08-13-1986 MinutesBOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
August 13, 1986
Supervisors in Attendance:
Mr. R. Garland Dcdd, chairman
Mr. Harry G. Daniel, Vice Chairman
Mr. G. H. Applegate
Mrs. Joan Girene
Mr. Jesse J. Mayes
Mr. Richard L. Hedrick
County Administrator
Staff in Attendance:
Mr. Stanley R. Balderson,
Dir., ~con. Develop.
Hr. Ksn Cronin, Asst.Dir.,
Human Resource Mgmt.
Mr. Richard M. McElfish,
Dir., Env. Eng.
Mr. Bradford S. Han~er,
Asst. Administrator
Mr. William Howell, Dir.,
General Services
Dr. Butt L~we, Exes. Dir.,
Mental Health & Mental
Retardation
Mr. John R. Marling,Chief,
Comprehensive Planning
~r. Robert Masden, Asst.
Co. Adm. for Human
Services
Mr. Steven L~ Micas,
County Attorney
Mrs. Pauline Mitchell,
Dir., News/Info.
Services
Major Lin Parrish, Deputy
Chief
Mr. Tim Perry, Landfill
~ngineer
Mr. William D. Poe!e, Act.
Dir., Planning
Mr. Lane Ramsey, Dir.,
Budget & Accounting
Mr. Robert Rivers,
Construction Engineer
Mr. Richard F. Sale, Asst.
Co. Adm. for Development
Mr. M. D. stith, Jr.,
Exes. Asst., CO. Ad~.
Mr. David Welchons, Dir.,
Utilities Departmen~
1. WORK B~SION ON THEPROPOSEDCOUNTYC~/~R
Mr. Dodd called the work session on the proposed County Char~er
to order at the Courthouse at 2:00 p.m. (EDST].
Mr. Daniel briefly explained the process by which the County had
arrived at its consideration of the proposed charter. Be stated
the Board's desire to obtain public participation and
involvement in the preparation of the proposed charter resulted
in the selection Of a fifteen (15) member comraittee. He stated
the Charter Conmmittee met many times in their endeavor to devise
a preposed charter that would serve to organize ~he governmental
structure of Chesterfield County and, hopefully, benefit all its
citizens. He stated there have been ~hree (3) public hearings
regarding the proposed charter as the Board has made every
effort to bring the issues to the attention of the public. He
stated that through the discussion and public hearing process
the concept of a city charter evolved.
With respect to concerns regarding a city charter, there was a
brief discussion of the legal steps required to become
incorporated into a city.
86-593
Mr. Applegate inquired if the County were to become incorporated
into a city if it would become immune to annexation.
Mr. Micas stated under the current ccnstltuticnal legal
structure of Virginia cities are not subject to annexation,
however, all forms of local government are ultimately subject to
control by the General Assembly.
Mr. Daniel stated the concept of becoming a city has not been
publicly advertised, the time element involved in the process of
becoming a city would he much more extensive than that which was
involved in the county charter process and stated he felt it
would be more appropriate, at this time, for the Cov_~ty to
proceed on its present course of pursuing a county charter. He
stated once this action is accomplished the County could pursue
the objective of becoming a city, at some time in the future,
and study the ramifications (i.e., funding, urbanized
ooK~itments, etc.) of such action, with citizen participation
and involvement. He stated he supports the Board continuing to
study city status and seeking to obtain such a status after
adopting the county charter.
Mrs. Girone expressed concern that the public needs more
information regarding the intent of the charter and more time to
react to it. She stated organizations such as the Business
Council, civic associations and the P.T.A.s have stated they
have not had time to meet to study Or discuss the proposed
Charter. She stated she has attended several meetings on the
matter and feels the Charter Committee has provided the Board
with an excellent foundation with which to work, however, many
new ideas continue to evolve from various meetinqs and the
public hearings which have been held. She stated the concept of
becoming a city has been a key issue at meetings, as there has
been concern expressed by residents of both the southern and
northern areas of the County regarding annexation. She stated a
city status would provide ~ermanent irf~unity from annexation and
provide more funding for roads. She stated she felt a city
charter has merit and requested that staff provide a
comprehensive, comparative study of the existing form of
goverrument, a county charter and a city charter. She stated she
felt more time should be allowed to study all the ramifications
and possibilities of the issues and concerns.
Mr. Daniel stated he did not feel the process had been rushed
and it was generally agreed a recommendation on the charter
would be provided to the public for their vote on the November
referendum.
Mr. Apple~ate stated the recomendation of the Board needs to be
communicated to the legislative delegation and their support
solicited as they will be the patrons of the bill.
Mr. Mayas expressed concern that there appears to be citizen
opposition referenced to by the Board and questioned why they
have not appeared during the public 'hearings to voice their
concerns, He stated two years ago the County determined it
needed a county charter in order to conduct its b~siness in a
more effective manner, a citizens committee was selected to
draft a proposed charter which would serve to organize the
governmental structure and he felt that committee had done a
wonderful job in accomplishing its task. Be stated this
committee conducted meeting8 at which to listen to concerned
individuals, however, this did not dissuade the committee from
drafting the document before the Board for consideration and he
stated he supports the Charter Committee's document. He stated
the question of a city charter is not an issue at this time.
Mr. Dodd stated a charter is a dot,ant that will provide the
Count~ with the strength to take care of its problems and
provide flexibility and freedom that is not allowed under the
present form of government. He stated he did not foresee
noticeable changes or problems created by adopting a charter.
86-594
~e stated he feels the General Assembly delegation will support
the document. He stated the charter will place the County in
line with its aeeountabilities to the people and he favors
consideration of the original oharter with whatever changes the
Board deems necessary.
Mr. Applegate stated his primary con~ern, with respect to
legislative support, is tha~ Chesterfield County must not only
have the support of its General Assembly delegation but also
their colleagues for this charter to be approved without major
changes.
Mr. Daniel stated he had no problem with presenting the proposed
document to the public for a vote in November and he also agreed
with Mr. Applegate that the Board should meet with the
legislative delegation and that such a meeting should be
scheduled immediately seeking their reeemmenda=ions. He stated
he did not ~eel it is a General Assembly prerogative to change
the substance of the charter, only provide format or wording
changes necessary to correct the document.
Mr. Dodd stated the presentation of the Roanoke charter was very
controversial aRd contained contradictions with the State law
which required many changes. He stated he did not foresee
problems with this charter, if approved by the voters.
Mr. Mayes stated the Charter Committee has provided the Board
with a fine document and it should be shared with the
legislative delegation.
Mrs. Girone stated she also felt it would be appropriate to
provide the legislative delegation with this docthment and that
they be requested to share their perspective and participate in
the formation of the charter with the Board.
Mr. Applegate stated he had received a condensed version ef the
proposed charter which differs from the document presented by
the Charter Committee.
Mr. Dodd stated he ~elt it would be most beneficial for the
Board to address/review each section of the original document
presented to the Board by the Charter Committee and discuss any
potential revisions.
Disousslons ensued with emphasis and concern expressed regarding
the need for a preamble for the charter that is a statement of
the County's philosophy and purpose; delaying consideration of
the charter to allow civic associations, school government
groups, the P.T.A.s, the Business Council and other
organizations more time to study the proposed document a~d
respond as to their positions on the document; boundaries;
general grant of powers, with teepee= to ~he deletion of the
word "cities" throughout the charter; additional powers of the
County, relative to the levy and collection of taxes on the sale
of meals and beverages; composition and election of the Board of
Supervisors, with respect to the reapportionment of the County
in 1991 and increasing the county to six (6) districts and six
(6) Board member~ with the Chairman of the Board being elected,
at large, by the County; presiding Officer, with respect to
election of a new chairman when, not if, a vacancy o~urs;
procedural powers of the Board; powers and duties of the County
Administrator, the word "powers" being deleted and replaced with
"responsibilities"; budget and accounting adoption dates being
amended; borrowing capabilities of the Board and deletion of the
restrictions for issuance of certain ~eb~; creation of
departments; operation of the Police Department as compared ~o
the operation of all o~her County departments; Committee on the
FUture of the County; appointment of the School Board members,
86-595
their terms and a public hearing process to be initiated;
funding and control of roads within the County; and the addition
of a conflict of interest statement as well as inclusion of
section to address the retention of school property in the
of the
It was generally agreed that the Board could vote on a
recommendation during its meeting to present the proposed
charter, with modifications, before the public for a vote in
November; that a meeting with the County's General Assembly
delegation would be scheduled prior to Septer~er 4, 1986; that a
prean~ble shall k~ drafted for inclusion into the Charter as an
amendraent at a future date; and a statement, as to the County's
position regarding a city charter, shall be issued.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by ~irs. Girone, the Board
recessed for dinner.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Dodd called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at the
Courthouse at 7:00 p.m. (EDST).
2. INVOCATION
Mr. Hedriok introduced Reverend Steve Hewlett, Associate Pastor
of the Second Baptist Church, who gave the invocation.
3. pr.~N~GE OF AL~KGIA~CE TO T~ FLAG OF 'r~ B/~l'r~ STATES OF
AMERICA
The Pledge of Allegiance
America was recited.
the Flag of
the United States of
4. APpROVAL OF~[IN~f~S
4.A. A24EN~MENT TO JULY 9, 1986
Mrs. Girone inquired if the statement regarding the 100%
participation includes the Rich~ond membership of the Richmond
Regional Planning District Commission, as Richmond has had its
own program for years.
Mr. ApDlegate stated the intent of his motion was not purposely
to exclude Richmond but to include participation by the other
jur±~dictions.
Mr. Daniel stated the minutes reflect that which took place at
the meeting and the amendment to the minute~ is correct. He
stated the minutes should be voted on, as amended, and then if
the Board wishes to further amend the minutes, with respect to
the intent of the motion, it should review, reinterpret and
revere on the motion at a later date.
It was generally agreed to defer this matter for further review.
4.B. JULY 23r 1986
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel,
approved the minutes of July 23, 1986, as submitted.
Vote: Unanimous
the Board
86-596
4.C. July 30, 1986
On motion o~ Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Mayes,
approved the minutes of July 30, 1986, as amended.
Vote: Unanimous
the Board
4.D. AUGUST 5, 1986
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Mayes,
approved the minutes of August 5, 1986, as submitted.
Vote: Unanimous
the Board
5. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Mr. Welchons stated that approximately two months ago the Board
was notified that the Falling Creek and Proctor'~ Creek
Wastewater TreatJaent Plants had been nominated by the State
water Control Board, Region III of the Envirord~ental Protection
Agency, for an award for excellence in maintenance and
operation of its facilities. He stated Mr. James Self,
Regional Administrator of Region III, EnviroD3~ental Protection
Agency, presented the Utilities Department with the award for
excellence in maintenance and operation of the Proctor's Creek
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Me stated the Proctor's Creek Plant
is now eligible to compete on the national level for an
additional award.
Mr. Howell introduced Mr. Robert Rivers who was recently
employed as Construction Manager and outlined his professional
experiences and responsibilities with the County.
6. BOA~DCO~I~EE~E~ORTS
Mr. Daniel stated that due to the length of the agenda he would
forego Committee Reports.
Mr. Applegate stated the first public presentation from the
Governor's commission on Transportation will be presented at a
joint RiehXnond Regional Planning District Commission and
Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting on August 14, 1986,
and urged the attendance of tho~e involved on these committees.
Mrs. Girone stated she would be attending the LGOC in
Charlottesville at which it is anticipated that the Executive
Board of VACO will take a position on the recommendation of the
Governor's .Commission on Transportation. She stated she had
attended several other events, which included the state Fire
Chief Conference held at the Sheraton which was very successful;
the Farm Tour, which included a dinner and tour of several farms
in Bowhatan and Chesterfield Counties; a meeting with the
Highway Commissioner regarding Route 288 at which time desires
were expressed regarding the location of and funding for roads;
aC=ended a meeting with citizens of the Brandermill community
regarding sewer; addressed the government class at Monaean High
School and a Kiwanis group; attended the grand opening of the
new Murray Oldsmobile dealership on Route 60; and attended the
presentation of the award for the Proctor's Creek Wastewater
Treatment Facility.
