit B), with respect to the location of site improvements. (P) 3. Fencing. A fence of a minimum of eight (8) feet in height shall be provided along the perimeter of the Point of Delivery station as generally shown on the Site Renderings (Exhibit C) If such fence is a chain link fence, a privacy screen (mesh tarp or windscreen) shall be provided as part of such a fence as may be approved at the time of site plan review. Such privacy screen shall be located on the northern, western, and southern sides of the fence and shall be earth tone in color, such as dark black, green or brown. Any portion of such fence with the privacy screen shall also be powder coated an earth tone color, such as dark black, green or brown. Such fence and privacy screen shall be maintained in good visual condition. (P) 4. Buffers - Northern and Western Property Boundaries. A fifty (50) foot buffer shall be provided along the northern property boundary and a twenty-five (25) foot buffer shall be provided along the western property boundary. Such buffers shall comply with the requirements of the ZO except that these buffers shall be planted at a density of 2.0 times Landscape C. In addition, within the northern buffer, supplemental evergreen tree and shrub plantings shall be installed as determined necessary by the Planning Department at the time of site plan review to mitigate views of the facility from the north. (P) 5. Landscaping - Midlothian Turnpike. Within the setback from Midlothian Turnpike, existing vegetation shall be maintained and supplemented, as needed, to comply with the Ordinance requirements for 2.0 times Landscape C. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-64 1/22/2020 20SNO550 In Midlothian Magisterial District, Chesterfield Economic Development Authority (project commonly known as Stonebridge) requests amendment of zoning approval (Case 07SN0333) relative to the maximum number of dwelling units and amendment of zoning district map in a Regional Business (C-4) District on 18.2 acres, fronting 450 feet on the west line of Starview Lane, 1100 feet north of Cloverleaf Drive; also located 450 feet off the south line of Midlothian Turnpike, 340 feet east of Granite Spring Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Regional Mixed use. Tax IDs 764-706-4839 and 6004. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SNO550 and stated the amendment is to increase residential density by 680 multi -family units. He noted this is a keystone final piece for the Stonebridge project. He stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to the condition. Mr. Garrett Hart, Director of Economic Development, was present representing the applicant. Ms. Haley called for public comment. Ms. Sonia Smith expressed concerns relative to the impact of the project on schools, noting A.M. Davis Elementary School is currently over capacity. Mr. Freddy Boisseau expressed his concerns relative to using the Economic Development Authority as a developer. He stated his objection to approval of the case. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing. In response to Ms. Haley's question, Mr. Hart confirmed that this case is an amendment of zoning approval relative to maximum permitted residential density. Ms. Haley made a motion to approve Case 20SNO550 subject to the condition, which was seconded by Mr. Holland. In response to Mr. Holland's question, Mr. Hart stated the project would be an additional use of apartments and there would be over -shop residential associated with the hotel and convention center development. Mr. Holland cited Stonebridge as a classic example of a revitalization project with an astounding economic impact in the wake of the Cloverleaf Mall failure, and he applauded the Economic Development Authority for being a catalyst to make the development happen. Ms. Haley clarified that the Economic Development Authority is acting only as the landowner, and Shamin will be the developer. 20-65 1/22/2020 P] P] 14 CA Ms. Haley called for a vote on her motion, seconded by Mr. Holland, for the Board to approve Case 20SN0550 subject to the following condition: With the approval of this request, Textual Statement Item IV(A)(3) of Case 07SN0733 shall be amended as stated below. All other conditions of Case 07SN0733 shall remain in force and effect. The total number of residential dwelling units on the property shall not exceed 680 dwelling units. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20SN0551 In Midlothian Magisterial District, Jennifer Kielb requests conditional use planned development to permit a deck within a buffer and amendment of zoning district map in a Residential (R-12) District on 0.4 acre known as 2302 Cranbeck Circle. Density is maximum 4.0 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Suburban Residential II use (2.0 to 4.0 dwellings per acre). Tax IDs 743-715-0454. Mr. Gillies presented a summary of Case 20SN0551 and stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to the conditions. He further stated this is another type of zoning request staff will try to address in the zoning ordinance rewrite. The applicant, Mr. Mike Kielb, was present. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Ms. Haley, seconded by Mr. Ingle, the Board approved Case 20SN0551 subject to the following conditions: 1. Use and Location. The proposed deck, as depicted on Exhibit A, shall be permitted to be constructed within the 50 -foot buffer. No additional structures or improvements shall be permitted within the buffer. (P) 2. Fence. The existing privacy fence shall be maintained in a location generally adjacent to the rear property boundary to reduce the visibility of the deck from Cranbeck Road. