Loading...
04-11-1984 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES April 11, 1984 Supervisors in Attendance: Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Chairman Mr. R. Garland Dodd Mrs. Joan Girone Mr. Jesse J. Mayes Mr. Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator Supervisors Absent: Mr. G. H. Applegate, Vice Chairman Staff in Attendance: Mr. Stanley Balderson, Dir. of Planning Mr. N. E. Carmichael, Comm. of Revenue Chief Robert Eanes, Fire Department Mr. Phil Hester, Dir. of Parks and Recreation Mr. Elmer Hodge, Asst. County Administrator Mr. Robert Masden, Dir. of Human Services Mr. Richard McElfish, Env. Engineer Mr. Steve Micas, County Attorney Mr. Jeffrey Muzzy, Dir. of Community Develop. Mr. Lane Ramsey, Dir. of Budget and Accounting Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Exec. Asst. to Co. Adm. Mr. Robert Wagenknecht, Library Dir. Mr. David Welchons, Dir. of Utilities 1. DINNER The Board met at the Airport Restaurant for dinner at 5:00 p.m. The Board recessed to travel to the CourthOuse for the regularly scheduled meeting. Reconvening at 7:00 p.m.: Mr. Daniel called the meeting to order. 2. INVOCATION Mr. Daniel introduced Reverend John E. Leonard, Pastor of the Church of the Epiphany, who gave the invocation. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the minutes of March 28, 1984, as submitted. Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Abstention: Mr. Daniel because he was not present at the meeting. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 4. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS Mr. Hedrick introduced and welcomed Ms. Pam Wood, who would be the regular reporter cover~ng the County for the Petersburg Progress Index. Mr. Hedrick introduced and welcomed Ms. Jane Dierkes Waldren with the Richmond News Leader who would be substituting for Mr. Hugh Robertson while he is on vacation. 5. REQUESTS FOR ITEMS TO BE DELETED OR HEARD OUT OF SEQUENCE Mr. Daniel stated Mr. Applegate was called out of town unexpectedly and had requested that the continuation of the public hearing regarding the Turner Road Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the public hearing regarding the establishment of the annual tax levy on various classes of property and the adoption of the 1984-85 Budget be deferred until April 25, 1984 when he would be present. He stated also there was a request that the sign policy and ordinance amendment be deferred for 30 days. Mr. Micas indicated there may be some administrative problems with deferring the establishment of the tax levies. Mr. Ramsey stated this is the latest the County has ever set the tax rate and the Treasurer and others are concerned with regard to sending out the tax bills and having the taxpayers receive the bills by the June 5th payment date. After discussion of this matter, it was generally agreed that the establishment of the annual tax levy on various classes of property would remain on the agenda. Mr. Owen Craddock stated he and others were present and would like to discuss the Turner Road Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment even if the matter was deferred officially. It was generally agreed the Board would hear the citizens present regarding the Turner Road Comprehensive Plan and defer official action until April 25, 1984. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board deferred consideration of the sign policy and ordinance amendment until May 9, 1984 and deferred discussion of the proposed 1984-85 budget until April 25, 1984. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 6. RESOLUTIONS OF SPECIAL RECOGNITION 6.A. HERBERT T. SINK Mr. Masden introduced Mr. Herbert Sink and gave an overview of his service and administration of the CETA Consortium for the Counties of Chesterfield, Henrico and Hanover. He stated he had managed the Consortium and developed an excellent staff. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Herbert T. Sink has served as Executive Director of the Chesterfield, Henrico, Hanover CETA Consortium for the past three years; and WHEREAS, The CETA Consortium administered over $7,000,000 in training programs during his tenure and while all expenditures were subject to independent audit, none were questioned or disallowed; and WHEREAS, Through his leadership, the program has received regional and national recognition from the U.S. Department of Labor; and WHEREAS, Mr. Sink has also provided masterful leadership during the last year as the program made a complex transition from the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act to the new Federal Jobs Training Partnership Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby expresses its sincere appreciation and commends Mr. Herbert T. Sink for his exemplary leadership during his tenure as Executive Director of the Chesterfield, Henrico and Hanover CETA Consortium. AND, FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County congratulates Mr. Sink on his selection as Executive Director of the Private Industry Council serving Chesterfield, the City of Richmond as well as six other surrounding counties and wishes him every success in his new endeavor. 84-]92 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Daniel presented Mr. Sink with the framed resolution and introduced Mrs. Sink who was also present. The Board expressed appreciation to Mr. Sink for an outstanding job and congratulated him on his new appointment. 