Mr. Dodd stated he also had attended many of the saree events as
the other members of the Board.
Mr. Mayes stated a public hearing was held at Matoaca ~iddle
School by the Board of Supervisors and Charter committee on the
proposed county charter. He stated the attendance indicated the
residents of Mateasa are very interested in events affecting the
County.
86-597
7. REOU~STBTOPOS~EACTION~ ~ERGENCYADDITIONS OR C~ANGES
IN 'r~K CInDER OF PP~EB~¢TATION
On motion Of ~r. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, tbs Beard added
Item 12.G.7., Consideration of Governor's Transportation
Program; added Item 8.C., Resolution Honoring MS. Karen Cart,
National Chairman of the Law Enforcement Explorers; added Item
12.H.3., Appointment of Alternate to the Richmond Regional
Planning District Commission and the Crater Planning District
Commission; deleted Item t2.J.2.a.l., Consider Condemnation
Proceedings for Water Line Easements Along Hicks Road for Leona
Branch; deleted Item 12.J.2.a.2., Consider Condemnation
Proceedings for Water Line Basements Along Hicks Road for Leona
T. Branch; and deleted Item 12.J.2.a.3., Con~ider Condemnation
Proceedings for Water Line Easements Along Hicks Road for
Bernard C. and Leona Branch, and adopted the agenda as amended.
Vote: Unanimous
8. RESOLD~tIONS OF SPECIAL P-ECOGNITION
8.A. MRS. GAIL MCCANTS AND MEMBERS OF CHESTER WOMAN'S CLUB FOR
VOLUNTEER EFFORTS
Mrs. McCants outlined the success of the 6th Annual Overnight
Camping Trip te Camp Baker for the residents of the Lucy Corr
~ursing Home, expressed appreciation for the financial support
provided by private individuals and businesses, the
administrator and staffs of the nursing home and Camp Baker for
the exceptional care and dedication provided to the nursing home
residents. She presented a check in the amount of $600 to the
Board for the Lucy B. Corr Nursing Home~s 6th Am_heal Overnight
Camping Trip to Camp Baker.
Several residents of the Nursing Home expressed their
appreciation for the care and support of the Chester Woman's
Club, the Board of Supervisors and the staff of the Nursing
Home.
On motion of the Board, the following resolution was adopted:
W~EAS, Gail MeCants, Health Chairman of the Chester
Woman's club, and members of that club, have strongly supported
the activities Of the Chesterfield County Lucy Corr Nursing
Home, through personal efforts and fund-raising activities; and
W~EAS, through the generosity and compassion of area
businesses and industry the members Of the Chester Woman's Club
were able to raise $1,000 to purchase supplies needed at Camp
Baker for the comfort and enjoyment of the handicapped campers;
and
Wk~EAS, the members of the Chester Woman's Club have
cooperated with staff members of the Chesterfield Nursing Home,
to provide special dietetic foods, special medication services,
individual assistance and volunteer services, especially in the
area of swimming assistance for Nursing Home residents at an
overnight camping trip for 30 residents, whose ages range from
30 to 100; and
W~U~a~EAS, the balance of the unused donation will be
presented to the Chesterfield County Nursing Home in the iorm
of a check for $600.
NOW, '£~U~mt~ORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors does hereby commend the members of
the Chester Woman's Club and Mrs. MeCants for outstanding
citizen participation in the voluntary care of Nursing Home
residents.
Vote: Unanimous
86-598
Mr. Dodd presented the executed resolution to Mrs. McCants and
several members of the Chester Woman's Club and expressed
appreciation for the invaluable service the organization
provides to the residents of the Nursing Moms.
8.B. RECOGNIZING STEPHEN RAYBOULD FOR MIS PARTICIPATION IN
INAUGURATION OF THE JAPkN YOUNG ASTRONAUT~ PROGRAM
On motion of the Board the following resolution was adopted:
W~N~AS, Stephen Raybould, son of Don and Geri Raybould of
12709 Ben Fry Drive, Chester, Virginia, founded a Chapter of the
Young Astronaut Council in his school; and
W~EI~EAS, Stephen Rayhould was One of two United states
teenagers selected to attend ceremonies for the inauguration of
the Japan Young Astronauts Program this month; and
W~u~EAS, Stephen Raybould has served ss editor-in-chief
and photo editor of his school's yearbook, co-editor of the
literary magazine, a member of the Math Club and jazz hand, and
was named "Carver's Outstanding Student of the Year"; and
W~E~U~, Stephen Raybould has brought pride and
recognition not only to himself and his !amily but also to the
County of Chesterfield at large.
NOW, THEI~EFOPd~ BE IT ~SOLV~D, that the Board of
Supervisors of Chesterfield County recognizes Stephen Raybould
for his selectio~ to at~end the Japan Young Astronauts Program
and for hie outstanding accomplishments while attending Carver
Middle School and wishes him continued success in all future
endeavors.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Dodd recognized Mr. Stephen Raybould for his exceptional
achievements and honors and presented him with the executed
resolution.
8.B. KAREN. CARR~ NATIONAL CHAIRMAN OF THIS LAW E~FORCEM~/~T
~XPLOP~ERS
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
adopted =he following resolution:
W~U~%~AS, Karen Carr of Skinquarter in Chesterfield,
three-time president of Law Enforcement Explorer Post 609 of the
Boy Scouts of America, sponsored by the Chesterfield County
Police Department, has brought honor to the County by her
positive leadership among young people and service to her
community; and
W.~EAS, Karen Carr has received acclaim outside the
community as Chairman of the Robert E. Lee Council Explorer
Officers Association and as a past recipient of a J. Edgar Hoover
Foundation Scholarship; and
W~EREAS, Karen Cart has used her time wisely and diligently
by attending college at John Tyler Community College and working
at Dot's Pastry; and
W~U~%EAS, Karen Carr has also recently been elected National
Youth Chairman of the Law Enforcement Explorer Scouts of America,
representing 20~ Explorer Posts with approximately 42,000
NOW, T~EREFO~E BE IT RESOL~1$D, tha~ the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors does hereby publicly congratulate
Eaten Cart on such high achievement, and extends good wishes as
she travels throughout the United States fulfilling her duties
86-599
and responsibilities as National Youth Chairman of the Law
Enforcement Explorers o~ the Boy ~cout~ of America.
Vote: Unanimous
Mrs. Sirone recognized the OUtstanding achievements and honors
of Ms. Karen Cart and presented her with the executed
resolution.
9. ~%RINGS OF CITIx~s ON L~SC~RnI~.~ MA'rr~S OR CLA//~S
Mr. ~edrick stated there were no hearings of citizens scheduled
at this time.
10. DE~%ED ITemS
Mr. Hedrick stated there were no deferred items for
consideration at this time.
11. PUBLIC HEAP. IN~S
ll.A. PUBLIC NEARING TO CONSIDER T~tE NORTF~RN AREA LAND USE
AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been scheduled for a
public hearing to consider the Northern Area Land Use and
Transportation Plan.
Mr. Bill Peele explained the principles for plans of this nature
and how they are utilized. He briefly reviewed background
information which initiated the preparation o£ the proposed Plan
and highlighted the issues considered most signficant by
concerned citizens. He stated the Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Plan.
Mr. Marling presented an overview of the proposed Plan. He
outlined in detail the following: boundaries of the area
encompassed in the Plan; goals and policies which would guide
the determination of growth and character for the area, with
emphasis on the need for improved standards for development for
a segment of the Route 360 Corridor between Courthouse and
Turner Roads and the establishment of an overlay district for
the Route 360 Corridor to preserve the functional capacity of
the arterial and encourage high quality development; reservation
of sufficient road rights-of-way for future read widening, as
necessary; revisions suggested by staff to the Plan, endorsed by
the commission, which represent minor changes in order to
reflect existing development and zoning commitments; and a
revision which modified the Transportation Plan Map to depict
three (3) alternative corridor alignments for proposed Route
288, the ultimate alignment of which is to be deter~ained threugh
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation IVDH&T)
Environmental Impact Study process.
Mrs. Girone stated she wished =o emphasize that it is the
intention of ~r. Applegate and herself to designate, via this
Plan, the eastern Route 288 Corridor to be shown on the Plan map
as it presently exists through Walton Park and Salisbury and to
designate the western route, as approved by the Hoard in the
~pwhite/Route 288 Development Area Land Use and Transportatiom
Plan and forwarded to the Metropolita~ Planning Organization
(MPC) and the State Highway Department, threugh Powhatan County
as the official position of Chesterfield County. She stated
staff had attended her "First Monday" night citizens ~eeting and
presented a recommendation for an alternative alignment for
Route 288 located along the Powhata~/Chesterfield County
borders; however, it is neither the will of the citizens, nor
the intent of Mr. Applegate and herself as representatives of
the northern area, that this route be designated on the map.
86-600
She stated the final determination for the future alignment of
this route will be determined after the State Highway Department
concludes an Environmental Impact Study, which study will
scrutinizs a nt=~ber Of corridors between the existing route and
the Powhatan Corridor. She stated, after a public hearing
process is completed, VDH&T will submit a recommendation tu the
Highway Commission for its decision. She stated the study has
not yet been funded and, when funding is received, it could take
at least two (2) years to complete.
Fir. Applegate stated he and Mrs. Girone feel it is in the best
interest of the northern area of the County that staff's revised
recommendation for an alternative route for Route 288 to border
Chesterfield and Powhatan Counties be deleted.
~_r. Larry Sledge e~ressed concern that, with respect to the
preparation of the Northern Area Plan and the Powhite/Route 288
Plan, Salisbury is not considered a core, unity but two separate
pieces of land. He stated he is very concerned about what will
happen to Winterfield Road as a result o~ these Plans. Re
~tated the residents located to the west of Winterfield Road do
not consider staff's proposed alternative alignment for Route
288 located a sufficient distance from their homes.
Ms. Maroie Bailey stated she had requested that two maps be
brouqht to the Board meeting, one map of current highways
indicating all the alternate routes that could be utilized in
connecting Route 288 to the highways in Henrioo and an accurate,
updated map of the southwestern section o~ Salisbury, indicating
the correlation of the most recently developed sections of
Salisbury with the proposed alignment of Route 288. She
expressed concern that maps of this area, utilized at the
various meetings regarding the proposed Route 288 alignment,
were incomplete, not shewing the residential develolznent in
areas such as Galloway Place, Reathland, and Fountainhead. She
expressed concern that staff had indicated the proposed corridor
~or Route 288 would be located approximately 3/4 mile from
Salisbury when information she obtained, by driving the route,
indicated the distance to be 0.8 mile, which would place the
Route 288 alignment either on top of or in the back yards of the
homes located on Galloway Place, Fountainhead and Heathland.
She stated she opposes staff's recommendation for the location
of Route 288 alignment to border along the powhatan/chesterfield
County borders and agrees with the Board to move the alignment
further west.
Mr. Luther Stringham opposed staff's proposed alignment of Route
288 as it would be located very close to his home. He stated he
is aware of the importance o~ good staff work and admires the
support that staff provides policy officials, however, he does
not feel it is riqht for staff to override those with
responsibility for making policy decisions. He stated he also
felt the location of the northern segment of Route 288 is an
issue On which the Board of Supervisors should take a positive
stand, in the interest of the people of the County and is not an
issue which should be left up to a consultant hired to perform
the Environmental Impact Study, the Highway Department or the
Governor's Commission on Transportation. He expressed his
appreciation ts the Board for its diligence in seeking a good
solution to this problem.
Mr. Marvin Gregory stated he opposes the desiqnation of Buford
Road as a ninety (90) foot right-of-way, as it will have a
detrimental impact on property he owns along this road. He
stated he ~oes not see any reason for designating the road as a
90 foot right-of-way for the purpose of future widening when
such action may neve~ materialize.
Ms. Deborah Coles ex~ressed concern that the proposed Route 288
will divide the Salisbur~ community and stated she has seen the
impact of such action in northern Virginia (i.e., noise
pollution, air pollution, decline in q~ality of l~fe and
property values, increase in crime, etc.) She stated she
86-601
supports the need for long term and farsighted planning to
preclude this area from becoming similar to northern Virginia.
