Loading...
05-08-85 MinutesBOA/~D OF SUPERVISORS May S, 1985 Supervisors in Attendance: ~r. G. H. Applegate, Chairman Mr. Jesse J. Mayes, Vice Chairman Mr. Harry G. Daniel ~tr. E, Garland Dodd Mrs. Jean Girone Mr, Richard L. Hedrtck County Administrator Staff in Attendance: Mr. Stanley R. Balderson Dir. of Planning Mrs. Doris D~Hart, Legislative Coord. Chief Robert Eanes, Fire Department Mr. ~lmer Hodge~ Asst. County Administrator Mr. William Howell, Dir. of Gen. Services Mis. Mary Leu Lyle, Internal Auditor Mr. Robert ~asden, Asst. CO. Admin. for Human Services ~r. Riohard McE3. f~sh, Dir. of Env. ~ng. Mr. R. J. ~cCracken, Transp. Director Mr. Steve Micas, Co. Attorney Mrs. ~auline Mitchell, Dir..of News/Info. Services Mr. Jeffrey Muzzy, Asst. CO. Admin. for Development Col. Joseph Pittman, Chief of Police Mr. Lane Ramsey~ Dir. of Budqet & Acctg. ~r. M. D. Stith, Jr.~ Exac. Asst., Co. Adm. Mr. David Welchon~, Dir. of Utilities ~r, Applegate called the n~eeting to order at ~he Courthouse at 2:35 p.m. {EDST). 1. WORK S~$SION 1.A. 1985.-~6 BUDGET Mr. BedrOck stated the County is e~r~'.iencing rapid growth and the budget as proposed maintains sexy=cee at the current level. He stated there a~ nc change proposed in the tax rate bur ~here ~re items such as i~cr~ased fees for' zoning~ the implementation of the prorafion of personal property taxes~ etc. H~ stated the School Budget has been adopted by the Board. He stated that any other items discussed for inclusion in the financial plan would constitute new or expanded programs. Mr, Ramsey presente~ the Board with a list of possible budget adj~stments with their service level impacts end coet~, items of special interest not reconm~ended for funding a~ well as possible funding sources. ~r. Mayes e~{pressed conoern for I]ine £1remen for th~ ~ttrick Fire Station which cost is estimated at $225,000. Mr. Hedrick stated that once the ~aderpas~ is ccDstructed in 85-2~2 Ettrick, the County may want to consolidate the Ettrick and Metoaca Fire Stations making these positions obsolete. There considerable discussion regarding the morale, the response time, possibly funding the positions for half the year, pos~ible cuts in the Fire Department's budget to fund the positions, etc. Mr. Daniel expressed interest in firemen for the Dale Fire Station as well since this is the busiest company in the County. There was discussion about hhe money that will be returned to th General Fund at year end which was estimated ho be $1,000,000. Mrs. Girone expressed concern for the Mental ~ealth/Mental Retardation Services budget and the need for additional services and funding in the amount of $150,000. She stated these citizen need help to be independent and elf-~u~fzclent. Mr. Daniel discussed a business in Cermany which was profitable, successful and operated by the mentally retarded/handicapped. Mr. stated a meeting had been scheduled at the end of the month representatives from Nautico County to discuss this concept. Mr. Ramsey indicated that funds which would be returned to the General Fund should be at ]east $450,000 which could fu~d the above mentioned items but that it will not be availabl~ for year's budget and it would increase subsequent years' expenditures. Mrs. Girene also expressed a concern for the unfunded civil engineer position for the Transportation Department as she felt there would be road issues coming witl~in the next year or two which would need a great deal of a~ten~ion. There was discussi~ regarding other positions~ a management study of the Planning Department, etc. Mr. Dodd stated he felt the County was entirely too much ~oney and is net doing enough to bring source~ ef revenue into the County. It was generally agreed that the tbs School Budget previously adopted on April 24, 1985 would be amended by $248,000 with the understanding that if funds fall short, the Board would reconsider their situation~ that the following would be added t¢ the proposed budget: 1. Job Training Pro,ram $ 58,000 2. Transportation Engineer 32,300 3. Revenue Sharing - Roads 220,000 4. The Diamond 54,000 5. Proration of Personal Property 90,080 6. Miscellaneous 50,100 Total $504,40d that the funding sources would be as follows: And 1. Additional Revenue Source-Fire Insurance Surcharge 2. Reducs =xpenditures - Insurance 3. Reduce Transfer to Schools 4. From Fund Balance Total $ 8B,000 160,000 246~000 10,200 And that a~ten the fund balance amounts are determined in July the following issues will be considered: 1. Nine firefighter~ at Mateaca Fire Station for one-half y~a~ $112,000 2. Three firefighters at Dale Fire Station fur one-half year 37,500 3. Mental Health and Mental Retardation additional fu~dlng 150,800 4. Secretary for General District Court ~ . Total. 22,100 85-283 It was generally agreed the Board would recess for 10 minutes Reconvening: 1.B. ZONING ORDINANCE ANI~NDMENT~ Mr. ~alderson distributed charts on development standards for residential townheuse (R-TH) zoning districts. He explained the reasons for recommending repealing the R-7 zoning category and rezoning all zoned but unplatted R-7 acreage to an appropriate zoning category; for amendments regarding the residential- townhouse zoning district; and for amendments regarding multiple family zoning districts. He presented maps indicating the parcels of land affected in each magisterial district. There wa discussion r~gardiag lot coverages, project acreages, parking space requirements, architectural designs, previous zonings and what requirements would apply, etc. It was generally agreed the Board would hold a work session on the issues priQr to fOrwa: them to the Planning Commission because of their complexity. Mr. Dodd stated he felt action should be taken by the Board to obtain a service road if not an interchange at Meadowville Road and 1-295. Bt stated this is prime land in the County which warrants industrimm, etc. and it is being ignored. It was generally agreed that staff wuuld prepare a resolution for consideration at the meeting later this evening. On motion of ~. Mayas, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board recessed at 4:35 p.m. for dinner at the Airport Crosswind Restaurant. Vote: Unanimous Neconvening: 2. DINNER The Board m~t with the Legislative Co~nmittee of the Richmond Cha~er of Con~erce a~d discussed matter= of mutual interest. The Board recessed to travel back to hhe Courthouse for the regularly scheduled meeting. Reconvening: Mr. Applegate called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at the Courthouse at 7=00 p.m. (EST). 3. INVOCATION Mr. Applegate introduced Reverend Dermic Cantwell, Pastor of the Open Door Baptist Church, who gave the invocation. Mr. Applegat, indicated RevereDd Cantwel! was also Chaplain for the Police Department. 4. APPROVAL OF ~IN~?TES On motion of Mr. Dodd~' seconded by Mr. ~ayes, the Board approved the minutes of April ~4, 19~5, as amended. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Mayes, Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Abstention: Mr. Daniel, as he was not present during the meeting, On motion of Mrs. Girone~ seconded b~ Mr. Mayas, the Board approved the minutes ¢~f A~ril 29~ 1985, as submitted. Vote: Unanimous 5. C,OUNT¥ zlDMINISTRATOR' S CQM~.ENT8 Mr. }~edrick introduced MS. Audi ~ondurant, a sen~or at Ma~ Baldwin College, who is workin9 as an intern in the Public Information Office during the month of May. 85~284 M~. Nedrick introduced Mr. Richard Verilla, Social Work Supervisor, who was pre,est. Mr. Verilla stated that the second Celebrity Day was held on April 16, 1985 at the Groaning Board Restaurant. He explained the program by which various radio and television celebrities, County officials and employees, etc. participated by serving as waiters and waitresses and donating their tips to the Child Abuse Team and the Virginia Chapter for Prevention of Child Abuse. He stated receipts for the day totaled $1,281.42 with th~ local team receiving $788.85 and the National Chapter receiving $512.57. He stated the funds would be used for training materials, brochures, filmstrips, etc., geared ko the prevention of child abuse. He expressed appreciation to Mre. Girone, Dr. B~rt Lowe, Sgt, Jim Burke, Ms. Jean Smith, Mr. Pete Stith and others for their participation. 6. BOARD COM~LtTTEE P~EPORTS Mr. Dodd Stated he attended the Capital Region Airport Co~ission meeting and the bid for construction has been awarded and was within the anticipated funding. He stated a groundbreaking ceremony world be held within the next ~ew weeks. He ~tated further there was an economic impact $~udy by the Uniuersity of Richmond which indicated Byrd International has a tremendous economic impact on the region and the County and it was a good investment for the County. Mrs. Girone stated she attended a C&R dinner at which attendees were advised of the n~w calling discount from the 794 to the 748 exchange which is an 83% reduction in calling charges. 5~s. Girone stated the Wa~er Resources Planning Task Porce of the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission met, she was elected Chairman and they wilt be planning water resources fox the region £or the next ~0-30 years. Mrs. Girone stated the Historical Society held a meeting at the Central Library to hear Dr. Peter Mooz, who used to be at the Virginia Museum, talk about what an ascot Magnolia Grange is to the County. Mrs, Girone stated there was an Advisory Committee meeting of the Extension Service. She stated she attended the Ambassadors' Dinner meeting, discussing economic development and meeting with businesses that are considering locating in the Richmond Region. She stated she attended ~odel Government Day and the children are doing better each year. She stated she attended a meeting of CONTOUR regarding the impact of tourism and that for every $1.00 invested, about $70.00 returns to the region. She stated she and Delegate John Watkins are working with the Forest View Rescue Squad to raise $90,000 to p~y for the building which will cost them $214,000 if ftnanced~ they are working toward trying to have business pay this amount and then the Squad could finance needed capital equipment. She stated there was a run at Stonehenge which was the largest ever and she attended two civic meetings as well. Mr. Mayes stated 'there was a Landfill Advisory Committee meeting recently which dealt with whether Or not to operate two landfills, increase tippin9 fee$~ ets. He stated it was recognized that there are seriou~ problem~ in the future and it may be necessary for the Hoard to consider a recycling progra~ rather than continuing with landfills. He stated he did attend another baseball game at the Diamond at the invitation of Crown Service Stations. Mr. Applegate stated he attended the Ambamsadors' meeting along with Mrs. (~iro~;e, the Landfill Advisory Committee with Mr. Mayes and the Capital Region Airport Commission with Mr. Dodd. He stated further he attended the Metro Chamber of Cos~erce'~ membership kick-off breakfast on behalf of the County in the Chamber's efforts to attract additional mes~ership. Mr. Hedrick reported that he, Mr. Applegate and Mr, Daniel along with other representatives from Virginia attended the Industrial Trade Fair in Germany. He stated that 6,500 industries were present, predominately European but Asian as well. He stated thc Virginia Team did make calls to European companies, the European~ tend to think of major population areas like New York, California, etc., and the Team intrcdnmed Virginia; Mr. Daniel, being an executive with Philip Morris, opened a lot of doors as they have a highly respected reputation in Europe; they visited an industry that has decided to locate in the Richmond M~tropolitan area; they visited companies already located in the County; the Team was very well received, and the County will be following up on the contacts made. He stated further that a company already located in Virginia is considering ~elocating and this gave the Virginia Team an opportunity ~o try to retain that company in the State. Mr. Daniel stated there was a business opera,ed by the mentally handicapped/retarded and it was a thriving business which cencept the County will be considering and investigating further in the near future. Mr. Applegate indicated a regional meeting was scheduled for May 28 1985 to discuss this concept in detail. ' .