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 20-66 1/22/2020 20SN0527 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Emerson Companies, LLC requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) District to Residential (R-12) District plus conditional use planned development to permit exceptions to ordinance requirements and amendment of zoning district map on 3.3 acres fronting 350 feet on the east line of Centralia Station Road, 700 feet south of Centralia Road. Density will be controlled by zoning conditions or ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for Residential (maximum of 1 dwelling unit per acre). Tax ID 786-662-4995. Mr. Josh Gillespie presented a summary of Case 20SN0527 and stated the Planning Commission and staff recommend approval subject to the proffered conditions. Mr. Kerry Hutcherson was present representing the applicant and stated the proffered conditions are reasonable under state law. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. In response to Mr. Ingle's question regarding the addition for the homeowner's association, Mr. Hutcherson stated the applicant intends to include the lots in the Centralia Station neighborhood by a supplemental declaration to be recorded at some point before construction has occurred. On motion of Mr. Ingle, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved Case 20SN0527 and accepted the following proffered 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. Road Cash Proffer. The Developer/Subdivider/Assignee shall pay $9,400 per dwelling unit (the "Road 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 building permit for a dwelling unit unless state law modifies the timing of the payment. (T and B & M) 20-67 1/22/2020 P] 9 lk �'R A 2. Architectural Design Standards. The Property shall be developed in accordance with the following Architectural/Design Elements, which are considered minimum standards. A. Style and Form: 1. Architectural Styles. The architectural styles featured on the Property shall use forms and elements compatible with those in the Centralia Station Subdivision, located in Chesterfield County, Virginia. 2. Variation in Front Elevations. The following restrictions are designed to maximize architectural variety of the houses. a. Buildings with the same front elevation may not be located adjacent to, directly across from, or diagonally across the street from each other on the same street. b. Variation in the front elevation to address the paragraph above may not be achieved by simply mirroring the facade but may be accomplished by providing at least two (2) of the following architectural changes: i. adding or removing a porch or covered entry or increasing or decreasing the length of the porch or entry ii. varying the location and/or style of a front facing gable(s) iii. alternating the location of the garage iv. providing different materials and/or siding types on at least 50% of the elevation V. providing a different roof type/roof line B. Exterior Facades. Dwelling facades shall be constructed with brick, stone, stucco, synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.), or lap siding. Where lap siding is used it shall either be manufactured from natural wood or cement fiber board or shall be premium quality vinyl siding with a minimum wall thickness of .044 inches. Synthetic Stucco (E.I.F.S.) siding shall be finished in a smooth, sand or level texture, and no rough textures are permitted. Dutch lap vinyl siding is prohibited. 20-68 1/22/2020 C. Foundations. All exposed foundations shall be constructed of brick, stone, or a combination thereof, except that stucco or synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.) foundations may be used where stucco or synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.) is used on the remainder of the dwelling. D. Roof Materials. Roofing material shall be dimensional architectural shingles or standing -seam metal with a minimum 30 -year warranty. All flashing shall be copper or pre -finished aluminum (bronze or black). E. Porches and Stoops. All front entry stoops and front porches shall be covered and constructed with either a continuous foundation wall or by masonry piers and lattice screening. If a continuous foundation wall is used to support a front entry stoop or front porch, the foundation wall shall be constructed of the same foundation material as is used on the remainder of the house (e.g., brick, stone, a combination of brick and stone, stucco, or synthetic stucco (E.I.F.S.)). Front porches shall be a minimum of five (5), deep. Handrails and railings shall be finished wood or metal railing with vertical pickets, stainless steel cables, sawn balusters, or better quality materials. Pickets shall be supported on top and bottom rails that span between columns. F. Fireplaces, Chimneys and Flues. 1. Chimneys. Chimneys must have masonry foundations. Siding other than masonry is permitted over chimney sections at roof planes or facades above the foundation level. Cantilevered chimneys are not permitted. The width and depth of chimneys shall be appropriately sized in proportion to the size and height of the dwelling unit. For gas fireplaces, metal flues may be used on the roof. 2. Direct Vent Fireplaces: Direct vent gas fireplace boxes that protrude beyond the exterior plane of the dwelling unit are not permitted on front facades or corner - side facades. All the exterior materials and finishes used to enclose the fireplace box must match the adjacent facade. (P and BI) 3. Driveways/Front Walks. A. Private Driveways. All private driveways serving residential uses shall be hardscaped (which hardscaping shall be constructed of `d 1/22/2020 P1 �J P] c, A 14 either asphalt, brushed concrete, stamped concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, or decorative pavers). Private driveways shall not require curb and gutter. B. Front Walks. Front walks shall be provided to the front entrance of each dwelling unit. Front walks shall be hardscaped (which hardscaping shall be constructed of either brushed concrete, stamped concrete, exposed aggregate concrete, or decorative pavers). Front walks shall be a minimum of three (3) feet wide. (P) 