6.B. DONATION AND REQUEST FROM HOPKINS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL P.T.A Mr. Hester stated the County had been working with the Hopkins Elementary School P.T.A. regarding their interest in providing basketball goals and playground equipment for the school which cost is approximately $5,000. He introduced Ms. Susan Newman, President of the Hopkins Elementary School P.T.A., who presented the Board with a check for $800 which they had raised for this purpose. Mr. Daniel stated the Board paper addresses funds to be expended from the Dale District 3¢ Road Funds but the next Agendai item seeks funds from the General Fund contingency for a similar purpose and he felt both should be consistent. After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Dodd, resolved that the Board accept the donation of $800 from the Hopkins Elementary School P.T.A., appropriated $3,300 from the Genera]. Fund contingency and appropriated $900 from the Dale District 3¢ Road Funds for basketball goals and playground equipment for Hopkins Elementary School. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the P.T.A.'s contribution. 6.C. DONATION AND REQUEST FROM BENSLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL P.T.A. Mr. Hester stated the Bensley Elementary School P.ToA. has been working with the County for a hard court play area at the school which cost is estimated at $10,000. He introduced Ms. Melissa Ball, President of the Bensley Elementary School P.T.A., who presented the Board with a check in the amount of $2,500 which they had raised for this project. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board accepte( the donation of $2,500 from the Bensley Elementary School P.T.A., appropriated $4,200 from the Bermuda park account and appropriated $3,300 from the General Fund contingency for this project. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Dodd expressed his appreciation for their assistance in this project. 7. HEARINGS OF CITIZENS ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS AND CLAIMS 7.A. BRYAN WALKER - REGARDING BOTANY WOODS PROJECT Mr. Bryan Walker, representing the Bensley Area Civic Association, recognized approximately 100 people who were present in opposition to the proposed Botany Woods project in the Bensley area. He stated their continuing opposition to this project as they feel it would be detrimental to their neighborhood as they are completely surrounded by apartments, truck terminals, trailer courts, etc. He stated they have worked long and hard for their homes and this project would reverse the restoration process and improvements that have been made on the homes in the neighborhood. He stated the number of homes for sale in the area 84-]_93 indicates the neighborhood unrest. He stated the rescue squad and fire department have been credits to the area. He stated the Bensley Athletic Club has provided programs for the children. He stated their area reflects a social and racial mix which planners try to achieve and to build this against their wishes would damage the area. He invited the Board to attend the Bensley Extravaganza on April 28 to see the lovely homes that exist. He presented a collection of the letters from the Governor, Congressman Bliley, Senator Warner, etc. regarding this project. He stated it was interesting to note that Ms. Margaret White, Director of the Richmond HUD Office, stated that this plan was a failure and then approved the project. He requested continued support from the Board in this matter. Mr. Dodd stated this represents the heart of the County and because of the inflationary costs of housing, there is no place for these people to relocate and they are being surrounded. He stated he hoped the Board would continue to support the Bensley area as in the past which he felt they would. 7.B. JOHN SMITH - REGARDING ORDERING ELECTION OF BOND REFERENDU~ Mr. Smith stated on March 14, 1984 there was an item on the agenda involving the ordering of an election for the extension of Powhite/Route 288. He stated he felt there should be an agenda with more detail. He discussed the document itself involving the use of general obligation bonds, the method of payment, funding, taxes, the purpose, etc. He stated a more definitive description of the project should have been outlined in the resolution prepared. He stated the resolution asked for a election on or about June 12, 1984 but there is an ongoing study which will not be received until August but it appears that the County has asked that the voting be held in June. He stated he did not feel the County residents would authorize the expenditure of $22,000,000 for road improvements not knowing where it is to be spent or what it is to be spent for. He stated the design should be first and then ask for the public vote. He added he felt $70,000,000 in 9C bond funding would build Powhite from Richmond to Coalfield Road and the project would be less costly if noise barriers were not necessary. e 8.a, DEFERRED ITEMS CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING TURNER ROAD AREA Mr. Balderson stated the Board deferred this matter from their March 14, 1984 meeting and since that time a meeting had been held with citizens of the area at which 60-80 people attended. He stated Mr. John Cofer, the consultant presented the plan, Mr. Applegate was in attendance as well as members of staff. Mr. Cofer reviewed the plan and the recommendations. He stated their plan indicated the relationship between traffic and the land use and the overall objective was to develop several plans for the area and to select an appropriate plan and transportation improvements to make the plan work reasonably well. He stated they studied existing land uses, the traffic projections, existing thoroughfares, topography, drainage, soils, public facilities, water, sewer, fire protection, zoning, etc. and based on the studies and the goal of the Genera]. Plan 2000 they developed goals for all of the plans. He stated they sought to preserve the residential areas, the stream, landscape, integrity, etc. He reviewed the alternate plans which dealt with low, medium and high intensity indicating the difference is in the vacant land. He stated the recommended plan, based on traffic studies and the capacity analysis on the traffic projections, resulted in a recommendation of less density than the medium 84-]94 intensity alternative that was developed. He presented a slide