~. ~QUESTS TO POSTPONE ACTION~ EMERGENCY ADDITIONS OR C~ANGEu On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Hoard added Item #12.D.3., Resolution Regarding 1-295 and Meadowville Road because of the emergency nature of the issue; deferred Item %10.D.1-3., Referral of Zoning Ordinance Amendments to the Planning Commission Regarding R~7, Residential-Townhouse Zoning Districts, and Residential Multiple Family Zoning Districts until May 22, 1985 with a work session scheduled before that date; added Item ~12.R., Executive Session for Consultation with Legal Counsel Pertaining to Potential Litigation Regarding Storer Cablevision Purs~ant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (6) of the Code of Virginia, 1950~ as ~mended, because e~ the emergency nature of the issue; added Item 12.C.6., 'Reso!ut~on A/handing the Previous Board Resol~tions of March 27 and April 9, 1985 Authorizing the Issuance of $3,DD0,000 in General Obligation Bond~ by the Virginia Public School Authority because of the emergency nature of the issue; and further the Board adopted the agenda as amended. Vote: Unanimous 8. RESOLUTIONS OF S~ECIAL ~CO~NIT~ON Mr. Daniel recognized Mr. Charles M. Denton and ~r. C~rtis R~ Sink, who recently attained Eagle ~cout as well as their famillcs who were present. Ke stated this is an honor and achievement which should be recognized. $.A. EAGLE SCOUT CHARLES M. D~N~ON On motion of the Board, the following resolution Was adopted: WHEREAS, Charles M. Denton, son of Mr. and Mrs. Michael Denton of Centralia Road, is a member of SCout Varsity Team R25 sponsored by ~he Meadowb~ook I War4, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and an eighth grader at Salem Middle School; and WHEREAS, it is known and rec0g~ized that this is an honor that must be earned over a long Period of time, requiring physical .kl.=~s, and ](.now/edge a~d. training in 24 different categories; and WHEREAS, he has proved tc his leaders that he is a eo0d ~itizen of outstanding character; s~d ~ 85-2~6 WHEREAS, the rank of Eagle Scout that he has attained is an honor that will remain with him forever. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to Charles M. Denton and acknowledges the good fortune of the Count, to have such an outstanding young man as one of its citizens. Vote: unanimous Mr. Applegate presented the ~xscuted resolutio~ to Mr. Denton an recognized his mother who was also present. 8.B. ~AGLE SCOUT CURTIS R. SINK On motion of the Boardr the following resolution was adopted: WHER]~AS, Curtis R0 Sink~ son of Mr. and Mrs. Danny R. Sink of Bellwood Road, is a member of Boy Scout Troop 880 sponsored by the Beulah United Methodist Church, and a senior at Neadowbrook High School; and WHEREAS, it is known and recognized that this is an honor that must be earned over a long period of time, requiring physical skills, and knowledge and training in 24 different categories; and NHER~AS, he ha~ proved to his leaders that he is a good citizen of outstanding character; and ~EREAs, the rank of Eagle Scout that he has attained is an honor that will remain with him forever. NOW, TNEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby extends its congratulations to Curti~ R. Sink and acknowledges the good fortune of the County to have such an outstanding young man es one of its citizens, Vote: Unanimous Mr. Applega%e presented the executed resolution to Mr. Sink and recognized his family members who were also present. 8.C. POLICE DEPARTMENT AWARDS CEREMONY .Chief Pittman stated that the Police Department recognizes certain individuals for their performance and/or contribution to the field of law enforcement. He stated the Department is honored that the Board is taking th~s opportunity to recognize these recipients at this time, especially in light of the fact that next week is National Police Week. Lt. Dennis McDonald introduced Ratro]man Milton Lee Pulley who received the "Chesterfield County Police 9urple Heart" because he almost gave his life while pez~ormin~ his duty and did in fact lose sight in one eye when shot; introdu~J~ Detective Ronnie O'Shields who was named the "Outs'k~nding ~o~ice Officer o~ the Year" because of his expertise which was instr,~ental in the clearance Of several major cases and his Outstanding record of clearance of cases assigned to hi~; introduced Patrolman Robert C. Pridemore who was named "Outstanding Rookie of '~he Year" because of his extraordinary investigations and willingness to contribute to the Department's efforts and dedication to serving the community~ introd%~ced Dispatcher Mil%on Ray James who was named "Police Emergency Services Ddspatcher of'the Year" because of hie earnest desire to learn al! functions of the position and because of h~e solid judgment and calm prefessio~al attitude during d~fficnlt cireumstances~ introd~ced Mrs. Janie Cimino who was named "Police Civilian Empioyae of the Year" because of her dedication~ team effort and efficient manner in handling administrative issues~ introduced Reverend Dennis Cantwell who was named "outstanding special Police Officer of the Year" because of the extra effort and time he volunteers to the community and Department by delivering death messages, being available when life/death situations arise, etc.; and intzeduced Mr. Jeffrey Spence, a non-employee, who received the "M~ritoriou~ Citizenship Award" as he has benefited the Department and oemm~nlty through h~a work and contributions to law enforce~ent by aiding in the establishment of the Chesterfield Crime Solvers as well as being instrumental ~n developing working re]ationmhip~ with other ~imila~ piograms in the state. On motion Of the Board, the following resolution was adopted: Whereas, Patrolman Milton Lee Pulley, recipient of the "chesterfield County Police Purple Heart~'; Detective Bonnie 0'Sbield~, "Outstanding Police Officer Qf ~he Year, 19~4"; Patrolman Robert C. Pridemore, "Outstanding Rookie of the Year, 19~"; Dispatcher Milton Pay JcDes, "Police ~mergency Services Dispatcher of th~ Year~ 198~"; ~r~. Janis Cimino, "Police Civilian ~mployes of the Year, 19S4~'; Reverend bonnie canfwell~ "Outstonding Special Polic~ Officer of the Year, 19~4": and Mr. kava been recognized by th~if peers as being Oes~r~ing of special police Departmen~ a~asds: and Whereas, th~ dedicated and loyal e~orta of khese iudividuai~ have enhanced, strenguhen=d and intensified the law enforcement e~fcrt~ effici@ncy and effectiveness i~ Chesterfield. county; and Whereas, the e~perience, professionalism and accomplishment~ of these £ndividuals have brought dls~inet credit net only to themselves en~ ~heir ~ami!ies but fo the County a~ well. New, Therefore, ~e It Resolved by nbc Chesterfield Co%%nty Bonnie o'$hields, Patrolmen Robert C. Pridemore, Di~Datoher com/~ended o~ their efforts "aho~e and beyond the call of duty" g.D. ~MOLUT%0N DECLAriNG POLICM WM=K, ~AY 12-18, 1985 On motion of the Suard, ~he following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, the d~dicated, loyal and brave members of Police Department~ thzougnout ~he Country provide an invaluable service WHEREAS, the week of May 12-!8~ 19~5 is renognized a~ outstanding and professional individuals as po]ice officers in Chestezfi~l~ Ceun~y who ~erve ~o p~otact uhe ha~l~h, ~afety and welfare of its citizenry. Board of Supervisors dec!ares May 22-18, 19S5 as Pollce Week in of all its c~ti~ens. resolution to Chief Pittman and his Department, Chief Pittman e~presaed appreciation to the Board un behalf o£ the current, the deceased and the disabled policemen who strive to make the community a safer place in which to llve. 8.E. CHESTERFIELD CpUNT¥ CRI~ SOLVERS Chief Pittman stated in March, 1984, Chesterfield Crime Solvers, Inc. officially became operational. He stated the first year results have exceed their expectations beCauSe of the conc~rne~ and dedicated individuals who oared about their oo~t~unlty and gave Of their time and efforts to make th% program sUCCessful. He introduced the Executive Board of the Crime Solvers: President Jim Brown, Vise President Owen Modem, Treasurer ~aul Carnes a~d Secretary Brenda Petrie. On motion of the ~oard, the following Iesolutlom was adOpted~ ~q~E~AS~ Chesterfield County Cringe Solvers, inc, was formed by a group of ci~izen$ whose sole purp0~ was to assist the County Police Department in their efforts =a solve crime; and WHEREAS, tw~nty-on~ citizens joiDed to,ether to form the non-profit orgaaisa~ion and have established an eff~ctiv~ crime fighting organization with minimal expens~ to taxpayers; and WHEREAS, Crime Sol~rs has ~ignificantly contributed to the successful re~olutien of over 100 crime~ during its first year of operation and recovered over $].0S,000 worth of stolen property and removed over $60,000 worth of drugs f~om the co,~munity; and W~R~AS, Crime Soluers has proven that citix~n~ and police, in a cooperative ~ffort, can significantly impact crime in Chesterfield County. gratitud~ to the Crim~ Solvers Board Df Directors ~nd to the me~er$ of Chesterfield County Crime ~olv~rs for their efforts toward a safer co~unlty. AND FURTHE~ B~ IT RESOLED that this Board of Supervisor~ acRnowledges it~ good fortune in having such a group as Chesterfield County Crim~ ~olvers, Ino_ ~uppOrting the police ~n4 VO~: Unan~ous ~he ~xecutiv~ Board, indicated it wa~ a pleasure to have such a dedicated group cf ciuizens ~n ~hu Coun=y and it was a~other effort on the private sector ~upp6rtln9 th~ co~=unity and its government. Se further recognized Officer Jim Burke~ Program ~=Ai~INGS OF CITIngS ON UNSCHEDULED /4ATTERS OB CLAIMS MS. SYLVIA WILSON AND MR. L~ VkN~BL~ t~GARDING TRANSFER Ms. Sylvia wilson, resident of Robertsen Place