She urged the Board to recommend the furthest possible western
route through Powhatan County for Route 288.
Mr. Tom Snyder stated Chesterfield residents are very concerned
with the proposed lo~ation of Route 288 and feel a strong
message from the Board of Supervisors should be conveyed to
State agencies stressing that the residents do not want major
roadways constructed through their neighborhoods. He requested
that the Board of Supervisors make the voices of the people
heard by recon~ending a specific western rou=e for Route 288
into Powhatan County that does not cross Winterfield Road. He
requested that the Board reaffirm the Planning Commission'e
recommendation, ae well as the Board's position, on the specific
location for Route 288 and provide guidance and clarity On this
important issue.
Ms. Sandra Coleman, representing the Board cf Directors of the
Salisbury Romeow~ers Association, stated she had delivered
petitions, containing approximately 600 signatures, to the
Planning Commission clearly stating the residents' opposition to
the generalized recommendation for the toes=ion of Route 288 and
endorsement of the western route. She reiterated the position
of the Salisbury Homeowners Association to be opposition to the
location of Route 288 in close proximity to the Salisbury
Subdivision and support of the most westerly route into Powhatan
County; she stated the residents would like the Board of
Supervisors to take a position in favor of a specific western
route and not a generalized corridor.
Mr. Ken Willard stated he supports the Board's recommendation
for the most westerly route into Powhatan County for the
location of Route 288 and requested that the Board take a firm
position on its recommendation. Re stated he feels the issue
most important in this regard is the impact this proposed road
will have on the quality of life in this area.
Mr. Jim Mahone, President of ~he Surrywood Homeowners
Association, expressed concerns regarding the impact of this
Plan on the residential and commercial development in the Hull
Street Road Corridor, area schools, property values, traffic
congestion and the aesthetic appearance of the neighborhood.
Mr. Bob Mooney, President of the Bexley Association, stated the
main entrance into the Bexley Subdivision is located off Route
360 and expressed concern that the future development of Route
360, if not properly planned and compatibly developed, will
adversely impact the area. He stated residents support the
overlay zoning concept to protect residential property values
and enhance the quality of life in the surrounding communities.
He stated the residents realize that commercial development
along Route 360 is inevitable and profitable, however, they will
oppose any development that is not of a high quality and not
sought after as a unique development complex. ~e stated the
residents seriously question the need for additional small
shopping centers, fast food restaurants and discount food stores
along Route 360, particularly between Turner Read and Courthouse
Road, and believe the best commercial use for this land is a
high quality, properly planned office complex that is unique,
properly buffered and compatible with Bexley and other
surrounding communities. He stated secondly the residente feel
the only type of multifamily development along Route 360 that
is appropriate, or that would be supported by residents, would
be owner/occupied condominium developments.
Ms. Jacquelyn Stoddard inquired if the proposed Plan includes a
change for the expansion or widening oi Winterfield Road. Mr.
Marling stated the proposal for Winterfield Road is to maintain
a seventy (70) foot right-of-way with a two lane road.
In response to gueetione from Mrs. Girone, Mr. McCraoken
explained that the eastern corridor for Route 288 was approved
86-602
by the Highway Commission in the late 60's/early 70'a, this
corridor being the Commission's officially adopted corridor ~cr
Route 288 and the western corridor, along Michaux Creek into
Powhatan CouJlty, is the route adopted by the Board in the
Pewhite/Route 288 Land Use and Transportation Plan. Me stated
several alternative routes and options for identifying the
corridor for Route 288 will be established as part of the
envirorEaental assessment process conducted by the Highway
Department. He stated the "window concept" is the area located
between these two recommended corridors which will be studied
for alternative routes.
Ms. Coles expressed concern that staff's recommended alignment
for Route 288 would specifically traverse the proposed public
park along the James River whieh she believed would be adversely
impacted by this road.
In response to questions from Ms. Bailey, Mrs. Girone explained
that environmental impact studies and public hearings are
conducted prior to the determination of major highway corridors.
She stated upon conclusion of the public hearing process, the
Board cf Supervisors votes a position on the issue and makes a
recommendation to the State; then the Highway Department sta~
considers all the recommendations and positions on the issue and
makes a recor~endation to the Highway Commission, with the
Commission having the final decision and vote as to the exact
location of the road.
Mr. Tyler ~ancook inquired whether the Board has been approached
by Henrloo regarding Route 288 and if there has been any
discussion as to their position on this matter.
Mrs. Girone stated that, at the present time, there is a dispute
as to the river crossing for Route 288 into Henrico County, as
there is a federal court order ruling that Route 288 not be
built in close proximity to or on the grounds o~ the Tuekahoe
Plantation. She stated that the federal court order also
requires that, if the alignment of Route 288 is changed, there
must be an environmental irapact study completed. She stated
that if the Board's recommendation for following the Bowhatan
route is accepted the road would be moved a considerable
distance in Goochla//d and would cross near the quarry. She
stated she has met with Board members and planning staff from
both Goochland and Powhatan Counties cn this issue and they, as
well as the members of the Metropolitan ~lanning Organization,
are aware of Chesterfield's position on the location of this
road. She stated there is ne official position from either
Powhatan or Goochland County, as yet, on the location of this
route, however, people are always concerned ' about
construction of a major roadway such as this one and its impact.
Mr. Applegate stated Goochland is a member of the Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPC) and has endorsed the resolution ~or
the impact study, as has Chesterfield, Benrico and the City of
Richmond; however, Powhatan County is not a member of the M~O.
Mr. Applegate requested that Mr. Marling explain the intent and
objectives of the proposed overlay district for Route 360.
Mr. Marling explained that the concept of the Overlay dis:riet
would impose additional requirements above and beyond those of
the existing zoning ~or properties along the Corridor to enhance
the standards for development.
~r. Applegate expressed concern regarding co~ercial development
beyond the intersection of Courthouse and Branchway Roads in the
Stonehenge area and stated he could not support the
recommendation ~or office use in this area, as it represents
encroachment into a residential neighborhood. He requested that
the Plan, along Courthouse Road, be amended to remove the o~ice
u~e designation and confine land use in this area to existing
single family residential development; that the Board have the
authority to establish setback and buffer requirements on a case
86-603
By case Basis; that large parcel development, not strip
development, occur along Hull Street Road~ the removal of high
density residential development in the southeast quadrant of
Walmsley and Route 360, with a mixture of high quality
commercial or office development consistent with existing
cor~mercial or office development along Route 360 occur where
high density residential development is removed. Mr. Applegate
stated he did not want to see Null Street Road turn out to kc
another Midlcthian Turnpike. He stated he felt a sign
ordinance, similar to the ordinance established for Route 10,
should be implemented on Route 360 and incorporated into the
Plan. Me stated he wished to go on record that any encroachment
into residential areas is going to require larger setbacks and
buffers than those presently required.
Mr. Marling stated the overlay district would tend to reinforce
the ability to achieve large parcel development and address the
quality of development, not the land use. He stated the Plan
does recommend that s mixture of uses be achieved along Route
360.
Mr. Peele stated staff is of the opinion that the overlay
district would encourage better quality development than that
which has occurred in the past in this area. Me etated staff
had not recommended that the entire corridor be developed as
office or retail uses. Because of the unique topographical
features found along Route 360, staff felt it would be easier
to transition and protect the existing area residential
neighborhoods if more intense uses were abutting the higher
density residential uses, such as tewnhouse and/or condominium
developments. Me stated with respect to zoning cases in this
area, staff would recommend on a case by case basis larger
buffer and setback requirements, as well as greater restrictions
on uses to effect higher standards of development and serve to
protect adjacent neighborhoods. He stated the establishment of
a new sign district would require an ordinance amendment which
could not be effected at this hearing and the issue would have
to be brought before the Board at a later date.
Mr. Daniel indicated concern for the rehabilitation of the
segment of Route 360 from Chippenham Parkway to Turner Road and
requested that action be taken to make this portion consistent
with the rest of the long term planning for Bull Street Road.
~lr. Daniel reguested that the P18/1 include a recommendation that
staff conduct a detailed study for the rehabilitation of the
portion of Route 360 from ChippeD_ham Parkway to Turner Road and,
in a Plan amendment, submit a recommendation to the Board for
action.
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors
adopted General Plan 2000 on June 22, 1977; and
WHEREAS, Title 15.1, Chapter 11, Article 4 of the Code of
Virginia provides for the preparation and review of a
comprehensive plan for all Virginia localities, and allows
preparation of this Plan in parts; and
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Board of S~9ervisors
requested that the Chesterfield County Planning Commission
review the existing Plan for the Northern Planning Area and to
determine if revisions to the General Plan 2000 were needed; and
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Planning Commission has
considered proposed Plan alternatives and has h~ld public
hearings on the proposed Plan revisions; and
W~EREAS, the Chesterfield County ~lanning Cormmission has
recommen~ that the Chesterfield County Beard of Supervisors
adopt Staff's Recommended Plan subject to certain changes.
86-604
NOW, THEREFOP~E, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield
County Board of Supervisors adopt the recommended Northern
Plan~inq Area Land Use and Transportation Plan aa an amendment
to the Chesterfield General Plan 2000 to guide future
development and provision of ~treets and public facilities in
the area except:
1. the existing VDH&T eastern alignment, as well as the
western alignment, adopted by the Board in the
Powhite/Route 288 Land Use and Transportation Plan,
for Route 288 be designated on the Plan map;
2. Winterfield Road he designated as a two-lane road with
a seventy (70) foot right-of-way;
3. Buford Road be designated as a two-lane road with a
seventy (70) foot right-of-way and not be widened;
4. the southwest corner of Robious/Route 147 intersection
be designated as office use;
removal of high density residential ume along Route
360, unless zoning presently exists;
6. removal of office use on Courthouse Road at Branohway
Road south of the existing Southport Industrial Park
in the Stonehenge area and designate the area as
residential use} and
7. study for rehabilitation of the portion of Route 360
from chipper/tam Parkway to Turner Road.
Mrs. Girone expressed her appreciation to the Salisbury
residents for their participation in the evolution of the Plan.
Vote: Unanimous
It was generally agreed that the Board would recess for five
minutes.
Reco~vening:
Mr. Daniel requested to suspend the rules to allow Item 12.A.,
Acceptance of Funds for County's Share of Proceeds From Sale of
Timber at Pocahontas State Forest, to be heard out of order.
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
suspende~ the rules to allow the presentation and acceptance of
a check for the County's share of proceeds from the sale of
timber at Pocahontas State Forest to be taken out of order.
Vote= Unanimous
12. NEW B~SINESS
12.A. ACCEPTAi~cE OF FUI~DS FOR COUNTY'S SHARE OF PROC~nS FROM
SALE OF TIMBER AT POCAHONTAS STATE FOREST
~r. James E. ~owen, Superintendent of the State Forestry
Division, explained briefly the sources of revenue derived from
products sold at Pocahontas State Forest and presented the Board
with a cheek in the amount of $49,870.99, representing the
County's share of these proceeds.
Mr. Dodd, on behalf of the Board, expressed appreciation for the
efforts of the Forestry Service.
86-605
11.
ll.B.
CONTAININg 11.5± ACRES AT THE CHESTERFIELD AIRPORT
C
PUBLIC HEARINC. S
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A TRACT OF LA~D
iNDUSTRIAL PARK TO FORTU~rE PLASTICSr INC.
Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider conveyance of a tract cf land
containing 11.5± acres at the Airport Industrial Park, which
fronts the north side of Whitepine Road and adjoins the eastern
property line of CCC Properties.
Mr. Baldsrson presented a brie~ summary of the request.
No one came ~orward to address the matter.
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary documents for the sale of 11.5± acres (at $32,500 per
acre), fronting the northern side of Whitepine Road and
adjoining the eastern line of CCC Properties, in the Airport
Industrial Park to Fortune Plastics, Inc.
Vote: Unanimous
ll.C. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONVEYANCE OF A TRACT OF LAND
CONTAINING 14.06± ACRES AT THE CHESTE~!ELD AIRPORT
INDUSTRIAL PARK TO LANDMARK COMPANY OF VIRGINIAt INC.