indicating the plan recommended. He stated the traffic improvements for this plan are primarily built on the existing road network with improvements for the traffic flow. He stated all alternatives did indicate that Turner Road should be widened to four lanes with improvements at the intersections at Elkhardt Road, Midlothian Turnpike and Hull Street Road, without a median and could be constructed in the existing right of way. He reviewed zoning problems implementing that aspect, the parks, the right of way acquisition, restrictions on certain zonings, controls on access points, land acquisition for parks and road improvements, etc. He stated the overall plan is feasible and the objectives of the County to increase the tax base and stabilize the residential area can be accomplished. Mrs. Girone inquired if the neighbors were interviewed in the area. Mr. Confer stated they were not. Mrs. Girone inquired if the people understood this was not a rezoning of the land but intended for a guide for the future and if it were to happen, it would come through a public hearing process by the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors, etc. if this plan were to be approved by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Dodd inquired what the time frame was for the plan. Mr. Cofer stated projections were through the year 2000 for traffic but it could take longer than that for full development. Mr. Owen Craddock, on behalf of himself and his father who both own land in the area, stated the report was necessary for the area. He stated he felt if the Board should adopt the plan that it be a tool to refer to when rezoning and that all the property now remain as it is. He stated they are concerned mainly with the road situation as the problem exists now and will only get worse. He requested that before any other zoning, etc. is approved that the road situation be considered for safety reasons. He stated they are not totally against the report, as he feels there is a good cross reference referring to open space, parks, etc. He stated he would like the Board, when rezoning in the area, consider coordination of construction of roads and public sewer, etc. so that the area does not become cluttered for the next 20 years. Mr. Lee Lawson, representing himself and his father who own property in the area, stated they were concerned about maintaining the residential community. He stated that the intersection at Turner Road and Elkhardt is recommended to be developed for restricted office use and he feels this establishment will not maintain the residential integrity and will lead to unsafe traffic areas. He stated he was concerned with the public park and most area residents do not want a public park and would like it to remain in a natural state. He stated they are concerned with the widening of Turner Road to four lanes. He stated he felt this should not be a thoroughfare and the Board should discourage this. He suggested the reduction of a speed limit, prohibiting access to Cloverleaf Mall, and encouraging the use of Chippenham Parkway. Mrs. Girone inquired about the parks. Mr. Cofer stated the parks are to be active and passive in nature but they are not intended to be park faci].ities for the County but of a neighborhood type for neighborhood use. He stated this would be small unlighted ball fields, areas for picnicking in the woods, etc. He stated all plans considered recommended the park areas, but most would be left natural to maintain the open space and keep the residential appearance. There was no one else present to address the matter. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board continued this public hearing until April 25, 1984 at 9:00 a.m. 84-]95 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 8.C. APPOINTMENT - CAPITAL AREA HEALTH ADVISORY COUNCIL Mr. Daniel inquired if this matter could be deferred for two weeks as he would like to submit the name of Mr. Ray Moore as he suggested this when the matter first was brought to the Board's attention. Mr. Mayes stated he did not agree with deferring this matter as he felt Mr. Branch would make good contributions to the Council and this provided an opportunity for Matoaca District to increase its representation on boards and commissions. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board appointed Mr. Melvin S. Branch to the Capital Area Health Advisory Council effective immediately, whose term will expire in June, 1985. Ayes: Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absention: Mr. Daniel. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. ANNUAL TAX LEVY ON VARIOUS CLASSES OF PROPERTY Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider an ordinance establishing the annual tax levy on various classes of property for the County. Mr. Ramsey explained the legal requirements for this public hearing stating that the public hearing on April 4th was in conjunction with the budget and this public hearing is required for adoption of the tax rates by ordinance. He reviewed the tax rates which are: $0.98 per $100 assessed value $3.60 per $100 assessed value $1.00 per $100 assessed value $1.10 per $100 assessed value Real Estate Personal Property Machinery and Tools Aircraft Mr. Jimmy Martin, representing the Richmond Area Municipal Contractors Association, stated he had work with County staff in trying to reach an agreement with regard to heavy construction equipment and its tax rate. He stated he did not feel the same piece of equipment owned by a small contractor should be taxed more than the same piece of equipment owned by a manufacturer--a difference of $1.00 and $3.60. He stated House Bill 1699 allows each locality to reduce the rate for contractors such as himself. He stated the law is on the books and requested the Board reduce the rate in this matter. Mr. Dodd stated he thought this was to be considered over a three year period so it would not impact any one budget year of the