4. Garages. A. All units shall have, at a minimum, an attached garage. B. Both front -loaded and corner side - loaded garages 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, arches, columns, keystones, eyebrows, etc.). Flat panel garage doors are prohibited. C. Front -loaded garages shall be permitted to extend past the front line of the main dwelling provided that the architectural treatment of the garage (with respect to fenestration and foundation treatment) generally conforms to the example photo attached hereto as Exhibit A. (P and BI) 5. Landscaping and Yards. A. Front Foundation Planting Bed: Foundation planting is 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 four (4) feet wide from the dwelling 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 feet apart, and planting beds may include spreading groundcovers. Unit corners shall be visually softened with vertical accent shrubs (4-5 feet 20-70 1/22/2020 in height) or small evergreen trees (6-8 feet in height) at the time of planting. B. Front Yard Tree: At least one (1) tree per lot shall be planted or retained. A tree shall be planted or retained on both street frontages on corner lots. The front yard tree shall be a large deciduous tree and have a minimum caliper of two and one-half (2.5) inches. Native trees shall be permitted to have a minimum caliper of two (2) inches. (P) 6. Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Units and Whole 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) 7. Density. The number of dwelling units shall not exceed seven (7). (P) 8. Minimum Dwelling Unit Size. The minimum gross floor area for each dwelling unit shall be 2,000 square feet. (P and BI) 9. Connection to County Utilities. The applicant or developer shall connect the Property to County water and sewer at time of construction. (P) 10. Master Plan. The Textual Statement last revised December 9, 2019 shall be considered the Master Plan. (P) Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 17. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17.A. TO CONSIDER THE EXERCISE OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PERMANENT SEWER EASEMENTS, A WATER EASEMENT, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS FOR THE JOHNSON CREEK FORCE MAIN PROJECT Mr. Dean Sasek stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the exercise of eminent domain for the acquisition of permanent sewer easements, a water easement, and temporary construction easements for the Johnson Creek Force Main Project. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board authorized the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain for the acquisition of permanent sewer easements, a water easement, and temporary construction easements for the 20-71 1/22/2020 P7 P] P] (6. CEJ Johnson Creek Force Main Project, including the filing of certificates so construction may begin prior to eminent domain proceedings for the following properties: 2127 Burgess Road, Joshua C. Smith; 2106, 2108, 2112, 2124, 2130, 2134, 2138 Burgess Road, John B. and Rebecca S. Bishop; 2050 Burgess Road, Melissa D. Walker; 2501 Bermuda Hundred Road & 13911 Enon Church Road, Enon, LLC; 1901 Bermuda Hundred Road, Richmond Memorial Parks, Inc.; 1524 Irvenway Lane, James R. and Phyllis B. Carpenter; 1601 Bermuda Hundred Road, G. Dallas Coons Estate; and 2400 E. Hundred Road, Josephine K. Nye, et al., heirs of H. M. Frazier. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 17.B. TO CONSIDER THE CONVEYANCE OF COUNTY PROPERTY AT 2900 BERMUDA HUNDRED ROAD TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD Mr. Dean Sasek stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the conveyance of county property at 2900 Bermuda Hundred Road to the Economic Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield. He further stated this parcel serves as access to the Brown and Williamson conservation area and the conveyance is subject to replacement access being granted to the county. Ms. Haley called for public comment. Mr. Freddy Boisseau expressed his opposition to the transfer of the property to the Economic Development Authority. Ms. Haley closed the public hearing On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board approved the conveyance of approximately 2.2 acres of county property at 2900 Bermuda Hundred Road to the Economic Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield, subject to replacement access being granted to the county, and authorized the Chairman of the Board and County Administrator to execute the deed. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 17.C. TO CONSIDER THE EXERCISE OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A PERMANENT WATER EASEMENT FOR THE COWAN ROAD WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Mr. Dean Sasek stated this date and time has been advertised for a public hearing for the Board to consider the exercise of eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent water easement for the Cowan Road Waterline Improvements Project which is a rehabilitation project to replace an aging waterline. He further stated staff has reached an agreement with the landowners for the acquisition; however, it is 20-72 1/22/2020 necessary to proceed with eminent domain due to staff's inability to obtain consent from the landowners' lender. In response to Mr. Winslow's question, Mr. Sasek stated staff has attempted to work with the lender since July 2019, and the lender referred staff to Fannie Mae. He further stated staff has been unable to get a response from Fannie Mae since October 2019. Discussion ensued relative to staff's efforts to obtain consent from Fannie Mae. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Holland, seconded by Mr. Winslow, the Board authorized the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent water easement for the Cowan Road Waterline Improvements Project, including the filing of a certificate so construction may begin prior to eminent domain proceedings for the following property: 8025 Stiles Road, Ronald E. and Thelma J. Parrish. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 17.D. TO CONSIDER CODE AMENDMENT RELATIVE TO UPPER SWIFT CREEK TREE PRESERVATION Mr. Ray Cash provided the Board with a summary of the proposed ordinance amendments relative to Upper Swift Creek Tree Preservation. He stated the purpose of the ordinance is to adopt revised tree preservation standards in the Upper Swift Creek Watershed; to address protection of water quality; and to bring the county into compliance with the state code. He further stated both the Planning Commission and staff recommend adoption of the amendments. At Mr. Winslow's request, Mr. Scott Smedley, Director of Environmental Engineering, discussed how the ordinance came to fruition and other measures being taken to address water quality concerns in the Upper Swift Creek Reservoir. He stated tree canopies significantly reduce stormwater run-off and associated pollutants caused by impervious areas such as streets and roads in residential subdivisions. He discussed an ongoing project to add aeration to existing BMPs around the reservoir which reduces pollution going into the reservoir. Ms. Haley called for public comment. There being no one to address the issue, the public hearing was closed. On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adopted the following ordinance: 20-73 1/22/2020 P] E 9 A c. A AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD,1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 19.1-61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76,19.1-81, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-246, 19.1-247, 19.1-249, 19.1-250, 19.1-252, 19.1-306 & 19.1-545 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO UPPER SWIFT CREEK TREE PRESERVATION BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19.1-61, 19.1-66, 19.1-71, 19.1-76, 19.1- 81, 19.1-92, 19.1-97, 19.1-246, 19.1-247, 19.1-249, 19.1-250, 19.1-252, 19.1-306 & 19.1-545 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted, to read as follows: 20-74 1/22/2020 In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-88 District. rr Notes for Table 19.1-61.A. A. Lot and Building Standards. Table 19.1-61.A. ReqLlired Coiidltioiis [Z-88 District A. Lot Standards Setbacks --Generally, 1. Lot area and width Encroachments for a. Area (square feet 88,000[1][2] b. Width feet Bay or Upper Swift 1 Fronting on major arterial 300 2 Fronting on other road 150 Minimum setbacks shall 2. Lot coverage maximum % 20 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for feet dwelling purposes required lot width at the 1. Family subdivision lot 15 [7] 2. Other lots[3] area shall be a minimum a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 property line. c. Other roads[4] 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet [51 1. Front ard[6] a. Non cul-de-sac 75 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 40 3. Corner side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open space or common area['] 40 b. Other lot 75 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 50 b. Through lot 75 D. Principal Building Heights maximum [g] 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-75 [1] For lots not having direct access onto a major arterial road, lot area may be reduced to 65,340 square feet or 43,560 square feet with use of public water and wastewater. If lot area is reduced, the maximum number of lots permitted shall be based upon the calculation as shown in Figure 19.1-61.A. [2] Subject to the provisions of Chapter 12 relative to use of private onsite water and wastewater facilities, the area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV. Division 2. 1/22/2020 Ic IC P] A CEJ In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-40 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. I able 11). 1 -66. A. Rewili-ecl Coiiciltloiis R-40 I)Istnct A. Lint Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 40,000111121 b. Width feet 150 2. Lot coverage maximum % 20 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet [31 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads['] 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet [51 1. Front ard161 a. Non cul-de-sac 60 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 20 3. Corner side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/l/1:974 1) Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open space or common area E71 30 2 Other lot 55 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 30 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 50 b. Through lot 60 D. Princi Building Heights maximum 181 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Aecessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-76 Notes for Table 19.1-66.A. [ 1 ] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-25 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. 20-77 Notes for Table 19.1-71.A. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 P7 P] D A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 25,00011][21 b. Width feet 120 2. Lot coverage maximum % 25 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet [31 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads['[ 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks (feet)['] 1. Front ard[61 a. Non cul-de-sac 50 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 15 3. Corner side yard a. Through lot, back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [71 25 b. Other lot 45 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 40 b. Through lot 50 D. Principal Building Heights maximum [81 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-77 Notes for Table 19.1-71.A. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 P7 P] D (awe A 14 In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-15 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. 