Mr. Medrick stated this date and time had been advertised as a
public hearing to consider the conveyance of a tract of land
containing 14.06± acres at the Chesterfield Airport Industrial
Park to Landmark company of Virginia, Inc.
Mr. Balderson presented a brief summary of the request.
No one came forward to address the matter.
On motio~ cf Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayas, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute the
necessary documents for the sale of 14.06± acres (at $25,000 per
acre), fronting the southern side of Whitepine Road and
adjoining the southeastern property line of McQuay Perfex, Inc.,
in the Airport Industrial Park to Landmark CO~pany of Virginia,
Inc.
Vote: Unanimous
With respect to the pending proposed Interstate 288, Mr.
Applegate inquired ii consideration has been given to revising
the pricing structure of property at the Airport Industrial
Park. Mr. Balderson stated this issue has been under discussion
with the Administration.
ll.D. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDF~ AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1986-87
BUDGET INCREASING APPROPRIATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
ROUTE 288 ~ INTEREST PAYME19TS ON THE BOND ISSUR
Mr. Hedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a
public hearing to consider an amendment to the 1986-87 budget
increasing appropriations for construction of Route 288 and
interest payments on the bond issue,
Mr. Lane Ramsey presented a brie~ summary on this issue.
Nc one came forward to address the matter.
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. ~ayes, the Board
approved an ~endment to the 1986-87 budget to increase total
appropriations by approximately $31,043,260, for the Route 288
project and appropriated ~unds as follows:
86-606
Uses:
Bond Proceeds
Interest Earnings
Construction of Rt. 288
Interest Payment on Bonds
$30,000,000
lr043,300
$31,043,300
$30,000,000
lf043r300
$31,043,$00
12. NEW BUSINESS
12.B. RESOLUTION REpUESTING THE CHESTERFIELD CIRCUIT COURT TO
ORDER A REFEP~ENDUI~ ELECTION ON TH~ COLrRTY CHAi~TER
Mr. Micas presented an amended resolution and charter, per
discussions of the work session, to the Board.
Mr. Daniel briefly recapped the events leading to the
presentation of the amended resolution and charter to the Board
for consideration. He reiterated the significance of the
Board's decision to consider adoption of a County charter, the
participation of the Charter committee in drafting the proposed
charter, the citizen input received at three public hearings,
and the proposal for consideration of attaining city status. He
requested that staff assemble for consideration a comparative
report of the three forms of government (existing,
charter and city charter) with information relative to the pres
and cons, liabilities and responsibilities, benefits and costs
for city status for future reference and discussion. He stated
a meeting should be scheduled with the County's General Assembly
delegation, prior to September 4, 1986, ~o review ~he substance
of the proposed charter. He stated the Board's action this
evening represents collective thinking and is the culmination of
an extensive process. Mr. Daniel further stated this issue is
not a new issue as it has been under discussion for more than
one (1] year. He stated on August 28, 1985, the Board passed a
resolution committing the Board to bringing forth a charter
ooneep~ and to have it presente~ to the voters for a referendum
on November 4, 1986, with said resolution having been adopted
and signed by each individual ~oard member. ~r. Daniel read the
August 28, 1985 resolution, which was as follows:
"WHEREAS, Chesterfield County is a rapidly growing urban
community in the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, Chesterfield County's population currently trails
only Fairfax, Henrico and Prince William Counties, each with
structured forms of governments; and
WHEREAS, Chesterfield County's population currently trails
only Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Richmond among Virginia's ten
largest cities; and
· WHEP~EAS, Virginia's ten largos~ sidles and four of the five
largest urban counties have structured forms cf government which
require the institutions which their tax revenue support to be
accountable to the people; and
WHEREAS, The Commonwealth of Virginia estimates that in ten
years the population of Chesterfield County will trail only
~alrfax County, Virginia Beach and Norfolk; and
86-607
WHEREAS, The Citizens of Chesterfield County do not
currently enjoy the accountability of its institutions granted
to other urban communities within the Commonwealth of Virginia;
and
W~REAS, The Commonwealth of Virginia by Acts of 1985
General AsseJably has permitted by Section 15.1 of the Code of
Virginia, 1950, as amended for counties to adopt a charter as
their form of government.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County
Board of Supervisors on AuPust 28, 1985, initiate all necassary
legislative processes required by law to adopt a charter as its
form of government; and
FUR'i'~R BE IT RESOLVED, that the question "Should the
General As~e~ly of Virginia Grant Chesterfield County a Charter
as Its Form of Government?" be placed to the voters on November
4, 1986; and
FURTHER BE IT ~ESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board
of Supervisors appoint a citizens advisory cor~nittee to review
forms of government available to localities along with the
concept and format of the Chesterfield County draft charter
prepared by the County Attorney's Office and make their
recommendation for a structured change in Chesterfield County
government".
Mr. Applagate inquired as to the status of the preamble for the
propose~ charter and if the paper before the Board is being
moved along NOW or if the Board is waiting until after it meets
with the General Assembly delegation before proceeding.
~r. Daniel stated he understood the paper was being moved along,
based cn the completion of the Board's actions at the work
session, subject to modifications of the charter after the
Board's meeting with the General ASSembly delegation. He stated
he understood the preamble could be added to the proposal st a
future date, through an amendment process.
Mr. Micas stated the final conclusion of the Board at the work
session was that the preamble would be addressed at some future
date through an amendment to the proposal. He stated that
revisions to the charter can be made at the time the Board meets
with the General AsseJ~bly delegation, provided the revisions can
be incorporated into the final document prior to September 4,
1986.
Mr. Dodd stated a meeting will be scheduled with the C~eneral
Assembly delegation at which time revisions can be made to the
document.
Mrs. Girone stated that if the report on the city status could
be available by the time the Board meets with the General
Assembly delegation she would like to have it because if the
report provides favorable data relative to a city charter, she
would rather consider the city status.
Mr. Daniel stated he would not favor support of a city charter
until he had received more public input and perhaps
reestablishment of another citizens group to study the pros and
eons and recommendations for a city charter because it is a
total change in concept and very difficult to achieve in a short
period of time.
Mr. Mayes stated he had seconded Mr. Daniel's motion because the
document ensures aceountabillty for the County and the people;
it ensures that the power of the government rest~ with the
people; it ensures the protection of the integrity of the County
goverrament; and it ensures the efficiency of governmental
operations.
86-608
Mr. Applegate questioned the need for ~7.5, Corm~ittee on the
Future of the County, the Board may create, alter and abolish
commissions and advisory boards to assist the County in
accomplishing its statutory responsibilities. He stated he was
also concerned with singling out one depart~ent, the Police
Department, a~d felt all County departments should be generated
and addressed in the same manner.
Mr. Daniel stated he understands the charter to indicate that
the Board Of Supervisors has the prerogative of disciplining its
own members. He stated that it would only be necessary for the
Commonwealth's Attorney to become involved in situations where
criminal actions were implicated, such as involvement with the
Police Department. Mr. Applegate stated any criminal action of
the Board should carry the same penalty and this mechanism, if
applicable, should pertain to all departments, not just the
Police Department.
Mr. Mayes stated the charter has been reviewed, analyzed,
scrutinized and debated extensively and he did not believe any
useful purposes can be gained by continuing to discuss the
matter.
Mrs. Girone questioned, with respect to ~4.2., Duties and
Responsibilities of the County Administrator, the use of the
word responsibility in the second line. Mr. Micas stated it
would be appropriate for the word "responsibilities" to replace
"responsibility." with respect to ~6.7., Department of Police,
Mrs. Gircne stated she feels the Board should discuss this
document with the police officers to inform them of the Board's
actions and changes. In conjunction with the section pertaining
to the Police Department, she voiced objection to the portion of
the county charter indicating the nee~ for disciplinary and/or
punitive action against the Board, as s~eh situations should not
Mr. Daniel stated he did not feel any Board member should have
the right to serve On tho Scard and violate the law without
being punished and he felt the language appropriate.
Mr. Applegate stated he feels strongly about the issues he
previously addressed. He stated he has not had sufficient time
to read the revised charter in its entire context; however, with
the assurance of the Board that it will meet with the General
Assembly delegation prior to september 4, 1986, and that the
document can be a~ended, he will support the motion.
Mrs. Girone expressed concerns that the neither the General
Assembly delegation nor the Police Department have seen the
revised document or had an opportunity to comment on it. She
expressed concern regarding the statement indicating that
disciplinary and/or pumitive action against Board members may be
several school issues tc be resolved; she stated citizens have
indicated they would like to be free of the threat of arunexation
and would like to have more money for roads from the State, both
issues which can be accomplished through a city charter, but the
ramifications of such a document have not yet been addressed.
~he stated she would like to take the time to have staff outline
the ramifications of a city charter and the Board consider it
rather than expending action to go through the process cf
creating a county charter and then immediately proceed to amend
it. She stated she would abstain from a vote on the issue, at
this time, as she feels there are too many unanswered questions,
that the decision is being rushed and that there is a lack of
citizen involvement.
Mr. Dedd stated he supports the charter as he feels such a
dcct~aent will ~trengthen County government and will be a
stepping stone tc the creation of a city charter at so~e time in
the future. He stated the county charter will provide the
citizens the opportunity to vote for what they want for their
government. He stated it is the responsibility of the County
86-609
Administrator to operate the County government and the Board to
make the policies. He stated the County is a good county and it
will be an even better one in the future.
On motion o£ Mr. Daniel, seconded by Fir. Mayes, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED s¥ THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
C~STERFIELD, VIRGINIA:
1. That the Circuit Court of the County of Chesterfield,
or any judge thereof, is hereby reqlleste~ to order an election
on November 4, 1986, upon the question of whether the County of
Chesterfield should request the General Assembly to grant the
County a County charter, a copy of which is attached to this
resolution and incorporated hereby by reference, which question
shall be placed on the ballot i~ the following form:
Shall Chesterfield County request the General Assembly to
grant it a County charter?
of the
Court of the County of Chesterfield, or any judge thereof.
3. That this resolution shall take effect in~ediately.
The Board being polled:
Mr. Dodd: Aye
Mr. Daniel: Aye
Mr. Applegate: Aye
Mrs. Girone: Abstention
Mr. Mayes: Aye
Mr. Dodd requested the County Administrator to arrange
meeting with the General Assembly delegation as soon
possible.
Yes
No
That a copy of this resolution, certified by the Clerk
Board Of Supervisor~, shall be filed with the Circuit
the
as
12.C. RER~WAL RATES FOR GROUP HEALTH CARE PLANS
Mr. Hedriok reviewed the proposed health care plan program for
employees.
Mr. Applegate inquired if the recon~endation for obtaining a
consultant firm is necessary to perform a comprehensive review
of the County's employee benefits programs.
Mr. Hedrick stated this action will involve comparisons of other
governmental jurisdictions and industry, as well as extensive
research, etc., that is beyond the capability of County staff at
this time, and will require the expertise of a qualified
benefits administrative consulting firm.
Mrs. Girone inquired if the proposed Blue Cross/Blue Shield
deficit is being addressed at this time. Mr. Hedrick stated the
deficit figures are not yet available and the issue cannot be
addremsed until SUCh time as that information is available. He
stated the County is faced with renewals and it must deal with
ratee as far as the coverage is concerned.
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved the proposed renewal rates for Group Health Care Plans,
providing four options (Blue Cross/Blue Shield Comprehensive,
Prucare, U~ited Medical Plan of Virginia, and Key Care); and
authorized the County Administrator to contract a qualified
benefits administrative consulting firm to proceed with a
comprehensive review o~ the County's employee benefits programs
86-610
and ad~Lress the proposed Blue C~oss/Blue Shield deficit at a
later date once the actual figures are determined at the end of
the final quarter of the current plan year effective september
30, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
12 .D.
REQUEST FOR ENTERTAIN/~NT/MUSICAL AND FIREWORKS FESTIVAL
PERMIT FOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION
On motion o£ Mr. Daniel, seconded by Firs. Girone, the Board
approved the request for a musical/entertainmmnt and fireworks
permit to the Chesterfield County Fair Association to hold the
annual County Fair at the Chesterfield County Fairgrounds
September 7-13, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
12.E.