County. Mr. Martin stated he did not think a phasing alternative was discussed. Mr. Dodd inquired if any other localities are taking advantage of HB 1699. Mr. Martin stated he did not know what other localities do, but the County does have one of the highest personal property tax rates in the State. He stated he and a manufacturer could have the exact same piece of equipment, but because he is not a manufacturer his tax rate is three times higher. There was some discussion regarding the relocation of equipment on January 1 in an effort to avoid taxes in the County. Mr. Daniel inquired what amount of revenue would be lost if this rate were lowered to the same amount. Mr. Hedrick stated the figures are hard to ascertain but an estimate is $800,000 on information available. He stated that the Board was provided a report on this issue and it is a fact that the County does have a low tax rate for heavy industry and all of the other taxes are in line with the region and with the urbanizing jurisdictions in the State. He stated, however, the Board has made a decision to have a lower rate for heavy industry to try to attract their business to the County as it is felt they will 84-196 have a multiplying effect in that it brings other businesses and jobs into the community as well. He stated the State has a fairly low tax rate for heavy industry and in the County, one of the major problems in attracting heavy industry, is the transportation network, so we had a fairly low tax. He stated all other tax rates are somewhat equal to the region and especially equal to the urbanizing jurisdictions providing comparable levels of service. He stated the real issue to the Board is whether the County should offer a tax incentive for heavy industry. Mr. Martin stated he was not opposed to the incentive to the heavy industries but to the equality. Mr. Mayes inquired why this inequity was occurring. Mr. Micas stated the State law has made the decision that it is important for localities to encourage certain kinds of industries/activities that have a multiplier effect and for that reason they have given a break to the same equipment used by heavy industries vs. other businesses. He stated it is felt that it is important because of its effect on the economy of the State. He stated the contractors, etc. are not deemed to have the multiplier effect. Mr. Martin stated the State has given the localities the option of giving the contractors a break as well by House Bill 1699. Mr. Micas stated it was an opportunity, not a mandate. Mr. Mayes stated perhaps it would be equitable to raise the rate to the same $3.60 rate. Mr. Dodd cautioned the Board that the County is getting a high tax rate reputation, a high labor reputation, a high electric bill reputation. He stated that only two industries have located in the County in the last seven years and if the Board changes the dollar rate, we will be losing the opportunities for industry to come to the County. He stated officials of two industries had discussed the assessments of their plants which had been tremendous and Bermuda District has the industry and he felt he needed to protect the jobs of the people. Mr. Martin stated the contractors are asking for a rate between the $1.00 and $3.60, not the $1.00 rate. Mr. Dodd stated he felt there is an inequity but $800,000 could greatly impact the budget and he could see giving some relief as they have been affected by inflation, but by phasing the reduction over a three year period. Mr. John Smith stated when this was discussed in past years, he thought the basic difference was not on basic industry but for mining equipment. He stated he did not think mining got the protection because it was a basic industry but because it was in the County first and he did not conceive this was a basic industry. He stated he felt the County was forcing the smaller industries to relocate from the County because the rate of taxes is high. He stated interest is continuing to become higher and that if something is not done to keep small businesses in the County it will be bad. He stated he felt a reduction would not impact the budget adversely. There was no one else present to address the Board. Mrs. Girone pointed out that Chesterfield is competitive with the counties and cities on its border and reviewed their tax rates. She stated that this was a consideration when the Board last discussed this matter. Mr. Daniel suggested that the Board might consider adopting the other rates and defer this matter until another date. Mr. Hedrick stated that if the Board did proceed in this matter, and reduce that particular rate, there would have to be a reduction in expenditures. He stated the County is competitive in its tax rate and is among the lowest except for this item. He stated if we begin to lower the tax rate for special interest groups, there 84-197 will be others to ask for similar concessions. He stated the Board still wants to attract industry and commercial development amd that is part of the reason for Powhite and Route 288--to broaden the tax base. Mr. Ramsey explained the aircraft changes which would not affect the amount of tax, just the method for arriving at it. After further discussion, it was on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that the Board adopt the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY ON VARIOUS CLASSES OF PROPERTY FOR THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD Be It Ordained by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield that for the year beginning on the first day of January, 1984, and ending on the thirty-first day of December, 1984, the taxes on property in all the Magisterial Districts of the County of Chesterfield shall be as follows: Sec. 1. Real Property and Mobile Homes. On tracts of land, lots or improvements thereon and on mobile homes the tax shall be $0.98 on every $100 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 2. Personal Property. (a) On automobiles, trailers, boats, boat trailers, other motor vehicles and on all tangible personal property used or held in connection with any mining, manufacturing or other business, trade, occupation or profession, including furnish- ings, furniture and appliances in rental units, the tax shall be $3.60 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. (b) On aircraft as defined by S58-829.5 of the Code of V_ir~inia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $1.10 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof. Sec. 3. Public Service Corporation Property. (a) On that portion of real estate and tangible personal property of public service corporations which has been equalized as provided in Section 58-512.