Subdivision and owner of th~ Villag~ Marke~ on River P~ad, stated she represented a group of eitizeu~ in Matoaca ~ho ~r$ ©pposed to the d~mpsters being plac~d oI~ John Randolph Ferm~ Virgini~ Stats University. loo~tion signed by 789 people which represents only week's work, p~esented pictursz o~ another public dump site in Matoaca taken a few days ego in,Justin9 the condition of 85~2~9 Oqu~d indica~in9 the ~ange~ous location 0£ the roa~ ko tho site ~r. Applegats i~dicated t~e procedure for addressing the Board i: site at V~rqinia stale University, ~t~'~. Emmett E~ye$. President of the Trojan Woods Association, stated the gi~n~a of the petition recognize ~aR~ services the County provides its citizens; however, they were everwhe~me~ when they learned ~hrough th~ medi~ that Randolph Farm was to b~ u~e~ as a trash transfsr station, She juris~ict~on~ will u~e the dump~texs, the signe~ on the are be~n~ penallz~d ~or being seed citizenst this ~ould decreas~ wsll, the County would have to hire additional peopl~ to accommodate Lhem. Sh~ stated they would b~ ~e!ightsd to have ~tu~p site b~ removed from f~dolph Farm which would provide He rsviewed the history of Randolph Farm which was the home breeding ~rGund for vermi~ of various types, they have had traffic safety coucerns which hav~ not been ~valuated and eyp~ of facility affex mucE research and investigation. i~ being too ha~fy and has not found the right location nor th~ afford weekly pickup. Mr. Venable stated before dumgsters were there, refuse was handled by soma T~thod by the people who use the site, he s~ated people might burn tbs paper portion. ~e stated he had not really thought it through but indicated that the same concept he um~d here as in the uther districts of the County. M~, Mayas stated the County has an obligation tO provide this service to its red,dents which the upposition has net being received in the first place which has been an ongoing situation for years and it is an obligation of the Board to continue it, they are attemp%isg to phase it out and still accommodate those who are using it. ~irs. Girene inquired as to how many residents in the area have prlvats collectors, VenubIe stated he did not know of stt th~ areas but of the 96 homes in his n~ighbcrhood, 88 us~ a private s~rvice. ~[rs. Hayes stated Chat in Tro~an wo0~s (54 hom%~} 108% have private pickup as well as some of the other neig~ors in the area. ~s. Girona explained that Midlothian District did have dumpsturs, explained the problems, monitoring, and rem0~al w{th the construction of the landfill, she stated that Mr. Mayes is always talking about ~quity in all services and wha~ is done fo~ one ~hould bu done agreed because ~. Maye~ felt it was needed. She stated although there are 70 people present in ~ppo~itlon, there ar~ others who site would be maintained, it was not and the employee quit after a ~hort period of time because of th~ ~use hs had to tak~ from geopl~ of other jurisdiotions, co=~rcial contractor~ who refuse, etc. He 8tared i% was unfortunate tha~ people take advantage of situations. Mr. Lance ~ullano, an ad,agent property owner to John Randolph ~ite until r~Oen%ly, people have used his road, peopl~ have gone onto his property to dispose of ~rash, this site will devalue his to the landfill as he does, there i~ historic va].u~ in =he ar~a, the d~psters are no% emptie~ daily but we~kly, personnel at the weal ~eca~se of its close proximity to the site and others w~ll do the same, ther~ is a lot of opposition to %h8 request, p~ople will throw trash on th~ s~d~ of the road if the site is locked at ~ight, etC. He stated in c~der to place a t~ail~z on ~is own property, h~ had to receive a permit but yet a trash transfer station could be placed here and he was not contacted. He he uu~erstooO the County was trying to do the right thing but there will be major problems and requested that the Board not approve the site ~or this tran~r ~uppor~ of the ~ite. Mr. Daniel in,aired if it were proper debate the iseue as th~ Board is now fully sware of the concern. Mr. Apptegate stated the Board had suspended the rules, and he felt it only fair ~0 hear both Mr, Peyto~ GoodalI~ ~rO~erty owner near the Park site, that d~mpsters W~e within 100 yards ~f h~a residence a~d i~ would be sa~er, stated the proposed site is behind trees and not in view of the ro~d, ~tc. I{e stated thiE i~ a n~C=~ity. fl5-29l dumpstars are needed for the general public and he hoped there something to prevent its abuse. He stated hc has been a resident at this same address since 1933. Mr. Hrown referenced a petition given to ~r. Mayas in J~uary signed by auroral hundred people req~tlng that the trash dumpsters not b~ placed 200 feet from hi~ back dour when they were being considered and it was upheld. He sta=e~ in the peri=ion they requested that the Connt~ and Mr. Mayas work diligently to give more frequent pickup than once a month. He stated the C0~nty is a growing com~nnity and he felt th~s was necessary end som~thlng mor~ modern than a transfer statio~ should be considered. He stated they were eve~ in favor of atas increase to cover this aS h~ pays now for private collection, s~ated the $40~0§0 lot this site could be applied to the implementation of additional pickup service such as Once a week, at least. He stated he did not believe the tax rate ~ld have to be increased ~oo much and it would replace the $100! they spend now on private colle~tion. MI. Franklin Perry ~tated the people's main concern is the transfer s~tiun is in their backyar~ and they pay f0~ private collection. He ~'hated if it is needed that it be towered where the n~ed exists. Mr. Daniel stated the Board ha~ heard the comments about that they ara needed and thi~ will. have to be r~vi~wed by staff with recommendations fo=~arded ~0 ~he Mrs. ~irone expressed appreciation for the people taking time to to uuder~tand situations without people explaining them, Mr. Dodd stated he appreclatad the dile~a in Matoaca District, however, it would cost at least $3~000,000 to increase ~he ~p service. H~ ~tae~d ~ would not vot~ for this kind of increase as it would drive away industry, there are and perhaps another look ut the site m~qht be Dr. Lewi~ mta~ed he had concern about his property as well. stated he i~ a me.er of the faculty a~ the Unive~si%y~ 'he has a public health problem w~ich is unseen. He stated that this a r~uearch farm and th~s tr~fe~ $itm could contaminate the ~ntiru farm. Ha stated he f~tt it was disturbing that the President of th~ University and the Board of Visitors voted in mat~er and he i$ unawa=~ o~ any uther univ~rsit~ in the United farm. Mr. ~yes expressed aperec~a~ion to the citizens fo~ coming down and outlininq their concerns as this is the de~cratie way and %he way to approach a ~ulut~on to a problem. H% ~tated %hat th~ Soard has a responsibility and it mu~ p~rform the benefit of tho majori%~ of the p~c~,!~ of th~ COunty. ~e other ~s he understands the County do~s not have the being reviewed. Mr. Mayas stated tba~ there is a mandate from dependent upon the approual by th~ Attorney Cenerai which has not been done. He stated the only action %hat this Board can take tonight is to listen to the concerns Of the citi~en~ ~nd COme to has been reviewed. He stated he would like to officially addres~ Lhis concern at the appropriat~ Bo~rd meeting after the opinion has bee~ received from the Attorney General. Mr. Applegate e~preemed appreciation to those present for taking the time ~o express their oDiniens and stated there would be a conscientious effo~ to r=~olve the situation after an opinioR has been received from the Attorney General, It was g~nerally agreed the Board ~o~ld recusu for two minutes. 1~. DEFERRED ITEMS 10.A. APPOInTMenTS appointod Mr. William Dieterich to the L~fill Advisory Co~itte~, repr~sentinq Midlothien Di~trict~ effectiv~ immediately whose term will expire on ~arch 13, 19~5. Vote: Unanimous 10.A.~. A~OMATTOX BASIN INDUStrIAL DE~BLOPMEBT AUTHORITY On mo~ion of Mr. Dodd~ ~scondsd by Mrs. Girone~ th~ Board Nicholas and Mr. C. P. Currin to the Appomattox Basin Industrial Development Authoriky effective ima~ediately whose terms will expire in September, 1985. Vote: Unanimous 1O.B. PUBLIC IIE~/{ING Pd~GAPuDINO SUBDIVISION, ZONI~G AND ~IT~ PLD4 Mr. Hedrick sta~d this time and date ha~ been sohed~!ed for a . public bearing to consider ~n czdlnanc~ regarding subdivision, zon~n9 and slt~ Dian review f~es which ~a~ deferred item th~ April 24, 1985 meeting, Mr, Batderson stated the daf=frei wa~ a with them. He introduced Mr, ~bert Leipertz, Pre,id=ut o~ the Richmond ~ommbuilders Association. Mr. Leipertz s~ntad the Hom~builders AssociatioD ha~ 9~3oye~ a 9004 and beneficial relationship in working with County departm~nt~ a~ various issue oppose the proposal, they hnve spent considerable lime reviewing' s~ated they are concerned with tho rel~tionship the C~un~y has i re~ard to th~ staggering growth it is e~smrieDci~g at this time and what those ramifications ane for tko 2utur~, }Ia stated tbei would be comprised cf members o~ the development and building co~uni~y in ~he County slung w~th staf~ and citizen participation. Re s~at~ ~h~y WOu~d address long range planning in the County. as well as: 1. R~V%ew the current policles u:~d procsdur~ of the department to make sure they are stilt relevan'~, 2. identify localities 0f similar size ~hich are also 85-293 planning department and procedures to est~bllsh what positive activities exist in the County and look at others that could be explored. 3. Identify larger localities which already experienced rapid growthand work through their depart~ments, as well as reinforce things that we are currently doing and identify issues that could be addressed. 4. Review the information that is currently being collected by staff in the area of planning submissions to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors and establish feedback from each as this information is ne0essary. 