ACCEPT GRANT FOR MENTAL HEALTH/MENTAL RETARDATION TO
ESTABLISH COMMUNITY P~ESIDENCE FOR MF/4TALLY HETARDED
ADULTS
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
accepted a grant from the State Department of Mental Health and
Mental Retardation in the amount of $44,000 and amended the
Mental Health and Mental Retardation budget by said amount to
provide for the emplo!n~ent of one full-time Residential
Counselor for the p~rpose of establishing community residences
for three adults.
Vote: Unanimous
12.F. SET DATES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
12.F.1. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC MEARING TO CONSIDER Ot~DINANCE
LIMITING LICENSE TAX UPON "DIRECT SELLERS"
On motion of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Firs. Girone, the Board
set September 24, 1986, at 9:00 a.m,, for a public hearing to
consider adopting an Ordinance to amend the County Code by
adding ~12-1.2, to exempt certain direct sellers with sales of
no more than $4,000 per year from license ~axation and limit the
rate of tax on direct sellers with sales exceeding $4,000 per
year.
vote: Unanimous
12.F.2. SET DAT~ FOR PUBLIC ~%RiNG TO CONSIDER OREINANCR
RELATING TO BURNING OF LEAVES
On motion Of Mrs. Girone, seoonded by Mr. Daniel, the Board set
September 10, 1986, at 7:00 p.m., for a public hearing to
consider amendment of the Leaf Burning Ordinance.
Vote: Unanimous
Mr. Dodd inquired as to what the sources of funding would be if
the County assumes the responsibility for the disposition of
leaves. Mrs. Girone stated there is some funding in the budget
for this item. Mr. Daniel stated he would like to have the
results of the p~blio opinion study regarding leaf burning
available at the September 10, 1986, public hearing.
12.G. COM1EUNITYDEVELOPMENT ITRMS
12.G.1. STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION COST A~PROVAL
on motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved the request for street light installation at the end of
86-611
Bollinger Drive in the amount of $648.88,
the Matoaca District Street Light Fund.
Vote: Unanimous
to be expended from
12.G.2. STREET LIGHT REQUESTS
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
approved the requests for street lights at the intersection of
Focono Drive and Saybrook Drive, with funds to be expended from
the Clever Hill District Street Light Funds; the intersection of
Falstone Road and Southmoor Road, with funds to be expended from
the Dale District Street Light Funds; the intersection of
Marquette Road and Southmoor Road, with funds to be expended
from =he Dale District Street Light Funds; the intersection of
Hopkins Road and Monza Drive, with funds to be expended from the
Dale District Street Light Funds; and the intersection o~
Hopkins Road and Lake Hills Road, with funds to be expended ~rom
the Dale District Street Light Funds.
vote: Unanimous
Mr. Daniel requested that Mr. McHlfish respond to Ms. Smith as
to the reasons why a street light at Lake Rills Road does not
meet the criteria.
Mr. McElfish stated, with respect to a pending installation date
for street lights in Meadowdale, that Virginia Power had
informed him it would be two to three months, or longer, before
the street lights could be installed.
Mr. Hedrick stated the study and recommendation on the street
light policy is underway.
12.G.3. APPROPRIATION FOR SIDEWALKS ON HOPKINS ROAD
Mr. McCracken stated the Virginia Departa%ent of Highways and
Transportation (VDR&T) is currently designing the Hopkins Road
widening project from Seulah Road to Meadowdale Boulevard and
has asked the County if it wishes to include sidewalk on the
project. He s~ated VDR&T requires the County to acquire any
additional right-of-way needed for sidewalks and pay one-half of
the construction cost.
Mr. Daniel stated he supports the concept of installing
sidewalks along Hopkins Road, however, he did not believe the
County has yet adopted a policy for providing sidewalks. He
also stated that funding was not available fur such a project.
Mr. McCraeken stated VDH&T has requested to be advised by the
County as soon aa possible if it desires to include sidewalk on
the project, as it is proceeding with the design and anticipates
holding a public hearing in November, 1986.
Mr. Daniel expressed concern as to the impact of this project on
the properties adjoining Hopkins Road and requested staff to
contact VDH&T to determine if the sidewalk issue, to include the
concept of acquiring the right-of-way, could be included as part
of the public hearing process.
Mr. McCracken expressed concern that a delay in the progress of
the project may occur if no action is taken on this item at this
time, particularly if VDH&T needs to work out the detail of thc
design for the right-of=way.
On motion o~ Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Hoard
instructed staff to conduct VDH&T to determine if the sidewalk
issue, to include the concept of acquiring the right-of-way, can
be included as a part of their p~blio hearing process, with the
Board deciding on the sidewalk construction after the hearing.
86-612
It was generally agreed that a sidewalk policy should be
developed and that funding for sidewalk installation should be
included in the budget and the Capital Improvements Program.
12.G.4. TRAFFIC SICk, AL STUDIES FOR ROUTE 10 AND OSBORNE ROAD,
CHESTER ROAD AND CE~TRALIA ROAD~ AND JAHNKE ROAD AND
BLOOMFIELD ROAD
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors has
received requests from citizens to install a traffic signal at
the intersections of Route 10 and Osborne Road, Chester Road and
Centralia Road, and Jahnke Road and Bloomfield Road.
NOW, TMERHFORH BE IT RESOLVED, that the Virginia Department
of Highways and Transportation is requested to perform a traffic
signal study at these intersections and install signals if
Warranted.
Vote: Unanimous
12.G.5. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER RESTRICTION OF
THROUGH TRUCK TRAFFIC ON SMOKETREE DRI%r~ AND LUCKS
LANE
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
set the date of September 10, 1986, at 7:00 p.m., for a public
hearing to consider the restriction of through truck traffic on
Smoketree Drive and Lucks Lane.
Vote: Unanimous
12.G.6. CONSIDER WAIVER OF RESTRICTIVE COVF/~ANTM OF THR
AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK TO PERMIT F~%Y~FfJ~ FRONT YARD
SETBACK
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
granted a waiver of the Chesterfield County Airport Industrial
Park Restrictive Covenants to increase the maximum front yard
setback from 110 feet to 135 feet, for the p~rpose of
constructing eight buildings for office and warehouse use
totaling 198,300 square feet, for the Landmark Company of
Virginia, Inc.
Vote: Unanimous
12.G.7. ~OVHRI~OR'S TRANSPORTATION PROGRA~
On motion'of Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
deferred consideration of the ~overnor's Transportation Progr~u
until 7:00 p.m. on September 10, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
12.H. ;%?POINTM~NTS
12.H.1. YOUTH SERVICES A~BOI~fMENTS
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
nominate~ the following members to the Youth Services
Commission, whose formal appointments will be mede August 27,
1986: Mrs. Melissa Ball, Mr. F. Gibbo~s Slosh and Mrs. Sarah
Gregory, representing th~ Bermuda District; Mrs. Nancy Hudson,
Mr. Samuel Terry and Ms. Amy Goodman, representing the Dale
86-613
District; Mrs. Betty Parker, Ms. Jennifer Dvorak and Ms. Holly
Ford, representing the Clover Bill District; Mr. Howard Warren,
Mrs. Ann Hicks, and Ms. Kahlisia Pettus, representing Matoaca
District; and Mrs. Dorothy Biringer and Mr. Rob Wade,
representing Midlothian DistrAct.
Vote: Unanimous
12.}{.2. CA~P BAKER MANAGEMENT BeAirD
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes~ the Board
nominated Mr. Elwcod Elliott, representing the Chester Civitan
Club, to the Camp Baker Management Board, whose formal
appeintmenU will be made August 27, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
12.H.3. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE TO THE RIC}~4OND 'REGIONAL
PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION AND THE CRATER PLAITNING
DISTRICT COMMISSION
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
nominated Mr. Richard F. Sale as Chesterfield's alternate
representative to the Richmond Regional Planning District
Co~ission and the Crater Planning District Co~unission, whose
formal appointment will be made on August 27, 1986.
Vote: Unanimous
12.I. CONSENT ITEMS
12,I,1. RECOM~RDATIONFOR APPOINTMENT OF POLICE OFFICERS
On motion of Mrs. ~irone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
hereby respectfully requests that the Circuit Court Judges
appoint the following persons as Police officers for
Chesterfield County, effective September 22, 1986: Mr. Keith A.
Applewhite, Mr. Matthew A. Botset, Mr. Kevin P. Carroll, Ms.
Donna S. Castle, Mr. Glenn M. Corbin, Mr. David D. Deringer, Mr.
Edward E. Ferrell, Ms. Elizabeth H. Fulghum, Mr. John L.
Gonzalez, Mr. Jeffrey L. Green, Mr. Michael G. Heintzelman, ~.
Thomas B. Holloway, Ms. Kimberly L. Hunter, Mr. John L.
Hutchinson, Mr. Paul E. Lind, IV, ~r. Jeffrey A. Meador, Mr.
David E. Pollock, Jr-, Mr. Douglas A. Stewart, Mr. John K.
Sullivan, Mr. Donald L. Switzer, Ms. Christine L. Villanis, and
Mr. Michael A. walls.
Vote:
12.I.2. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE
This day the County Environmental Bngineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
ex~mination of Moss Creek Road, MOSS Creek Court and Moss Creek
Place in Moss Creek, Clover Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Moss Creek Road,
Moa~ Creek Court and MOSS Creek Place in Moss Creek, Clover
District, be and they hereby are established as public reads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and i~ hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary Syetem, Moss Creek Road,
beginning at the intersection with Woodlake Village Parkway,
State Route number unassigned, and going 0.19 mile easterly
to the intersection with Moss Creek Court, then continuing
0.11 mile southeasterly to a cul-de-sac; Moss Creek Court,
beginning at the intersection with Moss Creek Road and going
86-614
(,
0.15 mile easterly to the intersection with Moss Creek
Place, then continuing 0.05 mile southeasterly to a
cul-de-sac; and Hess Creek Place, beginning at the
intersection with Moss Creek Court and going 0.04 mile
northeasterly to a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 46 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads.
MOSS Creek is recorded as follows:
Moss Creek.
Plat Book 44, Pages 25 & 26, October 6, 1983.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
d~rections from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Oak Knoll Road, Oak Knoll circle and Oak Knoll
Lane in Oak Knoll, Clover Hill District.
Upon ¢onsldsration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girene~
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Oak Knoll Road,
Oak Knoll Circle and Oak Knoll Lane in Oak Knoll, Clove~ Hill
District, be and they hereby ars established as public roads.
And be it further reaolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways a~d Transportation, be and it hereby is reqttested
to take into the Secondary System, Oak Knoll Road, beginning
at the intersection with Wcodlake Village Parkway, State
Route number unassigned, and going 0.07 mile northwesterly
to the intersection with Oak Knoll Circle, then continuing
0.03 mile northerly to re-intersect with Oak Knoll Circle,
then continuing 0.05 milo northwesterly to the intersection
with Oak Knoll Lane, then continuing 0.10 mile northwesterly
to a cul-de-sac; Oak Knoll Circle, beginning at the
intersection with Oak Knoll Road and going 0.08 mile in a
circular direction to re-intersect with Oak Knoll Road; and
Oak Knoll Lane, beginning at the intersection with Oak Knoll
Road and going 0.09 mile northerly to a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
~hese roads serve 43 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board cf Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads.
Oak Knoll is recorded as follows:
Oak Knoll.
Plat Book 45, Pages 83 & 84, May 7, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Blakeston Drive and Blakeston Court in
Stonehenge, Section I, Midlothian District.
86-615
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion o£ Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Blakeston Drive
and Blakeston Court in Stonehenge, Section I, Midlothian
District, be and they hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department o4
Highways and Transportation, be a~d it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Blakeston Drive,
beginning where State Maintenance ends, Blakeston Drive,
State Route 2572, and going 0.22 mile northwesterly to the
intersection with Blakeston Court; and Blakeston Court,
beginning at the intersection with Blakeston Drive and going
0.03 mile northeasterly to a cul-de-sac. Again, Blakeston
Court, beginning at the intersection with Blakeston Drive
and going 0.05 mile southwesterly to tie into proposed
Blakeston Court.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These rsads serve 24 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Dspart~ent of Highways a 50'
right-cf-way for all of these roads.