20-78 Notes for Table 19.1- 76.A. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 A. of �tandds 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 15,000[1][2[ b. Width feet 100 2. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B.. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet [3j 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads [41 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet 151 1. Frontyard['] a. Non cul-de-sac 40 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard a. Lots recorded after 12/11/1945 15 b. Lots recorded on, or prior to, 12/11/1945 10 3. Corner side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/1/1974 1) Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [7] 20 2 Other lot 35 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 20 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 40 D. Princi al Building Heights maximum [g� 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. 3. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-78 Notes for Table 19.1- 76.A. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-12 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. 'Fable 19.1 -9 I.A. RCCIL111-CCI Collditloiis R- 12 District A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width a. Area (square feet 12,000111121 b. Width feet 90 2. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet [31 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads141 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet 151 1. Front yard161 a. Non cul-de-sac 35 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 10 3. Corner side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or common area [71 20 b. Other lot 30 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 30 D. Principal Building Heights maximum [81 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-79 Notes for Table 19.1-81.A. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1-306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 P] P] A In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-9 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. 20-80 01 Notes for Table 19.1-92.A. 00. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1- 306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 7Lotarea and width a. Area (square feet 9,00011, [21 b. Width feet 75 2. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling feet [31 purposes 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads [41 50 C. Princi Building Setbacks feet [sl 1. Front ard[61 a. Non cul-de-sac 30 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 25 2. Interior side yard 7.5 3. Corner side yard a. Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing to open sace or Common area [7] 15 b. Other lot 25 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot 30 D. Principal Building Heights maximum [gl 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Design Districts Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. Accessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 �] I 20-80 01 Notes for Table 19.1-92.A. 00. [1] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1- 306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks -- Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [7] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [8] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. 1/22/2020 In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the conditions specified in this section shall be met in an R-7 District. A. Lot and Building Standards. 20-81 1/22/2020 P1 P1 D A. Lot Standards 1. Lot area and width for lots recorded prior to 1/1/1989 which received tentative plat approval prior to 11/13/1985 and such plat has been properly renewed. a. Area (square feet 7,000111 b. Width feet 50 2. Lot area and width for lots where tentative approval is 11/13/1985 received on or after a. Area (square feet 9,000[1][21 b. Width feet 75 3. Lot coverage maximum % 30 B. Road Frontage for lots intended for dwelling purposes feet [3] 1. Family subdivision lot 15 2. Other lots a. Permanent cul-de-sac 30 b. Radius of a loop street 30 c. Other roads['] 50 C. Principal Building Setbacks feet [5] 1. Front yard except for Ettrick Special Design District[6][71 a. Non cul-de-sac 30 b. Permanent cul-de-sac 125 2. Interior side yard a. Lots recorded after 12/11/1945 7.5 b. Lots recorded on, or prior to, 12/11/1945 5 3. Corner side yard a. Lots recorded on, or after, 4/1/1974 1) Through lot, lot back to back with another corner lot, or lot backing too ens ace or common area['] 15 2 Other lot 25 b. Lots recorded prior to 4/1/1974 15 4. Rear yard a. Non through lot 25 b. Through lot191 30 D. Principal Building Heights maximum 1101 1. Midlothian Core and Chester Corridor East Special Lesser of 2.5 stories or 30 Design Districts feet 2. Other Lesser of 3 stories or 40 feet E. ccessory Building Requirements Subject to Section 19.1-304 20-81 1/22/2020 P1 P1 D A3, Notes for Table 19.1-97.A. [ 1 ] Lot area requirements may be impacted by the availability of public utilities. Refer to Chapter 12. [2] The area of a lot which shares a common boundary with a buffer, bikeway or tree canopy preservation area may be reduced in accordance with Sec. 19.1- 306. [3] For flag lots, road frontage may be reduced to 30 feet. [4] Frontage on the terminus of a stub street does not meet the requirements for road frontage unless through the preliminary plat review process it is determined that extension of the stub street is not needed to serve future development. [5] Setbacks may be impacted by Buffer, Setbacks --Generally, Permitted Yard Encroachments for Principal Buildings, Floodplain, Chesapeake Bay or Upper Swift Creek Watershed regulations. [6] For lots located in Ettrick Special Design District: • Between contiguous developed lots, front yard setback may be reduced to the least front yard setback of any principal building on any adjacent lot; or • For