5. Review any topics that the committee might feel that could b~ of benefit for $ long period rather than simply addressing Mr. Dodd stated several years ago there wac a committee established to review the regulatory process at the Courthouse ~¢ make things run smoother and cheaper. He stated he never heard recom~endation from that committee and he di~ not know if th~s committee would be of benefit unless it had a direct goal. Mr. Leipertz stated he understood that work was completed about the same time as the election of the Board and the matter just terminated and never was resurrected. He stated he hoped what h would be proposing would return something cf substance, Mr. Applegate suggested that Nr. Leipertz pre~ent his proposal in writing to staff for Board consideration. There was no one else present to discuss the matter. On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by M~. Dodd~ the Board adopted the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE TO ~24END THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTEP~FIEI/), 1978, AS ~4ENDED, BY ;LMENDING S~CTIONS 18-,!1, 21-9~ AND 21~77 RELATING T0 SUBDIVISION, ZONING AND SITE PL~.N REVIEW FEES BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Sapervisozs of Chesterfield County: 1, That Section 18-11 of ~he Cede of the County of Chesterfield, i978, as a~ended, is amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. i8-11. Fees The fees for processing subdivisions by ~he county shall be payable upon submission of ~he plats to the county for tentative or final approval ~d shall be equal to the following: (a) For tentative approvel ................... $200.00 (b) FOr renewal of tentative approval ......... (c) F~nal apprdval plus $10.00 pe~ lot $150.00 plus $1.00 per lot $75.00 plus $5.00 per lot 85-294 2. That Section 21-9 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended and reenacted aS follows: SAc. 21-9. Fees for hear~pgs. The cost of each hearing requested pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, including advertisement when required, shall be as foll~w~ and shall be deposited simultaneously with the filing of the application or petition: (a) Zoning: (1) Agricultural (A) .................. $300.00 plus $10.00 ~e~ (2) Residential IR-40, R-25, R-J5, R-12, R-9, R-7, MH-1, MR-2) $475.00 plus $20.00 {3) Commercial, industrial .............. $500.00 plus $45.00 pe~ acre Conditional uses and s~ecial exceptions: (1) ~4u]tiple family or two family ........ (2} .%Iobile Homes (i) New ............... (iii Renewal ........... $500.00 plus $10.00 pe= unit for each unit after the first two units $200.OO $ 75.00 (3) (ii Planned Development~ new ......... (ii) A~end condition of planned development .................... (4) Ail other~ $630.00 plus $10.00 pe~ $10.00 pe~ multi- family or duplex dwelling two (2} units $350.00 each occasion $200.00 plus $25.00 pe~ acre $300.00 85-295 (d) Appeal tO decision of Director of Planning .................................. $350.00 (3) (4) Vote: Unanimous 3. ~hat Section 21-77 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978~ as amended, is a~e~ded and reenacted as follows: Sac. 21~77. Fee~. (a) In addition to any other fees required by the county (state and county agencies and departments and tax exempt non-profit organizations excluded), a fee of three hundred and seventy-five dollars shall be paid to the county treasurer upon filing of a site plan, plus: (1) Ten dollars per each dwellin~ unit; (2) Twenty-five dollars per acre ior all new commercial sites; (3) Twenty-five dollars per acre for all new industrial sites; (4) Twenty-five dollars per acre for all new institutional sites; or (5) Two hundred twenty-five dollars for master site plans. (b) A fee of one hundred and fifty dollars shall be paid t, the County Treasurer upon filing a revised site plan. (c) A fee of seventy-five ~ollars shall be paid to the County Treasurer upon filing a schematic plan, plus; (1) One dollar per dwelling unit; %~enty-five doltars per acre for all new commercial ~i'tes; Twenty-five dollars per acre for all new industrial s~tes; Twenty-five dollars per acre for all new institutional sites. !0.C. STORER CABLEVISION FOR PulT~ I~C.R~A~E Mr. Hedrlck stated consideration of the request for a rate increase by Storsr Cablevision had been deferred until this date. Mr. Daniel stated ~hat he was not present at the last Board meeting when the issue was discussed and since that time he has reviewed the situation and the series of events since the last rste increase. ~e stated in January, 1985 the Board asked Store~ to consider service as its number one priority and the Board ever gave a list of which services needed to be improved. He stated that he has received less complaints ~ince that time as the service has been improved; however, service is not the issue to be discussed. He stated when determining rate structure or a rate increase, a statement of financial position and an income state--hr must be reviewed. }{e stated that the Board is dealing with a question of reasonable rate of return and not a maximum. He stated reasonable in the fact that wha% we have created here in tke County a monopoly and not so:[~tbing that is working in competition. ~e staged t~e Board has been presented with papers indicating ~at the two rates of increase would be as cempared tc the 1.2% currently. He stated 'there are other methods of det~zu, ining financial performance of an organization. He discussed internal rate of return; depreciation~ tax advantage gains from the tax investment credits; measure of. ~nvestment; interest payments on deb% %o ~torer Co~unication~, Inc. ~ stated ~h~ ne~ investmen~ in %ha corpora%ion ~s approxima'~ly $17,000,000; reviewe~ various methods of iinancial performance; esti~tes on return of investment ~rom 18%-35%; etc. tie if the company is ~atlsfied with, for ex~p!e, a 25% increase, then in 1986 you should begin ~o start discussing rate dec~ea~es and not increases. He stated %hat he ~id not take inves-~nent credits ~hioh change the situation even f~rth~r as wel~ as o%~erkaad and stock g~owth inte/ considera%iQn. ~{e sta~d no matter how you lock at itt %he floo.[ is between 22%-4~% which paren~ cc~any is ~attin9 as an internal rate of re%urn for thei~ investment. He stated if you take the two years prior to the acquisition atte~pts, th~ tnke over percent you ate talking is a v~7 healthy gain cf 53% ~rom ].983-84 and for the entire nine quarters there is 141% increase in the val%%e of ownership the entire orqani~ation. He stated S~o~er forwarded a l~ther to the County ind~ca%inq they were withdrawing their reque~t~ that on ~y 1~ 1985 they woul~ imple~ent the 5% increase fo~ basic an~ 10% increase for the expanded basic, ~hey felt a fair rah~ o~ retur~ wam pro~ided for in the frauchise, and if w9 have any thi~ point he was not sure what the Boar~ Wo~Id b~ a~ked to do ordinance was adopted to govern th~ cablevi~ion franchise an~ in that the r~ceiver of the franchise would adhere to everything in the ordinance and that %h~ franchisee would be obligated to ~o~ply with tern;s and conditions for the best int~r~s% of the citizens of Cheste:cfield County. ~te s~atad in this section it initiated that "no increase in rates.- deposit~ or ~s shall be made except as aethorized by the Board after appropriate public hearing affording due process." He stated before %he Board mRkel a decision on %he rate incrsase, ~:he q~estion of the County's answered.. He stated if cha~ aunhority is not up~eld then the question of fees becomes mu~e and the price elasticity in the market place wS'~l take ove~ and the CourtLy can allo%~ more severe comDeuition and we will be forced to encourage mo~e competition. He ~tated if =he answer is yes, then bhe Roar~ should determln~ in an 'unbzased and clear way what should be the criteria for estab!i~hing a reasonable rate of return. Ee stated the~e will be various ways of determining th.~ and he felt ~. established methodology should be determined. ~{e st~ggested that this matter . be taken un,er disc~ssion in Executive Session. (A copy of the prssenna~zon i~ filed wi~h the papers of the Board.} Mr, App!egate ststed he felt the i~oa~'d =herald consider Storer's it is thc Board'~~ desire ~ot to grant it then the Board should into Execnti~e '.3ass~on to consider an i~]junetion to block this wiLl,Out action b.~, the Bo~rd ~ould not be proper. He stated the Bo~0.~d has been ~:~ ~{ fha% it can regulate rates by the County Attorney. ~e st?~tc~ he felt the Board ~hould consider thc rate Mr. Dodd stst~d fhat the rede.fei ].aw {~a$ pas~ed h~ca~se it was felt this was a luxury item a~d not a ~]ecessity and the localities shol~]d ~ot get in%'olved and hs felt this was wrong, He stated he wcstd like to know i~ this federal law preempts their agrea~e~? ~ w~'itten as it is a form of a ~onepo]y. Stated he ~te?." ~be creation of ~he monopoly wa~ wrnn9 s!so. stated he did .~. feel that the federal !aw~ al[ihcu~h it is stand, os tho ::u~. · H~ stated ~.he people who are oppo&ed can of $5-297 Mr, Mayas stated he still hae a problem with the definition of basic and expanded basic. He stated after the presentation by Mr. Daniel he has a concern about the contract. Mrs. Girone inquired where the County stands with regard to the federal law. Mr. Micas stated that staff has researched the issue thoroughly and is satisfied that the Board has the authority to regulate basic and expanded basic service rates. He stated it appears that the new federal law will define the Richmond area as an are~ of effective oo~petition as of July 1, 1985. Be stated that means that since we are in an area of effective competition the federal law will preempt rate regulation as of December, 1986. He stated until December, 1986, the Board continues to regulate all rates in excess of 5% a year that the federal government has g~anted to every cable company. Mr. Mayas inquired if the cable company was in violation of the contract by adopting a 10% increase without Board approval. Mr. Micas stated they were in violation and they have attempted to unilaterally impose a rate increase without Board approval but there is still the request before the Board requesting an increase. Mrs. Gircne stated the 90 days ago the Board indicated that if the company did certain things such as clear up the billing, improve services, improve the telephone answering system, etc., it would look upon their request favorably. She stated she felt the Board's word to them must enter into consideration. Mr. Dodd stated that one or two Board members may h~ve given them that impression but that he never indicated he was in favor of a rate increase. Mr. Mayas stated he asked Mr. MacNeil!y i~ anyone promised him a raise at the last meeting, =nd he indicated they did not. Mrs. Girone stated we did net prom~se but implied that if the level of service improved which the people were not happy with, then the Board would favorably consider it. Mr. Dodd stated he would in favor of granting a 5% increase this year and next year. Mr. Applegate stated that the company is entitled to 5% by the federal law. Mr. Dodd ~tated ~hat was correct but it puts the Board on record of a reasonable increase and reasonable rate of return. Mr. Maye~ stated the contract has been violated, and he did not feel the Board could take any action with regard to the increase. Mr, Dodd stated he felt the federal law established 5 because it was reasonable and any more would be unreasonable. Mr. Applegate stated that in January the question was service an not the amount of increase and they have improved their service. He stated they asked for a rate increase, we d~ferred the issue, the company instituted it anyway; the Board should vote on the request and then consider alternatives. Mr. Daniel stated that Storer's letter to the County of April 26 1985 withdrew their request for a~% increase so the Board does no · have to vote on the issue. Ee stated further that they have informed the Board of what rates ~ey are going to take with or without our approval, and the next action would be whether or no the