This section of Stonehenge is recorded as follows:
Section I. Plat Book 46, Pages 85 & 86, July 19, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance
with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon
his examination of Woods Walk Road, Woods Walk Lane and
woods Walk Court in Woods Walk, Clover ~ill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Woods Walk Road,
Woods Walk Lane and Woods Walk Court in Woods Walk, Clover Hill
District, be and they hereby are established as public roads,
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Woods Walk Road,
beginning at the intersection with Weodlake Village Parkway
and going 0.06 mile northerly to the intersection with Woods
Walk Lane, then continuing 0.06 mile northerly to the
intersection with Woods Walk Court, then continuing 0.05
mile northerly to a cul-de-sac; Woods Walk Lane, beginning
at the intersection with Woods Walk Road and going 0.05 mile
westerly to a cul-de-sac. Again, Woods Walk Lane, begir~li~g
at the intersection with WOODS Walk Road and going 0.09 mile
northeasterly to a cul-de-sac; and Woods Walk Court,
beginning at the intersection with Woods walk Road and going
0.07 mile westerly to a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive o4 the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 46 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-el-way for all of these roads.
Woods Walk is recorded as follows:
Woods Walk. Plat Book 47, Pages 24 & 25, September t2,
1984.
86-616
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Forest Wood Road and Forest Wood Lane in Forest
Wood, Section One, Clover Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion Of Mrs. ~irone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Forest Wood Road
and Forest Wood Lane in Forest Wood, Section One, Clover Hill
District, be and they hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Forest Wood Road,
beginning at the intersection with Woodlake Village Parkway,
State Route nearer unassigned, and going 0.09 mile northerly
to the intersection with Forest Wood Lane, then continuing
0.04 mile northerly to a cul-de-sac; and Forest Wood Lane,
beginning at the intersection with Forest Wood Road and
going 0.09 mile easterly to a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designs%ed Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 23 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisor~
guarantees to the Virginia Department O£ Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads.
This section o~ Forest Wood is recorded as fellows:
Section One. Plat Book 48, Pages 19 & 20, December 20,
1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance
with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon
his examination of Shelter Cove Road, shelter Cove Pointe,
and Shelter Cove Circle in Shelter Cove, Sections I and II,
Clover Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Shelter Cove
Road, shelter Cove Pointe, and Shelter Cove Circle in Shelter
Cove, Sections I and II, Clover Hill District, be and they
hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary system, Shelter Cove Read,
beginning at the intersection with Woodlake Village Parkway,
State Route number unassigned, and going 0.16 mile southerly
to the intersection with Shelter Cove Pointe, then
continuing 0.03 mile southeasterly to the intersection with
Shelter Cove Circle, then continuing 0.04 mile easterly to
re-intersect with Shelter Cove Circle, then continuing 0.19 mile
northeasterly to a cul-de-sac; Shelter Cove Points, beginning at
the intersection with Shelter Cove Road and going 0.10 mile
southerly to a cul-de-sac; and Shelter Cove Circle, beginning at
the intersection with Shelter Cove Road and going 0.08 mile in a
circular direction to re-intersect with Shelter Cove Road.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of ~ighways
drainage easements.
86-617
These roads serve 52 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads.
These sections of Shelter Cove are recorded as follows:
Section I. Plat Book 44, Pages 19 & 20, October 6, 1983.
Section Ii. Plat ~ook 48, Pages 3 & 4, November 30, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Bent Creek Road, Bent Creek Place and Bent Creek
Court in Bent Creek, Clover Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that, Bent Creek Road,
Bent Creek Place and Bent Creek Court in Bent Creek, Clover Hill
District, bo and they hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways a~d Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Bent Creek Road,
beginning at the intersection with Woodlake Village Parkway,
State Route number unassigned, and going 0.05 mile northerly
to the intersection with Bent Creek Placer the~
0.02 mile northerly to the intersection with Bent Creek
Court, then continuing 0.08 mile northerly to a cul-de-sac;
Bent Creek Place, beginning at the intersection with Bent
Creek Road and going 0.04 mile easterly to a cul-de-sac;
Bent Creek Court, beginning at the intersection with Bent
Creek Road and going 0.10 mile southwesterly to a
cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 35 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all o~ these roads.
Bent Creek is recorded as follows:
Bent Creek.
Plat Book 45, Pages 64 & 65, April 23, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Country Walk Road and Country Walk Court in
Country Walk, clover Hill District.
Upon c6nsideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Country Walk Road
and Country Walk Court in Country Walk, Clover Hill District, be
and they hereby are established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department Of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary Syste~, Country Walk Road,
beginning at the intersection with Woedlake Village Barkway,
State Route number unassigned, and going 0.09 mile
Southeasterly to the intersection with Country Walk Court,
then continuing 0.05 mile southerly to the intersection with
itself, then continuing 0.15 mile in a circular direction to
re-intersect with itself; and Country Walk Court, beginning
at the intersection with Cou_~try Walk Road and going 0.04
mile easterly toga cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 20 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Eoard of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these reads,
Country Walk is recorded as follows:
Country Walk. Plat Book 44, Pages 21 & 22, October 6, 1983.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in ascordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examinatio~ of Waters Edge Road, Waters Edge Court, Waters Edge
Terrace and Waters Edge Circle in Waters Edge, Clover Hill
District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Waters Edge Road,
Waters Edge Court, Waterm Edge Terrace and Waters Edge Circle in
Waters Bdge, Clover Hill District, be and they hereby are
established as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Waters Edge Road,
beginning at the intersection of woodlake Village Parkway,
~tate Route number unassigned, and going 0.16 mile
southeasterly to the intersection with Waters Edge Court,
then continuing 0.05 mile southeasterly to the intersection
with Waters Edge Terrace, then continuing 0.04 mile
southerly to the intersection with Waters Edge Circle, then
continuing 0.07 mile southerly to a cul-de-sac; Waters Edge
Court, beginning at the intersection with Waters Bdge Road
and going 0.05 mile northerly to a cul-de-sac; Waters Edge
Terrace, beginning at the intersection with Waters Edge Road
and going 0.05 mile southwesterly to a cul-de-sac; and
Waters Edge Circle, beginning at the intersection with
Waters Edge Road and going 0.04 nile easterly to a
Cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 36 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads.
Waters Edge is recorded as follows:
Waters Edge. Plat Book 44, Pages 23 & 24, october 6, 1983.
Vote: Unanimous
86-619
This day the County EnviroD~ental Engineer, in accordance
with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon
kis examination cf Glenmeadow Terrace, ~lenmeadcw Road,
Ardara Lane, ~lenpark Lane, Kar~baugh Court, Winamaok Road,
Winamaok Court, Groveton Terrace, Groveten Court and
Groveton Circle in Walton Park, Sections L and M, amd
portions of Sections D and ~, Midlothian District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Sirens,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that ~lenmeadow
Terrace, ~lenmeadow Road, Ardara Lane, Glenpark Lane, Kanbaugh
Court, Winamack Road, Wina~ack court, Groveton Terrace, Groveton
Court and Groveton Circle in Walton Park, Section L and M, and
portions of Sections D and H, Midlothian District, be and they
hereby are e~tablished as public ~oads.
And be it f~rther resolved, that the Virginia Department cf
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary System, Glenmeadow Terrace,
beginning where State ~aintenanes ends, Glenmeadow Terrace,
State Route 1083, amd going 0.05 mile southerly to a
cul-de-sac; GleD2ReadOW Road, beginning where State
~aintonance ends, Gle~adow Road, State Route 1074, and going
0.08 mile southerly to the intersection with winamaek Read, then
continuing 0.08 mile southerly tc the intersection with Ardara
Lane, then continuing 0.13 mile southerly to the intersection
with Glenpark Lane; Ardara Lane, beginning at the intersection
with Glenmeadow Road and going 0.12 mile easterly to the
intersection with Watch Hill Road, State Route 1084; GlenDark
Lane, beginning where State Maintenance ends, Glenpark Lane,
State Route 3109, and going 0.03 mile northwesterly to the
intersection with Glenmeadow ROSe, then continuing 0.09 mile
northwesterly to the intersection with Kanbaugh Court, then
continuing 0.09 mile northerly to the intersection with Winamack
Road, then continuing 0.06 mile northerly to the intersection
with Groveton Terrace, then continuing 0.08 mile northerly to
the intersection with Groveton Court and Groveton Circle, then
continuing 0.06 mile northerly to tie into existing Glonpark
Lane, State Route 3135; Karubaugh Court, beginning at the
intsrsection with Slenpark Lane and going 0.07 milo easterly
to a cul-de-sac; Winamack Road, beginning at the
intersection with Glenpark Lane and going 0.08 mile easterly
to the intersection with Winamaek Court, then continuing
0.07 mile easterly to the intersection with Glenmeadow
Winamack Court, beginning at the intersection with Winamaok
Road and going 0.04 mile northerly to a cul-de-sac; Groveton
Terrace, beginning at the intersection with Glenpark Lane
and going 0.05 mile westerly to a cul-de-sac; Groveton
Court, beginning at the intersection with Glenpark Lane and
going 0.05 mile westerly ~o a cul-de-sac; and Groveton
Circle, beginning at the intersection with Glenpark Lane and
going 0.05 mile easterly to a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 121 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads except Glen~eadow
Terrace which has a 40' right-of-way.
These sections of Walton ~ark are recorded as follows:
Section D. Plat Book 32, Page 77, December 4, 1978.
Section H. Plat Book 35, Page 23, December 6, 1979.
Section L. Plat Book 45, Pages 59 & 60, April 17, 1984.
Section M. Plat Book 47, Pages 96 & 97, November 28, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
86-620
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Mill Spring Drive, Mill Spring Court, Mill Spring
Road, Mill Spring Lane and Mill Spring Circle in Mill Spring,
Clover Mill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Mill Spring
Drive, Mill Spring Court, Mill Spring Road, Mill Spring Lane and
Mill Spring Circle in Mill spring, Clover Hill District, be and
they hereby are established as public roads.
A~d be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Mighways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requ/ested
to take into the Secondary system, Mill Spring Drive,
beginning at the intersection with woodlake Village Parkway,
State Route nu/~er unassigned, and going 0.07 mile
northwesterly to the intersection with Will Spring Court,
then continuing 0.03 mile northwesterly to the intersection
with Mill Spring Road, then continuing 0.11 mile westerly to a
cul-de-sac; Mill Spring Court, beginning a= the intersection
with Mill Spring Drive and going 0.08 mile westerly to a
cul-de-sac; Mill Spring Road, beginning at the intersection with
Mill Spring Drive and going 0.07 mile northeasterly to the
intersection with Mill Spring Lane, then continuing 0.15 mile
northerly to a cul-de-sac; Mill Spring Lane, beginning at the
intersection with Mill Spring Road and going 0.05 mile
northwesterly to the intersection with Mill Spring Circle, then
continuing 0.01 mile northwesterly to re-intersect with Mill
Spring Circle, then continuing 0.05 mile northerly to a
cul-de-sac; and Mill Spring Circle, beginning at the
intersection with Mill Spring Lane and going 0.07 mile in a
circular direction tc re-intersect with Mill Spring Lane.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
These roads serve 80 lots.
~-~d be it further resolved, that the Board Of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads except Mill Spring Drive
which has a $0' to 70' variable width right-of-way, and Mill
Spring Circle which has a 40' right-of-way.
Mill Spring is recorded as follows:
Mill Spring. ~!at Book 45, Pages 97 & 98, May 23, 1984.