other developed lots, front yard setback may be reduced to the front yard setback of any principal building on the same side of the street and within 200 feet of the lot. [7] Minimum setbacks shall be increased where necessary to obtain the required lot width at the front building line. [8] Open space or common area shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide for the entire length of the rear property line. [9] For lots located in Ettrick Special Design District: • Between contiguous developed lots, through yard setback may be reduced to the least through yard setback of any principal building on any adjacent lot; or • For other developed lots, through yard setback may be reduced to the through yard setback of any principal building on the same side of the street and within 200 feet of the lot. [10] Height limits are subject to Article IV, Division 2. Landscape plans shall be submitted to comply with the requirements of this chapter. The director of planning may allow the phasing of landscape installation at the time of plan review. 000 B. Detailed Landscape Plan. A detailed plan shall be submitted for approval prior to the release of a temporary occupancy permit or recordation of a subdivision final plat. Detailed landscape plans shall be drawn to scale and show the following information: 1. information as required on a conceptual plan; 20-82 1/22/2020 2. plant species and sizes for each plant type; and 3. details, notes and plan specific requirements. C. Upper Swift Creek Tree Canopy Plans. Within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, where a minimum tree canopy is required, the following shall be submitted: 1. Master Tree Canopy Plan. Preliminary subdivision plats and any development having multiple phases or sections shall include a tree canopy master plan for review and approval with initial submittal. The tree canopy master plan shall serve as a guide to be followed for each site and construction plan, and shall be updated during the development of the overall project. Any revisions to the plan during the development shall be submitted to the planning department for approval. The plan shall graphically delineate areas to be set aside to satisfy tree canopy requirements and the means by which such requirements will be satisfied. For subdivision plats which received approval prior to December 11, 2013 and which required compliance with tree canopy requirements for each subdivision section, then, upon submission of a tree canopy master plan, the director of planning may grant approval to comply with tree canopy requirements on an overall subdivision basis. 2. Detailed Tree Canopy Plan. In conjunction with each site plan and subdivision construction plan submission, a detailed tree canopy plan shall be submitted to the planning department for approval. Upon completion of grading or construction activity, if it is determined that the quality of remaining trees, slopes, drainage or other issues have impacted the tree canopy requirements as shown on the detailed plan, a revised detailed plan shall be submitted for approval prior to the recordation of a subdivision final plat or release of temporary occupancy permit. Such plans shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements for detailed landscape plans per 19.1-246.B.. 1. Preservation. Existing trees and shrubs within required setbacks along roads and buffers shall be retained to provide continuity, improve buffering, and minimize new landscaping that requires watering. At time of plan review, removal of existing healthy vegetation may be approved to accommodate vehicular access or utilities that run generally perpendicular through the setback or buffer, or as necessary to accommodate healthy vegetative growth. 2. Credits for Preservation. Healthy existing vegetation may be credited toward landscaping requirements provided it is reasonably distributed throughout the setback, buffer or other required landscape area. 3. Root Protection Zone during Construction. Land disturbance other than for access or utilities shall be allowed in setbacks along roads provided that such disturbance is no closer to the tree than the root protection zone. The root protection zone is a one foot radius around the tree for each inch of trunk diameter measured 4.5 feet above grade. However, under no circumstances shall the root protection zone extend beyond the road setback limits. 4. Upper Swift Creek Watershed Tree Canopy. Tree preservation shall be required in compliance with Sec. 19.1-545 within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed. 20-83 1/22/2020 1k lk P] 14 �Z•Z�] B. Water Supply for Sites Requiring Site Plan Approval. Except as specified herein, a readily available water supply shall be provided for required landscaped areas. The exceptions are as follows: 1. In I-2 and I-3 Districts, a readily available water supply shall only be required in the setback along roads which accommodate or are intended to accommodate through traffic; 2. Landscaped areas in stormwater management or BMP facilities; 3. Landscaped areas planted with drought tolerant plants listed in the Chesterfield County Plant Materials List; or 4. Properties that provide a continuous maintenance, watering, and replacement program for plant materials with a reputable landscape maintenance company for a minimum of 3 years. C. Landscape Replacement. 1. With the exception of trees required to meet the canopy requirements within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, required landscaping which is removed, becomes unhealthy or dies, or is pollarded shall be replaced during the next planting season. 2. Required trees or shrubs which are removed from within required setbacks from roads or buffers without written approval from the planning department shall be replaced at a ratio of 2 trees or shrubs for each tree or shrub removed, or other treatment as may be approved by the planning department. 