Board %-ill challenge their action. He stated he felt comfortable not voting on a rate increase as they have stated what they feel is the Board involvement on the rate increase. Mr. Micas stated that once a matter is properly before the Board no one can unilaterafiy withdraw it unless the Board approves th withdrawal. Mr. Dodd stated he felt the the Board should vote On the request. He stated the federal government indicated the~ took their action because localities will not give increases. Mr. Dodd moved that the Board 9rant Sforer Cablovisien a 5% increase this year and 5% next year. ~r. Mayas stated that the c0~tr~ct had been violated and he not vote on the issue, The motion died for a lack of a second. Mr. Mayas moved, seconded by Mr. Daniel, that the Board go into Executive Session for consultation with legal cou=~sel regarding potential litigation regarding Storer C~levision pursuant to 85-298 Section 2.1-~44(a) (6) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Mr. Micas stated the Board had agreed to add this tfm~ at the beginning of the meeting. Mr. Daniel stated the Executive Session would end any further discussion of the issue tonight. Mr. Micas stated rules would have to be suspended to move the Executive Session to this point in the meeting. Mrs. Girone stated she felt it should be held at the end o~ the meeting as listed On the agenda. Mr. Daniel stated the Board could then proceed with the other issues on the agenda. Mr. Mayes stated if the Board were to continue with the agenda, he withdrew his motion and F~. Daniel withdrew his second. Mr. Applegate stated the issue before the Board is ~o consider the rate increase request by Storer. Mr. Daniel moved that the Board table the rate request of Storer Cablevision at this time. This motion died for lack of a second. Mrs. Girone moved that the Board grant Storer Cablevision a 10% increase for both basic and expanded basic service. The notion was s~conded by Mr. Applegate. Mr. Mi~as stated that if th~ motion fails, it does not necessarily constitute a denial of a rate increase only that the motion to grant an increase fails, ge stated it is not an affirmative vote to deny a rate increase and the Board could still move that the rate increase be denied. Mr. Applegate stated he seconded the motion because the ~oard gave Storer a list el service problems which they ~e].t needed to be corrected before a rate increase would be considered and they have over the last four months made strides to approve the ~ervice and that was his intent in January. Mr. Daniel made a substitute motion that the question on rate increases not be ccnsidered until after the Executive Session to determine what th~ Board's positlon w~tl be toward answering the question aa to who determines the ra~es and fees in Chesterfield County. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mayas. Ayss~ Mr. Mayas, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Dodd. Nays: Mr. Applegate and M~s. ~iro~e. !2.E. ~XECUTIVE SESSION On motion of Mr. App!egate, seconded by Mr. Daniel, the Board suspended its rules and procedures to allow item 12.H., Executive SesSion for consultation with legal counsel pertaining to potential litigation regarding Stormr Cablevision pursuant to Section 2,1-344 (a) 16) of the Coda of Virginia, 1950, as amended, to b~ moved to 10.c. on ~t]e agenda. vote: Unanimous On motion of Mr. Daniel, seconded by Mr~ Mayas, the Board went into Executive Session for consultation w~%?~ legal counsel pertaining tO potential litigation regar~!i:'~g Storer Cablevis~on pursuant to Section 2.I-34S(a) (6) of the ~!ode of virginia, 1950, as amended. Vote: U~animous Reconvening: 10.C. p~EQI~k]ST FOR t~ATE INCREASE ~Y STORER CABLEVISION On motion o~ Mr. Dodd, secondmd by Mr. Mayas, the Board approved 85-299 a 5% increase for Storer effective May 1, 1985. Ayes: Mr. ~ayes, Mr. Daniel and Mr. Dodd. Nays: Mr. Applegate and Mrs. Gir0ne. Mr. Applegate stated based on Stcrsr's disregard for the Board and net waiting two weeks for its decision on the rate increase, he moved that the County Attorney enjoin in Court any increase ir excess of 5% and asked the Court to decide the County's right to regulate rates. Mr. Daniel seconded the motion. Ayes: Mr. Applegate, Mr. Mayes. Mr. Daniel and Mr. Dodd. Nays: Mrs. Girone. Mr. Daniel disclosed to the Board that his employer, Philip Morris manufactures smoking products, the next ite~ involves the manufacturing of equipment for such products, declared a potential conflict of interest and excused himself from the meeting pursuant to the Virginia Comprehensive Conflict of Interest Act. 1~. PUBLIC BEARINGS o SALE OF LAND AT AIRPORT INDUSTRI~ PARK TO PMB~ INC. Mr. }Iedriok stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider the sale of 1.08 acres at the Airport Industrial Park to PM~, Inc. There was no opposition present. On motion of ~r. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. ~irone, the Board approved and authorized the Chairman of the Board to execute any necessary documents conveying 1.08 acres ~o PMB, Inc., at a cost of $25,000 per acre at the Airport Industrial Park. Ayss~ Mr. Applegate, Mr. Mayes~ Mr. Dodd and Mrs. Girone. Absent: Mr. Daniel. Mr. Daniel returned =o the meeting. 12. NEW BUSINESS .A. ADOPTION OP 1985-86 BUDGET On motion of the Board~ it is hereby -~esolved that the 1985-96 Budget be ~dopted a~ follows: FUND General Fund School Fund Revenue Sharing Vehlcl~ and Communication Airport Nursing Home Utilities Less Int~rf~nd Transfers TOTAL TOTAL $132,600,100 124,514,200 1,926,900 2,208,600 1,034,400 4,.462,600 49,000,500 j6~91~300) $246~56,000 It is ~oted that the School Budget previously adopted on April 24, 1.9~5 is amended by $246,000 and that the County Administrator's proposed Budget is amended as follows: Add Expenditures: o Job Training Program $ 58,000 o Transportation ~ngineer 32~300 o Revenue Sharing-Roads o The Diamond o Proration of Personal Property o Miscellaneous TOTAL Funding Source: o Additional Revenue Source- F~re Insurance Surcharge o Reduce Expenditures-Insurance o Reduce Transfer to Sehools 0 From Fund Balance TOTAL 220t000 54,000 90,000 50,100 $ 504,400 $ 88,000 160~200 246,000 tO~20q $ 504,400 Be it further resolved thou in ~dopting the I985~86 Budget the Board of Supervisors ccm~its to consider additional funding for tho following items after fund balance amounts are determine in July: o Nine Pirefightmrs at Ma+oaca Fire Station for half year $ 112,000 o Three Firefighters at Dale Fire Station for half year 37,500 o Mental Health and Mental Retardation additional funding 150~800 o Secretary ~or General District Court 22,~00 TOTAL $ 322,400 Be it further resolved that the Board of Supervisors expresses appreciation to the School Board for decreasing the School Budge~ to help balance the County Budget, in particular increasing the County's revenue ~ha~ing participation in road projects ~rom 15% ~o 25%. T~e Board o~ Supervisors understands that this reduction in the School Budget will not affect any progranls and should the funding be needed during the 1985-86 year~ tho Board of Supervisors will consider the request. Vote: Unanimous · ] 2.B. L~ASE PURCMASE FINANCING OP THREE BUILDINGS On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr, Mayas, the Board named Municipal Lusting/Wheat First Securities as Lessors/Underwriters Services and Courts buildings and further authorized the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents/contracts. It is noted that the staff will develop the structure of the financing ove~ the next several ~eks and the Board will formall 12.C. CONSENT ITEMS 12.C,1. DECI, ARING POCONO SUBDIViST~)R AS BIPD SANCTUARY On mokion of 5~rs. Girone, s~cc~nd~d by ~r, Dodd~ the Board adopts the followin,~ resolution: WHEREAS, conservation or the saving, protecting, preserving o;. our natural resources should claim the deep and considered concern of every patriotic citizen of the County; 85-301 $¢HBP. EAS, somm provision must be made for wildlife if it is to continue to exist. NOW, TEEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors Of Chesterfield County, Virginia, that the entire area known as the Pocono Subdivision be designated as a Bird Sanctuary. That it shall be unlawful to trap, hunt, shoot or attempt t~ shoot or molest in any manner any bird or wild fowl or to rob bird nests or wild fowl nests. Provided, however, if starlings or similar birds are found to be congregating in such numbers in a particular locality that they constitute a nuisance or menace to health or property in the opinion of the pr0pe~ health authorities of Chesterfield County, then in such event said health authorities shall meet with representatives of the Audubo~ Society, BiId Club, Garden Club or Humane So0iety, or es many of said clubs as are found to exist in the Poconc Subdivision, afte~ having given at least three days actual notice cf the time and place of said meeting ts the representatives of said clubs. If as a result of said meeting no satisfactory alternative is found to abate such nuisance, then said birds may be destroye( in such numbers and in such manner as is deemed advisable by sai( health authorities unde~ the supervision of the Chief of Police of the County of Chesterfield. Permission is hereby granted to the Pocono Garden Club to place, subject to the r~gulatlons of the State Highway Department, s~itable plaqees at the various entrances of Pocono stating that said Pocono Subdivision is a Bird Sanctuary, as an appeal and reminde~ ~o Tourist and Native alike. Vote: Unanimous 12.C.~. DECLAR]~ CHEVROLET STEP VAN SURPLUS On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by M~. Dodd, the Board declared a 1969 Chevrolet Step V~n, PS259F866152, Surplus and granted the Pi~e Department permission to donate the unit fo a volunteer department outside the Count~. Vote: Unanimous 12.C.3. CBANGR ROUTE NUMBER OF EASTMAN ROAD On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board adopte( the following resolution= WHEREAS, a section of Eastman Road IEoute 2890), 0.29 mile in length, has recently been accepted into the state system; and WHEREAS, this section forms a. connecting link between other sections of Rastman Road previously designated as Route 2842~ an( WBER~S, in order to p~ovide route nu~e~f continuity, the Virginia Department of Mighway$ and Transportation has proposed ren~m~ering of Eastman Road {Route 2842) to Route 2890. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield Coent~ concurs with this proposed renumbering. Vote: Unanimous 12.C.4. ST~Ji'E i~OAD ACCEPTANCE This day the County Environmenf~l Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report ~n writing upon his examination of Glenpark Lane, Glenshade Drive, Fennimore Road and 85-302 Fennimore Terrace in Walton Park, a portion of Section H and Section K, Mi~lothian District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, it is resolved that Glenpark Lane, Glenshade Drive, Fennimore Road end Fennimore Terrace in Walton Park, a portion of Section H and Section K, Midlothian District, be and they are hereby established as public roads. A~d be it further resolved, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, be and it hereby is requested to take into the Secondary System, Glenpark Lane, beginning at the intersection with Queensgate Road, State Route 1385, and going 0.05 mile northerly to the intersection witk Glenshade Drive, then continuing 0.05 mile northwesterly to the intersection with Fennimore Road, then continuing 0.03 mile northwesterly to tie into proposed Glenpark Lane, Walton Park, Section L; Glenshade Drive, beginning at the intersection with watch Hill Road, State Route 1084, and going 0.11 mile westerly to the intersection witl Glenperk Lane; Fennimore Road, keginning at the intersection with Glenpark Lane and going 0.04 mile southwesterly to a cul-de-sac. Again Fennimore Road, beginning at tile intersection with Glenpark Lane and going 0.07 mile northeasterly to the inte~ection with Fennimore Terrace, then continuing 0.03 mile northwesterly to a cul-de-sac; and Pennimore Terrace, beginning at the intersection with Fennimore Road and going 0.05 mile southeasterly to a cul-de-sac. This request is inclusive of the adjacent slope 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. These sections of Walton Park are recorded as follows: Section H. Plat Hook 35, Page 23, Dece~oer 6~ 1979. Section K. Plat Hook 44, Page 44, Novenfoer 1, 1983. Vote: Unanimous This day the County ~nvironmental Engineer, in accordance with directions from this Board, made report in writin~ upon his examination of Sara Kay Drive, Fox Run Drive and Edington Drive in Alton, Sections 5 and 6, Dale District. Upon consideration whereof, and on motion of Mrs. Girone~ seconded by Mr. Dodd, it is resolved that Sara Kay Drive, POX RUb D~ive and E~inp'ton Drive in Aft~, Sections 5 and 6, Dale 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 taka ~nto the Secondary £ystem~ S~ra Kay Drive, beginning at the end of State Maintenance, Sara Kay Drive, State Route 2750 and running westerly 0.05 mile to -the ~ntersection with FOX Run Drive, then continuing westerly 0.05 m{l~ to the intersection with Edington Drive, thel] continuing westerly 0.02 mile to end in a dead end. Again, Sara Ray Drive, beuinning at the northern end of Fox Run Drive and running weeter].y 0.07 mile to the intersection with Edington Drive, then continuing westerly 0.04 mile ~o end in a temporary turnaround~ Fox Run Dr~ve, beginning at the intersection with Sera Kay Drive ~nd ru~ning northerly 0.13 ~!ile to the second ]ntersectmun with Sara Kay Drive, then continuing northerly 0.03 mile ~0 end in a dead end; and Edingtom Drive, beginning at the intersection with Sara Kay Drive and running northerly 0.15 milo tc end at the second intersection with Sara Kay Drive. This request i~ inclusive of tko adjacent slope easements. These reade serve 56 lots. And be it further resolved, that tho Board of Supervisors guarantees to the Virginia Department of Highways a 50' right-of-way for all of these road~ except Sara Kay Drive which has a variable 50' to 70' right-of-way. These sections of Alton are recorded as follows: Section 5. Plat Book 40~ Page 87, March 17, 1982. Section 6. Plat Book 4~, Page 65~ July 28, 1983. 12.C.5. BINGO AND/OR k~FFLE pERMiTS On motion cf Mrs. Girone~ seconded by M~. Dodd, the Board approved the request ~or a bingo/raffle permit from the Ettri~k Youth Sports Association for calendar year 1985. Vote: Unanimous !2.C.6. G.0. BONDS BY VIRGINIA ~DBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORIT¥ On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board adopte( the following res01~tion: A RESOLUTION AMENDING "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING T~IE ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF $3,000,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT O} GENEP3%D OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS, SERIES OF 1985, OF C}~ESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA; AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF SUCH BONDS TO VIRGINIA PUELIC SCHOOL, AUTNORIT¥" AND "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF $3~000,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ~ENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS, SERIES OF 1985, OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA, TO THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL, AUTHORITY~ FIXING TEE INTEREST RATES TO BE BORNE BY SUCB BONDS AND OTHERWISE APPROUING THE DETAILS OF SUCN BONDS; APPROVIN0 THE FOR~ OF SUCH BONDS; RATIFYIN~ CERTAIN ACTS AND PROCEEDINGS; AND OTHERWISE PROVIDING PeR THE ISSUANCE OF SUCN BONDS" ADOPTED BY TEE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON MARCH 27, 1985 AND APRIL 9, 1985, RESPECTIVELY, PROVIDE FOR TH~ APPOINTMENT OF CENTP~L pIDELITY BANK AS ~LEGISTRA~ FOR SUCH BONDS WHEREAS, tho Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia (the "County") on March 27, 1985 adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance by the County cf its $3,000~000 principal amount of General Obligation School Bonds, Series of 1985 (the "Bonds") ~ such resoiutioh being entitled "A R~SOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVEUING FOR THE ISSUANCE, sALE AND DELIVERY OF $3,000,0C0 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENEFJ~L OBLIGATION SCHOOL BONDS, SERIES OF !985, OF CHESTERFIELD COU}~TY~ VIR.GINIA; AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF S[3CH BONDS TO THE VIROINIA PUBLIC SCBOOL ADTHORITY~' (the "Authorlzin9 Resolution"); and WHEREAS~ the Board of S~per¥isorE of the County On April 9, 19~5 adopted a re?osutlo~ ~uthcrizlng the sale of the BOndS, such resolution being entitled "A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF $3,000~000 PRiNCIP~. AMCUNT OF GENERAL OBLIGATION SC~{©OL BONDS, SERIES OF 19~5, O~ CHeSTERFiELD COL%ITY, VIRGINIA, TO TM~ VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCtIOOL AUTHORiTY~ FIXIN~ THE INTEREST F3.TES TO BE BO~E BY SUCH BONDS AND 0TRERWISE APPROVING THE DETAILS OF SUCH BONDS; APPROVING T~E ~'ORM OF SUCH BONDS; RATIFY!NO CERTAIN ACTS AND PROCEEDINGS; ~D OTBEBWISE PROVID£NG FOR THE iSSUANCE OF SUCH S0NDS" t~e "Sale Resolution"); and B5-304 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the County has determined that it is desirable to amend the Authorizing Resolution and the Sale Resolution to provide for the appointment of Central Fidelity Bank as the Registrar for the Bonds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County: 1. (a) The first sentence of the second subparagrap~ of paragraph 3 of the Authori=ing Resolution is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "The County Administrator shall direct Central Fidelity Bank, as the registrar for the Bonds (the 'Registrar'), to authenticate such Bonds and no such Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose unless and until the certificate of authentication endorsed on such Bond shall have been manually executed by the Registrar." (b) The first sentence of the first subparagraph of paragraph 6 of the Authorizing Resolution is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "At all times during which any Bond remains outstanding and unpaid, the Registrar shall keep or cause to be kept at the principal office of hhe Registrar in the City of Richmond, Virginia, books of registry for the registration, exchange and transfer of the Bonds." 2. (a) The first sentence of the third subparagraph of paragraph 3 of the Sale Resolution is amended to read in its entirety as fellows: "Tl~e principal of, and premium, if any~ on the ~onds shall be payable ak the principal office of Central Fidelity Bank in the City of Richmond, Virginia, as Registrar." (b) The form of the Bond set forth in paragraph of the Sale Resolution is amended as follows: (I) The first paragraph of the fomn of the Bond is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Chesterfield County (hereinafter referred to as the 'County')~ a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, for value received, hereby promises to pay to the registered eisner of this Bond specified above (the 'Registered Owner'), or registered assigns, on the Maturity Date specified above, the Principal A~.oun~ specified above (unless this Bond shall have been duly called for previous redemption and payment of the redemption price shall have been made or provided for), upon presentation and surrender of this Bond at the principal office of Central Fidelity Bank in the City of Richmond, Virginia, as Registrar (hereinafter referred to as the 'Registrar~)~ and to pay interest on such Principal Amount fre~ the date of authentication hereof at the Interest Rate per annum specified above~ such interest being payable on DecaYer 15, 198~ and semiannually on each June 15 and December 15 thereafter unti2 the payment of such Principal Amount, by check or draft mailed b the Registrar to the person in whose name this Bend is registers on the books of registry kept and ma~nfained by the Registrar as of the close of business on the last business day of the calendar month next preceding each interest payment date." (II) The third paragraph of the form of the Bond is amended to read in its entirety as fc±iows: "This Bond is one o~ a duly a%~thorized issue of Bonds (herein referzed to as 5he 'Bonds') of the aggregate principal amount of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) and is issued for the purpose of financing the costs of school improvements of and for the Co~/l~y, under and pursuant to and in full co~plian~ ~wi%h the Constitution and statutes of ~he Co~onw~alth of Virginia, ~ncluding Chapter 5 of Title 15.1 of the Code Of Virginia 1950, as amended (the same being tho Public Finance kc~), and resolutions duly adopted on March 27, 1985, April 9, 1985 and May 8, 1985 by the Roard of Supervisors of the County under such Chapter 5." (III) If any Bond shall be issued in printed form, the last paragraph of the form of the Pond may be amended to re~d a~ follows: "i~ WITNESS WKE~EOF, th~ County~ by its 5Card of Supervisors, ha~ caused this Bond to be executed by a facsimile of ~he signature of th~ Chairman of such Board; a facsimile of the corporate seal of such Board kc be imprinted h~r~on, attested by a facsimile Qf the ~i~nature o~ the Clerk of ~uoh Board; and this Bohd to be dated a~ ef May 1, 19857 (IV) The Certificate cf Authentication on ~he form of ~on~ is amended to read in its entirety as follows: This Son~ is one of t~e Bonds delivere~ pursuan= ~o the within*mentioned proceedings. C~TRAL FIDELITY B~ Richmond~ Virginia, ~gistrar ~. The County Attorney is kereby au=horized and ~ir~cted to file a COpy of this resolution, certified by the Clerk of ~his Board to be a true and correc~ copy hereof, with ~he Circuit C~nrt of the County. 4. If an~ s~tiOn, para~rap~, clause o~ provi~ion of this ~esolution Bi,all ~¢ he~d iuv~l~d Qr u~enforce~l~ for any paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this re~olution. 