This day the County Environmental Engineer, in accordance with
directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Fairpines Road, Fairpines Court, South Jessup
Road, East Banes Court, West Banes Court, East Denny Court, West
Denny Court, Bre~nbleton Road, Berryridge Terrace and Meterle
Court in Fairpinss, Sections 1, 2 and 3, Clover Hill District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Fairpines Road,
Fairpines Court, South Jessup Road, East Banes Court, West Banes
Court, East Denny Court, West Denny Court, Brambleton Read,
Berryridge Terrace and Meterie Court in Fairpines, Section 1, 2
and 3, Clover Mill District, be and they hereby are established
as public roads.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, bo and it hereby is requested
to take into the Secondary Sy~t~, Fairpines Road, beginning
at the eastern end of existing Fairpines Road, State Route
86-621
2130, and running easterly 0.06 mile to the intersection
with south Jessup Road, then continuing easterly 0.05 mile
to the intereection with Fairpines Court, then continuing
easterly 0.04 mile to end in a dead end; Fairpines Court,
beginning at the intersection with Falrpines Road and
rUBBing southerly 0.06 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; South
Jes~up Road, beginning at the intersection with Fairpines
Road and running southerly 0.07 mile ~c end in a temporary
turnaround. Again, South Jet,up Road, beginning at the
intersection with Fairpines Road and running northerly 0.08
mile to the intersection with East and West Banes Court,
then continuing northerly 0.05 mile to the intersection with
East and West Denny Court, then continuing northerly 0.07
mile to the intersection with Bramble~on Road, then
continuing northerly 0.08 mile to the intersection with
Meterie Court, then continuing northerly 0.14 mile to the
intersection with Hallmark Drive, State Route 3165; East
Banes Court, beginning at the intersection with South Jessup
Road and running easterly 0.06 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; West
Banes Court, beginning at the intersection with South Jessup
Road and running westerly 0.09 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; East
Denny Court, beginning at the intersection with South Jessup
Road and running easterly 0.05 mile to end in a cul-de-sac; West
Denny Court, beginning at ~he intersection with South Jet,up
Road and running westerly 0.19 mile to end in a cul-de-sac;
Brambleton Road, beginning at the intersection with South Jessup
Road and run/ting westerly 0.08 mile to the intersection with
Berryridge Terrace, then continuing westerly 0.01 mile ~c end in
a dead end; Berryridge Terrace, beginning at the intersection
with Brambletcn Road and running northerly 0.01 mile to end in a
dead end; and Materie Court, beginning at the intersection with
South Jessup Road and running northeasterly 0.04 mile to end in
a cul-de-sac.
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, ~ite
distance and designated Virginia Department of Highways
drainage easements.
Thess roads serve 150 lots.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50'
right-of-way for all of these roads except Fairpines Court,
East and West Banes Court, and East Denny Court which have a
40' right-of-way, and South Jessup Road and a portion of
Fairpines Road which have a 60' right-of-way.
These ~eotions of Fairpines are recorded as follows:
Section 1. Plat Book 42, Pages 81 & 82, April 7, 1983.
Section 2. Plat Book 44, Pages 69 ~ 70, Deoe~lber 1, 1983.
$oction 3. Plat Book 46, Page 8, June 1, 1984.
Vote: Unanimous
This day the County Environmental Engineering, in accordance
with directions from this Board, made report in writing upon his
examination of Twin Ridge Lane in Twin Ridge O~ice Condominiums
Phase I, Midlothian District.
Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone,
seconded by Mr. Applegate, it is resolved that Twin Ridge Lane
in Twin Ridge Office Condcmlniums Phase I, Midlothian District,
be and it hereby is established as a public road.
And be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested
to take into ~he Secondary System, Twin Ridge Lane,
beginning at the intersection with N. Providence Road, State
Route 678, and going 0.03 mile northwesterly to tie into
proposed Twin Ridge Lane, Phase !II.
86-622
This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope, site distance
and designated Virginia Department of Highways drainage'-
easements.
This road serves the adjacent commercial development.
And be it further resolved, that the Board of Supervisors
guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 60'
right-of-way for this road.
This section of Twin Ridge Office Condominiums is recorded
as ~ollows:
Phase I. Plat Book 1615, Page 511, May 25, 1983.
Vote: Unanimous
12.I.3. APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL STATE REVENUE TO SHERIFF'S
OFFICE
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegute, the Board
accepted additional State revenue in the amount of $15,500 for
the Sheriff's Office for an additional Court Security position
and appropriated said funds for the position.
Vote: Unanimous
12.I.4. REQUEST FOR FIREWORKS DISPLAY
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approve~ a fireworks display permit for WWBT-Channel 12 to stage
a fireworks display at the County Airport on August 31, 1986, in
conjunction with the W%rBT-12 Balloon Sacs, co-sponsored by the
cou/lty Airport, contingent upon approval from the Fire Marshal
and Risk Manager, in accordance with the following conditions:
1. Approval of a site acceptable to the Fire Marshal:
2. WWBT-12 must submit a certificate of insurance for at
least $1,000,000 naming the County as co-insured, in a
form acceptable to the Risk Manager, no later than
August 22, 1986; and
3. Ms. Proctor must contact and obtain the approval of
the Fire Marshal on August 30, 1986, that conditions
are not too dry to conduct the fireworks display.
12.I.5. REpUEST TO AMEND 1986 BINGO PBRMiT FOR BENSLE¥-BERMUDA
VOLUNTEER P~SCUE SQUAD
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applsgate, the Board
approved the Bensley-Berm~a Volunteer Rescue Squad's amendment
to its bingo permit to change the location O~ its bingo games
from 2500 Rio Vista Drive to 9010 Quinn~ord Boulevard.
Vote: Unanimous
12.I.6. DONATION TO YMCA IN CHE~T~R
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
approved a donation to the Y~CA in Chester, in the amount of
$23,051., which funds are to be expended from the Contingency
Account.
Vote: Unanimous
86-623
12.I.7.
C
ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FOR MATHEMATICS RETRAINING PROGPJ~M
POR TEACRERS
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board
accepted a grant in the amount of $15,000 from the Virginia
Department of Education for the Mathematics Retraining Progra~
for teachers and appropriated estimated revenues and
expenditures to the appropriate accounts for this program.
Vote: Unanimou~
12.I.8. ACCEPT VIRGINIA DELINQUENCY PREVENTION AND YOUTH
DEVELOi~T ACT GRANT
On motion of Mrs. ~irone, seconded by Mr- Applegate, the Board
accepted a grant in the amount cf $34,000 ($25,500 State monies,
$8,500 local monies) from the virginia Department of Corrections
and appropriated said ftt~ds to assist the Youth Services
Commission in encouraging measure~ in Chesterfield County that
will enhance the qula!ity of life for its youth.
Vote: Unani/~ous
12.J. UTILITIES
12.J.1. WATER AND SEWER ITEMS
12.J.l.a.
RECONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR PUBLIC WATER SERVICE
ALONG OLD STAG~ ROAD
Mr. Welchons pre~ented a brief background history of this
request for public water service along Old Stage Road. Me
stated since the time the $70,000 funding from Utilities
Department funds was appropriated for the estimated cost of
extending the water line from Bermuda Industrial Park to Old
Stage Read, staff has been informed that the representative of
one of the property owners would not fulfill hi~ commitment of
$22,500. and, at this time, design work on the project was
stopped. He stated the Department of Economic Developmen~ and
the Planning Department have reviewed the area and advised that
the property is zoned industrial and because Old Stage Road is
Of high quality and the interstate and railroad are readily
accessible, there is a high potential for commercial, industrial
and economic development of this area which will increase
property value and broaden the tax base. He stated staff has
contacted the other property owners to determine if their prior
co~itments are still valid and of the six original
participants, four have v~rbally confirmed their cor~i~en~ as
listed below:
A. L. HaD-bury
R.M. & Jack Shoosmith
Paul Thiel
Tidewater Material
Total
$22,500
$22,500
$12,500
$ 5~000
$62,500
He stated Shoosmith's participation is based on the water line
being located on the west side of Old Stage Road through ~heir
property or the County payihg the cost of extending the water
line across Old Sta~e Road.
Mr. Dodd stated he felt the County should encourage development
in areas such as this one by installing =he necessary water
facilities. M_rs. Gircne stated she felt a policy, similar to
the special assessment water/sewer district established for the
Ruffin Mill Road area, should be drafted to handle this tlrpe
situation in the future. Mr. Mayes stated he felt the County
should invest in the water facilities as it will benefit the
County in revenues in the long term.
86-624
On motion of Mr. Mayes, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved the request for public water service along Old Stage
Road and adopted the joint funding method in the amount of
$170,000 (property owner commitments in the a~ount of $62,500,
General Fund. in the amount of $37,500 and Utilities Department
in the amount of $70,000) to finance the project and authorized
appropriations and expenditures for the project.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.l.b. SECOND AMEbIDMENT TO SERVICE AGP~EEMENT WITH
APPOMATTOX RIVER WATER AUTHORITY
On motion of Mrs. Girone, eeoonded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF
CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, REI~ATING TO AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1964
SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE APPOMATTOX RI%-ER
WATER AUTHORITY REQUIRED I~ CONNECTION WITH THE REFUNDING OF THE
OUTSTANDING BONDS OF THE AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors o~ the Appomattox River
Water Authority ("Authority") has by resolution adopted on May
21, 1986 authorized the issuance of up to $18,000,000 of the
Authority's Water Revenue Refunding Bonds ("Refunding Bonds")
for the purpose of refinancing the Authority's outstanding
bonded indebtednese; and
WHEREAS, as a condition to issuing the Refunding Bonds, it
is necessary to further amend the Service Agreement between the
County of Chesterfield ("County") and the Authority, dated
September 9, 1964, as amended by a First Amendment thersto,
dated December 16, 1982, and by a Modification Agreement, dated
as of september 1, 1983 (collectively, the "Service Agreement");
and
W~EREAS, the Authority, the County and the ether four
member jurisdictions of the Authority ("Participating
Jurisdictions") desire to amend the Service Agreement by the
execution of a Second Amendment thereto entitled "Second
Amendment to 1964 Service Agreements between Appomattox River
Water Authority and Participating Jurisdictions" ("Amendment").
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA:
1. The Chairman of the County Board of Snpervi~ors is
hereby authorized to execute the Amendment on behalf of the
County and, if required, the County Clerk or Deputy County Clerk
is authorized to affix the seal of the County to the Amendment
and to attest such seal, such authorizations being conditioned
upon approval by appropriate resolution e~ the governing body of
each Participating Jurisdiction, and upon execution of the
Amendment by the duly authorized representatives of the
Authority and each Participating Jurisdiction.
~. The Amendment shall be in substantially the form
submitted to this meeting with such minor ehangee, insertions or
omissions which do not materially adversely affect the interests
of the County as may be approved by the Chairman of the County
Board of Supervisors, whose approval ~hall be evidenced
conclusively by the execution and delivery of the Amendment.
3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Vote: Unanimous
86-625
12.J.2. CONSIDER CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS
12.J.2.a. WATER LINE EASEmENtS ALONG RICKS ROAD
12.J.2.a.1. CURTIS TURNER, EARLINE T, AND WALTER R. GREENr
LOUISE HARRIS~ MARGARET JACKSON, MARViN TtrR/CER
WILLIE H. TURNER, JR
On motion of Mr. Apple~ate, seconded b y Mr. Daniel, the Beard
authorized the County Attorney tc proceed with condemnation
proceedings against the following property owners if the amounts
as set opposite their names are not accepted. And be it further
resolved that the county Administrator notify said property
owners by registered mail on August 14, 1986, of the County's
intention to enter upon and take the property which is to be the
subject of said condemnation proceedings. This action is on an
emergency basis a~d the County intends to exercise immediate
right cf entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Cede of
Virginia.
Curtis Turner
Earline Turner Green and Walter Raleigh Green $30.00
Louise Harris $50.00
Margaret Jackson $30.00
Marvin Turner $30.00
Willie H. Turner, Jr. $30.00
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.2.b. WATER LINE EASEMENTS FOR JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY
A~D WILLIS ROAD
t2.J.2.b.1. WILLIAM C. AND A~N!E M. EPRERSON
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Hr. Mayss, the Board
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
owners by registered mail on August 14, 1986, of the County's
intention to enter upon and take the property which is to be the
subject of said condemnation proceedings. This action is on an
emergency basis and the County intends to exercise immediate
right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of
Virginia.
William C. and Annie Mae Epperson $1,150.00
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.2.b.2. PETER P. AND IRENE W.C. BEVILLE
On motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Mayes, the Board
authorized the County Attorney to institute condemnation
proceedings against the following property owners if thc amount
as set opposite their hat, es is not accepted. And be it further
resolved that the County Administrator notify said property
owners by registered mail on Au~st 14, 1986, of the County's
intention to enter upon and take the property which is to be the
SthbJect of said condemnation proceedings. This action is on an
emergency basis and the County intends to exercise immediate
right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of
Virginia.