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $0.98 on every $100 of the assessed value thereof determined by the State Corporation Co~nission. (b) On that portion of the real estate and tangible per- sonal property of public service corporations which has not been equalized as provided in Section 58-512.1 of the Code of Virgin~, 1950, as amended, the tax shall be $3.20 on every $100 of assessed value thereof determined by the State Corporation Commission. (c) The foregoing subsections to the contrary notwith- standing, on automobiles and trucks belonging to such public service corporations the tax shall be $3.60 on every $100 of assessed value thereof. Sec. 4. Machinery and Tools. On machinery and tools used in a manufacturing or mining business the tax shall be $1.00 on every $100 assessed value thereof. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 84-]98 Mr. Dodd suggested that staff be instructed to review and consider how a reduction over a three year period could be accomplished and its effect. He stated there are other special interest groups but their taxes are not triple. He stated the County is penalizing the people who are struggling. Mr. Mayes stated he felt equity is important. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, it is resolved that staff be instructed to bring back to the Board within the next 30 days a true impact of some reduction on the heavy equipment tax rate for contractors. He stated this could be accomplished in a phasing method over a three year period and that $1.00 may be too low but $3.60 is too high. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 9.B. CONVEYANCE OF LEASES AT VARIOUS PARK SITES Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider leases of real property at various park sites to operate food concessions. There was no one present to address this matter. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a three year lease agreement with the Chalk]ey Athletic Association to operate the County owned concession facility at Chalkley Elementary School from May 1, 1984 until December 31, 1986 waiving the normal rental fee of 10% since they built the facility and further that the County Administrator execute seasonal contracts with the following associations to operate portable concession facilities as indicated beginning May 1, 1984 until September 1, 1984: Bird Athletic Complex Ettrick Park Chesterfield Courthouse Complex Harrowgate Park Matoaca Park Coalfield Athletic Complex Chesterfield Girl's Softball League Ettrick Youth Sports Assoc. Chesterfield Baseball Club Harrowgate Athletic Assoc. Matoaca Athletic Assoc. Midlothian Youth Soccer League Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 9.C. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PLAN AND FY 84-85 SECONDARY SYSTEM BUDGET Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider the Secondary System Construction Plan and the FY 84-85 Secondary System budget. Mr. Charles Perry, Resident Engineer with the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, stated the purpose of the hearing was to receive comments from citizens concerning improvements to the Secondary System in the County for the next six years and comments regarding the Secondary System for the first year of the Six Year Plan. He presented the Board with the Secondary System Construction Plan and the first year of the Six Year Plan and reviewed the projects which are: 1. Belmont Road (completed) - $20,105 2. Salem Church Road (completed) - $200,000 3. Incidental Items (Route 711 drainage problem, Route 718 right turn lane and Route 625) - $100,000 4. County wide items involving new traffic signs and signals, rural additions, financing of new pipes, surveying and preliminary engineering and fertilizing and seeding of secondary roads - $400,000 5. Enon Church Road Recreation Access Project - $63,324 6. Railroad crossing at Coxendale Road - $23,221 7. Branders Bridge Road - widening, grading and reshaping - $107,426 8. Branders Bridge Road - box culvert - $38,000 9. Otterdale Road -- bridge improvement - $50,000 84-199 10. Turner Road - $200,000 11. Turner Road - $325,000 12. Courthouse Road - $5,000 13. Robious Road - $5,000 Mr. Doug Stokes, representing HMK Corporation the owner of property of which Item 24 on the Six Year Plan traverses, stated his client objects to the use of his property for the sole benefit of the Boulder Executive Park Development. He stated controversy has arisen regarding development proposals for property west of Chippenham Parkway and north and south of Jahnke Road. He stated the developer south of Jahnke has received approval of everything he has asked for and the developer north of Jahnke Road has gotten nothing. He stated the developer south of Jahnke Road has no usable access along Jahnke Road, however, his ability to build his full development is contingent upon gaining access to Jahnke Road through property owned by related companies of the developer north of Jahnke. He stated by including Chinaberry Drive in the Six Year Road Plan, the County is attempting to create a situation which would allow the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation to initiate condemnation proceedings