5. Ali. resolution~ an~ proceedings {n co~fliet 6. This resolution sh~ll take ~fiact upon its adoption. 12.9. COMMb~ITY DEVEL©P~EET ITEM5 12.D,1. HOPKINS AND BEIlLAt{ ROAD TRAFFIC SIGNAL STWD¥ On me,ion of ~¢r. Daniel, m~onded hy M~ Dodd, the Board adopted the following re~olution: reGgfv~d requests from cLtiz=n~ to in, tall a traffic ~ignai at the intersection of ~opkins Road (si. ate Route 637) and Beula.b ~oad (State Route 641), NOW, THEREP'©RE HE iT RESOLVED thah the Virqinaa Depar~meDt of ~ighways and Transportation is r~q~ested to perform m traffic 12.D.2. CHANGE ORDER P0R ROUTE 60/t47 DR2%I~AGE DISTRICT CONTRAC~ On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Applegate, the Board authorized a change order for J. H. ~rtin and Sons for in lieu of open-cutting of Route 147 for the Route 60/147 drainage district contract and further appropriated $48.363 to cover the Change order request with f~nding coming from the Rout 60/147 Drainage District funds provided by private ~Ources. It is noted that the r~ason for th~ change o~der is that the bid based o~ the ~igbway Department allowing the open-cutting of Route 147 an~ they will not allow the usa of Alverser Drive er Old Buckingham Road as a d~t0u~, forcing the tunneling. 12.D.3. R~$OLOT%0N ~GA~t~ M~ADOWVILLE ROAD On motion Of ~r. OO~d, seconded ~y Mr. Mayes~ the Board adopted the following resolution: numerous occasions, ha~ ~equests~ the Virginia Department of Hiqhways an~ Transportation (VDB&T) to conmtruc~ an on 1-295 at l~adowvil]e Road (Route 61~)~ end W~EREAS~ the current VDH&T consfr~etion planu do nof includ an interchange en 1-295 at ~[eadowvili~ Road; and WHEREAS~ the Board of Supervi~cru has recently adopfe~ a la~ u~e and t~ansportat~Qn plan for the eastern area of Chesterfield County which design~te~ the 1-295/~4eado~rvilte Road area for indu=tria~ u~es; and ~ERE~ ~n interchange on !-2es at Meadowville and/or Now, Therefore, Be It ~solved ~hat ~h~ Chesterfield COunty hoard of Supervisors respectfully requests the State ~nd Federal representatives for Chesterfield County Co ~ek ~pport of the virginia Department of Highways and Transportation to ac~uir~ inol~d~ a interchange at Meadowville Road (Root~ 6lB} and/or a Vote: Unanimous Mr. Dodd expressed appreciation to st~ff for p~teing this together this date a~ ~h~re i~ a vital p~r= of our COunty that being by-passed by a lack of planning and for~gight which Mr. Charles P~rry, Resident Engi~leuI with the Virginia Departs=ut of Highways and Tra~portatic~n, ~tated ~hat th~ Depar'kme~t has s~a~ted ~he insts!]at~o~ ef ~he traffic Signal at-the intersection oi Pccoshock nnd ~ikhar~t. Itc Sfafu~ they are also ~5-307 ~. Dodd stated he would refer his =oncern$ through ~r. Stith to Mr. Perry. Mr. Mayas stated appreciation for =ho work ~he Department is doing in Matoaca District. Mrs. Girone ~t~ed On Robious Road between Route 60 and Route 147~ she has had another request asking ~er ~ tra~e ~ight at Huguenot Park. ~%~. P~rry stated he talked with Mr. Isbell last week about this issu~ and he was assured that it wo~ld net quali~y for a truffle signal at this time. ~e stated there are fund~ in the budqet that were carried over that could be use~ but it does not qualify. Mrs. Girons stated that p~rhaps when Park is expanded it would quaii~y, Mrs. Girone $~ated she had also received a request to reduce the speed limit from Robious Road et that same area. On motion of Mrs. Girene, ascended by Mr. Denis!; the Board requssted ~he Virgiaia Department of Highways and Transportation to study the speed limit On Robicus Road between Route 147 and ROU=a 60 for a possible redaction from 4~ Lee Gordon to Midlothian High School by way of Charter Colony Parkway, Mr. Per~y stated ~hat the Department is ~orking with County staff and there has not been any formalized plan at this time. Mrs. Oirone ~tated ~hat whatever is done should be completed by August before school starts which was agreed to at the meeting held w~th the Department. Mr. Daniel expressed appreciation for the eutti~g of weeds on intersection of ElkP~rdt and Pocoshock. H~ stated th~ interuucfiOn of Retie 360, at the north sJde, is coming apart and perhaps it can be included with th~ resurfacinq projects. 12.F. UTiI,IT%.ES D~RART~i~NT ITEMS 12.F.1 PUBLIC HEAI~INGS 12.F.l.a. ORDINANCE TO VACATE EASEMENT IN BAYPORT LANDING ~4~. Bedrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public h~aring to consider an ordinance to vacate ~ sewer easement in Baypoft Lending across Lot ~3. ~here wa~ no one present in opposition. On mo~ion cf Mr. Applegate, seconded by Mr, Dodd, the Board adopted tho following Ordinmnce~ AN O~DINA~CE to Vacate 16-foot sewer easenent across Lot 13, Bayport Landing Subdivision, C].cver ~ill ~agi.sterlal District~ Chesterfield COunty, ~;irgini&, as show~ on a plat =hereof dnly recorded in th~ Clerk's 0f~.ce of =he Circuit Court of Chesterfz~!d County in Plat Book 34~ at pa~e 99. W~REAS, Robert A~ ~aclve~ at%d Barbara J. MacIver, husband and wife, have p~tirloned tnt Boar~ of Supnzvizors uf Chesterfield County, Virginia tc vacate a 16-£0ot sewer easement across Lot 13~ B~jpert Landin~ Subdivision, Clo=~r ~ill ~glster~al Dis=xict: Chest~rfiel~ County, V%rginla more particularly sh~n oua plat of recold in t~e Clerk's Office of the Cixcuit Court ct ~aJd C~u~ty in Pl~t Buck 34, page 9~, mad~ by J. K. Tigons and ~ssociates~ Inc.~ dated Oe/obe~ 3~ 1979. follows: A I6-foot sewer easement across Lot 13, Baypcrt Landing subdivision, the lo0ation of which is more fully shown shaded in red on a plat made by J. K. Tir0mons and Associates, Inc., dated October 30, 1979, a copy of which i~ attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance. WH~R~A~, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15,1-431 of the Cods of Vir~.i~ia, 19~0, as amended, by advertising; and~ WH=~AS, no public necessity exists for the continuancs of the easement sought to be vacated. CEESTERFIRLD COUNTY~ VIRGINIA: That ~ur~uant to Section 15.1-4~2(b) of the Code of hereby vacated and no longer necessary for public use. accordance with Secsiun 15.1-492(b} cf the Code cf Virginia, 1950, a~ amended~ and a certified copy of thi~ Ordinance, ~og~ther with the plat ah~=ched hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office of the free an~ clear cf any rights of public use. Mr. Redrick stated this date and time had been advertised for a public hearing to consider th~ vacation of a portior~ of Lake Shore Drive. Mr. Welchons stated ~. Sally Clay requested the vacation of the portion o~ L~ke Shore Drive within Rock Creek Park~ Section C. ~e state~ this was a requirement of ~h~ Board · e~ Zoning Appeals i.~ Order to c0nst~uct a dwelling on Let 1, in reviewing another matte~, Plannin~ staff ~oted that a ShOre Drive through thi~ right of way. ~ stated that th~ a~j~cent property owner, Re,bury Squ~re~ bt~. i~ oppose~ to tbs r~quest beCauSe they plan to u~e %h~ ~ght of way for additioD~l access when they expand their apartment project, ~e stated that · taff advised ~r. McGowan~ representative of Re,bury square, the ~he conditions o~ zoni~ would not permit this sccass except for enl~rgency use. ~e s~mted the e~ergency access was in violation o~ the zanin~ casa as ~t was not available for ready access. s~t~d further that staff recommended approval of the vacation with the County retaining a 25 ft. easement along the southeast 5tr. Kevin ~:Gowan~ representing Re~burv Square, was present in opposition ~¢. ute request. ~{e s~ated that ~oxbury Sofuare is a= apartments located ~t ~he end of Lake Shore Drive. ~e state~ Roxbury Square Ltd. purchased tb.m ~ro~urty abuttJ.n9 the end of Lake Shore Driv~ after Lake Shor~ Drive had been ~ platted sires knowledge of and Nith the expectation of the co;ttinuation of ex~etence of the righ~ of way for I,ske Share Drive. ~e stated vehicles only at the current time and he felt the~e was no need for the vacation. He stated he felt if a temporary variance approved, that a pexm]anent one should be approved. He suggested Dhat the 19U St. strip of Lake Shore Drive could provide access to Lot 1, Block F. ~e stated Roxbury does not have any present plans to use the right of way for the expansion of an apartment existing multi-family development of Re×bury Square Apartments and adj~eunt property which bas been zoned for multi-family use but which has not been d~eloped. ~e stated if the vacation is approved~ the access ~ill be taken away and the us~ ~£ emergency vehlcle~ to use the s~te would be h~mppred as i% would not be nm intained for passibJ, li~y, He Suggested tha~ there are alternatives such as physical b~rriers to stop the continuous of the property by dirt b~kes, etc. ~xcept that his client keep it as an open access. He stated abandonment of the right way works a far greater potential damage to tho Re.bury Square residents and his client than good it provides to the lot owners on each side. Mr. Dodd inquired if access to Red B~ Road was still available. Mr. McQow~n stated that there ~as ~Otential the apartments but it does not access the other property. Mr. Applegate stated the retentio~ of ~hs 25 ft, would still maintai~ tho access for emergency equipment. Be stated he did eot feel ingress/e~ress was t~e intention in th~ zoning case. Mr. stated he felt hi~ client should not b~ d~nie~ future use of the road ~or increased u~e of %he prcper~y and the 25 ft. would be s~fficient, 5t~. Applegate stated that w~uld no~ keep his client from developing the undeveloped property in an~ of itself ~ir. McGowan stat~ that was correct. Ms. Sally R. Ct~y stated that it was = nuhsance because o~ bioyoles, motorcycles, litter, e~¢. and the property is not take care of. Sh~ stated she had spent considerable monuy on landscaping which is constantly being destroyed. ~u. Susie Hunnicutt~ adjacent property owner, stated that she could not imagine the traffic flow that would cu~%~ from the upartment~ as aSSured that the vacation would be accomplished, She inguire~ vacation. Mr. Applegate ~×plained the use for emergency vehicle as i= is a condition Of zoning and is the obligation of the providua for a buffer which cannot be violated other nhan for utilities. She stated this is a zing%~ family ~Ubdivision ~ith very narrow winding xoads and it would be impossible to allow 250 On motion of Mrs~ ~i~ons, seconded by Mr. Dodd, the Board adopted the follcwinq ordinance which allows for th~ County to retain a AN ORQINANCE to vacate a po.tion of Lake ~hore Drive within Rock Creek Park, Section C, Midlothian Maqisterial District, Chesterfield Coumty¢ Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's office Of the Circuit Court of MMER~A$, Sally R. Clay has petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County~ Virginia ¢o va~et~ a portion o~ Lake shore Drive in Rook Creek Park, Section C, Magisterial District, Chemterfi~ld County~ Virginia more particularly shown on a ~lat of record in ~h~ Clerk'e office of the Circuit Court Of ~aid County in Pla% Book 12~ page 13, made