Peter P. Beville and Irene W. Carnes Beville $265.00
Vote: Unanimous
86-626
12.J.3. SET PUBLIC HEARING DATES
12.J.3.a. TO A~i~ND CHAPTER 20 OF TWZ COUNTY CODE
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board set
the date of September 10, 1986, at 7:00 p.m., for a public
hearing to consider amending Section 20-1.31, Chapter 20, of the
County Code, to permit a reduction in the connection fee for
existing residences when the Board approves an extension funded
by the Federal Community Developmen= Block Grant Program,
administered by the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.3.b. TO C0NSID~R BALE OF ABANDONED UTILITIES BTORAG~
YARD AT 5025 WALMSLE¥ BOULEVARD
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board set
the date of SeDter~ber 10, 1986, at 7:00 p.m., for a public
hearing to consider the sale of the abandoned Utilities Storage
Yard (5.55 acres with improvements) located at 5025 Walmsley
Boulevard, in Richmond.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4. CON~F/~T ITEMS
12.J.4.a. CONTRACTS FOR INSTALLATION OF WATF!R LINES
12.J.4.a.1. HUNTERS LANDING, S~CTION 4
On motion of Mrs. Girths, ~eeonded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following water contract:
Water Contract NO. W$6-150CD:
Developer: Ropsr Land Corporation
Contractor: J.H. ~artin & Sons; Sub-Castle Equipment
Total Contract Cost: $120,490.60
Estimated County cost: Oversize $ 2,139.00
Off-Site $16,119.50
To~al $.18,258.50
(Refund Through Connection)
Estimated Developer Cost: $102,232.10
No. of Connections: 116
Code: 5B-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.a.2. M~ADOW OARS BOUL~VARD
On motion of Mrs. Girons, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following water contract:
Water Contract NO. W86-157CD:
Developer: ~eadow Oaks Development Corporation
Contractor: Castle Equipment
Total Contract Cost: $116,137.20
Total Estimated County Cost: $ 69,202.74
(Refund Through Connection Fees)
Estimated Developer Cost: $ 46,934.46
NO. of Connections:
Code: 5B-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
86~627
12.J.4.a.3. WOODLAKE VILLAGE PARKWAYt PHASE V
On motion of Mrs. Girono, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following water contract:
Water Contract No. W86-156CD:
Developer: Investors Woodlake Development Corporation
Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors, IBC.
Total Contract Cost: $71,080.00
Total Estimated County Cost: $ 8~474.40
(Refund Through Coni%ection Fees)
Estimated Developer Cost: $62,605.60
No. of Connectiono: 0
Code: 5H-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.a.4. HICKS ROAD A~D BROWN/PECK ROADS
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for contract number W85-170C for
construction of a water line along Hicks Road and contract
number W86-79C for Brown/Peck Road water line replacement to the
low bidder, O.D. Duncanson & Son, Inc., in the amount of
$39,783.36 and $74,657.86, respectively, for a total of
$114,441.22. Funds previously appropriated.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.a.5. JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY AND WILLIS ROAD
On motion of Mrs. Giro~e, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for contract number W85-86B for construction
of a water line along Jefferson Davis Highway and Willis Road to
the low bidder, F. L. Showalter, Inc., in the amount of
$257,458.00. Funds previously appropriated.
Vote; Unanimous
12.J.4.b. CONTACTS FOR SEWER INSTALLATION
12.J.4.b.1. ROCKSPRING FARMS
On motion of Mrs. Girone, secondod by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the county Administrator to execute any
necessary documents, on behalf o~ the County, for Sewer Contract
N~a~ber $86-102CD/7(8)6A2M, for developer participation between
Rowe Associates, LTD. and the County, the amount of
participation estimated to be $22,477.00 and is to be paid prior
to thc first sewer connection being made in Meadowbrook Farms.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.b.2. HUNTERS LAI~DIN~, SECTION 4
On motion cf Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized ~h~ County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents ~or the following sewer contract:
86-628
Sewer Contract N%h~ber S86-111CD/7(8)6B1M, Bunters
Section 4-Offsite and Onsite Sewers.
Developer: Roper Land Corporation
Contractor: Castle Equipment Corporation
Total Contract Coat: $168,329.62
Total Estimated County Cost: 35,608.14
{Refund through Connection Fees)
Estimated Developer Cost: $132,721.48
Number of Connections: 116
Code: 5N-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
Landing,
12.J.4.b.3. CBBSTERFIRT.D BANKr ROUTE 360
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following sewer contract:
Sewer Contract Number S86-113CD/7(8)6B3M, Chesterfield
Bank, Route 360-Offsite Sewer Extonsion.
Devoloper: Vernon E. LaPrads, Jr.
Contractor: Bookman Construction Company
Total Contract cost: $28,075.50
Total Estimated County Cost: $13r586.50
(Refund through Connection Fees)
~stimated Developer Cost: $14,489.00
N%lmber of Connections: 6
Code: 5N-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.b.4. REYMET INDUSTRIAL PAP/(
On motion of Mrs. Girone, ~eoonded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following sewer contract:
Sewer Contract Number S86-120CD/7(8)6COM, Reymet Industrial
Park-Offaite and Onsite Sewer Improvements.
Developer: Willia~ B. and Gene H. Dural
Contractor: Lewis H. Easter and Company
Total Contract Cost: $23,158.20
Total Estimated County Cost: $15,551.01
(Refund through Connection Fees)
Estimated Developer Cost: $ 7,607.19
Number of Connections: 9
Code: 5N-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.b.5. PRE-CON INDUSTRIAL PARK
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for the following sewer contract:
sewer Contract Number S86-103CD/7(8)6A3M, Pre-Con
I~dustrial Fark-O~fsite Sewer ExtensioA.
Developer: Pre-Con Incorporated
Contractor: Gerald K. Moody, Inc.
T/A Southern Construction Company
Total Contract Cost: $93,291.95
Total Estimated County Cost: 5$51,824.93
(Refund through Connection Fees)
Estimated Developer Cost: $41,467.02
Number of Connections: 1
Code: 5N-2511-997
Vote: Unanimous
86-629
12.J.4.b.6.
ENON AREA SEWER f~EHABILITATION PROJECT
On motion of Mrs. Sirone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any
necessary documents for Sewer Contract Nu~ber S85-139C/7(8)5D9E
in the amount cf $748,565.85, for the Bnon Area Sewer
Rehabilitation Brojeet for rehabilitation of existing sewer
lines in the Enon Area to the low bidder, Roanoke Contraction
CO. This project is part of the ongoing ~ & I (Infiltration &
Inflow] rehabilitation of sewer lines and funding is included in
the Capital Improvement Budgets.
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.o.
REQUEST FROM VIRGINIA POWER TO INSTALL URDEEGROURD
CABLE ON COUAVfY PROPERTY
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved a request from Virginia Power for the County to allow
the installation of underground cable, with the condition that
Virginia Power relocate the cable at its expense if it
interferes with the installation of County utilities or future
road widening. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of
this Board.]
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.d. CONVEYANCE OF EASEMENT TO VIRSINIA ELECTRIC ~
POWER COMPANY TO SERVE CLOVER BILL WATER TANK
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the Chairman of the Board and the county
Administrator to execute an agreement to VEPCO conveying a 15
foot wide easement from an existing pad at the clover Hill Fire
Station to the tank ~or electrical ~ervice to the new Clover
Hill Water Tank. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers
of this Soard.)
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.e. APPROVAL OF EASEMENT TO COMMONWEALTH GAS PIPELINE
CORPORATION AT COUNTY AIRPORT
Oh motion of Mrs. Gircne, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the Chairman and CoLunty Administrator to
execute an easement agreement to Commonwealth Gas Pipeline
Corporation for relocation of an existing gas line on the
southeast corner of the Airport property for the construction of
Route 288. (A copy of the plat is filed with =he papers of this
Board.]
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.f. AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY AND SEA, CARD SYSTEM
RAILROADt INC. FOR PRESSURE SEWER LINE CROS$I~Gt
S85-19Cr BAILEY BRIDGE FORCE M_~IN
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
adopted the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Chesterfield, Virginia, i~ a regular meeting assembled that the
Chairman of said Board cf Supervisors, be, and he hereby is,
authorized to enter into an agreement with the SEkBOARD SYSTEM
RAILROAD, INC., and to sign same on behalf of said County
whereby said Railroad Company grants unto said County the right
or license to install and maintain, for the purpose of
coaductin~ domestic sewerage; as particularly described in ~aid
agreement, which agreement is dated January 6, 1986, a copy of
which agreement is filed with this Board of Supervisors.
86-630
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.9. AI~ENDMENT TO SEWER AND WATER EASEMENT AGREEMENT AT
IRONGATE SHOPPING CEi~TER
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the Chairman and County Administrator to
execute an amended sewer and water easement agreement for
Irongate shopping Center to allow ~he encroachment cf a portion
of an existing sidewalk and overhang from the building on the
County easement, which agreement does not require the County to
restore the structures within the easement which may be damaged
during construction or maintenance. (A copy of the plat is
filed with the papers of ~his Beard.)
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.h.
ACCEPTANCE OF D~_ED.,. APPROVAL OF EASEMENT AND PERMIT
FOR HENRICUS PARK
On motion of Mre. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to: a) sign a
deed from the National Society of the Colonial Dames of America
in the Co~onwealth of Virginia, accepting it on behalf of the
County; b) to sign a permit with the Department of the Army to
cross its easement with a walking trail; and e) to sign an
easement from the Virginia Electric and Power Company to
construct trails on its property, all o~ which are necessary for
Henrious Park.
Vot®: Unanimous
I2.J.4.i. ACCEPTANCE OF DEEDS OF DEDICATION
12.J.4.i.1. ALONG GROVE ROAD FROM ELIZABETH T. AND ARCHIE K.
MCLELLANt JR.
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved and authorized the County Administrator to execute a
deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the
conveyance of a 5' strip of land along Grove Road (868) from
Elizabeth T. and Archie K. McLellan, Jr. (A Copy of the plat is
filed with the papers of this Board.)
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.i.2. ALONG MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE FROM COLONY PLAZA
ASSOCIATES
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Beard
approved and authorized ths County Administrator to execute a
deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the
conveyance of a 9' strip of land along ~idlothian Turnpike
(Route 60) from Colony Plaza Associates, a Virginia General
Partnership. (A copy of the plat is filed with the papers of
this Board.)
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.i.3. ALONG RIVER ROAD FROM DEBORAH B. AND DAVID G.
MABE,. JR,
On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board
approved a~d authorized the County Administrator to execute a
deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the
conveyance of a 30' strip of land along River Road (Route 602)
from David G. Mabe, Jr. and Deborah B. Mabe. (A copy of the
pla~ is filed with the papers of this Board.)
86-631
Vote: Unanimous
12.J.4.i.4. ALONG OLD BEPJ~3DA HUI~DR~D ROAD FROM J. LEO
CROSIERr M.D. AND DAVID M. HAINES~
On motion cf Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Beard
approved and a~thorized the County Administrator to execute a
deed of dedication accepting, on behalf of the County, the
conveyance of a variable width strip of land along Old Bermuda
Hundred Road from J. Leo Crosier, M.D. and David M. Haines, M.D.
(A copy of the plat is ~iled with the papers of this Board.)
Vote: Unanimou~
12.J.5. REPORTS
Mr. Welohons presented the Board with a report on the developer
water and sewer contracts executed by the County Administrator.
12.R. REPORTS
Mr. Hedrick presented the Board with status reports on Volunteer
Services, the Ganeral F~nd Contingency Account, General Fu~d
Balance, Road Resezve Funds, District Road and Street Light
Funds.
13. ADJO~
On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mrs. Girone, the Board
adjourned at 11:15 p.m. until 7:00 a.m. on August 27, 1986, at
the Sheraton Park South, i~ arrangements could be made to mee~
with the legislative deloga=ion at that time.
Votes Unanimous
Count~ Administrator
Chairman
86-632