3. Within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, trees required to meet the canopy requirements which are removed without written approval from the planning department, become unhealthy or die, or are pollarded shall be replaced unless the planning department determines that the replacement is unnecessary to meet the tree canopy requirements. 000 C. Ouality. At time of planting, required landscaping shall be alive and in a healthy condition. Plant materials shall conform to the standards of the most recent edition of the American Standard for Nursery Stock, published by the AmericanHort. Native species shall be those outlined on the Chesterfield County Plant Materials List. Within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, the planting of trees to meet tree canopy requirements shall be in accordance with either the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nursery and Landscape Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, or the road and bridge specifications of the Virginia Department of Transportation. 20-84 1/22/2020 A. Tree Wells. Tree wells in a sidewalk along a road or drive shall have a minimum area of 75 square feet by 3 feet deep and contain an uncompacted soil mix favorable for healthy tree growth. If approved at time of plan review, a portion of the area may be located underneath the sidewalk. The area shall have a sub -drain tied to the storm sewer system. For properties requiring site plan approval, the tree wells shall be irrigated. B. Street Trees Required. Street trees shall be required as follows: 1. As specified in this chapter; 2. R-TH and MH -3 subdivisions; 3. Upper Swift Creek Watershed, single-family residential subdivision receiving preliminary plat approval after 1/22/2020; and 4. Upper Swift Creek Watershed, single-family residential subdivision where lots did not receive preliminary plat approval but received construction plan approval after 1/22/2020. C. Street Trees. Unless otherwise specified in this chapter street trees shall comply with the following requirements: 1. Street trees shall be installed along both sides of roads and any private pavement serving multiple units excluding alleys; 2. Unless otherwise provided in this chapter, or as permitted during plan review, street trees shall be large deciduous trees spaced generally 40 feet on center; however, if large deciduous trees will conflict with overhead utility lines, small deciduous trees spaced generally 40 feet on center shall be installed; 3. Trees shall either be installed within the right-of-way, or a maximum of 5 feet outside of the right-of-way. In a subdivision, if the trees are planted outside of the right-of-way, they shall be located in an easement granted to the homeowners' association; 4. Tree species shall be those species designated for use as a street tree in the Chesterfield County Plant Materials List; and 5. Within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed eligible street trees installed within tree wells may be credited towards tree canopy requirements under 19.1-545 if designated through plan review. In R Districts required lot area may be reduced in accordance with this section. In no case shall the lot area reductions provided in this section be combined so as to have a lot area reduction of more than 20 percent. 1. Bikeways and Buffers. In R Districts, the required lot area may be reduced by 20 percent when the lot shares a common boundary with one of the following: a. a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208. constructed in conjunction with the development of the affected lot, and right-of-way in excess of the ultimate right-of-way is dedicated free and unrestricted, to and for Chesterfield County, to accommodate the facility; 20-85 1/22/2020 P] K K A L 14 b. a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208. constructed in conjunction with the development of the affected lot, and land is dedicated fee simple, to and for Chesterfield County, to accommodate the facility; or c. a buffer required by Sec. 19.1-263.B.1 and the buffer is located in common area. The length of the common boundary shall be at least the minimum lot width required for the district. Lot lines shall not be arbitrarily manipulated, as determined by the planning department, to obtain the required minimum lot width at the common boundary. In an R-88 District, the minimum lot area for the district shall be based upon requirements of Table 19.1-61.A. Note 1. 2. Upper Swift Creek Tree Canopy Preservation. In R districts within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed, the required lot area may be reduced by 20 percent when the lot shares a common boundary with one of the following: a. designated tree canopy preservation area located in a continuous unbroken open space having a minimum of 30 feet in width and 0.5 acres in area that excludes wetlands, resource protection areas or stormwater infrastructure. The preservation area shall not include easements provided that easements less than 20 feet in width which run generally perpendicular through the preservation area may be permitted at time of plan review; or b. designated tree canopy preservation area located in continuous unbroken open space which includes primarily Resource Protection Area. Tree canopy preservation or replacement areas utilized for lot area credit shall be designated on the record plat and be in accordance with provisions Sec. 19.1- 545. The length of the common boundary shall be at least 50 contiguous feet. Lot lines shall not be arbitrarily manipulated, as determined by the planning department, to obtain the required minimum width at the common boundary. In an R-88 District, the minimum lot area for the district shall be based upon requirements of Table 19.1-61.A. Note 1. In no case shall number of lots in subdivision exceed the permitted density as determined by the comprehensive plan or condition of zoning approval. CIZ6Z67 The purpose of this section is to promulgate regulations for the planting and replacement of trees destroyed or damaged during the development or redevelopment process, pursuant to Sec. 15.2-961 of the Code of Virginia, and to provide for the preservation of trees within development in appropriate instances. A. General standards. 