by J. K. Ti~ons~ Civil Engineer, dsted July I2~ 1960. The right of way petitioned ~o be v~tsd i~ ~ore fully described as follOwe: A portion of Lek~ Shore D:ive within R~¢k Creek ~ark, ~otion C, the ~ocation of which is more fully ~howh On plak made by J. K. Timtmons~ CiviX Engi~eer, da~ed July 12, ~960, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of thim ordinance. WR~REAS, n~tice has keen oiven pursuant %O Section 15.t-4~1 o~ the Co~e o~ VirgiDia, 1~50, am amended, by advertising; end the ~t~e~t sought to be vacated. NOW TSBREFORE~ BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOA~ OF SUPERVISORS OF CE~MTE~LD COUNTY, VIrGINIa: That pursuan~ ~to S~ction 15.1-482(b] of the Code of This Grdinance shall be iD full force and effect in acQord~nce with Sec%ion 15.1-482(b} of the Code o~ virginia, Circuit Couf~ 0f Chesterfield, Virginia pursuamt to destroy th~ forc~ and effect of the recording of the portion owners of the abutting lots o~ the portion of Lake Shore D=ive hereby vacate~ frsm and ci~ar of aDy rights of public use with ]~.P.l.c. OP~I~ANCE VAC~IM~ POR'~IO~ OF ~FAYETTE AVENUE Mr. 5ed~isk skated this date and time l~ad been &dvertized for a public hearing 'to con~ide~ an ordinance vacating a pop,ion of Lafiaye~se Avenue. There wag no :~ppc~ition present. On motion ~1 Mr. Dodd, second,ed by Mr. Mayas, the Board adopted '~h~ fallowing ordinanms: 25-311 AN ORDINANCE to vacate a portion of Lafayette Avenue in the Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clsrk's Office of the Circuit Cou~t of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 3, at pages ll0 and WH~REAS~ J. Dan Melvin has petitioned th~ ~oard Of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of Lafayette Avenue in Mouth Che~tmr Subdivision, R~r~da Magisterial District, Chest~rfiel~ County, Virginia particularly shown on a plat of record in the clerk's Office of ehe Circuit Court of sai~ County in Plat Rook 3; pages It0 and 111, made by Jervis B~ Harding, Engineer, dated ~cvember, 19t~. The right of way petitioned to De va=abed im more fully described as follows: A portion of Lafayette Avenue within South Chester Subdivision, the location of which is moro fully shown shaded in red on a plat made by Jarvis s. Harding, Engineer, dated ~0ve~foer; 1915~ a copy of wkich is attac~ed hereto and made a part of th~s W~REAS, notice ha~ bsen given ~ursuan= to Section 15.t-431 of the Coda of Virginia, 1950, as amended, b~ advertising; and WHEREA~, no public nocsssity ~×ists fo~ the continuance of CHeSTERFIeLD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuan~ to Section 15.i-482{b) o~ tho Code of ~i~, 1950, as amended, 'the aforesaid right of way b~ an~ ia vacated and no longer necessary for public use. This Ordinance shall be in full ~orce and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Co~e of Virginia, 1950, as a~ended, and a certifieO copy of th~$-0~dinanne, together with the ~lat attached h~retc shall be record~ no seeder ~han %hir~y days hereafter in ~he clerk's office o~ the Circuit Court of Chesterfield~ Virginia pursuant to SettiOD 15.1-45~ of tbs Code o~ vir~in~, ~50, aa amended. The effect Qf this ©rdinanc~ pursuant to Section 15.1-483 to destroy ~he force and effect of the recording of the portion of th~ p~a9 vacated.. This Ordinance shall vest fee simple title to the cen=ertin~ of th~ afoz~me~tiOned street in th~ property owners uf ~he abutting lo~s on the north and south ~ide~ of the ~ortion of Lafayette A=e~=e hereby vacated free ~nd clear of any rights of public use. Accordingly, this 0zdinance shall be indexed i:% the name~ the County of Chesterf~td~ 65 grantor, alld J. Dan ~Ielvin and Doris P. Melvin~ husband and wife~ and ~uanita D. ~oorman, or ~h~ir successors in title, as Vot~: Unanimous REQUEST EOR WATEA LINE EXTENSION ON HICKS On motion of Mr. App]sgats~ seconded hy th-. Dodd~ th~ ~oard authorized a survey of the property owners along Hicks Road between Mountain Pine ~oad Boulevard and Dowd Lane to de~e~ine the number of ~o~idents that ~ould connect 'to public wa~er if it were made available, Vote: Una~imo~ ~.~.F.3. RI¢~T OF WAY I~EMS ~2.F,~.a. CGNDE~A~EON ACROSS RROPER~¥ OF JETTIE M... AO~INS0N On motion of Zr. Daniel, seconded by Mr. ~©dd, the Boar~ rejected the counteroffer of Jettie M. Robinson in the amount of $4~,~0 for which the County had offered $3o,o00 ~or 2.~ acres, more or lass, ~or the Falling Creek Sewage Pumping Station site and a vari~bl~ width ~ewer casement and fuxthur the ~oard authorized the County Attorney to institute conde~atlon proceedings against the following property ow~ex if the amount as s~t o~postte his nal~ is not acoe~ted. And be it ~urthar r~sol=ed that the County Administrator notify said pr(:perty owner by registered mail of the County's intention to enter upon and take the property which is to bs th~ s~bjeut Of said conde~ation p~Oceedings. Jet,ia M. Robinson Falling Creek Sewage 12,F.3.b. COUMTE~OF~MR FOR NORCLIPP ROAD WATER TA~]K SITE O~ motion of Mr. Dodd, seeon~e~ by Mr. Mayas, the Beard accepted the counteroffer from Dr. Victor F. German, on behalf of ~arvey value which is apprcxima=a~.y $5,0~0 to $6,000 per 10t and further th= Board authorized the County A~in~stra%or, on behalf of the 12.F.3.c. COUNTEROPPER ACROSS RRORERTY OF CONSOLIDATED SALES CO. On ~otion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by ~. Ap~ega~e, the Boar~ appruYed a counteroffer in the amount of $9,912.14 from Consolidated Sales Company, Inc. for a sewer easement necessary to serve the LaPetite Academy alon~ Robious Ro~. It is ~oted that this amount is to h~ paid by George W. Parley ba~ed on his contract to pay tile costs, 12.F.4. CONSENT 12.F.4.a. CONTRACT FOR WATER I,IN~S IN WORS~AN CR~ On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded hy Mr. ~o~d~ the ~oard approved an~ author{zed the County Administrator to execute any Water Contract No~ W~5-72CD/6{R)672R, Install. erich ef Water Lines f~r Worsham Green E~bdivision Developer; M&dlo~hi~n ~Dterprise$, Inc. To,al Centre~t Coat: $29,300.6Q connections) Estimated Developer Cost: $28,420.65 On motion of Mrs, Girone, seconded by ~r. Do,d, the Board a~proved and authorized the County Administrator to execute any necesfary documents, accepting on behalf of the County, a 3fi foot strip of land along River t{oad from Keith W. COndroy and Sally A. Condrey, 12.F.4.c. ACCEPTANCE OF DEEMS OF DEDICATTON ~LONG MOBELEy ~O~ On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, =he ~oar~ approved an~ authezlzed the County Administrator to exucut~ any necessary docuT~nts~ accepting On behalf of the County, two 20 foot strips of land aicng Moaelsy Road from Thomas Randolph Lacy. 12.F.4.d. ACCEPTANCE OF DEED OF DEDICatION - DAIL=Y BRIDGE ROAD On motion of Ers. Girone~ seconded by approved and authorized tbs County A~inistra'tor to exeoute uny necessaxy doou~euts~ accepting on behalf of the COunty, a 35 foc~ ~trip Of l~nd along ~ailey Bridge Road from Timothy Lu~ and Mary Gayle R. Holt. 12,F,4.e. CORI~CTI©N TO ORDII~ARC~ VACATING VINELAND ROAD Mr. Welchons ststed that on A~ril t0, !985~ the Board adopted an ordinance vacatillg Vineland ~oad, ~ni~Lproved within Ben Air Terrac~ (fe~rly Repine). ~!e stated the ~rantees w~re insorrectly identified and requested that tee BO~d direct staff tc correct the g~anrees in eider to p=operl~, effe~:tuate the intent o~ the vacation. On motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by ~-. Dodd, the Board approved the following or~&nance as a correction te the ~fnute~ of April 10, ].985 which li~ted the grantees incorrectly: AN O~DI~ANCE to ~aeate Vineland Road, Unimproved, within BQn Air Terrace {formerly Repine}, }~idlot~ian Magisterial Distriet~ Chesterfield County, Virginia, a~ shown on a plat thereof duly r~aarded in the Clerk's Office Of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in 91at Book 9 at page 75. WHHRE3~S, by Re~elution dated ~4arch 13, 198~, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia authorized the Right of Way staff to advertise for a public hearing to vacate Vineland Road, unimproved, within Ben Air Terrace (foi'merly Repine), Midlothian Maqisaerial Di~%riCt~ Chusturfimld Cuunty, ~ru particularly shown on a plat of record in th~ Cte~k's office by La,rede ~rothers, dated July 29, 1955. The ~%~eet petitioned location of WhiCh iS more fully shown on a p~at made by LaPrade Brotherm, date~ J%~ly 29, 1955, a e0py 0f which is 85-31~ NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TEE BOA~D OF ~UF~RVI$OI~ OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIBGINIA: That pursuant to section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of virginia, 1950, as amended, the above describe~ portion of VinelaBd Road is hereby vacated and no iongsr necessary for public ~e except as hereinafter outlined. The grantees hereby convey unto the County and the County hereby reserves a 25' utility easement within tke portion of Vineland Road hereby vacated a~ shown on the attached plat. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section t5.1-482{b) cf the ~e o~ Vir~inia~ 1950, as amended, and a certified cody o£ this Ordinance, together with the pdat attached h~r~to ~hall be recorded no sooner than thirty dsy~ hereafter in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Chestsrfie!d, VirgiDi~ pur~ant to Section ~5.1-485 of the Co~e of Vir~inia~ 1950, ~s amended. The e~fecm Of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483 is to destro~ the force and effect of the recording of the portion o~ th$ pl~t vacated. This Ordinance shall vast f~e simple t~tle to the centerliue of ~he afo~mentioneO stree~ in the p=operty Accor~imgly, this OrdiD~nee zhall b~ indexed in the name~ of M. Smith, husband and w~fe, or their successors in title, as Vote: Unanimous 12.F.5. P~PORT$ Mr. Welchons presen%ud the Board with a iigt Qf developer wa=er and sewer co,tracts ~x~cuted by th~ County Administrator. 12.G. REPO~TS ~. Hedrick presented the Board with $ status ~epor~ on the ~r. Redrick stated %h~t the Virginia Department Of Ei~hweys and Transportation had £o~mally notified the County that tho roads ii the following subdi~i~icn~ had been officially accepted into the Stats secondary Syst~m~ effective az indicated: Chestermilt Subdivision (4-22-S5~ Petersburg Street - FreTs Route 1546 southerly 0.08 mile t.o a cul-de-sac. ~snggh 0.08 mi. Thr~ Pines ~i-~ision~ Sections t and 3 (4-.23-85) Spruce 9i~e Dr~ve - From Route 3081 to Route 3086. 0.16 mi. 3195 to 0.03 mile south of ~out~ 31~5. 0.15 iai. Somerset Subdivision, Sections = u ~nd 6 (4-25~5} 0.20 mi. Route 1181%0 0.63 mile southwest of ROUte 1181. Mooring Way - From Tri-Gate Ro&d running southwesterly to a Dockside Drive - From Tri-Cate Ro~d funding ~outhwesterly to a cul-de-sau. Dockside Court - From Dock~ids Drive running soutSsrly to a cul-de-sac. Length 0.05 mi, 0.08 mi. 0.08 ~i. 13. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mrs, ~irone, Seconded by M~. Mayes, ~he Doard adjourned at 11:05 p.m. unti~. 9:00 a.m. on ~ay 22, t985. ~k S5-316