for the taking of this property for the benefit of the developer south of Jahnke. He stated exclusive benefit is shown by three facts: the County and developers south of Jahnke have entered into a contract dated February 7, 1984, one day before approval of the Six Year Plan by the County requiring the developer to pay for all acquisition costs of this property including attorney fees and appraisal fees during the contemplated condemnation procedures; Mr. Hedrick was quoted saying the County would not have considered building this road unless the developers were willing to pay for it; and the developer's attorneys were quoted in the newspapers saying that without the willingness of the developer to pay for the road it would not be built at the present time. He stated the impact of the traffic on this road has never been adequately addressed at a public hearing. He stated the original approved plan for the development south of Jahnke called for access directly into Chippenham Parkway creating little additional traffic on Jahnke Road. He stated when the Highway Department rejected this plan, the developer filed an amended application substituting the Chinaberry access to Jahnke Road from the previously approved access to Chippenham Parkway and allowing partial development with access only to Midlothian Turnpike. He stated the notice for the public hearing only stated that the amendment addressed partial development of the project and did not address substitution of the direct freeway access to Chippenham Parkway with the local road access to Jahnke Road. He inquired where the public need was for this road. He stated the section of the road encompassed in the Six Year Plan connects an extension of Chinaberry Drive at the northern end of the proposed development to Jahnke Road. He inquired if this road would connect Jahnke Road with Midlothian Turnpike, roughly parallel to Chippenham Parkway, relieving any local traffic congestion. He stated it would increase local traffic congestion and once this road is constructed, the Board has already authorized the developer to build an additional 1,005,000 sq. ft. office space and 100 rooms of a 300 room hotel which is in addition to the already approved 215,000 sq. ft. of office space, 200 room hotel and 285 apartment units. He stated the only traffic outlets are Midlothian Turnpike and Jahnke Road. He stated the County and the Highway Department are allowing themselves to be used to obtain what a private developer could not obtain in the marketplace--access to Jahnke Road, and are using the power of the state by eminent domain to gain economic benefits and advantages to private developers and it would create a dangerous precedent. He stated the neighbors of the area will not use this road unless they live or work in the Boulders development. He stated there is no need for the road and it should not be included in the Six Year Road Plan. There was no one else present to speak and the public hearing was closed. 84-200 Mr. Dodd stated that Bermuda and Matoaca Districts are not receiving much from the Plan. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adopted the 1984-85 - 1989-90 Six Year Plan as the official plan of the County as proposed by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, a copy of which is filed with the papers of this Board. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board adopted the first year of the Six Year Plan as the County's Secondary Road budget for fiscal year 1984-85, a copy of which is filed with the papers of this Board. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Dodd inquired what the time frame was for the East Avenue project which is not on the plan. Mr. Newcomb stated this was a rural addition project and there are some right of way problems. Mr. Perry indicated he would discuss this matter with Mr. Dodd. 10. NEW BUSINESS iO.B. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING JOINING CAPITAL REGION AIRPORT COMM. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the General Assembly, by Chapter 537 of the Acts of Assembly of 1975 created the Capital Region Airport Commission ("CRAC") and continued the CRAC as a political subdivision of the Commonwealth by Chapter 380 of the Acts of Assembly of 1980; and WHEREAS, it was the intent of the General Assembly in creating and continuing the CRAC to establish and operate one or more airports for those participating political subdivisions in the region which join the CRAC; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County that the County join the CRAC as a participating political subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Chesterfield hereby joins the CRAC as a participating political subdivision, subject to the provisions of the Capital Region Airport CommissiOn Act. AND BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Board of Supervisors authorizes the County Administrator to execute any agreements or other documents between the County, CRAC or any political subdivisions which participate in CRAC, which may be necessary in furtherance of the purposes set out in this resolution. Ayes: Mr. Dan~.el, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.C D ~ · ISCARDED LIBRARY BOOKS TO FRIENDS OF LIBRARY On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved and authorized the donation of discarded library materials to the Friends of the I.ibrary on a continuing basis with the proceeds to go as before to the Friends of the Library. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: ~4r. Applegate. 84-?01 10.D. FIREFIGHTING AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF PETERSBURG On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a firefighting aid agreement with the City of Petersburg, a copy of which is filed with the papers of this Board. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Chief Eanes stated the County has a mutual aid agreement with City of Richmond and Henrico and the neighbors on the south and southeast sides. He stated this is the first time the County has entered into an automatic interjurisdictional agreement. 10.E. REIMBURSEMENT FROM STATE TO SHERIFF'S OFFICE On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board increased anticipated State revenue by $24,299 and increased expenditure appropriations for medical expenses in the Sheriff's budget by $24,299. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.F. HIGHWAY ENGINEER Mr. Charles Perry, Resident Engineer with the Highway Department, was present. He introduced Ms. Penny Kanode who was recently employed with the Department as Assistant Resident Engineer and gave a brief background of her educational and professional experience. Mr. Perry stated the Department has placed the painting of road lines on their list of projects as requested by the Board but there is a backlog at this time. He stated with regard to Mro Dodd's question about Route 10, it was his understanding that the preliminary engineering would be 80% funded by the Federal Highway Administration with regard to actual construction but the percentage has not actually been established at this time. Mr. Mayes stated he did not have any road items at this time as he is still pursuing his problems through the office of the County Administrator. Mr. Dodd thanked the Department for the work at the Kingsdale Road area and he hopes this will eliminate the problems at the three intersections. He stated appreciation for the positive response of the Department for the guard rails on Route 10 east bound toward Hopewell. He requested the Department to investigate the possibility of paving Elmwood Lane as only half of the road is paved and the other portion is deteriorating. Mrs. Girone inquired if there were any response regarding the meeting with Mr. Brett on the 12 ft. shift on Huguenot Road. Mr. Perry stated while a date has not been set he knows Mr. Brett is working on it. Mrs. Girone stated she hoped it could be done in April. Mrs. Girone presented Mr. Perry with a letter from Sharon Strong regarding the need for a light at the intersection of Winterfield and Route 60 and about the lack of shoulders on Winterfield Road at the railroad track which was also forwarded to Mr. King. She requested that she receive of copy of the Department's response to this letter. Mr. Perry stated this matter has been addressed in Richmond but he has not received any correspondence with its outcome as of yet. 84-202 Mr. Daniel stated that in his correspondence with the Department it has been said that it is inappropriate to consider the restricting of truck traffic on Hopkins Road as it is not used as a thoroughfare. He stated Melody Road is still being used and he is unaware of how that is coming along and presented a letter from a constituent and requested a copy of the Department's response to it. He stated one of the County Magistrates has some suggestions for improvements to Salem Church Road and requested that Mr. Perry talk with him regarding this matter. 10.G. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS 10.G.1. CRATER PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP Mr. Muzzy stated with the Bureau of Census' recent creation of the Richmond SMSA it calls the County's attention to the obligations the County has to the Richmond and Tri-Cities area. He stated the Board has discussed the County's means of communication with the Tri-Cities area and we do participate in the Tri-Cities area in a number of ways. He stated staff has contacted the Crater Planning Commission and although the County is ineligible for membership because it is a member of the RRPDC, it is felt an ad hoc membership may be possible and suggested the adoption of the submitted resolution. Mrs. Girone stated that Mr. John Kidd, Executive Director of the RRPDC, is concerned about one county becoming a member of two Planning Commissions and there may be a more feasible way of working this out and asked that the Board investigate any alternative action between now and January. She requested that "and further investigate the feasibility of such" be added after item %2. Mr. Mayes stated that was not a problem, but he believes that the majority of Matoaca District is not included under any planning region and this has been a disservice and has done irreparable harm to the area. He stated not to have representation on the Crater Planning Commission is a mistake and even if it has to be ad hoc we should pursue that and a permanent membership as this area has been denied the services of these commissions in past years. Mr. Dodd stated a great part of Bermuda District is also Petersburg-Colonial Heights oriented and he felt Petersburg would welcome County participation in the Crater Planning Commission as they have lost a great deal of industry and it needs some attention and we are a part of that community. On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board: Authorized the County Administrator to forward an official request by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors to the Crater Planning District Commission for an ad hoc membership. Although Chesterfield would not have any official voting power, our participation would serve as a useful vehicle to improve communication in the region. e The County Attorney's office is directed to prepare legislation for consideration by the 1985 General Assembly Session to allow us to be members of both the Richmond and Crater Planning District Commission and further investigate the feasibility of such. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.G.2. STREET LIGHT REQUESTS On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board approved the following requests for street lights with the funds to be expended from the District Street Light Funds as indicated: 84-20~ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Intersection of Austin Road and Cornwall Street, Bermuda Intersection of Morehead Drive and Bruce Road, Bermuda Between 7010 and 7020 Walmsley Boulevard, Dale 21313 Perdue Avenue, Matoaca Intersection of Buford Road and Buford Commons, Midlothian Intersection of Westfield Road and Sycamore Square Drive, Midlothian Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.H. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 10.H.1. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS 10.H.l.a. COUNTEROFFER FOR WATER EASEMENT ON CONIFER ROAD On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board denied the counteroffer in the amount of $1,000 from C. E. and J. B. Bell for a water easement along Conifer Road and further authorized the County Attorney to institute condemnation proceedings against the following property owners if the amount as set opposite their names is not accepted. And be it further resolved that the County Administrator notify said property owner~ by certified mail of the intention of the County to enter upon and take the property which is to be the subject of said condemnation proceedings. An emergency existing, this resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. C. E. and J. B. Bell W84-1B/2 $313.00 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.H.].b. CONDEMNATION ACROSS PROPERTY OF GLEN BUTLER On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board authorized the County Attorney to institute condemnation proceedings against the following property-owner if the amount as set opposite his name is not accepted. And be it further resolved that the County Administrator notify said property owner by certified mail of the intention of the County to enter upon and take the property which is to be the subject of said condemnation proceedings. An emergency existing, this resolution shall be in full force and effect immediately upon passage. Glen Butler Extension of Water and Sewer Lines-Atlantic Baptist College $194 $233 ~27 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Mr. Dodd stated this also involved the East Avenue Project and he would like the County Administrator to instruct staff to pursue this as best as possible. 10.H.2. CONSENT ITEMS 10.H.2.a. DEED OF DEDICATION ALONG GOOLSBY AVENUE On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to accept on behalf of the County, a deed of dedication for a 15 ft. strip along Goolsby Avenue from James H. Pace and Michael E. Wirt and Catherine T. Wirt~ husband and wife. Ayes: Mr. Danie!, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 84-204 10.H.2.b. WATER CONTRACT FOR GLEN TARA~ .SECTION 5-A On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for the following water contract: W84-64CD/6(8)4642, Glen Tara, Section 5-A Subdivision: Glen Tara, Section 5-A Developer: Glen Tara Company Contractor: Glen Tara Excavating Company Estimated Project Cost: $41,508.00 Estimated Refund: 6,258.60 (oversize mains through connections) Estimated Developer Cost: 35,249.40 Code: 559-1-00556-0000 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.H.2.c. WATER CONTRACT FOR FERNBROOK TAYLOR'S LANDING~ PHASE 2 On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for the following water contract: W84-65CD/6(8)4652, Fernbrook Taylor's Landing, Phase 2 Subdivision: Fernbrook Taylor's Landing, Phase 2 Developer: Fernbrook Limited Partnership Contractor: W. T. Curd, Jr. Contractor, Inc. I.P.K. Excavating Company, Inc., subcontractor Estimated Project Cost: $71,591.06 Estimated Refund 16,328.00 (oversize mains through connections) Estimated Developer Cost: 55,263.06 Code: 559-1-00556-0000 Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.H.2.d. WATER CONTRACT FOR GILL STREET On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for O. D. Duncanson, Jr. & Sons who submitted the low bid of $7,928.50 for W83-77C/6(8)3771, replacing water lines in Gill Street, and further the Board appropriated $8,722.00 from 563 Surplus to 380-1-63771-4393. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 10.H.2.e. WATER CONTRACT FOR HUGUENOT ROAD On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents for B & D of Virginia, Inc. who submitted the low bid of $74,530.00 for W74-80CD/6(8)4802, installation of a 16 inch water line along Huguenot Road, and further the Board appropriated $67,983.00 from 563 Surplus to 380-1-64802-4393. It was noted that $17,500 has been previously appropriated. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. !0.H.3. DEVELOPER WATER AND SEWER CONTRACTS I~. Welchons presented the Board with a report of developer ter and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator. 84-205 10.I. REPORTS Mr. Hedrick presented the Board with a report on the status of the contingency. 10.J. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. Hedrick stated he had been informed by the County Attorney that an executive session is unnecessary. Mr. Micas stated last year the County obtained a judgment for $28,000 against a developer who failed to make improvements in Chesdin Heights Subdivision. He stated the work was done by the County for $16,000 and the developer has agreed to pay the $16,000 plus interest and he requested the Board to accept this settlement. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board accepted the compromise settlement in the amount of $16,000 plus interest from the developer of Chesdin Heights Subdivision for streets and drainage facilities made by the County. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. 11. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board adjourned at 9:30 p.m. until 7:30 a.m. on April 17, 1984 at Johnston-Willis Hospital to meet with the Chesterfield Business Council meeting and in addition the Board would have a meeting afterwards to discuss general County business after said Council meeting. Ayes: Mr. Daniel, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Girone and Mr. Mayes. Absent: Mr. Applegate. Ric~fard L. Hedrick County Administrator Chairman 84--?06