1. All trees to be planted shall meet the specifications of the AmericanHort. 2. The planting of trees shall be done in accordance with either the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nursery and Landscape Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, or the road and bridge specifications of the Virginia Department of Transportation. The county shall maintain current copies of these specifications available to the public. 3. The minimum size standards for trees shall be in accordance with Sec. 19.1-250. 20-86 1/22/2020 4. The canopy area of planted trees shall be in accordance with the Chesterfield County Plant Materials List as maintained by the planning department. Canopy credit for trees not included on the Chesterfield County Plant Materials List may be approved by the planning department based on credible published documentation. Preserved trees and wooded areas may be credited toward the canopy requirements in compliance with this section. B. Canopy requirements. 1. Site and Construction plans. All site plans and construction plans for subdivision plats shall include detailed landscape plans prepared in accordance with Sec. 19.1-246 to provide for the preservation, planting and replacement of trees on site to the extent that, at maturity of twenty (20) years, the minimum tree canopy shall be as follows: a. 10 percent tree canopy for any cemetery; b. 10 percent tree canopy for sites zoned for commercial or industrial; c. 10 percent tree canopy for sites zoned for residential, with densities 20 units or more per acre; d. 15 percent tree canopy for sites zoned for residential, with densities more than 10 but less than 20 units per acre; and e. 20 percent tree canopy for sites zoned for residential, with densities of 10 units or less per acre. Upon written request, the director of planning may grant approval for any residential project to comply with tree canopy requirements of this section on an overall project basis. Compliance on an overall basis will require review and approval of a tree canopy master plan. Except for street trees, in lot subdivisions tree canopy utilized to meet this section shall be located in recorded open space, common area or buffers required per 19.1-263.B.1. 2. Tree Canopy Landscape Plans. Landscape plans for tree canopy shall be submitted in accordance with 19.1-246.C. 3. Exclusions. For the purpose of calculating the area of a site for tree canopy coverage requirements, the following areas shall be excluded: a. ponds and non -wooded wetlands; b. properties reserved or dedicated for school sites, playing fields and other non -wooded recreation areas, and other facilities and areas of a similar nature; and c. portions of a site which contain existing structures that are not the subject of a pending application. 4. Credits for Preservation of Existing Trees. Existing trees which are to be preserved may be included in the calculation of the canopy requirements, and may include wooded preserves, if the site or construction plans identify such trees, trees are located within designated preservation areas and the trees are ,determined by the director of planning to be healthy, viable for canopy provision and long term preservation. 20-87 1/22/2020 PJ Ik ow___..� L c. L 5. Designated Tree Canopy Preservation Areas. Areas which are to be preserved or replanted to meet the requirements of this section shall be designated on site plan and final record plat. A note shall be provided which states "Removal of trees within designated tree canopy preservation areas shall not be permitted without approval from the director of planning." C. Exceptions to requirements. Upon written request of the developer, the director of planning may approve reasonable exceptions to, or deviations from, the requirements of this section in order to allow for the reasonable development of farmland or other areas devoid of healthy or suitable woody materials, for the preservation of wetlands, or when the strict application of requirements would result in unnecessary or unreasonable hardship to the developer. In such instances, the director of planning may approve satisfaction of a portion of a development's tree canopy requirement through use of a tree canopy bank or off-site planting or replacement of trees provided that the canopy thereby substituted is located within the Upper Swift Creek Watershed. D. Enforcement. Penalties for violations of the requirements of this section shall be the same as those applicable to other violations of this chapter as set forth in Sec. 19.1-6. 000 (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately after adoption. Ayes: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow, and Holland. Nays: None. 18. REMAINING MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND ZONING REQUESTS There were no remaining manufactured home permits or zoning requests. 19. FIFTEEN -MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS Ms. Janice Caldwell of the Dale District stated she is a naturalized U.S. citizen and she is grateful to live in the county, but she expressed concerns relative to gunfire in her neighborhood. She spoke of her desire to obtain a handgun to protect herself. She thanked the Board for its support of Second Amendment gun rights. 20. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Winslow, seconded by Mr. Holland, the Board adjourned at 8:40 p.m. until February 19, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. for a work session in Room 502. Ayes: Nays: Haley, Carroll, Ingle, Winslow and Holland. None. Jfseph,,Ir,. Casey C Administrator Chairman 20-88 1/22/2020 PI PI w